Distributions to shareholders from net investment income are accrued daily and paid monthly. Distributions from net realized gains, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Such distributions are determined in conformity with income tax regulations, which may differ from generally accepted accounting principles.
Income, common expenses and realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated to the classes based on the relative net assets of each class. Distribution fees, if any, are calculated daily at the class level based on the appropriate net assets of each class and the specific expense rates applicable to each class.
Evergreen Investment Management Company, LLC (“EIMC”), an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Wachovia Corporation (“Wachovia”), is the investment advisor to the Fund and is paid a fee at an annual rate of 2% of the Fund’s gross investment income plus an amount determined by applying percentage rates to the aggregate average daily net assets of the Fund and its variable annuity counterpart, Evergreen VA Diversified Income Builder Fund, starting at 0.31% and declining to 0.16% as the aggregate average daily net assets increase. For the six months ended October 31, 2008, the advisory fee was equivalent to 0.42% of the Fund’s average daily net assets (on an annualized basis).
On October 3, 2008, Wells Fargo & Company (“Wells Fargo”) and Wachovia announced that Wells Fargo agreed to acquire Wachovia in a whole company transaction that will include all of Wachovia’s banking and other businesses. In connection with this transaction, Wachovia issued preferred shares to Wells Fargo representing approximately a 40% voting interest in Wachovia. Due to its ownership of preferred shares, Wells Fargo may be deemed to control EIMC. If Wells Fargo is deemed to control EIMC, then the existing advisory agreement between the Fund and EIMC would have terminated automatically in connection with the issuance of preferred shares. To address this possibility, on October 20, 2008 the Board of Trustees approved an interim advisory agreement with EIMC with the same terms and conditions as the existing agreement which became effective upon the issuance of the preferred shares. EIMC’s receipt of the advisory fees under
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (unaudited) continued
the interim advisory agreement is subject to the approval by shareholders of the Fund of a new advisory agreement with EIMC.
From time to time, EIMC may voluntarily or contractually waive its fee and/or reimburse expenses in order to limit operating expenses. During the six months ended October 31, 2008, EIMC voluntarily waived its advisory fee in the amount of $79.
The Fund may invest in money market funds which are advised by EIMC. Income earned on these investments is included in income from affiliate on the Statement of Operations.
EIMC also serves as the administrator to the Fund and is paid an annual rate determined by applying percentage rates to the aggregate average daily net assets of the Evergreen funds (excluding money market funds) starting at 0.10% and declining to 0.05% as the aggregate average daily net assets of the Evergreen funds (excluding money market funds) increase. For the six months ended October 31, 2008, the administrative services fee was equivalent to 0.10% of the Fund’s average daily net assets (on an annualized basis).
Evergreen Service Company, LLC (“ESC”), an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Wachovia, is the transfer and dividend disbursing agent for the Fund. ESC receives account fees that vary based on the type of account held by the shareholders in the Fund. For the six months ended October 31, 2008, the transfer agent fees were equivalent to an annual rate of 0.17% of the Fund’s average daily net assets.
The Fund has placed a portion of its portfolio transactions with brokerage firms that are affiliates of Wachovia. During the six months ended October 31, 2008, the Fund paid brokerage commissions of $19,452 to Wachovia Securities, LLC.
4. DISTRIBUTION PLANS
EIS serves as distributor of the Fund’s shares. The Fund has adopted Distribution Plans, as allowed by Rule 12b-1 of the 1940 Act, for each class of shares, except Class I. Under the Distribution Plans, the Fund is permitted to pay distribution fees at an annual rate of up to 0.75% of the average daily net assets for Class A shares and up to 1.00% of the average daily net assets for each of Class B and Class C shares. However, currently the distribution fees for Class A shares are limited to 0.25% of the average daily net assets of the class.
For the six months ended October 31, 2008, EIS received $8,093 from the sale of Class A shares and $33,297 and $7,115 in contingent deferred sales charges from redemptions of Class B and Class C shares, respectively.
5. INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS
Cost of purchases and proceeds from sales of investment securities (excluding short-term securities) were $39,313,310 and $67,267,567, respectively, for the six months ended October 31, 2008.
23
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (unaudited) continued
On May 1, 2008, the Fund implemented Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (“FAS 157”). FAS 157 establishes a single authoritative definition of fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. FAS 157 establishes a fair value hierarchy based upon the various inputs used in determining the value of the Fund’s investments. These inputs are summarized into three broad levels as follows:
Level 1 – quoted prices in active markets for identical securities Level 2 – other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar securities, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) Level 3 – significant unobservable inputs (including the Fund’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The inputs or methodologies used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in those securities.
As of October 31, 2008, the inputs used in valuing the Fund’s assets, which are carried at fair value, were as follows:
Valuation Inputs | | Investments in Securities |
|
|
|
Level 1 – Quoted Prices | | $ | 48,321,787 |
Level 2 – Other Significant Observable Inputs | | | 128,813,846 |
Level 3 – Significant Unobservable Inputs | | | 0 |
|
|
|
|
Total | | $ | 177,135,633 |
|
|
|
|
During the six months ended October 31, 2008, the Fund loaned securities to certain brokers. At October 31, 2008, the value of securities on loan and the total value of collateral received for securities loaned amounted to $4,928,034 and $4,856,900, respectively. Any additional collateral required when the total value of collateral received is not sufficient to cover the value of the securities on loan due to market fluctuations is received the following business day.
On October 31, 2008, the aggregate cost of securities for federal income tax purposes was $254,719,772. The gross unrealized appreciation and depreciation on securities based on tax cost was $0 and $77,584,139, respectively, with a net unrealized depreciation of $77,584,139.
As of April 30, 2008, the Fund had $46,173,062 in capital loss carryovers for federal income tax purposes expiring as follows:
Expiration |
|
2009 | 2010 | 2015 | 2016 |
|
|
|
|
$14,759,243 | $27,292,961 | $3,090,558 | $1,030,300 |
|
|
|
|
24
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (unaudited) continued
Certain portions of the capital loss carryovers of the Fund were assumed as a result of acquisitions. These losses are subject to certain limitations prescribed by the Internal Revenue Code.
For income tax purposes, capital losses incurred after October 31 within the Fund’s fiscal year are deemed to arise on the first business day of the following fiscal year. As of April 30, 2008, the Fund incurred and elected to defer post-October losses of $3,010,692.
6. INTERFUND LENDING
Pursuant to an Exemptive Order issued by the SEC, the Fund may participate in an interfund lending program with certain funds in the Evergreen fund family. This program allows the Fund to borrow from, or lend money to, other participating funds. During the six months ended October 31, 2008, the Fund did not participate in the interfund lending program.
7. EXPENSE REDUCTIONS
Through expense offset arrangements with ESC and the Fund’s custodian, a portion of fund expenses has been reduced.
8. DEFERRED TRUSTEES’ FEES
Each Trustee of the Fund may defer any or all compensation related to performance of his or her duties as a Trustee. The Trustees’ deferred balances are allocated to deferral accounts, which are included in the accrued expenses for the Fund. The investment performance of the deferral accounts is based on the investment performance of certain Evergreen funds. Any gains earned or losses incurred in the deferral accounts are reported in the Fund’s Trustees’ fees and expenses. At the election of the Trustees, the deferral account will be paid either in one lump sum or in quarterly installments for up to ten years.
9. FINANCING AGREEMENT
The Fund and certain other Evergreen funds share in a $100 million unsecured revolving credit commitment for temporary and emergency purposes, including the funding of redemptions, as permitted by each participating fund’s borrowing restrictions. Borrowings under this facility bear interest at 0.50% per annum above the Federal Funds rate. All of the participating funds are charged an annual commitment fee of 0.09% on the unused balance, which is allocated pro rata. Prior to June 27, 2008, the annual commitment fee was 0.08%. During the six months ended October 31, 2008, the Fund had no borrowings.
10. REGULATORY MATTERS AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The Evergreen funds, EIMC and certain of EIMC’s affiliates are involved in various legal actions, including private litigation and class action lawsuits. In addition, the Evergreen
25
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (unaudited) continued
funds, EIMC and certain of EIMC’s affiliates may be subject from time to time to regulatory inquiries and investigations. EIMC does not expect that any of the legal actions, inquiries or investigations currently pending or threatened will have a material adverse impact on the financial position or operations of any of the Evergreen funds or on EIMC’s ability to provide services to the Evergreen funds. There can be no assurance that these matters and any publicity surrounding or resulting from them will not result in reduced sales or increased redemptions of Evergreen fund shares, which could increase Evergreen fund transaction costs or operating expenses or have other adverse consequences on the Evergreen funds.
The SEC and the Secretary of the Commonwealth, Securities Division, of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are conducting separate investigations of EIMC and Evergreen Investment Services, Inc. concerning alleged issues surrounding the drop in net asset value of the Evergreen Ultra Short Opportunities Fund (the “Ultra Short Fund”) in May and June 2008. In addition, various Evergreen entities are defendants in three purported class actions in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts and related to the same events. The cases generally allege that investors in the Ultra Short Fund suffered losses as a result of (i) misleading statements in Ultra Short Fund’s prospectus, (ii) the failure to accurately price securities in the Ultra Short Fund at different points in time and (iii) the failure of the Ultra Short Fund’s risk disclosures and description of its investment strategy to inform investors adequately of the actual risks of the fund.
EIMC does not expect that any of the legal actions, inquiries or investigations currently pending or threatened will have a material adverse impact on the financial position or operations of any of the Evergreen funds to which these financial statements relate. Any publicity surrounding or resulting from any legal actions or regulatory inquiries involving EIMC or its affiliates or any of the Evergreen Funds could result in reduced sales or increased redemptions of Evergreen fund shares, which could increase Evergreen fund transaction costs or operating expenses or have other adverse consequences on the Evergreen funds.
11. NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In March 2008, FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (“FAS 161”), an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133. FAS 161 requires enhanced disclosures about (a) how and why a fund uses derivative instruments, (b) how derivative instruments and hedging activities are accounted for, and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedging activities affect a fund’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. Management of the Fund does not believe the adoption of FAS 161 will materially impact the financial statement amounts, but will require additional disclosures. This will include qualitative and quantitative disclosures on derivative positions existing at period end and the effect of
26
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (unaudited) continued
using derivatives during the reporting period. FAS 161 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008.
In September 2008, FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 133-1 and FIN 45-4, Disclosures about Credit Derivatives and Certain Guarantees: An Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133 and FASB Interpretation No. 45; and Clarification of the Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 161. This FASB Staff Position (1) amends FASB Statement No. 133 to require disclosures by sellers of credit derivatives, including credit derivatives embedded in a hybrid instrument (2) amends FASB Interpretation No. 45 to require additional disclosure about the current status of the payment/performance risk of a guarantee and (3) clarifies the effective date of FAS 161. Management of the Fund does not believe the adoption of this FASB Staff Position will materially impact the financial statement amounts, but will require additional disclosures. This FASB Staff Position is effective for reporting periods (annual or interim) ending after November 15, 2008.
12. SUBSEQUENT DISTRIBUTIONS
On December 10, 2008, the Fund declared distributions from short-term capital gains to shareholders of record on December 9, 2008. The per share amounts payable on December 11, 2008 were as follows:
| Short-term |
| Capital Gains |
|
|
Class A | $0.0313 |
Class B | 0.0313 |
Class C | 0.0313 |
Class I | 0.0313 |
|
|
These distributions are not reflected in the accompanying financial statements.
27
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited)
SPECIAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
On March 12, 2009, a Special Meeting of Shareholders for the Fund was held to consider a number of proposals. On December 1, 2008, the record date for the meeting, the Fund had $165,473,772 of net assets outstanding of which $85,254,018 (51.52%) of net assets were represented at the meeting.
Proposal 1 — To consider and act upon a new investment advisory agreement with Evergreen Investment Management Company, LLC:
|
|
|
Net assets voted “For” | $ | 78,082,906 |
Net assets voted “Against” | $ | 2,375,957 |
Net assets voted “Abstain” | $ | 4,795,155 |
|
|
|
28
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited) continued
INFORMATION ABOUT THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE FUND’S INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT
Each year, the Fund’s Board of Trustees determines whether to approve the continuation of the Fund’s investment advisory agreements. In September 2008, the Trustees, including a majority of the Trustees who are not “interested persons” (as that term is defined in the 1940 Act) of the Fund or EIMC (the “independent Trustees”), approved the continuation of the Fund’s investment advisory agreements. (References below to the “Fund” are to Evergreen Diversified Income Builder Fund; references to the “funds” are to the Evergreen funds generally.)
At the same time, the Trustees considered the continuation of the investment advisory agreements for all of the funds. The description below refers in many cases to the Trustees’ process for considering, and conclusions regarding, all of the funds’ agreements. In all of its deliberations, the Board of Trustees and the independent Trustees were advised by independent counsel to the independent Trustees and counsel to the funds.
The review process. In connection with its review of the funds’ investment advisory agreements, the Board of Trustees requests and evaluates, and EIMC and any sub-advisors furnish, such information as the Trustees consider to be reasonably necessary in the circumstances. The Trustees began their 2008 review process at the time of the last advisory contract-renewal process in September 2007. In the course of their 2007 review, the Trustees identified a number of funds that had experienced either short-term or longer-term performance issues. During the 2008 review process, the Trustees monitored each of these funds in particular for changes in performance and for the results of any changes in a fund’s investment process or investment team. In addition, during the course of the year, the Trustees regularly reviewed information regarding the investment performance of all of the funds, paying particular attention to funds whose performance since September 2007 indicated short-term or longer-term performance issues.
In spring 2008, a committee of the Board of Trustees (the “Committee”), working with EIMC management, determined generally the types of information the Board would review as part of its 2008 review process and set a timeline detailing the information required and the dates for its delivery to the Trustees. The Board engaged the independent data provider Keil Fiduciary Strategies LLC (“Keil”) to provide fund-specific and industry-wide data containing information of a nature and in a format generally prescribed by the Committee, and the Committee worked with Keil and EIMC to develop appropriate groups of peer funds for each fund. The Committee also identified a number of expense, performance, and other issues and requested specific information as to those issues.
The Trustees reviewed, with the assistance of an independent industry consultant retained by the independent Trustees, the information that EIMC and Keil provided. The Trustees
29
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited) continued
formed small groups to review individual funds in greater detail. In addition, the Trustees considered information regarding, among other things, brokerage practices of the funds, the use of derivatives by the funds, strategic planning for the funds, analyst and research support available to the portfolio management teams, and information regarding the various fall-out benefits received directly and indirectly by EIMC and its affiliates from the funds. The Trustees requested and received additional information following that review.
The Committee met several times by telephone during the 2008 review process to consider the information provided by EIMC. The Committee then met with representatives of EIMC. In addition, over the period of this review, the independent Trustees discussed the continuation of the funds’ advisory agreements with representatives of EIMC and in multiple private sessions with independent legal counsel at which no personnel of EIMC were present. At a meeting of the full Board of Trustees in September, the Committee reported the results of its discussions with EIMC, and the full Board met with representatives of EIMC and engaged in further review of the materials provided to it, and approved the continuation of each of the advisory and sub-advisory agreements.
In considering the continuation of the agreements, the Trustees did not identify any particular information or consideration that was all-important or controlling, and each Trustee attributed different weights to various factors. The Trustees evaluated information provided to them both in terms of the funds generally and with respect to each fund, including the Fund, specifically as they considered appropriate. Although the Trustees considered the continuation of the agreements as part of the larger process of considering the continuation of the advisory contracts for all of the funds, their determination to continue the advisory agreements for each of the funds was ultimately made on a fund-by-fund basis.
This summary describes a number of the most important, but not necessarily all, of the factors considered by the Board and the independent Trustees.
Information reviewed. The Board of Trustees and committees of the Board of Trustees meet periodically during the course of the year. At those meetings, EIMC presents a wide variety of information regarding the services it performs, the investment performance of the funds, and other aspects of the business and operations of the funds. At those meetings, and in the process of considering the continuation of the agreements, the Trustees considered information regarding, for example, the funds’ investment results; the portfolio management teams for the funds and the experience of the members of those teams, and any recent changes in the membership of the teams; portfolio trading practices; compliance by the funds and EIMC with applicable laws and regulations and with the funds’ and EIMC’s compliance policies and procedures; risk evaluation and oversight procedures at EIMC; services provided by affiliates of EIMC to the funds and share-
30
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited) continued
holders of the funds; and other information relating to the nature, extent, and quality of services provided by EIMC. The Trustees considered a number of changes in portfolio management personnel at EIMC and its advisory affiliates in the year since September 2007. The Trustees also considered changes in personnel at the funds and EIMC, including the appointment of a new Chief Compliance Officer for the funds in June of 2007 and a new Chief Investment Officer at EIMC in August of 2008.
The Trustees considered the rates at which the funds pay investment advisory fees, and the efforts generally by EIMC and its affiliates as sponsors of the funds. The data provided by Keil showed the management fees paid by each fund in comparison to the management fees of other peer mutual funds, in addition to data regarding the investment performance of the funds in comparison to other peer mutual funds. The Trustees were assisted by an independent industry consultant in reviewing the information presented to them.
The Trustees noted that, in certain cases, EIMC and/or its affiliates provide advisory services to other clients that are comparable to the advisory services they provide to certain funds. The Trustees considered the information EIMC provided regarding the rates at which those other clients pay advisory fees to EIMC or its affiliates for such services. Fees charged to those other clients were generally lower than those charged to the respective funds. In respect of these other accounts, EIMC noted that the compliance, reporting, and other legal burdens of providing investment advice to mutual funds generally exceed those required to provide advisory services to non-mutual fund clients such as retirement or pension plans. The Trustees also considered the investment performance of those other accounts managed by EIMC and its affiliates, where applicable, and concluded that the performance of those accounts did not suggest any substantial difference in the quality of the service provided by EIMC and its affiliates to those accounts.
The Trustees considered the transfer agency fees paid by the funds to an affiliate of EIMC. They reviewed information presented to them showing that the transfer agency fees charged to the funds were generally consistent with industry norms.
The Trustees also considered that EIMC serves as administrator to the funds and receives a fee for its services as administrator. In their comparison of the advisory fee paid by the funds with those paid by other mutual funds, the Trustees considered administrative fees paid by the funds and those other mutual funds. The Board considered that EIS, an affiliate of EIMC, serves as distributor to the funds generally and receives fees from the funds for those services. They considered other so-called “fall-out” benefits to EIMC and its affiliates due to their other relationships with the funds, including, for example, soft-dollar services received by EIMC attributable to transactions entered into by EIMC for the benefit of the funds and brokerage commissions received by Wachovia Securities, LLC, an affiliate of EIMC, from transactions effected by it for the funds. The Trustees also noted that the funds pay sub-transfer agency fees to various financial institutions
31
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited) continued
that hold fund shares in omnibus accounts, and that Wachovia Securities, LLC and its affiliates receive such payments from the funds in respect of client accounts they hold in omnibus arrangements, and that an affiliate of EIMC receives fees for administering the sub-transfer agency payment program. In reviewing the services provided by an affiliate of EIMC, the Trustees noted that an affiliate of EIMC had won recognition from Dalbar customer service each year since 1998, and also won recognition from National Quality Review for customer service and for accuracy in processing transactions in 2008. They also considered that Wachovia Securities, LLC and its affiliates receive distribution-related fees and shareholder servicing payments (including amounts derived from payments under the funds’ Rule 12b-1 plans) in respect of shares sold or held through it. The Trustees also noted that an affiliate of EIMC receives compensation for serving as a securities lending agent for a number of the funds.
In the period leading up to the Trustees’ approval of continuation of the investment advisory agreements, the Trustees were mindful of the financial condition of Wachovia Corporation (“Wachovia”), EIMC’s parent company. They considered the possibility that a significant adverse change in Wachovia’s financial condition could impair the ability of EIMC or its affiliates to perform services for the funds at the same level as in the past. The Trustees concluded that any change in Wachovia’s financial condition had not to date had any such effect, but determined to monitor EIMC’s and its affiliates’ performance, and financial conditions generally, going forward in order to identify any such impairment that may develop and to take appropriate action.
Nature and quality of the services provided. The Trustees considered that EIMC and its affiliates generally provide a comprehensive investment management service to the funds. They noted that EIMC formulates and implements an investment program for the Fund. They noted that EIMC makes its personnel available to serve as officers of the funds, and concluded that the reporting and management functions provided by EIMC with respect to the funds were generally satisfactory. The Trustees considered the investment philosophy of the Fund’s portfolio management team, and considered the in-house research capabilities of EIMC and its affiliates, as well as other resources available to EIMC, including research services available to it from third parties. The Board considered the managerial and financial resources available to EIMC and its affiliates, and the commitment that the Wachovia organization has made to the funds generally. On the basis of these factors, they determined that the nature and scope of the services provided by EIMC were consistent with their respective duties under the investment advisory agreements and appropriate and consistent with the investment programs and best interests of the funds.
The Trustees noted the resources EIMC and its affiliates have committed to the regulatory, compliance, accounting, tax and oversight of tax reporting, and shareholder servicing
32
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited) continued
functions, and the number and quality of staff committed to those functions, which they concluded were appropriate and generally in line with EIMC’s responsibilities to the Fund and to the funds generally. The Board and the disinterested Trustees concluded, within the context of their overall conclusions regarding the funds’ advisory agreements, that they were generally satisfied with the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided by EIMC, including services provided by EIMC under its administrative services agreements with the funds.
Investment performance. The Trustees considered the investment performance of each fund, both by comparison to other comparable mutual funds and to broad market indices. Although the Trustees considered the performance of all share classes, the Trustees noted that, for the one-, three-, and five-year periods ended December 31, 2007, the Fund’s Class A shares had underperformed the broad-based securities index against which the Trustees compared the Fund’s performance and performed in the fifth, fifth, and fourth quintiles, respectively, of the mutual funds against which the Trustees compared the Fund’s performance for the same periods. The Trustees noted that, for the ten-year period ended December 31, 2007, the Fund’s Class A shares had underperformed the Fund’s benchmark index, and outperformed a majority of the mutual funds against which the Trustees compared the Fund’s performance. The Trustees noted that changes to the Fund’s portfolio management team had recently been implemented. The Trustees also considered that the Fund’s investment performance had not improved through the period ended December 31, 2007, and that the period from the change in management had been relatively short and that EIMC remained confident in the ability of the new portfolio manager to enhance performance over time.
The Trustees discussed each fund’s performance with representatives of EIMC. In each instance where a fund experienced a substantial period of underperformance relative to its benchmark index and/or the non-Evergreen fund peers against which the Trustees compared the fund’s performance, the Trustees considered EIMC’s explanation of the reasons for the relative underperformance and the steps being taken to address the relative underperformance. The Trustees also noted that EIMC had appointed a new Chief Investment Officer in August of 2008 who had not yet had sufficient time to evaluate and direct remedial efforts with respect to funds that have experienced a substantial period of relative underperformance. The Trustees emphasized that the continuation of the investment advisory agreement for a fund should not be taken as any indication that the Trustees did not believe investment performance for any specific fund might not be improved, and they noted that they would continue to monitor closely the investment performance of the funds going forward.
Advisory and administrative fees. The Trustees recognized that EIMC does not seek to provide the lowest cost investment advisory service, but to provide a high quality, full-
33
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited) continued
service investment management product at a reasonable price. They also noted that EIMC has in many cases sought to set its investment advisory fees at levels consistent with industry norms. The Trustees noted that, in certain cases, a fund’s management fees were higher than many or most other mutual funds in the same Keil peer group. However, in each case, the Trustees determined on the basis of the information presented that the level of management fees was not excessive. The Trustees noted that the Fund’s management fee was near the average and the median of the management fees paid by the mutual funds against which the Trustees compared the Fund’s management fee, and that the level of profitability realized by EIMC in respect of the fee did not appear excessive.
Economies of scale. The Trustees noted the possibility that economies of scale would be achieved by EIMC in managing the funds as the funds grow. The Trustees noted that the Fund had implemented breakpoints in its advisory fee structure. The Trustees noted that they would continue to review the appropriate levels of breakpoints in the future, but concluded that the breakpoints as implemented appeared to be a reasonable step toward the realization of economies of scale by the Fund.
Profitability. The Trustees considered information provided to them regarding the profitability to the EIMC organization of the investment advisory, administration, and transfer agency (with respect to the open-end funds only) fees paid to EIMC and its affiliates by each of the funds. They considered that the information provided to them was necessarily estimated, and that the profitability information provided to them, especially on a fund-by-fund basis, did not necessarily provide a definitive tool for evaluating the appropriateness of each fund’s advisory fee. They noted that the levels of profitability of the funds to EIMC varied widely, depending on among other things the size and type of fund. They considered the profitability of the funds in light of such factors as, for example, the information they had received regarding the relation of the fees paid by the funds to those paid by other mutual funds, the investment performance of the funds, and the amount of revenues involved. In light of these factors, the Trustees concluded that the profitability of any of the funds, individually or in the aggregate, should not prevent the Trustees from approving the continuation of the agreements.
Matters Relating to Approval of Interim Investment Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements. Following the Trustees’ approval of the continuation of the funds’ investment advisory agreements, Wells Fargo & Company (“Wells Fargo”) announced that it had agreed to acquire Wachovia in a whole company transaction that will include all of Wachovia’s banking and other businesses, including EIMC. As a result of this transaction, the funds’ investment advisory and sub-advisory agreements were expected to terminate. Accordingly, on October 20, 2008 the Board of Trustees approved interim investment advisory and sub-advisory agreements for the funds. In approving these interim advisory arrangements, the Trustees noted EIMC’s representation that the scope and quality of the
34
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (unaudited) continued
services provided to the funds during the term of the interim contracts would be at least equivalent to the scope and quality of the services provided under the previous advisory agreements and that the terms of the interim agreements are substantially similar to the funds’ previous advisory agreements except that the interim agreements will be in effect for a period of no more than 150 days and certain advisory fees will be placed in escrow until new advisory agreements are approved.
35
TRUSTEES AND OFFICERS
TRUSTEES1 | | |
Charles A. Austin III Trustee DOB: 10/23/1934 Term of office since: 1991 Other directorships: None | | Investment Counselor, Anchor Capital Advisors, LLC. (investment advice); Director, The Andover Companies (insurance); Trustee, Arthritis Foundation of New England; Former Director, The Francis Ouimet Society (scholarship program); Former Director, Executive Vice President and Treasurer, State Street Research & Management Company (investment advice) |
|
|
|
K. Dun Gifford Trustee DOB: 10/23/1938 Term of office since: 1974 Other directorships: None | | Chairman and President, Oldways Preservation and Exchange Trust (education); Trustee, Member of the Executive Committee, Former Chairman of the Finance Committee, and Former Treasurer, Cambridge College |
|
|
|
Dr. Leroy Keith, Jr. Trustee DOB: 2/14/1939 Term of office since: 1983 Other directorships: Trustee, Phoenix Fund Complex (consisting of 50 portfolios as of 12/31/2008) | | Managing Director, Almanac Capital Management (commodities firm); Trustee, Phoenix Fund Complex; Director, Diversapack Co. (packaging company); Former Partner, Stonington Partners, Inc. (private equity fund); Former Director, Obagi Medical Products Co.; Former Director, Lincoln Educational Services |
|
|
|
Carol A. Kosel Trustee DOB: 12/25/1963 Term of office since: 2008 Other directorships: None | | Former Consultant to the Evergreen Boards of Trustees; Former Vice President and Senior Vice President, Evergreen Investments, Inc.; Former Treasurer, Evergreen Funds; Former Treasurer, Vestaur Securities Fund |
|
|
|
Gerald M. McDonnell Trustee DOB: 7/14/1939 Term of office since: 1988 Other directorships: None | | Former Manager of Commercial Operations, CMC Steel (steel producer) |
|
|
|
Patricia B. Norris Trustee DOB: 4/9/1948 Term of office since: 2006 Other directorships: None | | President and Director of Buckleys of Kezar Lake, Inc. (real estate company); Former President and Director of Phillips Pond Homes Association (home community); Former Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (independent registered public accounting firm) |
|
|
|
William Walt Pettit2 Trustee DOB: 8/26/1955 Term of office since: 1988 Other directorships: None | | Partner and Vice President, Kellam & Pettit, P.A. (law firm); Director, Superior Packaging Corp. (packaging company); Member, Superior Land, LLC (real estate holding company), Member, K&P Development, LLC (real estate development); Former Director, National Kidney Foundation of North Carolina, Inc. (non-profit organization) |
|
|
|
David M. Richardson Trustee DOB: 9/19/1941 Term of office since: 1982 Other directorships: None | | President, Richardson, Runden LLC (executive recruitment advisory services); Director, J&M Cumming Paper Co. (paper merchandising); Former Trustee, NDI Technologies, LLP (communications); Former Consultant, AESC (The Association of Executive Search Consultants) |
|
|
|
Russell A. Salton III, MD Trustee DOB: 6/2/1947 Term of office since: 1984 Other directorships: None | | President/CEO, AccessOne MedCard, Inc. |
|
|
|
36
TRUSTEES AND OFFICERS continued
Michael S. Scofield Trustee DOB: 2/20/1943 Term of office since: 1984 Other directorships: None | | Retired Attorney, Law Offices of Michael S. Scofield; Former Director and Chairman, Branded Media Corporation (multi-media branding company) |
|
|
|
Richard J. Shima Trustee DOB: 8/11/1939 Term of office since: 1993 Other directorships: None | | Independent Consultant; Director, Hartford Hospital; Trustee, Greater Hartford YMCA; Former Director,Trust Company of CT; Former Trustee, Saint Joseph College (CT) |
|
|
|
Richard K. Wagoner, CFA3 Trustee DOB: 12/12/1937 Term of office since: 1999 Other directorships: None | | Member and Former President, North Carolina Securities Traders Association; Member, Financial Analysts Society |
|
|
|
OFFICERS | | |
W. Douglas Munn4 President DOB: 4/21/1963 Term of office since: 2009 | | Principal occupations: Chief Operating Officer, Wells Fargo Funds Management, LLC; former Chief Operating Officer, Evergreen Investment Company, Inc. |
|
|
|
Kasey Phillips4 Treasurer DOB: 12/12/1970 Term of office since: 2005 | | Principal occupations: Senior Vice President, Evergreen Investment Management Company, LLC; Former Vice President, Evergreen Investment Services, Inc. |
|
|
|
Michael H. Koonce4 Secretary DOB: 4/20/1960 Term of office since: 2000 | | Principal occupations: Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Evergreen Investment Services, Inc.; Secretary, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Evergreen Investment Management Company, LLC and Evergreen Service Company, LLC |
|
|
|
Robert Guerin4 Chief Compliance Officer DOB: 9/20/1965 Term of office since: 2007 | | Principal occupations: Chief Compliance Officer, Evergreen Funds and Senior Vice President of Evergreen Investment Company, Inc.; Former Managing Director and Senior Compliance Officer, Babson Capital Management LLC; Former Principal and Director, Compliance and Risk Management, State Street Global Advisors; Former Vice President and Manager, Sales Practice Compliance, Deutsche Asset Management |
|
|
|
1 | Each Trustee serves until a successor is duly elected or qualified or until his or her death, resignation, retirement or removal from office. Each Trustee oversaw 77 Evergreen funds as of December 31, 2008. Correspondence for each Trustee may be sent to Evergreen Board of Trustees, P.O. Box 20083, Charlotte, NC 28202. |
2 | It is possible that Mr. Pettit may be viewed as an “interested person” of the Evergreen funds, as defined in the 1940 Act, because of his law firm’s previous representation of affiliates of Wells Fargo & Company (“Wells Fargo”), the parent to the Evergreen funds’ investment advisor, EIMC. The Trustees are treating Mr. Pettit as an interested trustee for the time being. |
3 | Mr. Wagoner is an “interested person” of the Evergreen funds because of his ownership of shares in Wells Fargo & Company, the parent to the Evergreen funds’ investment advisor. |
4 | The address of the Officer is 200 Berkeley Street, Boston, MA 02116. |
Additional information about the Fund’s Board of Trustees and Officers can be found in the Statement of Additional Information (SAI) and is available upon request without charge by calling 800.343.2898.
37

564358 rv6 12/2008
Item 2 - Code of Ethics
Not required for this semi-annual filing.
Item 3 - Audit Committee Financial Expert
Not required for this semi-annual filing.
Items 4 – Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Not required for this semi-annual filing.
Items 5 – Audit Committee of Listed Registrants
Not applicable.
Item 6 – Schedule of Investments
Please see schedule of investments contained in the Report to Stockholders included under Item 1 of this Form N-CSR.
Item 7 – Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 8 – Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 9 – Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers.
Not applicable.
Item 10 – Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
There have been no material changes to the procedures by which shareholders may recommend nominees to the Registrant’s board of trustees that have been implemented since the Registrant last provided disclosure in response to the requirements of this Item.
Item 11 - Controls and Procedures
(a) | The Registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer have evaluated the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) within 90 days of this filing and have concluded that the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective, as of that date, in ensuring that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant in this Form N-CSR was recorded, processed, summarized, and reported timely. |
(b) | There has been no changes in the Registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. |
Item 12 - Exhibits
File the exhibits listed below as part of this Form. Letter or number the exhibits in the sequence indicated.
(a) | Any code of ethics, or amendment thereto, that is the subject of the disclosure required by Item 2, to the extent that the Registrant intends to satisfy the Item 2 requirements through filing of an exhibit. |
(b)(1) | Separate certifications for the Registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, are attached as EX99.CERT. |
(b)(2) | Separate certifications for the Registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as required by Section 1350 of Title 18 of United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, are attached as EX99.906CERT. The certifications furnished pursuant to this paragraph are not deemed to be “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certifications are not deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Registrant specifically incorporates them by reference. |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Evergreen Fixed Income Trust
By: | | | | |
|
| | | |
| W. Douglas Munn Principal Executive Officer | | | |
Date: April 9, 2009
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
By: | | | | |
|
| | | |
| W. Douglas Munn Principal Executive Officer | | | |
Date: April 9, 2009
By: | | | | |
|
| | | |
| Kasey Phillips Principal Financial Officer | | | |
Date: April 9, 2009