Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014 round2/Wikimedia Norge/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.
- 1 Purpose of the report
- 2 Basic entity information
- 3 Overview of the past year
- 4 Financial summary
- 5 Progress against past year's goals/objectives
- 6 Lessons learned
- 7 Stories of success and challenge
- 8 Additional learning
- 9 Compliance
- 10 Signature
- 11 References
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 Norge|
|Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd)||01/01-12/31 and 07/01-06/30|
|12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy)||07/01/14-06/30/15|
|Contact information (primary)||Primary contact name||Hogne Neteland|
|Primary contact position in entity||Chairman|
|Primary contact username||Hogne|
|Primary contact email||hogne(a)wikimedia.no|
|Contact information (secondary)||Secondary contact name||Astrid Carlsen|
|Secondary contact position in entity||Executive Director|
|Secondary contact username||WMNOastrid|
|Secondary contact email||astrid(a)wikimedia.no|
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)?
- Success: Receiving funding from 3 different Norwegian foundations, enabling us to expand our effort to increase the number of female university students editing Wikipedia and buying much needed technical equipment. Total sum of funding was 306,000 NOK.
- Success: Collaboration with the Oslo National Academy of the Arts were we helped put together a 2 day workshop on making illustrations for Wikipedia. 84 illustrations were made by the students.
- Challenge: With organizational changes in Wikimedia Norge during 3 and 4 quarter it has been a challenge to find a balance between governance issues that needed to be addressed and our program work.
- Lessons learned: Division of tasks and responsibilities: To prevent burn out and secure good governance Wikimedia Norge has made several organizational changes this last year.
- Strengths: High value partners. Small organization that are highly responsive.
- Weaknesses: Small organization that is not capable to fulfill all requirements. No links to the top management in the Norwegian academy.
- Opportunities: Several public, academic and busyness partners wants our help to present their perspective in Wikipedia and want to do projects with WMNO. A lot of quality writers are potential Wikipedia contributers.
- Threats: Decline in contributers and in reader statistic. Economic challenges.
- WIKI-FOCUS: Wikipedia (Bokmål), Wikipedia (Nynorsk), Wikipedia (Northern Saami) and Wikimedia Commons.
The number of wikipedians and edits per capita in Norway is still high, only comparable to countries like Israel, Estonia, and Iceland, and far above that of the large language communities. Every month, there are 1500 editors making changes to the Wikipedia in Norway, with 10-15 % of these wikipedians at the Nynorsk version and the rest at Bokmål. As of this writing (28. Sept. 2015) there are 1508 at Norwegian Bokmål, 176 at Norwegian Nynorsk, and 18 at the Sami Wikipedia which has virtually no edits anymore.
In 2015 The Wikipedia versions in Norway witnessed a continued slight drop and stagnation for some of the cohorts. For example in August 2015 there were 354 contributers with more than 5 edits at Norwegian Bokmål  and 36 contributors with the same amount of contributions at Norwegian Nynorsk. In August 2009 the number was 648 and 52, giving a decline in contribution by 45% and 31%.
Those numbers are somewhat scary, but looking closer it is clear that the situation is about to change. The provided graphs shows that the drop for contributors with more than 100 edits for both Norwegian Bokmål and Nynorsk has stopped and is about to settle at a new lower level. We think that the drop can be attributed to two major effects, one is people leaving the project but another is people that starts to contribute at Wikidata. At Norwegian Nynorsk it is clear that something happen when Wikidata went active, which may indicate that those people didn't leave Wikimedia but only started to contribute in another project.
There are indications that some of the drop at Norwegian Nynorsk Wikipdia is in fact IW-bots stopping their edits, but we have no hard facts on this. It could be interesting if WMF could produce some numbers on the impact of the IW-bots, and how that changed with Wikidata.
New users with edits drops more than the contributors with more than 5 edits, and this indicates that we are also hit by some other effect. We guess that one of the effects is an increased amount of contributions on social media like Facebook. That uses a considerable amount of peoples spare time, creating a ripple effect into Wikipedia. People in Norway use social media a lot, to a level where analysts starts to question if this has impact on the newspapers ad revenue.
If we reads the graphs a bit speculative it seems like the contributors with 5 edits or more is about to flatten the same way the graph for contributors with 100 edits or more did. That graph has an influx of contributors from the new ones, and as long as that falls the 5 edits will fall too, and for now it does not seem to slow down.
Wikipedia has also declined in the reader statistic. At Alexa Wikipeda number 8 in the list of most visited sites in Norway. The decline can be partly explained by the change Google did by presenting more of the Wikipedia article in the search page, partly by the increased time people are using on social media, and partly on efforts made by an alternate encyclopedia to take market shares. The change Google made has an overall effect on all projects, and the only way we may counteract that is to make our pages more attractive both when it comes to content and style. The effect from social media is hard to counteract, but perhaps we can interface better to route back some traffic. The local encyclopedia en:Store norske leksikon, which is really an old paper-based encyclopedia, has redesigned and focused their effort and is now becoming a real contender in the Norwegian market. Estimates shows that they have about or slightly more than 10% of the market Wikipedia had previously.
2003-2015: Edits on Nynorsk, Bokmål and Nordsamisk Wikipedia The following graphs shows the statistics, but processed and visualized to clarify the trends. The blue lines shows the numbers "as is" from from the stats. The red line shows the 12 month moving average, taken from the previous 12 months. The yellow line shows a 12 month difference over the 12 month moving average. Because we use a moving average taken from the previous 12 months, the effects seems to be delayed and smoothed. This is as expected, and can be interpreted as an increased confidence in the numbers.
Norwegian Nynorsk Wikipedia the smaller of the two Norwegian projects. Important thing to note is the drop for contributors with more than 100 edits that starts in the spring 2013. We think this can be attributed to Wikidata, and the IW-bots stopping maintenance of the IW-links.
Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia the larger of the two Norwegian projects. As this project is larger the effect of IW-bots leaving isn't that visible. At the same time there were courses held in Norway that created some contributions, and this smears the drop out over a longer time. Still the drop is very large. An important thing to note is that the drop seems to have stopped and the graph for contributors with 100 edits or more is about to settle on a new level.
Northern Sami Wikipedia which is the smallest project within our area. As seen from the daily contributions the edits have died away the last two years. It is not obvious how this project can be revitalized.
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:
- Originally: USD = 6 NOK
- Q2, Q3 and Q4: USD = 7 NOK
- Wikimedia Norge changed to a new accounting system during August and September 2015. Because of this some of the numbers reported here may change. Some numbers from expenses Q1-Q3 are missing. Our auditor will make the financial statement by October 28, when the financial statement is due, so any errors will be sorted by then.
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 ($US)* Explanation of variances from plan Membership fees NOK 20,000 100 0 2,450 7,668 10,218 3,333 1,460 Gifts from individuals NOK 15,000 1,682 1,698 1,320 0 4,700 2,500 671 Only individuals Event support and fees NOK 55,000 0 1,800 400 0 2,200 9,166 315 See below Sales revenues NOK 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,666 0 FDC funds from WMF NOK 1,400,000 213,025 373,510 313,296 500,169 1,400,000 215,000 200 000 Saami project funding NOK 750,000 0 0 0 0 0 125,000 0 No program applied for. State project funding NOK 250,000 0 0 0 0 0 41,666 0 Main application (Summer) was rejected by the State Charitable projects funding NOK 0 0 0 175,000 0 175,000 0 25,000 Q3: Awarded 100,000 from "Fritt Ord" and 150,00 from "Finansmarkedsfondet" of which 75,000 will be paid out when the project end, Q3 2016. Saami project funding NOK 750,000 0 0 0 0 0 125,000 0 No program applied for. Prizes NOK 1,000 2,000 3,000 2,000 8,000 1,143 Prizes (editing contests) sponsored from our main partners Food NOK 2,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 7,000 1,000 Food from GLAM partners at events Venues: wiki workshops and wiki meetups NOK 7,000 5,000 4,000 10,000 26,000 3,714 Rent covered by partners Video Screen from Frivillighetshuset NOK 0 250,000 250,000 35,714 We received one video screen from Frivillighetshuset, where our office is. Total Revenues NOK 2,500,000 224,807 386,008 501,466 770,837 1,883,118 398,331 269,017 State funding was rejected. Charitable funding awarded.
* Provide estimates in US Dollars
Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ 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 Personnel cost NOK 1,010,000 154,181 261,765 250,107 158,285 824,338 155,385 117,763 76 % Costs were reduced due to one staff member on furlough June 2015 and one staff member left 31. May Office costs NOK 100,000 40,880 0 25,587 21,705 88,172 15,385 12,596 82 % On budget Wikipedia Academy NOK 70,000 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 10,000 7,143 71 % All costs accrue in Q4. Partners sponsored some of the arrangement. Other rental and meeting costs NOK 30,000 6,542 40,779 6,261 0 53,582 4,500 7,655 170 % This post is slightly re-classified since Q2, to apply more correctly to actual cost items. IT, postal, etc NOK 5,000 907 1,092 134 6,115 8,248 800 1,178 147 % Accounting, auditing NOK 40,000 0 20,000 7,500 54,750 82,250 6,000 11,750 196 % Outside accountant started May 2015. This was a requirement from FDC accepted by WMNO during the budget period. Membership fees NOK 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 325 0 0 % May accrue later Nordic activities NOK 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 % Wikimaps costs not accrued Program activities NOK 50,000 0 0 19,630 0 19,630 7,500 2,804 37 % Film production + Regional outreach costs. Travelling cost NOK 75,000 10,315 18,783 12,235 13,267 54,600 11,500 7,800 68 % Meals, HR costs, etc NOK 5,000 0 7,679 1,160 6,075 14,914 2,131 n.a. Q1-Q3 = Meetings among staff Q4=Staff and outside meetings Competition prizes NOK 30,000 0 24,427 1654 578 26,659 4,500 3,808 85 % Editing contets' prizes and WLM 2014. Saami Project NOK 750,000 0 0 0 0 0 107,100 0 0.0 % Not funded State funded projects NOK 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,850 0 0.0 % Not funded Bank fees and other costs NOK 5,000 731 1,280 1,094 9,246 12,351 750 1,764 235 % Bank fees for integration of the accountant. TOTAL NOK 2,467,000 213,556 375,805 325,362 320,021 1,234,744 379,500 176,392 See notes above
* 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."
A qualitative improvement of Wikipedia
A visible advocate for free knowledge
Professionalization of Wikimedia Norge
A transparent and inclusive organization
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?
- We have developed our GLAM partnerships focusing on improving quality.
- We have gained publicity and funding for our gender gap project. The project focus on improving quality by getting more female editors to share their knowledge on Wikipedia.
- 2. What were your in the past year (e.g., programs that were not successful)?
- The first 4 goals under program 2 were to ambitious for the staff to achieve
- 3. What (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?
- The library sector in Norway has turned out to be a very welcoming partner for Wikimedia Norge.
- The Arts Counsil Norway´s Wikipedia project from 2012-2014.
- The reorganization of Wikimedia Norge and and getting an outside accountant has helped staff to work more efficient
- 4. What did you encounter and how did this affect what you were able to accomplish?
- Wikimedia Norge has had many governance issues to address tis last year. This was time consuming for board and staff, especially from December 2014-June 2015
- One employee left 31. May an another was on furlough in June 2015. This delayed The Wikipedia Library project In Norway which was suppose to start in June and Wikimedia Norge was not present at other events we had planned together with GLAM partners. The first meeting was held in August 2015.
- 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.
- Division of duties between board and staff is essential
- If you are a small organizations, concentrate on few partners that you know are positive to a collaboration
- Define what you what to achieve with organizing events. They always take more time to plan and organize then we think
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?
- Program 1: Focus on few partners and build connections between these partners. Any new partners should "fit in" with existing partners
- Program 4: Maintain and secure new system for division of duties in Wikimedia Norge
- 2. What might you change in organisational and program strategies in order to improve the effectiveness of your entity?
- Fewer events and make sure most events include more than one partner
- Wikimedia Norge has until now often not planned how / when / if we can collect data from our program work in order to report on global metrics. For this falls visits to univeristy libraries we have set up this page to do so and to give the participants a place to connect. This page has been helpful in gaining better understanding of what Wikimedia Foundation means by global metrics.
- 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: Immigration of photos - How did the photo of Sir John Benjamin Stone escape from the Nansen collection at The National Library?
This is a story about how photos can immigrate. If images are shared and can be used by everyone they can immigrate. The National Library holds the Nansen collection. This is a collection of photos mostly of the explorer Fridjof Nansen, his family and his travels to Russia and the polar regions. And a photo of Sir John Benjamin Stone (9 February 1838 – 2 July 1914), known as Benjamin, a British Conservative politician, and noted photographer. He was the major of Sutton Coldfield outside Birmingham. The photo of Sir John (from a business card) somehow ended up in the Nansen collection. Now one would have looked for him there. 2 weeks after the photo was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons it was cropped and used in this article on English Wikipedia. We think it is a good story on how images can come alive again, and has used this story as an example in an article we have written this fall for the Norwegian Union of Librarians´ journal about why librarians and wikipedians like each other so much.
Case study: challenge: Transition from a working board to having staff
This last year there has been many organizational changes in Wikimedia Norge. We have a new chair and vice chair, new board members, one staff member was made ED, another staff member left in May and we have one new staff member financed by Norwegian funding. Spring 2015 we also had to interns joining us at the office. In the transition from a working board to having staff these changes were necessary and we have had many discussions on the divisions of duties between board and staff. This discussions started in December 2014 and took more or less place until June 2015 when staff signed new contracts and detailed job descriptions. During spring staff, in agreement with the board, could start the search for an outside accountant. We hope that the systems we now have build will secure good governance and.
During the last 6 Months it has been important for us to talk to other chapters, staff at Wikimedia Foundation and our neighbor organizations in Frivillighetshuset. The issues discussed in Wikimedia Norge are the same as so many other organizations and just from talking to our neighbors we found a very skilled outside accountant and suggestions for new board members. These learning patterns have also been useful for Wikimedia Norge: Divisions of tasks and responsibilities between board, staff and volunteers and Governance Codex The Governance Codex we used as a starting point for discussions in December and it helped get many issues on the table.
- 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?
- Community (wikipedians): Editing contests. The weekly editing contest runs on bokmål, nynorsk and nordsamisk Wikipedia. Organized week to week by community members, and from time to time by staff and then with prizes sponsored or paid for by Wikimedia Norge. The Norwegian community member who did the UKbot also helped Finnish Wikipedia set up a Finnish version of the weekly editing contest. Metrics from editing contests from week 27 2014 - week 26 2015 (thanks to Danmichaelo):
- 2,417 new articles
- 312,822 new words
- 11,202 sources added
- Community (partners): Both at the National Archive and The Directorate of Cultural Heritage they have editing groups that meet on a regulary basis. This show commitment to doing Wikipedia related work during working hours. Discussions around mass uploading of pictures is often made directly between The National Library and other institutions after Wikimedia Norge has made introductions. The new government strategy for libraries in Norway is very strong on digitaliztion and access and is a strong indicator for a continued collaboration between Wikimedia Norge and The National Library.
- 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.
Wikimedia Norge´s impact this last year is a result of how we have concentrated more on having the role as a connector rather then an organizator. Our impact is the result of how we can link community members, partners, sponsors, board and staff together. We are a small organization and impact can best be achieved in collaboration with others.
Media coverage, highlights from 2014-2015:
- National media coverage in the newspaper Dagsavisen, interview with the new female editor Monica Annett Dyrø, and WMNO project officer Jorid Martinsen.
- National media coverage in the Nynorsk Media.
- National radio (NRK) program interviewing WMNO staff and a language researcher from the University of Oslo, about male and female language and power at the Wikipedia.
- Visible media debate in Nov-Dec, initiated by CEO Frank Meyer (a wikipedian) of the Labour Union Archives ensuing debate in the newspaper Klassekampen between Meyer and Astrid Carlsen (WMNO) resulted in a conclusion that labour union members should volunteer to edit the Wikipedia. Spread to newspapers Dagbladet, Adresseavisen, Hordaland.
- The Wikipedian-in-Residence at The National Library online (link) and on national radio.
- Promoted the drawing and illustrations workshop at the Arts Academy of Oslo, on National public radio (NRK), and in the countries largest newspaper Aftenposten, the weekend magazine Aftenposten K (not online).
- Wikimedia Norge´s blog
- Other WMF reports we have given data to: Evaluation reports on Writing contes and Financial Trend Report 2103
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.
- Deviations due to lack of funding is described above. Some missions in our grant proposal was not possible to fulfil.
- 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.
- Nothing to report.
- 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.
- The Credit interest in the bank is 0,1 %. Accrued interests on the project account were NOK 311,22 until August 31, 2015. This corresponds to USD 44.
Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.