Big climate commitments.Bigger data requirements.

The Situation

Ambitious targets, no infrastructure to prove them

The institution had made public net-zero goals and climate-aligned investment commitments across a multi-asset portfolio spanning public equity, private equity, growth, and infrastructure. These commitments reflected the mandate of the institution and the expectations of its key stakeholders. But the investment teams responsible for executing and justifying decisions lacked usable data to connect its investment activity to impact outcomes. Impact teams at even the largest institutions are typically under-resourced relative to the mandate placed on them.

Each external manager used different metrics, methodologies, assumptions, and timelines. Critical data gaps regarding the decarbonization potential of manager portfolios made it impossible to substantiate long-term decision-making. Varying risk profiles and durations across asset classes prevented meaningful aggregation. There was no transparent way to connect company-level activity to portfolio- or LP-level outcomes and goals.

The Stakes

Fiduciary duty and climate credibility on the same line

The pressure was both internal and external. Decisions risked being driven by storytelling rather than evidence, creating fiduciary and reputational exposure. High-stakes capital allocation decisions had to be made quickly, despite major data gaps. Existing approaches like financed emissions proved inadequate for private markets: many cleantech investments involve companies whose operational footprint grows as they displace high-emission incumbents. The metric captures the present, not the trajectory. Incomplete by design.

Beyond seeking to reduce the negative climate impacts of their portfolio, the investment team wanted to demonstrate how their investments drive positive climate outcomes as well. But without a consistent, bottom-up data model, every public climate commitment was a liability waiting to be tested. Fiduciary duty has legal teeth. Claims built on narrative don't survive headlines or litigation.

The Solution

Standardized climate data, built for fiduciary rigor

Using the Climate Solutions Index, Koi implemented a company-solution-level, bottom-up climate data framework designed to support fiduciary-grade decision-making across private markets. The approach modeled climate data at the individual company level, with interoperable aggregation from company to portfolio to fund to LP, all under methodological consistency across asset classes and solution types.

100+ individual private-market investments were modeled with future scenarios, eliminating reliance on manager self-reporting, inconsistent metrics, and data gaps. A consistent, defensible methodology was applied with standardized assumptions across diverse assets and timelines, aligned with emerging standards and frameworks for climate impact forecasting. Every output was fully transparent and traceable to underlying assumptions, secondary data sources, and key inputs.

The framework was built to evolve alongside the portfolio. As investments are added, methodologies mature, and regulatory requirements shift, the underlying structure remains consistent and extensible -- a durable foundation rather than a one-time report.