Re: Current state of Foundation finances, upgrade internal systems and controls...
On 16 April 2014 11:19, Dave Neary wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/16/2014 05:23 AM, Liam R E Quin wrote: >> The more important something is, the more important it is that we have >> good Free software to meet our needs. > > I agree. > >> If there are problems with GnuCash and it's the most suitable Free >> software, let's get the problems fixed. > > There are, and a big part of the problem is that the GNU Cash project > does not have a large developer community, partly because it does not > have a large user community. I'm not sure if you've tried the latest version of GnuCash (the 2.6 series), but it has seen a *lot* of improvements and bug fixes. I have been a GnuCash user for 6-7 years now, both for personal and business accounting, and can honestly say that the the latest version is miles ahead of any of the previous ones. I have also filed bugs on occasion, and I have always had fast and good responses from the developers. > There is LedgerSMB which Bradley Kuhn evaluated for the Software Freedom > Conservancy some time back - I don't recall the issues he had with it, > but I do recall that he did not embrace it. SFC are currently working on some accounting software which may be of interest to the Foundation: we will be investigating it further once we're on top of everything. > For invoicing, SimpleInvoices http://www.simpleinvoices.org/ might be a > solution to look at? There are currently no significant issues with invoice creation, and I'm not sure that jumping between different software will be any less time consuming. Having a GNOME theme for invoices in GnuCash will save us 5 minutes of work per invoice, so it would be a nice bonus, but is not a make or break deal for us. > For Paypal integration, I know CiviCRM handled that - are we still using it? We use a script that Tobi wrote and maintains, and the script is currently being modified for EUR transactions by someone on the PiTiVi team. As far as I am aware, accounting since at least 2009-2010 has been consolidated to GnuCash only, but it may have been more recent than that. Paypal is still a pain because they do not offer any good transaction export options. If Paypal were to start offering QIF exports, which is what many banking institutions offer and which is an ideal format for double entry accounting, then we wouldn't need need to process the Paypal output. Unfortunately, this is not currently available from Paypal, so regardless of which accounting software we use, we would still need to process Paypal statements in some way before we can use them. > I imagine that integrating real-time data from the bank is still an issue... > > Cheers, > Dave. > > -- > Dave Neary, Lyon, France > Email: dne...@gnome.org > Jabber: nea...@gmail.com > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances, upgrade internal systems and controls...
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Dave Neary wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/16/2014 05:23 AM, Liam R E Quin wrote: >> The more important something is, the more important it is that we have >> good Free software to meet our needs. > > I agree. +1 > There is LedgerSMB which Bradley Kuhn evaluated for the Software >Freedom > Conservancy some time back - I don't recall the issues he had with it, > but I do recall that he did not embrace it. > https://sfconservancy.org/campaign/ http://npoacct.sfconservancy.org/ -- -mvh Oliver Propst ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances, upgrade internal systems and controls...
Hi, On 04/16/2014 05:23 AM, Liam R E Quin wrote: > The more important something is, the more important it is that we have > good Free software to meet our needs. I agree. > If there are problems with GnuCash and it's the most suitable Free > software, let's get the problems fixed. There are, and a big part of the problem is that the GNU Cash project does not have a large developer community, partly because it does not have a large user community. There is LedgerSMB which Bradley Kuhn evaluated for the Software Freedom Conservancy some time back - I don't recall the issues he had with it, but I do recall that he did not embrace it. For invoicing, SimpleInvoices http://www.simpleinvoices.org/ might be a solution to look at? For Paypal integration, I know CiviCRM handled that - are we still using it? I imagine that integrating real-time data from the bank is still an issue... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary, Lyon, France Email: dne...@gnome.org Jabber: nea...@gmail.com ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances, upgrade internal systems and controls...
On Tue, 2014-04-15 at 21:20 -0400, Alxndr G.S. wrote: > Yes, I > understand the need to use free-software in everything, but for something > as vital as financial management can't you just make an exception? If you say this, you don't understand :-) The more important something is, the more important it is that we have good Free software to meet our needs. If there are problems with GnuCash and it's the most suitable Free software, let's get the problems fixed. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml The barefoot programmer ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances, upgrade internal systems and controls...
This is a rather random post but it was sufficiently important for me to point out. When I read the following FAQ linked below I took some time to digest what was really happening. You lost track of your accounting, that's all. You don't have systems in place that allow a small staff to properly manage these functions and that results in poor internal controls. One of the lines that really caught my attention in this FAQ was: "If anyone is familiar with Guile/Scheme, the Foundation would benefit from a custom printable invoice stylesheet for GnuCash. Contact the board for a PDF of what it needs to look like." This whole problem could be solved if you just upgraded to a proper financial management system. Using non-standard software to manage your finances as a fast-moving organization doesn't make any sense. Yes, I understand the need to use free-software in everything, but for something as vital as financial management can't you just make an exception? That's my random suggestion on this topic and I'm sure GNOME sponsors would gladly provide these kind of resources if you explained the urgency of the situation. [1] https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 13 April 2014 17:11, Stormy Peters wrote: > Is the budget and the current state of financials (account balances, > invoices due, money expected) public? If not, can we get at least a summary? Hi Stormy, here's the link to the financial summary for 2013, with earlier years for reference: https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/FinancialSummary . We are aiming to publish the 2014 to-date accounts and proposed budget towards the end of the month as we are currently concentrating on our tax return paperwork (which is due mid-May) and chasing up invoices. > Are we paying our employee during this freeze? Is it expected that we would > be able to employ an executive director if we want to? We are still paying all running expenses such as employee and administrative costs. I estimate that these amount to around $5000 per month. We will be able to employ an executive director, but not in the immediate future as it seems prudent to keep expenses to a minimum until some of the outstanding invoices are paid. > Thanks to the board members for working through this and being open. > > Stormy > > > On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova > wrote: >> >> On 13 April 2014 14:40, Allan Day wrote: >> > David King wrote: >> > ... >> Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating >> expenses as reserves. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm >> >>> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate >> >>> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the >> >>> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still >> >>> very >> >>> small. >> >> >> >> >> >> That is not correct according to: >> >> >> >> >> >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F >> >> That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves >> >> right >> >> now". >> > >> > Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really >> > bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. >> > >> > Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the >> > freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually >> > have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure >> > this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? >> >> We do not have protected reserves. The freeze on sponsorship >> repayments is in place to make sure that we can reacquire our >> reserves. >> >> The intention of the FAQ is to be honest with our Foundation members >> because the board believe in being open not only in our code but also >> when we keep in touch with the membership. >> >> As a large portion of our membership are not native English speakers, >> it is important to keep to keep our communication as simple, concise >> and precise as possible. The FAQ already clearly states what the board >> is planning to do to fix the problem and when we expect it to happen. >> >> > Allan >> > ___ >> > foundation-list mailing list >> > foundation-list@gnome.org >> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list >> ___ >> foundation-list mailing list >> foundation-list@gnome.org >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 14 April 2014 05:19, Jim Campbell wrote: > Hi All, > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova > wrote: >> >> On 12 April 2014 05:29, Sindhu S wrote: >> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to >> >> know more details about the problem, please read >> >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact >> >> the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. >> > >> > >> > I want to ask questions. >> > >> > Was this situation visible or known before or at the time funds for Dev >> > X >> > Hackfest were being allocated? >> >> No, it wasn't know. If it had been known, spending would have been >> frozen by then and a budget for the hackfest would not have been >> approved. > > > The email and the FAQ do not address the impact of the spending freeze on > previously-approved hackfests [0]. Could the board address whether > previously-approved hackfests will proceed or not? It would also be helpful > to address the impact of this "go / no go" decision on intended hackfest > participants (regardless of whether or not they had been approved for a > GNOME-sponsored travel stipend). Hi, I assume that you would like me to expand on "All Foundation members who expect to receive reimbursements within the next three months have already been informed of the issue and most have responded positively. The board will prioritise these pending reimbursements over other expenses." from the first email in this thread: The hackfests will proceed, and all the sponsored attendees were informed on Tuesday-Friday last week that their reimbursements will be later than expected. There are currently two outstanding reimbursements which were due to be paid last week, and these will be our priority as soon as we have enough cash to cover operational costs for April. There will be 18 reimbursements due for events happening now and at the end of April. Of these 18 reimbursements, 2 have requested that their reimbursements are sent as soon as possible and will be prioritized next. There will be an additional 19 reimbursements due at the start of June. All of those that have replied have said that they are happy to wait for reimbursements until the Foundation has more cash reserves. The board is currently not voting on any event expenses, but will continue voting on events to be designated as official GNOME events. For example, the Location hackfest was approved at the last meeting and it will currently not be affected by the freeze as no budget was requested for the hackfest at the time. > Also, in reviewing recent board meeting minutes, I do not see details that > would give an indication of overall financial status. Even if they aren't > disclosed publicly as part of the minutes, are things like "aging summaries" > provided or discussed as part of a treasurer's report during the meetings? There are a number of items in the minutes since October 2013 that indicate that there has been no budget for the 2014 financial year. Looking at the public minutes, it is mentioned in minutes from 2013-11, 2013-12, 2014-01 and 2014-02. The board spent 2013-03 meeting for two hours on a weekly basis to ensure that the Executive Director leaving will not affect the running of the Foundation. I did bring up the lack of budget during some of those meetings as well. There is also mention of the budget in private minutes from 2013-09 and 2013-10. The treasurer is supposed to present the board with a monthly budget, but this was not possible as I did not have the necessary information. I pointed this out almost every time that there was a vote for spending. As the treasurer, I did warn the board when votes came up with that we did not have a budget for the expense. In general, votes for hackfests and events proceeded, while votes for other types of expenses did not proceed. > Thanks, > > Jim > > [0] https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 14 April 2014 10:02, Dave Neary wrote: > Hi Kat, > > Has any thought been Hi en to charging an administrative handling fee for > Women's Outreach? Clearly it is taking a lot of time to administer, it does > not seem fair that the GNOME Foundation shoulder all of the financial burden > of managing it. Yes, GNOME charges participating organisations $250-500 per intern in administrative fees, of which at least $100 usually goes on bank charges. Most organisations pay $250. When the GOPW started, the administration involved sending 30-60 payments per year. Once the OPW expanded to take in other organisations, the administrative overheads included invoicing sponsors in addition to sending payments. For example, in the 2014 financial year, I estimate that the Foundation would need to send around 250 payments and send around 30-35 invoices. It was or will be the Foundation's first time invoicing some of those companies, which entails extra work in figuring out how to do it. In practical terms, the money itself comes close to covering the hours that our administrative assistant needs to spend on the OPW. Our administrative assistant was at full capacity when sending an extra 30-60 payments per year, but the extra work which resulted in the program expanding put her over capacity. The board is currently taking on some of these tasks and other administrative tasks to ease the load on our administrative assistant. This would normally be done by our Executive Director, but we currently do not have one. > Cheers, > Dave. > > On Apr 12, 2014 1:32 AM, "Ekaterina Gerasimova" > wrote: >> >> Dear Foundation members, >> >> Due to a shortfall in the budget, the Foundation board voted on >> 2014-04-08 to freeze all expenditure which is not essential to the >> running of the Foundation. This freeze affects sponsorship expenses >> which are unpaid at this time, but it does not affect the funds which >> we hold for other organisations. >> >> By keeping our expenditures to a minimum while we regain some delayed >> revenue, we aim to have things back to normal within a few months. All >> Foundation members who expect to receive reimbursements within the >> next three months have already been informed of the issue and most >> have responded positively. The board will prioritise these pending >> reimbursements over other expenses. >> >> The issue has been caused by a number of factors. These include >> increased administrative overheads in the last few years due to the >> increased turnover which has been caused by to the Outreach Program >> for Women (OPW), and the associated payments going out while the >> associated income has been slow to come in. >> >> The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to >> know more details about the problem, please read >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact >> the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. >> ___ >> foundation-list mailing list >> foundation-list@gnome.org >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Olav Vitters wrote: > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 12:32:12AM +0100, Ekaterina Gerasimova wrote: >> The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to >> know more details about the problem, please read >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact >> the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. > > Could you slightly change this and clarify what "cash flow" means? ... I agree that the FAQ is generating some misconceptions. I've attached a revised version which I think is clearer - can we update the page with it? Allan <> == What is the problem? == The GNOME Foundation has a temporary lack of reserves due to processing the funds for the Outreach Program for Women (OPW). As is typical for this type of program, sponsoring organizations send in money after funds have been sent out to end recipients. As the OPW has grown, this has created a temporary shortfall while we wait to receive payments. Since our financial reserves are currently in a depleted state, the board voted on 2014-04-08 to freeze Foundation spending that is not essential to the running of the Foundation. The board aims to have things back to normal within a few months. == Does this affect organizations for whom GNOME handles funds? == No, the freeze and the budget shortfall do not affect organizations for whom GNOME handles money and donations. These organizations should not experience any changes or delays. == What is the board doing to fix it? == Primarily, the board is working to bring in the funds that are needed to continue the work of the Foundation. This includes: * Invoicing our Advisory Board members for their annual subscription fees. * Invoicing our conference sponsors. * Following up on unpaid invoices more actively. * Taking on the Executive Director's administrative and fundraising duties. * Invoicing the OPW sponsoring organizations for the upcoming round immediately. * Increasing our general fundraising efforts for the Foundation and its events. * Some of the OPW administrative workload is being shifted from Foundation employees to the OPW organizing team. == How can you help? == If you have thought about donating to the Foundation but never got around to it, then this is the time when it will help the Foundation most. The Foundation accepts [[https://www.gnome.org/friends/|Paypal]], [[https://www.gnome.org/friends/other-ways-to-donate/|check and bank/wire transfer]] donations. You can also support the Foundation financially by using the [[https://www.gnome.org/friends/amazon/|using the GNOME referral link on Amazon]]. The Foundation is also currently looking for sponsors for GUADEC and GNOME.Asia. If you know of any companies, especially in France and China, that may be interested in sponsoring our two biggest conferences, please reach out to those companies or tell the board about them. The OPW is also currently looking for more people to join the organizing team. Please contact the organizers for more details. If anyone is familiar with Guile/Scheme, the Foundation would benefit from a custom printable invoice stylesheet for !GnuCash. Contact the board for a PDF of what it needs to look like. == When will this be resolved? == The situation has already improved as some 2014 Advisory Board fees and outstanding invoices have been paid. The board expect more to be paid within the next 4 weeks. If there are no unexpected issues and no delays, the freeze should be lifted by July. == What is the board doing to make sure it does not happen again? == The board is examining the issues associated with administering a multi-organization OPW with two internship rounds per year. This includes: * Documenting OPW processes. * Sharing the invoice tracking duties between the board and OPW organizers so that unpaid invoices can be followed up more effectively. * Efficient invoicing for each OPW round by a team of board and community members, to ensure taht invoices are sent out no later than a week after internship acceptances are made. * Invoice paying dates will be agreed upon with each organization with the goal of having the payments come in before the first intern payments are due out. * Invoice payments will be tracked on a weekly basis. In addition, we will track the time spent by the Foundation administration on handling OPW and will re-examine whether the administration fees, which are currently $150-400 per intern after the cost of payment transfers, are sufficient for the increased demands on the administration's time. As the Foundation cannot continue to shoulder the responsibility of paying interns out of the Foundation budget and wait for other organizations to reimburse us, OPW organizers will be communicating with the sponsoring organizations and the board expects that a solution can be found which enables the continuation of the outreach efforts without undue consequences for GNOME in the futu
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 12:32:12AM +0100, Ekaterina Gerasimova wrote: > The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to > know more details about the problem, please read > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact > the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. Could you slightly change this and clarify what "cash flow" means? It seems a lot of people are reading this and assuming that we ran out of money due to spending all our money on OPW. While in practice, it is just the financial boring bit that the money on the bank account is lower because the money hasn't been coming in as quickly as handing it out. But that'll resolve once we focus upon it. Or in brief: we are not the best with sticking with financial followup. I think changing the wording would help a lot in changing the impression that we spent too much money. A lot of people don't know about "cash flow", etc. -- Regards, Olav ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Hi Kat, Has any thought been Hi en to charging an administrative handling fee for Women's Outreach? Clearly it is taking a lot of time to administer, it does not seem fair that the GNOME Foundation shoulder all of the financial burden of managing it. Cheers, Dave. On Apr 12, 2014 1:32 AM, "Ekaterina Gerasimova" wrote: > Dear Foundation members, > > Due to a shortfall in the budget, the Foundation board voted on > 2014-04-08 to freeze all expenditure which is not essential to the > running of the Foundation. This freeze affects sponsorship expenses > which are unpaid at this time, but it does not affect the funds which > we hold for other organisations. > > By keeping our expenditures to a minimum while we regain some delayed > revenue, we aim to have things back to normal within a few months. All > Foundation members who expect to receive reimbursements within the > next three months have already been informed of the issue and most > have responded positively. The board will prioritise these pending > reimbursements over other expenses. > > The issue has been caused by a number of factors. These include > increased administrative overheads in the last few years due to the > increased turnover which has been caused by to the Outreach Program > for Women (OPW), and the associated payments going out while the > associated income has been slow to come in. > > The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to > know more details about the problem, please read > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact > the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Matthew Garrett wrote: ... > GNOME exists because people contribute to it. OPW has demonstrated a > strong track record of creating long-term contributors. The mere > existence of OPW has caused people who might otherwise not be > enthusiastic about contributing to GNOME to contribute to GNOME, even > without the board spending any money on them. Spending money on creating > the impression that GNOME is a safe space is an excellent way to > increase the pool of potential contributors, and this has succeeded far > beyond spending the same amount of money on full-time developers. > > So, by every reasonable metric, OPW has proven to be directly beneficial > to the goals of the project. I'm sure that the board is willing to > consider alternatives, as long as those alternatives are equally > compelling. So far, I haven't seen any. ... It has been beneficial in other ways too. One of the defining features of the GNOME project is that we work closely with other projects, and we work to promote Free Software in general. OPW is strongly aligned with that, and I think it helps us to communicate our core mission to the wider world. OPW has prompted major organisations to notice the positive impact that GNOME has on the wider ecosystem. In short: this initiative has really helped us to tell a positive story about what GNOME is about and why it matters. I personally feel proud that GNOME is so closely associated with OPW, and I think that many others in the project feel the same way. Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 01:45:15AM +0200, Mathieu Duponchelle wrote: > I'll play devil's advocate here: Hi Mathieu, I'll start by saying that playing devil's advocate isn't really likely to be a helpful way to contribute to this discussion. The board should consider the opinions that the GNOME community genuinely holds, not opinions that exist purely to be argued. If you really feel this way then you're not playing devil's advocate - if you don't, then do you believe that this is a genuinely beneficial contribution to the discussion? > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? GNOME exists because people contribute to it. OPW has demonstrated a strong track record of creating long-term contributors. The mere existence of OPW has caused people who might otherwise not be enthusiastic about contributing to GNOME to contribute to GNOME, even without the board spending any money on them. Spending money on creating the impression that GNOME is a safe space is an excellent way to increase the pool of potential contributors, and this has succeeded far beyond spending the same amount of money on full-time developers. So, by every reasonable metric, OPW has proven to be directly beneficial to the goals of the project. I'm sure that the board is willing to consider alternatives, as long as those alternatives are equally compelling. So far, I haven't seen any. -- Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
I have also have a question: can the Board please explain why they were not aware of this situation until now, and how they became aware of it? This seems like a lot of money and I would like to know how it is that no one noticed the shortfall until we got to this point. It seems like this discussion should have happened earlier if possible. Thanks very much, Meg On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Jim Campbell wrote: > Hi All, > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova < > kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 12 April 2014 05:29, Sindhu S wrote: >> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to >> >> know more details about the problem, please read >> >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact >> >> the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. >> > >> > >> > I want to ask questions. >> > >> > Was this situation visible or known before or at the time funds for Dev >> X >> > Hackfest were being allocated? >> >> No, it wasn't know. If it had been known, spending would have been >> frozen by then and a budget for the hackfest would not have been >> approved. >> > > The email and the FAQ do not address the impact of the spending freeze on > previously-approved hackfests [0]. Could the board address whether > previously-approved hackfests will proceed or not? It would also be helpful > to address the impact of this "go / no go" decision on intended hackfest > participants (regardless of whether or not they had been approved for a > GNOME-sponsored travel stipend). > > Also, in reviewing recent board meeting minutes, I do not see details that > would give an indication of overall financial status. Even if they aren't > disclosed publicly as part of the minutes, are things like "aging > summaries" provided or discussed as part of a treasurer's report during the > meetings? > > Thanks, > > Jim > > [0] https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/ > > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Hi All, On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova < kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12 April 2014 05:29, Sindhu S wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova > > wrote: > >> > >> The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to > >> know more details about the problem, please read > >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact > >> the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. > > > > > > I want to ask questions. > > > > Was this situation visible or known before or at the time funds for Dev X > > Hackfest were being allocated? > > No, it wasn't know. If it had been known, spending would have been > frozen by then and a budget for the hackfest would not have been > approved. > The email and the FAQ do not address the impact of the spending freeze on previously-approved hackfests [0]. Could the board address whether previously-approved hackfests will proceed or not? It would also be helpful to address the impact of this "go / no go" decision on intended hackfest participants (regardless of whether or not they had been approved for a GNOME-sponsored travel stipend). Also, in reviewing recent board meeting minutes, I do not see details that would give an indication of overall financial status. Even if they aren't disclosed publicly as part of the minutes, are things like "aging summaries" provided or discussed as part of a treasurer's report during the meetings? Thanks, Jim [0] https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Yep, they were mine. Hijacking the thread to ask you which channels you're hanging in Meg, have tried #gnome-music once or twice but you were not around, I've started some work on a waveformer object, I guess you'll be interested :) On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 2:06 AM, meg ford wrote: > Hi Germán , > > I apologize for the bad paste. I was replying to Mathieu Duponchelle but > the paste was from an email in which you quoted his previous email. > > Cheers, > Meg > > > On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > >> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 19:44 -0500, meg ford wrote: >> > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño >> wrote: >> > >> > > > I'll play devil's advocate here: >> > > > >> > > > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund >> activities >> > > > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? >> > >> > I think a better approach might be: how can we motivate sponsors to fund >> > our other activities as well as OPW. >> > >> > Perhaps finding members who are as passionate and motivated about other >> > aspects of our project as the organizers of OPW are, and encouraging >> those >> > members to seek funding for initiatives, would be a reasonable place to >> > start. >> >> Hi Meg, >> >> Just to clarify: the words you are quoting here are not mine, although >> they you attribute them to me. >> >> Regards, >> >> -- >> Germán Poo-Caamaño >> http://calcifer.org/ >> > > > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Hi Germán , I apologize for the bad paste. I was replying to Mathieu Duponchelle but the paste was from an email in which you quoted his previous email. Cheers, Meg On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 19:44 -0500, meg ford wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño > wrote: > > > > > > I'll play devil's advocate here: > > > > > > > > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund > activities > > > > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? > > > > I think a better approach might be: how can we motivate sponsors to fund > > our other activities as well as OPW. > > > > Perhaps finding members who are as passionate and motivated about other > > aspects of our project as the organizers of OPW are, and encouraging > those > > members to seek funding for initiatives, would be a reasonable place to > > start. > > Hi Meg, > > Just to clarify: the words you are quoting here are not mine, although > they you attribute them to me. > > Regards, > > -- > Germán Poo-Caamaño > http://calcifer.org/ > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 19:44 -0500, meg ford wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > > > > I'll play devil's advocate here: > > > > > > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities > > > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? > > I think a better approach might be: how can we motivate sponsors to fund > our other activities as well as OPW. > > Perhaps finding members who are as passionate and motivated about other > aspects of our project as the organizers of OPW are, and encouraging those > members to seek funding for initiatives, would be a reasonable place to > start. Hi Meg, Just to clarify: the words you are quoting here are not mine, although they you attribute them to me. Regards, -- Germán Poo-Caamaño http://calcifer.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Is the budget and the current state of financials (account balances, invoices due, money expected) public? If not, can we get at least a summary? Are we paying our employee during this freeze? Is it expected that we would be able to employ an executive director if we want to? Thanks to the board members for working through this and being open. Stormy On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova < kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 April 2014 14:40, Allan Day wrote: > > David King wrote: > > ... > Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating > expenses as reserves. > >>> > >>> > >>> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm > >>> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate > >>> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the > >>> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very > >>> small. > >> > >> > >> That is not correct according to: > >> > >> > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F > >> That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves > right > >> now". > > > > Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really > > bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. > > > > Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the > > freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually > > have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure > > this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? > > We do not have protected reserves. The freeze on sponsorship > repayments is in place to make sure that we can reacquire our > reserves. > > The intention of the FAQ is to be honest with our Foundation members > because the board believe in being open not only in our code but also > when we keep in touch with the membership. > > As a large portion of our membership are not native English speakers, > it is important to keep to keep our communication as simple, concise > and precise as possible. The FAQ already clearly states what the board > is planning to do to fix the problem and when we expect it to happen. > > > Allan > > ___ > > foundation-list mailing list > > foundation-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Right! Thanks Emmanuele, We need to work out on the goolge juice so that "how to donate to gnome foundation" shows something useful in a search engine :-) 2014-04-13 17:40 GMT+02:00 Emmanuele Bassi : > hi Alberto; > > you can donate to the GNOME Foundation through the Friends of GNOME > program: > > https://www.gnome.org/friends/ > > which is also linked directly and prominently from the www.gnome.org > landing page. ;-) > > ciao, > Emmanuele. > > On 13 April 2014 16:31, Alberto Ruiz wrote: > > So, the FAQ has a call for donations, however I can't find how to donate > > anywhere, the closest thing I can find is making a PayPal donation to > GIMP > > :-) > > > > > > 2014-04-13 15:40 GMT+02:00 Allan Day : > > > >> David King wrote: > >> ... > >> >>> Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating > >> >>> expenses as reserves. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm > >> >> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate > >> >> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the > >> >> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still > very > >> >> small. > >> > > >> > > >> > That is not correct according to: > >> > > >> > > >> > > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F > >> > That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves > >> > right > >> > now". > >> > >> Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really > >> bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. > >> > >> Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the > >> freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually > >> have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure > >> this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? > >> > >> Allan > >> ___ > >> foundation-list mailing list > >> foundation-list@gnome.org > >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Alberto Ruiz > > > > ___ > > foundation-list mailing list > > foundation-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > > > > > -- > W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name > B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ > -- Cheers, Alberto Ruiz ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
hi Alberto; you can donate to the GNOME Foundation through the Friends of GNOME program: https://www.gnome.org/friends/ which is also linked directly and prominently from the www.gnome.org landing page. ;-) ciao, Emmanuele. On 13 April 2014 16:31, Alberto Ruiz wrote: > So, the FAQ has a call for donations, however I can't find how to donate > anywhere, the closest thing I can find is making a PayPal donation to GIMP > :-) > > > 2014-04-13 15:40 GMT+02:00 Allan Day : > >> David King wrote: >> ... >> >>> Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating >> >>> expenses as reserves. >> >> >> >> >> >> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm >> >> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate >> >> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the >> >> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very >> >> small. >> > >> > >> > That is not correct according to: >> > >> > >> > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F >> > That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves >> > right >> > now". >> >> Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really >> bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. >> >> Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the >> freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually >> have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure >> this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? >> >> Allan >> ___ >> foundation-list mailing list >> foundation-list@gnome.org >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > > > > -- > Cheers, > Alberto Ruiz > > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Hi Alberto, On 13 April 2014 16:31, Alberto Ruiz wrote: > So, the FAQ has a call for donations, however I can't find how to donate > anywhere, the closest thing I can find is making a PayPal donation to GIMP > :-) There's a link from https://www.gnome.org to https://www.gnome.org/friends/ and there's also https://www.gnome.org/friends/other-ways-to-donate/. I will add both of these to the FAQ. Thanks for pointing out! > 2014-04-13 15:40 GMT+02:00 Allan Day : > >> David King wrote: >> ... >> >>> Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating >> >>> expenses as reserves. >> >> >> >> >> >> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm >> >> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate >> >> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the >> >> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very >> >> small. >> > >> > >> > That is not correct according to: >> > >> > >> > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F >> > That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves >> > right >> > now". >> >> Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really >> bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. >> >> Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the >> freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually >> have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure >> this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? >> >> Allan >> ___ >> foundation-list mailing list >> foundation-list@gnome.org >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > > > > -- > Cheers, > Alberto Ruiz > > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
So, the FAQ has a call for donations, however I can't find how to donate anywhere, the closest thing I can find is making a PayPal donation to GIMP :-) 2014-04-13 15:40 GMT+02:00 Allan Day : > David King wrote: > ... > >>> Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating > >>> expenses as reserves. > >> > >> > >> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm > >> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate > >> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the > >> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very > >> small. > > > > > > That is not correct according to: > > > > > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F > > That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves right > > now". > > Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really > bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. > > Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the > freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually > have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure > this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? > > Allan > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > -- Cheers, Alberto Ruiz ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 13 April 2014 14:40, Allan Day wrote: > David King wrote: > ... Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating expenses as reserves. >>> >>> >>> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm >>> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate >>> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the >>> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very >>> small. >> >> >> That is not correct according to: >> >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F >> That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves right >> now". > > Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really > bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. > > Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the > freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually > have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure > this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? We do not have protected reserves. The freeze on sponsorship repayments is in place to make sure that we can reacquire our reserves. The intention of the FAQ is to be honest with our Foundation members because the board believe in being open not only in our code but also when we keep in touch with the membership. As a large portion of our membership are not native English speakers, it is important to keep to keep our communication as simple, concise and precise as possible. The FAQ already clearly states what the board is planning to do to fix the problem and when we expect it to happen. > Allan > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
David King wrote: ... >>> Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating >>> expenses as reserves. >> >> >> I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm >> recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate >> reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the >> program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very >> small. > > > That is not correct according to: > > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F > That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves right > now". Blunt statements like this aren't very helpful, and they send a really bad message. It's easy to read this line and think the worst. Clearly we do have protected reserves - which we are preserving by the freeze on sponsorship repayments. The extra reserves that we usually have are expected to recover, and there is a plan in place to ensure this happens. Can we try and clarify this on the wiki please? Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 2014-04-13 02:20, Karen Sandler wrote: On 2014-04-13 01:43, Stormy Peters wrote: Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating expenses as reserves. I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very small. That is not correct according to: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ#What_is_the_problem.3F That section states "The Foundation does not have any cash reserves right now". For a rough overview, the 30 participants in the round that just ended required around $170k in expenditures, and that's the smaller of the two rounds per year. The two most recent rounds together should have approached $400k. So OPW only accepts interns with confirmed funding for each intern but if there are delays in getting that funding it adds up to a big burden for the org to bear. By writing that the OPW "only accepts interns with confirmed funding", I would assume that you mean "has a contract with the sponsor where the sponsor agrees to pay on time, with appropriate penalties in place for late payment". However, as you then go on to say that delays in funding are a burden for the GNOME Foundation, that does not seem to be the case. You mention an estimate of $400k as annual turnover for the OPW, which (according to the most-recently available annual report that I can find, the 2012 one at https://www.gnome.org/foundation/reports/) is very close to the turnover of the Foundation as a whole ($418k income and $409k expenditure). Those 2012 numbers include $106k of Women's Outreach expenses, so the turnover of non-OPW Foundation tasks seemed to be somewhere in the region of $300k. Additionally, the 2012 annual report states that "The GNOME Foundation currently has approximately $274,000 in cash". Referring to my first point, if the Foundation now has no cash reserves I would assume that the current figure would be approaching zero. Assuming that other items in the budget have remained the same (which is unlikely, but without a 2013 annual report the best information I have to go on), this means that the OPW has a greater turnover than the rest of the Foundation combined, and the unpaid invoices have reduced the Foundation's cash reserves by around $250k since 2012. As the FAQ states, the board is evaluating various solutions, including raising the admin fee already charged and putting measures in place to assure earlier payments. I think the program should also try to raise its own reserves, though this is very difficult on a short term basis. Given the popularity of the OPW, it would seem reasonable to expect a decent amount of financial support from sponsors. If this is difficult in the short term, what are the medium- and long-term plans to raise funding for the OPW in a way that does not negatively impact the traditional activities of the GNOME Foundation? GNOME would never have been able to support the program to date without the reserves it already had in place. Those reserves no longer exist, according to the first point in the FAQ. How is it possible for the Foundation to continue fronting the costs of the OPW without those reserves? Given that the budget of the OPW now dwarfs the rest of the GNOME Foundation, it seems that the Foundation is ill-equipped to support it in terms of both administrative effort and financial backing, unless major changes are made to the way that the OPW is funded and supported. -- http://amigadave.com/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 2014-04-13 01:43, Stormy Peters wrote: Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating expenses as reserves. I should leave maybe this to Kat and other board members but I'm recently enough gone that I can answer - the Foundation has adequate reserves for GNOME's ordinary operations but not for OPW, and the program has ramped up really quickly while the Foundation is still very small. For a rough overview, the 30 participants in the round that just ended required around $170k in expenditures, and that's the smaller of the two rounds per year. The two most recent rounds together should have approached $400k. So OPW only accepts interns with confirmed funding for each intern but if there are delays in getting that funding it adds up to a big burden for the org to bear. As the FAQ states, the board is evaluating various solutions, including raising the admin fee already charged and putting measures in place to assure earlier payments. I think the program should also try to raise its own reserves, though this is very difficult on a short term basis. GNOME would never have been able to support the program to date without the reserves it already had in place. karen On Apr 12, 2014 5:26 PM, "Karen Sandler" wrote: On 2014-04-12 14:45, Ekaterina Gerasimova wrote: No, it wasn't know. If it had been known, spending would have been frozen by then and a budget for the hackfest would not have been approved. For perspective, people actually call this a "success crisis." Thank you so much to the board and Rosanna for getting on top of this situation and being transparent about it. karen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list [1] Links: -- [1] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Don't we have reserves though? We should have 6 months of operating expenses as reserves. On Apr 12, 2014 5:26 PM, "Karen Sandler" wrote: > On 2014-04-12 14:45, Ekaterina Gerasimova wrote: > > No, it wasn't know. If it had been known, spending would have been >> frozen by then and a budget for the hackfest would not have been >> approved. >> > > For perspective, people actually call this a "success crisis." > > Thank you so much to the board and Rosanna for getting on top of this > situation and being transparent about it. > > karen > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 2014-04-12 14:45, Ekaterina Gerasimova wrote: No, it wasn't know. If it had been known, spending would have been frozen by then and a budget for the hackfest would not have been approved. For perspective, people actually call this a "success crisis." Thank you so much to the board and Rosanna for getting on top of this situation and being transparent about it. karen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On 12 April 2014 05:29, Sindhu S wrote: > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova > wrote: >> >> The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to >> know more details about the problem, please read >> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact >> the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. > > > I want to ask questions. > > Was this situation visible or known before or at the time funds for Dev X > Hackfest were being allocated? No, it wasn't know. If it had been known, spending would have been frozen by then and a budget for the hackfest would not have been approved. > If so, > why wasn't a cautionary note not issued when funds less than requested were > approved for some attendees and > that GNOME was looking at a tight situation on funds? [...] ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Reimbursement ticket system [was: Re: Current state of Foundation finances]
On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 09:59 +0530, Sindhu S wrote: [...] > Could this be resolved by putting in place web application that > one can login to with their e-mail > address and the details would of reimbursement associated with that person > could be pooled in there? > This web application should also be able to send emails every time there is > an update for the person. If using a ticket-based system for requests was/is wanted: https://rt.gnome.org/ could have another queue for reimbursement. If information on https://wiki.gnome.org/MembershipCommittee/RT is up-to-date, filing out the foundation membership web form creates a new ticket in RT. Hence a similar setup (web form) could be considered for travel sponsorship applications / reimbursement. andre -- Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova < kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote: > The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to > know more details about the problem, please read > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact > the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. > I want to ask questions. Was this situation visible or known before or at the time funds for Dev X Hackfest were being allocated? If so, why wasn't a cautionary note not issued when funds less than requested were approved for some attendees and that GNOME was looking at a tight situation on funds? I have always found this a major hassle that there is no queue/request system in place to check the status of a reimbursement and that one has to depend on e-mail threads to ask if a reimbursement was sent or if it's being delayed. I was delayed by 2 months on my first reimbursement and now again due to this situation. Could this be resolved by putting in place web application that one can login to with their e-mail address and the details would of reimbursement associated with that person could be pooled in there? This web application should also be able to send emails every time there is an update for the person. Perhaps even streamlining and eliminating mistakes that can happen with a normal *.odt form, we can have the web app take in details. Thanks. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
I'm not sure this is a direct answer to the question I was asking, but yes it is clear that finding more funding would be beneficial in the absolute, I have absolutely no clue regarding that though :) On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 2:44 AM, meg ford wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > >> > I'll play devil's advocate here: >> > >> > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities >> > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? >> > > > I think a better approach might be: how can we motivate sponsors to fund > our other activities as well as OPW. > > Perhaps finding members who are as passionate and motivated about other > aspects of our project as the organizers of OPW are, and encouraging those > members to seek funding for initiatives, would be a reasonable place to > start. > > Meg > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > > I'll play devil's advocate here: > > > > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities > > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? > I think a better approach might be: how can we motivate sponsors to fund our other activities as well as OPW. Perhaps finding members who are as passionate and motivated about other aspects of our project as the organizers of OPW are, and encouraging those members to seek funding for initiatives, would be a reasonable place to start. Meg ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
Thanks for the answer. I think the question deserves being asked, I'd be interested in other opinions, as well as hopefully facts about sponsors' involvement (of particular interest would be the question to know if they see sponsoring OPW as just a way to help GNOME at large or if they do have a particular interest in outreach to women). Cheers On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 01:45 +0200, Mathieu Duponchelle wrote: > > I'll play devil's advocate here: > > > > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities > > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? > > No, for two reasons: > > 1. My understanding after reading the FAQ is that GNOME Foundation > handles the payment for every intern in OPW (not only gnomers), > but we are not getting the funds from the sponsors and other > organizations timely. So, these are not transferible funds to > other activities. > 2. I think embracing diversity is one of GNOME strengths as a > project, not only in gender equality, but also in other areas, > like accessibility and non-English speakers. Diversity enriches > a community by bringing multiple mindsets that in the long term > pays off in the software produced. Dropping OPW not only would > stop bringing new blood to the project, but it could be also a > discouraging factor to the current developers. > > > The question I'm asking here is really: would these sponsors be ready to > > help on other fronts, and isn't there a situation where certain sponsors > > already help for OPW, and can't consider funding GNOME for other > activities > > as they already sponsor OPW? > > They are sponsoring OPW, so they are interested in that. The problem is > the GNOME Foundation has not following up with them to cash the promised > funds on a timely manner. > > -- > Germán Poo-Caamaño > http://calcifer.org/ > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 01:45 +0200, Mathieu Duponchelle wrote: > I'll play devil's advocate here: > > Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities > more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? No, for two reasons: 1. My understanding after reading the FAQ is that GNOME Foundation handles the payment for every intern in OPW (not only gnomers), but we are not getting the funds from the sponsors and other organizations timely. So, these are not transferible funds to other activities. 2. I think embracing diversity is one of GNOME strengths as a project, not only in gender equality, but also in other areas, like accessibility and non-English speakers. Diversity enriches a community by bringing multiple mindsets that in the long term pays off in the software produced. Dropping OPW not only would stop bringing new blood to the project, but it could be also a discouraging factor to the current developers. > The question I'm asking here is really: would these sponsors be ready to > help on other fronts, and isn't there a situation where certain sponsors > already help for OPW, and can't consider funding GNOME for other activities > as they already sponsor OPW? They are sponsoring OPW, so they are interested in that. The problem is the GNOME Foundation has not following up with them to cash the promised funds on a timely manner. -- Germán Poo-Caamaño http://calcifer.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
I'll play devil's advocate here: Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? I'll leave the question of what these other activities might be to the engagement core team, who discuss that at length and will certainly have better ideas than I do. The question I'm asking here is really: would these sponsors be ready to help on other fronts, and isn't there a situation where certain sponsors already help for OPW, and can't consider funding GNOME for other activities as they already sponsor OPW? On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova < kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Foundation members, > > Due to a shortfall in the budget, the Foundation board voted on > 2014-04-08 to freeze all expenditure which is not essential to the > running of the Foundation. This freeze affects sponsorship expenses > which are unpaid at this time, but it does not affect the funds which > we hold for other organisations. > > By keeping our expenditures to a minimum while we regain some delayed > revenue, we aim to have things back to normal within a few months. All > Foundation members who expect to receive reimbursements within the > next three months have already been informed of the issue and most > have responded positively. The board will prioritise these pending > reimbursements over other expenses. > > The issue has been caused by a number of factors. These include > increased administrative overheads in the last few years due to the > increased turnover which has been caused by to the Outreach Program > for Women (OPW), and the associated payments going out while the > associated income has been slow to come in. > > The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to > know more details about the problem, please read > https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact > the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Current state of Foundation finances
Dear Foundation members, Due to a shortfall in the budget, the Foundation board voted on 2014-04-08 to freeze all expenditure which is not essential to the running of the Foundation. This freeze affects sponsorship expenses which are unpaid at this time, but it does not affect the funds which we hold for other organisations. By keeping our expenditures to a minimum while we regain some delayed revenue, we aim to have things back to normal within a few months. All Foundation members who expect to receive reimbursements within the next three months have already been informed of the issue and most have responded positively. The board will prioritise these pending reimbursements over other expenses. The issue has been caused by a number of factors. These include increased administrative overheads in the last few years due to the increased turnover which has been caused by to the Outreach Program for Women (OPW), and the associated payments going out while the associated income has been slow to come in. The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to know more details about the problem, please read https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
