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
Note you can copy this from your recent progress report if the information is the same.
|Entity information||Legal name of entity||Wikimedia Sverige|
|Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd)||01/01-12/31|
|12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy)||01/01/12-12/31/12|
|Contact information (primary)||Primary contact name||Jan Ainali|
|Primary contact position in entity||CEO|
|Primary contact username||Jan Ainali (WMSE)|
|Primary contact email||jan.ainaliwikimedia.se|
|Contact information (secondary)||Secondary contact name||Mattias Blomgren|
|Secondary contact position in entity||Chairman|
|Secondary contact username||Historiker|
|Secondary contact email||mattias.blomgrenwikimedia.se|
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. Also, we encourage you to share photographs, videos, and sound files in this report to make it more interactive, and include links to reports, blog posts, plans, etc as these will add context for the readers.
- HIGHLIGHTS: What were 2–3 important highlights of the past year? (These may include successes, challenges, lessons learned. Please note which you are describing)
- 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? Feel free to include factors unanticipated in the proposal.
- Strengths: Organizational strengths that enabled the plan
- Weaknesses: Organizational weaknesses that inhibited the plan
- Opportunities: External opportunities that enabled the plan
- Threats: Risks or threats that inhibited the plan
- WIKI-FOCUS: What Wikimedia projects was your entity focused on (e.g., Wiki Commons, French Wiktionary) this year?
- GROWTH: How did your entity grow over the past year (e.g., Number of active editors reached/involved/added, number of articles created, number of events held, number of partipants reached through workshops)? And what were the long term affects of this growth (e.g. relationships with new editors, more returned editors, higher quality articles, etc)?
- Establishing ourselves in the GLAM sector - see major accomplishments.
- Accreditation to Eurovision - see case studies.
- Growth - see major accomplishments.
- Great and enthusiastic staff with good connections to the community.
- Dedicated board with several respected community members.
- Technical competence, in staff, board and volunteers.
- Wikipedia is a strong trademark which gives the organization credibility towards many stakeholders.
- Wikimedia Sverige has gained a positive reputation amongst many organisations and there is a real interest in working with us.
- Small number of members.
- A lot of basic instructional material still need to be created/updated.
- No real expertise in communications within the staff or board.
- Many projects are planned on too short terms. Most projects would benefit from being planned on a two or three year basis.
- Lots of interest from GLAM institutions.
- Many teachers are interested in how they can use Wikipedia.
- Relied on project grants to complete the full plan and not enough were granted to carry everything through.
- Mostly Swedish Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons but thanks to the Swedish for Immigrants project we were involved in around 10 other language versions.
- New users through chapter activities: 20+ (these are confirmed, probably many more during edit-a-thons and workshops which were not tracked)
- Editors involved in chapter activities: 260+ (same as above)
- Media uploaded through the technology pool: 3091 files
- Technology pool media viewed: 24,038,621 views (data for Q1 missing)
- Persons engaged in workshops and seminars: 468
- Persons reached in presentations: 1114
- Number of events held (edit-a-thons, workshops, seminars, presentations): 112
- New chapter members: 56 (total 194)
- New likes on Facebook page: 253 (total 801)
- GLAM cooperations: 7 (~20,000 uploaded files)
- New persons employed: +2 FTE (total 5)
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."
If you'd prefer to share a budget created in Google or another tool and import it to wiki, you can do so in the tables below instead of using wiki tables. You can link to an external document, but we ask that you do include a table in this form. We are testing this approach in this form.
Provide exchange rate used:
- 1$ = 6.88 SEK
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 FDC grant round 1, 2012 SEK 2,350,000 564,627 602,818 360,007 822,548 2,350,000 $341,570 $341,570 Grant from Wiki Skills SEK 235,000 101,145 46,261 18,693 47,578 214,037 $34,156 $31,110 Grant from Europeana Awareness SEK 230,000 97,887 128,792 60,368 46,809 333,856 $33,430 $48,526 Some work was moved from 2012 to 2013. Membership fees SEK 15,000 12,200 1,900 1,400 1,600 17,100 $2,180 $2,485 Donations SEK 20,000 14,125 1,799 14,224 2,994 33,142 $2,907 $4,817 Interests, sales SEK 15,000 48 28 6,274 11,022 17,372 $2,180 $2,525 Other grants SEK 1,835,000 114,468 154,121 203,706 329,430 801,725 $266,715 $116,530 Fundraising did not go as well as expected.
* Provide estimates in US Dollars
Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ 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 Staff expenses (including on-costs, labour taxes, etc) SEK 3,130,000 609,126 713,848 465,230 691,297 2,479,498 $454,942 $360,392 79% Less funding than expected, meant that we did not hire in the same pace as planned, which kept the spending down. Community support SEK 619,000 7,906 13,828 22,180 171,531 215,445 $89,971 $31,315 35% Difficulties to find external funding in this area made us keep the costs down. Content liberation SEK 110,000 10,143 39,686 32,993 67,078 149,900 $15,988 $21,788 136% The Europeana Awareness project grew since some work from 2012 was moved into 2013. Free knowledge in Education SEK 80,000 41,595 37,375 10,209 147,785 236,964 $11,478 $34,442 287% An area with a lot of opportunities. The Wikipedia for immigrants project which was externally funded had some large costs for partners. External funding from WWF SE arrived unexpectedly in Q4 which started a pilot project in Uganda. Reader participation SEK 75,000 1,883 1,872 20 10,248 14,023 $10,901 $2,038 19% The feedback program was not started at all due to feedback from the community. Free knowledge awareness SEK 90,000 0 3,677 2,885 13,750 20,312 $13,081 $2,952 23% Since some of the planned activities in this area were to be made with external funding that we did not receive the program were reduced. Administration, non-staff (rent, servers, systems, etc) SEK 750,000 169,929 158,961 114,584 166,531 609,825 $109,012 $88,637 81%
* 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."
Free knowledge in education
Free knowledge in education
Free knowledge awareness
Free knowledge awareness
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.
- 1. What were your in the past year, and how did you help to achieve movement goals?
- Really establishing ourselves as a player in the GLAM sector. This is due to long term work from our side, and the pilots with the Central Museums Cooperation Council and the Working Life Museums. It has come to the point that we are the natural partner for a dialouge and that many GLAM insitutions are thinikng about how they can contribute to the cause of free knowledge, most of them do realize that we sre working with very similar missions. This ensures that high quality content have been made accessible for the Wikimedia projects this year and that it will continue in years to come.
- Managing growth. The chapter grew in both budget and employees, and handled it very well. This in itself made all other things that we report on here possible. Having an Education Manager, one GLAM-technician and a CEO made all our work both more effective and efficient. EG. if we had not had en Education Manager, the entire program Free knowledge in education would have come out with a lot less value towards the movement goals.
- 2. What were your in the past year (e.g., programs that were not successful)?
- There were no major setbacks on program level. Some individual events suffered from e.g. lack of participants though.
- 3. What (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?
- The spirit in the chapter is really thriving. The staff is eager and the board tries to enable them as much as possible. After the quick expansion in 2012 things have been falling into places and the chapter has matured.
- 4. What did you encounter and how did this affect what you were able to accomplish?
- It has been more difficult than expected to fundraise. Since our plan had projections for a lot more, several projects were cut down or not started at all.
- 5. What are the that other entities can learn from your experience? Consider learning from both the programmatic and institutional (what you have learned about professionalizing your entity, if you have done so) points of view.
- When seeking grants it has shown that to be most successful there should already be established partnerships and that it can be shown that these partners are active and also has something to gain through the grant.
- Wikimedia Sverige had a few EU-grants and one important thing we learned is to consider currency fluctuations. This is especially important when the projects are longer, as in our case 2 years long.
- One other thing that might not be obvious is that ending the projects in enough time so that all financial numbers are settled. That means that you cannot really work in the project until the very day you need to submit the reports, since salaries are not paid and accounted for yet. Make sure to have everything ready so that you just need to fill in the latest numbers before submitting. This means that work should be finished at least one month before reporting is due.
- Having an office have been hugely beneficial for us this year. Potential partners have taken the time to visit our office when in town or nearby, which in an informal but very tangible way have strengthened our partnerships. We have also had the opportunity to give volunteers a place to have meetings in, over which a lot of appreciation has been made.
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 organisational 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).
- 1. What organisational or program strategies would you continue?
- In essence, we will continue all our programs. So far they are all promising, and in some areas we will expect impact to happen gradually which makes it important not to stop.
- 2. What might you change in organisational and program strategies in order to improve the effectiveness of your entity?
- In our efforts to diversify the user base, we will make sure that time is getting more attention. That is, a one hour workshop has a very low chance in creating a long term wikipedian out of the participants. So we want to make sure there is more time to guide newcomers. In that we will try making series of workshops or really long ones. For example, when talking to a university we will stress that in order to get their Ph.D. students on track we need at least 2x8 hours for starters. By doing that we have time to guide the newcomers over the first hurdles so that they feel strong and self confident when parting from us.
- 3. Please create at least one learning pattern from your entity's experiences this year and link to it here.
Stories of success and challenge
Of all the accomplishments highlighted through this report, please share two detailed stories: one story of a success and one story of a challenge that your entity experienced over the past year in a few paragraphs each. Provide any details that might be helpful to others in the movement on the context, strategy, and impact of this initiative. We suggest you write this as you would tell a story to a friend or colleague. Please refrain from using bullet points or making a list, and rather focus on telling us about your organization's experience.
Case study: success
- Eurovision Song Contest. One volunteer wanted to go to the Eurovision song contest to photgraph. However, he was denied entry at first. When Wikimedia Sverige wrote a letter of support, explaining he was a well known contributor to the Wikimedia projects, he was granted full press accreditation. He also borrowed camera and sound equipment from our technology pool, enabling him to capture high quality content. Over 800 images and videos are uploaded, used in over 30 language versions that got several millions of page views only in May 2013. Our experience is that this particular volunteer thought it was a very motivating task, and got energized for a long time period afterwards. The key to be able to do this were chapter people that were able to act quickly and high quality equipment that we were able to send across the country.
Case study: challenge
- External fundraising. We raised the bar for ourselves, striving not to be dependent on the grant through the FDC. This turned out to be hard. Although we managed to keep the FDC to only 63% of our income, we had ambition for it to be closer to 50%. During the year we have learned that the sucess rate for grant seeking in Sweden is highly dependent on how well established partnerships are already when the applications are written. In several cases in the beginning of the year we either had no partners, or they had been contacted in the last minute, which were shining through in the applications.
- 1. 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?
- One of the biggest things on svwp this year was bot creation of all animals. The chapter was not involved. The success, around 800 000 articles, were enabled by good discussions on-wiki, and support from several editors in debugging on the test-runs. A healthy community that can engage in constructive dialogue even in such a controversial subject seem to be key to the success (along with a dedicated and skilled bot runner of course!). Example of a bot created article.
- 2. Provide any links to any media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, more detailed financial information that you haven't already, as well as at least one photograph or video that captures the impact your entity had this past year.
- Annual report (in Swedish).
- Detailed accounting.
- Project sponsor breakdown.
- Board meeting minutes(in Swedish).
- Detailed reports on all projects(in Swedish, but with nice traffic light symbols).
- Blog posts in English on the Wikimedia Foundation blog: Wikipedia Education Program Sweden Sweden Agricultural Sciences collaboration Hosts first fashion edit-a-thon Wiki Loves Public Art Documenting the Eurovision Database for Public Art Linneaus University Wiki Loves Public Art 2 Collection days edit-a-thon The humming teachers Picture of the day Wiki Loves Public Art results Parallel WWI edit-a-thons Wikiskills help teachers use Wikipedia Wikiskills - lessons learned Translation sprint
- Sample pictures and movies from 2013.
Updated image of which municipalities have been contacted in the Open Database for Public Art
Video of Superconducting levitation train shot with camera from the technology pool.
Video from Bokmässan of Björn Ranelid.
One of the volunteers in action at the bookfair.
One of the pictures from the Swedish Championships.
Accredited photographer at the Swedish Championships.
One of the pictures from Barack Obama's visit.
The editathon on sustainable development.
At a break during the Digikult Hackathon.
Infographic from Cultural treasures on the net.
Bengt Oberger in Milan.
How to add a reference
User abbedabb filming Krista Siegfrids for Wikimedia Commons during Eurovision Song Contest 2013.
Robin Stjernberg presenting himself and his song in Eurovision Song Contest 2013.
After a presentation at the School of Hallen.
During Wiki Loves Public Art
Three of the developers helping us at A Helping Hack.
Picnic after a board meeting.
From a photo hunt, the first of our approved mini grants.
One participant at the 1864 edit-a-thon, with detailed edit plans on the whiteboard.
Teachers night at the Nobel Museum.
Time-lapse of the introduction session at the Europeana Fashion edit-a-thon.
Sample of donated images throught the Fashion edit-a-thon from the Nordic museum.
One presentation at the education day for volunteers.
Our new computer bag for Wikipedia ambassadors.
Sample of images taken in the aerial photography
Member of Parliament Karl Sigfrid chaired our Annual meeting.
House warming in the new office.
One of the movies about Commons.
Is your organization compliant with the terms defined in the grant agreement?
- 1. 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.
- The major deviation from the grant proposal is that due to less expected external funding, some areas have had reduced budget and therefore less activity in them.
- 2. Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".
- 3. 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".
- 1. 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.
- All funds are expended.
- 2. 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.
- 5,245.12 SEK was earned.