2. The College Sustainability Report Card (National)
The Billion Dollar Green Challenge (National Challenge)
Leaders in Energy Efficiency Financing (Regional Network)
The Sustainable Endowments Institute

5. Why choose a Green Revolving Fund?
• Transform expense into investment
• Convey reputational benefits
• Catalyze a culture shift
• Alleviate pressure from tight budgets
• Reduce internal transaction costs
• Institutionalize a mechanism for reinvesting
• Performance Tracking
• Seize new fundraising opportunities

6. Anatomy of a Green Revolving Fund
• Seed Capital
• Accounting Systems
• Fund Oversight
• Fund Operations and Project Selection
• Project Criteria
• Measuring Savings
• Long-term Strategy

7. 10 Steps to a Successful GRF
1. Do your homework
2. Select your model
3. Access opportunity and run the numbers
4. Build buy-in
5. Secure seed capital
6. Establish financial flows
7. Launch and manage
8. Implement projects
9. Track, analyze, and assess performance
10. Optimize and improve

8. • Financial Goals
• Environmental Goals
• Education or Community Goals
• Types:
Efficiency
Innovation & Engagement
Hybrid
• Champions
• Sources of Capital
• Fund Size
• Project Selection
• Payback Criteria

9. • Champions
• Sources of GRF Capital
• Fund Size
• Fund Structure & Management
• Payback Criteria
• Interest Charges

10. • ROI & Other Benefits
• Reported payback
• Loan vs. Accounting Model
• Estimating & Verifying Performance
• Tracking Savings
• GRF Restrictions

12. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
NumberofGRFs
Year
Growth of Green Revolving Funds: 1992-2012 N = 79

13. 16
11
17
8
27
12
14
17
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0-4,999 5,000-14,999 15,000-24,999 25,000+
NumberofInstitutions
Distribution of GRFs
Distribution of Green Revolving Fund Institutions
by Enrollment Size
2011
2012
N = 70

14. 40
5
10
6
2
6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0-49k 50-99k 100-249k 250-499k 500-749k 750k+
NumberofInstitutions
Endowment Value per Student
Distribution of Green Revolving Funds by Endowment
Value per Student
N=68

15. 38
23
33
6 7
25
16
39
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
NumberofInstitutions
Champions
Green Revolving Fund Champions
N= 69

16. 8
3
5
23
2
7
6
3
5
2
14
0
5
10
15
20
25
NumberofInstitutions
Type of funding
Green Revolving Fund
Common Sources of Capital
N= 59

17. 14
15 15
22
27
16
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Above $1 million $100k - $999k Under $100k
NumberofInstitutions
Size of GRFs
Number of Green Revolving Funds
by Capitalization
Series1
Series2
N= 65

18. Institution Fund Name Est. Fund Commitment Projects ROI
Western Michigan University Quasi-Revolving Fund 1980 $385,000 101 47%
Stanford University Energy Retrofit Program 1993 $2,000,000 381 27%
Harvard University Green Loan Fund 2001 $12,000,000 200 29.9%
Stanford University Whole Building Energy
Retrofit Program
2004 $8,000,000 25 22%
Boston University Sustainability Revolving
Loan Fund
2008 $1,203,000 13 57%
Iowa State University Live Green Revolving
Loan Fund
2008 $1,000,000 13 24%
University of Colorado,
Boulder
Energy and Climate
Revolving Fund
2008 $521,186 80 37.8%
Caltech Caltech Energy
Conservation
Investment Program
2009 $8,000,000 30 24%
Swarthmore College Renewing Fund for
Resource Conservation
2009 $43,500 N/A 28.6%
University of Denver Energy Reserve Fund 2009 $6,570,297 32 53%

19. Fast Facts
 Total green revolving funds: 79
 GRFs at private institutions: 42
 GRFs at public institutions: 37
 U.S. states represented: 31
GRF Size
 Smallest fund: $12,000 (Bucknell University)
 Largest fund: $13 million (University of Vermont)
 Median fund size: $400,000
 Average fund size: $1.41 million
Return on Investment
 Minimum reported ROI: 20 percent
 Maximum reported ROI: 57 percent (Boston University)
 Median reported ROI: 28 percent
Payback
 Minimum reported average project payback: 1.6 years
 Maximum reported average project payback: 7.8 years
 Average reported average project payback: 4.4 years

20. Green Revolving Investment Tracking System (GRITS)

26. Dartmouth Green Revolving Loan Fund
FOM Projects
Community Fund

27. Dartmouth Green Revolving Loan Fund
FOM Projects
Community Fund

29.  Existing accounting structures
 Organizational entanglements
 The lighting speed of large organizations
 Sustainability Project bandwidth and priorities