Maima Community Foundation “Perspektiva”
Lenina str. 10
Maima Village, Altai Republic 649100
Russia
Mission
Aggregation of all the available resources of the community to solve social problems of Mayma rural settlement
Most Meaningful Change
People know that they can realize their creative potential through our foundation. And every citizen of Mayma rural settlement knows that he or she can participate in the charity directly by taking part in our events and charitable programs.
2009 Year Founded
2 Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalent)
$5,000 Total Annual Grantmaking
Organization | Maima Community Foundation “Perspektiva” |
---|
Address 1 | Lenina str. 10 |
---|
Address 2 | Did not answer |
---|
City / Town | Maima Village |
---|
State / Region | Altai Republic |
---|
ZIP / Postal Code | 649100 |
---|
Country | Russia |
---|
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 | +7 923-662-46-08 |
---|
Email | perspektivagorny@mail.ru |
---|
Website | www.fond-perspektiva.ru |
---|
Organization Leader (Name, Title) | Volosovceva Olga Igorevna, President |
---|
Primary Contact’s Name | Olga Volosovceva |
---|
Primary Contact’s Position | President |
---|
Year Founded | 2009 |
---|
Mission Statement | Aggregation of all the available resources of the community to solve social problems of Mayma rural settlement |
---|
Organization Description | Community Foundation |
---|
Other Description | Did not answer |
---|
Approximate Size of the Population Serviced | 17,000 |
---|
Total Paid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 2 |
---|
Total Unpaid Staff (Full-Time Equivalents) | 2 |
---|
Total Board Members | 5 |
---|
Organization’s Total Income in Last Fiscal Year | $7,000 |
---|
Organization’s Gifts Income in Last Fiscal Year | Did not answer |
---|
Organization’s Total Expenditures in Last Fiscal Year | $6,250 |
---|
Organization’s Grantmaking Budget in Last Fiscal Year | $5,000 |
---|
Does Organization Have an Endowment | No and do not intend to build one |
---|
Value of Endowment (or Financial Reserves) as of the End of Last Fiscal Year | Did not answer |
---|
Change in Financial Status Over Last Three Years | Stayed about the same |
---|
Factors that Played a Role in the Origins of Your Organization |
---|
Community leadership | Did not answer |
---|
Philanthropic gifts | Did not answer |
---|
Grassroots activism | Played an important role |
---|
Inadequate government services | Did not answer |
---|
Changes in the political environment | Played an important role |
---|
Changes in the economic environment | Did not answer |
---|
Government initiative funding | Did not answer |
---|
Foundation initiative funding | Played a centrally important role |
---|
Bilateral or multilateral initiative funding | Did not answer |
---|
Favorable legal or fiscal policies | Did not answer |
---|
|
Time Spent Working in Following Areas |
---|
Neighborhood | Very little time |
---|
Locally | Fair amount of time |
---|
Regionally | Very little time |
---|
Nationally | Fair amount of time |
---|
Internationally | Very little time |
---|
|
Rate Importance of the Following Functions |
---|
Grantmaking | Important but not central |
---|
Having local people as leaders in the organization | Centrally important |
---|
Seeking local donations | Important but not central |
---|
Having a gender balance in the organization | Not important |
---|
Board reflective of community diversity | Important but not central |
---|
Building an endowment | N/A |
---|
Serving donor needs | Not important |
---|
Acting as a fiscal intermediary for the community | Centrally important |
---|
Building inclusion and trust in the community | Centrally important |
---|
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 | Lot |
---|
Education | Not at all |
---|
Environment | Not at all |
---|
Health | Not at all |
---|
Human and social services | Not at all |
---|
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 | Little |
---|
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 | Little |
---|
Advocacy with authorities | Fair amount |
---|
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 | Occasionally |
---|
Training/capacity-building for local organizations | Occasionally |
---|
Advocacy | Rarely |
---|
Loaned staff | Rarely |
---|
Research | Rarely |
---|
Community needs assessment | Did not answer |
---|
Leadership development | Often |
---|
Internships | Often |
---|
Providing space for local organizations | Rarely |
---|
Access to information technology | Occasionally |
---|
Publishing/knowledge sharing | Often |
---|
|
Main Trends Over the Past Year in Geographic Area Served |
---|
Poverty | No change |
---|
Crime | Getting better |
---|
Trust among different sections of the community | No change |
---|
Equitable distribution of resources and services | Getting worse |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | No change |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Getting worse |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Getting better |
---|
Value of community assets | No change |
---|
Quality of the environment | Getting worse |
---|
Number of people and organizations working to change and improve their community | Getting worse |
---|
Levels of innovation and risk taking in addressing community problems | No change |
---|
Networks and links between different parts of the community | No change |
---|
Gender equity | No change |
---|
Charitable giving through the community foundation | Getting 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 | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
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 | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
Social position of marginalized groups | Do not work in this sphere |
---|
Responsiveness of authorities | Some important achievements |
---|
Appropriateness of public policies | Some important achievements |
---|
Value of community assets | Much achievement |
---|
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 | Work in the sphere but no measurable achievement |
---|
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 | Much achievement |
---|
|
Active Partnerships |
---|
Formal community associations and groups | Little |
---|
Informal associations of citizens | Lot |
---|
Non-governmental organizations | Little |
---|
Local government | Lot |
---|
National government | Little |
---|
Universities | Little |
---|
Schools | Lot |
---|
Businesses | Little |
---|
|
Other Institutions Helpful to Our Work |
---|
National association of grantmakers | Very unhelpful |
---|
Regional association of grantmakers | Helpful |
---|
Global Fund for Community Foundations | Helpful |
---|
Particular foundation | Helpful |
---|
Other organization | 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 | 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 | No |
---|
|
Assistance in Overcoming Main Difficulties Faced in Developing Organization Further |
---|
Increased funding | Important |
---|
Better legal or fiscal environment | Unimportant |
---|
More volunteers | 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 | Did not answer |
---|
Most Meaningful Change that Organization Has Helped to Bring About in the Last Three Years | People know that they can realize their creative potential through our foundation. And every citizen of Mayma rural settlement knows that he or she can participate in the charity directly by taking part in our events and charitable programs. |
---|