| Overall Rating | Silver - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 58.75 |
| Liaison | Mark Klapatch-Mathias |
| Submission Date | May 1, 2014 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
University of Wisconsin-River Falls
PA-14: Sustainable Investment
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
0.33 / 4.00 |
Chris
Mueller Investment University Advancement |
"---"
indicates that no data was submitted for this field
None
Total value of the investment pool:
14,000,000
US/Canadian $
None
Value of holdings in each of the following categories::
| Value of Holdings | |
| Sustainable industries (e.g. renewable energy or sustainable forestry) | 700,000 US/Canadian $ |
| Businesses selected for exemplary sustainability performance (e.g. using criteria specified in a sustainable investment policy) | --- |
| Sustainability investment funds (e.g. a renewable energy or impact investment fund) | --- |
| Community development financial institutions (CDFIs) or the equivalent | --- |
| Socially responsible mutual funds with positive screens (or the equivalent) | --- |
| Green revolving loan funds that are funded from the endowment | --- |
None
A brief description of the companies, funds, and/or institutions referenced above:
Since the definition of Sustainable Industry is open ended, Chris Mueller directed the advisors to define as members of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index.
None
Does the institution have a publicly available sustainable investment policy?:
No
None
A copy of the sustainable investment policy:
---
None
The sustainable investment policy:
---
None
Does the institution use its sustainable investment policy to select and guide investment managers?:
No
None
A brief description of how the policy is applied, including recent examples:
---
None
Does the institution's sustainable investment policy include negative screens?:
---
None
A brief description of the negative screens and how they have been implemented:
---
None
Approximate percentage of the endowment that the negative screens apply to:
---
None
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?:
No
None
A copy of the proxy voting guidelines or proxy record:
---
None
A brief description of how managers are adhering to proxy voting guidelines:
---
None
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?:
No
None
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?:
No
None
A brief description of the investor networks and/or collaborations:
---
None
The website URL where information about the institution's sustainable investment efforts is available:
---
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
This is a hard one to get our arms around as “sustainable investment” has so many different definitions. Nevertheless, under Option 1, we can claim $700,000 of the $14,000,000 portfolio in sustainable investments. If there were a better definition, it could be more.
“Active investor engagement” is challenging for us given our diverse alumni and donor population.
-Chris Mueller
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.