2017-12-16 17:04 GMT+01:00 Eugene Alvin Villar <sea...@gmail.com>: > > And surely saying that the decision-making process is "completely > intransparent" is just being plain lazy. Here are several blog posts and > documents providing quite a bit of detail into the process and results that > can be reached with just a couple minutes of Googling: > > https://www.hotosm.org/updates/2016-12-06_funds_for_ > community_led_projects_the_2017_hot_microgrants_program > https://www.hotosm.org/updates/2017-02-02_hot_microgrants_programme_ > launches_0 > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SVI_wxf0CbZ2pOOf8kuqREkZwvmxmSTp9i > 3jbHsBkCo/edit > https://www.hotosm.org/updates/2017-04-20_hot_microgrants_2017_results > >
Eugene, you have posted 4 links, can you please explain how these pages contribute to transparency of the decision making process? The only 2 hints about the selection process I have found are as vague as possible: "* Who decides? Applications will be evaluated and funding decisions made by a panel with representation from HOT senior staff, Board of Directors, HOT voting membership, donor organizations, and external advisors." and then: "We had a fantastic response to our first ever Microgrants Programme, with over 70 applications from nearly 50 countries worldwide. After much deliberation, we’re pleased to announce we are supporting the following projects with Microgrants for 2017 (in no particular order):" (followed by a list of 8 projects) Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
