John Ruggie, human rights icon, dies at 76

Some SGI members may not recognize his name, but much of our work in human rights over the last 20 years has been built upon John Ruggie’s vision, imagination, determination, and political skill.

John G. Ruggie, a Harvard professor who developed the U.N. Global Compact and its Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), died on Thursday, September 16, at age 76.

SGI joins with so many who mourn the passing of this icon in human rights. May we, who believe in the work that he advanced, continue the efforts that he initiated.

Ruggie was a professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. From 1997-2001, he served as United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Strategic Planning, a post created specifically for him by then Secretary-General Kofi Annan. His areas of responsibility included assisting the Secretary-General in establishing and overseeing the UN Global Compact, now the world’s largest corporate citizenship initiative; proposing and gaining General Assembly approval for the Millennium Development Goals; and broadly contributing to the effort at institutional reform and renewal for which Annan and the United Nations as a whole were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2001. In 2005, Annan appointed Ruggie as the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Business and Human Rights, tasked with proposing measures to strengthen the human rights performance of the global business sector. In June 2011 the UN Human Rights Council, in an unprecedented step, unanimously endorsed the UNGPs that Professor Ruggie developed through extensive consultations, pilot projects and research. The UNGPs, dubbed the “Ruggie Principles,” celebrated their 10th anniversary this year.

I’d recommend reading these tributes to his work:

What’s all the Fuss about Exxon Mobil and Investors lately?

By Sr. Barbara Jennings, CSJ

On May 26, 2021, a little known investment company called Engine No. 1 challenged and won a proxy battle with one of the world’s largest public oil and gas companies, Exxon Mobil.  Three of Engine No. 1’s four proposed Board Members who have qualified energy industry experience were elected to the board. They will challenge company management to transform their business model for a low carbon economy, which will benefit all stakeholders including workers and shareholders alike. 

Shareholder elected Greg Goff, former CEO of Andeavor and EVP of Marathon Petroleum who thinks that mitigating climate change is part of corporate responsibility; Kaisa Hietala, a former VP of Finnish renewable energy company, Neste Oyi; and Alexander Karsner, a strategist at Alphabet, Inc.  These three candidates beat out three of Exxon Mobil’s current, reelected board members. 

Shareholders proposals co-filed by members of the Seventh Generation Interfaith also received majority votes at the Exxon Mobil AGM. Dana Investments, the Capuchins, and the School Sisters of Notre Dame, Central Province co-filed a proposal asking for a report on climate lobbying (64% vote). The Sisters of St. Agnes co-filed the proposal asking for broader lobbying disclosure (55% vote). The Dubuque Franciscan’s co-filed the separate chair proposal (22% vote). Members of SGI and ICCR also co-filed successful climate proposals at Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Phillips66. 

Members of ICCR have dialogued and filed shareholder resolutions at Exxon Mobil since the early 1990’s. The company always responded with platitudes about their amoeba studies for alternative fuels, but refused to set targets or goals.  What has changed?

Here are my educated guesses:

  1. The Time has come! Finally, extreme weather events and consistent calls from scientists have increased public awareness of climate change, although a decreasing percentage remain climate deniers. Climate Activists like Greta Thunberg are finally getting through to all of us, especially to young people.
  2. It is irrefutable that drilling, and burning petroleum produces is a major cause of climate change as well as of human rights abuses. The latest IPCC report removed any uncertainty: “It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land.” 
  3. There is growing popularity of ESG strategies. It has become easier to invest sustainably through many asset managers. Bloomberg projects ESG assets may hit $53 trillion by 2025, a third of global AUM.
  4. The International Energy Agency (IEA) Net Zero by 2050: a Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector report published shortly before the Exxon Mobil AGM called on governments and companies to stop investment in new fossil fuel supply projects or coal plants; no sales of new internal combustion engine passenger cars after 2035; and net-zero emissions in the global electricity sector by 2040.
  5. Pope Francis continues to remind us to care for our common home. The Vatican released 14 recommended actions in June 2020, including ‘ethical responsible and integral criteria for investment decision making.” The Vatican Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development urges that Church divestment from fossil fuels and reinvestment in renewables is a moral imperative.
  6. The U. S. Catholic Bishops are reviewing their Socially Responsible Investment Guidelines for the first time in 20 years. Bishop Gregory Parkes, USCCB Treasurer, who worked in the banking industry before entering the priesthood, is seeing the “financial writing on the wall” for fossil fuel companies who will not or cannot diversify. 
  7. A U. S. House subcommittee is “demanding that Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron testify before Congress about the industry’s decades-long effort to wage disinformation campaigns around climate change.” (St. Louis PostDispach, July 3, 2021 and New York Times, June 16, 2021) 

The majority votes at Exxon Mobile indicate a tipping point in pushing fossil fuel companies to transition to low-carbon business models. SGI and ICCR members have persisted and led the way with corporate engagements…and are continuing to see success. 

What’s a “Good Buy?”

According to the latest statistics released by the American Apparel & Footwear Association: In 2020, on average, every man, woman, and child in the United States spent $1,067.93 to buy 51.8 pieces of clothes and 5.8 pairs of shoes. Normally, those numbers are higher, but the COVID-19 pandemic reduced them.

In Laudato Si’, Pope Francis reminds us: “Purchasing is always a moral – and not simply economic – act” (#206).

We have five times more clothing today than 40 years ago. We prize bigger, walk-in closets to accommodate our clothes. Clothing purchased this year will have seven uses on average before being discarded by the purchaser.

That’s a lot of clothing with a hefty impact on carbon emissions and the climate crisis. That’s a lot of stuff sitting in people’s closets. That’s a lot of that ends up in landfills.

Our overflowing landfills aren’t the only obvious signs of a “throwaway culture.” The purchase of discardable clothing lends itself to thinking of the workers as disposable as well.

The old notion of a “good buy” is that it is cheap and makes you look thin. A renewed notion: a “good buy” has ethical content. How was it sourced? How does it care for creation? How were the workers treated in the making of this garment? Were they paid a living wage?


In April 2021, 200 ICCR members and affiliates signed the ICCR Investor Statement Calling for Renewal of Bangladesh Accord, a month before the agreement was set to expire. A brief extension of the Accord secured protections for worker rights and remedy solutions for 2 million workers at 600 factories through August 31st. We are delighted that the Accord has been renewed and expanded for two years as the International Accord for Health and Safety in the Textile and Garment Industry. This new Accord takes effect on September 1, one day after the current Bangladesh Accord is set to expire. Like its predecessor agreement, the new International Accord is a legally binding agreement between companies and trade unions that aims to make ready-made garments (RMG) and textile factories safe. True to its new title, the new Accord aims to expand these safety standards and worker to other countries and labor markets using the Bangladesh Accord model.

A list of signatories to the International Accord is available here. While it includes American labels like Fanatics and PVH (owner of Tommy Hilfiger, Calvin Klein, Warner’s, Olga and True & Co., and licenses brands such as Kenneth Cole New York and Michael Kors), we are disappointed that U.S. companies like Costco, the Gap, Kohl’s, Macy’s, Target, TJX (owner of TJ Maxx and Marshalls), and Walmart are not yet signatories. This roster of American non-signatories aligns with those who refused to join the Accord in 2013, opting to create the now defunct Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety instead. Given that a fire swept through a garment factory, killing 17 people in Pakistan on Friday (8/27), worker safety remains an urgent concern and requires multilateral action. To sit on the sidelines is irresponsible.

Connecting the first section of this post with the second, I’d suggest that, while we, as consumers, can “buy better,” the Accord, a legally binding, multi-stakeholder agreement, advances commitments to worker safety in ways that corporate “codes of conduct” and audits cannot. If a company hasn’t signed it, the onus is on them to demonstrate that they are doing something better.

Please see the New York Times and Reuters articles for more background on the new Accord.

Do You Know Where Your Asset Manager Is (on climate)?

By Frank Sherman

This article augments an earlier blog by John Mueller of Dana Investment Advisors on Questions to Ask Your Money Manager.

There is a growing recognition within the financial sector of its responsibility, as well as its power, to transition the economy to a low carbon future.  The Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), representing $70tn in assets, is committed to achieving the objective of the Paris Agreement to limit global temperature increases to 1.5°C. Combined with Net Zero commitments from countries representing approximately 70% of global GDP, it sounds like the world has turned the corner on climate change. However, there is a gap between these long term ambitions and short term actions. The latest round of UN Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) put the world on track for less than a 1% reduction in emissions by 2030 vs. 45% called for by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see Responsible Investor, Aug 17, 2021).

As a small asset owner, what can an SGI member do to ensure they are part of the solution rather than contributing to the problem? One easy strategy is to ask your asset manager about their climate stewardship activities, including proxy voting. The UN-convened Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance, part of the GFANZ composed of over 40 institutional investors (including some ICCR members), recently released a new resource designed to help asset owners set expectations for, evaluate, and engage with asset managers on their climate-related proxy voting activities. As well, the resource is useful to asset owners who retain the right to vote their shares or to those asset owners with internally managed portfolios by integrating the principles into their own proxy voting and asset manager selection, appointment, and monitoring processes. These foundational guidelines are centered on four themes: governance, interest alignment, merit-based evaluation, and transparency. They help asset owners construct their own expectations of their asset managers’ proxy voting approaches.

Many asset managers have already made the commitment to align their portfolios with net-zero as part of the Net-Zero Asset Manager Initiative (NZAMI), which is also part of the GFANZ. Among the 128 signatories with $43tn in assets under management have already signed on to this Initiative are some of the biggies like Blackrock, Vanguard, and State Street. If you find your asset managers are part of NZAMI, you have the opportunity as a client to ask about how they are actualizing this goal within their management of their portfolio. If your asset managers have not yet signed on to NZAMI, you should ask them “why not?” I suggest you share this resource with your Investment Committee with a recommendation to review your own proxy voting guidelines and your expectations set with your asset management service providers. At the same time, you may want to challenge your Investment Committee to consider signing on to the Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance themselves. As Blackrock’s Larry Fink has made clear, “climate risk is investment risk.”

Use Finance to Reduce Gender-based Violence

Today is Women’s Equality Day, a day that commemorates the ratification of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, granting women the right to vote. Earlier this week, I circulated a request to SGI members asking them to sign an investor letter to a company that requires employees to submit to forced arbitration in matters of workplace discrimination, harassment, and other worker complaints. As these employment agreements disproportionately have adverse effects for women and People of Color, we are asking the company if the use of forced arbitration is consistent with their commitment towards gender and racial equity.

In some respects, supporting an investor letter of that nature is consistent with our mission and automatic for SGI, so I appreciated a recent invitation to be a part of the Criterion Institute’s design sessions for a Roadmap for Christian Denominations to Use Finance to Reduce Gender-based Violence. This allowed for some greater reflection on why we take these actions and what we hope to achieve.

While I recommend that you read the Roadmap for yourself, I’d like to make three observations.

First, the document begins with “Sparking the financial imagination,” a fruitful origin that I experienced in the design sessions, embedded in an exercise with our hands that we performed as we began. A theologian from Duke Divinity School, Craig Dykstra, coined the term “pastoral imagination.” As he put it, in any profession (law, architecture, music, etc.), those particularly apt in its practice see things that most of us will miss. Dykstra also writes of ecclesial imagination: “the way of seeing and being that emerges when a community of faith, together as a community, comes increasingly to share the knowledge of God and to live a way of abundant life–not only in church but also in the many contexts in which they live their daily lives.” This roadmap aims to spark that imagination “in the many contexts in which [we] live [our] daily lives.”

Second, the roadmap address “prophetic hope.” A Biblical prophet is not one who sees the future so much as one who sees clearly what is happening here and now. A lesson in community organizing is about seeing with two eyes: one eye sees “the world as it is,” and the other sees “the world as it should be, as God made it to be.” A prophetic hope, then, is a stubborn conviction that we can live into that second world, in spite of the immediate evidence to the contrary. It took many years for women to obtain the right to vote, and obtaining the goal of eliminating gender-based violence appears to be on a distant horizon. We, as faith-based investors are called to practice this prophetic hope.

Third, I am a Catholic; so please, then, let me leverage a little Catholic guilt in a final observation about “bystanders.” Many conversations about violence typically frame the discussion in terms of “victim” and “perpetrator.” While that conversation is important, it only addresses part of the problem. A comprehensive response to gender-based violence must also address the role of collective passivity in the face of anything that dehumanizes. Given the pervasiveness of inaction, whether in the form of denial, willful ignorance, or silent complicity, we who are bystanders must be held accountable, especially those of us who occupy social positions of privilege. We can’t afford to stay on the sidelines.

I am reminded of when I heard a member of an African-American church who helped drive a bus to integrate some schools in the Boston area. Like the kids, he faced insults and potential violence regularly. When he was asked: why did you do it? He replied, “Well, I think you’re either working to make the world a better place, or you’re working to keep it the same. So I had to drive the bus.”

I hope that all of us feel similarly compelled to act, engaging all of the imagination and hope that we can muster!

Webinar: Water Stewardship

When describing the geography of SGI, one can use bodies of water as a descriptor: The Great Lakes and the Mississippi River. We have a new member from the other side of Lake Michigan, the Grand Rapids Dominicans as well as another new member near the Lake’s southern shore, the Poor Handmaids of Jesus Christ. We are based on the western shore of Lake Michigan in Milwaukee, and a returning member here is more commonly known as the Lake Franciscans and our board president is from Riverwater Partners. Most other members can be characterized by their proximity to the Mississippi: The Franciscans Sisters of Little Falls near the Mississippi’s origin, our members from the Twin Cities, the FSPA’s in La Crosse, the Dubuque Franciscans and the BVMs, our St. Louis members, down to the Jesuits in New Orleans.

One might say that water is in our DNA as an organization.

On August 19th, we continued efforts to educate ourselves on issues related to water. In a webinar on Water Stewardship, we learned about some tools that we can use and actions we can take in these efforts. We are grateful that Robin Miller of Ceres and Lydia Miller Dana Investment Advisors joined us to enrich our conversation.

“The ultimate stranded asset related to water is people.”

Climate change, loss of biodiversity, and access to water have become existential threats, and, while politicians have been forced to collaborate on a global scale, the financial sector and businesses must also contribute if we are to have a chance of success. Until recently, there was not enough publicly available information for investors to assess the real-world impacts of their investments on water availability, making it difficult to accurately assess water-related risks. New tools present opportunities for investors to become involved through active ownership and investing in companies that provide water solutions. 

Water stewardship, in corporate life, means understanding the risks faced from water scarcity and pollution, and taking action to help ensure sustainable water management. In its plainest sense, water is a shared, public resource.

Again, we are very grateful for the presence of Robin and Lydia in this webinar, for their commitment to this work, and their generosity in sharing their wisdom and experience with us. As always, we welcome your feedback via a confidential evaluation found here. Slides are available here.

Water Stewardship Resources:

Questions to Ask Your Money Manager

By John Mueller of Dana Investment Advisors

For over twenty years, Dana has been managing ESG portfolios for clients. During this time, we’ve participated in countless meetings and been asked a wide array of questions. While the old adage, ”There is no such thing as a dumb question” holds true, there are usually questions that are more effective than others to help you find the right solution for your investment portfolio. Below is a list of questions we’ve faced over the years that we think can help investors determine the appropriate partner in their search.

What does ESG mean to you and your firm? We believe the most important, and perhaps the simplest, question is often the most overlooked. During meetings, many words or terms are generally used, and everyone nods in agreement, assuming they understand the definition of that word or term. However, one of the greatest missteps in these meetings is not asking for clarification or a better understanding. Often, there will be many different answers as to a particular definition, and that can be good. Yet, instead of trying to have the investment manager convince you that their method/approach is the best, simply ask yourself if their definition fits what you and/or your group is trying to achieve.

How long is your history with ESG investing? As time goes on, this question perhaps becomes less relevant, yet with the increase in asset flows and countless new product launches for ESG strategies, this question will perhaps give you clarity on the manger’s intentions. While time alone is not a determinant of qualification, it should provide another check box for you to determine if this investment manager is the right solution.

Does your firm rely on external ESG ratings, internal, or a combination of both? ESG research providers have grown exponentially in recent years. While many managers have internal methods, there are a number of researchers that specialize in ESG data. Neither answer is wrong, but there is such rapid growth of data that finding external sources can help form a more complete picture of a company’s policies or changes in policies. Both internal and external methods can have biases; therefore, understanding and partnering with multiple can help in eliminating some of these biases.

How does your firm handle companies with recent controversies or catastrophic events? Missteps and unfortunate events happen, but how the aftermath of such an event was dealt with is generally more telling. While catastrophic events are hard to predict, an investment manager’s response in the following days or weeks is of great importance. If they own shares, do they sell right away on headlines, do they seek to understand more before making a portfolio decision, or do they hold the position? These questions will give you more insights into their process. Controversies are generally more difficult and often have a less clear path to their solution. While investment managers may look at the issue differently from clients, their willingness to listen and discuss, or lack thereof, should be key in your evaluation, as these discussions can be vital in adding to the knowledge base for both the client and investment manager.

How do you approach corporate engagement and proxy voting? This question will help in determining the level of commitment the firm has to this space. While some may not currently be active in engagement, their answers will likely reveal their level of willingness to take on that role at a later date. Recent history has taught us that these actions can be impactful and look to be a greater piece of the puzzle going forward.

While this is only a sampling of questions, there are likely more that will be important to each individual organization. Some of the best questions we’ve been asked over the years don’t pertain to any investment strategy or philosophy. At the end of the day, you are choosing to invest with a person or a team, and asking questions about current events or personal backgrounds can be ways for you to better understand the driving force behind a firm’s ESG investing and other principles and characteristics, which is likely the best way to find a long-lasting partnership that will benefit all involved.

July 30: World Day Against Trafficking in Persons

Victims’ Voices Lead the Way

Today is the United Nations’ World Day Against Trafficking in Persons. This year’s theme puts victims of human trafficking at the center of the campaign and highlights the importance of listening to and learning from survivors of human trafficking.

Many victims of human trafficking have experienced ignorance or misunderstanding in their attempts to get help. They have had traumatic post-rescue experiences during identification interviews and legal proceedings. Some have faced revictimization and punishment for crimes they were forced to commit by their traffickers. Others have been subjected to stigmatization or received inadequate support.

Learning from victims’ experiences and turning their suggestions into concrete actions will lead to a more victim-centred and effective approach in combating human trafficking.

SGI members have been longtime leaders in efforts to fight human trafficking, and we consider it to be one of the most important issues we raise with companies. We believe that companies that genuinely want to root out trafficking from their supply chains must incorporate worker voice into their human rights due diligence process. That means listening to those who have been harmed. In the work to end human trafficking, it is vital to listen to the stories and experiences of survivors and to allow those to shape our shape our path forward.

A Legal Framework for Impact

By Frank Sherman

Sustainable investing has not only become mainstream in recent years; it is now recognized as a mark of prudent investment practice. US-SIF reported last year that sustainable investing in the US increased 42% over the previous two years and now represents one in three dollars of the $51 trillion in total assets under professional management. A Morgan Stanley study found that, while the market experienced extreme volatility and recession in 2020, funds focused on “on environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, across both stocks and bonds, weathered the year better than non-ESG portfolios.” Yet there are still those who challenge the legal basis for and prudence of incorporating ESG investment strategies.

SGI members who are institutional investors, pension fund trustees, asset managers, or      investment advisors must put their clients’ or beneficiaries’ interests before their own. Despite having been debunked many times, the myth that the fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of a client excludes ESG and socially responsible investing still exits. In a 2019 SGI webinar, Frank Coleman of Christian Brothers Investment Services (CBIS), referenced a 2005 study by law firm Freshfields, Bruckhaus, Deringer LLP which found investors could incorporate financially material ESG issues as part of their fiduciary duties. The Freshfields report contributed to the launch of the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI). Frank also described a 2015 Freshfields report, Fiduciary Duty in the 21st Century, which clarified that ESG integration is not just permissible but required for many fiduciaries. Since its publication, financial regulators in Brazil, France, EU, Ontario, South Africa and UK have clarified ESG requirements in legislation.

However, these studies found that a fiduciary’s duty to account for the sustainability impact of their investment activity is limited to the extent that it impacted the financial performance of the assets. In other words, their fiduciary duty requires consideration of how sustainability issues affect the investment decision, but not how their investment decisions affect sustainability issues. Too many investors still approach ESG investing from a defensive posture, considering risk management alone.

Since the publication of the 2015 Freshfields report, the adoption of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Climate Agreement have significantly raised awareness within the investment community of global sustainability challenges. The third generation of responsible investors are beginning to measure, account for, and integrate the real-world sustainability impact of their investment activity. A third Freshfields report issued last week, The Legal Framework for Impact, considers the role of the investor as an active agent in shaping the world around us, rather than as a spectator betting on the side lines. This detailed, global, legal analysis demonstrates that investors should feel empowered to set impact goals and measure progress against them. It also highlights what must change to ensure that the rules that govern our financial system foster a truly sustainable economy.

SGI members have always considered the positive and negative impacts of their investments on people and the planet. We have been exposing tools to our members to help them assess these impacts. Investors, like all business actors, are expected to respect human rights as outlined by UN Guiding Principles on Business in Human Rights. Last year, the Investor Alliance for Human Rights published an Investor Toolkit on Human Rights for asset owners and managers to address risks to people posed by their investments. This spring, Ceres joined a number of other investor coalitions to launch the Paris Aligned Investment Initiative providing recommendations on key actions and methodologies for asset owners and managers to achieve net zero GHG emissions by 2050 across their portfolio.

So it is now clear that investors must look beyond the financial returns to understand the ESG impacts of their portfolios have on the real world around them—the world their beneficiaries live in.

“Human trafficking does not stop during a pandemic”

Today, the U.S. State Department issued its 2021 Trafficking in Persons Report. The annual report is a critical tool to monitor and assess efforts to eliminate human trafficking. As investors, we expect companies, in the course of their human rights due diligence, to act based on the report’s identification of salient risks to people in their operations and supply chain.

“We document 11 countries where the government itself is the trafficker. For example, through forced labor on public works projects or in sectors of the economy that the government feels are particularly important,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said during a news conference. Those countries include: Afghanistan, Burma, China, Cuba, Eritrea, North Korea, Iran, Russia, South Sudan, Syria, and Turkmenistan.

If there is one thing we have learned in the last year, it is that human trafficking does not stop during a pandemic.”

acting Director of the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons Kari Johnstone

I’d highlight a few things from this year’s report:

  • For the first time, the report draws a link with systemic racism in the United States and abroad, connecting discriminatory policies to the perpetuation of human trafficking. “If we’re serious about ending trafficking in persons, we must also work to combat systemic racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination,” Blinken said.
  • The report underscores the pandemic’s effect on trafficking. Women and children were severely affected by the pandemic, according to the report, along with those facing food and economic insecurity.
  • The chapter concerning the United States recognizes a shortcoming here at home: “There was a continued lack of progress and sustained effort to comprehensively address labor trafficking in the United States.”

The report categorizes countries of the world with regard to their adherence to the standards of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000. Each country is tiered according to compliance:

  • Tier 1 (those governments who fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards)
  • Tier 2 (while not fully complying, governments with significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards)
  • Tier 2 watch list (not fully complying along with a significant absolute number of trafficking victims, or a failure to increase efforts, or a determination that the country is in fact committed to making significant progress in the coming year)
  • Tier 3 (those governments who do not fully comply with the minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so)
  • Special cases (countries where a civil or humanitarian crisis makes gaining information difficult).

Remember that tier 1, which includes the United States, is simply compliance with the minimum standards. A tier 3 designation means that the U.S. can restrict assistance or withdraw support for the country at global funding organizations like the International Monetary Fund. This year, the State Department downgraded Malaysia and Guinea-Bissau to Tier 3.

The report intends to offer “homework” to governments based on their tier. The image above lists the countries of the tier 2 watch list, tier 3, and special case categories. The report includes a country by country analysis of human trafficking.

To read about a previous year’s TIP Report, please see the 2020 edition here and the 2019 here.