Discuss About The Obesity Prevention And Improved Nutrition.
The need to implement stable improvement in the society by fostering incredible improvement and progress is of utmost urgency and should never be neglected. In today’s realm of apparent economic freedom, millions of people are living impoverished and living within marginalised communities where various social problems like health issues, economic disparity, high rate of orphans and other issues. People like these who are not able to make ends meet and lack sufficient resources for supporting their livelihood, rely mostly upon charitable organisations who work in close counters for the upliftment of these people, by helping them with basic supplies like food and shelter along with other resources. It should be understood that governments of developing countries have lot of responsibilities. On that mote, there are several organisations who do not operate on the lines of profitability and raise funds in order to support people who are impoverished or needy, particularly orphans, or the people who have been marginalised due to their health factors of chronic illnesses.
Works of charity also make significant contributions toward social, political as well as economic factors in Australia (Chuen 2015). Like private and public organisations, ancillary funds also renders services that make significant contributions. Services like building hospitals, schools, and housing complexes create value towards the society. This research study focuses on the Open Society Foundations Organisation which is a fictional charitable philanthropic trust.
This organisation is a reputable trust that operates in various parts of Australia rendering charitable works in various Australian cities. The organisation has handsome funds and educated employees who understand the societal needs and haver the potential to create a long lasting influence on the lives of the Australian people. The organisation allocate their funds and the philanthropic projects particularly towards the welfare of the deserving, including the orphans. This is a philanthropic organisation basically, which focuses on charitable activities only, operating within and even outside their periphery by offering either service or financial grants. The innovative evaluation dissemination is followed by the organisation by means of which the people in the organisation update themselves with relevant information of social status of the people in Australia so that they can strive towards helping more and more people.
I have undertaken the active role of acting as a consultant to this non-profit organisation and by means of global knowledge, I suppose the organisation would be able to spread their helping hands towards other areas of the world just as foreign organisations also renders help to their needs. As an outcome of this, their productivity level as well as fund generation would also increase. The kind of operations that this organisation undertakes makes them popular in Australia and hence they are able to attract attention as well as funds from many philanthropist from Australia and also all over the world.
Following a report based structure, the organisation have been described here along with a proper layout of the legal status and the legal layout of the philanthropic trust. The impact investing outcomes for this trust have also ben highlighted with proper evidence of case examples. Besides recommendations for the future improvements of this trust have also provided in the course of this report.
In the year 1985, the joint venture from Melbourne Academy of Social Sciences and the Open Society Foundations was founded. The objective of the foundation was to eradicate living bi-standards and communalism. The backdrop of the undertaken activities of the organisation have been cultural freedom and social integrity. In 1993, the company started its core operations in the areas of Queensland council, Calinan County and so on. Since August 10th of 2009, the company expanded their role in order to act as a benefactor to the civil society organisations in all parts of the country and even in other parts of Oceania as well. The organisation believes that political agendas are limited and their impacts shows reflexivity of their diplomatic needs. Nevertheless, financial markets are cold stores of power which needs optimisations and decentralisation for supporting the move to eradicate bi standards of living and intentional and unethical communalism. This is essentially a non-profit organisation. The organisation addresses the current as well as the future needs of the local communities. They are also up to creating an alternative monetary fund permanently that would support the local communities. As informed by Barraket, Barth and Mason (2015), they receive help from other philanthropic organisations as well as famous personalities in Australia and other countries who also carry out philanthropic activities by themselves.
The key missions of their operations are:
The organisation accumulate their governance expertise, depth of knowledge, societal working trends as well as their grass root connections in order to deliver a community of engaged philanthropists to the society. Their main motto is the creation of potential, resilient and healthy communities who have equal participation in the state territory where they exist. They also operate various communication channels in order to create an Impact Fund, having share in existing sub-funds and start small initiatives with Gumnut accounts.
However, most importantly, the organisation raises impact investments funds for small objectives. In order to break the shackles of communal fragmentation, the company also invests about AUD $65 million annually to establish high-impact, sub market returns. Till now the company have provided AUD $200 million loans to 300 small and emerging business law entrepreneurs represented by sub sided communities. The repayment rate have been 98%. This shows that most of the ventures of the company have been successful. The company, for evidence invested in certified apple trading in Perth. Smallholder farmers mainly comprised of the cooperative society which have been sponsored with the funds. The additional revenue that the company earns from such endeavours are used to launch small projects like reforestation, establishing community based clinics for health care and donating towards developing the business of small farmers.
The company also invests in housing projects with investment based financial returns and providing various social benefits to the rural communities in Southern Australia and South Eastern Australia. In this context, the company gathers investments from major financial institutions, privately owned family companies, development and real estate agencies and other large scale organisations. For instance, the company made a potential investment of AUD $$4 million to an organisation that worked towards building affordable homes for low end incoming families in the unorganised rural sector. Another similar aid was provided to a real estate agency in Tasmania that provided temporary shelters to the people affected by natural calamities. Other important investments area are access to clean energy as well as clean drinking water. A European organisation approached the organisation as a part of their CSR activities. The two companies formed a joint venture to donate AUD $10 million towards the development of in-house electricity producing facility in order to light up 500 houses of the rural sector. This include houses of aboriginal Australians who have been submitting petitions to the government with the want of access to electricity.
In the year 2013, the Australian social impact investment saw a rapid rise owing to major investments from international investors and the United Nations. At present the market value of the operations of the philanthropic impact investments in Australia is AUD $32 million (Carè & Wendt, 2018). In the G8 conference the Australian Social as well as affordable housing fund was formed and invited tenders from various agencies around the world to establishing housing in Australia. The federal government of Australia sanctioned loans for the housing program at 15% lower corporate tax rate for the agencies involved in that approach (Wheeler et al. 2014). However trusteeship is a very big concern for engaging in philanthropic impact investing in Australia. In case if an organisation itself or in joint venture undertakes an approach to launch an investment campaign they needs to assure the government that the company(s) have the financial capability to make the investment. Hence, Cumming and Johan (2016), opines that the government needs to confirm that the campaign is within the investments power of the campaigners. In this regard, the company had received financial aids from European investors and 8 agencies had launched a joint venture under the leadership of this organisation in order to fulfil the financial needs of the farmers in the Great Barrier Reef area. Hence the company had to fill the 52 (c) (c) form of the federation’s Superannuation Industrial Act 1933 (Chuen, 2015). The beneficiaries had an insurance of getting return on their investments as an impact and there always is an assurance of the completion sand/or implementation of the project.
Another regulation of the government of Australia requires that the workers employed in accomplishment of the project required basic standard of the care and/or skill that is to be provided to the beneficiaries. In this context, de Zwaan, Brimble and Stewart (2015), opines that the government have the 52(b) of the SIS act that confirms that the labours involved should provide a skill test for being eligible to work on the project. The company had to comply with this regulation during undertaking the artificial electricity hub implantation in the rural areas of Tasmania and the Northern Australia (Stubbs, 2017). In this context, the company had to endure additional costs of AUD $1million for inviting a Japanese company to act as technical supervisors for the project. Again, Dowling (2017), informs that the Prudential Regulatory authority in Australia is another regulatory body that inspects the norms of the micro-financial loans that the organisation gives to various small agencies or communities. In this context, the social investment undertaking bodies like this company have to deposit certain share of their value that would be credit with interest after completion of a certain percentage of the project and the release is up to the discretion of the concerned body that is the Prudential Regulatory body in Australia. The investments from foreign origin is on the rise and that is why the Australian government have introduced a new regulation since 2016. It is evident that the social investment making organisations have the license to accept funds from any of the foreign origins including the middle East and Asia also. As per Flatau et al. (2015), the prudential regulatory body of Australia requires the monitoring of the investments also. The major bodies that accepts foreign investments have to give a record of the funds that they have accepted from the foreign origins and also mention the source from where they have accepted the funds. Furthermore the government also forms an inspection council that collects data regarding the progress of the various projects that have been launched with foreign aid and sends a satisfaction report to the government (Snider, 2015). Another important regulation 35 © of the SIS act also allows the government from stalling or terminating any of the investors or partners from any ongoing project in case if the government finds any of following in the case of the project:
The concerned company here, being a private ancillary fund needs to follow up all these regulations along with one principal consideration. One of such persons have to be in the directorial committee of the organisation who is a socially responsible person. In this organisation, there are two personalities who associated with international level outdoor sports in Australia and later turned to philanthropists. The concerned organisation being a private fund is to pay a certain percentage of financial return to the government. Other than that the activities of the company in or outside Australia are not taxable by the Australian government or the United Nations (Impact, 2014). The requirements for accepting funds have been stated already. Other than that if the organisation provides fund to any other corporation of the same genre, it have to grant the sanctioning of the fund from the government of Australia. The organisation also have to fill the clause 61 form of the 58(b) regulation of the SDIS act whereby the government should be informed of the possible risk of participating in a philanthropic program as a partner, either strategic or financial.
Often impact investments are undertaken by corporations that have particular thematic approach towards social investments. IN case if any organisation is selling products like as alcohol or might be tobacco that is potentially harmful for the society, undertaking impact investments can suggest to be really beneficial for the company. Other genres of organisation like pornography, or guns often endorse projects based on environment concerns or usage of clean energy. Although the organisation is not concerned with any of such aforementioned industries, the company had taken up the in initiative of cleaning the Great Barrier Reef. As informed by Lehner (2016), this initiative won high acclaim from the United Nations and fund as well as resources were allocated from the UN in order to facilitate the heritage site of the Great Barrier Reef. Hence it is evident as per the regulations of the Australian regulations that if any of the organisations are taking up any unethical business initiatives for generation they would be at a good place if they have paralley, also taken up an impact investment initiative that is significant from the social perspective.
Operating in Australia, the individuals or the organisations also have the benefit of accepting the funds of mutual funds in delving in to philanthropic projects. However, Ormiston et al. (2015), opines that the allocation of funds should be notified with the Sustainable as well as Responsible investment Forum of Australia. The Australian government at presents enlist 456 mutual funds from where the social investment agencies can take loans without the prior concern of the government. In this context, it requires mention that the company during 2017, accepted loans of AUD $5 million from a British fund raiser, that had a Canadian stock investor in their governing body. The company named Amana Income Fund had to provide a declaration to the Australian government citing that they had suitable permissions for collecting funds from any of the beneficiaries connected with them. In this context, they showed a NOC to the Australia government (Scholtens, 2014). Only after that the Australian government sanctioned the AUD $30 million joint venture project to the company and its partners.
However impact Investing have various disadvantages also. There is no specific genre to define an impact investing company. A tobacco brand if they comply by the norms of SRI guidelines in Australia, can invest in philanthropic projects. However since this company is a core investment company that is listed only for philanthropic operations the particulars of the two parent agencies have only 50% impact on the operations (Sardy & Lewin, 2016). Other than that, there are also few socially responsible persons who have represented the nation in various fields.
Portfolio management n undertaken by the mutual funds in order to determine the funds are coming from ethical sources can often cause interruption in the activities of the social projects that might have been undertaken currently by a company (Patton, 2015). The fees payable to mutual funds have fallen in the recent year and this is why most of the philanthropic organisations accepts funds from them.
Often a company like this one might have global partners and investors. Often many of the foreign investors might be unwilling to provide funds under the stringent guidelines of the Australian government. In that case the parent company would be in doldrums as they might have done partial investments and also deposited security fees to the government (Playford et al. 2014). The company under concern here most of the times do not take the risk and involves stakeholder’s representatives in the executive committee of almost all project.
One of the most important initiatives that have been taken up by the company was the distribution of the pay against success bonds, the bonds granted the farmers of West Australia to purchase bonds and conduct business under the guidance of the experts who would be working with them in their projects. The company had a policy that in case if the business of the beneficiaries did not click or if they run into loss at -11% or more they would not have to pay back the bond value. They can only pay back the purchase value. This helped the farmers immensely. However the company ensured that the business projects of the stakeholders did not fail. In order to achieve this this they had along with team a groups of agricultural experts committee whom the farmers could not have afforded to active. However in concern to the priorities of the grant makers who had invested about AUD $50 million for the project, the company y made this arrangement. However as an impact the farmers associated with this venture had worked with the group of agricultural experts and gained a harvest rate of 144%. Hence the company could also gain back 81% of their money. Their expected return rate was 65%. Hence, the grant makers’ interest were commendably defended by the company in this initiative.
Another international initiative of the company might be highlighted in this context. In 70 of the poorest countries the country had arranged for vaccination during the recent outburst of the swine flu. Nevertheless, the company skilfully preserved the interests of the grant makers, this time also. Many of the global corporations of medicine had supplied vaccination to the company as a part of their CSR activities. The company made this a public campaign and marketed this as an event with keeping the commercial medicine companies in the frontline. This helped hugely in their brand endorsement and as an outcome, the companies gained a brand equity of over 1.5 units (Qiu, Movassaghi & Bramhandkar, 2017). This also increased their revenue returns.
It would be beneficial for the Australian companies to team up with the government or government franchised organisations. As an impact, the profit making companies would not have endure the stringencies of the government. Moreover, government aid in case of philanthropic activities do not require payback of funds and hence grant makers interest do not raise concern for the companies. Other than that, having government as partners raise the weightage of the companies investing in social impacts.
Having public ancillary funds as partners and having greater share of them in the project funds reduces the stringency of the government. Hence it makes easier for the executive or the governing body of the project to manipulate funds according to the needs of the project.
Investing in development impact bonds earns high amount of aid from the government bodies. Besides the development impact projects are considered to be most beneficial as the listing of the company becomes higher and the share value also increases as an impact.
Conclusion
Analysing the impact investing trends in Australia, it can be concluded that there are more chances of confirming investable deals. Larger development investments projects and government favoured endeavours can lead an impact investment organisation towards becoming a universal regulator of economy and as an outcome they can earn more and more brand endorsements also. Besides that, the creation of a benchmark of a core investment agency have helped the company to gain serious reputation among the private ancillary funds of Australia.
Reference List
Barraket, J., Barth, S. and Mason, C., 2015. Resourcing social enterprises: approaches and challenges, Bankwest Foundation Social Impact Series No. 2, Bankwest Foundation, Western Australia. Jo Barraket is Director of the Centre for Social Impact (CSI) Swinburne. Sharine Barth is Senior Research Assistant with CSI Swinburne. Chris Mason is Senior Research Fellow with CSI Swinburne. Published by The Bankwest Foundation Level C, 12, p.300.
Carè, R. and Wendt, K., 2018. Investing with impact: An integrated analysis between academics and practitioners. In Social Impact Investing Beyond the SIB (pp. 5-45). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Chuen, D.L.K. ed., 2015. Handbook of digital currency: Bitcoin, innovation, financial instruments, and big data. Academic Press.
Cumming, D. and Johan, S., 2016. Venture’s economic impact in Australia. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(1), pp.25-59.
de Zwaan, L., Brimble, M. and Stewart, J., 2015. Member perceptions of ESG investing through superannuation. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6(1), pp.79-102.
Dowling, E., 2017. In the wake of austerity: social impact bonds and the financialisation of the welfare state in Britain. New Political Economy, 22(3), pp.294-310.
Flatau, P., Zaretzky, K., Adams, S., Horton, A. and Smith, J., 2015. Measuring outcomes for impact in the community sector in Western Australia. Bankwest Foundation Social Impact Series, (1), pp.4-4.
Haski-Leventhal, D. and Mehra, A., 2016. Impact measurement in social enterprises: Australia and India. Social Enterprise Journal, 12(1), pp.78-103.
Höchstädter, A.K. and Scheck, B., 2015. What’s in a name: An analysis of impact investing understandings by academics and practitioners. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(2), pp.449-475.
Impact, S. and Taskforce, I., 2014. Impact investment: The invisible heart of markets.
Junkus, J. and Berry, T.D., 2015. Socially responsible investing: a review of the critical issues. Managerial Finance, 41(11), pp.1176-1201.
Lehner, O.M., 2016. Routledge handbook of social and sustainable finance. Routledge.
Liu, M.M., 2015. Angels without borders: Trends and policies shaping angel investment worldwide. World Scientific.
Ormiston, J., Charlton, K., Donald, M.S. and Seymour, R.G., 2015. Overcoming the challenges of impact investing: Insights from leading investors. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 6(3), pp.352-378.
Patton, A., 2015. Investing in the right things makes business and ethical sense. Development Finance Agenda (DEFA), 1(3), pp.8-9.
Playford, D.E., Evans, S.F., Atkinson, D.N., Auret, K.A. and Riley, G.J., 2014. Impact of the Rural Clinical School of Western Australia on work location of medical graduates. Med J Aust, 200(2), pp.104-107.
Qiu, J., Movassaghi, H. and Bramhandkar, A., 2017. Socially conscious investing in good times and bad: do good deeds get punished?. The Business & Management Review, 8(4), p.210.
Sacks, G. and Robinson, E., 2018. Investing for Health: Potential Mechanisms for the Investment Community to Contribute to Obesity Prevention and Improved Nutrition. Current obesity reports, pp.1-9.
Sardy, M. and Lewin, R., 2016. Towards A Global Framework for Impact Investing. Volume 7 Table of Contents 2016, p.73.
Scholtens, B., 2014. Indicators of responsible investing. Ecological Indicators, 36, pp.382-385.
Snider, A., 2015. Impact investing: The performance realities. Wealth Management Institute.
Stubbs, W., 2017. Characterising B Corps as a sustainable business model: An exploratory study of B Corps in Australia. Journal of cleaner production, 144, pp.299-312.
Wheeler, S., Loch, A., Zuo, A. and Bjornlund, H., 2014. Reviewing the adoption and impact of water markets in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia. Journal of Hydrology, 518, pp.28-41.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download