This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

University of Toronto Asset Management Corporation (re University of Toronto Endowment)

PRI reporting framework 2018

You are in Direct - Listed Equity Active Ownership » (Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions


LEA 15. Voting policy & approach

New selection options have been added to this indicator. Please review your prefilled responses carefully.

15.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal voting policy.

15.2. Indicate what your voting policy covers:

15.3. Attach or provide a URL to your voting policy. [Optional]

15.4. Provide a brief overview of your organization’s approach to (proxy) voting.

Proxy voting is one of the most important rights available to investors. UTAM's fiduciary duty is to act in the best interest of our client and to manage conflicts of interest, and this applies particularly to the way we vote proxies. Moreover, we expect our third-party investment managers to apply the same standard. To that end, we routinely review the proxy voting practices of our investment managers as part of our Operational Due Diligence reviews.

As a responsible investor and a PRI signatory, UTAM has adopted the ESG-focused Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) Sustainability Guidelines for proxy voting, which we apply wherever possible.

To effectively address proxy voting in all the ways we may invest, we have provided guidance in our Responsible Investing Policy with respect to segregated account mandates, customized fund investments and commingled fund investments. 


LEA 16. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

16.1. Indicate how you typically make your (proxy) voting decisions.


Based on

16.2. Provide an overview of how you ensure your voting policy is adhered to, giving details of your approach when exceptions to the policy are made (if applicable).

Towards the end of 2016, we engaged ISS for its Sustainability Policy and Guidelines. ISS votes ballots on our behalf for LE holdings in separate/segregated account mandates and in certain commingled fund mandates where the University of Toronto's Pension and Endowment are the only investors In the upcoming proxy season, we do not anticipate making exceptions but will monitor proxies as they are available.

We intend to review the effectiveness of this process at the end of each proxy voting season to enable us to assess whether any process changes are warranted. 

16.3. Additional information.[Optional]

LEA 17. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed (Not Applicable)

LEA 18. Confirmation of votes (Not Completed)

LEA 19. Securities lending programme (Private)

LEA 20. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

New selection options have been added to this indicator. Please review your prefilled responses carefully.

20.1. Indicate whether you or the service providers acting on your behalf raise any concerns with companies ahead of voting

          On a case by case basis depending upon the issues under consideration.

20.2. Indicate whether you and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, communicate the rationale to companies, when , you abstain or vote against management recommendations.

20.3. Additional information. [Optional]

Outputs and outcomes

LEA 21. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

21.1. For listed equities where you and/or your service provider have the mandate to issue (proxy) voting instructions, indicate the percentage of votes cast during the reporting year.

Votes cast (to the nearest 1%)

99 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

21.2. Explain your reason(s) for not voting certain holdings

21.3. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 22. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

22.1. Indicate if you track the voting instructions that you and/or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

22.2. Of the voting instructions that you and/or third parties on your behalf issued, indicate the proportion of ballot items that were:

Voting instructions
Breakdown as percentage of votes cast
For (supporting) management recommendations
89 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
11 %
0 %

22.3. Describe the actions you take in relation to voting against management recommendations.

          Based on our proxy voting guidelines votes may be cast against management recommendations when considered to be in the best interests of the University portfolios, particularly with respect to shareholder proposals.

22.4. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 23. Shareholder resolutions (Private)

LEA 24. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)