Grants:PEG/WM NL/GLAM WIKI 2015/Report
- 1 Project status
- 2 Activities and lessons learned
- 2.1 Activities
- 2.2 Lessons learned
- 2.3 Learning patterns
- 3 Outcomes and impact
- 4 Reporting and documentation of expenditures
- Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?
- Is your project completed?
- No. A followup survey, measuring the long-term impact of the conference, must still be held in October 2015.
Activities and lessons learned
The previous GLAM-WIKI conference was held in London, in 2013. Wikimedia Mexico intended to host GLAM WIKI in 2014, but had to abandon this plan. At Wikimania 2014 (London), during a GLAM session, attendees voted to hold the next GLAM-WIKI conference in the Netherlands.
In consultation with WMF, it was originally decided to include the costs of GLAM-WIKI 2015 in WMNL’s APG application. After internal discussions within WMF, Wikimedia Nederland was asked to remove GLAM WIKI 2014 from the APG application and submit a separate PEG grant request for GLAM-WIKI 2015. This was submitted by the end of December 2014 and approved by the end of January 2015. As a result, the final go-ahead for the conference could only be given 2.5 months before the planned start of the conference.
A call for members of the conference’s programme committee went out in November 2014. The aim was to have a committee that was knowledgeable about various aspects of GLAM work, and representative of the global community. The WMNL board selected the members of the (international, volunteer) committee, which was announced and became active in January. The programme committee performed the following tasks:
- Designed the theme structure for the conference (initial track proposals)
- Defined criteria for assigning scholarships
- Wrote the calls for proposals and scholarships
- Reviewed all the presentation proposals and scholarship applications
- Designed the programme
- Promoted the conference in own networks (see also below)
The calls for scholarships and presentation proposals went out end January. Initial deadline was 25 February; for the presentation proposals this was extended till 5 March. 47 presentation submissions were received, of which 37 have been accepted into the final programme. The programme was published on 23 March.
The programme committee has initially defined five main themes/tracks for the conference:
The submitted proposals mainly corresponded with themes 1, 2, 4 and 5. When composing the programme, the programme committee made sure to create a balanced schedule that accommodated both beginners and experienced participants, with diverse speakers, allowing as many participants as possible to share their experiences (showcase track and panels) and learn new skills (workshops, tutorials, learning circles). See also 'Lessons learned' below.
Due to the short time span in which the conference needed to be organised, it was not obvious to find suitable and available keynote speakers. Paul Keller was suggested by many people. He delivered a highly valued keynote speech on GLAMs and European copyright reform, followed by a workshop.
38 people were awarded a scholarship. This includes 4 members of the programme committee's travel and accommodation. Of these 38, 35 were actually used. Two people eventually could not attend the conference due to visa problems; 1 person did not need a scholarship as she could combine her journey with another Wikimedia conference.
A request for visa invitation letters went out mid-January, in order to meet the visa request deadlines. Despite this early announcement, many potential attendees were late in applying. The WMNL office has arranged visas for 15 people.
Accommodation and venue
In the beginning of december 2014 we requested price rates and room blocks (we approached 4 hotels). We could not freeze the prices per room until we were able to officially confirm the reservation. We were able to confirm the hotel in in the first week of february, after the grant was approved. Prices rose since December 2014, april is a very busy tourist season in The Netherlands.
End January, the location of the conference (Koninklijke Bibliotheek and Nationaal Archief, The Hague) was confirmed. The use of the meeting rooms was provided free of charge.
A call for volunteers at the conference went out early February. As a result, a team of 8 volunteers supported GLAM-WIKI on site (hosting sessions, photography, registration). They worked alongside WMNL staff.
Communication and PR
Promotion of the event was executed by the project team at WMNL and, internationally, by the members of the programme committee, by other enthusiastic volunteers and the conference’s partners (especially Europeana). Communication included:
- Creation and maintenance of conference website at https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM-WIKI_2015
- Two press releases, sent to Dutch national press and a wide selection of GLAM contacts
- Promotion via social media (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn)
- Announcement via village pumps and GLAM-related mailing lists / websites, both inside and outside the Wikimedia movement
- Dedicated blogs and mailings by Europeana
- Also, a dedicated mailing list was created for all conference participants, used to send urgent updates to everyone.
For an overview of press and other coverage, see https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM-WIKI_2015/Statistics.
The conference took place 10-12 April. In total, 147 people attended the conference.
26 sessions were held during 3 days, including
- 1 keynote speech
- 3 showcase sessions (overview of short presentations of current GLAM projects from all over the world)
- 10 workshops and tutorials
- 7 panels and thematic presentation series
- 2 group discussions
Additionally, during the conference itself, two spontaneous meetups took place.
No less than 54 separate presentations (sometimes very short ones) were given. This means that on average one in three GLAM-WIKI attendees has also taken the stage at the conference.
Participants of the conference took notes during many sessions. Links to all Etherpads with notes can be found on the conference’s programme overview.
Followup and evaluation
- Participants were encouraged to upload their photos and presentations to Wikimedia Commons. Category: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:GLAM-WIKI:_NL_2015
- Right after the conference, an evaluation survey was sent to all participants. The survey - almost the same as the one held after GLAM-WIKI 2013 in London - focused on immediate evaluation of the event, including the popularity and rating of the various sessions, participant's opinions on aspects of the conference that were good or that should be better next time. Find a link to the survey and a summary of the results at https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM-WIKI_2015/Statistics.
- Video registrations of the conference were edited and uploaded to YouTube and Wikimedia Commons, see https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv60EXP08A3bJ6RTmt_ObYQ/videos and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:GLAM-WIKI:_NL_2015_video_registrations (upload still in progress at the time of writing this report)
- A report of the conference was written.
What worked well?
We are happy with attendance of the conference, with the degree of participation of all participants and their diversity. We had 147 participants - of which almost 50 also gave presentations. Participants came from 32 countries and six continents. 40% were women. The success above can largely be attributed to the skills and attentiveness of the programme committee. This consisted of representatives from all over the world, with a majority of women. The programme committee was consciously keen to host presenters who were as diverse as possible, both from a global and a gender perspective.
Organisational experience of WMNL office made the organisation of this event go very smoothly, even when there were staff switches.
The conference’s partners were very active and supportive. Our hosts (Koninklijke Bibliotheek and Nationaal Archief) were extremely hospitable and enthusiastic, which also resulted in (among many other things) smooth organisation for the conference location, highly appreciated guided tours, and a lovely sticker for all participants. Europeana went to great lengths to promote the conference among its large network and has used the conference as a catalyst for fine-tuning its strategy in collaboration with the Wikimedia movement. Beeld en Geluid, a long-term partner of WMNL, also contributed actively and presented valuable (brand new!) GLAM metrics at the conference.
The ‘walking dinner’ on Saturday really encouraged informal interaction and encounters among all participants.
Many attendees complimented us on the flawless Wifi - an important aspect of any Wikimedia gathering.
What didn't work?
The preparation time for the conference was very short because final approval of budget was later than expected. Therefore:
- Due to the very short timespan, the programme committee had to be pragmatic in building the programme. This process has not been as interactive and participatory as hoped.
- The timespan to arrange visas was very short. We ended up having two attendees who did not manage to get a visa in time.
There was not a group of dedicated local volunteers behind the initiation and organisation of the conference. The volunteer programme committee functioned well, but mainly worked online because the team was extremely international. GLAM-WIKI 2015 was mainly initiated and organized by the WMNL office. This was unlike the experience we had when organising the International Hackathon in 2013, when a group of Netherlands based volunteers was extremely active.
Several attendees have remarked that they were disappointed that there were not enough participants from the GLAM sector. The conference was well-advertised in this sector, especially in the Netherlands, but was maybe seen as too specialistic by many GLAM representatives. See below for suggestions.
What would you do differently if you planned a similar project?
We think it’s preferable for such large events if at least a few dedicated local volunteers take charge and initiative, as has happened with the 2013 Amsterdam hackathon.
We would do less tracks at the same time (maximum 2, not 4 as sometimes was the case).
If the participation of more GLAM representatives is a must for such an event, it is advisable to organize a separate day which is targeted to them specifically, to their own needs and questions, with a name/title that is relevant and catchy to them. Preferably, this day would even be organized by an external partner, an organisation which is rooted in the cultural sector itself.
Several participants remarked that we should have placed the conference information on meta.wikimedia.org, not on nl.wikimedia.org, because meta.wikimedia.org is more actively followed by international volunteers.
Created a new learning pattern: How to get diverse presenters at your conference (from a gender, Global South... perspective)
Outcomes and impact
- Provide the original project goal here.
- To let professionals and volunteers from the cultural sector share lessons learned and best-practices on GLAM projects that are contribute to Wikimedia projects and/or contribute to open knowledge in another way.
- To inspire and motivate participants to join existing or start up their own projects that support the mission of the Wikimedia movement.
- To increase awareness among GLAM professionals of the importance of accessible cultural heritage and to put currently available content in the spotlight.
- Did you achieve your project goal? How do you know your goal was achieved? Please answer in 1 - 2 short paragraphs.
- Share lessons learned. The approximately 50 presentations of the conference did precisely this. Many presentations were recorded and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Participants rated the sessions as a whole:
- Was a good range of topics covered? 8.43/10
- Were the topics relevant to you? 8.38/10
- Inspire and motivate participants. Long-term motivation and influence of the conference’s lessons learned by participants will be measured in a survey in October 2015. In the short-term follow-up survey (April-May), 95% indicated that they expected to be involved in some type of GLAMwiki activity in the upcoming six months.
- Increase awareness. This topic was central to the Showcase track and the ‘Impact of OpenGLAM’ track. The followup survey in October 2015 will ask about the actual influence that these tracks have had over the longer term on decision making processes among conference participants.
Progress towards targets and goals
Measures of success as mentioned in the original grant proposal: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/WM_NL/GLAM_WIKI_2015#Measures_of_success
|Type||Target outcome||Achieved outcome||Explanation|
|Participation||There is at least one participant of every continent (7 continent model, excluding Antartica)||Achieved.|
|>= 30% of the participants are GLAM professionals||Of the 63 post-conference survey respondents, 17 indicate they are GLAM professionals. 26.98%|
|50% of the participants are female||Of the 147 conference attendees, 88 were male and 59 (= 40,13%) female.|
|>= 60% has experience with GLAM - Wikimedia/Wikipedia projects||63.26% of all attendees had previous experience with GLAMwiki projects||Based on a count from the participants’ list.|
|Every part of the program attracted >= 50% of the target audience size||59% attended at least one of the Showcase sessions.
73% attended the keynote speech.
84% attended at least one workshop or tutorial.
89% attended at least one panel or thematic presentation series.
52% attended at least one group discussion.
25% attended one of the (spontaneously organized) meetups.
|Percentages refer to survey respondents but are probably quite representative for all conference participants.|
|Multiplication||> 1 new or renewed GLAM partnership initiated in 2015 for every country that participated||The long term impact of the conference will be measured 6 months after the conference (October 2015).||Survey among participants in October 2015|
|>= 3 new or renewed GLAM partnerships initiated in 2015 for every country that had 5+ participants|
|Participating GLAM professionals were involved in setting up partnerships or explained what withheld them in 2015|
|>= 30% of participants without prior involvement in organising Wikimedia related events have organised or been involved in organising an event in 2015|
|>= 50% of participants with prior experience in organising Wikimedia related events have organised >= 1 events in 2015|
|>= 30% of participating GLAM professionals have been involved and/or hosted >= 1 Wikimedia related event in 2015|
|Public relations||>= 1 mention of the conference in a Dutch national newspaper||Not achieved.|
|>= 15 news and/or blogposts of Wikimedia chapters or user groups||4 blog posts by Wikimedians, chapters or user groups that we are aware of.||These are listed on https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM-WIKI_2015/Statistics|
|>= 5 news and/or blogposts of participating GLAMs||5 blog posts by GLAMs that we are aware of.||These are listed on https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM-WIKI_2015/Statistics|
|Visitors||>= 1500 unique visitors of the conference website / project page||Could not be measured.||The wiki nl.wikimedia.org does not measure visitor numbers (for privacy reasons).|
|>= 200 views of every video published||Too early to measure.||Video is uploaded to YouTube in June 2015.|
|>= 500 views of at least 50 photos of the conference||820 files in the category GLAM-WIKI: NL 2015 were viewed 13,883 times on Wikimedia projects in May 2015.||Source: BaGLAMa2|
|>= 50 views of published presentations||On SlideShare, 23 June 2015:
OpenGLAM Benchmark Survey - 91 views
Learn to edit Wikidata - 56 views
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.
- Next to each required metric, list the actual outcome achieved through this project.
- 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."
|1. # of active editors involved||enwiki: 24
|Of all 147 attendees, 65 valid user names could be collected. Their activity was measured for 30 days after the start of GLAM-WIKI (i.e. 10 April 2015).|
|2. # of new editors||0||Recruiting new editors was not a direct goal of GLAM-WIKI 2015.|
|3. # of individuals involved||157||
|4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages||0||Not a goal of GLAM-WIKI 2015.|
|5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects||0||Not a goal of GLAM-WIKI 2015.|
|6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects||0||Not a goal of GLAM-WIKI 2015.|
- Learning question
- Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?
- In the followup survey held in April-May, of the 63 respondents:
- 37 answered they expect to be involved in training GLAMs in the upcoming months
- 37 answered they expect to be involved in edit-a-thons in the upcoming months
- 42 answered they expect to be involved in releases of digital media to Wikimedia Commons in the upcoming months
- 27 answered they expect to be involved in data donations to Wikidata in the upcoming months
- 15 answered they expect to be involved in Wikipedian in Residence programs in the upcoming months
- 6 answered they expect to be involved in photography sessions in the upcoming months
The followup survey in October 2015 will attempt to measure how many new projects have been initiated and explicitly motivated by GLAM-WIKI 2015.
Option A: How did you increase participation in one or more Wikimedia projects?
The conference included many workshops and tutorials, in order to make participants more knowledgeable and confident to participate in specific Wikimedia project (especially Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons).
Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects?
The survey in October 2015 will inquire how many international GLAM projects have been inspired by GLAM-WIKI 2015.
Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects?
Wikimedia Commons is traditionally the most obvious Wikimedia project that obtains an increase in reach via GLAM collaborations, and this was definitely again highlighted during GLAM-WIKI 2015 (example: presentations by Trilce Navarrete and Jesse de Vos). But this was probably also one of the first GLAM conferences where Wikidata received so much emphasis. Wikidata is a very interesting platform for GLAM collaborations, and via the conference it was brought to the attention of a new and interesting audience which is not only likely to re-use its information actively, but also to contribute to it. See Europeana’s strategic presentation on Wikidata, for instance, which - if followed up - will involve the inclusion and re-use of metadata of the whole of Europe’s cultural heritage via Wikidata!
Reporting and documentation of expenditures
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".
Yes. Two Google Drive folders with invoices were shared with grants at wikimedia dot org.
|Invoice number, Supplier, Date||Category||Item Description||Unit||Number of units||Actual costs per unit||Total costs (EUR)||Budgeted total (EUR)||Notes|
|Hire of extra audiovisual equipment, local wifi facilities and furniture at the conference location.|
|171 Bis 201504015||Hire BIS/AV Technicial (Fri, Sat, Sun)||1||1||€ 2,207.72||€ 2,207.72|
|191 Budgetcam 20150409||Hire video equipment||1||1||€ 626.18||€ 626.18|
|151 JdV 201504015||Sockets||1||1||€ 36.36||€ 36.36|
|31-03-2015 Gamma, credit card||Reels||1||1||€ 66.00||€ 66.00|
|154, Event Engineers, 15 april 2015||WIFI , Event Engineers||1||1||€ 3,279.10||€ 3,279.10|
|200 Jan Verhuur 20150416 en 104, Jan Verhuur, 27 maart 2015"||rent hockers and tables for lounge in foyer||1||1||€ 1,293.97||€ 1,293.97|
|172 AON 201504009||Insurance for equipment WIFI and Video.||1||1||€ 155.16||€ 155.16|
|Kasbon nr 25 + 26||USB sticks||€ 28.85||€ 28.85|
|148, ACE, 11 april 2015||Transportatiom materials Utrecht-Den Haag ACE||1||1||€ 60.48||€ 60.48|
|168, ACE, 18 april 2015||Transportation materialen Den Haag-Utrecht||1||1||€ 115.14||€ 115.14|
|Subtotal||€ 7,868.96||€ 9,250.00||We got discount from our suppliers and made a good deal on the furniture hiring.|
|208 Vitam 20150430||Coffee, thee and lunch on Friday, saturday, Sunday||1||125||€ 68.25||€ 8,530.78|
|209 New Babylon meeting Centre 20150430||Buffet on Saturday, April 11 2015||1||115||€ 36.46||€ 4,192.65|
|157 DJ 201504016||diner costs organisation thue, fri - 2 persons||1||1||€ 61.32||€ 61.32|
|263 SF 20150615||pre-conference meeting||1||1||€ 34.75||€ 34.75|
|Subtotal||€ 12,819.50||€ 13,500.00||We changed lunch menu at the venue in the week prior to the conference and we lowered the number of people, therefore the prices were a bit lower|
|Travel costs for speakers (based on 5 speakers)|
|Subtotal||€ -||€ 5,000.00||No extra travelcosts for speakers were made.|
|173 Hampshire Hotel 201504021||Accomodation for speakers/who were also scholarship attendees (based on 5 speakers)||€ 1,085.60|
|Subtotal||€ 1,085.60||€ 1,050.00||The price per room rose because we were late to lock the deal, we had to wait until grant approval|
|Printed programs, handouts and other communication material|
|170 De Kopijwinkel 20150416||Paper badges, programme (A4), postcards||1||150||€ 2,37||€ 355.95|
|253 Super Ambachtelijk 20150424||Welcome package Stroopwafels GLAMWIKI logo, verpakt per 5 voor in het tasje, 150 stuks||1||150||€ 1.83||€ 274.00|
|201 cost calculation post-its markers tape etc||post-its, markers, pens, tape||1||1||€ 50.00||€ 50.00|
|097, Tornado, 20-03-2015||keycords||1||140||€ 1.09||€ 152.46|
|200 cost calculation prints GLAMWIKI.xlsx||prints bewegwijzering, prints infovellen||1||150||€ 0.66||€ 100.00|
|Kasbon nr 25 + 26||etiketten voor op badges||1||1||€ 9.75||€ 9.75|
|146 JA 20150413||Batterijen||1||1||€ 10.89||€ 10.89|
|176 SM 201504023||cartridge badges etc||1||1||€ 9.79||€ 9.79|
|152 SR 201504015||Bloemen||1||2||€ 14.95||€ 29.90|
|241 SF 20150603||External harddrive (tbv video)||1||1||€ 99.99||€ 99.99|
|Subtotal||€ 1,092.73||€ 1,500.00||We choose to make a low budget programm booklet|
|Presents for speakers|
|133, Maxilia, 3 april 2015||Water bottles GLAM-WIKI for volunteers and Speakers||100||1||€ 381.30||€ 381.30|
|Stock WMNL||Power charges (gifts) with Wikimedia logo logo for host KB/Na||1||2||€ 8.75||€ 17.50|
|Subtotal||€ 398,80||€ 400.00|
|107-119 Uniglobe 20150326||1 month, Hiring a freelancer part time to support the organisation of the conference.||Hire services travel agent for book trips scholarships||1||1||€ 840.00||€ 840.00|
|Subtotal||€ 840.00||€ 1,000.00||Less hours than estimated|
|Reserve of 10% for unforeseen costs|
|279 Daniel Grapes 20150629||Video editing||1||1||€ 3,921.13||€ 3,921.13|
|Subtotal||€ 3,921.13||€ 4,000.00||volunteer who edits videos was not available|
|107-119 Uniglobe 20150326 + reimbursements doc||35 scholarships for International participants||35 scholarships for International participants||35||1||€ 18,711.36||€ 18,711.36||See invoices for details|
|Grootboekkaart Traincosts Glam Wiki||train costs AMS/The Hague - The Hague AMS||16||1||€ 363.00||€ 363.00||See PDF ledger for details|
|146 JA 20150413||travel costs (by car, for transportation goods) WMNL personel||1||1||€ 35.53||€ 35.53|
|visakosten GLAMWIKI.xls||8||1||€ 573.50||€ 573.50|
|Subtotal||€ 19,683.39||€ 21,000.00||we approved scholarship up to € 20.500. We have lower costs due to: last minute cancellation (€ 1,500,-) + better prices thanks to travel agent|
|173 Hampshire Hotel 201504021||35 scholarships for International participants||18 twin rooms for 2 persons use, incl VAT and breakfast and tourist tax - 36 persons||1||1||€ 8,000.00||€ 8,000.00||Total amount for the hotelrooms was higher, see category Accomomdation speakers for the rest of the costs.|
|Subtotal||€ 8,000.00||€ 8,000.00|
|35 scholarships for International participants||Food - per diem, € 50.00 total||1||18||€ 46,94||€ 845.00|
|Bank costs||1||1||€ 100.50||€ 100.50|
|Grootboekkaart per diem||Subtotal||€ 945.50||€ 1.750.00||Not al scholarship participants claimed per diem|
|157 DJ 201504016||Reserve of 10% for unforeseen costs||Medical consult participant||1||1||€ 100,05||€ 100,05|
|152 SR 201504015||Taxi medical consult participant||1||1||€ 30.10||€ 30.10|
|106, UPS, 17 maart 2015||UPS shipment Armenie and Ukraine for VISA requests||1||1||€ 103.61||€ 103.61|
|105, UPS, 18 maart 2015||UPS_APG GLAMWIKI - UPS||1||1||€ 87.82||€ 87.82|
|287 DJ 20150630||Concall Embassy in India||1||1||€ 19.01||€ 19.01|
|Subtotal||€ 340.59||€ 3,000.00|
|Total||€ 56,996.20||€ 69,450.00|
Total project budget (from your approved grant submission)
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)
Total amount spent on this project
Total amount of Project and Event grant funds spent on this project
Costs minus B&G en ticket sales = € 52,509.40
Are there additional sources that funded any part of this project? List them here.
Beeld en Geluid: € 2,000.-
Ticket Sales: € 2,486.80
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.)
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.
Wikimedia Nederland will return the unused funds to WMF.