Public Safety committee  That would be our contention, yes.

Public Safety committee  Thank you very much for having us.

Public Safety committee  We were originally founded to be unique curators of this model in Canada, because we recognized a gap in this area. There is no other functioning organization at this point filling this very specific need that we identified, so we have started with social impact bonds as sort of a proof-of-concept within the broader social finance landscape.

Public Safety committee  I think it's a valid concern, but I would also say that what we have seen internationally is that as social service agencies are moving from their current measurement system, it's not so much that there's increased pressure for results, but just that there's a better measurement system.

Public Safety committee  Obviously, I think some of the acute services offered, to which you can attach sort of the highest economic proxies, would be the costs of incarceration, which has international precedent, as we have mentioned multiple times. In fact, the very first social impact bond in the U.K. and in the U.S. was in that particular area of focus, so I think that is an easy and obvious first area.

Public Safety committee  If I could just add one thing, it's that we're seeing, at least for private high net worth individuals, an interest in.... Because there's a bit of donor fatigue, they don't want to strictly do philanthropy any more. They want a way to invest their money such that they can earn their money back, potentially, and then repurpose that capital back into another social objective.

Public Safety committee  I absolutely believe that it has to be a collaborative effort at all levels of society. Obviously when we're talking about social impact bonds as they relate to crime prevention, we are talking about very easily measurable indicators of a reduction in crime, as in a reduction of recidivism.

Public Safety committee  Perhaps I could just add to that. I think one of the concerns people have is that the investors will have some sort of capability or jurisdiction over the actual implementation of programs such that they could influence with their personal preferences the delivery of these services.

Public Safety committee  Would we agree with you that it's worth the risk? Of course, absolutely. In terms of the reduction of risk, inherently these populations that we're dealing with are risky transactions...sorry, collaborative efforts that we're entering into. Would you want to speak to part of that?

Public Safety committee  First of all I would just mention that in no way do we think that social finance or SIBs will inherently replace the existing structure. They are simply meant to be an additional source of capital influx into the system, and they're a way to test new, innovative projects and ideas.

Public Safety committee  Sure. I suppose, then, I'll just take a moment to mention my primary interest in this area, which is the service provider. The reason these organizations actually find this a very credible and valuable model for them is, one, the long-term capital. In the current granting system, when they're required to implement programs year after year and track those measurements only year by year, it's very difficult to actually prove the long-term objectives they want to see with their clients.

Public Safety committee  Oh my, okay.

Public Safety committee  Absolutely. I think ultimately all of the various stakeholders in not only a social impact bond but in the general social finance landscape, whether that is public, private, or social sector, have similar objectives around wanting to see our communities healthier, better, and more crime-free, in this particular case.