Generations Foundation
Obrońców Westerplatte 6
Tczew, Pomerania 83-110
Poland
Mission
To support youth and other NGOs through education and cultural activities, projects, grant and scholarship funds, and consulting. We also work on behalf of civic society.
Most Meaningful Change
We continue our mission of helping local youth. Our “Includer” (name translated literally) project helps young people by organizing activities (capoeira, climbing, art and many others); we also offer psychological assistance and grants.
2002 Year Founded
11 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$217,257 Endowment Value
$27,066 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Generations Foundation |
---|
Address 1 | Obrońców Westerplatte 6 |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Tczew |
---|
State / Region | Pomerania |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 83-110 |
---|
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 58 352 45 46 |
---|
Email | biuro@fundacjapokolenia.pl |
---|
Website | www.fundacjapokolenia.pl |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Members of Local Fund Board |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Filip Jędruch |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | Fundraising, marketing and image specialist |
---|
Year Founded | 2002 |
---|
Mission Statement | To support youth and other NGOs through education and cultural activities, projects, grant and scholarship funds, and consulting. We also work on behalf of civic society. |
---|
Organization Description | Community philanthropy organisation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 150,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 11 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 30 |
---|
Total Board Members | 3 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $708,262 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | Did not answer |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $660,222 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $27,066 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | Yes |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | $217,257 |
---|
Change in Financial Status Over Last Three Years | A little improvement |
---|
Factors that Played a Role in the Origins of Your Organization |
---|
Community leadership | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Philanthropic gifts | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Grassroots activism | Played an important role |
---|
Inadequate government services | Played a slight role |
---|
Changes in the political environment | No role |
---|
Changes in the economic environment | No role |
---|
Government initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Foundation initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Bilateral or multilateral initiative funding | Played an important role |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | No role |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Lots of time |
---|
Locally | Lots of time |
---|
Regionally | Lots of time |
---|
Nationally | Very little time |
---|
Internationally | Very little time |
---|
|
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 | Slightly 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 | Important but not central |
---|
Pursuing equity | Important but not central |
---|
Accountability to local people | Important but not central |
---|
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 | Not at all |
---|
Health | Not at all |
---|
Human and social services | Fair amount |
---|
Human rights | Lot |
---|
International relations | Little |
---|
Religion | Not at all |
---|
Economic development | Little |
---|
Conflict resolution/bridging different parts of the community | Fair amount |
---|
Information technology | Fair amount |
---|
Strengthening local or regional government | Not at all |
---|
Housing | Not at all |
---|
Children | Fair amount |
---|
Water | Not at all |
---|
Alternative energy | Not at all |
---|
Disaster relief | Not at all |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Little |
---|
Job training | Fair amount |
---|
|
Nongrantmaking Services Offered to Community in Recent Years |
---|
Convening for issues of local concern | Often |
---|
Promote collaboration between grantees | Often |
---|
Promote understanding of public policy | Rarely |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Occasionally |
---|
Advocacy | Never |
---|
Loaned staff | Never |
---|
Research | Occasionally |
---|
Community needs assessment | Rarely |
---|
Leadership development | Did not answer |
---|
Internships | Rarely |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Occasionally |
---|
Access to information technology | Occasionally |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Occasionally |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | Getting better |
---|
Crime | Getting better |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Getting worse |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | No change |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Getting worse |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting better |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Getting better |
---|
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 better |
---|
Gender equity | Getting better |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | No change |
---|
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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Crime | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | Some important achievements |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Some important achievements |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Much achievement |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | A few small achievements |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | A few small achievements |
---|
Value of community assets | Much achievement |
---|
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 | 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 | Little |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Little |
---|
National government | Not at all |
---|
Universities | N/A |
---|
Schools | Little |
---|
Businesses | Not at all |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Very helpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | Very helpful |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | N/A |
---|
Particular foundation | Very helpful |
---|
Other organization | 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 | Yes |
---|
All of our board is composed of local people | No |
---|
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 | Very important |
---|
Access to advice or technical assistance | Important |
---|
Better local culture of giving | Very important |
---|
Stronger civil society | Very important |
---|
More responsive authorities | Very important |
---|
|
Other | Lasting Local Partnerships |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | We continue our mission of helping local youth. Our “Includer” (name translated literally) project helps young people by organizing activities (capoeira, climbing, art and many others); we also offer psychological assistance and grants. |
---|