Home / Capital Advisory Glossary / Fund placement
Fund placement

Investor due-diligence questionnaire

Organise an investor's questions, supporting documents and open items so the fund manager can answer consistently and the investor can assess the manager on a documented basis.

Quick answer

An investor due-diligence questionnaire, or investor DDQ, is a structured set of questions and document requests used by a prospective limited partner to assess a fund manager and proposed fund. It commonly covers the firm, ownership, governance, team, strategy, investment process, track record, risk, operations, service providers, legal terms, compliance, responsible investment and reporting. A completed DDQ supports review and follow-up; it does not constitute investment approval, legal advice or a commitment.

Use the worked example

Meaning and transaction use

ILPA states that its DDQ is intended to standardise frequent and important questions used by investors when conducting diligence on managers. [S1]

ILPA DDQ 2.0 asks about firm organisation, fund structure, team, investment strategy, process, track record, alignment, governance, risk, operations, technology and requested supporting documents. [S2]

Proposed control method: assign each request an owner, status, evidence link, confidentiality level, review date and approver; reconcile narrative answers to the LPA, PPM, model, track record and data room before release.

Worked example

Illustrative process metric only. Assume a DDQ register contains 120 requested items. Twelve are documented as not applicable, 84 applicable items are complete and 24 applicable items remain open.

Scroll the table horizontally to view all columns.

MeasureCalculationResult
Applicable items120 - 12108
Completed applicable items84 / 10877.8%
Open applicable items24 / 10822.2%
Register reconciliation84 + 24 + 12120
Priority-item resolution6 / 1060.0%

The illustrative register is 77.8% complete across applicable items. Twenty-four applicable responses remain open, including four of the ten priority items. Completion measures document readiness; it does not evidence investor satisfaction or approval.

Proposed transaction review process

Set the response perimeter

Confirm the fund, entities, period, investor requirements, confidentiality restrictions and permitted recipients.

Build the controlled register

Map every question and document request to an owner, source, status, due date and reviewer.

Draft and reconcile

Answer from dated evidence and reconcile figures, legal terms, policies, track record and disclosures across materials.

Approve and release

Obtain subject-matter and legal review where required, release through the authorised channel and log follow-up questions and changes.

Evidence checklist

Constitutional and offering documents

LPA, PPM, subscription documents, side-letter policy and entity records.

Organisation and governance

Ownership, organisation chart, committees, delegated authorities, conflicts and succession arrangements.

Investment and performance

Strategy, pipeline, attribution, realised and unrealised track record, valuation policy and supporting calculations.

Operations and controls

Compliance manuals, regulatory status, risk controls, cybersecurity, business continuity, service providers, audited accounts and reporting samples.

Decision framework

SituationProposed action
An answer lacks current evidenceKeep it open, identify the source and owner, and state the expected resolution date.
Materials contain inconsistent figuresPause release of the affected response and reconcile to an approved source of truth.
A request includes restricted informationApply the confidentiality protocol and obtain approval before disclosure or provide an authorised alternative.
A prior answer changesVersion the response, record the reason and date, and notify authorised recipients when the change is material.

Common errors to check

  • Treating a completed template as proof that diligence is complete.
  • Copying prior-fund answers without checking the current fund, period and legal terms.
  • Marking partial or unsupported answers as complete.
  • Releasing personal, privileged or restricted information without the required authority.

Control the investor DDQ process

Bring the investor request list, fund documents, approved performance data and disclosure controls to a DDQ readiness review. Identify unsupported answers, document gaps and approval dependencies before materials are released.

Discuss the transaction

Primary references and editorial scope

  1. ILPA Due Diligence Questionnaire and Diversity Metrics Template
    Purpose, standardisation and development of the ILPA investor due-diligence framework. Reference checked 17 September 2026.
  2. ILPA Due Diligence Questionnaire 2.0
    Detailed diligence topics and supporting-document requests for private-market managers and funds. Reference checked 17 September 2026.
Editorial qualification

General fund-placement education and process design. Figures are hypothetical. The applicable questions, disclosure permissions, investor eligibility and legal, regulatory, privacy and marketing requirements depend on the fund, investor and jurisdictions.

General business information. Obtain advice appropriate to the legal, tax, accounting and financing facts. No offer, lender commitment or transaction outcome is represented. All worked examples use expressly assumed figures. Editorial draft date: 17 September 2026.

WhatsApp