Stanislaus Community Foundation
1029 16th Street
Modesto, California 95354
United States
Mission
To enhance the quality of life of all Stanislaus County residents by transforming community resources into community good, in order to encourage philanthropy, provide services to donors and assist those who work to meet community needs
Most Meaningful Change
We have experienced significant organizational change in the last fiscal year with the hire of a new CEO and the creation of a program officer position. Although the foundation has acted as a trusted steward of community assets for over ten years, our visibility in the community has remained low. As we transition from primarily a “transactional” to a “transformational” community foundation, our main focus is to increase our organization’s visibility, to learn about and understand the community to inform our grantmaking, and to develop stronger relationships with public agencies and community organizations. In the past year, we have made large strides in reaching these goals through the implementation of a strategic marketing plan, participation in key community collaboratives around education and health, conducting nonprofit site visits and interviews, and the development of a new discretionary grant cycle. Consequently, these tactical activities have helped to forge stronger ties with new and existing fund holders, which has led to increased charitable giving in our community.
2001 Year Founded
3 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$3,000,000 Endowment Value
$100,000 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Stanislaus Community Foundation |
---|
Address 1 | 1029 16th Street |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Modesto |
---|
State / Region | California |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 95354 |
---|
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 | 209.576.1608 |
---|
Email | aghughes@stanislauscf.org |
---|
Website | www.stanislauscf.org |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Marian Kaanon, CEO |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Amanda Hughes |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Program Officer |
---|
Year Founded | 2001 |
---|
Mission Statement | To enhance the quality of life of all Stanislaus County residents by transforming community resources into community good, in order to encourage philanthropy, provide services to donors and assist those who work to meet community needs |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 520,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 3 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | Did not answer |
---|
Total Board Members | 16 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $2,239,758 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | $1,555,742 |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $1,187,819 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $100,000 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $3,000,000 |
---|
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 slight role |
---|
Philanthropic gifts | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Grassroots activism | No role |
---|
Inadequate government services | No role |
---|
Changes in the political environment | No role |
---|
Changes in the economic environment | No role |
---|
Government initiative funding | No role |
---|
Foundation initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Bilateral or multilateral initiative funding | No 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 | Very little time |
---|
Nationally | None |
---|
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 | Centrally important |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Centrally important |
---|
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 | Little |
---|
Education | Lot |
---|
Environment | Little |
---|
Health | Little |
---|
Human and social services | Fair amount |
---|
Human rights | Little |
---|
International relations | Not at all |
---|
Religion | Little |
---|
Economic development | Not at all |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Fair amount |
---|
Information technology | Little |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Little |
---|
Housing | Little |
---|
Children | Lot |
---|
Water | Little |
---|
Alternative energy | Not at all |
---|
Disaster relief | Little |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Lot |
---|
Job training | Not at all |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Occasionally |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Occasionally |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Occasionally |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Occasionally |
---|
Advocacy | Rarely |
---|
Loaned staff | Occasionally |
---|
Research | Occasionally |
---|
Community needs assessment | Occasionally |
---|
Leadership development | Occasionally |
---|
Internships | Never |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Often |
---|
Access to information technology | Never |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Often |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | Getting much worse |
---|
Crime | Getting much worse |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Getting better |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting worse |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Getting much worse |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting much worse |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Getting worse |
---|
Value of community assets | No change |
---|
Quality of the environment | Getting much worse |
---|
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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | A few small achievements |
---|
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 | A few small achievements |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | A few small 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 | Lot |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Lot |
---|
Local government | Lot |
---|
National government | Not at all |
---|
Universities | Little |
---|
Schools | Lot |
---|
Businesses | Little |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Helpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | Helpful |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Particular foundation | Very helpful |
---|
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 | 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 | Very important |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Important |
---|
More volunteers | Unimportant |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Very important |
---|
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 have experienced significant organizational change in the last fiscal year with the hire of a new CEO and the creation of a program officer position. Although the foundation has acted as a trusted steward of community assets for over ten years, our visibility in the community has remained low. As we transition from primarily a “transactional” to a “transformational” community foundation, our main focus is to increase our organization’s visibility, to learn about and understand the community to inform our grantmaking, and to develop stronger relationships with public agencies and community organizations. In the past year, we have made large strides in reaching these goals through the implementation of a strategic marketing plan, participation in key community collaboratives around education and health, conducting nonprofit site visits and interviews, and the development of a new discretionary grant cycle. Consequently, these tactical activities have helped to forge stronger ties with new and existing fund holders, which has led to increased charitable giving in our community. |
---|