manbetx安卓版最新版下载家庭慈善事业讲话：与Irene Pritzker和Liesel Pritzker Simmons的对话
Liesel Pritzker Simmons, principal and co-founder of Blue Haven Initiative, and her mom Irene Pritzker, president of the IDP Foundation, have built innovative family philanthropy efforts. In thisFamily Philanthropy Speaksepisode, hear how Liesel and Irene have learned alongside one another while forging their own identities as impact investors and change agents.
Philanthropy is a practice borne out of compassion and commitment—and one that is deeply rooted in family. It’s also a practice that must continue to evolve to effectively meet the needs of the communities it seeks to serve. Thankfully, there are countless social sector leaders who are advancing the field with their bold ideas and unwavering enthusiasm for the greater good. The National Center for Family Philanthropy is honored to share the stories of these leaders through its program,Family Philanthropy Speaks—a series of conversations designed to feature the innovative spirit of family philanthropy. These dynamic discussions aim to capture emerging trends and solutions, share new and diverse voices in the field, and lift up the role of family philanthropy—past, present, and future—in stewarding social change. We hope you will join us to explore what it means to give with intention!
Watch moreFamily Philanthropy Speaks对话这里。
尼克·泰德斯科:欢迎来到Family Philanthropy Speaks来自国家家庭慈善中心的视频博客系列。manbetx安卓版最新版下载这些对话突出了家庭奉献的创新精神。
In this episode, we feature speakers from our 2020 Trustee Education Institute. Liesel Pritzker Simmons is the co-founder and principal of Blue Haven Initiative, a single-family office focused on total portfolio activation. Her mom, Irene Pritzker is the president and CEO of the IDP Foundation. They’ve learned alongside one another, developed their own giving identities, and build bold family philanthropy efforts. I began by asking Liesel about Blue Haven Initiative. What does total portfolio activation look like in practice, and how has the approach evolved over time?
Liesel Pritzker Simmons:Blue Haven是一个家庭办公室，我和我的丈夫是校长。我们今天要做的是真正地试图整合我们的投资工作的影响和慈善工作的影响，并将这两件事融合在一起。最终，无论是寻求回报还是赠款资本，我们进行的每笔投资都会产生影响。因此，我们想作为一个家庭的财富管理者，作为负责任的资产所有者，我们想成为一家人，我们想知道这是什么影响。和第二，对此负责。希望在发现这种影响是什么时，我们可以确保它是积极的。而且，我们的投资工作至少没有破坏我们想要看到的影响。最好的是，实际上是在协助这种影响继续前进。
And so, what that all boils down to is, we look at every investment that we make through an extra lens. So yes, we look at its financial components, but it’s got to be doing something that has a positive either environmental or social impact. And that looks different across different asset classes. There are ways, strategies to do this well in both public equity and debt, as well as across private investments and real assets as well. And so, we just take a portfolio approach. We try to look to only work with companies and managers that have strategies that have a positive impact. And then, after we make that investment, we follow up and hold ourselves accountable for whatever that impact may be. Hopefully, positive. Sometimes it’s not, and we have to pivot.
所以,真的,我们想做这个100%的our portfolio. It doesn’t make sense to me to say that some investments have an impact, but some of them don’t. And so, that just doesn’t make any sort of philosophical sense to me. And so, we felt like we had no choice but to do it with everything. And then what that frees up is we can really let our philanthropy at Blue Haven, not necessarily have to work as hard, because it’s not the only asset in the portfolio that is having an impact. So we can really let it be the flexible, high-risk patient capital that we talk about philanthropy really needing to be.
尼克·泰德斯科:你说我只是想强调的东西that I think was really powerful and I want to emphasize here, the idea that you and Ian are taking responsibility for the impact. Right? And you’re looking at all the different ways that you can address social impact using all the different tools at your disposal. I think that that’s extraordinarily powerful and something that I wanted to emphasize here. Irene, I want to bring you into the conversation.
What I find so often is that investment committees never talk to the grantmaking side of the foundation. So we have utilized the program-related investment to bridge that, and we’ve done it very, very successfully. We have made money on it. The program-related investment is very often not understood well by foundations, but it came from a 1969 tax reformat. So the idea is, before that, because of the prudent investing rule, a foundation couldn’t take risk with any kind of investment or anything it did. It had been terribly safe. That Tax Reform Act said, a foundation can take fantastic risk as long as it doesn’t have a higher expectation of return. And if it fails, you can write it off as a grant. And counts towards the mandatory 5%.
因此，我们已经能够承担慈善资本的巨大风险，可以实际赚钱，经常在我们所做的事情上赚钱，并提供穷人无法获得的早期种子，非常必要的资本。听起来好像我们知道我们在做什么。实际上，我们没有。我们一直说：“哦，看。看，你可以做到这一点。哦，让我们来做吧。”然后，另一件事也是，我们成为一家公司，我很长一段时间以来，唯一的导演。因此，我唯一需要允许做一些高风险的事情的人就是我。我总是与Liesel讨论过，但是她对Blue Haven如此忙于，以至于她最近才成为董事会成员。现在我没有所有的责任，但是她拥有丰富的经验，现在可以以一种非常受过教育的方式告诉我：“看妈妈，这些是优点，这些都是弊。” So I would say we both have been on parallel growth paths.
尼克·泰德斯科:Thank you for that honesty too, Irene. I think it’s really amazing that you didn’t and still don’t have it all figured out, right? It’s an ever-evolving learning journey, and it’s one of experience and one of patience. Both from a learning perspective, as well as putting a capital to work perspective. I want to bring Liesel back into the conversation. Liesel, I’d love for you to talk about how the learning that you did with your mom in those early years helped shape your strategy for Blue Haven.
Liesel Pritzker Simmons:Well, I think, I mean, very much what Mom was just talking about in terms of thinking flexibly of like, what her foundation has done as well is, there’s checks we write to other people, there’s things that are operational at the foundation itself. This program was really in conjunction with Sinapi Aba Trust, but also something that the foundation ran itself. So how do you think about investing in your own operations? You’ve got grants, you’ve got your program-related expenses, and then you’ve also got all of these different sorts of tools, whether it’s, low-interest or no-interest debt in order to make a program come together. And so, what I really learned from that is that, keep your eye on what the issue is and what the problem is.
这些工具是工具，实际上您拥有更多的工具。特别是您自己有很多工具。然后，当您与其他资助者或其他类型的金融公司建立好友时，您甚至更强大，并且具有更大的工具腰带。因此，但是如果您从“哦，我们是一个赠款组织，我们不这样做”开始的，那么您已经限制了潜在干预措施的范围。因此，请注意问题是什么，我们要解决的问题是什么？需要有哪些不同的组件？不要使您的潜在工具宇宙小。您无需这样做。And so, that’s one of the things I think I learned early on and saw that in practice, and then was like, “Okay, well, how do you blow that out actually to the whole family office, which has different cashflow needs and has a slightly different function of course, than a foundation does, but still with an impact focus?”
And so, you can extrapolate that and just expand it out for a family office and all the different things that we can do there. And so, that’s what I think has been really exciting, and I got to see that really early on of, no one ever told my mom, “This is how you’re supposed to do things.” Just as she said, she finds it and makes it work. The eye is on, how do we help these schools help these kids? And we’ll figure out the tools.
尼克·泰德斯科:Is it safe to assume that in the beginning, this is probably a very unfamiliar approach to the both of you, and that it felt largely uncomfortable, and was something that you had to learn and live into, but you didn’t let that stop you?
艾琳·普利兹克（Irene Pritzker）：I would say that I felt very indignant at this situation. I think really, what it just took was fantastic determination. And to think that for 70 or 80 years, there’s been international development aid. Where are we? Nowhere near achieving SDG 4 by 2030. We already failed the eight millennium development goals. We’re so far off track, and yet, isn’t it Albert Einstein that talked about the definition of insanity, doing the same thing and all that? Well, that’s exactly what’s still going on. What I’m hoping is that eventually, eventually, and you have to believe that one day somebody is going to say, “You know what? My God, this works. We can build schools. If we subsidize schools with low-interest debt into financial institutions, and we’ll do it in local currency to so that their cost of hedging isn’t there.”
尼克·泰德斯科:Take risk and get angry enough, right? Two incredible pieces of advice. I really want us to move into demystifying the idea of market-based solutions as a tool to advance community. Then Liesel, you talk a lot about your experience, starting from the time you were a student at Columbia and all the way through to meeting people on the ground, a wonderful woman named Paulina that you met in Ghana. Can you share a little bit about how to use market-based solutions as a tool to advance change?
Liesel Pritzker:Sure. Yeah. When my inheritance came in, all in one fell swoop, I was 21. I was in college, and I was at Columbia, and that was right around the time when Jeffrey Sachs came and set up the Earth Institute and market-based solutions was the thing. It was micro microfinance and it was all like, that was what everybody was talking about, and it was all very exciting. I was thinking, I’ve always been interested in international development and development economics, and things like that as well. And so, I thought, “Wow, this is exciting. It opens up a whole lot more capital to address some of these problems than just official development assistance.”
Like, that’s only small relative to all of the capital markets. If you could get all of the capital markets moving towards fighting poverty or pushing forward market-based solutions, that would be very powerful. But I think one of the things though, I still think that’s exciting, but I have definitely, I think pulled back a bit on, when markets are appropriate, market-based solutions can be a wonderful force for good. But markets shouldn’t show up everywhere. There are times and instances where just markets have no business being there. And so, I think we’re seeing a lot of this around issues involving racial equity and justice and how markets actually undermine a lot of that work because of systemic racism. And that’s not a market problem, that’s a people problem. And that can’t get fixed with a debt instrument.
There’s a lot, a lot of financing that can address it, but the root of the problem isn’t necessarily a market problem. The market is just reflecting what people are doing. And so, I think what I’ve also become a little bit more just humble about is, markets are great when they’re great, and then they need to step aside when markets are actually exacerbating a certain kind of problem. And so, I think one of the tricks and one of the real opportunities of taking a total portfolio approach, I mean, that’s one of the first things that we look at with any investment in our investment committee is, is this a market problem? If it is, let’s explore that. If it’s not, let’s put on our policy hats. Or let’s put all our philanthropy hats. Or let’s go yell at a Senator. Or use one of those other tools. Not everything’s a market-based solution, and that’s one thing I think, even as, as a evangelical impact investor, I think we get overly excited about markets sometimes.
尼克·泰德斯科:To follow up on that question, when you think about using the different tools in partnership with each other, maybe you can share a little bit about when you choose to leverage grants versus investments. Particularly if you’re thinking about seeding an individual enterprise or sustaining that. How do you think about toggling between these different tools that you have?
Liesel Pritzker:I can take a stab at that, and then I think Mom also probably has a lot to say on this one too. We’ve been building out, particularly our catalytic capital at Blue Haven, like that in between space of, sometimes it looks like a recoverable grant to a for-profit or we’re in a blended finance facility. Or we’re coming in at a weird junction, where it’s not quite grant and it’s not quite for-profit. The way that we look at it is, is it being leveraged for more dollars for scale? Like, is there something we’re proving out? Like we helped to subsidize a mini grid developer in Tanzania because energy access is a big theme in our portfolio. And they needed someone to come in at a concessionary piece to prove out the cost of connection for 10,000 connections.
如果他们能证明融资模式,then the government of Tanzania was going to come in and build like six more of these projects. So we were like, “That would be great.” We are taking our capital and leveraging it in a way that, if we’d made a market rate investment, it never would have been leveraged that way. And so, things like that. So can it be leveraged, or are we helping to, and we blatantly steal this kind of language from Omidyar Network around, are we helping to build a market, build a marketplace that just needs a little bit of extra investment upfront? And then it will be its own vital marketplace, but at the moment, do we just have to prove some things out, and will that need some subsidy as well? And so, that’s how we do it. It’s more art than science.
尼克·泰德斯科:Irene, I’d love to get your thoughts on this as well. When you look at the different tools that you can leverage. And then I want to move into a broader topic of how you look at impact more broadly.
So there are so many different ways in which you can employ these tools in philanthropy. They’re not all the same. Some of them are alike, the ones I described with the IDP Rising Schools Program. Some of them are other PRI and dead investments. So some of them are actually writing a check to let somebody get on their feet, where they can actually even go to friends and family for the initial support. So we examine every single request that we get extremely carefully. And if we see that potential, then we probably will go for it.
Liesel Pritzker Simmons:是的。我们非常喜欢影响管理项目在影响投资领域提出的语言，这实际上是关于影响影响的，不仅是在产出和成果方面，而且实际上，您是否正在努力影响影响？这不仅仅是每季度或每年一次获得静态报告，而且您积极参与这些目标是什么？因此，这就是我们试图采取的方法。无论是赠款还是投资，第一步始终处于尽职调查过程中。因此，我们很乐意看到，一般来说，在我们的投资组合中演讲，该公司或该基金正在尝试获得的影响，即作为业务模型嵌入的实际影响指标？这两件事捆绑在一起吗？
董事会的多样性是什么？他们如何进行决策？管理团队还如何看待其影响力与业务模式之间的联系？我们与共同投资者的一致性如何。所有这些事情也是如此，因为我们想为成功做好准备。因此，前期尽职调查是我们花费大量时间的地方。然后，管理层实际上是一系列管理我们与公司和基金经理建立的目标的管理。对于我们的直接投资，对于我们的风险投资组合，我们实际上将董事总监Carrie与她的影响目标以及财务绩效联系在一起。因此，我们在内部做到这一点，并且在拨款方面与我们要管理的方向相似。但是，成为单户办公室的一件有趣的事情是，我们不必为任何人提供光泽的报告。 We want to stay honest about what it is we’re doing, but also not overburden our investees and our grantees.
Liesel Pritzker Simmons:I mean, I think that one of the things that I saw and learned from an early age was just my mom’s own actions, and what she was doing and how she was a part of her community and giving back and worried about this. All those things you see day-to-day, and they’re important. Also knowing. I come from a well-known business family. And so, always hearing that also reflected back, and wanting to understand that I know how lucky I am, first of all, I know that the odds of getting born in this position are insane, therefore it’s up to me to take that seriously. And how do I engage with the world in a way that doesn’t exacerbate privilege, but actually might do something good with it?
And so, what I should do is learn from my mom, learn from my family and be as creative and thoughtful as I possibly can be around how to do that effectively. And so, I think that was a big part of it, of seeing in action growing up my mom live those things out. And so, that made a big impression on me. And then I also think, I mean, one of the things that I’ve also learned and when I’ve spoken with other peers who are also inheritors, I understand and I get that there’s pressure associated with that. And sometimes it can be a little bit paralyzing of, you know you’re really lucky, you know you’re supposed to be lucky, you know you’re supposed to do… There’s a lot of pressure around that. And sometimes I see peers retreat from that, or don’t want people to know their last name, or don’t want people to know their net worth.
我认为我有早期的好处being relatively public about all of this is that that just blew that out of the water. I didn’t have time for that. You can Google me and you know how much money I … I’m aware of it, and so now what I want to do is I’m going to say, “Okay, now that you have that information, let me tell you so much more about what we’ve been doing and what we can do.” Once you can break through that, and I get that that can be a scary thing. I’m not yelling at anybody about that. I’m not judging people around that, but the quicker you can be like, “Oh, whatever, the cat’s out of the bag,” the faster you can move forward with the actual work that desperately needs to be done. We need all of the creative, smart, thoughtful, responsible asset owners to be out there on the forefront. We don’t have time anymore. Yeah, I think that’s part of it too.
尼克·泰德斯科:Well, well done, Mom. Irene, you raised an incredible daughter, who has gone on to change the world. And no doubt will continue to do so. We’d love to hear any advice you have for the parents out there that are listening about how to raise responsible children. In part the same lessons that you embodied in your raising of Liesel.
艾琳·普利兹克（Irene Pritzker）：Well, I think an awful lot depends on the family values, the values of the parents themselves. The fact that Liesel embraced the path that she did was sourced maybe in what she saw me do, but not all parents hold the same values by any stretch of the imagination. But I think that it’s really important. You can share what you think is important, but I wouldn’t shove it down a kid’s throat. I think it’s better for them to just take a quizzical look at, what is she doing? Find your own passion.
尼克·泰德斯科:I’d love for you to share some words of advice, some reflections.
Liesel Pritzker Simmons:One thing I think is interesting, and particularly for the next gens out there who maybe want to do impact investing or want to do it with the corpus of their foundation or family office, and might be hitting a barrier, whether it’s with family members or financial advisors, one of the things that I found to be really interesting, and it’s clear from this conversation, is sometimes if you position impact investing as this new thing, or you guys have been doing it wrong all these years. I’m the young, next gen here to tell you how we’ve all been terribly irresponsible, and now we need to take responsibility, that doesn’t tend to go very well.
But one of the things that I have seen, and when you start talking to next gens, the reason that they want to do impact investing is because of the values their parents taught them. It’s because of the older generation and they want to activate it in a new way with new tools that weren’t around necessarily 20 years ago. And so, I think threading the needle between impact investing and catalytic capital with actually what you’ve been taught. Of course, you’re going to want to use these new tools. Because you were raised by parents with values. And so, I think that’s one thing I’ve seen work effectively in terms of getting into impact investing when you’re working with multi-generations and lots of different personality types. So yeah.
艾琳·普利兹克（Irene Pritzker）：Well, I think perhaps, if you see something that troubles you, don’t work in a bubble. Find out who else is doing this sort of thing, and whether or not they’re doing it well. I always remember when I first started with this thing, and I’m like, “These low-fee schools. This is troubling me, and I don’t know what to do.” And Liesel said, “Be a joiner, join everything. You’ll never learn unless you trundle off and join everything, and hear what everybody else is saying.” I’m like, I don’t want to trundle all over the place and sit in conferences.” And she said, “Well, then, you’ll never learn.”
现在，我是在会议上讲话的人。对于不确定该怎么做的所有人，成为一名细木工。我认为，使用您的网络。您的网络比您想象的要大得多。相信我。我认为我没有任何类型的网络，然后我发现我很快就可以通过木匠开发网络。因此，我认为您只需要真正的灵活性即可。不要坚持您已经持续了很长时间的这些严格的信念。显示灵活性，听。最重要的是，听人们说的话。 Those are my best words of advice, and don’t ever, ever give up.
尼克·泰德斯科:I just want to thank you both. I think we’re all leaving with full hearts and really open minds, and inspired by this conversation. So thank you both for your time.