Stowarzyszenie Czajnia
Łaszczowiecka 9
Tomaszów Lubelski, Lublin 22-600
Poland
Mission
Comprehensive development of the local community with a special emphasis on youth
Most Meaningful Change
Our most meaningful change has been enhancing a sense of community in the district of Tomaszów and increasing social capital by building a professional NGO.
2004 Year Founded
13 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$15,000 Endowment Value
$16,000 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Stowarzyszenie Czajnia |
---|
Address 1 | Łaszczowiecka 9 |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Tomaszów Lubelski |
---|
State / Region | Lublin |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 22-600 |
---|
Country | Poland |
---|
Continent | Europe |
---|
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 | +48 84 664 13 40 |
---|
Email | czajnia@o2.pl |
---|
Website | www.czajnia.pl |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Marcin Rechulicz, Chairman |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Aleksander Jurzysta |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Director |
---|
Year Founded | 2004 |
---|
Mission Statement | Comprehensive development of the local community with a special emphasis on youth |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 95,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 13 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 5 |
---|
Total Board Members | 3 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $320,000 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | Did not answer |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $340,000 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $16,000 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $15,000 |
---|
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 a centrally important role |
---|
Grassroots activism | Played a slight role |
---|
Inadequate government services | Played a slight role |
---|
Changes in the political environment | Played a slight 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 | 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 | Important but not central |
---|
Seeking local donations | Important but not central |
---|
Having a gender balance in the organization | Slightly important |
---|
Board reflective of community diversity | Important but not central |
---|
Building an endowment | Slightly important |
---|
Serving donor needs | Important but not central |
---|
Acting as a fiscal intermediary for the community | Centrally important |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Important but not central |
---|
Pursuing equity | Slightly important |
---|
Accountability to local people | Important but not central |
---|
Raising money for grantmaking annually | Important but not central |
---|
Community development | Centrally important |
---|
|
In the Last Year, Extent to Which Programming and/or Grantmaking Involved Work in the Following Areas |
---|
Arts and culture | Fair amount |
---|
Education | Fair amount |
---|
Environment | Little |
---|
Health | Fair amount |
---|
Human and social services | Little |
---|
Human rights | Not at all |
---|
International relations | Not at all |
---|
Religion | Not at all |
---|
Economic development | Little |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Not at all |
---|
Information technology | Not at all |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Little |
---|
Housing | Not at all |
---|
Children | Fair amount |
---|
Water | Not at all |
---|
Alternative energy | Not at all |
---|
Disaster relief | Not at all |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Fair amount |
---|
Job training | Not at all |
---|
|
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 | Occasionally |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Often |
---|
Advocacy | Occasionally |
---|
Loaned staff | Rarely |
---|
Research | Never |
---|
Community needs assessment | Occasionally |
---|
Leadership development | Often |
---|
Internships | Rarely |
---|
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 | Getting worse |
---|
Crime | Getting better |
---|
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 better |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Getting better |
---|
Value of community assets | Getting better |
---|
Quality of the environment | No change |
---|
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 much better |
---|
Gender equity | No change |
---|
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 | 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 | A few small achievements |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | A few small achievements |
---|
Value of community assets | A few small achievements |
---|
Quality of the environment | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
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 | 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 | Some important achievements |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | Some important achievements |
---|
|
Active Partnerships |
---|
Formal community associations and groups | Little |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Little |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Little |
---|
National government | Not at all |
---|
Universities | Little |
---|
Schools | Not at all |
---|
Businesses | Little |
---|
|
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 | Helpful |
---|
Particular foundation | Very helpful |
---|
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 | 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 | Important |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Very important |
---|
More volunteers | Important |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Unimportant |
---|
Better local culture of giving | Very important |
---|
Stronger civil society | 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 | Our most meaningful change has been enhancing a sense of community in the district of Tomaszów and increasing social capital by building a professional NGO. |
---|