Corporativa de Fundaciones
López Cotilla 2139, Arcos Vallarta
Guadalajara, Jalisco 44130
Mexico
Mission
To promote institutional strengthening of the civil society organizations engaged in community well-being, acting together with individuals, businesses and committed public and private agencies and so contributing to the community’s sustainability for better social development
Most Meaningful Change
We promote public awareness of various societal issues, strengthen grassroots organizations’ capabilities, provide leadership regarding local public policy, and foster federal, state and private co-funding programs.
1999 Year Founded
19 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$2,951,054 Endowment Value
$2,800,000 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Corporativa de Fundaciones |
---|
Address 1 | López Cotilla 2139, Arcos Vallarta |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Guadalajara |
---|
State / Region | Jalisco |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 44130 |
---|
Country | Mexico |
---|
Continent | North America |
---|
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 | +52 33 36158286 |
---|
Email | david@vivirparacompartir.org |
---|
Website | www.vivirparacompartir.org |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | David Pérez Rulfo, CEO |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | David Pérez Rulfo |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | CEO |
---|
Year Founded | 1999 |
---|
Mission Statement | To promote institutional strengthening of the civil society organizations engaged in community well-being, acting together with individuals, businesses and committed public and private agencies and so contributing to the community’s sustainability for better social development |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 7,000,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 19 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 3 |
---|
Total Board Members | 8 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $3,500,000 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | $2,116,404 |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $3,250,000 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $2,800,000 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | No but intend to build one |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $2,951,054 |
---|
Change in Financial Status Over Last Three Years | A little improvement |
---|
Factors that Played a Role in the Origins of Your Organization |
---|
Community leadership | Played a slight 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 | Played a slight role |
---|
Changes in the economic environment | Played an important role |
---|
Government initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Foundation initiative funding | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Bilateral or multilateral initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | Played an important role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Did not answer |
---|
Locally | Lots of time |
---|
Regionally | Fair amount of time |
---|
Nationally | Very little time |
---|
Internationally | Did not answer |
---|
|
Rate Importance of the Following Functions |
---|
Grantmaking | Important but not central |
---|
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 | Slightly important |
---|
Building an endowment | Centrally important |
---|
Serving donor needs | Centrally important |
---|
Acting as a fiscal intermediary for the community | Centrally important |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Centrally important |
---|
Pursuing equity | Important but not central |
---|
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 | Little |
---|
Education | Lot |
---|
Environment | Little |
---|
Health | Fair amount |
---|
Human and social services | Lot |
---|
Human rights | Little |
---|
International relations | Fair amount |
---|
Religion | Not at all |
---|
Economic development | Fair amount |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Little |
---|
Information technology | Little |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Not at all |
---|
Housing | Not at all |
---|
Children | Lot |
---|
Water | Not at all |
---|
Alternative energy | Not at all |
---|
Disaster relief | Not at all |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Lot |
---|
Job training | Lot |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Rarely |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Often |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Often |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Often |
---|
Advocacy | Often |
---|
Loaned staff | Rarely |
---|
Research | Occasionally |
---|
Community needs assessment | Occasionally |
---|
Leadership development | Often |
---|
Internships | Occasionally |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Often |
---|
Access to information technology | Rarely |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Rarely |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | No change |
---|
Crime | Getting worse |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | No change |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting worse |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | No change |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting worse |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | No change |
---|
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 | No change |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | Getting better |
---|
Gender equity | Getting better |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Getting better |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | No change |
---|
|
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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | A few small achievements |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | A few small achievements |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Some important achievements |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | A few small achievements |
---|
Value of community assets | A few small achievements |
---|
Quality of the environment | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | Some important achievements |
---|
Levels of innovation and risk taking in addressing community problems | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
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 | A few small achievements |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | A few small achievements |
---|
|
Active Partnerships |
---|
Formal community associations and groups | Lot |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Little |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Lot |
---|
Local government | Lot |
---|
National government | Lot |
---|
Universities | Little |
---|
Schools | Little |
---|
Businesses | Lot |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Unhelpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | N/A |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Particular foundation | Did not answer |
---|
Other organization | Very helpful |
---|
|
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 | No |
---|
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 | No |
---|
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 | Important |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Very important |
---|
More volunteers | Important |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Did not answer |
---|
Better local culture of giving | Very important |
---|
Stronger civil society | Very important |
---|
More responsive authorities | Very important |
---|
|
Other | Did not answer |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | We promote public awareness of various societal issues, strengthen grassroots organizations’ capabilities, provide leadership regarding local public policy, and foster federal, state and private co-funding programs. |
---|