pri fundamentals for grantmakers

© 2007 PRI Makers Network 1

Program Related InvestmentsProgram Related InvestmentsFundamentals for GrantmakersFundamentals for Grantmakers

Susan Halliday, Jacobs Family FoundationSusan Halliday, Jacobs Family FoundationAlvertha Penny, California Community FoundationAlvertha Penny, California Community Foundation

Ed Diener, Skoll FoundationEd Diener, Skoll Foundation

PRI Institute PRI Institute PRI Makers Network – Northern California Grantmakers

March 27, 2007

Prepared by Greg Ratliff, Lisa Richterwww.gpscapitalpartners.com


Outline

Introduction to Program Related Investments Defining PRIs Motivation for PRIs: Strategic Benefits The PRI/MRI/SRI/”Social Capital” Marketplace Getting Started with PRIs

Break

Case Studies Alvertha Penny, California Community Foundation Susan Halliday, Jacobs Family Foundation Ed Diener, Skoll Foundation


“The prototype of charity that serves as a model of compassion is the story of the Good Samaritan. When a traveler discovers someone beaten and badly in need of assistance along a public road, he stops and provides assistance. But what happens if each day that he travels the road he finds someone at the very same spot badly beaten and in need of assistance. Compassion requires that he give aid, but eventually compassion requires that he ask the question “Who has responsibility for policing the road.” One is charity. The other is strategic philanthropy. One is working to ameliorate consequences. The other is working to eliminate causes.”

James A. JosephPresident Emeritus, Council on FoundationsChairman, Louisiana Disaster Recovery

Foundation

“Sound PRIs work in philanthropy the same way that commercial loans and investment capital work in the economy; they add capacity and increase productivity. Their impact is great because they advance philanthropic enterprises that can generate a lot, but not all, of their own steam.”

Paul Lingenfelterformer Director of Program Evaluation,

MacArthur Foundation

Introduction to PRIs


Conventional Philanthropic Investing Continuum

FundGrants from Earnings

~ 5% of assets

Primary Motivation:Maximize social return

on grants funded by at least 5% of assets

per year.

Invest Endowment Assets

95%+ of assets

Primary Motivation:Maximize financial return to

fund annual grant payout of at least 5% of assets

while preserving Endowment.


Conventional Philanthropic Investing Continuum

Limitations of Conventional Foundation Approach: Individual project timing and financing needs may outstrip grant resources. Broader scale of social needs and charitable opportunities outstrips grant

resources. Assets deployed 95% for financial return, 5% for mission. Fewer dollars for grantmaking in down markets. Pressure for hasty grants in up markets and periods of new endowment.

Opportunity: Apply discipline of capital markets to invest a portion of foundation resources, which can increase and stabilize strategic philanthropic distributions over time.


Invention and Authorization of PRIs

Benjamin Franklin ahead of his time in 1790: Endowed trust of 2,000 pounds sterling ($300,000) to lend to apprentices

and tradesman at 5% interest. High repayment led to trust assets of $5 million by 1990.

Ca. 1970 contemporary PRI model devised: John Simon (Taconic Foundation and Yale Law School) and Louis

Winnick (Ford Foundation), 1968. To lend to nonprofit organizations and invest in minority businesses

lacking access to conventional capital markets.


Legal Definition of PRI1

1. The primary purpose of the investment is to accomplish one or more of the charitable, religious, scientific, literary, educational and other exempt purposes described in section 170(c)(2)(B) of the Code;

2. No significant purpose of the investment is the production of income or the appreciation of property; and

3. No purpose of the investment is to lobby, support or oppose candidates for public office or to accomplish any of the other political purposes forbidden to private foundations by section 170(c)(2)(D) of the Code.

1

Source: Tax Reform Act of 1969.


New Philanthropic Investing Continuum

Grants

Primary Motivation:Social Return

Investments

Primary Motivation:Financial Return

MRIs: Mission Related

Investments

PRIs: Program Related

Investments


New Philanthropic Investing Continuum

Investments can include a full range of “asset classes” —debt, equity, real estate, loan guarantees, or deposits—and can be structured as:

Program Related Investments (PRIs) with a concessionary risk-adjusted financial return, which can be counted as part of a foundation’s distribution requirement, or

Mission Related Investments (MRIs) from the endowment that provide sufficient risk-adjusted financial return to fulfill a foundation’s fiduciary responsibility to preserve endowment and avoid “jeopardizing investments.“

Example: The F.B. Heron Foundation invests 25% of its assets to support

mission: 7% in PRI + 18% in MRI (in addition to grants).


PRIs in the Investing Continuum

Fixe

d Income

Below-Market InvestmentsBelow-Market Investments

Gua

rant

ees

Sen

ior

Loa

ns

Sub

ordi

nate

d Lo

ans

Equ

ity

Gra

nt

Cas

h

Cash

Pub

lic Eq

uity

Private E

quity

Cash

Not Risk-Adjusted Not Risk-Adjusted Market Rate Market Rate InvestmentsInvestments

Risk-Adjusted Risk-Adjusted Market Rate Market Rate InvestmentsInvestments

Private E

quity

Adapted with permission from F.B. Heron Foundation’s “New Frontiers in Mission-Related Investing”

Program-Related Investments


PRI Accounting PRI can be counted as part of 5% distribution in year that it is

made.

Asset Value of PRI is not included in calculation of Foundation’s asset base and distribution requirement during time that PRI is outstanding.

Income on PRI adds to Foundation’s general revenue.

In year that PRI matures, entire balance is treated as a “negative distribution” and is recycled into new grants or PRIs.


PRI Accounting: Losses A defaulted PRI becomes a grant.

Cumulative PRI loss rates since inception are in the 4% range, adjusting for outliers.* That’s 96% return of principal compared to a grant—plus any interest

on the PRI. Loss rates on equity investments and/or international PRIs are higher

than for domestic lending, but still manageable.

* Source: FSG Social Impact Advisors, Report to be published Spring, 2007.


PRI Accounting: Losses Representative Loss Rates from MacArthur Foundation’s

initial 10 years of making PRIs:

Housing $45,650,000 invested Losses: none

Business: $24,183,750 invested Losses $700,000 or 2.9%

Program-related Enterprises: $18,195,000 invested Losses $1,474,000 or 8.1%

Use of specialized intermediaries is a “best practice” that manages risk and lowers loss rates.


Strategic Benefits for Foundation Recyclable: Once repaid PRIs can be redeployed for new projects,

extending philanthropic resources.

Size: PRIs can provide capital for larger projects that exceed typical grant amounts.

Leverage: PRIs can attract other sources of funding from banks, corporations and government.

Pay-out: During rapid asset growth PRIs help meet immediate distribution requirements with the likelihood capital will be available in the future.

Incorporates material from Ford Foundation


Strategic Benefits of PRI for Investees Capacity: Access to larger pools of capital when needed to support

strategic growth and projects.

Strength: PRIs help foster management capacity as repayment obligations require financially disciplined approach to programs and strategies.

Self-Sufficiency: PRIs support investee efforts to build self-sufficiency through earned income.

Credibility: Over time, PRI investees develop credit history, leading to more bankable organizations.

Relationship: PRIs establish a long term relationship between investor and investee, with built in accountability that is unusual in grant relationships.


Strategic Benefits of PRI for Society/Market

PRIs promote financial structures and markets that foster sustainable social benefit: Leverage: Flexible, low-cost, first loss PRI capital encourages financial

institutions and other investors to take risks they might otherwise avoid.

Proving Markets: In emerging markets, PRI capital can stimulate new segments, e.g., minority business, organic coffee, affordable housing, sustainable timber, retail financial services for the underbanked.

PRIs are a means for the private sector to drive a social change agenda regardless of shifting political will or quarterly corporate profit expectations.


PRI Marketplace: Supply Spring 2007: FSG Report to describe $2.3 billion of social

investments--mostly PRIs. Current published data covers activity for 2000 - 2001:

135 leading PRI providers 667 charitable investments $421 million More than two-thirds is PRI debt (loans).

Top 10 funders provide 60% of investments. Top 56 funders provided 92.5%.

Asset size not a significant determinant of making PRIs. Every PRI investor has a different profile based upon mission,

geography, risk/return appetite, experience.

Source: Annie E. Casey Foundation analysis based upon data from PRI Directory, 2003. Foundation Center.


PRI Marketplace: Supply 2000 – 2001

PRI Amounts # % $ (000s) %$10 million + 2 0.3 24,911 7.1

$5 – $10 million 8 1.2 51,225 14.6

$1 – $5 million 96 14.9 176,747 50.3

$500,000 – $1 million 61 9.4 36,567 10.4

$100,000 – $500,000 233 36.1 52,491 14.9

$50,000 – 100,000 95 14.7 5,795 1.6

$25,000 – $50,000 76 11.8 2,549 0.7

$10,000 – $25,000 75 11.6 1,199 0.3

Total 646 100.0 351,484 100.0


PRI Marketplace: Supply by Program 2000 – 2001 ($)

Community development, 25%

Housing, 12%

Environment, 18%

Education, 17%

Arts, media, historic preservation, 8%

Human Services, 7%

Health, 6%

Religion, 4%

Other, 3%


PRI Marketplace: Supply Foundations making PRIs for community development:

Place Based: Gund and Cleveland Foundations, Cleveland California Community Foundation Jacobs Family Foundation, San Diego Meadows Foundation, Dallas Meyer Memorial Trust, Oregon

National and International: Annie E. Casey Foundation, emphasized regions/national; also does MRI Heron Foundation, national/emphasized regions; also does MRI Ford Foundation, national and international MacArthur Foundation, national and international Skoll Foundation, social enterprise/national and international


PRI Marketplace: Ford Foundation Early Examples

PRI Investee Structure Amount Term Rate DateResearch Libraries Group Working Capital Loan 1,700,000 6 years 8% 1980YWCA, Jersey City Bridge Loan 1,000,000 5 years 8% 1981Mountain Association for Community Economic Development (MACED) Loan 925,000 5 years 3% 1981Grameen Bank Guarantee 770,000 3.5 years 0% 1981Tacolcy Economic Development Corporation Loan 1,375,000 9 years 3% 1986Local Initiative Support Corporation Loan 1,500,000 <=10 years 2% 1987Neighborhood Housing Services of America Guarantee 200,000 10 years 0% 1978Public Interest Law Center Loans 670,565 <= 7 years 5% 1983Appalshop Loan 400,000 6 years 1% 1988Studio Museum of Harlem Bridge Loan 1,005,000 NA NA 1977


PRI Marketplace: Recent Examples Specialized, collaborative local initiatives

Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) and Intermediaries reinvesting in housing, small business, child care, charter schools, and asset building in low income communities.

Land Purchases for environmental conservation or community development.


PRI Marketplace: Recent Examples New York Acquisition Fund, $200 million for bridge loans to finance site

acquisition. Offers Loan to Value of up to 130% for nonprofits and 95% for for-profits developers.

Market Creek Plaza, $23.5 million commercial and cultural center built on the former site of a 20-acre abandoned factory in San Diego.

Wilson Historic District, a nonprofit community owned and operated by the Meadows Foundation of Dallas since 1981. Goal was to preserve remaining Victorian structures as well as provide attractive space for numerous, varied nonprofit organizations.

Neighborhood Progress Inc. Founded in 1988, NPI restores Cleveland neighborhoods by providing investment capital and real estate development services to qualified Community Development Corporations (CDCs), along with operating support and capacity building.

Seedco. Founded in 1987, the Structured Employment Economic Development Corporation creates opportunities for low-wage workers and their families by engaging with community partners and anchor institutions to develop, operate and learn from model programs that help people join the workforce and achieve economic self-sufficiency, assist small businesses, and promote asset building for residents and businesses in economically distressed communities.


MRI Overview MRI due diligence qualifies investment as acceptable for the

endowment under Foundation’s Investment Policy.

Documentation should: Confirm that investment has been reviewed and approved

under normal procedures required by the Investment Policy. Confirm the mission objectives of the investment.

The MRI segment is emerging; data and benchmarks are less evolved. MRI will be featured at Council of Foundations 2007 Conference in Seattle.


MRI Recent Examples Bay Area Smart Growth Fund I, LLC, private equity fund

formed investing in commercial and residential real estate projects in 46 low- and moderate income neighborhoods.

UrbanAmerica, LP, private equity fund investing in commercial real estate in U.S. low- and moderate-income communities.

Yucaipa Corporate Initiatives Fund I, LP, private equity fund investing in corporate partnerships that locate in, relocate to or expand their operations in U.S. underserved rural and urban communities.


PRI/MRI/SRI Market PRI uptake slow in first four decades, despite success. Interest increasing today due to range of factors:

Recognition of scale in social sector programs; grant revenues not sufficient. Empirical evidence that PRIs strengthen investee organizations while also extending

philanthropic resources. Continued strong PRI performance at large foundations. Strong PRI performance as use increases by smaller foundations. Decrease in market returns on endowments, intensifying focus on methods to extend

resources. Large contributions to endowment, effects of which can be smoothed with PRI

strategies. Business approach and increased involvement, consistent with a range of other

philanthropic trends.


Social Return: Impact

Fundamental questions for PRI investors: What are the tangible and intangible benefits on PRI for

exempt purpose– social return on investment or “ROI”? Are beneficiaries better served by PRIs plus grants?

Field is still developing impact measurement systems. Empirical evidence suggests important advantages, demonstrated

by growth and effectiveness of organizations that use and recycle PRI funds to solve social problems, as well as increased resources for philanthropy.


Social Capital Market Equilibrium

Subsidy Return

Innovationand Impact

Scale

Supply of Social Capital

Demand for Social Capital


Getting Started with PRI

Developing and Vetting PRI Strategy: Coordination with Grants Program PRI versus PRI/MRI/SRI Approach Intermediary investing Collaborative investing

Setting up PRI Infrastructure Staffing and/or Outsourcing Functions:

Deal Sourcing Underwriting Monitoring Structuring (Legal)


Getting Started with PRI: Intermediaries PRI examples and intermediaries exist to support range of

community development needs: Land: Clean sites for development and greenspace.

Acquisition Funds, Land Trusts, CDFIs Housing: Quality affordable rental and special needs housing and

homeownership opportunities. CDFIs, Affordable Housing Developers

Commercial Real Estate: Retail goods and services; facilities. CDFIs, CDCs, Smart Growth Funds

Small Business Development: Financing and technical assistance. CDFIs/CDVC, Smart Growth Funds

Human Capital and Asset Building: Quality affordable schools and childcare, workforce development, savings and asset building opportunities.

CDFIs/development banks and credit unions


Getting Started with PRI: Collaboration

“ ….The second lesson of New Orleans is the need to understand when it is appropriate to act independently and when it is best to collaborate. And here I believe that if the philanthropic sector is to serve society well, it must, to whatever extent possible, prepare itself for greater collaboration.

The management guru Peter Drucker spoke several years ago about the emergence of a fourth sector in American society. We tend to highlight three sectors, a public sector driven by the ballot, a private sector driven by the market and a third or independent sector driven by voluntarism and the institutions of civil society. But Drucker pointed to a fourth sector where leaders recognize that the problems of our time are not only complex and interdependent, but of such scope and scale that we often need to form partnerships within sectors and across sectors in order to enhance our impact and effectiveness.”

James A. JosephPresident Emeritus, Council on FoundationsChairman, Louisiana Disaster Recovery

Foundation


Questions and Follow-up

GPS Capital Partners Lisa Richter

[email protected]

PRI Makers Network Peter Berliner

[email protected]

pri fundamentals for grantmakers

Documents

pri makers network fund

skoll foundation

heron foundation

pris motivation

market investments

contemporary pri model

legal definition of

assets primary motivation