Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015 round1/Amical Wikimedia/Impact report form

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Purpose of the report[edit]

This form is for organizations receiving Annual Plan Grants to report on their results to date. For progress reports, the time period for this report will the first 6 months of each grant (e.g. 1 January - 30 June of the current year). For impact reports, the time period for this report will be the full 12 months of this grant, including the period already reported on in the progress report (e.g. 1 January - 31 December of the current year). This form includes four sections, addressing global metrics, program stories, financial information, and compliance. Please contact APG/FDC staff if you have questions about this form, or concerns submitting it by the deadline. After submitting the form, organizations will also meet with APG staff to discuss their progress.

Global metrics overview - all programs[edit]

'We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our grantees' programs. Please use the table below to let us know how your programs contributed to the Global Metrics. We understand not all Global Metrics will be relevant for all programs, so feel free to put "0" where necessary. For each program include the following table and

  1. Next to each required metric, list the outcome achieved for all of your programs included in your proposal.
  2. Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome.
  3. In addition to the Global Metrics as measures of success for your programs, there is another table format in which you may report on any OTHER relevant measures of your programs success

For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.

Program Community
Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved 205 program details
2. # of new editors n/a program details
3. # of individuals involved 10,279 program details
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages n/a program details
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects n/a program details
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects n/a program details
Detailed & expanded version of these metrics available here

Program GLAM
Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved 585 program details
2. # of new editors 419 program details
3. # of individuals involved 3,088 program details
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages 1,946 program details
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects 1,468 program details
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects n/a program details
Detailed & expanded version of these metrics available here
Program Education
Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved 764 program details
2. # of new editors 756 program details
3. # of individuals involved 2,315 program details
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages 621 program details
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects 2,371 program details
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects n/a program details
Detailed & expanded version of these metrics available here
Program Community suggested innovation and other partnerships
Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved 512 program details
2. # of new editors 206 program details
3. # of individuals involved 1,493 program details
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages 4,075 program details
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects 13,213 program details
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects n/a program details
Detailed & expanded version of these metrics available here
Comment on bytes added: We haven't reported this metric due to several reasons:
a) We don't really feel this metric is a good tool to evaluate the progress of a project.
b) We cannot know which editions come from a project and which ones don't in a busy article or enviroment, since not everyone sign up for the wikiproject list. We could add all the bytes related to one topic or edited in an specific time slice, but it wouldn't be an appropiate picture of reality.
c) We think it's impossible to count every byte equally. It's not the same when you add content, when you correct typos or when you edit wikidata.


Telling your program stories - all programs[edit]

Please tell the story of each of your programs included in your proposal. This is your chance to tell your story by using any additional metrics (beyond global metrics) that are relevant to your context, beyond the global metrics above. You should be reporting against the targets you set at the beginning of the year throughout the year. We have provided a template here below for you to report against your targets, but you are welcome to include this information in another way. Also, if you decided not to do a program that was included in your proposal or added a program not in the proposal, please explain this change. More resources for storytelling are at the end of this form. Here are some ways to tell your story.

  • We encourage you to share your successes and failures and what you are learning. Please also share why are these successes, failures, or learnings are important in your context. Reference learning patterns or other documentation.
  • Make clear connections between your offline activities and online results, as applicable. For example, explain how your education program activities is leading to quality content on Wikipedia.
  • We encourage you to tell your story in different ways by using videos, sound files, images (photos and infographics, e.g.), compelling quotes, and by linking directly to work you produce. You may highlight outcomes, learning, or metrics this way.
  • We encourage you to continue using dashboards, progress bars, and scorecards that you have used to illustrate your progress in the past, and to report consistently over time.
  • You are welcome to use the table below to report on any metrics or measures relevant to your program. These may or may not include the global metrics you put in the overview section above. You can also share your progress in another way if you do not find a table like this useful.

Program "Community care"[edit]

Community care program against its targets
Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (end of year) Comments
Organising Viquitrobada 2015, Catalan Wikimedians AGM 2014 edition
2015 edition: We had our most succeed viquitrobada so far >100 attendees, media coverage, great programme & guest speakers and Venue for free. It was not Amical's AGM but community's AGM.
2 formative seminars for Wikimedians Test done during Viquitrobada 2014
We organised workshops for experienced Wikimedians on how to give Wikimedia workshops to newbies.
Interviews 2014: [1], [2] [3], [4] and many more.
Interviews/reports/posts: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]
Following each volunteer driven activity n/a
We've been following all volunteer proposals so far this year
Community grants London 2014
We've funded 2 grants for Hackathon Lyon 2015. None to Wikimania 2015 due to lack of user quality proposals
Community care program evaluation
Successes (so far) Failures (so far) Learnings (so far)
  • Amical Way: Amical is successfully promoting members engagement and committing while taking care of emotional welfare of everybody, not only Amical members but Catalan Wikimedians community. We behave as an open, committed and friendly group and have a shared discourse and views over the Wikiverse. 50% of Catalan Wikimedian most active editors are Amical members. Also, as Amical we kindly support projects raised by community, as explained further in detail in Program 4.
  • Test case group: as a result of our community health and mood, we've been chosen by WMF as a test group case for implementing tech projects like Content Translation or Flow.
  • Viquitrobada 2015: our annual meeting is the most important Catalan Wikimedians meeting. This year (again) we got the venue for free thanks to our collaboration with Catalan libraries network. It took place on 14-15th November.
  • Wikimania 2015: after the grantmaking process, we didn't grant any proposal for Wikimania 2015 to our community members. Although after Wikimania 2014 there was a momentum and several catalan wikimedians wanted to apply for 2015, this year applications were poorly based and almost none of us presented at Wikimania. Thus, the jury decided to call it null and void.
  • Measure help: it's hard to measure "online help" or "community care" with formal metrics. The kind of care we offer to the community members some times is done via email, IRC, personal call, Whatsapp, talkpages, sharing a coffee or a beer... and it's basically based on personal confidence. We still don't know how to report this or if we want to report it, although it's a quite important issue that takes a lot of time to a concrete group of Amical volunteers.
  • Sharing our model: We are improving and learning how can we better share more our model with the rest of the movement. We are on our way but there is a lot of things to be done yet. This year we have been more active in Wiki Education Collab, helped many chapters on their GLAM programmes and WMF on the thinking and designing phases of the brand new PCL team, as well as the Wikipedia Library group. We've also improved our documentation strategy and are more active in discourse forums, although we know there is still a lot of way for improvement.
  • Community: community doesn't make (and doesn't care to make) a clear difference between Amical members and the rest of the community. It's just a committed group and they see Amical as an organization which works for promoting Wikimedia projects, not just supporting their members.
  • Deep interviews: our deep interviews to community members project is completely based on a volunteer proposal who -due to lack of onwiki available time (he is a student)- it was downgraded to shorter blog posts during first semester of the year, but great interviews were done during the second half of the year. Learning was adapting the calendar to the volunteer availabilty.

GLAM program[edit]

GLAM program against its targets
Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (end of year) Comments
Active GLAMwiki libraries 100 (2014)
Case study. We will try to stop growing the rest of the year and improve quality & depth of activities.
Reaching 10 new GLAM 2014
Starting collaboration with the network of Catalan Archives.
10 new libraries self organized 2014
Catalan Libraries self-organize several edit-a-thons and workshops: [16], their own writing challenges or Wiki Takes events
5 museums or GLAMs using the Wikipedian in Residence model 2014
WiR residence is being rethought among community members. Although some GLAMs are looking fwd to it, community members prefer a midterm collaboration rather than a formal real life commitment. We have detected that in some areas, like the Land of Valencia, the model is still attractive to both GLAM and community members and will go for it during 2016.
10 commited libraries will test a "small sister" libraries project, where the experienced library will be helping new glamwiki librarians getting into wiki universe. n/a n/a Program is ongoing, but unofficially. The reason is that it can't be formally implemented due to difficulties to establish legal responsabilities between local admins. Although it is happening as an informal network.

GLAM program evaluation
Successes (so far) Failures (so far) Learnings (so far)
  • Bibliowikis: collaboration with Catalan libraries it's our best project so far. We've reached more libraries than expected and they are more autonomous than expected. It's a very diverse group made basically of women (90% of librarians in Catalan Areas are women), which is also good for reducing our gender gap. It is very hard for us to track the total amount of work due to side events/workshops/trainings/edits done by librarians locally which are not reported to us. And we are happy about it because it means it's working!! We have started to share the model with other countries presenting it in Italy, Spain, Basque country, writing a case study and doing some interviews with UK, USA and NL wikimedians, librarians or other community members.
  • Archives: we are copied bibliowikis model to Catalan Archives system and have started a series of workshops. So far several archives are already doing wiki stuff and some of them have started to organize their own local edit-a-thons.
  • Music Day Wikifest: We've been partnering with Music Museum of Barcelona and ESMUC music school for long. On June 21 we did an event at the Barcelona Auditorium to celebrate the Music Day. Volunteers improved articles related to music in Wikipedia and all sister projects where Catalan language is active with the aim of promoting open knowledge. We organized several thematic challenges (instruments, bands, events ...) in order that everyone can collaborate wherever they have more interest. It was an experiment and a success because we joined GLAM partner, EDU partner, Sister projects and volunteers in a same place to shared our passion for culture. We tried to scale it internationally but we failed on it (due to a too short in time announce).
  • Wikipedians in Residence: after some years learning what assumptions and expectations related to Wikipedians in Residence, we know now what to ask and expect from a cultural institution. We've moved our model from a "say yes to almost everything" to a "let's talk". That's why we have a successful model with Víctor Balaguer Museum with 3 WiR at a time at the museum (they behave as a working group) but we have failed in finding 5 new institutions to partner (with a certain level of quality relationship). It is also true than we don't focus our efforts on museums that much anymore and it seems that Libraries are not that interested in this model. Probably it's has come to a maturity point. On the other hand we have detected some interest on the WiR figuer on territorial areas where the GLAM programmes are not very mature, like in the Land of Valencia. We will try to develop WiR model there during 2016.
  • Mature GLAM: GLAM projects have been our entrance door to society (institutions, media, government, volunteers...) but they started 5 years ago now. As they are now "new" anymore we've moved from occasional events to long term partnerships, which is better from our point of view. On the other hand, is more difficult to call for volunteers or Wikimedia editors to join an specific project (they don't feel they are "much" needed anymore, project is working ok so they just keep on their daily topics) so we need to work better to find new audiences. We've learn to team up with the GLAM where we offer our wiki expertise if they offer "their" community to find new editors and sustainability.
  • Evaluation reports Some of the long term GLAM projects gave us mid term information to evaluate these kind of Long term project, as requested by organisations and public administration. You can read an example of the kind of reports we run here

Education Program[edit]

Education program against its targets
Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (end of year) Comments
Having an ongoing eduwiki project in at least 75% of the Universities of the Vives Network 2014
Projects done course 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.
30 university classrooms 2014
Projects done course 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.
Collecting specific feedback on our portal Catalan Wiki Education Portal
We did interviewed teachers and lively improved portal with their comments. We also have a steering commitee in some Universities to evaluate every semester our wiki efforts and improve our documentation.

Education program evaluation
Successes (so far) Failures (so far) Learnings (so far)
  • Number of classrooms & more content: during this year we have improved our coverage and our number of classes working with Wikipedia in Catalan Areas. 90% of it work in Catalan language, but we also have some courses in Spanish and English and we model in a way international students can edit in their own language. We've also reached our goal in % of universities with a Wikiprogram active.
  • Better portal: we have been editing our Education Portal following recommendations from teachers and students. We are working on evaluating to find a better way for scaling these kind of projects.
  • Temporary peaks of edits: students use to do their assignments on their last minute. As we are a mid size community we have experienced some peak of editions that have caused low quality reviewing procedures (we didn't have volunteers enough to review an edits peak in a Sunday night, for example). That may have caused frustration among students and editors. We need to better think how to scale this program.
  • Low retention rations: Although content quality is improving significantly, the retention ratio among students is very low. They see wiki as an assignment so when the assignment is finished most of them don't keep editing.
  • Overwelmed teachers: We still need to learn how to better help teachers. Sometimes they feel overwelmed in this new digital scenario and don't know how can they better evaluate their students (content, wiki-activity, formatting...)
  • High level conversations: So far we have deal with teachers, professors and some Universities department representatives, but it is getting hard for us to get in touch with decission-makers or higher profiles in university sector (dean, directors, presidents...). We are afraid that they still doesn't see us as a potential partner. It would be great to know if other movement partners have reached them and how.
  • Dealing with educational sector: teachers and universities have different needs and expectations than cultural sector. We have been learning how to leverage our discourse and promotional materials to better partner with them.
  • Education Wiki Collab: We are sharing our experiences and learning from other members of the Education Wiki Collab working group, helping to expand the best practices among the Education Global Programme.
  • Voice in the Educational sector: We started working to publish some materials and attend conference and events related to the educational sector so we can become an active and heard voice in this sector, as we did in GLAM some years ago. The big difference is that it takes longer to get the commitment from the community of professionals, but we understand that this is a long time investment for our organization.
Number of Eduwiki Classrooms x year (source)
07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16
3 1 3 4 7 13 38 46 28*
Note: 2015-2016 educational projects, although started in Oct 2015, are not included in this report as they end in Feb 2016. We have included some of them which actually finished during 2015.

Program "Community suggested, other partnerships and innovation projects"[edit]

Community suggested & innovation program against its targets
Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (end of year) Comments
Wiki Loves Earth 2015 [17]
WLE results 2015
Wiki Loves Monuments 2015 [18]
We did a writing contest related to Catalan monuments, like in 2014.
"Navega en català" project 2014
We didn't get to an agreement with other partner organizations.
1 international challenge with editors from as many wikis as possible Catalan culture challenge 2014
We did 288 Wikipedia languages wikiproject and Saint George Wikiproject, explained further below.
Community suggested & innovation program evaluation
Successes (so far) Failures (so far) Learnings (so far)
  • Half a milion milestone: we actively promoted our community a challenge to reach half a milion articles during 2015. They shared on social media and there was even a poll to guess the milestone date. Looking at Catalan Wikipedia stats you can see how daily created articles boosted from 80 to 150 articles per day the month our campaign is more active. Note: we haven't included this project on our Global metrics because we don't know how to measure this kind of "general impact" in the whole Catalan Wikimedia community. We didn't reach the 500k goal during 2015 but we did for our 15th birthday on March 16!
  • Wikiprojects: we are particularly happy about community suggested projects that are being succesful both online and on site. Regarding online regular wikiprojects we could talk about Wikiproject EU where volunteers write articles related to EU temporary president country (Jan-Jun >1.000 articles) or Xucladors (suckers) where volunteers list and write articles of free sourced materials (websites...) that our partners have released (hundreds of articles every month). We have also started to collaborate with the Catalan Esperanto community and tto write about esperanto topics on Catalan Wikipedia and about Catalan culture on Esperanto Wikipedia.
  • Volunter led: Another thing that is remarkable is the growing number of projects, events, workshops and editathons that are organized, managed, led or evaluated without the intervention of our FTE Employee, showing that a Community led organisation is a good sustainable way of organizing a wiki organization. The role of the FTE in coordinating events has specially decreased during the second part of the year, and now most of the projects are led directly by community members, as planned in our 2014-2017 Strategy Plan.
  • Online contests: we have promoted several short writing contests, some for promoting translation of Catalan content to other wikis, some for creating a wikipedia article of each language Wikipedia is active on (288 languages wikiproject) and some shorter ones.
  • Wikipedia Day at the radio: Catalunya Ràdio is a top leader broadcaster in Catalonia, it's national public radio. On March 13 we did a Wikipedia day where from 8 AM to 21 PM we were interviewed in every single program they broadcasted, and their talks, reports and chats where somehow related to Wikipedia. We also did an 12 h editathon at the radio's board members room so it was a win-win partnership. Pics here.
  • Catalan Terminology Center: We have started a collaboration with TERMCAT, the official Catalan terminology office. They have released many dictionaries which are now on Catalan Wiktionary but also some of our science volunteers are collaborating with the institution making proposals to officially name weird species of mammals which still doesn't have an official Catalan name but they are on Catalan Wikipedia. We are now preparing a shared paper to explain our partnership that was be presented in a Spanish conference in November.
  • Modernism in Wikidata: we have started a partnership with University of Barcelona where a former Wikipedian in Residence will lead a Wikidata Wikiproject on Modernisme (Catalan Version of Art Nouveau: Gaudí...) the project that aims to improve items and statements of Modernisme català artworks, which are currently spread in online databases throughout the Internet (and even offline sources). This project is inspired by WikiProject Sum of all paintings, where we are collaborating with a couple of museum databases.
  • Internationalization: Amical Wikimedia and Catalan Community is usually known on the wikiverse as the Catalan Army, because we try to join and help with translation to all projects proposed by the rest of chapters. But we really fail every single time we try to ask for help to other chapters when talking about interlanguage projects. This may be due to our specific weight among global community, but is something we really would like to improve. For example: The starting idea of our 288 languages wikiproject was that it became "a Wikiproject on tour" so during 2 weeks Catalan Wikipedia improved articles related to languages which are active on Wikipedia, and then another wiki takes it (e.g. Italian wiki) and then another one. We still think the idea is cool and that a Wikiproject can be jumping from wiki to wiki, but when we did the international call (wikis, lists,...) no one answered and no one took it. And is not the first time. Our second failed experience this year was regarding International Music Day: we did an open call just to ask if someone else wanted to join/schedule similar event and almost no one answered. In this case we where said it was announced with too short time. Probably is due to the fact that we don't need that much time for preparing an event as it seems other groups need.
  • Announce in advance: if we want something to become international we need to plan in advance, but we still have the feeling that if same project X was announced by a major chapter, some other chapters would have joined. We need to learn how to better work on these issues and any help would be appreciated.
  • Leveraging projects to our community map: We have learnt to invest time and efforts in projects where community members shows interest, trying to use Amical's experience for boosting projects opportunities. When we find a "theme volunteer" we try to help him/her to find a partner organisation to collaborate with. This way we guarantee a better % of success, because there is already a previous existing interest on the topic.
  • Online / Onsite: We learnt to ask clearlier to our community members if they preffer to lead online or onsite projects. Some of them have different skills and are great online but preffer not to participate onsite, or the other way around. We use online contests and challenges to test & improva organising skills of our volunteers. When they feel confortable with them, usually they start to also organizing real life events, with a better programming background.
  • 'Caring is caring. Putting efforts & time in listening to our community members claims, worries and wills it has been proved as a successful technique for different purposes: Keep the community linked to our organization, promoting a good vibes feeling on our villagepumps and mailing lists, sharing our discourse, detecting project oportunities, helping people when they have any kind of social needs or online disputes. When we feel appreciated, useful and member of a group, we all collaborate better, because we better know each other and know what can we ask and expect from other, and how can we help them.

Revenues received during this period (12 months for impact report)[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

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
Revenue source Currency Anticipated Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Anticipated (USD) Cumulative USD Explanation of variances from plan
Membership fees + donations EUR 2.500,00 € 952,00 € 3.223,08 € 4.175,08 € 3.282,50 USD 5.481,88 USD Memberships fees in 3Q
Grant EUR 82.100,66 € 47.892,00 € 34.209,00 € 82.101,00 € 107.798,17 USD 107.798,61 USD
Other revenues EUR 9.500,00 € 4.084,47 € 6.170,00 € 10.254,47 € 12.473,50 USD 13.464,12 USD
Total EUR 94.100,66 € 52.928,47 € 43.602,08 € 96.530,55 € 123.554,17 USD 126.744,61 USD

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Euro/USD 1,313 the exchange rate in our APG proposal

Spending during this period (12 months for impact report)[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

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
Expense Currency Budgeted Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Budgeted USD Cumulative USD Percentage spent to date Explanation of variances from plan
Program 1: Community EUR 12.000,00 € 4.717,59 € 4.308,10 € 9.025,69 € 15.756,00 USD 11.850,73 USD 75,21%
Program 2: GLAM EUR 34.550,33 € 17.424,70 € 16.975,32 € 34.400,02 € 45.364,58 USD 45.167,23 USD 99,56%
Program 3: Education EUR 34.550,33 € 14.866,52 € 13.345,12 € 28.211,64 € 45.364,58 USD 37.041,88 USD 81,65%
Program 4: Other partnerships EUR 13.000,00 € 1.378,92 € 5.133,01 € 6.511,93 € 17.069,00 USD 8.550,16 USD 50,09% * Money from WLE awards was kindly donated by a project partner
Total EUR 94.100,66 € 38.387,73 € 39.761,55 € 78.149,28 € 123.554,17 USD 102.610,00 USD 83,05%

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Euro/USD 1,313 the exchange rate in our APG proposal


Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?[edit]

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.

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

  • YES

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".

  • YES


Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.


Resources to plan for measurement[edit]

Resources for storytelling[edit]