Heritage Fund-Community Foundation of Bartholomew County
538 Franklin St
Columbus, Indiana 47201
United States
Mission
To provide responsible stewardship of gifts donated for broad charitable purposes, promote leadership to address community issues, serve as a catalyst for positive change in partnership with others, and promote philanthropy broadly within the community
1976 Year Founded
6 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$54,800,000 Endowment Value
$1,300,000 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Heritage Fund-Community Foundation of Bartholomew County |
---|
Address 1 | 538 Franklin St |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Columbus |
---|
State / Region | Indiana |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 47201 |
---|
Country | United States |
---|
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 | 812.372.7776 |
---|
Email | tsouza@heritagefundbc.org |
---|
Website | www.heritagefundbc.org |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Amber Fischvogt, VP Development |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Tracy Souza |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | President & CEO |
---|
Year Founded | 1976 |
---|
Mission Statement | To provide responsible stewardship of gifts donated for broad charitable purposes, promote leadership to address community issues, serve as a catalyst for positive change in partnership with others, and promote philanthropy broadly within the community |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 45,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 6 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | Did not answer |
---|
Total Board Members | 28 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $2,100,000 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | $4,557,547 |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $750,000 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $1,300,000 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $54,800,000 |
---|
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 | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Grassroots activism | Played a slight 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 | Played a slight role |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | Played an important role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Fair amount of time |
---|
Locally | Lots of time |
---|
Regionally | Fair amount 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 | Centrally important |
---|
Board reflective of community diversity | Centrally important |
---|
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 | Centrally important |
---|
Pursuing equity | Important but not central |
---|
Accountability to local people | Centrally important |
---|
Raising money for grantmaking annually | N/A |
---|
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 | Not at all |
---|
Health | Not at all |
---|
Human and social services | Lot |
---|
Human rights | Little |
---|
International relations | Not at all |
---|
Religion | Not at all |
---|
Economic development | Little |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Little |
---|
Information technology | Not at all |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Little |
---|
Housing | Fair amount |
---|
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 | Often |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Often |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Often |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Often |
---|
Advocacy | Occasionally |
---|
Loaned staff | Rarely |
---|
Research | Rarely |
---|
Community needs assessment | Occasionally |
---|
Leadership development | Often |
---|
Internships | Often |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Never |
---|
Access to information technology | Rarely |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Rarely |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | Getting 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 much worse |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting better |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | No change |
---|
Value of community assets | Getting better |
---|
Quality of the environment | Getting better |
---|
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 much better |
---|
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 | Getting much better |
---|
|
Extent to Which Organization Can Claim Tangible and Measurable Achievements in the Past Three Years |
---|
Poverty | Some important achievements |
---|
Crime | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | A few small achievements |
---|
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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Much achievement |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | Much achievement |
---|
|
Active Partnerships |
---|
Formal community associations and groups | Lot |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Little |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Lot |
---|
Local government | Lot |
---|
National government | Not at all |
---|
Universities | Lot |
---|
Schools | Lot |
---|
Businesses | Little |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | Very unhelpful |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | N/A |
---|
Particular foundation | Helpful |
---|
Other organization | Did not answer |
---|
|
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 | Yes |
---|
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 | Important |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Important |
---|
More volunteers | Very important |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Important |
---|
Better local culture of giving | Very important |
---|
Stronger civil society | Very important |
---|
More responsive authorities | Neither important nor unimportant |
---|
|
Other | Did not answer |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | Did not answer |
---|