Bürgerstiftung Rheda-Wiedenbrück
Lange Straße 50
Rheda-Wiedenbrück, North Rhine-Westphalia 33378
Germany
Mission
To strengthen our community, especially in the fields of youth, families, education and inclusion
Most Meaningful Change
From the very beginning, our strategy has been to work with partners in local networks. This has helped us to learn from experts in the field of young people, and has given us the opportunity to build up some highly visible projects rather swiftly. As trust in the foundation grew, more and more funds came in. We also scanned the field in Germany and abroad for good philanthropic ideas to adapt and implement in Rheda-Wiedenbrueck. This proved to be a very successful way to build capacity, the organization and our funds.
2006 Year Founded
1 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$780 Endowment Value
$115 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Bürgerstiftung Rheda-Wiedenbrück |
---|
Address 1 | Lange Straße 50 |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Rheda-Wiedenbrück |
---|
State / Region | North Rhine-Westphalia |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 33378 |
---|
Country | Germany |
---|
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 | +49 160 968 44442 |
---|
Email | info@buergerstiftung-rhwd.de |
---|
Website | www.buergerstiftung-rhwd.de |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Bettina Windau, Chair Executive Board |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Bettina Windau |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Chair Executive Board |
---|
Year Founded | 2006 |
---|
Mission Statement | To strengthen our community, especially in the fields of youth, families, education and inclusion |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 47 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 1 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | Did not answer |
---|
Total Board Members | 5 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $150 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | Did not answer |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $120 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $115 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $780 |
---|
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 | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | Played an important role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Very little time |
---|
Locally | Lots of time |
---|
Regionally | None |
---|
Nationally | None |
---|
Internationally | None |
---|
|
Rate Importance of the Following Functions |
---|
Grantmaking | Important but not central |
---|
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 | Centrally important |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Important but not central |
---|
Pursuing equity | Important but not central |
---|
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 | Did not answer |
---|
Education | Lot |
---|
Environment | Did not answer |
---|
Health | Did not answer |
---|
Human and social services | Fair amount |
---|
Human rights | Did not answer |
---|
International relations | Did not answer |
---|
Religion | Did not answer |
---|
Economic development | Did not answer |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Did not answer |
---|
Information technology | Did not answer |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Did not answer |
---|
Housing | Did not answer |
---|
Children | Lot |
---|
Water | Did not answer |
---|
Alternative energy | Did not answer |
---|
Disaster relief | Did not answer |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Did not answer |
---|
Job training | Did not answer |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Never |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Often |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Never |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Never |
---|
Advocacy | Never |
---|
Loaned staff | Never |
---|
Research | Never |
---|
Community needs assessment | Never |
---|
Leadership development | Never |
---|
Internships | Never |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Never |
---|
Access to information technology | Never |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Occasionally |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | No change |
---|
Crime | No change |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | No change |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting worse |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Getting worse |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | No change |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | No change |
---|
Value of community assets | No change |
---|
Quality of the environment | Getting better |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | Getting better |
---|
Levels of innovation and risk taking in addressing community problems | No change |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | Getting better |
---|
Gender equity | No change |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Getting much 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 | A few small achievements |
---|
Crime | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | A few small achievements |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Value of community assets | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
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 | Little |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Little |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Not at all |
---|
National government | N/A |
---|
Universities | N/A |
---|
Schools | Little |
---|
Businesses | Not at all |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Helpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | N/A |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | N/A |
---|
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 | No |
---|
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 | No |
---|
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 | Neither important nor unimportant |
---|
More volunteers | Important |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Important |
---|
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 | From the very beginning, our strategy has been to work with partners in local networks. This has helped us to learn from experts in the field of young people, and has given us the opportunity to build up some highly visible projects rather swiftly. As trust in the foundation grew, more and more funds came in. We also scanned the field in Germany and abroad for good philanthropic ideas to adapt and implement in Rheda-Wiedenbrueck. This proved to be a very successful way to build capacity, the organization and our funds. |
---|