Collegium Development Fund I
Investment Committee Portal
A staged approval framework for development land and construction capital. Each gate authorizes only the capital necessary to resolve the next material uncertainty. Land acquisition approval is not approval to construct.
The central IC question is not whether the base case works. The Committee must determine whether the investment thesis is supported by evidence, whether the delivery team can execute the plan, and how much adverse variance the investment can absorb before LP capital is impaired.
The three-gate framework
Capital is staged. Each gate has its own evidence standard, its own scoring model, and its own capital authorization. A decision at one gate never presumes the next.
Governance principles
- Stage capital at risk. Approve only the capital necessary to resolve the next material uncertainty.
- Do not pay the seller for value the GP must create through rezoning, density, design, entitlement or execution.
- Prefer sites with multiple credible value-creation and capital-recovery paths.
- Use ranges and probability-weighted scenarios where information is preliminary. Avoid false precision.
- Document assumptions, evidence gaps, conditions, dissenting views and post-approval obligations.
- Apply a fiduciary LP lens to conflicts, related-party arrangements, fees and valuation assumptions.
Scoring methodology
Both Gate 2 and Gate 3 use a 1–5 criterion score. Pillar score is the average of its criteria; the overall score is the weighted average across pillars. A strong aggregate score never overrides a mandatory test failure.
| Score | Rating | IC interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Strong | Materially exceeds institutional requirements; high conviction supported by evidence. |
| 4 | Above acceptable | Exceeds minimum requirements; manageable risks with clear mitigation. |
| 3 | Acceptable | Meets minimum requirements; identifiable risks require active monitoring. |
| 2 | Conditional / weak | Material underwriting concern; approval requires a defined condition or mitigation. |
| 1 | Unacceptable | Thesis unsupported or capital exposed to unacceptable risk. Mandatory IC exception — written rationale and unanimous approval required. |
Hard decision rules
Where the CFO sits
Across all three gates, the CFO carries four responsibilities that are prerequisites to any IC vote proceeding:
- Model integrity. Certify the internal consistency of every financial model presented to the IC.
- Assumption benchmarking. Confirm underwriting assumptions have been tested against current market evidence, not sponsor optimism.
- Downside presentation. Present stress and downside scenarios with equal weight to the base case.
- Capital-at-risk tracking. Maintain the running schedule of capital spent, capital committed, and the next non-refundable milestone.
Open governance item. The uploaded Land Acquisition IC Charter contemplates a five-member Committee (Chair/CEO, CIO, CDO, CFO, Independent Member) with a quorum of four and a 4-of-5 approval threshold. CDCL currently has four directors, no CIO, and no independent member. The pages in this portal reflect CDCL's actual composition. See Governance for the reconciliation options.