hi lisa, have a good start into the new year everybody! should not, ideally, the legal team of amanda keton be able to tell if fundting something is legal? or is this a liability issue, so tides would be liable for misconduct, and not a person within wikimedia foundation?
rupert On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:18 PM Lisa Gruwell <lgruw...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi Mike- > > Thanks for the question. The review and oversight that we will get from > Tides is nothing like the FDC review. They will be looking at, for > example, "Is this grant supporting activity that is legal for a 501c3 to > fund?" It is in no way a replacement for the work that the FDC or the > Global Council would do regarding grants. > > Best, > Lisa > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:55 PM Michael Peel <em...@mikepeel.net> wrote: > >> Hi Lisa, >> >> Isn’t this the oversight work that the WMF wanted to be able to do when >> it changed from Wikimedia affiliates being able to fundraise directly to >> the FDC process? Why has WMF chosen to outsource this to Tides rather than >> continuing to do it in-house? And why does Tides now get to approve such >> grants, rather than a community appointed committee? >> >> FDC was a process that worked extremely well, and was discontinued for >> obscure reasons. The Global Council approach that the strategy was heading >> towards looked like it might be a good replacement. Outsourcing it to Tides >> seems really bad. >> >> Boldly creating a new fund for fellow organisations looks nice, but >> without community involvement it’s a controversy in development. >> >> Thanks, >> Mike >> >> On 14 Dec 2020, at 20:11, Lisa Gruwell <lgruw...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> >> Hi Chris- >> >> I am happy to answer your questions about Tides. No, Tides is not >> picking the grantees. The docket of grantees and the specific of the >> grants comes from us. Tides provides legal and administrative review of >> the grants, approves them, and processes the grants(i.e. wires the funding >> to the grantees). It is rare that there is ever a problem, but if Tides >> were to see one, we actually appreciate the outside review and would be >> open to hearing their reasons. There is no change for the reporting and >> transparency requirements for APG grants. Tides will also not be making >> recommendations for the grants for the Knowledge Equity Fund. They will >> play a similar role as I described for the APG grants. Again, I know there >> will be more info on the Knowledge Equity Fund in the new year. I ask your >> patience for the folks initiating this and trust that they will share more >> soon. >> >> Best, >> Lisa >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:18 AM Chris Keating < >> chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Lisa. That statement makes a lot of sense, though I do have some >>> questions still. >>> >>>> >>>> Our first priority was to ensure that we had enough funding to support >>>> community grants. We transferred the full amount for Annual Plan Grants >>>> (APG) for FY20-21 over to Tides to ensure that all funding for >>>> affiliates for this year was secured, regardless of how fundraising >>>> performed. It also gives staff at affiliates and the Foundation more time >>>> to work together to make thoughtful grants, instead of an end-of-year rush. >>>> All affiliates who will be receiving funding through Tides were informed of >>>> the arrangement last summer. All other grantmaking (Community Grants, >>>> Rapid Grants, Project Grants) are still being funded through WMF directly, >>>> as usual. There is a round of APG grants set to go out via Tides this week. >>>> >>> >>> Are Tides simply administering these funds at the WMF's direction, or >>> will Tides start to take over decisions about who gets these grants and >>> what amount different entities are eligible for? Has there been any change >>> to the reporting and transparency requirements that go with the APG grants? >>> What is the intention about how APG grants will work, since the FDC was >>> abolished a couple of years ago and there is unlikely to be any >>> community-driven replacement for it until at least a year or two's work has >>> gone into the implementation of the strategy? >>> >>> >>>> As of now, this is a one-time commitment of approximately $4.5 million. >>>> We are still working on the specific initial objectives of the fund and how >>>> it will operate. As a pilot initiative, we’ll be learning and adapting as >>>> we go. >>>> >>> >>> Funding knowledge equity sounds like a great idea, but I have not >>> previously heard of an organisation making an irrecoverable $4.5 million >>> transfer without knowing what that money will be used to fund. Is there >>> anything more that can be shared apart from "it'll be used to fund >>> knowledge equity somehow"? And as above - is this going to be a WMF-led >>> process (maybe even involving the community), or will Tides be actually >>> making recommendations about who and what is funded? If the latter, how are >>> Tides going to adjust to the Wikimedia community's expectations about >>> transparency? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Chris >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Lisa Seitz Gruwell >> Chief Advancement Officer >> Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, < >> mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe >> <wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >> > > > -- > > Lisa Seitz Gruwell > > Chief Advancement Officer > > Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
