What should LP reference calls cover when reviewing a first-time venture manager?

LP references should address specific behavior relevant to the proposed fund. Founders, co-investors, prior colleagues, and prior LPs observe different things. A generally positive reputation does not answer questions about judgment, attribution, reliability, or conflicts.

Start with the decision

Prepare role-specific questions and ask for concrete episodes. Record the reference's relationship, timing, and direct observations. Seek permission before sharing private statements and corroborate important claims where appropriate.

The illustrative scenario

This is an educational workbook. The company or fund and all numerical inputs below are fictional. They are not ADIN results, customer claims, market benchmarks, or a forecast.

The fictional manager is raising a first independent fund after working on investments at another firm. The pitch includes several prior deals, but the LP has not yet verified the manager's role or permission to use those examples.

A prior employer's portfolio is not automatically an attributable personal track record. Separate sourcing, analysis, investment authority, board work, and realized outcomes for each deal.

Turn the scenario into an evidence decision

Consider a review of a first-time venture manager in which a confident explanation arrives before the supporting records. Start with the first question in the table. Write down what an answer would change: the next interview, the experiment's scope, a request for specialist review, or a decision to wait. A question without a consequence can produce a longer document while adding little understanding.

Next, inspect the record named in the table and record its date, owner, permission boundary, and limitations. Request a role-by-deal table, permissioned references, dated evidence of decisions, and clear realized versus unrealized figures. Keep unavailable evidence visible instead of filling gaps with estimates. If the record contradicts the explanation, preserve both accounts and ask which definition, period, or workflow differs. Do not silently select the version that makes the opportunity look strongest.

Finish with a conditional statement: if the specified evidence supports the claim under these conditions, take the named next step; otherwise investigate the unresolved question. A reference process adds context rather than a simple popularity score. Preserve mixed evidence and distinguish a person's helpfulness from their investment decision quality and operating capability. This worked exercise is about the decision process. It does not assert that a fictional company has met a real diligence standard or that a template can authorize an investment.

Use this worksheet

Answer the questions with a source, date, owner, and next action. Mark an unknown as unknown. Use public or permissioned information and involve a qualified specialist when a question requires expertise beyond the team’s competence.

1. What did the reference observe?
2. How did the manager handle a difficult situation?
3. What role was actually owned?
4. What limitation exists in the reference?
5. Which account conflicts with another?

Questions specific to this scenario

• Which decisions were actually theirs?
• Who can verify the attribution?
• What is missing from the independent operating plan?

Request a role-by-deal table, permissioned references, dated evidence of decisions, and clear realized versus unrealized figures. Keep unavailable evidence visible instead of filling gaps with estimates.

A concrete next test

Choose one successful prior investment and one unsuccessful example from the relevant set. Ask the manager to specify their role and obtain permissioned corroboration. Compare the work shown with the responsibilities they would hold in an independent fund, including decisions not previously theirs.

Interpret the result

A reference process adds context rather than a simple popularity score. Preserve mixed evidence and distinguish a person's helpfulness from their investment decision quality and operating capability.

Compare the proposed independent fund's work with the manager's actual prior responsibilities. Explain where the new role requires capabilities not shown by the old one.

Sources and method

These primary resources provide background for the concepts. The fictional scenario, calculations, and worksheet are ADIN educational examples; the sources do not report or validate those invented results. Reviewed October 11, 2026.

• ILPA: Due Diligence Questionnaire user guide
• Investor.gov: Private Equity Funds