Wabash Valley Community Foundation
2901 Ohio Boulevard, Suite 153
Terre Haute, Indiana 47803
United States
Mission
To engage people, build resources and strengthen community in the Wabash Valley
Most Meaningful Change
This past year, our foundation partnered with a group of local women to start a 100 Women Who Care giving circle. Each member gives $100 to an advised endowment fund, then commits to giving $100 at each of the circle’s quarterly meetings for a total of $500 per year. Our 100 Women group has grown to 218 women and has given more than $100,000 in charitable funds in our community; of that amount, $21,800 is endowed for the future. While the dollars seem remarkable, the real impact has been the diversity of involvement and the public discussion and advocacy of philanthropy.
1991 Year Founded
6 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$37,693,000 Endowment Value
$1,424,500 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Wabash Valley Community Foundation |
---|
Address 1 | 2901 Ohio Boulevard, Suite 153 |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Terre Haute |
---|
State / Region | Indiana |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 47803 |
---|
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 | 812-232-2234 |
---|
Email | beth@wvcf.com |
---|
Website | www.wvcf.com |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Beth Tevlin, Executive Director |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Beth Tevlin |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Executive Director |
---|
Year Founded | 1991 |
---|
Mission Statement | To engage people, build resources and strengthen community in the Wabash Valley |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 155,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 6 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | Did not answer |
---|
Total Board Members | 17 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $5,257,078 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | $1,275,302 |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $2,079,908 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $1,424,500 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $37,693,000 |
---|
Change in Financial Status Over Last Three Years | Significant improvement |
---|
Factors that Played a Role in the Origins of Your Organization |
---|
Community leadership | Played an important role |
---|
Philanthropic gifts | Played an 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 a slight 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 a slight role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Fair amount of time |
---|
Locally | Lots of 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 | Important but not central |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Slightly important |
---|
Pursuing equity | Not important |
---|
Accountability to local people | Centrally important |
---|
Raising money for grantmaking annually | Centrally important |
---|
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 | Fair amount |
---|
Education | Lot |
---|
Environment | Fair amount |
---|
Health | Fair amount |
---|
Human and social services | Lot |
---|
Human rights | Little |
---|
International relations | Not at all |
---|
Religion | Little |
---|
Economic development | Little |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Little |
---|
Information technology | Fair amount |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Not at all |
---|
Housing | Little |
---|
Children | Lot |
---|
Water | Not at all |
---|
Alternative energy | Not at all |
---|
Disaster relief | Little |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Not at all |
---|
Job training | Little |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Occasionally |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Often |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Rarely |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Often |
---|
Advocacy | Never |
---|
Loaned staff | Never |
---|
Research | Never |
---|
Community needs assessment | Occasionally |
---|
Leadership development | Occasionally |
---|
Internships | Often |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Rarely |
---|
Access to information technology | Never |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Never |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | Getting worse |
---|
Crime | No change |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | No change |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting better |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | No change |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting worse |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Getting better |
---|
Value of community assets | Getting better |
---|
Quality of the environment | Getting better |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | Getting much 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 | Getting better |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Getting much 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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Value of community assets | Some important achievements |
---|
Quality of the environment | A few small achievements |
---|
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 | A few small achievements |
---|
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 | Some important achievements |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | Some important achievements |
---|
|
Active Partnerships |
---|
Formal community associations and groups | Lot |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Little |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Little |
---|
National government | Not at all |
---|
Universities | Lot |
---|
Schools | Lot |
---|
Businesses | Lot |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Helpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | Very helpful |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Particular foundation | Very helpful |
---|
Other organization | Very helpful |
---|
|
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 | 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 | Very important |
---|
More volunteers | Neither important nor unimportant |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Very important |
---|
Better local culture of giving | Neither important nor unimportant |
---|
Stronger civil society | Very important |
---|
More responsive authorities | Important |
---|
|
Other | Did not answer |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | This past year, our foundation partnered with a group of local women to start a 100 Women Who Care giving circle. Each member gives $100 to an advised endowment fund, then commits to giving $100 at each of the circle’s quarterly meetings for a total of $500 per year. Our 100 Women group has grown to 218 women and has given more than $100,000 in charitable funds in our community; of that amount, $21,800 is endowed for the future. While the dollars seem remarkable, the real impact has been the diversity of involvement and the public discussion and advocacy of philanthropy. |
---|