by Wesley Lyons

We all sense the world is not the way it ought to be. 40 million people are enslaved, and 16% of the US is caught in poverty. We all agree our systems leave many people poor, oppressed, or captive. We want and hope for justice and better systems. We have faith for restoration—for something more, something better for our world. Our hope will never completely come to pass until Jesus returns to assume Kingship of this world, but until then, He announced His mission in His first sermon:

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has anointed me to bring Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the oppressed will be set free. . . 

Luke 4:18 (NLT)

In his Kingdom Advisors 2021 presentation, Finny Kuruvilla called this quote the “Nazareth Manifesto,” the mission statement for Christian investing. At Eagle Venture Fund, we agree with Finny. This mission resonates deeply with our passion to fight for the hearts and lives of the oppressed and the impoverished. We fight for the poor who can’t break out of the cycles of living paycheck to paycheck. We fight for the single mom who feels trapped while she fights for her kids to have a better future. We fight for the little girl who will be trafficked if her family can’t find enough to eat. We also love to connect those we serve to a relationship with Jesus and communities that will help them grow, bringing the gospel in word as well as deed.

We fight for them through investing, but how is our investing different from the $1 trillion of impact investments already in the marketplace? First, we are a different kind of VC team—entrepreneurs first who invest deeply in our companies through Eagle Venture Lab, where we co-found ⅓ of our portfolio, Eagle University; where we pass on the lessons learned from 67 startups; and where we invest in the spiritual and emotional health of our founders through Eagle Leadership Development. We also bring big solutions to big problems through focusing our funds on causes, like Eagle Freedom Fund, and locations, like the Dallas City Fund.

1. Cause-Based Investing [Eagle Freedom Fund] Combatting Slavery and Human Trafficking: There are 40 million slaves in the world. Many of the most exploited populations are systematically oppressed, disadvantaged, and impoverished. Nonprofits and governments are valiantly serving, but they face systemic headwinds. We have been investing for three years in four startups that are combatting slavery (FRDM, Evidencity, World Wide Generation, and Techless). We have a pipeline of 10 opportunities to combat trafficking and slavery, and we plan to expand our exposure and leadership in this space. Our primary thesis is that the majority of the 40 million slaves are employed by first world economies that enable it to happen through a lack of transparency. For example, Apple does not vote “yes” to slavery in their board meeting to improve profit, but it’s unlikely that they know if the tungsten in their phones was mined by an adult paid a fair wage. Companies like FRDM, Evidencity, and WWG are all working to bring transparency to the marketplace. We’re also working with startups to address the demand side of human trafficking through pornography-free devices (Techless) and to incubate a distribution platform for companies that employ survivors.  

2. Place-Based Investing [Dallas City Fund] Building Flourishing Cities: Cities with huge concentrations of people are amazing and full of potential, but they’re also full of the painful realities of systemic poverty, oppression, human trafficking, and people caught in systems they can’t escape from. Rampant urbanization has produced some of the most pressing challenges and the greatest opportunities of our generation. Startups are uniquely positioned to shape flourishing cities. We’ve been investing in companies that are part of building flourishing cities for six years (VeroSkills, UpFrom, LivFul, Wise Medicine), and we are expanding and deepening our investment funds in specific cities, starting with the Dallas City Fund. We are investing with a city impact focus through a three-fold strategy. First, we’re investing in local, faith-driven, high-impact startups. We’re also investing in a “bring your startup to our city” strategy for high-impact startups that is proving successful. In addition, we’re engaging our venture building engine through Eagle Venture Lab and M5 Labs, which are proprietary business creation labs incubating and accelerating businesses in line with these missions.  

We are investing in our pipeline of impact businesses through our movement-birthing partners at Eagle Foundation (See Eli Mercer’s CEF 2022 white paper, “10,000 Voices”). The early results of Eli’s work show that the top issues that leaders in Dallas Fort Worth are talking about are (1) entrenched poverty, (2) racial and political division, and (3) lack of unity in the church. 

Our goals are to leverage the pools of shared passion around these issues to mobilize advantages for our companies and catalyze movements of people working together to solve entrenched poverty, racial divisions, and lack of unity in the church.

We Aspire to Deeper Impact

The impact investing industry often suffers from impact that is widespread and hard to measure. For example, a green energy fund investing in alternative energy with the goal of caring for creation is a worthy cause, but it’s an impact that is widespread and difficult to measure.  

We are guilty of many investments with widespread and hard-to-measure impact—we’ll continue to invest in some companies that are investing in hard-to-measure impact like long-term culture building—but we are also striving to join a new cadre of impact investors that we call “Big Problems, Big Solutions” investors. We seek out entrepreneurs who are tackling the biggest problems in society—problems where the impact can be clearly measured—such as blighted communities with massive disparity from nearby zip codes or modern-day slavery. One of the best examples of “Big Problems Big Solutions” investing is Talanton in East Africa. David Simms once described their work as, “We help people move from $1 per day to $10 per day.” David’s description may be the clearest statement of impact that I’ve ever heard, and Talanton’s work investing in job-creating businesses in East Africa is an amazing example of “Big Problems Big Solutions” investing. We have set a goal to join Talanton, Ibex, Eventide, and many others who tackle big problems in partnership with investors and entrepreneurs.  

We Collaborate for Wider Impact

We invest in entire ecosystems in order to unleash the potential of groups of organizations on mission together. No single startup can end modern day slavery or raise up a blighted community, but a cohort of startups working in partnership with governments, non-profits, ministries, artists, and consumers has a great chance of success. This is why our funds are themed by location (like Dallas-Fort Worth) and causes (like Freedom from Modern Day Slavery), so that we can play a role in convening and investing in the entire ecosystem.  

We also believe that concentrating our efforts and our family of startups around causes and locations provide advantages to our companies because they are joining and building networks of passionate people on mission together. For example, our startups can benefit from the natural marketing that comes from a group of organizations all combatting human trafficking.  Finny Kuruvilla in his Kingdom Advisors 2021 Conference presentation contended, “The prime way to win social capital is to demonstrate a sacrificial commitment to serve in ways that are true, good, and beautiful.” Our companies sacrificially serve in ways that are true, good, and beautiful, and we help them leverage that beauty into marketing and growth through earned media. Serving sacrificially can be a competitive advantage when you build communities on mission together.  

We Aspire to Be Investors Who Demonstrate High Authority and High Vulnerability on Behalf of the Needy

Andy Crouch contended in Strong and Weak that true human flourishing is the combination of high authority and high vulnerability on behalf of the weak. To illustrate this idea, he paints a picture of watching an expert skier on an impossibly treacherous descent. We’re attracted to the scene because the huge vulnerability the skier is placing himself in is matched by the high authority of the skier’s skill. To take it a step further, we would be engrossed if that descent was on behalf of a stranded child whom only that skier could help. This picture has captured our imagination for what the calling of an investor is. We’ve been entrusted by God with authority in the forms of money to manage on His behalf, our experienced venture building team, and relationship with entrepreneurs with a passion to change the world. Like the skier, we propose to define success as investors as taking risk skillfully on behalf of the vulnerable, in ways that bring good news to the poor, release captives, give sight to the blind, and set the oppressed free. 

Article originally hosted and shared with permission by The Christian Economic Forum, a global network of leaders who join together to collaborate and introduce strategic ideas for the spread of God’s economic principles and the goodness of Jesus Christ. This article was from a collection of White Papers compiled for attendees of the CEF’s Global Event.

Article originally posted here by Inspire

by Robert Netzly

More and more Christian investors are making intentional steps to glorify God by aligning their investment portfolios with biblical values, and the biblically responsible investing (BRI) movement continues to advance at breakneck pace as a result. However, I still routinely come across Christian investors and financial advisors who have not yet decided to adopt BRI into their portfolios, instead keeping their money invested in the same secular funds they have always used.

A frequent reason they share with me for their reluctance to invest with BRI principles is that they are concerned that doing so would be legalistic of them. They rightly value their freedom in Christ, and in their view, biblically responsible investing screens are akin to “straining out gnats” from a portfolio while “swallowing a camel” of legalistic slavery. They are quick to point out that the Bible does not provide specific rules for screening investments, and despite the broader scriptures concerning moral business dealings, they consider it a bridge too far to say the Bible teaches that Christian investors have a moral responsibility for the actions and profits of the companies in their portfolios.

The essence of their position is that they believe the Bible does not require them to screen their investments, and therefore they don’t do it. This has historically made for some lively discussions among the Christian financial professional community between those who believe the Bible does teach the necessity of BRI and those who do not, each trying to convince the other side of their erroneous judgement on the matter.

Pardon The Interruption

But can I just interrupt that conversation for a minute? Can I take a humble step back and ask the question, “What if my interpretation of the Bible is wrong and the Bible really does give Christians the freedom to invest in anything without raising questions on the ground of conscience?”

Somewhere, a pin drops.

The natural assumption is that if the Bible does not say that you have to screen your investments, then you should not screen your investments. But is that actually a biblical assumption? If the Bible does not specifically prohibit an activity, does that mean that you therefore should do it? Or, if the Bible does not specifically teach that you should do a thing, does that mean you should refrain?

The Apostle Paul provides some Holy Spirit inspired wisdom on this topic, “‘All things are lawful,’ but not all things are helpful. ‘All things are lawful,’ but not all things build up. Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor.” (1 Cor. 10:23-24)

In this concise treatment, Paul gives us a very practical lens with which to make God-honoring decisions. He teaches here that there is something greater than the obligations of the moral law at work in the life of a believer, another law at work with a superior claim on the Christian than the Law of Moses. This other law he calls the “law of Christ”(see 1 Cor. 9:21and Gal. 6:2), pointing to the teaching of Jesus to love your neighbor as yourself.

Applied to our context of investing, this verse might read, “’All investments are lawful,’ but not all investments are helpful. ‘All investments are lawful,’ but not all investments build up. Let no one invest for his own good, but for the good of his neighbor.”

Does your portfolio only seek your own good, or the good of your neighbor as well?

Seeking The Good

Instead of asking whether Christian investors “have to” screen their investments to fulfill the righteous requirements of the law, shouldn’t we first be asking the more important question of how we can best seek the good of our neighbor with our investments to fulfill the love-motivated law of Christ to the glory of God?

Let’s consider some examples together. Which investor is more fully “seeking the good of his neighbor”…

• The investor that avoids stocks of abortion drug manufacturers because their products bring death and tragedy? Or is it the investor that keeps abortion drug manufacturers in their portfolio because they want to keep using a particular fund from their favorite fund company, perhaps because the costs are lower?

• The investor who excludes Netflix and Amazon from their portfolio because the pornography they sell and distribute enslaves people to wickedness and ruins marriages? Or is it the investor who keeps Netflix and Amazon in their portfolios because their performance has been so good, turning a blind eye to the millions of pornographic videos streamed every year through their platforms?

• The investor who actively seeks out investments in companies that are operating with integrity in their management, fairness in their supply chains, sustainability with the environment and is a blessing to their employees? Or is it the investor who only looks for the best risk/reward performance and lowest cost, no matter how the management runs the company?

To truly invest with Christian freedom is to actively use our freedom in Christ to love God and love our neighbor with our investment decisions. A position that views freedom in Christ as freedom from responsibility, and in our context freedom from being responsible for the actions of the companies we own, is lacking in appreciation for the great opportunity and responsibility to glorify God that our freedom in Christ is meant to create,

“For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” (Gal. 5: 13-14)

So then, we are set free not so that we can do whatever we want, but in order to glorify God by loving our neighbor as ourselves. We are set free not so that we can invest in whatever we want, but in order to glorify God by loving our neighbors through the companies we invest in.

Asking The Right Question

“Does the Bible say I have to screen my investments?” is ultimately the wrong question. The right question is, “Am I loving God and loving my neighbor with my investment decisions?”

For the record, I do believe the Bible teaches a moral obligation to avoid profiting from and participating in immoral activities, including through a Christian’s investment account. But I also believe that there is a greater, even more compelling motivation that should inspire every Christian to invest differently than the world: to seek the good of others.

Christians around the world are choosing to be intentional about loving their neighbors by pouring billions of dollars into biblically responsible investments. Will you join us and invest for the good of others to the glory of God? (Even if you don’t “have to”?)

by Eventide

by John Siverling

Hear from four investment managers on how they approach investing from a Christian faith perspective.

Article originally posted here by Tech Crunch

by Jake Chapman

Colin Kroll  was the co-founder of Vine and HQ Trivia, both consumer sensations that brought joy to millions; Anthony Bourdain had been a chef, journalist and philosopher who brought understanding and connectedness to millions of lives; Robin Williams built a career as a brilliant comedian and actor.

What these three share in common is that they were all people at the pinnacle of their industry and they all died too soon. Their premature loss is a tragedy.

The most brilliant and creative amongst us are sometimes the most troubled, and nowhere is that clearer than in the entrepreneurial ecosystem. With each passing unnecessary death, the importance of mental health comes briefly into focus… but that focus lasts no longer than a news cycle and nothing changes. The time for lip service came and went long ago. We must take these issues seriously and we need to act.

The mental health epidemic is real. There are 18.5 percent of Americans that will suffer from mental illness this year; 4 percent of them will suffer so acutely that it will substantially limit their ability to live their lives.

That means it is extremely likely you or someone you know is suffering right now and could use support. Moreover, unlike many of the challenges we face today, the most common expressions of mental health disorder (anxiety, depression, substance abuse and imposter syndrome) are largely addressable through individual action. Not only should we all take action, we all can take action.

While national mental health statistics are troubling, they are downright terrifying for entrepreneurs. According to a study by Michael Freeman, entrepreneurs are 50 percent more likely to report having a mental health condition, with some specific conditions being incredibly prevalent amongst founders.

Founders are:

• 2X more likely to suffer from depression

• 6X more likely to suffer from ADHD

• 3X more likely to suffer from substance abuse

• 10X more likely to suffer from bi-polar disorder

• 2X more likely to have psychiatric hospitalization

• 2X more likely to have suicidal thoughts

Addressing the ongoing mental health catastrophe in entrepreneurship is a moral imperative, and for wise investors, it should be a function of doing business.

Venture capitalists make their living off the blood, sweat and tears of founders. It is through their passion and efforts that we succeed or fail. We can either choose to see founders purely as a means to an end (generating returns) or we can see them as the whole people they are.

When I make an effort to get to know our founders beyond the most superficial level, then I cannot help but be moved by their personal struggles. Seeing founders in our portfolio succeed on a personal level is just as rewarding for me as sharing in their professional success. Luckily, I believe the two are intrinsically linked, which means we don’t have to choose.

 As Michael Freeman writes:

Mental health is as essential for knowledge work in the 21st century as physical health was for physical labor in the past. Creativity, ingenuity, insight, brilliance, planning, analysis, and other executive functions are often the cognitive cornerstones of breakthrough value creation by entrepreneurs.

Depression, anxiety and mood disorders all actively work to undermine founder performance. They often contribute to burnout, co-founder conflict, toxic company culture, increased employee turnover, an inability to hire top talent, an inability to “show up” for important meetings and pitches and poor decision making in general. According to Noam Wasserman at HBS, 65 percent of failed startups fail for avoidable reasons like co-founder conflict. All of these experiences are exacerbated when founders are in a time of high mental and emotional strain.

Let’s assume that in a portfolio of 20 companies, 15 of them fail or underperform and that Noam Wasserman’s 65 percent statistic holds true. That would mean that 10 of the 15 companies (65 percent) failed for avoidable “human-centric” reasons. If a firm were able to help even half of those companies avoid failure caused by burnout and mental strain, that would mean an additional five companies would be successful, doubling the number of successful outcomes in the portfolio.

Even if you’re a huge pessimist, to help change the trajectory for one out of 10 companies changes the portfolio from five winners to six. In other words, supporting founders before their “people problems” become business problems yields a 20 percent improvement in performance. Even if one were indifferent to the personal lives of the portfolio founders, they should care about founder health if they care about portfolio returns.

It’s great that investors profess to care about founders’ mental health, but words are not enough. We must act to reduce founders’ mental and emotional suffering. It’s the right thing to do and it’s good for business.

Why do entrepreneurs suffer so much more acutely?

Mental health problems permeate every industry, not just the tech industry, but the statistics above would seem to indicate that we have a particular problem. What causes entrepreneurs to suffer at substantially higher than average rates? It’s a hard question to answer, and soon research from progressive labs like that of the Founder Central Initiative will help us to identify these drivers. For now, based on our own observations of founders, we believe there are several explanations that may contribute.

Self-selection: Most founders are smart, driven and skilled people whose résumé could almost certainly land them a job with a higher lifetime expected value (the median salary at Facebook  is now $240,000), but they still choose the grueling, uncertain and more creative founder journey. Founders are almost certainly pre-disposed toward certain conditions (like ADHD) for example. In his book The Da Vinci Method, Garret LoPorto cites Fortune Magazine as claiming that people with ADHD are 300 percent more likely to start their own company than others.

Poisonous industry tropes: The narratives our industry tells are less real than pictures that grace the front of fashion magazines and are just as destructive. Photoshopped pictures of “perfect people” create an unattainable standard of beauty; the constant stream of stories about “overnight success” and “crushing it” create an unattainable standard for founders.

Startups are hard: The magic of a great team is in building a group with complementary skills. Just-starting-out founders don’t have a complete team and are required to do things they are not well-suited to do. Working on projects that do not fit within a leader’s innate skills tends to be emotionally draining. It’s not uncommon in an early startup for introverts in the company to have to pitch and make sales calls while extroverts are forced to sit at a desk and grind away in a CRM.

Startups are alienating: The all-encompassing nature of a startup often causes founders to spend less time with family, friends and significant others, and many are required to re-locate away from these support networks for funding or strategic reasons. As stress at a company builds, founders are more inclined to double down at work (a natural response to an emergency). This tendency only further burdens the founder by muting their supportive relationships and reduces their ability to cope with company pressures.

A founder must be a rock: There’s a lot of pressure put on founders to stay steady in times of company turmoil.  As a result, they are often alone when they need others the most. Founders report that they feel they cannot talk with their co-founders, especially when the problem is with the co-founder, they cannot pass the burden of their worry on to their employees and they feel their friends and family do not understand or are tired of hearing about the company.

The “I am my company” syndrome: Founders blur the line between themselves and their companies in such a way that company failures often are felt as personal failures. Losing a customer contract or receiving a “no” from an investor can feel like a deeply personal rejection.

Founders eat last: I have yet to meet a founder who has a budgeted line item for self-care or who takes guilt-free vacations. In almost every other skilled industry there is recognition that people have a right to take care of themselves and that a little bit of self-care actually leads to a more productive workforce. Investors, founders and poorly trained middle managers all perpetuate a myth in the startup ecosystem that the only way to be successful is to grind yourself inexorably to the bone.

Financial risk: In addition to opportunity cost, founders often go without a paycheck and pour a significant portion of their personal capital into their businesses. This creates enormous financial stress and anxiety that sets up a scenario in which a business failure also creates personal financial ruin. A certain amount of “skin in the game” can be positive, but founders are often already all-in emotionally with their businesses. A founder with too much skin in the game may live under a Sword of Damocles and be unable to focus on the key tasks, ironically bringing about their own worst fears.

Imposter Syndrome: Founders often suffer from the sense that they don’t belong where they are and that eventually they will be exposed as frauds. This leads founders to chalk up success to luck, but to take all the blame for any failures. Indeed, 58 percent of tech workers suffer from Imposter Syndrome, and I suspect the number is substantially higher among founders.

Moving the goalposts: Founders find it difficult to celebrate the small wins, as each victory brings on the next, greater challenge. The second most stressful time for founders is right before they are able to secure a major fundraise; the most stressful time is right afterward.

Substance abuse: Our industry is awash in alcohol and other substances that founders and tech workers are encouraged to consumer freely for bonding, as a social crutch and for performance optimization. These substances are both a cause and a symptom of broader problems in the ecosystem.

I wager that simply reading the above list left you stressed out and self-identifying with a number of the factors that cause founders stress. Luckily there are some things we can all do to combat mental health strain.

What can investors and founders do about founder mental health?

Each of us who participates in the startup ecosystem contributes to the problem of poor founder health. This puts each of us in a position to positively impact this experience by acting. Here are a few things we can do.

Destigmatize

Investors should make sure that the founders they work with know that they take mental health issues seriously. One way to do this is to take the Investors Pledge developed by Erin Frey and Ti Zhao at Kip. Just taking the pledge sends a powerful signal to founders that it’s OK for them to seek help. Better yet, investors, in their onboarding process with founders, should explicitly touch on their support for the founders’ seeking mental health services when they feel compelled to do so.

Drop the act. Being an investor is different from being a founder, but it isn’t easy, and investors suffer in many of the same ways. If investors want to support their founders, they need to be authentic and vulnerable in front of them. Investors need to show founders it’s OK to open up and that it’s OK to have doubts or to struggle with mental health.

For founders, don’t spread or buy into the myths. When you’ve been grinding away on your business for years in anonymity and then have a major breakthrough, make sure your PR campaign accurately reflects the journey. You suffered to bring your company to the pinnacle of success and you had to invest heavily in yourself to survive the trip. Make sure when other founders read about your success they understand how you really got there.

Provide Resources

It’s easy for people to forget how financially constrained most founders are. Just because they’ve raised $5 million in a recent financing doesn’t mean they necessarily have the personal capital to seek help and support. A portion of financing rounds should be earmarked for the founders themselves and investors should hold founders accountable for investing in their well-being and development.

Founders need to include a line item in their P&L for wellness or self-care. Budgets are moral documents and they set the priorities of a company. If there is no line item for supporting the mental/physical/emotional well-being of the founders and employees, then the company will be devoid of the resources to offer this type of support. We, the participants in this ecosystem, need to put our money where our mouths are when we say that we are “founder-friendly” and “invest in founders first.”

Don’t forget the mind-body connection 

Mental, emotional and physical well-being are all deeply linked to one another. Just as mental health issues often lead to substance abuse, a lack of physical exercise or nutrition can also lead to depressive mood states and a lack of focus. The founder 15 is as real as the freshman 15, but it’s much more destructive.

Founders need to make sure to incorporate their physical activity of choice into their life, need to watch their nutritional intake and should consider activities such as yoga, meditation and intentional breathing that research shows help boost mood, sharpen focus and enhance emotional resilience. (Short plug, at Atlas we work on addressing the whole person because we believe effective leaders are those who are both physically and emotionally fit.)

Connect, connect, connect 

Founders need to remain anchored in a support network. They should join a peer group, engage with old friends, go out on date nights with their significant other and make new friends. Not only is it a fun way to unload some of the pressure they’re under, but it’s a great reminder to founders that they have a separate existence from their company.

Founders should take an intentional vacation away from work, tech and business. If, like me, a founder can’t voluntarily disconnect even while on vacation, they should consider joining a community like Soulscape or traveling off the grid so they are forced to disconnect and recharge. Burnout rarely appears as the primary track in startup post-mortem, but a trained ear can usually find its influence.

Set a culture that is supportive of self-care. If everyone from the receptionist to the CEO is willing to seek help and take care of themselves, it creates a company-wide habit that enables everyone to thrive. A healthy culture will pay for itself a thousand times over in recruitment, lower turnover and happier, more productive people who are willing to sacrifice for the company when sacrifice is called for.

Set priorities not tasks

Founders and A-type personalities tend to live and die by their calendar and their task lists. Unfortunately, task lists are just reminders that there are countless things to be done. For most of us our task lists are quite literally infinite. This is a recipe for unbearable mental strain and unmanageable cognitive load. The definition of anxiety is when we perceive that our ability to achieve is overwhelmed by the tasks at hand, which is inevitable when our tasks are ill-defined, too large or seemingly unending. Instead of a task list, switch to a daily priorities list where only the urgent AND important items are listed. Completing these items may be more difficult, but getting them off your plate is infinitely more satisfying.

Be vigilant 

Learn the warning signs of depression and burnout. People who are drowning don’t wave their hands in the air and shout for help, they slip silently beneath the waves and only trained life guards tend to spot people in trouble. It’s the same way with depression. Depressed people don’t mope around and they aren’t necessarily sad so much as numb. Here are things to look for:

• Persistent feelings of pessimism

• Sad, anxious or empty mood

• Change in behavior and loss of interest in previously enjoyed activities

• Change in diet or eating schedule

• Change in sleep schedule

• Irritability

• Inability to make decisions or concentrate

• You can also use this validated self-assessment for depression

Building companies is inherently hard mentally, physically and emotionally, but our ecosystem is a toxic one, with dozens of factors all contributing to make it even more so. We are quite literally killing ourselves and thereby sabotaging our long-term competitiveness. There are tangible actions each one of us can take to start fixing this toxicity, but at the end of the day I believe most of those actions boil down to treating each other and ourselves as human beings. If we recognize and embrace our weaknesses and support one another in our imperfections, we will start seeing a healthier more sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem.

Resources:

National Suicide Prevention Hotline: 1-800-273-8255

Depression resources: https://www.everydayhealth.com/depression/guide/resources/

Free/Cheap Peer Groups: https://www.evryman.co; https://www.chairmanmom.com; Atlas Events and Peer Groups

by Joe Gitto

There are many ways to support charitable organizations and many ways to make sure your gifts make a long-term, sustainable impact. One method that’s gained popularity over the past few years is called a donor-advised fund. 

Should you consider it?

The answer depends on your individual situation because donor-advised funds are not appropriate for everyone. However, if you’re in a position to make larger charitable gifts, you want to see what this strategy has to offer. A donor-advised fund provides the benefits of a managed portfolio, lower capital gains tax, and anonymity.

Here’s how a donor-advised fund works:

Contribute to the fund

You can contribute to your donor-advised fund with cash or marketable securities, which are assets that can be converted to cash quickly. If your contribution is tax deductible, you’ll get the deduction in the year you make the contribution to the fund. Of course, these contributions are still subject to IRS limits on charitable tax deductions and whether you itemize your deductions. 

If you typically don’t give enough each year to itemize and plan on making consistent charitable contributions, you could consider combining multiple years’ worth of planned giving into a single donor-advised fund contribution and claim a larger deduction in that year. This move may be especially impactful if you have years with a higher amount of income, with an accompanying higher tax rate. If you contribute marketable securities, like stocks and bonds, into the fund, a subsequent sale of the securities avoids capital gains taxes, maximizing the impact of your contribution. 

Choose an investment

Typically, donor-advised funds offer several professionally managed, diversified portfolios where you can place your contributions. You’ll want to consider the level of investment risk to which your fund may be exposed. And assuming all requirements are met, any investment growth is not taxable to you, the donor-advised fund, or the charity that ultimately receives the grant, making your charitable gift go even further. 

Choose the Charities

You can choose grants for the IRS-approved charities that you want to support. You decide when you want the money donated and how it should be granted. You’re generally free to choose as many IRS-approved charitable organizations as you like. And the tax reporting is relatively easy — you don’t have to keep track of receipts from every charity you support. Instead, you can just keep the receipts from your contributions to the fund.

Drawbacks of Donor-Advised Funds

Although donor-advised funds clearly offer some benefits, there are important trade-offs to consider. For one thing, your contributions are irrevocable, which means once you put the money in the fund, you cannot access it for any reason other than charitable giving. And the investments you choose within your fund will carry some risk, as is true of all investments. 

Also, donor-advised funds do have investment management fees and other costs. So, consider the impacts of these fees when deciding how you want to give. 

Donor-Advised Funds are a Unique Way to Support Causes that Matter to You

In any case, you should consult with your tax and financial professionals before opening a donor-advised fund. And if the fund becomes part of your estate plans, you’ll also want to work with your legal advisor. But give this philanthropic tool some thought — it can help you do some good while also potentially benefiting your own long-term financial strategy.

Joe Gitto is a Certified Kingdom Advisor (CKA) and Certified Exit Planning Advisor (CEPA) and a Financial Advisor with Edward Jones in Toluca Lake California. He is a member of The Financial Planning Association, the Burbank, Toluca Lake and Glendale Chambers of Commerce and a finance instructor at the Burbank Adult School. His office is located at 3500 W Olive Ave, Ste 1420 Burbank CA 91505. He can be reached at 818 840-8040 or joe.gitto@edwardjones.com. Bio/Website: www.edwardjones.com/joe-gitto

This article was written by Edward Jones for use by your local Edward Jones Financial Advisor.

Edward Jones, Member SIPC

Learn more about donor-advised funds through FDI resources. Click the image below!