| Overall Rating | Gold - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 65.95 |
| Liaison | Susan Powers |
| Submission Date | Feb. 12, 2016 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
Clarkson University
PA-14: Sustainable Investment
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
1.19 / 4.00 |
Susan
Powers Director of the Institute for a Sustainable Environment ISE |
Total value of the investment pool:
Value of holdings in each of the following categories::
| Value of Holdings | |
| Sustainable industries (e.g. renewable energy or sustainable forestry) | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| Businesses selected for exemplary sustainability performance (e.g. using criteria specified in a sustainable investment policy) | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| Sustainability investment funds (e.g. a renewable energy or impact investment fund) | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| Community development financial institutions (CDFIs) or the equivalent | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| Socially responsible mutual funds with positive screens (or the equivalent) | 5,100,000 US/Canadian $ |
| Green revolving loan funds that are funded from the endowment | 0 US/Canadian $ |
A brief description of the companies, funds, and/or institutions referenced above:
.We use the Aperio Group for SRI fund management.
Investments are all done through mutual funds / invest managers. The inclusion of "0" value for sustainable industries or performance reflects a lack of data, not lack of investment.
Does the institution have a publicly available sustainable investment policy?:
A copy of the sustainable investment policy:
The sustainable investment policy:
CLARKSON UNIVERSITY
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT BELIEFS
February 21, 2013
The Clarkson University Values Statement includes a description of “Vision”: Having a vision of a sustainable future helps us prepare for it. Embracing the inevitable changes in our world as opportunities allows us to anticipate, promote, and facilitate change.
Our investment strategy will seek to embody this value by taking account of the relationship between 1) good environmental management, 2) sensitivity to social issues, and 3) and strong corporate governance; and long-term sustainable business profitability. We will seek to overlay this strategy across our investment portfolio. Our main influence will be through our strategic asset allocation, manager structure, manager selection, performance benchmarks, monitoring, and reporting – and not by getting involved in the day-to-day investment decisions, which is the role of our asset managers.
We will favor investing on a positive “best in class” selection basis, and encourage the use of engagement rather than negative screening.
We believe companies with strong environmental, social, and governance profiles are better managed for the long term, have lower risk profiles, and are positioned to outperform their peers. We engage indirectly through allocating capital to investment managers who invest with companies and sectors with positive economic, ecological, and social impact.
We will consider environmental impact, social justice, and corporate governance issues as we cast our proxy votes.
Does the institution use its sustainable investment policy to select and guide investment managers?:
A brief description of how the policy is applied, including recent examples:
For choice of the SRI fund
Does the institution's sustainable investment policy include negative screens?:
A brief description of the negative screens and how they have been implemented:
The SRI fund focuses on positive screens for pollution abatement, environmental innovations, human rights, and climate change. The negative screens include businesses that promote tobacco, adult entertainment and animal testing. These attributes were identified based on a campus-wide survey that solicited the opinions of employees and students.
Approximate percentage of the endowment that the negative screens apply to:
Has the institution engaged in proxy voting, either by its CIR or other committee or through the use of guidelines, to promote sustainability during the previous three years?:
A copy of the proxy voting guidelines or proxy record:
A brief description of how managers are adhering to proxy voting guidelines:
Has the institution filed or co-filed one or more shareholder resolutions that address sustainability or submitted one or more letters about social or environmental responsibility to a company in which it holds investments during the previous three years?:
Examples of how the institution has engaged with corporations in its portfolio about sustainability issues during the previous three years:
none
Does the institution engage in policy advocacy by participating in investor networks and/or engaging in inter-organizational collaborations to share best practices?:
A brief description of the investor networks and/or collaborations:
The website URL where information about the institution's sustainable investment efforts is available:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.