State0 Blog

I went to a smartphone gathering last night and met some guys from AccessAble Systems. They are smart, fun folks. They are trying to solve an interesting problem: helping people with disabilities navigate the UT campus. At BarZ, we have done accessibility work in a similar way with parks and zoos and the like. It has generated good press and been a rewarding investment. We may even have closed a few deals based on our accessibility offerings. 

I often wonder what the best way is to fund social entrepreneurship is. AccessAble is directly focused on ADA and related initiatives. The entrepreneurial endeavour is dependant on an already socially conscious movement. BarZ is slightly different because we derive our primary income from tour rentals to non-disabled individuals. That is not to say it is better, but it is different. Google, on the third hand, has ventures that may have no clear connection to their primary mission. They do get benevolence points for it though, in the same way that BarZ gets good press for some of the stuff we do and how AccessAble got funding to start with. 

In the US, non-profits can only generate income in ways that align with the general mission of the non-profit. This implies, to me, that this is the model that we support in the US for social entrepreneurship. However, that is not how I would decide where to get funding. I think a more appropriate model/metric in deciding how to generate funds would be sustainability. Will you continue to keep your doors open and your eyes on the goal while generating income doing x? If you answer yes, that is a good way to generate income.

But what do I know?