Four questions by Antony-Bugg Levine and Ellis Carr:

  • What can we do to become more diverse and inclusive?

We already have the programs in effect that all we need to do is change them from affirmative action to diversitive action in a economical environmental social governance structure.


  • How can we measure and manage our social impact more effectively?
    Social Impact Bond Corporation structure simply runs our capitalist structure in reverse from a financial return to the creator of financial return which is a prosperous human being/consumer using the same metrics in reverse. To do that, investments are made into opportunities that are abundant in blighted communities and 80% of the impoverished world.


  • How can we stay true to our founders’ spirit of social justice?

Investing Impact’s meaning is each investor’s gifts/skills are the impact with their funding  being the resources combining with the gifts/skills of people with their knowledge of their communities as resources  in an inter-connecting network of intrapreneurs as a corporation of corporations. In the words   of J.Paul Getty, “I rather have 1% of the effort of 100 men(people) than 100% of my own effort." "What if these men who are successful because of their drive, intelligence and ambition, were to put their talents to work improving their communities?" Melvin Jones, Chicago Businessman and founder of the Lions Club 1917.


  • How can we build conduits that connect marginalized communities to innovations in impact investing and social enterprise? 

Through the Social Impact Bond Corporation stucture, these marginalized communities become our base development training grounds because the people and these communities are the closest template to the development of the 80% impoverished sector of the world as the now inter-connected people of these American communities become the lead in developing communities they have knowledge of and were once a part of. Using recycled materials and alternative energy in the development of these communities creates limitless opportunities for innovation while the government profits from the massive scaling of the growing tax base to develop more opportunities for creating a synergy with the present system. All of the publicly traded corporations who are involved in the mentor/protégé program of this stucture are all now positive targets for Impact Investing. The corporations that the investors are invested in are creating their own prosperity by nurturing, developing, and growing their own consumer base out of the once 80% impoverished part of the world.

Additional questions: 


  • Few solutions that meet the fundamentals of the poor will get your money back.

Resolved: Because of the single bottom line of (TROI) Total Return on Investment, the investment is in the skills and talents of people converted to Micro-businesses as commodities developing each person as a valued asset in production, then, through prosperity as a consumer-(TROI).


  • Overcoming market failure requires subsidy.

Resolved: Social Impact Bond Corporation’s service is to provide the government with a growing tax base that actually would supply subsides needed for SIB’s or Pay for Success Project development.


  • Revenue does not equal profit.

Resolved: No, but TROI does! With revenue circulating through dual structures with two essentially conjoining different bottom lines, Social Impact Bond Corporation’s purpose is revolving revenue generating a product that the residual creates what generates profits, a consumer/prosperous human. Intrapreneurist System TROI = Capitalist System ROI!


  • There’s a natural tendency to focus on the needs and concerns of the investor over those of the enterprise.

Resolved: The Investors begin the cycle as shareholders (The Core) of the enterprise, as the enterprise is a partner stakeholder. As the enterprise evolves and prospers, the enterprise becomes a re-investor to the investor.


  • Social goals are not amenable to single, simple measures the way that financial goals are.

Resolved: Social Impact Partnership is simply measured by each human participants Micro-Business Business Volume (MBV), production, consumption, duplication, reinvestment and interest for one common purpose, TROI! The Global Poverty Clock gauges per second how many people die of poverty in the world. The average developed country GDP per capita is $45,000. Our simple metrics is gauged by 1 second gained in the Social Impact Partnership Corporation Strucutre is equivalent to $45,000 in the Capitalist Stucture, thus a conversion system designed with a clear understanding for the investors. 


  • The deep, underlying structures of modern corporate enterprises (ownership, governance, legal rights and obligations) create an unintended barrier to integrating concerns about people and planet with the profit-making motive, and current capital markets (both primary and secondary) and investment practices strongly amplify rather than mitigate this tendency.

Resolved: Simply running the Capitalist structure in reverse in collaboration with a tandem structure creates a circular economy. People as consumers via a prosperous person, are the only source of profits. The planet is the only source for the survival of people. Therefore, the only true underlying structure of the economic system is the development of healthy prosperous people living on a healthy environmental earth (TROI).







Eyes on the Horizon: Impact Report Shows $60 Billion in Assets, but Where’s the Growth?

 The results are in from impact investing’s annual report, and while they show clear progress, they raise a serious question: why can’t impact fund managers put more capital to work, even after they’ve raised it?

Poverty, Hunger and Environment are not a Problem in this Present System...Their just not Important!...Social Impact Bond System creates that Importance!

Super Rich Hide $21-32 Trillion Offshore, Study Says - Forbes


Jul 23, 2012 - A new report finds that around the world the extremely wealthy have accumulated at least $21 trillion in secretive offshore accounts. That’s a sum equal to the gross domestic products of the United States and Japan added together.

*SIBCO creates an industry that recycles those profit accounts through the same channels that created them. Thus, securing those profits for the people who created them and growing their NETWORTH/WEALTH in perpetuity.

3.1 Harnessing the Hype

 Since the term was firm coined in 2007, many leading proponents of impact investing have estimated the potential size of the sector. In 2009, the Monitor Institute estimated that the impact investment market could potentially reach US$ 500 billion by 2020 (or 1% of total managed assets, estimated at US$ 50 trillion). In 2010, JP Morgan and Rockefeller Foundation sized the bottom-of-the-pyramid market opportunity across five sectors and estimated that the impact investment sector could reach US$ 400 billion to US$ 1 trillion by 2020. And in 2012, the Calvert Foundation formed an estimate through a representative survey of investment managers, applying prospective adoption rates to a global investment management industry of US$ 26 trillion, and reached a market potential of US$ 650 billion.









Issues from “Learning from Experience” – Rikers Island SIB Project, Gordon l. Berlin  


The balance of risk and reward. The returns governments are willing to pay may not be proportional to the risks some lenders are able to take.

Resolved: With SIB’s incorporated into the SIBCO structure, all risks are calculated then corrected within the stucture allowing the government and SIBCO to decide at their own discretion whether to incorporate the SIB into the stucture where impact is primary or let the government maintain the SIB. 


The focus on government savings. Many deals still depend on the possibility of government savings. But insisting on government savings can unnecessarily rule out projects that might otherwise offer valuable social returns.

Resolved: Because of SIBCO’s single bottom line of Impact (TROI), all SIB’s that are impact focused will have value to the SIBCO stucture, which will be contractually obligated to growing the government’s tax base.


The tyranny of SIB metrics. For SIB-funded programs to meet the expectations of all parties, it is not enough for them to have the desired effect on participants. To meet a deal’s savings targets they must also serve a pre-specified number of people and do so in a fixed span of time. These expectations are codified in relatively inflexible lending agreements. Yet to be successful, social interventions must be able to adapt to unforeseen developments.

Resolved: The participants are stakeholders and SIBCO’s metrics (TROI), sharing in the contractual agreement in the time span of the contract with any unforeseen developments adjusted by the stakeholders to improvise, adapt and overcome for future SIBCO-Government contracts making all SIB’s valid.


The role of evidence. SIBs reduce risk for government entities by promising that they will have to pay only for successful interventions. To fulfill that promise, a SIB must include independent, rigorous evaluation of a program’s effectiveness over the status quo — a requirement that poses a new form of investor risk.

Resolved: SIBCO is structured by parts of pre-existing proven business models and social programs exposing the risk potential to the investors as investments with track records they have either experienced or can acquire knowledge from partner shareholders in the SIBCO stucture. The bottom line is the investors are investing in the only commodity that gives all other commodities their market value, a consumer.  

The mission of SIBCO is to to provide the next step for SIB programs to continue on into the SIBCO stucture for guaranteed success!