Many witnesses highlighted the need to build the technical capacity of organizations to participate in social finance as an important issue in the social finance marketplace.[144] The Committee heard that building capacity in the social finance context largely refers to “helping prepare or mak[ing] the investees more investable.”[145] Some witnesses also raised the issue of supporting intermediaries and supply side actors to build capacity in order to better participate in this sector.

Suggested measures to help build capacity were mostly related to supports for social enterprises and service delivery organizations. As Bill Crawford of the Eden Community Food Bank stated:

The bottom line is that social finance in Canada is still relatively unknown. In the non-profit and charitable sectors there would need to be a lot more education on social finance and an easy-to-step-into opportunity for organizations to test the waters; basically more business-minded people with a heart for social development, where business and charity combine, to be able to work together.[146]

Funds dedicated to the specific purpose of developing capacity among demand-side actors were raised by several witnesses.[147] Kieron Boyle highlighted two recent programs that the U.K. Government had undertaken in this area, noting that “[t]he demand side is a more crucial area from my perspective in terms of the distinct role government can play, we focus a lot on capacity building, specifically to enable organizations to take on investment.” First, he indicated that an “investment and contract readiness fund”, valued at £15 million, was piloted to provide larger and more established organizations with:

… some ground support to build up the sorts of business models or financial planning or back-office capabilities that would enable an investor to place money into them. For that pilot every £1 of government grant we put in succeeded in unlocking over £27 of private investment, which if nothing else has made it—and I've checked—the most successful U.K. business support program out there.[148]

Mr. Boyle also noted that the U.K. Government had supported earlier-stage social ventures through a number of “social incubators”, which he described as “essentially business accelerators that were typically combining public money and then private money, often from large corporates, and putting that into accelerated programs for very early stage organizations that were looking to have a social impact.”[149]

In Canada, the Committee heard that “what works” centres can be useful in synthesizing and disseminating information on interventions that work. Technical assistance labs were suggested as useful to offer training, advice and support for impact evaluation.[150] As Sunil Johal noted:

If the federal government wants to move into this space, I think it's absolutely critical that it plays a role in providing that critical support of infrastructure in terms of a "what works" centre and technical assistance labs, so that we're not seeing all of these contracts and opportunities going just to the largest [not-for-profit] service provider.[151]

Debbie Brown of Crossing All Bridges Learning Centre added that while urban centres have fairly well-established social enterprise “hubs” (for example, the MaRS Discovery District), rural hubs are needed for smaller, more isolated communities and their projects. This would help smaller organizations to seek out partnerships and funding.[152]

Some witnesses also identified a need to build capacity among intermediaries and supply side actors in the Canadian social finance market. The Committee heard that there is a need to “create programs that will give social workers business skills and give potential investors social value perspectives.”[153] In addition, Andy Broderick told the Committee that:

[I]t really is time to begin to focus on how to build the capacity in the sector by gravitating investment around successful groups, groups that have shown the capacity to move money out. Measure it on moving money out and managing money effectively in the same way you would with a private sector intermediary. You really want to build strong intermediaries that have a good track record. They don't exist yet. They're starting to exist, but I think that's of fundamental importance.[154]

In an effort to address identified and emerging capacity needs in this area, Budget 2015 committed to implementing a social finance accelerator initiative aimed at helping to develop promising social finance proposals. According to budget documents, ESDC will implement the initiative to help such proposals become investment-ready through “workshops, advisory services, mentorship, networking opportunities and investor introductions.”[155]

Several witnesses observed that there are currently programs geared towards small and medium enterprises that should be made accessible to charities or non-profits. For example, Ian Bird told the Committee:

There’s a skilling up, a training up of those organizations so that they’re ready to come forward with their business plans. That’s fundamentally no different from the kind of thing that goes on all the time right now with small and medium-sized enterprises. There are extensive programs across governments, and as public-private efforts to skill up those small and medium-sized enterprises. Right now charities, public-purpose non-profits, don’t have access to those programs.[156]

Some witnesses noted that giving charities and non-profit organizations access to existing programs for the private sector would be straightforward, could happen in a short period of time, and would not involve new resources.[157] In addition, David LePage from Social Enterprise Council of Canada noted that many existing programs are not in fact officially closed to non-profits, and mentioned Industry Canada’s Canada Business Network as a program that could be expanded.[158] Similarly, Jacques Charest of CAP Finance observed:

… the easiest way is if we consider ourselves businesses and cover all the products and investment support measures intended for private businesses. We often see programs that are for businesses in category 1. Why are they not for NPOs or cooperatives? It's because that's the way things are. There are also programs for the capital and the shares of a company, but since there are none for social economy enterprises, we must find an equivalent.[159]

Additionally, the representative for Enactus Canada noted that many post-secondary education institutions are not providing training in the areas of social finance and social entrepreneurship. This witness suggested that programs and initiatives should be put forward to train the future generation of social entrepreneurs and social finance actors.[160]