Dwight Poler on Impact Investing
"I think often of the age-old wisdom: 'Alone I go fast, but together we go far.' Working in partnership with the Boston Foundation on a significant portion of my philanthropy has proven the essence of that phrase."
TBF interviewed Dwight Poler, Chair of TBF's Board of Directors, for his insights about impact investing for the Spring 2025 issue of TBF News. Read his full interview here.
A condensed and edited version of this interview appeared in the Spring 2025 Issue of TBF News.
TBF News: Impact Investing is a broad term. How do you think about it?
Dwight Poler: I think of all investments as having impact; the question is whether that impact is positive or negative and to what degree. As such, I think about all investments on a spectrum, with two axes: First, the financial return on the capital deployed; and second, the direction and degree of social impact. In my family’s portfolio, we first try to screen out investments with negative outcomes, as much as possible; then we seek out those with the maximum positive impact and opportunity for financial return, which thereby extends the economic sustainability of our investing.
For the purpose of this conversation, I use impact investing to mean social impact investments with the potential for the return of capital. When considering social impact investments, I try to focus on the most important issues that also are the most unmet by other support. I also consider where my own skillsets and resources offer the best fit for accomplishing a positive impact. I consider: the degree of total positive impact, whether through perfect supporting data or not; economic sustainability, by which I mean how likely the organization is to survive beyond its founding supporters; and repeatability and scalability of the proposed impact. I tend to hold high standards up front and then reinvest more heavily in those that demonstrate the best outcomes.
TBF News: What is an example of a best practice when it comes to impact investing?
DP: The success of impact investing depends on organizations and investors engaging in intentional dialogue up front: defining the problem; proposing the intervention; considering the economic sustainability of the intervention and the possible scenarios of the outcomes and refinements to improve them. If outcomes are met, then capital is recycled. Job training programs that incorporate the needs and offerings of employers, schools, students, and funders directly demonstrate the best realized successes. Careful pre-thinking, prioritization and reconciliation is critical to enabling the higher likelihood of a sustainable positive impact.
While the process for some topics is straightforward to structure for impact investments—such as skills training, healthy living choices, and housing outcomes—many issue areas do not lend themselves as easily to this approach, such as racial inequality or gender discrimination. That said, the same thinking about “systems” is just as effective for grantmaking toward social progress.
TBF News: Do you think impact investing strengthens traditional philanthropy?
DP: I think impact investing has been broadly positive, where applicable, because expectations and intentions are established between funders, communities in need, and the organizations pursuing change. That early collaboration dramatically improves the likelihood of effectiveness, efficiency, legitimacy, and outcomes.
That said, funders should realize that impact investing is not easily applied to all issues and their expectations need to be adapted accordingly. There is a constant tension between a funder’s desire for specific outcomes with supporting data and the burden that places on the organization delivering those outcomes—and sometimes even the privacy of those being served. Sensitivity to these issues is critical and best practice is to have an interactive dialogue, not unspoken frustration.
I am highly attuned to the reality that those with money to grant are often less proximate to the issues and emotions of those they hope to support, so I find ways to incorporate the views and networks of those more proximate to the issues than myself, hopefully including those with true lived experience of the issue we are addressing. Community foundations are particularly well-positioned to provide this, and have significantly amplified the impact of my philanthropy.
"I am highly attuned to the reality that those with money to grant are often less proximate to the issues and emotions of those they hope to support, so I find ways to incorporate the views and networks of those more proximate to the issues than myself, hopefully including those with true lived experience of the issue we are addressing. Community foundations are particularly well-positioned to provide this, and have significantly amplified the impact of my philanthropy."
This is why I have found the Boston Foundation to be a great partner. They have a deeper staff, closer understanding and more tools of impact—including research, convenings and public policy advocacy—than I could ever develop in my own family foundation. With time and engagement with TBF staff, I have been able to expand both the depth and the breadth of the impact of my investments. This is a key advantage that Donor Advised Funds at a community foundation, such as the Boston Foundation, have over private foundations or mass market DAF platforms.
TBF News: Can impact investing attract those who might not be philanthropic otherwise?
DP: I think it won’t likely reach those who are not philanthropically minded, but it can certainly catalyze more funding and impact. With impact investing, there is typically a more defined process to see and understand and more measurable outcomes to assess. Impact investing is also more familiar to those who may have made their wealth in the investment world or building a business themselves. Impact investing draws not only on a philanthropist’s dollars, but on their strategic and operational expertise, leveraging everything they can bring to positive social outcomes. That often brings more personal satisfaction to their philanthropy.
TBF News: Do you think that impact investing can expand the pool of donor partners for a community foundation such as the Boston Foundation?
DP: Absolutely! Most mass market DAF platforms don’t offer impact investing in the many ways that TBF does, and few family foundations have the extensive resources to do this well. Community foundations, such as TBF, are a great place to bring more than just money from donors to bear on our community's challenges and opportunities. While every donor is completely different in a number of ways—lived experience, objectives, resources, advisors, time horizons, and time availability—the more we can collaborate, through community foundations, the more likely it is that we will create economic opportunity and personal satisfaction for all. The Boston Foundation was “There at the Beginning” for so many critical improvements in Boston that we now take for granted. To the extent that funders successfully continue to turn the challenges of Greater Boston into opportunities for its future, I believe we can and will attract more donors, creating a positive flywheel for our shared city.
TBF News: You have been quoted as saying, ‘We used to see risk in the unconventional, but the bigger risk is simply continuing to do the same things and hoping for a different outcome.’ Could you expand on that?
DP: The case is often made—both by both donors and social entrepreneurs—that the philanthropic "system" doesn't work well. It is clear to all that every nonprofit spends an exorbitant amount of time fundraising, often with a very low-percentage yield. Pressure for data is frustrating to nonprofits and donors alike. Donors who struggle to point to clear successes feel frustration. Nonprofits that see bulging DAF balances while the need for funding is omnipresent, feel similarly frustrated.
"To the extent that social impact investing can increase positive outcomes, meet clearly set expectations, recycle more capital into social change, and support more proximate leadership, we have a chance at more positive and legitimate "outcome oriented" successes in social change."
The risk is the counter-narrative. If views from all sides suggest that grant-based funding is not effective, efficient, or legitimate, we can expect that funding will not be sustainable over the long term. That is a huge risk when so many inequality gaps are increasing, environmental risks are rising and collective political will is crumbling. To the extent that social impact investing can increase positive outcomes, meet clearly set expectations, recycle more capital into social change, and support more proximate leadership, we have a chance at more positive and legitimate "outcome oriented" successes in social change.
TBF News: We are in volatile times. Is it a good atmosphere for expanding impact investing?
DP: Overall, the need for philanthropic resources is only likely to rise, at exactly the time the philanthropic sector is under attack. All else being equal, we need to ensure that every charitable dollar is deployed to have the most positive impact it possibly can. Investing well takes discipline but now is the time! Community foundations with deep and experienced staff at the ready can be great partners to help each donor think through their whole portfolio and amplify their impact most effectively.
TBF News: What keeps you engaged in impact investing? How do you think about losses or potential losses?
DP: I feel very fortunate to have both resources and relationships with organizations such as the Boston Foundation that understand community needs and can help me. One way of thinking about losses is when my DAF balance declines. As long as I think my resources were applied to address the most important and most unmet issues, with great partners doing their very best, I feel I have made a positive difference. The losses I don’t like are those I have sustained by not engaging on the right issues, not working with the most effective partners, or not approaching the issues with the appropriate intentionality. I think often of the age-old wisdom: “Alone I go fast, but together we go far.” Working in partnership with the Boston Foundation on a significant portion of my philanthropy has proven the essence of that phrase.
Dwight Poler, Chair of the Boston Foundation, is the founder and CEO of AccelR8 Ventures, a fund investing in early-stage climate change mitigation technologies. Before shifting his career to social impact investing, Dwight spent 24 years investing at Bain Capital, where he became a partner in 1999. Dwight moved to London in 2000 to open and manage Bain's European private equity business until 2018. Dwight remains a Senior Advisor to Bain Capital. He has been active in philanthropic activities over a long period, having co-founded a social investment model in London called the Private Equity Foundation (now Impetus PEF) which, since 2004, invests funds and pro bono skills to build capacity in charities that help disadvantaged young people achieve education and employment and training.