Fondation Passions Alsace
9 place Kléber
Strasbourg, Alsace 67000
France
Mission
To nourish the vitality of the Alsace region by supporting multiple projects of interest by associations which are the wealth of the country. The foundation serves as a gateway between projects and private donors, businesses and individuals.
Most Meaningful Change
Over the past three years the foundation has supported more than 100 projects, most of which could not otherwise have been realized due to lack of visibility or financial assistance. The foundation often serves as the last resort for small local associations regardless of their field of endeavor.
2009 Year Founded
$280,000 Endowment Value
$240,000 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Fondation Passions Alsace |
---|
Address 1 | 9 place Kléber |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Strasbourg |
---|
State / Region | Alsace |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 67000 |
---|
Country | France |
---|
Continent | Europe |
---|
Map Address (If Different) | Did not answer |
---|
Map City / Town (If Different) | Did not answer |
---|
Map State / Region (If Different) | Did not answer |
---|
Map Zip / Postal Code (If Different) | Did not answer |
---|
Map Country (If Different) | Did not answer |
---|
Phone | 06 75 65 10 28 |
---|
Email | bonjour@fondationpassionsalsace.fr |
---|
Website | www.fondationpassionsalsace.com |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Guillaume d’Andlau,Créateur et Président |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Guillaume d’Andlau |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Président |
---|
Year Founded | 2009 |
---|
Mission Statement | To nourish the vitality of the Alsace region by supporting multiple projects of interest by associations which are the wealth of the country. The foundation serves as a gateway between projects and private donors, businesses and individuals. |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 2,000,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | Did not answer |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 5 |
---|
Total Board Members | 12 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $200,000 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | Did not answer |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $154,000 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $240,000 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $280,000 |
---|
Change in Financial Status Over Last Three Years | Declined |
---|
Factors that Played a Role in the Origins of Your Organization |
---|
Community leadership | Played an important role |
---|
Philanthropic gifts | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Grassroots activism | Played an important role |
---|
Inadequate government services | Played a slight role |
---|
Changes in the political environment | No role |
---|
Changes in the economic environment | Played an important role |
---|
Government initiative funding | No role |
---|
Foundation initiative funding | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Bilateral or multilateral initiative funding | No role |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | Played a centrally important role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Very little time |
---|
Locally | Very little time |
---|
Regionally | Lots of time |
---|
Nationally | Very little time |
---|
Internationally | None |
---|
|
Rate Importance of the Following Functions |
---|
Grantmaking | Centrally important |
---|
Having local people as leaders in the organization | Centrally important |
---|
Seeking local donations | Centrally important |
---|
Having a gender balance in the organization | Slightly important |
---|
Board reflective of community diversity | Important but not central |
---|
Building an endowment | Centrally important |
---|
Serving donor needs | Centrally important |
---|
Acting as a fiscal intermediary for the community | Slightly important |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Important but not central |
---|
Pursuing equity | Centrally important |
---|
Accountability to local people | Centrally important |
---|
Raising money for grantmaking annually | Centrally important |
---|
Community development | Centrally important |
---|
|
In the Last Year, Extent to Which Programming and/or Grantmaking Involved Work in the Following Areas |
---|
Arts and culture | Fair amount |
---|
Education | Little |
---|
Environment | Little |
---|
Health | Fair amount |
---|
Human and social services | Fair amount |
---|
Human rights | Not at all |
---|
International relations | Not at all |
---|
Religion | Not at all |
---|
Economic development | Not at all |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Not at all |
---|
Information technology | Not at all |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Not at all |
---|
Housing | Not at all |
---|
Children | Little |
---|
Water | Not at all |
---|
Alternative energy | Little |
---|
Disaster relief | Not at all |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Not at all |
---|
Job training | Little |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Often |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Never |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Never |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Never |
---|
Advocacy | Never |
---|
Loaned staff | Never |
---|
Research | Never |
---|
Community needs assessment | Never |
---|
Leadership development | Never |
---|
Internships | Never |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Never |
---|
Access to information technology | Never |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Never |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | Getting much worse |
---|
Crime | No change |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Getting worse |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting worse |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Getting worse |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting worse |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Getting worse |
---|
Value of community assets | Getting better |
---|
Quality of the environment | Did not answer |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | Getting better |
---|
Levels of innovation and risk taking in addressing community problems | Getting better |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | Getting better |
---|
Gender equity | No change |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Getting better |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | Getting better |
---|
|
Extent to Which Organization Can Claim Tangible and Measurable Achievements in the Past Three Years |
---|
Poverty | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Crime | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Value of community assets | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Quality of the environment | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Levels of innovation and risk taking in addressing community problems | Some important achievements |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | Some important achievements |
---|
Gender equity | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Some important achievements |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | Some important achievements |
---|
|
Active Partnerships |
---|
Formal community associations and groups | Little |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Did not answer |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Not at all |
---|
National government | N/A |
---|
Universities | N/A |
---|
Schools | Not at all |
---|
Businesses | Little |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | N/A |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | N/A |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | N/A |
---|
Particular foundation | N/A |
---|
Other organization | N/A |
---|
|
Involvement of Local People |
---|
Regularly survey local people about our programs | Yes |
---|
Local people are engaged in the delivery of our work | Yes |
---|
Local people control what our organization does | Yes |
---|
Have local people represented on our board | Yes |
---|
Have regular sessions where local people advise us what our programs should do | No |
---|
Actively engage local people as volunteers | Yes |
---|
All of our board is composed of local people | Yes |
---|
Account to local people about our successes and failures each year | Yes |
---|
|
Assistance in Overcoming Main Difficulties Faced in Developing Organization Further |
---|
Increased funding | Very unimportant |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Neither important nor unimportant |
---|
More volunteers | Very unimportant |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Important |
---|
Better local culture of giving | Important |
---|
Stronger civil society | Important |
---|
More responsive authorities | N/A |
---|
|
Other | Did not answer |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | Over the past three years the foundation has supported more than 100 projects, most of which could not otherwise have been realized due to lack of visibility or financial assistance. The foundation often serves as the last resort for small local associations regardless of their field of endeavor. |
---|