| Overall Rating | Gold - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 70.23 |
| Liaison | Daimon Eklund |
| Submission Date | Oct. 17, 2012 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
University of Washington, Seattle
SD-14: Endowment
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
| -- | N/A |
"---"
indicates that no data was submitted for this field
None
The institution's total endowment market value as of the close of the most recent fiscal year:
2,154,000,000
US/Canadian $
None
Date as of:
June 30, 2011
None
Does the institution offer donors the option of directing gifts to an investment fund that considers environmental/sustainability factors?:
No
None
If yes, or if currently under consideration, provide a brief description:
N/A
None
Has the institution made investments in on-campus energy and/or water efficiency projects through the endowment (as an endowment investment and not a payout or using operating budget funds):
---
None
Size of capital commitments made within past 3 years:
118,000,000
US/Canadian $
None
Provide a brief description:
Venture capital, private equity, real estate & natural resources
None
Does institution lack the ability to vote proxies on environmental and social resolutions, as the entire equity holdings of the endowment are invested in mutual funds (e.g. CommonFund, Fidelity, Vanguard)?:
No
None
Does the institution lack the ability to vote proxies on corporate governance resolutions, as the entire equity holdings of the endowment are invested in mutual funds (e.g. CommonFund, Fidelity, Vanguard)?:
No
None
Do investment managers handle the details of proxy voting on environmental and social resolutions?:
Yes
None
Do investment managers handle the details of proxy voting on corporate governance resolutions?:
Yes
None
Are investment managers provided with general guidelines that determine proxy votes on environmental and social resolutions?:
Yes
None
Are investment managers provided with general guidelines that determine proxy votes on corporate governance resolutions?:
Yes
None
Are investment managers provided with specific guidelines that determine proxy votes on environmental and social resolutions?:
No
None
Are investment managers provided with specific guidelines that determine proxy votes on corporate governance resolutions?:
No
None
Does a single administrator determine proxy votes on environmental and social resolutions?:
No
None
Does a single administrator determines proxy votes on corporate governance resolutions?:
No
None
Does a committee of administrators and/or trustees deliberate and make decisions on proxy votes on environmental and social resolutions?:
No
None
Does a committee of administrators and/or trustees deliberate and make decisions on proxy votes on corporate governance resolutions?:
No
None
Does a committee that includes student representatives deliberate and make recommendations or decisions on proxy votes on enviromental and social resolutions?:
---
None
Does a committee that includes student representatives deliberate and make recommendations or decisions on proxy votes on corporate governance resolutions?:
---
None
Is institution community feedback incorporated into proxy voting decisions on environmental and social resolutions through town hall meetings or a website?:
No
None
Is institution community feedback incorporated into proxy voting decisions on corporate governance resolutions through town hall meetings or a website?:
No
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
Do investment managers handle the details of proxy voting on environmental and social resolutions? Yes, with an exception for shareholder resolutions related to human rights violations in Burma. The University votes proxies in this area.
Are investment managers provided with general guidelines that determine proxy votes on environmental and social resolutions? Yes, We give them our investment policy which includes a section on Ethical Considerations
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. While fiscal goals are of central importance, due consideration shall be given to the degree of
corporate responsibility exercised by the companies in which investments are made.
2. Direct investment in companies doing business in Sudan whose business activities support the
Sudanese government in its continuing sponsorship of genocidal actions and human rights violations
in Darfur is prohibited.
3. Direct investment in tobacco companies is prohibited.
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.