[Wikimediaau-l] Funding query

[Adam Jenkins]

Hi!

I was surprised to see that WMAU didn't put in an application for funding
with the FDC in the October round. As a result, we won't be getting any
funds from that route in 2013, especially as we didn't apply in the earlier
round. As near as I can figure, we currently have commitments of at least
$54k in 2014 as part of the ARC Linkage grant, along with the $29k
commitment for 2013 (which was quarantined and covered), but it seems that
meeting these commitments will drain us of remaining funds unless something
has changed with the Linkage grant or we have an alternative revenue stream
in place.

In light of comments about the possible changes to FDC funding, where does
this leave us? Do we have sufficient funds to see us out until June, 2014,
when the next FDC round is due to be decided?

It seems that this may be worth discussing, especially if there's anything
that we can do to get alternative revenue sources in place.

Regards,

Adan,
___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Craig Franklin]

Hi Adam,

Thanks for the question.  As you've noted, we haven't put in a funding
request to this round's FDC process.  This has largely come about because
in discussions with members of the FDC and the Foundation staff supporting
the FDC, we were 'encouraged' not to apply in this round for a variety of
reasons.  Chief among those was a desire to see a more substantial record
of evaluation, impact, and value for money in the projects that we do.

To this end, we need to reposition the chapter from an organisation that
attempts large, expensive, and complex projects to an organisation that
sets goals that are more modest, measurable, and achievable.  This is going
to require a cultural shift in the way we administer the chapter, as our
previous success in participating in the fundraiser means that we have not
developed the evaluation and project management mechanisms that we would
have done if we'd continued to evolve without the sudden windfall injection
of tens of thousands of dollars.

In relation to the actual figures and numbers, I'm happy to share those.
 Please note that the figures I'm quoting here are only approximate, I'm
sure that John Vandenberg can come and give more precise figures if they're
needed.

The commitment for the first round of the Paralympic project is in the
realm of $25,000.  This payment has not yet been made, while we continue to
work with UQ and APC to determine how this will work administratively.  As
you've noted, this money is quarantined and locked in, subject to the
necessary paperwork with UQ and APC being agreed to.  At the moment, I'm
expecting the actual payment will probably not occur until early in
calendar year 2014 (but I might be pleasantly surprised).  Kerry is
handling the direct negotiation with APC and UQ and may be able to provide
further context.

Year two and three come to about $50k a pop, but this money is *not*
guaranteed.  We have been extremely upfront with everyone involved that we
will only be able to fund the second and third years if we get the money
from the Foundation (or from elsewhere).  So at some point we're going to
need to ask for this money, but not for quite some time.  Obviously, we've
been firm that the best way to actually guarantee that we'll get the
funding is for the first year's investment to produce those measurable
outcomes for the Wikimedia movement so we can make a good argument that
it's a project worth investing further in.

We currently have on the order of $80k in cash reserves, and if you
subtract the $25k for the APC project that leaves us with about   Subtract
another $5k for essential running costs over the next year (financial
software, office supplies, etc etc), and that leaves us with about $50k to
play with.  $50k is a lot of money and it should be possible to achieve a
lot of impact with this, especially if we keep in mind that projects should
be modest, measurable, and achievable.

More generally speaking, I am wary of equating success for the chapter
purely in terms of how many dollars we can squeeze out of the Foundation.
 Success needs to be measured in terms of our impact, whether that is the
creation of new content, the recruitment of new editors, or encouraging
diversity.  I believe that by concentrating on smaller and simpler
projects, we can have a measurable impact in those spaces within the next
twelve months, without exhausting our reserve funds, which will put us in a
much better position to request money for the Linkage Grant and other
programmes in the future.

Cheers,
Craig




Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 15:18:09 +
> From: Adam Jenkins 
> To: Wikimedia-au 
> Subject: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding query
> Message-ID:
> <
> cabrrgoa3eyqtkpilw42asfhw0qsvnns5ri_hrhxa+25icoc...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi!
>
> I was surprised to see that WMAU didn't put in an application for funding
> with the FDC in the October round. As a result, we won't be getting any
> funds from that route in 2013, especially as we didn't apply in the earlier
> round. As near as I can figure, we currently have commitments of at least
> $54k in 2014 as part of the ARC Linkage grant, along with the $29k
> commitment for 2013 (which was quarantined and covered), but it seems that
> meeting these commitments will drain us of remaining funds unless something
> has changed with the Linkage grant or we have an alternative revenue stream
> in place.
>
> In light of comments about the possible changes to FDC funding, where does
> this leave us? Do we have sufficient funds to see us out until June, 2014,
> when the next FDC round is due to be decided?
>
> It seems that this may be worth discussing, especially if there's anything
> that we can do to get alternative revenue sources in place.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adan,
>
___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Kerry Raymond]

Before WMAU would need to pay even the first year of money for the linkage
grant, we (WMAU, UQ and APC) have to agree a legal contract in relation to
project. The UQ-drafted contract we have been given would seek to commit
WMAU to all 3 years of funding. Obviously WMAU does not wish to agree to
that given the uncertainty in relation to this funding and we will be
seeking to have the contract varied to allow us to not make the subsequent
payments if we have not been able to obtain those funds from WMF (or
elsewhere). There are other issues with the contract in relation to
intellectual property, levels of indemnity etc that also need to be
resolved. I agree with Craig that this is likely to be a slow process.

 

If any WMAU member happens to be a lawyer, we would be very happy to have
your assistance in this matter.

 

Kerry

 

  _  

From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Craig
Franklin
Sent: Monday, 7 October 2013 3:31 PM
To: Wikimedia-au
Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

 

Hi Adam,

 

Thanks for the question.  As you've noted, we haven't put in a funding
request to this round's FDC process.  This has largely come about because in
discussions with members of the FDC and the Foundation staff supporting the
FDC, we were 'encouraged' not to apply in this round for a variety of
reasons.  Chief among those was a desire to see a more substantial record of
evaluation, impact, and value for money in the projects that we do.  

 

To this end, we need to reposition the chapter from an organisation that
attempts large, expensive, and complex projects to an organisation that sets
goals that are more modest, measurable, and achievable.  This is going to
require a cultural shift in the way we administer the chapter, as our
previous success in participating in the fundraiser means that we have not
developed the evaluation and project management mechanisms that we would
have done if we'd continued to evolve without the sudden windfall injection
of tens of thousands of dollars.

 

In relation to the actual figures and numbers, I'm happy to share those.
Please note that the figures I'm quoting here are only approximate, I'm sure
that John Vandenberg can come and give more precise figures if they're
needed.

 

The commitment for the first round of the Paralympic project is in the realm
of $25,000.  This payment has not yet been made, while we continue to work
with UQ and APC to determine how this will work administratively.  As you've
noted, this money is quarantined and locked in, subject to the necessary
paperwork with UQ and APC being agreed to.  At the moment, I'm expecting the
actual payment will probably not occur until early in calendar year 2014
(but I might be pleasantly surprised).  Kerry is handling the direct
negotiation with APC and UQ and may be able to provide further context.

 

Year two and three come to about $50k a pop, but this money is *not*
guaranteed.  We have been extremely upfront with everyone involved that we
will only be able to fund the second and third years if we get the money
from the Foundation (or from elsewhere).  So at some point we're going to
need to ask for this money, but not for quite some time.  Obviously, we've
been firm that the best way to actually guarantee that we'll get the funding
is for the first year's investment to produce those measurable outcomes for
the Wikimedia movement so we can make a good argument that it's a project
worth investing further in.

 

We currently have on the order of $80k in cash reserves, and if you subtract
the $25k for the APC project that leaves us with about   Subtract another
$5k for essential running costs over the next year (financial software,
office supplies, etc etc), and that leaves us with about $50k to play with.
$50k is a lot of money and it should be possible to achieve a lot of impact
with this, especially if we keep in mind that projects should be modest,
measurable, and achievable.

 

More generally speaking, I am wary of equating success for the chapter
purely in terms of how many dollars we can squeeze out of the Foundation.
Success needs to be measured in terms of our impact, whether that is the
creation of new content, the recruitment of new editors, or encouraging
diversity.  I believe that by concentrating on smaller and simpler projects,
we can have a measurable impact in those spaces within the next twelve
months, without exhausting our reserve funds, which will put us in a much
better position to request money for the Linkage Grant and other programmes
in the future.

 

Cheers,

Craig

 

 

 

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 15:18:09 +
From: Adam Jenkins 
To: Wikimedia-au 
Subject: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding query
Message-ID:
mailto:CABRRgOA3EYqTKPiLw42AsfhW0qSvnnS5Ri_hRHxa%2B25iCOcq%2BA@mail.gmail.c
om> >
Content-Typ

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[G. White]

Hi Adam,

I went to the initial meeting/workshop/training session of the new Program
Evaluation and Design (PE&D) Team  that is now working closely with the
Grants Team. In line with what Sue has recently said about measurable
impact for money spent, the team is developing and disseminating tools to
help Wikimedians gather data to help measure the inputs/outputs/outcomes
and longer term impacts of programs and activities. They have produced this
data prep 
sheet<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqQxi0BdfXDsdDlsc3RxYXlLaHJ6SUtxZTRZOWM0LUE&usp=drive_web#gid=1>.
Here is the Evaluation
Portal.<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programs:Evaluation_portal>

Craig is right about getting demonstrable small runs on the board to show
we can plan AND deliver - that is, BOTH, not just one or the other.  When I
was talking to some of the leaders of the Grants team, they were bewildered
at the fractiousness and unresponsiveness of the Australian chapter (they
were referring to the period before the last Chapter election). From a
distance, the level of general disarray and argument appears comparable to
the US government's current paralysis, and about as comprehensible.

The Chapter needs good processes because good processes produce good
outcomes. However, *processes are not the same thing as rules.*  We need to
quietly and competently incorporate any necessary rules into our processes.
Kerry and Craig are working on this. Then we need to document our processes
and get on with small, achievable, well planned programs. I agree with
Craig that our success will not be measured in how much funding we get.

Whiteghost.ink


On 7 October 2013 19:27, Kerry Raymond  wrote:

>  Before WMAU would need to pay even the first year of money for the
> linkage grant, we (WMAU, UQ and APC) have to agree a legal contract in
> relation to project. The UQ-drafted contract we have been given would seek
> to commit WMAU to all 3 years of funding. Obviously WMAU does not wish to
> agree to that given the uncertainty in relation to this funding and we will
> be seeking to have the contract varied to allow us to not make the
> subsequent payments if we have not been able to obtain those funds from WMF
> (or elsewhere). There are other issues with the contract in relation to
> intellectual property, levels of indemnity etc that also need to be
> resolved. I agree with Craig that this is likely to be a slow process.
>
> ** **
>
> If any WMAU member happens to be a lawyer, we would be very happy to have
> your assistance in this matter.
>
> ** **
>
> Kerry
>
> ** **
>  --
>
> *From:* wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Craig Franklin
> *Sent:* Monday, 7 October 2013 3:31 PM
> *To:* Wikimedia-au
> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>
> ** **
>
> Hi Adam,
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks for the question.  As you've noted, we haven't put in a funding
> request to this round's FDC process.  This has largely come about because
> in discussions with members of the FDC and the Foundation staff supporting
> the FDC, we were 'encouraged' not to apply in this round for a variety of
> reasons.  Chief among those was a desire to see a more substantial record
> of evaluation, impact, and value for money in the projects that we do.  **
> **
>
> ** **
>
> To this end, we need to reposition the chapter from an organisation that
> attempts large, expensive, and complex projects to an organisation that
> sets goals that are more modest, measurable, and achievable.  This is going
> to require a cultural shift in the way we administer the chapter, as our
> previous success in participating in the fundraiser means that we have not
> developed the evaluation and project management mechanisms that we would
> have done if we'd continued to evolve without the sudden windfall injection
> of tens of thousands of dollars.
>
> ** **
>
> In relation to the actual figures and numbers, I'm happy to share those.
>  Please note that the figures I'm quoting here are only approximate, I'm
> sure that John Vandenberg can come and give more precise figures if they're
> needed.
>
> ** **
>
> The commitment for the first round of the Paralympic project is in the
> realm of $25,000.  This payment has not yet been made, while we continue to
> work with UQ and APC to determine how this will work administratively.  As
> you've noted, this money is quarantined and locked in, subject to the
> necessary paperwork with UQ and APC being agreed to.  At the moment, I'm
> expecting the actual payment will probably not occur until early in
> calendar year 2014 (but I mig

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Adam Jenkins]

gument appears comparable to
> the US government's current paralysis, and about as comprehensible.
>
> The Chapter needs good processes because good processes produce good
> outcomes. However, *processes are not the same thing as rules.*  We need
> to quietly and competently incorporate any necessary rules into our
> processes. Kerry and Craig are working on this. Then we need to document
> our processes and get on with small, achievable, well planned programs. I
> agree with Craig that our success will not be measured in how much funding
> we get.
>
> Whiteghost.ink
>
>
> On 7 October 2013 19:27, Kerry Raymond  wrote:
>
>>  Before WMAU would need to pay even the first year of money for the
>> linkage grant, we (WMAU, UQ and APC) have to agree a legal contract in
>> relation to project. The UQ-drafted contract we have been given would seek
>> to commit WMAU to all 3 years of funding. Obviously WMAU does not wish to
>> agree to that given the uncertainty in relation to this funding and we will
>> be seeking to have the contract varied to allow us to not make the
>> subsequent payments if we have not been able to obtain those funds from WMF
>> (or elsewhere). There are other issues with the contract in relation to
>> intellectual property, levels of indemnity etc that also need to be
>> resolved. I agree with Craig that this is likely to be a slow process.***
>> *
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> If any WMAU member happens to be a lawyer, we would be very happy to have
>> your assistance in this matter.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Kerry
>>
>> ** **
>>  --
>>
>> *From:* wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
>> wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Craig Franklin
>> *Sent:* Monday, 7 October 2013 3:31 PM
>> *To:* Wikimedia-au
>> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Thanks for the question.  As you've noted, we haven't put in a funding
>> request to this round's FDC process.  This has largely come about because
>> in discussions with members of the FDC and the Foundation staff supporting
>> the FDC, we were 'encouraged' not to apply in this round for a variety of
>> reasons.  Chief among those was a desire to see a more substantial record
>> of evaluation, impact, and value for money in the projects that we do.  *
>> ***
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> To this end, we need to reposition the chapter from an organisation that
>> attempts large, expensive, and complex projects to an organisation that
>> sets goals that are more modest, measurable, and achievable.  This is going
>> to require a cultural shift in the way we administer the chapter, as our
>> previous success in participating in the fundraiser means that we have not
>> developed the evaluation and project management mechanisms that we would
>> have done if we'd continued to evolve without the sudden windfall injection
>> of tens of thousands of dollars.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> In relation to the actual figures and numbers, I'm happy to share those.
>>  Please note that the figures I'm quoting here are only approximate, I'm
>> sure that John Vandenberg can come and give more precise figures if they're
>> needed.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> The commitment for the first round of the Paralympic project is in the
>> realm of $25,000.  This payment has not yet been made, while we continue to
>> work with UQ and APC to determine how this will work administratively.  As
>> you've noted, this money is quarantined and locked in, subject to the
>> necessary paperwork with UQ and APC being agreed to.  At the moment, I'm
>> expecting the actual payment will probably not occur until early in
>> calendar year 2014 (but I might be pleasantly surprised).  Kerry is
>> handling the direct negotiation with APC and UQ and may be able to provide
>> further context.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Year two and three come to about $50k a pop, but this money is *not*
>> guaranteed.  We have been extremely upfront with everyone involved that we
>> will only be able to fund the second and third years if we get the money
>> from the Foundation (or from elsewhere).  So at some point we're going to
>> need to ask for this money, but not for quite some time.  Obviously, we've
>> been firm that the best way to actually guarantee that we'll get the
>> funding is for the first year's investment to produc

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Leigh Blackall]

s:Evaluation_portal>
>>
>> Craig is right about getting demonstrable small runs on the board to show
>> we can plan AND deliver - that is, BOTH, not just one or the other.  When I
>> was talking to some of the leaders of the Grants team, they were bewildered
>> at the fractiousness and unresponsiveness of the Australian chapter (they
>> were referring to the period before the last Chapter election). From a
>> distance, the level of general disarray and argument appears comparable to
>> the US government's current paralysis, and about as comprehensible.
>>
>> The Chapter needs good processes because good processes produce good
>> outcomes. However, *processes are not the same thing as rules.*  We need
>> to quietly and competently incorporate any necessary rules into our
>> processes. Kerry and Craig are working on this. Then we need to document
>> our processes and get on with small, achievable, well planned programs. I
>> agree with Craig that our success will not be measured in how much funding
>> we get.
>>
>> Whiteghost.ink
>>
>>
>> On 7 October 2013 19:27, Kerry Raymond  wrote:
>>
>>>  Before WMAU would need to pay even the first year of money for the
>>> linkage grant, we (WMAU, UQ and APC) have to agree a legal contract in
>>> relation to project. The UQ-drafted contract we have been given would seek
>>> to commit WMAU to all 3 years of funding. Obviously WMAU does not wish to
>>> agree to that given the uncertainty in relation to this funding and we will
>>> be seeking to have the contract varied to allow us to not make the
>>> subsequent payments if we have not been able to obtain those funds from WMF
>>> (or elsewhere). There are other issues with the contract in relation to
>>> intellectual property, levels of indemnity etc that also need to be
>>> resolved. I agree with Craig that this is likely to be a slow process.**
>>> **
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> If any WMAU member happens to be a lawyer, we would be very happy to
>>> have your assistance in this matter.
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Kerry
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>  --
>>>
>>> *From:* wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
>>> wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Craig Franklin
>>> *Sent:* Monday, 7 October 2013 3:31 PM
>>> *To:* Wikimedia-au
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Hi Adam,
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Thanks for the question.  As you've noted, we haven't put in a funding
>>> request to this round's FDC process.  This has largely come about because
>>> in discussions with members of the FDC and the Foundation staff supporting
>>> the FDC, we were 'encouraged' not to apply in this round for a variety of
>>> reasons.  Chief among those was a desire to see a more substantial record
>>> of evaluation, impact, and value for money in the projects that we do.
>>> 
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> To this end, we need to reposition the chapter from an organisation that
>>> attempts large, expensive, and complex projects to an organisation that
>>> sets goals that are more modest, measurable, and achievable.  This is going
>>> to require a cultural shift in the way we administer the chapter, as our
>>> previous success in participating in the fundraiser means that we have not
>>> developed the evaluation and project management mechanisms that we would
>>> have done if we'd continued to evolve without the sudden windfall injection
>>> of tens of thousands of dollars.
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> In relation to the actual figures and numbers, I'm happy to share those.
>>>  Please note that the figures I'm quoting here are only approximate, I'm
>>> sure that John Vandenberg can come and give more precise figures if they're
>>> needed.
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> The commitment for the first round of the Paralympic project is in the
>>> realm of $25,000.  This payment has not yet been made, while we continue to
>>> work with UQ and APC to determine how this will work administratively.  As
>>> you've noted, this money is quarantined and locked in, subject to the
>>> necessary paperwork with UQ and APC being agreed to.  At the moment, I'm
>>> expecting the 

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Adam Jenkins]

rote:
>>
>>> Hi Adam,
>>>
>>> I went to the initial meeting/workshop/training session of the new
>>> Program Evaluation and Design (PE&D) Team  that is now working closely with
>>> the Grants Team. In line with what Sue has recently said about measurable
>>> impact for money spent, the team is developing and disseminating tools to
>>> help Wikimedians gather data to help measure the inputs/outputs/outcomes
>>> and longer term impacts of programs and activities. They have produced this
>>> data prep 
>>> sheet<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqQxi0BdfXDsdDlsc3RxYXlLaHJ6SUtxZTRZOWM0LUE&usp=drive_web#gid=1>.
>>> Here is the Evaluation 
>>> Portal.<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programs:Evaluation_portal>
>>>
>>> Craig is right about getting demonstrable small runs on the board to
>>> show we can plan AND deliver - that is, BOTH, not just one or the other.
>>> When I was talking to some of the leaders of the Grants team, they were
>>> bewildered at the fractiousness and unresponsiveness of the Australian
>>> chapter (they were referring to the period before the last Chapter
>>> election). From a distance, the level of general disarray and argument
>>> appears comparable to the US government's current paralysis, and about as
>>> comprehensible.
>>>
>>> The Chapter needs good processes because good processes produce good
>>> outcomes. However, *processes are not the same thing as rules.*  We
>>> need to quietly and competently incorporate any necessary rules into our
>>> processes. Kerry and Craig are working on this. Then we need to document
>>> our processes and get on with small, achievable, well planned programs. I
>>> agree with Craig that our success will not be measured in how much funding
>>> we get.
>>>
>>> Whiteghost.ink
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7 October 2013 19:27, Kerry Raymond  wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Before WMAU would need to pay even the first year of money for the
>>>> linkage grant, we (WMAU, UQ and APC) have to agree a legal contract in
>>>> relation to project. The UQ-drafted contract we have been given would seek
>>>> to commit WMAU to all 3 years of funding. Obviously WMAU does not wish to
>>>> agree to that given the uncertainty in relation to this funding and we will
>>>> be seeking to have the contract varied to allow us to not make the
>>>> subsequent payments if we have not been able to obtain those funds from WMF
>>>> (or elsewhere). There are other issues with the contract in relation to
>>>> intellectual property, levels of indemnity etc that also need to be
>>>> resolved. I agree with Craig that this is likely to be a slow process.*
>>>> ***
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> If any WMAU member happens to be a lawyer, we would be very happy to
>>>> have your assistance in this matter.
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Kerry
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>  --
>>>>
>>>> *From:* wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
>>>> wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Craig
>>>> Franklin
>>>> *Sent:* Monday, 7 October 2013 3:31 PM
>>>> *To:* Wikimedia-au
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the question.  As you've noted, we haven't put in a funding
>>>> request to this round's FDC process.  This has largely come about because
>>>> in discussions with members of the FDC and the Foundation staff supporting
>>>> the FDC, we were 'encouraged' not to apply in this round for a variety of
>>>> reasons.  Chief among those was a desire to see a more substantial record
>>>> of evaluation, impact, and value for money in the projects that we do.
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> To this end, we need to reposition the chapter from an organisation
>>>> that attempts large, expensive, and complex projects to an organisation
>>>> that sets goals that are more modest, measurable, and achievable.  This is
>>>> going to require a cultural shift in the way we administer the chapter, as
>>>> our previous suc

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Gnangarra]

 funding or very limited funding, will be
>>> fully completed by September 2014, (including all reporting requirements and
>>> metrics), and will be impressive enough as a set to justify a large grant
>>> for an unusual project? And if we do need more funding for these projects,
>>> how much time do we need to factor in so as to go through the grants process
>>> with the WMF, or do we risk pulling funds from those currently committed?
>>>
>>> I should also add that I think that the committee and members have done
>>> some great work over the last year. I think part of the problem is that we
>>> haven't been informing the WMF of the successes and strength of the current
>>> committee as well as we should. In coming up with new projects, we should
>>> also be looking at how we share the successes beyond the metrics offered. I
>>> believe that if the WMF was better aware of some of the work the committee
>>> has been doing, funding would be much less of an issue.
>>>
>>> Adam.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7 October 2013 23:34, G. White  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>
>>>> I went to the initial meeting/workshop/training session of the new
>>>> Program Evaluation and Design (PE&D) Team  that is now working closely with
>>>> the Grants Team. In line with what Sue has recently said about measurable
>>>> impact for money spent, the team is developing and disseminating tools to
>>>> help Wikimedians gather data to help measure the inputs/outputs/outcomes 
>>>> and
>>>> longer term impacts of programs and activities. They have produced this 
>>>> data
>>>> prep sheet. Here is the Evaluation Portal.
>>>>
>>>> Craig is right about getting demonstrable small runs on the board to
>>>> show we can plan AND deliver - that is, BOTH, not just one or the other.
>>>> When I was talking to some of the leaders of the Grants team, they were
>>>> bewildered at the fractiousness and unresponsiveness of the Australian
>>>> chapter (they were referring to the period before the last Chapter
>>>> election). From a distance, the level of general disarray and argument
>>>> appears comparable to the US government's current paralysis, and about as
>>>> comprehensible.
>>>>
>>>> The Chapter needs good processes because good processes produce good
>>>> outcomes. However, processes are not the same thing as rules.  We need to
>>>> quietly and competently incorporate any necessary rules into our processes.
>>>> Kerry and Craig are working on this. Then we need to document our processes
>>>> and get on with small, achievable, well planned programs. I agree with 
>>>> Craig
>>>> that our success will not be measured in how much funding we get.
>>>>
>>>> Whiteghost.ink
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7 October 2013 19:27, Kerry Raymond  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Before WMAU would need to pay even the first year of money for the
>>>>> linkage grant, we (WMAU, UQ and APC) have to agree a legal contract in
>>>>> relation to project. The UQ-drafted contract we have been given would seek
>>>>> to commit WMAU to all 3 years of funding. Obviously WMAU does not wish to
>>>>> agree to that given the uncertainty in relation to this funding and we 
>>>>> will
>>>>> be seeking to have the contract varied to allow us to not make the
>>>>> subsequent payments if we have not been able to obtain those funds from 
>>>>> WMF
>>>>> (or elsewhere). There are other issues with the contract in relation to
>>>>> intellectual property, levels of indemnity etc that also need to be
>>>>> resolved. I agree with Craig that this is likely to be a slow process.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If any WMAU member happens to be a lawyer, we would be very happy to
>>>>> have your assistance in this matter.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kerry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>> From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Craig
>>>>> Franklin
>>>>> Sent: Monday, 7 Octo

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Craig Franklin]

estion, how do we tackle this? At worst, we need
> funding through Round 1 of the 2014/2015 FDC grants process, which means we
> need to be in a position to successfully request funding by September next
> year, or be assured that we can get funds for our needs through an
> alternative grants process by the end of 2015. Thus, what projects can we
> put in place that either require no funding or very limited funding, will
> be fully completed by September 2014, (including all reporting requirements
> and metrics), and will be impressive enough as a set to justify a large
> grant for an unusual project? And if we do need more funding for these
> projects, how much time do we need to factor in so as to go through the
> grants process with the WMF, or do we risk pulling funds from those
> currently committed?
>
> I should also add that I think that the committee and members have done
> some great work over the last year. I think part of the problem is that we
> haven't been informing the WMF of the successes and strength of the current
> committee as well as we should. In coming up with new projects, we should
> also be looking at how we share the successes beyond the metrics offered. I
> believe that if the WMF was better aware of some of the work the committee
> has been doing, funding would be much less of an issue.
>
> Adam.
>
>
>
>
> On 7 October 2013 23:34, G. White  wrote:
>
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> I went to the initial meeting/workshop/training session of the new
>> Program Evaluation and Design (PE&D) Team  that is now working closely with
>> the Grants Team. In line with what Sue has recently said about measurable
>> impact for money spent, the team is developing and disseminating tools to
>> help Wikimedians gather data to help measure the inputs/outputs/outcomes
>> and longer term impacts of programs and activities. They have produced this
>> data prep 
>> sheet<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqQxi0BdfXDsdDlsc3RxYXlLaHJ6SUtxZTRZOWM0LUE&usp=drive_web#gid=1>.
>> Here is the Evaluation 
>> Portal.<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programs:Evaluation_portal>
>>
>> Craig is right about getting demonstrable small runs on the board to show
>> we can plan AND deliver - that is, BOTH, not just one or the other.  When I
>> was talking to some of the leaders of the Grants team, they were bewildered
>> at the fractiousness and unresponsiveness of the Australian chapter (they
>> were referring to the period before the last Chapter election). From a
>> distance, the level of general disarray and argument appears comparable to
>> the US government's current paralysis, and about as comprehensible.
>>
>> The Chapter needs good processes because good processes produce good
>> outcomes. However, *processes are not the same thing as rules.*  We need
>> to quietly and competently incorporate any necessary rules into our
>> processes. Kerry and Craig are working on this. Then we need to document
>> our processes and get on with small, achievable, well planned programs. I
>> agree with Craig that our success will not be measured in how much funding
>> we get.
>>
>> Whiteghost.ink
>>
>>
>> On 7 October 2013 19:27, Kerry Raymond  wrote:
>>
>>>  Before WMAU would need to pay even the first year of money for the
>>> linkage grant, we (WMAU, UQ and APC) have to agree a legal contract in
>>> relation to project. The UQ-drafted contract we have been given would seek
>>> to commit WMAU to all 3 years of funding. Obviously WMAU does not wish to
>>> agree to that given the uncertainty in relation to this funding and we will
>>> be seeking to have the contract varied to allow us to not make the
>>> subsequent payments if we have not been able to obtain those funds from WMF
>>> (or elsewhere). There are other issues with the contract in relation to
>>> intellectual property, levels of indemnity etc that also need to be
>>> resolved. I agree with Craig that this is likely to be a slow process.**
>>> **
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> If any WMAU member happens to be a lawyer, we would be very happy to
>>> have your assistance in this matter.
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Kerry
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>  --
>>>
>>> *From:* wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
>>> wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Craig Franklin
>>> *Sent:* Monday, 7 October 2013 3:31 PM
>>> *To:* Wikimedia-au
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Manuel Schneider]

Dear all,

I hope nobody is surprised or worried by seeing a stranger speaking up
on this list. I've been subscribed here since the inauguration of this
list and been a silent observer for most of the time. My home is
Germany, my fellow chapters are Austria and Switzerland.

I understand well the concerns of already existing commitments and the
bad outlooks towards FDC and the chapter's reputation.

Maybe I can offer a compromise: The Wikimedia Grants program is great
for funding projects and chapters not able or willing to cope with the
FDC. WMAU could apply for individual grants for individual projects. So
it won't be a global yes or no, either funding a huge budget you'd have
to come up with 1,5 years beforehand or not funding anything, like in
the past. It also saves you from the hassles of the FDC process and, by
the way, may help to improve your chapter's reputation within the WMF!

Small projects with planned inputs, outputs and outcomes as Whiteghost
states it are doable with grants. Each successful project will represent
a successful grant and create a positive track record, not only within
your community, also with the WMF grantmaking team and also publicly on
Meta. It also allows you to adjust your projects and commitments to your
growth and possibilities.
Maybe even the research project - or parts of it, if they can be divided
into packages with outcomes - may be granted that way.

FDC is meant for chapters with staff, even the FDC staff states so.
AFAIK WMAU has no staff, so it would be really hard to deal with all the
requirements of the FDC - design of programs with measurable results,
evaluation of all programs, budgets, control systems, audit through WMF,
reporting requirements etc.
For bigger chapters with an existing infrastructure FDC is great,
because most of the processes are already in place or need to be in
place if you have staff anyway and FDC makes sure you can operate at
full scale for a full year.
For small chapters FDC is a nightmare and grants are much better to
allow people to concentrate on certain projects and get them done well.

There is one gap between the two programs though: Grants normally don't
cover staff. We had grants approved with contractors, so to make the
shift from grants to FDC one either manages to create programs including
all the evaluation part, the budget and the FDC proposal with volunteers
and hires staff right after approval, or one uses contractors or an
exceptional grant, designed to bridge that gap and get the right person
on board to help with the FDC process later. If it is clear to the GAC
and the WMF grantmaking team that a chapter will manage a positive FDC
proposal they are likely to approve such an exception as a grant.

If someone - chapter or volunteers - need help with a Grant request or
someone of you happen to be in Europe - please contact me.
In case I help making a grant request please note that I will abstain
from handling it at the GAC to avoid conflict of interest.

Regards,


Manuel

-- 
Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch

___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[G. White]

Hi Adam and All,

We don't have a shortage of ideas for things to do - I organised all
the current
proposals 
hereso
that if we had spare resources or time (ha! is that likely?) we could
prioritise them and plan, or at the very least, see where there were
duplications.  If we had resources, would need a planning process to
prioritise and plan routinely.

Otherwise, as people are saying, we get out there and do it. It helps if we
use a good, reliable process and a known place on our website where we
could see what people are doing so people can come along. On this subject,
with some apology, I grab this opportunity to advertise our forthcoming
backstage pass and edit-a-thon
at
SLNSWon
23 November. Please put your name down (for catering purposes) and
come
along or participate! The curators want to meet you.

The Evaluation and Grants teams are looking for data about programs and
activities and we will need to plan to gather our data up front. I think
their current spreadsheet is not user-friendly and will be sending send
some feedback about it.

Whiteghost.ink



On 9 October 2013 05:23, Manuel Schneider wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I hope nobody is surprised or worried by seeing a stranger speaking up
> on this list. I've been subscribed here since the inauguration of this
> list and been a silent observer for most of the time. My home is
> Germany, my fellow chapters are Austria and Switzerland.
>
> I understand well the concerns of already existing commitments and the
> bad outlooks towards FDC and the chapter's reputation.
>
> Maybe I can offer a compromise: The Wikimedia Grants program is great
> for funding projects and chapters not able or willing to cope with the
> FDC. WMAU could apply for individual grants for individual projects. So
> it won't be a global yes or no, either funding a huge budget you'd have
> to come up with 1,5 years beforehand or not funding anything, like in
> the past. It also saves you from the hassles of the FDC process and, by
> the way, may help to improve your chapter's reputation within the WMF!
>
> Small projects with planned inputs, outputs and outcomes as Whiteghost
> states it are doable with grants. Each successful project will represent
> a successful grant and create a positive track record, not only within
> your community, also with the WMF grantmaking team and also publicly on
> Meta. It also allows you to adjust your projects and commitments to your
> growth and possibilities.
> Maybe even the research project - or parts of it, if they can be divided
> into packages with outcomes - may be granted that way.
>
> FDC is meant for chapters with staff, even the FDC staff states so.
> AFAIK WMAU has no staff, so it would be really hard to deal with all the
> requirements of the FDC - design of programs with measurable results,
> evaluation of all programs, budgets, control systems, audit through WMF,
> reporting requirements etc.
> For bigger chapters with an existing infrastructure FDC is great,
> because most of the processes are already in place or need to be in
> place if you have staff anyway and FDC makes sure you can operate at
> full scale for a full year.
> For small chapters FDC is a nightmare and grants are much better to
> allow people to concentrate on certain projects and get them done well.
>
> There is one gap between the two programs though: Grants normally don't
> cover staff. We had grants approved with contractors, so to make the
> shift from grants to FDC one either manages to create programs including
> all the evaluation part, the budget and the FDC proposal with volunteers
> and hires staff right after approval, or one uses contractors or an
> exceptional grant, designed to bridge that gap and get the right person
> on board to help with the FDC process later. If it is clear to the GAC
> and the WMF grantmaking team that a chapter will manage a positive FDC
> proposal they are likely to approve such an exception as a grant.
>
> If someone - chapter or volunteers - need help with a Grant request or
> someone of you happen to be in Europe - please contact me.
> In case I help making a grant request please note that I will abstain
> from handling it at the GAC to avoid conflict of interest.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Manuel
>
> --
> Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch
>
> ___
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Nick Dowling]

Bidgee has also provided excellent outcomes for the photography grant(s?) he 
received. 

> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 18:38:19 +0800
> From: gnanga...@gmail.com
> To: wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> CC: cfrank...@halonetwork.net
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> 
> well some that come to mind
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Freo - Freopedia only cost for
> WMAU has been Craig to Perth for the Launch, and from reports was well
> recieved at Wikimania in Hong Kong...
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Takes_Waroona,
> prelude to a Wikitown there.
> then there 2 of us doign a workshop tomorrow in Toodyay, and 3 of us
> being part of the Shire of Toodyay demostrations on Saturday for a
> third WikiTown there -- WMAU approved $200 to cover some expenses but
> well below the true costs of running the two
> 
> add to that, the work of SatuSuro
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Takes_Western_Australian_Wheatbelt_Railways_2013
> and to that a larger Wheatbelt project...
> 
> Its not talking about ideas thats going to change things it needs more
> people to get out there and do things,
> 
> Gideon
> 
> On 8 October 2013 10:39, Adam Jenkins  wrote:
> > I realised one big mistake in the wording of my email. The question as to
> > what projects we can put into place is not intended at the committee as
> > such, but for everyone interested. I've started talking to people about some
> > ideas, but I'm wondering how we, as WMAU, can work out some really good
> > projects to put us into a position where we exceed the WMF's expectations,
> > and what ideas to do so we can come up with. :)
> >
> > Adam.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8 October 2013 11:50, Leigh Blackall  wrote:
> >>
> >> kickstarter?
> >> I think it now does Australian projects...
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Adam Jenkins 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi!
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for explaining things. I need to say upfront that I'm not trying
> >>> to raise doubts about the ARC linkage grant. But from reading the replies,
> >>> we are currently in the process of committing $140k over three years based
> >>> on existing funds of (at best) $75k. I disagree that we should be tackling
> >>> this on the understanding that we can pull out in subsequent years - it
> >>> would be very unusual for that to be permitted, as it would leave the
> >>> university with insufficient funds to complete the research. If that
> >>> happened, the university would have to convince another partner to cover 
> >>> the
> >>> remaining funds, reduce the research scope, or cancel the project. If
> >>> cancelled, we damage our reputation with partner institutions as well as
> >>> losing any money previously invested. If a partner steps up, we damage our
> >>> reputation. We need to go into this with the intent of being committed for
> >>> the full amount, not with the belief that we are able to pull out if the
> >>> funds don't materialise.
> >>>
> >>> So from what you are saying, we are in trouble. Not as much trouble as we
> >>> would be if the $50k payment was still expected in 2014, but not in a nice
> >>> place. We have only half the funds needed to meet existing (or at least in
> >>> process) commitments over the next three years, (and are short of having
> >>> enough funds to meet our commitments in the next two years), have no
> >>> additional funds to spend on new projects unless we pull the money from 
> >>> the
> >>> linkage grant commitment (which will increase the risk of defaulting) or
> >>> pull out of that project (which we certainly do not want to do), and are
> >>> being told that we would be unsuccessful in getting funds through the 
> >>> major
> >>> funding body (the FDC) that has been providing grants to the Chapters.
> >>>
> >>> Going on the assumption that we should move forward with the linkage
> >>> grant, (which we should do), we need to guarantee at least $10k from the 
> >>> WMF
> >>> or the FDC to meet the 2015 commitment, assuming no additional 
> >>> expenditure,
> >>> and $50k to meet 2016.  This will be difficult, in that I gather there 
> >>> will
> >>> not be a deliverable until 2017, so we need to present this as a three 
> >>> year
> >>> program instead of focusing

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Craig Franklin]

Hi Nick,

Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another and
done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes for
the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them all
for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).

Cheers,
Craig




On 9 October 2013 12:22,  wrote:
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:42:29 +
> From: Nick Dowling 
> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Bidgee has also provided excellent outcomes for the photography grant(s?)
> he received.
>
> > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 18:38:19 +0800
> > From: gnanga...@gmail.com
> > To: wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > CC: cfrank...@halonetwork.net
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> >
> > well some that come to mind
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Freo - Freopedia only cost for
> > WMAU has been Craig to Perth for the Launch, and from reports was well
> > recieved at Wikimania in Hong Kong...
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Takes_Waroona,
> > prelude to a Wikitown there.
> > then there 2 of us doign a workshop tomorrow in Toodyay, and 3 of us
> > being part of the Shire of Toodyay demostrations on Saturday for a
> > third WikiTown there -- WMAU approved $200 to cover some expenses but
> > well below the true costs of running the two
> >
> > add to that, the work of SatuSuro
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Takes_Western_Australian_Wheatbelt_Railways_2013
> > and to that a larger Wheatbelt project...
> >
> > Its not talking about ideas thats going to change things it needs more
> > people to get out there and do things,
> >
> > Gideon
> >
>
>
> ___
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>
> End of Wikimediaau-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 14
> *
>
___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Gnangarra]

Hi All

While on the subject of doing something I'd like to take this opportunity
to announce

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Toodyaypedia
*Toodyaypedia*our latest WikiTown QR project, this comes as of the
result of a lot of
hard work by a number of people including our President who spoke with the
Shire while in Perth to launch Freopedia, this will include a Wikitakes
event on Saturday
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Takes_Toodyay_Showwhere
SatuSuro, Andrew Owens and myself will spend the day unlocking
mysteries of Wikipedia for the public while shire staff will be approaching
people with cameras to upload photographs from the Toodyay Agriculture
Show, which also happens be celebrating 160 years since its first
show(there has been only 4 years where the show hasnt occured). This will
be followed up with workshops on 2 November.

Shire Museum staff will be using Wikiversity to create a number of
exercises for school students to do prior to visiting the museum, while at
the museum and follow up projects afterwards, while these will be Toodyay
museum specific the formula/formats etc will readily replicable for any
museum.

Shire Tourism staff will be focusing on developing Wikivoyage content for
the region, Library and Community Resource centre staff will be readily
available to help the community add content, today SatuSuro and myself
spent 4 hours with them working thorugh contributing to Commons, it was a
wonderful collaborative effort where we showed one person how to create an
account and they then help other participants do the same, then I show
walked the group thorugh uploading a photograph using upload wizard they
each then went on to upload more photographs and not just ones I had
supplied for the workshop but also some of their photographs by the end of
the session they were uploading their own photographs, adding categories,
then adding content to en.wp articles. Given the small number of regular
contributors in WA the 8 new people today are a significant increase in
editors over here and definately took the idea of contributing Watch
this space more exciting things happening soon

Cheers
Gideon




On 9 October 2013 18:04, Craig Franklin  wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
> and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes
> for the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them
> all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
>
>
>
> On 9 October 2013 12:22, wrote:
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:42:29 +
>> From: Nick Dowling 
>> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter 
>>
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>> Message-ID: 
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>
>> Bidgee has also provided excellent outcomes for the photography grant(s?)
>> he received.
>>
>> > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 18:38:19 +0800
>> > From: gnanga...@gmail.com
>> > To: wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > CC: cfrank...@halonetwork.net
>> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>> >
>> > well some that come to mind
>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Freo - Freopedia only cost for
>> > WMAU has been Craig to Perth for the Launch, and from reports was well
>> > recieved at Wikimania in Hong Kong...
>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Takes_Waroona,
>> > prelude to a Wikitown there.
>> > then there 2 of us doign a workshop tomorrow in Toodyay, and 3 of us
>> > being part of the Shire of Toodyay demostrations on Saturday for a
>> > third WikiTown there -- WMAU approved $200 to cover some expenses but
>> > well below the true costs of running the two
>> >
>> > add to that, the work of SatuSuro
>> >
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Takes_Western_Australian_Wheatbelt_Railways_2013
>> > and to that a larger Wheatbelt project...
>> >
>> > Its not talking about ideas thats going to change things it needs more
>> > people to get out there and do things,
>> >
>> > Gideon
>> >
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
>> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>>
>>
>> End of Wikimediaau-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 14
>> *
>>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>


-- 
GN.
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
Gn. Blogg: http://gnangarra.wordpress.com
___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Craig Franklin]

Absolutely fantastic news Gnangarra!  I'm so pleased to see that something
has come out of all the hard work that I know you and other WA editors have
been putting into this over quite an extended period of time.  Bravo, and
very well done!

Cheers,
Craig


On 9 October 2013 22:07, Gnangarra  wrote:

> Hi All
>
> While on the subject of doing something I'd like to take this opportunity
> to announce
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Toodyaypedia  *Toodyaypedia*our 
> latest WikiTown QR project, this comes as of the result of a lot of
> hard work by a number of people including our President who spoke with the
> Shire while in Perth to launch Freopedia, this will include a Wikitakes
> event on Saturday
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Takes_Toodyay_Show where
> SatuSuro, Andrew Owens and myself will spend the day unlocking mysteries of
> Wikipedia for the public while shire staff will be approaching people with
> cameras to upload photographs from the Toodyay Agriculture Show, which also
> happens be celebrating 160 years since its first show(there has been only 4
> years where the show hasnt occured). This will be followed up with
> workshops on 2 November.
>
> Shire Museum staff will be using Wikiversity to create a number of
> exercises for school students to do prior to visiting the museum, while at
> the museum and follow up projects afterwards, while these will be Toodyay
> museum specific the formula/formats etc will readily replicable for any
> museum.
>
> Shire Tourism staff will be focusing on developing Wikivoyage content for
> the region, Library and Community Resource centre staff will be readily
> available to help the community add content, today SatuSuro and myself
> spent 4 hours with them working thorugh contributing to Commons, it was a
> wonderful collaborative effort where we showed one person how to create an
> account and they then help other participants do the same, then I show
> walked the group thorugh uploading a photograph using upload wizard they
> each then went on to upload more photographs and not just ones I had
> supplied for the workshop but also some of their photographs by the end of
> the session they were uploading their own photographs, adding categories,
> then adding content to en.wp articles. Given the small number of regular
> contributors in WA the 8 new people today are a significant increase in
> editors over here and definately took the idea of contributing Watch
> this space more exciting things happening soon
>
> Cheers
> Gideon
>
>
>
>
> On 9 October 2013 18:04, Craig Franklin  wrote:
>
>> Hi Nick,
>>
>> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
>> and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes
>> for the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them
>> all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9 October 2013 12:22, wrote:
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:42:29 +
>>> From: Nick Dowling 
>>> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter 
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>>> Message-ID: 
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>>
>>> Bidgee has also provided excellent outcomes for the photography
>>> grant(s?) he received.
>>>
>>> > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 18:38:19 +0800
>>> > From: gnanga...@gmail.com
>>> > To: wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> > CC: cfrank...@halonetwork.net
>>> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>>> >
>>> > well some that come to mind
>>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Freo - Freopedia only cost for
>>> > WMAU has been Craig to Perth for the Launch, and from reports was well
>>> > recieved at Wikimania in Hong Kong...
>>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Takes_Waroona,
>>> > prelude to a Wikitown there.
>>> > then there 2 of us doign a workshop tomorrow in Toodyay, and 3 of us
>>> > being part of the Shire of Toodyay demostrations on Saturday for a
>>> > third WikiTown there -- WMAU approved $200 to cover some expenses but
>>> > well below the true costs of running the two
>>> >
>>> > add to that, the work of SatuSuro
>>> >
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Takes_Western_Australian_Wheatbelt_Railways_2013
>>> > and to that a larger Wheatbelt project...
>>>

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Toby Hudson]

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
 wrote:
> I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of great
> work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the head
> that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.  Part of
> any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're going to
> measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we can
> either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or use
> that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't make
> the same mistake twice.

and then:

> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another and 
> done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes for 
> the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them all 
> for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).


Hi Craig,
Although forward planning of outcome metrics is obviously a good thing
for the future, I think we should make an effort now to compile
outcomes and metrics for projects, programs and grants that have
already taken place.  Is there an onwiki page for this, or a table to
fill out for each project or grant we have undertaken?  I know there
are some reports linked from here
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Reports#Small_grants but surely there
are more hanging around?  Even though you can't enumerate them off the
top of your head, we *should* be able to enumerate them if everyone
writes up the outcomes of projects we've individually been involved
with.  I know there are huge outcomes as a result of the SLNSW
training and residency.. but maybe they have not been tabulated into
reportable dotpoints?
Toby

___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[G. White]

This is great work Gnangarra and the WA team!

The metrics and evaluation issue is topical at the moment. I have just been
sent a survey from the Program Evaluation & Design Team (PE&D) at WMF. They
also provided this prep spreadsheet
for
gathering data. I think the prep sheet is daunting and not user-friendly
and I have given a lot of feedback on it, which you can see
hereif
you want.

My main concern is that we need a sheet that will help us to *plan* as well
as report, including planning what data we need to gather, so we don't have
the problem of reporting on what we have not gathered. (And also so we *have
* some data). I understand the PE&D team are working towards that end and
this spreadsheet is a start. So use it if you can to think about your
activity and what data you might want from it. Here is the Programs:
Evaluation portalon
meta if you want to follow this. The grants people, naturally enough,
are working with the Evaluation people as this work is all about how to
tell what what activities produce worthwhile results, what is gained from
money expended, and as a consequence, where/how it is best to expend effort
and money.

An evaluation of the Residency at SLNSW is here as part of the Library's
project 
page.
*No funding* from the Chapter or WMF was used in this program.

Whiteghost.ink


On 10 October 2013 17:15, Toby Hudson  wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
>  wrote:
> > I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of
> great
> > work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the head
> > that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.  Part
> of
> > any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're going
> to
> > measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we
> can
> > either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or use
> > that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't
> make
> > the same mistake twice.
>
> and then:
>
> > Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
> and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes
> for the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them
> all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
>
>
> Hi Craig,
> Although forward planning of outcome metrics is obviously a good thing
> for the future, I think we should make an effort now to compile
> outcomes and metrics for projects, programs and grants that have
> already taken place.  Is there an onwiki page for this, or a table to
> fill out for each project or grant we have undertaken?  I know there
> are some reports linked from here
> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Reports#Small_grants but surely there
> are more hanging around?  Even though you can't enumerate them off the
> top of your head, we *should* be able to enumerate them if everyone
> writes up the outcomes of projects we've individually been involved
> with.  I know there are huge outcomes as a result of the SLNSW
> training and residency.. but maybe they have not been tabulated into
> reportable dotpoints?
> Toby
>
> ___
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Kerry Raymond]

Toby

You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it would
be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please put
their hands up now? 

[Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]

Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face. Volunteers
do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from), because they
do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer organisation
is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks" and
someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person didn't
want to do.

But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect another
incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster for
cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody wanted to
do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I fear that
metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need to look
at outsourcing that task. As you will all know (but maybe don't remember) we
do now have a contracting policy

http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Contracting

and, any moment now (drum roll), John V will be outlining the arrangements
for the contracting subcommittee so we can get outsourcing happening.

If there are tasks we need to outsource, we need to do this now while we
still have funds to pay for the work that needs doing. If we delay until we
have no funds, then we are in a serious catch-22 situation. I note that a
number of the chapters who receive FDC funding appear to use at least part
of those funds to employ project management staff, suggesting that this is
the kind of thing that is hard to resource with volunteers in most chapters.

Kerry



-Original Message-
From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Toby Hudson
Sent: Thursday, 10 October 2013 4:16 PM
To: Craig Franklin; Wikimedia Australia Chapter
Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
 wrote:
> I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of
great
> work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the head
> that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.  Part of
> any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're going
to
> measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we can
> either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or use
> that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't make
> the same mistake twice.

and then:

> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes
for the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them
all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).


Hi Craig,
Although forward planning of outcome metrics is obviously a good thing
for the future, I think we should make an effort now to compile
outcomes and metrics for projects, programs and grants that have
already taken place.  Is there an onwiki page for this, or a table to
fill out for each project or grant we have undertaken?  I know there
are some reports linked from here
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Reports#Small_grants but surely there
are more hanging around?  Even though you can't enumerate them off the
top of your head, we *should* be able to enumerate them if everyone
writes up the outcomes of projects we've individually been involved
with.  I know there are huge outcomes as a result of the SLNSW
training and residency.. but maybe they have not been tabulated into
reportable dotpoints?
Toby

___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l


___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Toby Hudson]

Hi Kerry,

My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
submitted).  We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.

To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
Grants).  I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run.  I'll
start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.

Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to edit:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing

Toby





On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond  wrote:
> Toby
>
> You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it would
> be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please put
> their hands up now?
>
> [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
>
> Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face. Volunteers
> do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from), because they
> do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer organisation
> is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks" and
> someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person didn't
> want to do.
>
> But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect another
> incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster for
> cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody wanted to
> do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I fear that
> metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need to look
> at outsourcing that task. As you will all know (but maybe don't remember) we
> do now have a contracting policy
>
> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Contracting
>
> and, any moment now (drum roll), John V will be outlining the arrangements
> for the contracting subcommittee so we can get outsourcing happening.
>
> If there are tasks we need to outsource, we need to do this now while we
> still have funds to pay for the work that needs doing. If we delay until we
> have no funds, then we are in a serious catch-22 situation. I note that a
> number of the chapters who receive FDC funding appear to use at least part
> of those funds to employ project management staff, suggesting that this is
> the kind of thing that is hard to resource with volunteers in most chapters.
>
> Kerry
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Toby Hudson
> Sent: Thursday, 10 October 2013 4:16 PM
> To: Craig Franklin; Wikimedia Australia Chapter
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
>  wrote:
>> I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of
> great
>> work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the head
>> that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.  Part of
>> any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're going
> to
>> measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we can
>> either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or use
>> that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't make
>> the same mistake twice.
>
> and then:
>
>> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
> and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes
> for the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them
> all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
>
>
> Hi Craig,
> Although forward planning of outcome metrics is obviously a good thing
> for the future, I think we should make an effort now to compile
> outcomes and metrics for projects, programs and grants that have
> already taken place.  Is there an onwiki page for this, or a table to
> fill out for each project or grant we have undertaken?  I know there
> are some reports linked from here
> http://www.w

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[G. White]

till have funds to pay for the work that needs doing. If we delay until
> we
> > have no funds, then we are in a serious catch-22 situation. I note that a
> > number of the chapters who receive FDC funding appear to use at least
> part
> > of those funds to employ project management staff, suggesting that this
> is
> > the kind of thing that is hard to resource with volunteers in most
> chapters.
> >
> > Kerry
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Toby
> Hudson
> > Sent: Thursday, 10 October 2013 4:16 PM
> > To: Craig Franklin; Wikimedia Australia Chapter
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
> >  wrote:
> >> I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of
> > great
> >> work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the
> head
> >> that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.  Part
> of
> >> any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're going
> > to
> >> measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we
> can
> >> either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or use
> >> that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't
> make
> >> the same mistake twice.
> >
> > and then:
> >
> >> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
> > and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive
> outcomes
> > for the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate
> them
> > all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
> >
> >
> > Hi Craig,
> > Although forward planning of outcome metrics is obviously a good thing
> > for the future, I think we should make an effort now to compile
> > outcomes and metrics for projects, programs and grants that have
> > already taken place.  Is there an onwiki page for this, or a table to
> > fill out for each project or grant we have undertaken?  I know there
> > are some reports linked from here
> > http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Reports#Small_grants but surely there
> > are more hanging around?  Even though you can't enumerate them off the
> > top of your head, we *should* be able to enumerate them if everyone
> > writes up the outcomes of projects we've individually been involved
> > with.  I know there are huge outcomes as a result of the SLNSW
> > training and residency.. but maybe they have not been tabulated into
> > reportable dotpoints?
> > Toby
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
> ___
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
___
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Robert Myers]

I've added my two grants, but the equipment cost (amount that I paid out of my 
own pocket) is just an estimate for now, until I can locate the receipt. 

-
Bidgee

On 10/10/2013, at 10:39 PM, Toby Hudson  wrote:

> Hi Kerry,
> 
> My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
> should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
> partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
> submitted).  We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
> I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
> to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.
> 
> To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
> linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
> the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
> Grants).  I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
> grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
> Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
> about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run.  I'll
> start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.
> 
> Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to edit:
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing
> 
> Toby
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond  
> wrote:
>> Toby
>> 
>> You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it would
>> be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please put
>> their hands up now?
>> 
>> [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
>> 
>> Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face. Volunteers
>> do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from), because they
>> do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer organisation
>> is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks" and
>> someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person didn't
>> want to do.
>> 
>> But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect another
>> incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster for
>> cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody wanted to
>> do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I fear that
>> metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need to look
>> at outsourcing that task. As you will all know (but maybe don't remember) we
>> do now have a contracting policy
>> 
>> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Contracting
>> 
>> and, any moment now (drum roll), John V will be outlining the arrangements
>> for the contracting subcommittee so we can get outsourcing happening.
>> 
>> If there are tasks we need to outsource, we need to do this now while we
>> still have funds to pay for the work that needs doing. If we delay until we
>> have no funds, then we are in a serious catch-22 situation. I note that a
>> number of the chapters who receive FDC funding appear to use at least part
>> of those funds to employ project management staff, suggesting that this is
>> the kind of thing that is hard to resource with volunteers in most chapters.
>> 
>> Kerry
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Toby Hudson
>> Sent: Thursday, 10 October 2013 4:16 PM
>> To: Craig Franklin; Wikimedia Australia Chapter
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
>>  wrote:
>>> I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of
>> great
>>> work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the head
>>> that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.  Part of
>>> any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're going
>> to
>>> measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we can
>>> either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or use
>>> that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't make
>>> the same mistake twice.
>> 
>> and then:
>> 
>>> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
>> and done some great work that have (

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Craig Franklin]

Bidgee and Toby,

Thanks for preparing and adding your info to these spreadsheets.  I know
that filling out paperwork isn't fun but it's one of those things that has
to be done, so thanks for stepping up and leading the way.

I do have some figures on editathons across NSW and Qld that I will add as
soon as I can locate them.

Cheers,
Craig


On 11 October 2013 18:35,  wrote:

>
> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:35:13 +1100
> From: Robert Myers 
> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> Message-ID: <271ccc96-0449-4d48-b0c5-ccde898cd...@me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I've added my two grants, but the equipment cost (amount that I paid out
> of my own pocket) is just an estimate for now, until I can locate the
> receipt.
>
> -
> Bidgee
>
> On 10/10/2013, at 10:39 PM, Toby Hudson  wrote:
>
> > Hi Kerry,
> >
> > My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
> > should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
> > partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
> > submitted).  We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
> > I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
> > to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.
> >
> > To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
> > linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
> > the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
> > Grants).  I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
> > grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
> > Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
> > about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run.  I'll
> > start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.
> >
> > Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to
> edit:
> >
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing
> >
> > Toby
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond 
> wrote:
> >> Toby
> >>
> >> You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it
> would
> >> be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please put
> >> their hands up now?
> >>
> >> [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
> >>
> >> Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face.
> Volunteers
> >> do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from), because
> they
> >> do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer
> organisation
> >> is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks" and
> >> someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person
> didn't
> >> want to do.
> >>
> >> But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect
> another
> >> incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster for
> >> cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody
> wanted to
> >> do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I fear
> that
> >> metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need to
> look
> >> at outsourcing that task. As you will all know (but maybe don't
> remember) we
> >> do now have a contracting policy
> >>
> >> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Contracting
> >>
> >> and, any moment now (drum roll), John V will be outlining the
> arrangements
> >> for the contracting subcommittee so we can get outsourcing happening.
> >>
> >> If there are tasks we need to outsource, we need to do this now while we
> >> still have funds to pay for the work that needs doing. If we delay
> until we
> >> have no funds, then we are in a serious catch-22 situation. I note that
> a
> >> number of the chapters who receive FDC funding appear to use at least
> part
> >> of those funds to employ project management staff, suggesting that this
> is
> >> the kind of thing that is hard to resource with volunteers in most
> chapters.
> >>
> >> Kerry
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Gnangarra]

I've also started adding info, but the last few days I've been sidetracked,
and need to spend time chasing down the details :)

Cheers
Gnangarra


On 11 October 2013 21:07, Craig Franklin  wrote:

> Bidgee and Toby,
>
> Thanks for preparing and adding your info to these spreadsheets.  I know
> that filling out paperwork isn't fun but it's one of those things that has
> to be done, so thanks for stepping up and leading the way.
>
> I do have some figures on editathons across NSW and Qld that I will add as
> soon as I can locate them.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
>
> On 11 October 2013 18:35, wrote:
>
>>
>> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:35:13 +1100
>> From: Robert Myers 
>>
>> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter 
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>> Message-ID: <271ccc96-0449-4d48-b0c5-ccde898cd...@me.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>>
>> I've added my two grants, but the equipment cost (amount that I paid out
>> of my own pocket) is just an estimate for now, until I can locate the
>> receipt.
>>
>> -
>> Bidgee
>>
>> On 10/10/2013, at 10:39 PM, Toby Hudson  wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Kerry,
>> >
>> > My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
>> > should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
>> > partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
>> > submitted).  We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
>> > I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
>> > to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.
>> >
>> > To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
>> > linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
>> > the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
>> > Grants).  I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
>> > grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
>> > Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
>> > about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run.  I'll
>> > start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.
>> >
>> > Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to
>> edit:
>> >
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing
>> >
>> > Toby
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond 
>> wrote:
>> >> Toby
>> >>
>> >> You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it
>> would
>> >> be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please
>> put
>> >> their hands up now?
>> >>
>> >> [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
>> >>
>> >> Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face.
>> Volunteers
>> >> do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from),
>> because they
>> >> do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer
>> organisation
>> >> is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks" and
>> >> someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person
>> didn't
>> >> want to do.
>> >>
>> >> But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect
>> another
>> >> incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster for
>> >> cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody
>> wanted to
>> >> do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I
>> fear that
>> >> metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need
>> to look
>> >> at outsourcing that task. As you will all know (but maybe don't
>> remember) we
>> >> do now have a contracting policy
>> >>
>> >> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Contracting
>> >>
>> >> and, any moment now (drum roll), John V will be outlining the
>> arrangements
>> >> for the contracting subcommittee so we can get outsourcing happening.
>> >>
>> >> If there are tasks we need to outsource, we need to do this now while
>> we
>> >> still have funds to pay for the work that needs

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Leigh Blackall]

Could I get the link to the take again please?
On 12/10/2013 8:52 AM, "Gnangarra"  wrote:

> I've also started adding info, but the last few days I've been
> sidetracked, and need to spend time chasing down the details :)
>
> Cheers
> Gnangarra
>
>
> On 11 October 2013 21:07, Craig Franklin wrote:
>
>> Bidgee and Toby,
>>
>> Thanks for preparing and adding your info to these spreadsheets.  I know
>> that filling out paperwork isn't fun but it's one of those things that has
>> to be done, so thanks for stepping up and leading the way.
>>
>> I do have some figures on editathons across NSW and Qld that I will add
>> as soon as I can locate them.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Craig
>>
>>
>> On 11 October 2013 18:35, wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:35:13 +1100
>>> From: Robert Myers 
>>>
>>> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter 
>>> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>>> Message-ID: <271ccc96-0449-4d48-b0c5-ccde898cd...@me.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>>
>>>
>>> I've added my two grants, but the equipment cost (amount that I paid out
>>> of my own pocket) is just an estimate for now, until I can locate the
>>> receipt.
>>>
>>> -
>>> Bidgee
>>>
>>> On 10/10/2013, at 10:39 PM, Toby Hudson  wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Kerry,
>>> >
>>> > My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
>>> > should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
>>> > partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
>>> > submitted).  We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
>>> > I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
>>> > to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.
>>> >
>>> > To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
>>> > linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
>>> > the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
>>> > Grants).  I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
>>> > grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
>>> > Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
>>> > about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run.  I'll
>>> > start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.
>>> >
>>> > Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to
>>> edit:
>>> >
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing
>>> >
>>> > Toby
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond <
>>> kerry.raym...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> Toby
>>> >>
>>> >> You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it
>>> would
>>> >> be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please
>>> put
>>> >> their hands up now?
>>> >>
>>> >> [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
>>> >>
>>> >> Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face.
>>> Volunteers
>>> >> do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from),
>>> because they
>>> >> do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer
>>> organisation
>>> >> is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks"
>>> and
>>> >> someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person
>>> didn't
>>> >> want to do.
>>> >>
>>> >> But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect
>>> another
>>> >> incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster
>>> for
>>> >> cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody
>>> wanted to
>>> >> do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I
>>> fear that
>>> >> metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need
>>> to look
>>> >> at outsourcing that task. As y

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query

[Toby Hudson]

Hi Leigh,

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing
(it's also a long way down in your threaded reply)

Thanks for pitching in people.

Gnangarra, I think it might be worth splitting the FreoSociety image
donation from the editathon into a separate GLAM content donation if
it's an ongoing thing.  I guess that will carry even more weight.

Toby


On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Leigh Blackall  wrote:
> Could I get the link to the take again please?
>
> On 12/10/2013 8:52 AM, "Gnangarra"  wrote:
>>
>> I've also started adding info, but the last few days I've been
>> sidetracked, and need to spend time chasing down the details :)
>>
>> Cheers
>> Gnangarra
>>
>>
>> On 11 October 2013 21:07, Craig Franklin 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Bidgee and Toby,
>>>
>>> Thanks for preparing and adding your info to these spreadsheets.  I know
>>> that filling out paperwork isn't fun but it's one of those things that has
>>> to be done, so thanks for stepping up and leading the way.
>>>
>>> I do have some figures on editathons across NSW and Qld that I will add
>>> as soon as I can locate them.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Craig
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11 October 2013 18:35, 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:35:13 +1100
>>>> From: Robert Myers 
>>>>
>>>> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter 
>>>> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
>>>> Message-ID: <271ccc96-0449-4d48-b0c5-ccde898cd...@me.com>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've added my two grants, but the equipment cost (amount that I paid out
>>>> of my own pocket) is just an estimate for now, until I can locate the
>>>> receipt.
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Bidgee
>>>>
>>>> On 10/10/2013, at 10:39 PM, Toby Hudson  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Hi Kerry,
>>>> >
>>>> > My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
>>>> > should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
>>>> > partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
>>>> > submitted).  We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
>>>> > I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
>>>> > to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.
>>>> >
>>>> > To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
>>>> > linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
>>>> > the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
>>>> > Grants).  I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
>>>> > grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
>>>> > Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
>>>> > about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run.  I'll
>>>> > start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.
>>>> >
>>>> > Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to
>>>> > edit:
>>>> >
>>>> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing
>>>> >
>>>> > Toby
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond
>>>> >  wrote:
>>>> >> Toby
>>>> >>
>>>> >> You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it
>>>> >> would
>>>> >> be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please
>>>> >> put
>>>> >> their hands up now?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face.
>>>> >> Volunteers
>>>> >> do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from),
>>>> >> because they
>>>> >> do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer
>>>> &g