An emerging manager carries an institutional reporting obligation on a team that is usually two or three people, and the work does not scale down just because the fund is small. The waterfall still has to be modelled the way the partnership agreement actually words it, the capital accounts still have to roll, the marks still need workpapers that document how each one was reached, and the track record still has to survive an institutional reviewer. Each engagement has a fixed fee and an agreed scope.
Fund support is priced by assets under management, with the fund model and the track record pack as one-off engagements, LP reporting and valuation workpapers per quarter, and portfolio monitoring per month. The five engagements are a fund model carrying the full waterfall and carry mechanics, quarterly LP reporting with capital account statements, monthly portfolio monitoring across holdings, quarterly valuation workpapers prepared as input to your own mark, and track record and due diligence questionnaire preparation. Each can be taken on its own, with the fee and scope agreed before work begins.
You are raising a first or second fund and the model has to reflect what the partnership agreement actually says.
Quarter end arrives and the capital account statements, the notices and the LP commentary take two weeks of somebody senior's time.
Your auditor wants workpapers behind the marks and what exists is a spreadsheet of multiples with no documented screen.
You are going to institutional investors and the track record needs a gross to net bridge and attribution that holds up to a diligence team.
The arithmetic in fund reporting is usually right. What is missing is the support behind it.
A waterfall modelled from a template rather than from the document is the clearest example. Preferred return compounding, whether the catch-up is full or partial, whether the carry is calculated deal by deal or on the whole fund, and how the clawback is tested at the end all sit in specific clauses, and each of them changes what an LP actually receives. A model that gets those wrong produces numbers that look reasonable and are not, and nobody finds out until a distribution is being calculated under pressure.
The same pattern runs through the rest of it. Capital accounts that do not roll cleanly from opening through contributions, distributions and allocations to closing cannot be reconciled when an LP asks. Marks carried at a multiple with no documented screen, no record of which comparables were rejected and no bridge explaining the movement from last quarter give an auditor nothing to work with. A track record presented gross, without the bridge to net, is the first thing an institutional reviewer will ask about and the thing that most often turns out not to exist.
What comes out of these engagements is the support rather than only the output. Every term in the fund model is referenced to the clause it comes from, with a written note on how each one was interpreted. Capital account statements carry the full roll per LP and the pack is tied back to fund accounting with any difference explained. Valuation workpapers document the screen criteria, name the rejected comparables, record the source of every data point and bridge the mark movement with performance, multiple, net debt and currency isolated. The track record walks gross deal returns through fees, carry and expenses to net LP returns, with attribution split by revenue growth, margin, debt paydown and multiple.
The workpapers are prepared for your own valuation process and your auditor's review. The general partner determines the mark. Nothing in this engagement is a fair value opinion under ASC 820, a certified appraisal or any other attest or assurance service, and it is not offered as one.
The pack, the questionnaire sections and the diligence room are prepared materials. This is not a verification or an examination of performance, which are third-party attest services, and no engagement here involves approaching investors, soliciting capital, placing securities or making introductions. No fee depends on a fund closing.
Fixed fees depend on assets under management. Fund models and track record packs are one-off engagements, while LP reporting and valuation workpapers run quarterly and portfolio monitoring runs monthly.
| Engagement | Under $25M AUM | $25M to $150M AUM | $150M and above AUM |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fund Model, one-off | $3,999 | $7,999 | $9,999 |
| LP Reporting, per quarter | $9,999 | $14,999 | $21,999 |
| Portfolio Monitoring, per month | $2,000 | $4,500 | $8,500 |
| Portfolio Valuation Support, per quarter | $3,100 | $4,999 | $7,999 |
| Track Record and DDQ, one-off | $7,500 | $15,990 | $21,900 |
Funds beyond the published assets-under-management bands are scoped individually. Each engagement can be taken on its own, and taking one does not require taking any of the others.
From $3,999
We model the waterfall and carry mechanics from the partnership agreement itself.
From $9,999 per quarter
We prepare the quarterly pack, the capital accounts and the notices and tie them back to fund accounting.
From $2,000 per month
We define the KPI set once, collect and validate it monthly, and run variance against plan and the underwriting case.
From $3,100 per quarter
We prepare the workpapers behind each mark in the format your auditor asks for.
From $7,500
We build the gross to net bridge, the attribution and the deal by deal performance, and draft the questionnaire financials.
Fund Model fits a fund being raised, or an existing model that cannot be relied on for a distribution calculation. Every term is referenced to the clause in the partnership agreement it comes from. The European and American waterfall variants are each calculated separately, and the carry mechanics carry the preferred return, the catch-up, the split and the clawback.
LP Reporting is for the point where quarter end has become the bottleneck. It produces the pack with commentary at fund and holding level, and a capital account statement per LP with the full roll. The capital call and distribution notices come with their allocation calculations attached, and the whole pack is tied back to fund accounting with any difference explained.
Portfolio Monitoring suits a portfolio that has grown past the point where a spreadsheet of emailed updates works. The KPI set is defined once and applied the same way at every holding, collection is chased and validated monthly, and variance runs against both the budget and the original underwriting case.
Portfolio Valuation Support applies when the auditor wants to see the work behind the marks. It produces comparable company and precedent transaction analysis per holding, with the screen criteria documented and the rejected comparables named. Where a holding's cash flow supports one it adds a discounted cash flow, and it bridges the mark movement with performance, multiple, net debt and currency isolated.
Track Record and DDQ is for a manager preparing to go to institutional investors. It builds the gross to net bridge, the attribution by driver, the deal by deal performance with hold periods and entry and exit multiples, and the loss ratio and dispersion. It benchmarks against a named peer set, then drafts the financial sections of the questionnaire and prepares the diligence room.
| Deliverable | Component | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Excel fund model | Control and agreement mapping | Every modelled term referenced to the clause in the partnership agreement it comes from |
| Excel fund model | Commitments and capital calls | Commitments by limited partner, the general partner commitment and the call schedule by period |
| Excel fund model | Management fee | Fee on a committed and on an invested basis, with step-downs and offsets |
| Excel fund model | Deployment and portfolio | Deal by deal deployment with entry metrics, hold period and exit assumptions |
| Excel fund model | Distribution waterfall | European and American variants, each calculated separately |
| Excel fund model | Carry mechanics | Preferred return, catch-up, carry split and clawback |
| Excel fund model | Fund returns | Internal rate of return, TVPI, DPI, RVPI and PIC by period |
| Excel fund model | Partner split | Net to the limited partners and to the general partner by scenario |
| Excel fund model | Sensitivity | Sensitivity to exit timing, exit multiple and deployment pace |
| Documentation | Term documentation | A written note on every term modelled and how it was interpreted |
| Deliverable | Component | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Quarterly pack | Cover and commentary | Written commentary on the quarter at fund and at holding level |
| Quarterly pack | Capital account statements | A statement per limited partner with the full roll from opening through contributions, distributions and allocations to closing |
| Quarterly pack | Notices | Capital call and distribution notices with the allocation calculations attached |
| Quarterly pack | Reconciliation | Contributed, distributed and remaining value reconciled to the fund's records |
| Quarterly pack | Portfolio summary | Holding by holding performance, cost, value and movement in the quarter |
| Quarterly pack | Fee and expense disclosure | Management fee, partnership expenses and offsets set out |
| Quarterly pack | Returns | Gross and net returns at fund level and at limited partner level |
| Quarterly pack | Tie-out | The pack tied to fund accounting with any difference explained |
| Deliverable | Component | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| KPI framework | Definitions | The KPI set defined once and applied the same way at every holding |
| Collection | Monthly collection | A template issued to each company, chased and validated on receipt |
| Consolidation | Portfolio roll-up | Monthly consolidation across holdings with currency handled |
| Analysis | Variance to plan | Variance against budget and against the original underwriting case by holding |
| Analysis | Covenant tracking | Covenant position and headroom at every holding that carries debt |
| Analysis | Liquidity roll-up | Cash and availability across the portfolio with the near-term calls visible |
| Dashboard | Maintenance | The dashboard maintained monthly with trend and prior period comparison |
| Reporting | Exception reporting | Escalation triggers defined, with exceptions reported as they trip |
| Deliverable | Component | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Valuation workpapers | Comparable company analysis | Per holding, with the screen criteria documented and the rejected comparables named |
| Valuation workpapers | Precedent transaction analysis | Per holding, with the deal detail and the source of every data point |
| Valuation workpapers | Discounted cash flow | Where the holding's cash flow supports one, with the assumption build shown |
| Valuation workpapers | Mark movement bridge | Movement from the prior quarter with the drivers isolated across performance, multiple, net debt and currency |
| Valuation workpapers | Supporting schedules | Underlying financials, adjustments and the inputs behind every multiple |
| Valuation workpapers | Assumption documentation | Each assumption with its source and date, in the format auditors ask for |
| Basis | What this is | Workpapers prepared as input to the general partner's own determination. The general partner determines the mark, and this is not a fair value opinion under ASC 820 |
| Deliverable | Component | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Track record pack | Gross to net bridge | Gross deal returns walked through to net returns for the limited partners, with fees, carry and expenses shown |
| Track record pack | Attribution | Realized and unrealized attribution by driver across revenue growth, margin, debt paydown and multiple |
| Track record pack | Deal by deal performance | Entry and exit date, hold period, entry and exit multiple, and gross and net return for each deal |
| Track record pack | Loss ratio and dispersion | Loss ratio, realized dispersion and the distribution of outcomes |
| Track record pack | Benchmarking | Performance against a stated peer set and benchmark, with the source named |
| Questionnaire | Financial sections | The financial and track record sections drafted with the supporting schedules referenced |
| Diligence room | Preparation | The room prepared and indexed for institutional reviewers |
| Basis | What this is | Preparation of materials only, with no investor solicitation and no transaction-contingent fee |
The partnership agreement, the side letters and the existing records come in first, because on fund work the document decides what the deliverable has to say and a template assumption is the most common source of error.
On a model engagement the build runs against the clauses with each interpretation noted. On a reporting engagement the opening position gets established and tied to fund accounting before anything new is produced.
The pack, the workpapers or the model gets produced, and anything that does not reconcile is raised with you as it is found.
A partner reviews before release, and the tie-outs run first, which means the pack to fund accounting, the capital accounts to the roll, and every multiple to the schedule that supports it.
You receive the deliverable with the working files behind it, and on the recurring engagements the cycle then runs to a published calendar with each deliverable's due date and owner set out.
They stay, and this work sits alongside. Administration covers the fund accounting, the capital calls and the filings, while these engagements cover the model, the valuation workpapers, the portfolio monitoring and the track record.
Many first funds run on a spreadsheet for longer than they should, and the failure point is almost always the first distribution or the first audit. The model and the LP reporting engagements are the two that remove that risk.
To start we need the limited partnership agreement and any side letters, the subscription documents and commitment schedule, and the capital call and distribution history. We also need the fund accounting records or trial balances, and the holding level financials with the original underwriting model or memorandum for each deal. Send the prior LP reporting packs, prior valuation workpapers where they exist, and the auditor's prior year requests where there has been an audit.
Audit, review and compilation engagements. Any opinion or assurance on financial statements. 409A valuations and certified appraisals. ESOP valuations. Fair value measurement under ASC 805 and ASC 820. Fairness opinions. Tax return preparation and tax opinions. Securities placement, investor solicitation, and any transaction-contingent or success fee.
TEOL Capital is not a broker-dealer, an investment adviser, a placement agent or a finder. Engagements are preparation and support work. TEOL does not place securities, solicit investors or make investor introductions, and takes no success, contingency or placement fee.
The fees published here are indicative, set against the scope described on each page, and a final quote is confirmed in writing before any engagement letter is issued. Nothing published here is an offer, and no engagement begins until a letter is signed by both sides. Work outside the stated scope is identified and quoted before it begins. Full payment or a 50% deposit on engagements under $10,000, and 50% at start with 50% at delivery above that. Turnaround is quoted on receipt of a complete information request and is a target rather than a term of the engagement. Fees are reviewed quarterly, and an engagement letter issued at a published fee holds that fee regardless of any later review. Work is prepared for the client named in the engagement letter and for that client's own use. Anyone else who receives it does so for information and cannot rely on it. Management accounts, consolidations and financial statements we prepare are built from the records management maintains and remain management's responsibility. We do not guarantee any particular outcome, including a sale, a financing, a valuation conclusion or a price. Our liability on any engagement is limited to the fees paid for that engagement.