Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Wikimedia Foundation/Impact report form
Purpose of the report
FDC funds are allocated to improve the alignment between the Wikimedia movement's strategy and spending; support greater impact and progress towards achieving shared goals; and enable all parts of the movement to learn how to achieve shared goals better and faster.
Funding should lead to increased access to and quality of content on Wikimedia project sites – the two ultimate goals of the Wikimedia movement strategic priorities, individually and as a whole. Funded activities must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
Each entity that receives FDC funding will need to complete this report, which seeks to determine how the funding received by the entity is leading towards these goals. The information you provide will help us to:
- Identify lessons learned, in terms of both what the entity learned that could benefit the broader movement, and how the entity used movement-wide best practices to accomplish its stated objectives.
- Assess the performance of the entity over the course of the funded period against the stated objectives in the entity's annual plan.
- Ensure accountability over how the money was spent. The FDC distributes "general funds", for both ongoing and programmatic expenses; these funds can be spent as the entity best sees fit to accomplish its stated goals. Therefore, although line-item expenses are not expected to be exactly as outlined in the entity's proposal, the FDC wants to ensure that money was spent in a way that led to movement goals.
For more information, please review FDC portal/Reporting requirements or reference your entity's grant agreement.
Basic entity information
|Entity information||Legal name of entity||Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.|
|Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd)||07/01-06/30|
|12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy)||07/01/12-06/30/13|
|Contact information (primary)||Primary contact name||Sue Gardner|
|Primary contact position in entity||Executive Director|
|Primary contact username||User: Sue Gardner|
|Primary contact email@example.com|
|Contact information (secondary)||Secondary contact name||Sara Lasner|
|Secondary contact position in entity||Development Director|
|Secondary contact username||User: Slasner|
|Secondary contact firstname.lastname@example.org|
Overview of the past year
The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of this report. Please use no more than 2–3 paragraphs to address the questions outlined below. You will have an opportunity to address these questions in detail elsewhere in this report.
- HIGHLIGHTS: What were 2–3 important highlights of the past year? (These may include successes, challenges, lessons learned.)
The 2012–2013 fiscal year of the Wikimedia Foundation was a year of tremendous readership growth, infrastructure growth, and organizational growth. For the first time, the foundation’s web sites drew more than 500 million monthly users – a milestone that puts Wikipedia and our sisters sites in an elite category of online properties. It was also the year we introduced our VisualEditor to Wikipedia, debuting an editing system that formats articles with simple visual tabs instead of intricate coding. And it was the year that Wikipedia Zero, our mobile initiative for developing countries, built a steady momentum and gave millions of mobile users access to Wikipedia that is free of data charges. The Wikimedia Foundation’s funding application to the FDC emphasized four “non-core” areas of our ongoing work: Editor engagement experiments; the Global Education Program; the catalyst projects; and WMF fellowships and grantmaking. Two important highlights in these initiatives: 1) The Education Program oversaw a sizable expansion of student contributions around the world. Students in the program added more content to Wikipedia articles this year than ever before. Improved topic areas included: history, literature, psychology, sociology, biology, communications, and more. Students contributed mostly text to Wikipedia articles, but also photos and videos uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Overall, students in the US, Canada, Egypt, Algeria and Jordan added an equivalent of more than 16,000 printed pages over the course of 12 months. That’s the equivalent of 2.5 volumes of the last print edition of Encyclopedia Britannica. 2) Editor engagement experiments showed that giving new contributors encouragement and guidance have a marked impact on the contributors’ activity. The team ran a series of 12 tests involving more than 50,000 registered Wikipedia users. The biggest experiment, in February and March, showed that those who got a “Getting Started” page plus a Guided Tour were 3.9% more likely to make an edit than those new editors who didn’t get the page.
- SWOT: Reflecting on the context outlined for your entity in the FDC proposal, what were some of the contextual elements that either enabled or inhibited the plan?
- Strengths: Organizational strengths that enabled the plan
Led by our Executive Director and a team of C-level executives, the Wikimedia Foundation is committed to increasing the number of active contributors to Wikipedia and our sisters sites, to improving the breadth and quality of Wikipedia articles and our web sites’ other offerings, and to providing readers and contributors a more engaging way to interact with our web sites. This commitment, along with the strong vision to put it in place, is a key strength of the Wikimedia Foundation, giving us the ability to put resources into different areas, from software development to mobile partnerships to grantmaking, that have a collective worldwide impact on our knowledge sites.
- Weaknesses: Organizational weaknesses that inhibited the plan
We have yet to improve on how to collaborate with our community of volunteers. We’ve made progress in this area in 2012–13, but we still have to find a balance that doesn’t leave both sides unsatisfied.
- Opportunities: External opportunities that enabled the plan
Millions more people around the world are coming online for the first time, especially in developing countries, where “mobile-only users” – benefitted by price decreases in mobile phones and mobile plans – are accessing the Internet in record numbers. This increase offers the Wikimedia Foundation a much greater pool of potential readers and contributors.
- Threats: Risks or threats that inhibited the plan
Fortunately, there were no serious risks or threats that inhibited the plan. The nature of working in Global South countries means that often times, we are working in countries with political unrest. Strikes in Brazil and violent unrest in Egypt made work in those regions challenging.
- WIKI-FOCUS: What Wikimedia projects was your entity focused on (e.g., Wiki Commons, French Wiktionary) this year?
Our core work is to serve as a global steward for Wikipedia and its sister sites. Our primary focus is on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, though 2012–2013 has also seen increased efforts around Wikivoyage. The continued growth of Wikipedia and our sister projects depends on the stable pool of Wikimedians. And all initiatives funded by the Funds Dissemination Committee are ultimately designed to boost the number of volunteer contributors to the Wikimedia movement, or the number of articles, or the amount and diversity of content.
- GROWTH: How did your entity grow over the past quarter vs. the previous quarter (e.g., Number of active editors reached/involved/added, number of articles created, number of events held, number of participants reached through workshops)?
Because of our central role in the Wikimedia movement, the Wikimedia Foundation is uniquely positioned to grow the number of active editors and articles, and to reach users through workshops, events, and other means. This impact report covers the 2012–2013 fiscal year, not just the past quarter, so we are providing numbers that reflect this broader time span: In the 2012–2013 fiscal year, we averaged 80,600 active editors per month (compared to 79,620 monthly active editors on average in 2011–2012). During the 2012–2013 fiscal year, the number of Wikipedia articles jumped from 22.63 million to 27.49 million – an increase of 4.8 million, compared to the previous fiscal year, when the number of articles grew by 3.05 million. During the 2012–2013 fiscal year, Wikimedia staff, consultants, and partner organizations held more than 75 workshops, talks or other events that reached more than 2,000 people. This included 30 IRC chats where anyone around the world could ask questions of foundation staff.
The FDC requires information about how your entity received and spent money over the past year. The FDC distributes general funds, so your entity is not required to use funds exactly as outlined in the proposal. While line-item expenses will not be examined, the FDC and movement wants to understand why the entity spent money in the way it did. If variance in budgeted vs. actual is greater than 20%, please provide explanation in more detail. This helps the FDC understand the rationale behind any significant changes. Note that any changes from the Grant proposal, among other things, must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
Provide exchange rate used:
Table 2 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.
- Please also include any in-kind contributions or resources that you have received in this revenues table. This might include donated office space, services, prizes, food, etc. If you are to provide a monetary equivalent (e.g. $500 for food from Organization X for service Y), please include it in this table. Otherwise, please highlight the contribution, as well as the name of the partner, in the notes section.
Revenue source Currency Anticipated Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Anticipated ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Explanation of variances from plan Donation revenue USD $10,237,500 (Q4 fiscal year) $3,879,608 $26,592,263 $10,522,537 $9,563,496 $50,557,904 $10,237,500 (Q4); $45,500,000 (Q1-Q4) $50,557,904 Lower than plan primarily due to timing of donations received (refer to Q2 & Q3, which were higher than Plan). Other income USD $91,937 (Q4 fiscal year) $233,916 $210,878 $134,470 ($96,373) $482,891 $91,937 (Q4); $569,750 (Q1-Q4) $482,891 Lower than Plan due to unbudgeted unrealized loss on investments, which does not have any cash impact, and also lower activity on the Merchandise Store.
* Provide estimates in US Dollars
Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.
- (The "budgeted" amount is the total planned for the year as submitted in your proposal form or your revised plan, and the "cumulative" column refers to the total spent to date this year. The "percentage spent to date" is the ratio of the cumulative amount spent over the budgeted amount.)
Expense Currency Budgeted Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Budgeted ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Percentage spent to date Explanation of variances from plan All Wikimedia Foundation expenses USD $12,096,621 (Q4) $7,395,987 $8,065,583 $9,595,830 $12,159,007 $37,216,407 $12,096,621 (Q4); $42,069,750 (Q1-Q4) $37,216,407 Higher than plan due to higher CapEx spending, higher outside contract services, higher travel expenses, and unanticipated property tax on data center equipment, offset by lower salary and benefits from unfilled positions that resulted from a competitive market for engineering staff and staff turnover, lower internet hosting resulting from better negotiated pricing than expected, and lower FDC grant expenses.
* Provide estimates in US Dollars
Progress against past year's goals/objectives
The FDC needs to understand the impact of the initiatives your entity has implemented over the past year. Because the FDC distributes general funds, entities are not required to implement the exact initiatives proposed in the FDC proposal; the FDC expects each entity to spend money in the way it best sees fit to achieve its goals and those of the movement. However, please point out any significant changes from the original proposal, and the reasons for the changes. Note that any changes from the Grant proposal, among other things, must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
Editor Engagement Experiments
Wikipedia Education Program
Grants and Fellowships
Lessons from the past
A key objective of the funding is to enable the movement as a whole to understand how to achieve shared goals better and faster. An important way of doing this is to identify lessons learned and insights from entities who receive funds, and to share these lessons across the movement. Please answer the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs each.
- What were your in the past year, and how did you help to achieve movement goals?
For projects funded by the FDC, major accomplishments included the continuing success of the Education Program, in which students in Wikimedia Foundation-run programs added 34 million bytes to Wikipedia articles (even more content was added by chapter-run and volunteer-run programs worldwide, which are supported by the Education Program staff through brochures and other help materials). It’s the most content that students have contributed in a single fiscal year to the program. Editor engagement experiments were also successful in the past year, based on tests involving more than 50,000 registered Wikipedia users. The biggest experiment, in February and March, showed that those who got a “Getting Started” page plus a Guided Tour were 3.9% more likely to make an edit than those new editors who didn’t get the page. In onboarding, editor engagement experiments helped prompt more than 17,000 people to edit a Wikipedia article within 24 hours of registering, including 3,168 in a test from January 25 to January 31.
- What were your in the past year (e.g., programs that were not successful)?
We had some results that could be classified as static or unrealized. As noted above in the Program 3 review of our Catalyst Projects, our work in India and Brazil paralleled increases in some editor ranks and decreases in other editor ranks. Some of our Editor Engagement Experiment tests also yielded results that were statistically negligible. That’s to be expected, though, since the tests are designed for flexibility on setting variables and achieving results.
- What (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?
The Wikimedia Foundation’s Executive Director, team of C-level executives, and Board of Trustees provide the foundational vision that’s necessary to achieve both immediate goals and long-term ones. We have an incredibly mission-driven and increasingly global staff who prioritizes making Wikimedia projects better. Of equal importance is the input of Wikimedia’s community of active editors. Wikimedia’s vast readership also provides a constant stream of feedback, ensuring that every project that the Wikimedia Foundation undertakes is vetted for workability and viability in both the short- and long-term.
- What did you encounter and how did this affect what you were able to accomplish?
A top priority for the Wikimedia Foundation is to reverse the decline of Wikipedia editors, which we’ve done with varying success. Our plateaued year-over-year active editor numbers indicate that while we have stopped the decline in editors, we have not started increasing that number yet. We did not anticipate the opposition to technical changes we have faced from our community of editors, which led to significant staff time spent on community relations.
- What are the that other entities can learn from your experience?
As applied to the four projects funded by the FDC, there are two important lessons: 1. In testing the viability of new projects and reconsidering established ones, data is crucial. In the past fiscal year, the Editor Engagement Experiments team has made some important small breakthroughs because of rigorous data-driven experimentation. The team launched multiple features, including a revised Account Creation page, the first onboarding features for new account creators, and various tools to measure performance of these features. They completed a total of 12 A/B tests and 4 cohort analyses across a total of six projects (Getting Started, Guided Tours, Account Creation User Experience, Donor Engagement, Community Portal Redesign, Post-Edit Feedback). But we shifted from disconnected experiments to working within a user lifecycle framework. We measure the ongoing success of the team based on impact on key metrics such as percentage of attempted account creations that lead to accounts registered and percentage of account creators who make at least one edit. In the 2013–14 fiscal year, the Wikimedia Foundation is launching a Program Evaluation and Design team that will support evaluation of the impact of programmatic work across the Wikimedia movement. The team will facilitate conversations among program leaders, which is intended to identify and document best practices and expertise where it already exists. The team is designed to equip program leaders with information they need to direct energies towards activities that are proving to be effective, and to equip grantmakers with information to make good decisions about where to direct funding. 2. Make programs more scalable. Even as the Education Program has experienced new successes, we’ve worked to make the program self-sufficient. We’re refining the MediaWiki extension for the Education Program, which allows participating professors, ambassadors, and community members to better see how students are doing with edits – and to better help these students. Most of our Ambassador trainings – where Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians learn how to advise students in the Education Program classes – now take place online, rather than through costly and difficult-to-scale in-person trainings. Also, students and instructors now have the opportunity to take Wikipedia trainings online.
Lessons for the future
The Wikimedia movement grows as each entity in the movement reflects and adapts its approaches to changing needs and contexts. The questions below encourage you to apply your thinking in the sections above of "how well have we done" and "what have we learned" to the development and execution of future organizational and program strategies. The questions below can be informed both by your own entities' learnings, as well as the learnings of other movement entities (e.g., adding a new program that appears to have caused significant impact in several other countries or communities).
- What organisational or program strategies would you continue?
Each year, the Wikimedia Foundation produces an Annual Plan that reviews the previous year’s programs and that looks ahead to the next fiscal year. The plan, which includes budgets, charts, and checklist of past goals and future targets, is a project-by-project road map of the foundation’s projects. In our 2013-2014 Annual Plan, we detail both challenges and opportunities, and we reiterate our commitment to three of the four projects funded by the FDC in the 2012–2013 fiscal year: Education Program, Editor Engagement Experiments, and our Grant programs. For the Education Program, a top priority will be to increase the overall impact of educational programs worldwide. In order to achieve this, the team will partner with a number of chapter-driven and non-chapter-driven, high-potential education programs in different countries. The team will also work closely with volunteers and educators in Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia on driving impact in this high-potential region. In order to improve the sharing of learnings among program leaders from different parts of the world, the Education Program team will lay the foundation for a global education “cooperative” model that allows educational program leaders worldwide to share best practices, harness local programs' efforts to grow educational opportunities, and drive student contributions on local Wikipedias worldwide. The Editor Engagement Experiments team will continue to work in a highly iterative fashion, enabling it to flexibly shift gears among four areas as the data warrant it: 1. Acquisition. How do we draw new users into the signup process in a targeted way? 2. Activation. How do we get new users to contribute to the site after joining? 3. Retention. How do we get users who have started to contribute to continue to do so? 4. Reactivation. How do we get users who were once contributing productively to return to the site. For our Grants programs, we are committed in the 2013–2014 fiscal year to having the Project & Event Grants fund $1.37 million in projects (including partnership grants), and to having Individual Engagement Grants fund $200,000 in projects. We see these projects as viable incubators of work that can have a big impact on the Wikimedia movement. In fact, as a percentage of total grant money, our goal is to have individual grant-making increases in the 2013–2014 fiscal year to 7 percent – an indication of how committed we are to these projects.
- What might you change in organisational and program strategies in order to improve the effectiveness of your entity?
In terms of the four projects funded by the FDC in the 2012–2013 fiscal year, we’ve already changed the strategy around our catalyst programs. As part of our “Narrowing Focus” realignment, we’ve moved to a model where we give grants to organizations already on the ground in countries where we want to grow editorship, and these organizations manage the work themselves with the active encouragement and funding of the Wikimedia Foundation. Also, volunteer academics and Wikipedians have created a new nonprofit organization, the Wiki Education Foundation which will take over program management of the Wikipedia Education Program in the United States and Canada. On a broader scale in 2013–14, the Wikimedia Foundation is launching a Program Evaluation and Design team that will support evaluation of the impact of programmatic work in the Wikimedia movement. Finally, the Wikimedia Foundation is hiring a new Executive Director in the coming months, and this new Executive Director may implement new organizational and program strategies that impact our projects.
Stories of success and challenge
Of all the accomplishments highlighted through this report, please share two detailed case studies: one "story of success" and one story of challenge that your entity experienced over the past year (2–3 paragraphs). Provide any details that might be helpful to others in the movement on the context, strategy, and impact of this initiative.
Case study: success
Response: The Wikipedia Education Program Arab World started in spring 2012 with a small pilot in Cairo, Egypt. During the 2012–13 fiscal year, the program expanded dramatically, moving from one country to three by the end of spring 2013, from 7 classes to 48, from 54 students to 324, and from 1.8 million bytes added to the Arabic Wikipedia to 12.8 million. The impact the program has had on the Arabic Wikipedia is truly incredible: A small language Wikipedia (fewer than 100 very active editors) is growing significantly. Students have created 1,360 new articles on the Arabic Wikipedia and expanded many others (WikiMetrics does not allow us to count how many articles students have edited yet). During the term, students represent about 10% of the active and very active editors on the Arabic Wikipedia. Even better, we are retaining students at levels previously unheard-of levels: 5.4% of our first term students were still editing one year later, and 6.2% of our students from the second term were still editing six months later. Coupled with the gender diversity number of 87% female student editors, we believe this program has the potential to change the gender dynamic on the Arabic Wikipedia’s editing community and content. A detailed program evaluation report explains the history of the program in Egypt and its successes from the first two terms, including providing some guidance on what happened in classes and how the program was set up. This evaluation report may be instructive for others in the movement looking to start a small Wikipedia Education Program pilot to stimulate the growth of another language Wikipedia.
Case study: challenge
Response: For years, Wikipedia users have debated how inviting Wikipedia is to newcomers. Some users said the web pages that new contributors first encountered were perfectly fine. Others said the web pages were off-putting and too clinical. The debate (see here and here and here for examples) continued into the 2012–2013 fiscal year -- and may continue into the 2013–2014 fiscal year, even after the Wikimedia Foundation’s Editor Engagement Experiments team revamped the account-creation pages, where new contributors go to register an account. When people around the world first think of Wikipedia, they don’t think of the account-registration page – they might think of Wikipedia’s millions of articles that explain the world at large, and they might think of Wikimedia Commons’ millions of media files that are used in Wikipedia articles. But beyond reading Wikipedia, the account-creation pages are often the first tangible way that new editors engage with Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation. On just Wikipedia’s English-language version, more than 3,000 people sign up for an account on an average day. And for most of Wikipedia’s 12-year history, the pages were cluttered with information and directives that were uninspiring. In fact, until the 2012–2013 fiscal year, the Wikimedia Foundation had done very little to proactively introduce new participants to tasks that are interesting and easy. That lack of direction is a big part of why only about a quarter of all newly-registered accounts complete an edit. All that has changed. On English Wikipedia, for example, when people now go to register, it gives them a streamlined way to register, asking only for such basic information as a username and password. The message is more concise and clear, with the paged titled "Create an account" rather than the more clunky "Log in / create account.” The page reminds the registrants that, “Wikipedia is made by people like you.” It tells them that English Wikipedia has 4.3 million articles, has been edited 658 million times, and that 127,000 people have made recent contributions. And it tells them this with fonts and icons that are inviting. After registering, new editors are taken to a new GettingStarted page that invites them to do one of three basic edits: Fix an article’s spelling and grammar; improve an article’s clarity, add links to an article. The foundation implemented the GettingStarted page in December 2012. Before this feature was added, users were presented with a page where they could change their preferences, and it was up to them to search for tutorials or other orientation. Among the E3 team’s other additions: GuidedTours, which give readers interactive tutorials on editing. During the year’s account-creation testing, one participant who’d never registered before talked about Wikipedia’s lack of obvious guidance to new editors. (See “Test A” under “Testing Scenario One.”) It took him many minutes to find the registration tab on Wikipedia’s main articles page. “At this point,” he said at the 11th minute, “I think I’m lost.” Getting lost, we believe, is over for new editors. But the challenge of getting new editors to continue contributing – not just once a month, but five times a month, which would put them in the category of “active editors” – is our continuing challenge. And that’s a challenge that the Editor Engagement Experiments team, and the foundation as a whole, continues to face in the next fiscal year.
- What are some of the activities that are happening in your community that are not chapter-led? What are the most successful among these, and why?
Vorarlberg University of Applied Sciences in Dornbirn, Austria. Hanyang University in Seoul, South Korea. The Polytechnic of Namibia in Windhoek, Namibia. Schools, universities, and Wikimedia chapters around the world are running Wikipedia Education Program courses, supported through mentorship, support resources, and guidance from Wikimedia Foundation staff. It’s a “win-win” that benefits the students and benefits Wikipedia. Each class is individualized to fit the interests of the instructors and students, and the cultural environment of the institutions. In a rural, isolated part of Namibia in February, for example, an instructor at the Polytechnic of Namibia, Peter Gallert, conducted a Wikipedia training for teachers from six pilot schools. The training was done on computers that accessed the Internet through dial-up connections. In the language of OtjiHerero, the instructor and students created Wikipedia articles about the students’ home villages in Namibia. These volunteer-driven education initiatives are successful because of dedicated instructors like Peter Gallert. Just like Wikipedia, whose articles and content are contributed by volunteers, these ongoing courses owe their origins to people who see Wikipedia’s educational value. With our Education Program, the Wikimedia Foundation created a role model for how a class can incorporate lesson plans. We are happy to have a foundation web page that links to these independent initiatives. One reason they’re successful is because they’re independent. Their classes and lesson plans operate in a way that works for them.
- Provide any other relevant information that may be helpful or relevant for the FDC (e.g., links to any media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, more detailed financial information).
The Wikimedia Foundation is dedicated to being one of the world’s most transparent nonprofit organizations. Below are links to media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, and more detailed financial information:
- Blog posts: http://blog.wikimedia.org/
- More financial information: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Financial_reports
- Metrics Report Card that details unique visitors, pageviews, and other statistical data: http://reportcard.wmflabs.org/
- Media coverage summary of foundation projects is found in our monthly Foundation Reports, which are linked at: https://wikimediafoundation.org
Here is the link to the independent audit of our 2012-2013 fiscal year: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/6e/FINAL_12_13From_KPMG.pdf
Is your organization compliant with the terms defined in the grant agreement?
- As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.
- There are no deviations to report.
- Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".
- Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Grant funds as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".
- Report any Grant funds that are unexpended fifteen (15) months after the Effective Date of the Grant Agreement. These funds must be returned to WMF or otherwise transferred or deployed as directed by WMF.
Response: There are no grant funds unexpended.
- Any interest earned on the Grant funds by Grantee will be used by Grantee to support the Mission and Purposes as set out in this Grant Agreement. Please report any interest earned during the reporting period and cumulatively over the duration of the Grant and Grant Agreement.
Response: There is no interest to report.