| Overall Rating | Gold |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 73.94 |
| Liaison | Caitlin Steele |
| Submission Date | July 21, 2023 |
San Francisco State University
PA-10: Sustainable Investment
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
2.52 / 3.00 |
caitlin
Steele Dr of Sust & Energy Sustainability |
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) | 9,027,000 US/Canadian $ |
| Community development financial institutions (CDFIs) or the equivalent | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| Socially responsible mutual funds with positive screens (or the equivalent) | 29,835,000 US/Canadian $ |
| Green revolving funds funded from the endowment | 0 US/Canadian $ |
A brief description of the companies, funds, and/or institutions referenced above:
Global Equity Manager [GMO Climate Change]: invests in companies expected to benefit from climate change mitigation/adaptation
Private Real Assets Manager [Vision Ridge]: sustainable real assets strategy focused on renewable energy, infrastructure, water, ag, natural resource companies and projects
Fixed Income Manager [Community Investment Management (CIM)]: small business loans to underserved communities
Percentage of the institution's investment pool in positive sustainability investments:
Does the institution have a publicly available sustainable investment policy?:
A copy of the sustainable investment policy:
The sustainable investment policy:
SFSU policy is attached
Does the institution use its sustainable investment policy to select and guide investment managers?:
A brief description of how the sustainable investment policy is applied:
The Foundation’s investment policy integrates sustainability into 100% of the investment decisions. With commitment to net zero and a focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion, the investment policy provides clear direction to put social and environmental equity front and center in decision-making for investment managers
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:
The Foundation implements the portfolio with outside fund managers, that vote proxies on behalf of the Foundation. As part of due diligence when considering new investment managers, the Foundation considers their proxy voting approach, and where possible (e.g., separate accounts) will guide the manager to vote proxies in accordance with the ESG/sustainability objectives of the institution.
The Foundation will discuss with managers their proxy voting approach, and elect to have their shares voted in accordance with ESG objectives, where possible.
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:
Does the institution participate in a public divestment effort and/or have a publicly available investment policy with negative screens?:
A brief description of the divestment effort or negative screens and how they have been implemented:
The Foundation has committed to fully divest from fossil fuels over the next several years. More broadly, the Foundation has committed to a net zero objective, to reduce portfolio emissions by 50% by 2030 and 75% by 2035 and 100% by 2040. As part of this net zero approach, divestment from fossil fuel producing companies will be one approach.
Approximate percentage of endowment that the divestment effort and/or negative screens apply to:
Does the institution engage in policy advocacy by participating in investor networks and/or engage in inter-organizational collaborations to share best practices?:
A brief description of the investor networks and/or collaborations:
The Foundation have been active participants in the Intentional Endowments Network (https://www.intentionalendowments.org/), “the leading mission-aligned investing network for higher education and other endowed institution.” The Foundation also participates in investor statements/campaigns when possible, including the Global Investor Statement to Governments on the Climate Crisis (https://theinvestoragenda.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/2022-Global-Investor-Statement-.pdf) organized by the Investor Agenda.
Website URL where information about the institution’s sustainable investment efforts is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
Provided by Cambridge Associates, fiscal year 2021-2022
Provided by Cambridge Associates, fiscal year 2021-2022
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.