Sarah Kearney is the founder and executive director of Prime Coalition, a nonprofit that steers capital to support scalable solutions to climate change. Previously, Sarah was executive director and a trustee of the Chesonis Family Foundation, a grantmaking organization that supports transformational energy research, development and deployment.
Tell me about the start of your journey
In hindsight, it sounds like one long story arc. In 2006, I was hired by a high-net-worth family to set up their foundation. They basically gave me a blank sheet of paper, and it was an unbelievable learning opportunity for me at 22. I got to know an incredible community of scientists and engineers, and when they wanted to carry forward their research and make an impact in the real world, they came to us looking for equity investment in early-stage climate tech companies. And it left me with so many questions — is that appropriate for a foundation, and is there a more efficient way for this family to drive capital to these types of activities, projects and funds that might struggle to raise sufficient financial support but could someday help us achieve scale on some of the most important social and environmental causes of our time?
And that inspired you to start Prime Coalition?
I started Prime Coalition from 2013 to 2014 to try to bring down the very high barriers that were preventing all different types of philanthropists and foundations from driving capital to early-stage technologies combating climate change. In our case, over the first 10 years, we focused on the earliest stages of company formation and the types of companies that are particularly tricky to raise sufficient financial support for. But the same mechanism — traditional grants or program-related investment loans or program-related equity into for-profit startups — can be used for any capital gaps that when filled could significantly advance the charitable purpose. As long as the primary purpose is charitable and you can make the case that the investment would not be paid, but for the charitable purpose.
With July the hottest month on record, climate change grows ever more urgent. What are the most scalable solutions right now?
Humanity needs to reinvent our entire economy so that it is less active and does not continue to emit greenhouse-gas emissions even as the global population grows, and we need to remove the greenhouse gasses from our atmosphere that are already there. So I think your question is looking for a list of technology areas or companies, projects and funds that might be poised for investment to scale right now, which is important work.
But I'm gonna turn your question around because Prime Coalition is in the business of looking for gaps. So those are the solutions that society needs that are not yet ready to scale. For our first 10 years, Prime has focused on the neglected areas of early-stage-company formation. And we continue to do that through our venture capital practice, which is called Zola Ventures. But because we've now completed impact-first investment transactions with over 250 philanthropic partners, we now have the confidence to start building our second investment practice, which is focused on early climate infrastructure. So that includes kind of late-stage demonstration projects and first-of-a-kind projects that would be difficult to raise traditional project financing to advance without our support.
What types of projects are you focusing on?
Our early climate infrastructure team does both a top-down and a bottom-up pipeline analysis. So what are the most important sectors to shift greenhouse gasses globally? That's top-down. And what are the projects that are shovel-ready and could make a huge impact but need catalytic support today to bridge to large-scale deployment? That's bottom-up.
I think we would welcome a conversation with any philanthropist that wants to know more about what we are seeing and doing in the context of that pipeline. We're chasing the things that could reduce greenhouse-gas emissions the most. So if you look at our 30-company venture portfolio, it spans the gamut from grid capacity, energy storage to better solutions for renewable electricity generation, to transportation fuels, to industrial efficiency, to carbon dioxide removal solutions, to better HVAC solutions. It tends to be B2B solutions rather than B2C solutions because it's the big industrial stuff that tends to be the most difficult to finance toward scale.
What is the future of impact investing?
It encompasses many asset classes and a huge spectrum of priorities and risk tolerances. I'll focus my answer on the part of the spectrum that sits between traditional grantmaking, where there's a negative 100% financial return, and “market-rate investments” that might have a co-benefit of some environmental or social good but whose mandate is really financial returns. And it's between those two sides. It's where those charitable assets prioritize impact above everything else. And it's where thoughtful intermediaries like Prime can help substantiate additionally — would this investment not be made without our support?
As family foundations, donor advisory funds, corporate giving programs and trusts deploy their charitable capital increasingly into market-driven solutions, it is absolutely imperative that we support nonprofit public charities in their hard work to ensure that complex catalytic capital interventions avoid harm and pursue excellence.
How are next-gen family office members and investors shaping the future of impact investing?
I have felt like next-gen family members have been my peers and allies along my own story arc. And I feel close to them, not only in terms of age, but there's a sense of urgency around addressing climate change, poverty alleviation, income inequality, racial justice and so many other urgent social and environmental problems. It's the next-gen voices that I hear most loudly questioning the assumptions around maximizing financial returns as a default principle, like many want more and better impact-first options.
Most often, next-gen professionals are the ones that are introducing the concept of catalytic investing to their family. And then they work with the Prime team to help educate their own family members and trustees about the mechanics of how it all works. And I think the Prime partnerships team views each relationship with our philanthropic partners as a mutual learning journey more than a fundraising.
The looming crisis in the single-family-office world
By TERESA LEIGH
The aging of the older generation poses one of the greatest challenges facing single-family offices (SFO) today.
There are 56 million Americans ages 65 and over, which represents 17% of the population, per the U.S. Census. In seven short years, by 2030, that number is expected to increase to 73 million, with 70% of those needing some type of short- or long-term care. 
The National Institutes of Health stated in 2021 that the number of caregivers would decrease uniformly over the decades to come. What options will families have to hire skilled and experienced caregivers, and how can their SFOs help them when there is a nationwide shortage of nurses and caregivers?
A case study: William is an accomplished and respected CFO who has worked for SFOs for over 14 years. In 2017, he was courted by a self-made, ultra-high-net-worth entrepreneur born in the 1940s. Upon accepting the position, William knew he had both the opportunity of a lifetime and his hands full. The office team was full of drama fueled in part by the mercurial behavior of the patriarch and the extended family that revolved around him.
By March 2023, the patriarch was in his late 70s. He was newly widowed and spending the majority of his time in and out of hospitals or back and forth to doctors’ appointments. His estrangement from his two daughters meant the day-to-day management of his care fell to his executive assistants, the elder household staff and his handyman/driver.
Instinctively, William knew this was not sustainable. For months he had been fielding calls from the staff regarding the patriarch’s explosive temper and his capricious decisions when it came to following doctors’ orders. The staff often found him on the bathroom or kitchen floor or in the garage still inebriated from the night before, covered in vomit and human waste. They knew it was only a matter of time before something horrific happened.
When William contacted the patriarch’s daughters, their response shocked him.
They said: “We cannot force him to take better care of himself, he no longer listens to us, and we certainly cannot convince him to follow doctors’ orders or stop drinking. We cannot remove him from the board in the current situation. As our CFO, what are your suggestions for his personal care management, and how much will it cost?”
These are the basic options:
1. Contact a national or local caregiver staffing company to provide round-the-clock care providers. The hourly rate he can expect ranges from $25 to $150 or more, depending on skills and experience.
Pros:
- This option provides a quick “staff-up” solution to deliver round-the-clock care with a variety of skill levels.
Cons:
- The agency will send different care providers depending on who is available for each shift; there is no guarantee the same staff members will be used.
- The SFO loses control over team members; they work for the staffing company, not the family.
- The company may not have staff available for every care shift, leaving the family without a caregiver.
- The quality of staff needed for long-term care may be lacking.
- These temporary staff members may not be willing to work with a patient who has a difficult or problematic personality.
- These agencies have varying degrees of vetting practices for their staff; some caregivers may have personality defects, poor work habits or an attitude that is not suited to care providing.
- The SFO executive does not have control of the staffing teams being used by the agency.
- The staffing company may not offer a single point of contact for families.
- Caregivers provided by the company may not be willing to travel.
2. Hire a highly skilled personalized care team focused on the well-being of the family member.
Pros:
- The highest level of personalized in-home care with consistent care team employees
- The SFO controls the hiring process and compensation.
- This option provides a single point of contact for doctors, medical care, post-op, medications, digital follow-up and documentation.
- Caregivers are aware of unique needs of the job and are willing to work with patient complexities.
- Caregivers are able and willing to expand their roles to include assistant duties, driving, food prep, pet care, household chores, open communication with the SFO office and travel with patients when asked.
Cons:
- This option may exceed the cost of an outsourced care company.
3. Assess and find assisted-living residences that best meet the patriarch’s needs. The price of these facilities varies greatly depending on services, unit size, care levels and region.
Pros:
- Assisted-living residences offer flexible options for living spaces (small to large) with outdoor spaces and parking garages.
- Different levels of nursing and post-op care.
- Many offer dining rooms for three-plus meals a day.
- Assisted-living facilities provide personal-care services (hairdresser, physical therapy, yoga, etc.).
- Residents can participate in indoor and outdoor group activities.
- These senior communities offer a sense of connection to others.
Cons:
- There is no single point of contact for medical care.
- Communication with the SFO may be inconsistent.
- There is a rotation of staff with variable skill levels and experience.
- Residents may feel isolated from family.
- These facilities may have strict policies, violations of which may incur possible fines or charges.
- Assisted-living residences can be expensive with annual increases.
- Pet restrictions are common (no pets or only small pets).
- Assisted-living residences have multiple rules and restrictions.
- These residences may offer limited options related to nutrition and dining.
- Residents live in close proximity to their neighbors.
As families age, countless SFOs will face the same dilemma to provide optimal care options for their family members. In addition, these offices will be in competition with each other and other families for trusted and skilled caregivers. It is paramount that executives be prepared to provide clear choices that align with the family’s needs and offer the best care possible.