Térerő - Közösségi Alapítvány a Városunkért
Korach Mór utca 43.
Miskolc, B.A.Z. 3529
Magyarország
Mission
To increase the quality of life in the district of Ferencváros through promoting local philanthropy, supporting civic initiatives aiming to develop our community, and strengthening the sense of attachment and belonging to the district of Ferencváros
Most Meaningful Change
Although our community foundation is new and small, we have been tackling three major challenges. The first one is that Hungarian society is increasingly fragmented along lines of political orientation, economic position and social status. Taken together, it makes joint action, such as starting a new organization for the good of all, fairly difficult. The second issue is the economic crisis in the country, the worst in the past 25 years, meaning that everybody became more cautious with their money and reluctant to take risks and try out new things. And the third challenge was the lack of an in-country example to follow, as there were no operating community foundations in Hungary. We reflect regularly on our work and understand that more change-making lies ahead than behind us.
2016 Year Founded
$1,700 Endowment Value
$14 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Térerő - Közösségi Alapítvány a Városunkért |
---|
Address 1 | Korach Mór utca 43. |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Miskolc |
---|
State / Region | B.A.Z. |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 3529 |
---|
Country | Magyarország |
---|
Continent | Europe |
---|
Map Address (If Different) | 3530 Miskolc, Kont István u. 10. Fsz/1/A |
---|
Map City / Town (If Different) | Miskolc |
---|
Map State / Region (If Different) | B.A.Z. |
---|
Map Zip / Postal Code (If Different) | 3530 |
---|
Map Country (If Different) | Magyarország |
---|
Phone | +36709536605 |
---|
Email | kepesnorbi@gmail.com |
---|
Website | tererokozossegialapitvany.blogspot.hu/ |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Képes Norbert Péter Chairman of the Board of Directors |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Bodnár Erika |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Founder-trustee |
---|
Year Founded | 2016 |
---|
Mission Statement | To increase the quality of life in the district of Ferencváros through promoting local philanthropy, supporting civic initiatives aiming to develop our community, and strengthening the sense of attachment and belonging to the district of Ferencváros |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 160,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | Did not answer |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 1 |
---|
Total Board Members | 11 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $22 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | $14 |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $22 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $14 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $1,700 |
---|
Change in Financial Status Over Last Three Years | Significant improvement |
---|
Factors that Played a Role in the Origins of Your Organization |
---|
Community leadership | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Philanthropic gifts | No 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 | No role |
---|
Government initiative funding | No role |
---|
Foundation initiative funding | No role |
---|
Bilateral or multilateral initiative funding | No role |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | No role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Lots of time |
---|
Locally | Very little time |
---|
Regionally | Did not answer |
---|
Nationally | Very little time |
---|
Internationally | Very little time |
---|
|
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 | Important but not central |
---|
Board reflective of community diversity | Important but not central |
---|
Building an endowment | Important but not central |
---|
Serving donor needs | Important but not central |
---|
Acting as a fiscal intermediary for the community | Not important |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Slightly important |
---|
Pursuing equity | Not important |
---|
Accountability to local people | Centrally important |
---|
Raising money for grantmaking annually | Important but not central |
---|
Community development | Important but not central |
---|
|
In the Last Year, Extent to Which Programming and/or Grantmaking Involved Work in the Following Areas |
---|
Arts and culture | Little |
---|
Education | Fair amount |
---|
Environment | Not at all |
---|
Health | Not at all |
---|
Human and social services | Not at all |
---|
Human rights | Not at all |
---|
International relations | Little |
---|
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 | Fair amount |
---|
Water | Not at all |
---|
Alternative energy | Not at all |
---|
Disaster relief | Not at all |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Little |
---|
Job training | Not at all |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Never |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Occasionally |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Never |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Occasionally |
---|
Advocacy | Never |
---|
Loaned staff | Never |
---|
Research | Never |
---|
Community needs assessment | Rarely |
---|
Leadership development | Never |
---|
Internships | Never |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Occasionally |
---|
Access to information technology | Never |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Never |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | Getting much worse |
---|
Crime | Getting worse |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Getting worse |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting worse |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Getting much worse |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | No change |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Getting worse |
---|
Value of community assets | No change |
---|
Quality of the environment | No change |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | No change |
---|
Levels of innovation and risk taking in addressing community problems | Getting better |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | No change |
---|
Gender equity | No change |
---|
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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Crime | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | A few small achievements |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Value of community assets | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Quality of the environment | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Levels of innovation and risk taking in addressing community problems | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | A few small achievements |
---|
Gender equity | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
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 | Little |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Little |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Not at all |
---|
National government | Not at all |
---|
Universities | Little |
---|
Schools | Lot |
---|
Businesses | Lot |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | Very helpful |
---|
Particular foundation | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Other organization | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
|
Involvement of Local People |
---|
Regularly survey local people about our programs | No |
---|
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 | Unimportant |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Important |
---|
More volunteers | Very important |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Neither important nor unimportant |
---|
Better local culture of giving | Very important |
---|
Stronger civil society | Important |
---|
More responsive authorities | Important |
---|
|
Other | Better understanding of what a community foundation is |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | Although our community foundation is new and small, we have been tackling three major challenges. The first one is that Hungarian society is increasingly fragmented along lines of political orientation, economic position and social status. Taken together, it makes joint action, such as starting a new organization for the good of all, fairly difficult. The second issue is the economic crisis in the country, the worst in the past 25 years, meaning that everybody became more cautious with their money and reluctant to take risks and try out new things. And the third challenge was the lack of an in-country example to follow, as there were no operating community foundations in Hungary. We reflect regularly on our work and understand that more change-making lies ahead than behind us. |
---|