Grants:PEG/WM CZ/Mediagrant II/Report

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Report accepted
This report for a Project and Event grant approved in FY Pending has been reviewed and accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • You may still comment on this report on its discussion page, or visit the discussion page to read the discussion about this report.
  • You are welcome to Email grants at wikimedia dot org at any time if you have questions or concerns about this report.

Project status[edit]

Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?
Is your project completed?
YES, but continues as a photodocumentation program (Mediagrant III), part of the Czech APG Grant.

Activities and lessons learned[edit]


Systematic photographic documentation of the Czech Republic – the participants are asked to choose a local area lacking photodocumentation, make a plan of places to cover, and take a journey, photographing possibly everything planned plus any other objects discovered on the way. In the last six months of 2015 the number of pictures uploaded to Commons grew again. As of 31 December, there were 311 journeys with 42,569 photos taken of 3,060 objects, each of which now has an article with a photograph / photographs at Wikipedia. The photographs are also used in lists of cultural, natural and Jewish monuments, and frequently appear in other language mutations.

Lessons learned[edit]

What worked well?
Traditionally, the most successful topics were the Natural Protected Areas and the Czech Municipalities, whose number of journeys is stable and copying the weather conditions in the Czech Republic. These topics have also achieved the largest total of documented objects. Nevertheless, their number is lower than before, possibly because the distance of undocumented objects within reach of the regular photographers is logically growing. The Natural Protected Areas are proud of their 73 per cent of protected areas already photographed, and thus nearly comply with the goal set to be reached by the end of 2015, although more areas are declared as newly protected every year.
Allocation of expenses
Major areas of travel reimbursement
What didn't work?
A problem mentioned by most supervisors is the little awareness of the minor topics, which, unlike for example the Natural Protected Areas or the Czech Municipalities, have few journeys and objects, as well as a relatively low number of participants.
Also, there were disputes about the decisions taken about which topics should cover a photo journey if there were more topics included. On the one hand, the number of photos or objects was a significant issue, on the other hand, however, if a photographer wanted to do a minor topic journey (such as Water or Jewish Monuments) without wasting Mediagrant II finances unnecessarily, i.e. travelling large distances between the objects, it was only possible to plan such a trip including a number of the Municipalities objects. The initial idea of the journey had started with the minor topic, though.
Consequently, some of the supervisors have been considering closing their topics as they did not see a point in continuing with a very limited number of journeys conceded, or even none at all.
The Natural Protected Areas topic supervisors regret not having been able to organize topic workshops which had been planned to take place during the course of MG II. Unfortunately, planning 2 years ahead cannot take into account all changes in the supervisors’/volunteers’ working time. The gradually but steadily decreasing amount of free time was a significant matter in the other supervisors’ activity as well.
What would you do differently if you planned a similar project?
Referring to the problems mentioned above, the supervisors feel their topics should be promoted more and thus might reach more audience and achieve more objects photographed.
Further, there are ideas about how give the minor topics a feeling of more significance, for example by not considering the topic journeys to be the main criterion for a topic to be relevant but by rating just the number of photos and documented objects. Obviously, the minor topics can hardly achieve a number of objects as high as the Municipalities but should be given credit for their work.
There has been trouble making all journeys be evaluated in time as many supervisors were or got busy and were not able to evaluate journeys duly. Therefore there are suggestions to create a large group of evaluators in MG III who would be able to supervise more than one topic and thus help each other while the major topics may keep their own supervisor teams (as of 29 February 2016, the final decision has not been made yet). For this reason, more effort should be put in making the topic rules similar as much as possible with only a limited number of different rules which could be taken into account easily if there is a simple table listing them in one short page, for instance.
On the other hand, the supervisors of the minor topic suppose that popularization of their topics among the major topics participants would help them greatly as these minor topics very often include objects situated in municipalities or protected areas and thus could and should be photographed together and be distinguished and identified by particular topic. Moreover, some per cent subtractions might be prevented if the photos not considered ideal by the Municipalities or Protected Areas are identified as part of the Folk Craft topic, for example.

Learning patterns[edit]

Outcomes and impact[edit]


The goal of "Mediagrant II" is to continue with the activities of Mediagrant as the primary target, and to maintain and further develop the existing community of photographers as our second objective.
Did you achieve your project goal? How do you know your goal was achieved? Please answer in 1 - 2 short paragraphs.
The goal of photodocumenting all Czech municipalities, protected natural areas, Jewish monuments and other significant sites which do not have photographs at Commons is a long-term goal which cannot be achieved within a few years only. As is evident from the tables and the maps in our last report, the number of photographed objects has again significantly increased and so has the number of object photographs created during the two-year project. Actually, the number of photographs taken during the period was almost twice as big compared to the initial estimate, with the number of objects-villages four times as big.
The project has also succeeded in organizing or contributing photographically to related events, such as photographic workshops and Wikiměsto. With further improvement of the project, the quantity and quality of documentation is expected to keep on growing to get closer to the ultimate goal.

Progress towards targets and goals[edit]

Project metrics

Project metrics Target outcome Achieved outcome Explanation
Continue to attract new participants 30 unique people took part in this part of the program, 7 of them newbies to the project.
Each year, create ~8000 pictures of previously undocumented sights 44,750 pictures were uploaded by participants.
Document 75% of Czech protected areas during the two-years time period 73.3 % (359 new protected areas were documented) New protected areas have been proclaimed.
Maintain - and develop - the existing photographic communities both online (Facebook) and in real life (during workshops) Three successful workshops were organized in Přibyslav, Pelhřimov and Maršovice, leading to 2,105 uploaded pictures of previously poorly documented areas.

Current long-term topics (as of 31 December 2015)
Name Description Journeys
Objects Photographs Expenditures CZK (claimed) Paid out CZK
České zoologické zahrady Czech Zoos 1 4 156 545 382 (10 €)
Foto českých obcí Documentation of Czech Municipalities, including the smallest ones 239 2,605 32,230 168,046 159,252 (5 840 €)
Lidová tvořivost Folk Craft 4 19 1,177 4,987 4,887 (180 €)
Obrazová dokumentace chráněných území a památných stromů v ČR Documentation of Protected Natural Areas and Memorable Trees in the Czech Republic 55 359 7,475 41,882 39,864 (1 460 €)
Odborná fotografie Scientific Photography 4 20 573 4,163 2,926 (110 €)
Události Documentation of Important Events in the Czech Republic 5 18 604 4,084 4,084 (150 €)
Vodstvo Water Bodies of the Czech Republic 0 0 0 0 0
Židovské památky Documentation of Jewish Monuments in the Czech Republic 3 35 354 2,943 2,943 (110 €)
Summary 311 3,060 42,569 226,649 214,336 (7 860 €)
Related events
Workshops 4 4 2,181
Wikiměsto (Wikitown) 2 2 2,021
Summary 317 3,066 46,771


  • There will always be some difference between “Expenditures” and “Paid out” because some expenditures were decided not be approved in full.
  • The amounts in EUR were rounded so the summary amounts may not correspond.

Global Metrics[edit]

We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our grantees. In addition to the measures of success for your specific program (in above section), please use the table below to let us know how your project contributed to the Global Metrics. We know that not all projects will have results for each type of metric, so feel free to put "0" where necessary.

  1. Next to each required metric, list the actual outcome achieved through this project.
  2. Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome. For example, if you were funded for an edit-a-thon which resulted in 0 new images, your explanation might be "This project focused solely on participation and articles written/improved, the goal was not to collect images."

For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.

Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved 30
2. # of new editors Not applicable
3. # of individuals involved Not applicable
4a. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages approx 12,700 Data obtained from GLAMorous tool
4b. # of new images/media uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (Optional) 46,771
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects 3066
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects Not applicable
Learning question
Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?
Not applicable - the goal of MG was different.


What impact did this project have on WMF's mission and the strategic priorities?

Option A: How did you increase participation in one or more Wikimedia projects?

Not applicable - the goal of MG was different.

Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects?

The project added photographs to 3,066 articles which did not have any at the time.

Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects?

Not applicable - the goal of MG was different.

Reporting and documentation of expenditures[edit]

This section describes the grant's use of funds


Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grants at wikimedia dot org, according to the guidelines here? Answer "Yes" or "No".


Please list all project expenses in a table here, with descriptions and dates. Review the instructions here.

Medigrant II expenses include approximately 270 items and the table below only includes the sums per chapter. However, it is possible to view the details of all the expenses in public lists, available in both Czech and English:

Number Category Item description Unit Number of units Actual cost per unit Actual total * Budgeted total Currency Notes
1 Travel reimbursement Travel expenses for the participants - - - 7,861 3,500
1 Travel reimbursement 7,861 8,000 EUR
2.1 Equipment Maintenance of currently owned cameras - - - 201 220 EUR
2.2 Equipment New photographic equipment - - - 1,470 1,400 EUR
2 Equipment 1,691 1,620 EUR
3.1 Workshops Weekend workshops - 3 - 1,620 1,200 EUR
3.2 Workshops One-day workshops - 1 - 18 480 EUR
3 Workshops 1,638 1,680 EUR
4.1 Administration Accountancy - - - 814 792 EUR Our grant administrator served both this grant and the Presentation and Outreach one. In the year 2014, she was reimbursed from the latter, next year, she was paid from Mediagrant - for simplicity reasons.
4.2 Administration Other expenses - - - 183 130 EUR Includes print toner and minor stationery.
4 Administration 997 922 EUR
Total 12,167 12,222 EUR
Total project budget (from your approved grant submission)
12,222 EUR (333,239 CZK)
Total amount requested from WMF (from your approved grant submission, this total will be the same as the total project budget if PEG is your only funding source)
12,222 EUR (333,239 CZK)
Total amount spent on this project
12,167.44 EUR (331,751 CZK)
Total amount of Project and Event grant funds spent on this project
12,167.44 EUR (331,751 CZK)
Are there additional sources that funded any part of this project? List them here.

Remaining funds[edit]

Remaining funds from this grant have been returned to WMF in the amount of 53.84 EUR.
Are there any grant funds remaining?
Please list the total amount (specify currency) remaining here. (This is the amount you did not use, or the amount you still have after completing your grant.)
53.84 EUR (1,468 CZK)
If funds are remaining they must be returned to WMF, reallocated to mission-aligned activities, or applied to another approved grant.
Please state here if you intend to return unused funds to WMF, submit a request for reallocation, or submit a new grant request, and then follow the instructions on your approved grant submission.
We are ready to return the remaining funds to WMF.