Bedfordshire and Luton Community Foundation
The Old School, Southill Road
Bedford, MK44 3SX
United Kingdom
Mission
To be a catalyst for community development for the area of Bedfordshire and Luton and to positively touch the lives of those who come to us for support
Most Meaningful Change
We have worked with local businesses to show them how their support for the community can be strategic and effective rather than piecemeal.
2001 Year Founded
3 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$1,900,000 Endowment Value
$1,260,000 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Bedfordshire and Luton Community Foundation |
---|
Address 1 | The Old School, Southill Road |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Bedford |
---|
State / Region | Did not answer |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | MK44 3SX |
---|
Country | United Kingdom |
---|
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 | 123.483.4930 |
---|
Email | mark.west@blcf.org.uk |
---|
Website | www.blcf.org.uk |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Mark West, Chief Executive |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Mark West |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Chief Executive |
---|
Year Founded | 2001 |
---|
Mission Statement | To be a catalyst for community development for the area of Bedfordshire and Luton and to positively touch the lives of those who come to us for support |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 620,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 3 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 3 |
---|
Total Board Members | 9 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $1,000,000 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | Did not answer |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $1,420,000 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $1,260,000 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $1,900,000 |
---|
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 an important role |
---|
Grassroots activism | Played a slight role |
---|
Inadequate government services | No role |
---|
Changes in the political environment | No role |
---|
Changes in the economic environment | Played a slight role |
---|
Government initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Foundation initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Bilateral or multilateral initiative funding | Played a slight role |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | No role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Fair amount of time |
---|
Locally | Lots of time |
---|
Regionally | Very little 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 | 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 | 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 | Important but not central |
---|
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 | Little |
---|
Education | Fair amount |
---|
Environment | Little |
---|
Health | Lot |
---|
Human and social services | Lot |
---|
Human rights | Little |
---|
International relations | Not at all |
---|
Religion | Not at all |
---|
Economic development | Fair amount |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Fair amount |
---|
Information technology | Little |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Not at all |
---|
Housing | Not at all |
---|
Children | Lot |
---|
Water | Not at all |
---|
Alternative energy | Not at all |
---|
Disaster relief | Not at all |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Little |
---|
Job training | Little |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Rarely |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Occasionally |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Never |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Often |
---|
Advocacy | Occasionally |
---|
Loaned staff | Occasionally |
---|
Research | Rarely |
---|
Community needs assessment | Occasionally |
---|
Leadership development | Occasionally |
---|
Internships | Occasionally |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Never |
---|
Access to information technology | Never |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Often |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | Getting worse |
---|
Crime | Getting better |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Getting worse |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting worse |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Getting worse |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting better |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | No change |
---|
Value of community assets | No change |
---|
Quality of the environment | No change |
---|
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 much better |
---|
Gender equity | No change |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Getting much 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 | A few small achievements |
---|
Crime | Some important achievements |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Much achievement |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Some important achievements |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Some important achievements |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Much achievement |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Value of community assets | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Quality of the environment | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
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 | Much achievement |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | Much achievement |
---|
Gender equity | A few small achievements |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Much achievement |
---|
Number of people and organizations involved in philanthropic giving | Some important achievements |
---|
|
Active Partnerships |
---|
Formal community associations and groups | Little |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Not at all |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Little |
---|
National government | Not at all |
---|
Universities | Little |
---|
Schools | N/A |
---|
Businesses | Little |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Neither helpful or unhelpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | N/A |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | N/A |
---|
Particular foundation | Helpful |
---|
Other organization | N/A |
---|
|
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 | Very important |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Very important |
---|
More volunteers | 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 | Neither important nor unimportant |
---|
|
Other | Did not answer |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | We have worked with local businesses to show them how their support for the community can be strategic and effective rather than piecemeal. |
---|