Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/General Support Fund/Wiki Advocates Philippines User Group Community Fund 2024/Final Report
|
|
Part 1: Understanding your work
[edit]Per the recent update on the Wikimedia Foundation Affiliates Strategy process, Wikimedia Affiliates that are General Support Fund grantees will fulfill their affiliate reporting requirements through their final or yearly grantee report.
If you are a Wikimedia Affiliate, you will use this form for your affiliate reporting and to address the affiliate health criteria. You do not need to submit a separate report to AffCom. Follow the guidance in the green boxes to report on how you met the corresponding affiliate health criteria.
If you are not a Wikimedia Affiliate, aligning your responses with the affiliate criteria is optional and not required.
1. Please share to what extent your programs, approaches, and strategies contributed to addressing the challenges you shared in your proposal. If they did not contribute as you believed they would, please share what obstacles you faced and what, if anything, you learned from them? (required)
For affiliates, use this space (Question 1.) to address Affiliate Health Criterion 1.1 (Goal delivery). Describe how you actively delivered on mission goals, e.g. content creation.
Our programs and strategies for 2024-2025 have been pivotal in addressing the core challenge of closing content gaps, particularly concerning women's contributions, through the validation of new, community-embedded engagement methods under our Art + Feminism initiatives.
A key methodological success was the implementation of targeted, immersive documentation. The Documenting Capalonga Bamboo Weavers initiative exemplifies this: instead of a general contribution call, we used immersive fieldwork to build trust and collaborate directly with women in rural areas. This approach proved essential for surfacing and preserving intangible cultural heritage that general campaigns often miss. Similarly, the event-based Cooking ng Ina Mo: Food Fest successfully attracted a new demographic of contributors (mothers) by centering participation around relatable cultural knowledge (culinary arts). Our strategy also included foundational capacity building via the Digital Literacy for High School Students program, ensuring new, young contributors are equipped with the critical skills needed for sustained platform use.
While these deep, targeted approaches were highly effective in generating quality content, they proved to be logistically resource-intensive. The primary obstacle was the significant effort required for project management and tailoring each program to the unique context of the community (e.g., weavers versus students).
Our key learning is therefore strategic: to scale the impact of this high-quality, community-focused methodology, we must shift our focus from implementing individual programs to developing replicable project frameworks. This reinforces the importance of empowering "program champions" on the ground, which we see as the most sustainable mechanism for future growth.
2. Is there a plan to build on the key successes you had? If yes, please describe the plan and if no, please share the limitations to do so. For instance, did the activities lead to any new priorities, ideas for activities, or goals for the future? (required)
Yes, there is a clear, strategic plan to build on these successes. Our primary goal moving forward is to translate the effective, high-touch methodologies developed under Art + Feminism into replicable project frameworks that can be easily adopted and executed by local community leaders.
Our plan is built on two core priorities:
1. Codifying the High-Impact Engagement Model
[edit]The success of programs like Documenting Capalonga Bamboo Weavers (focused, immersive fieldwork) and Cooking ng Ina Mo: Food Fest (creative, cultural content generation) taught us that authentic content is best generated when we meet the community where they are, leveraging culturally relevant activities.
- The Plan: We are now prioritizing the codification of these approaches. This means creating clear, step-by-step guides—our "playbooks"—that outline everything from how to approach a local government unit for community access, to conducting ethically sound fieldwork for intangible heritage, and organizing a creative, themed event.
- Why it works: We are teaching newcomers that quality comes from resonance. Instead of simply asking, "Contribute to Wikipedia," we are teaching them to ask, "How can we document the knowledge central to your life and your community?" This guarantees high-quality, authentic content and attracts new contributors who are knowledge-holders, not necessarily veteran editors.
2. Scaling Local Capacity through Program Champions
[edit]The logistical intensity of managing every deep-dive project centrally became our main limitation. To overcome this and scale our impact, our future activities are shifting focus toward training trainers.
- The Plan: We will leverage the foundational training developed in the Digital Literacy for High School Students program and expand it to include leadership and project management training for aspiring regional coordinators. These champions will be equipped with our new "playbooks" and empowered to run localized versions of our successful Art + Feminism projects.
- New Priority: Distributed Impact: The learning here is that sustainability is achieved when responsibility and ownership are decentralized. A newcomer needs to understand that we are moving away from being a single group executing many projects to an organization that trains many small, localized groups to execute a few specific, high-impact project types, ensuring our documentation efforts can reach communities far beyond our province.
In short, the key learning—the need for replicable frameworks—has become our new strategic goal: to scale the quality of our success by empowering others to duplicate the process.
3. Please provide a link to reports that detail the activities that took place in the last year. This can include an annual report, Meta pages, and websites. If there are no links available, briefly describe the implemented activities and programs below or upload any files. (required)
For affiliates, use this space (Question 3.) to address Affiliate Health Criteria 2.1 (Affiliate health & resilience), 4.1 (Internal engagement), 4.2 (Community connection), and 4.3 (Partnerships and collaboration):
- Describe your activities engaging new users, new members for your decision-making body(ies), and developing leaders and organizers (2.1).
- Describe your activities creating or hosting spaces to encourage greater collaboration and engagement among your members (4.1).
- Describe how you engage with the contributing community that you serve and/or support (4.2).
- Describe your partnerships with other affiliates or with non-Wikimedia entities (4.3).
Here are some relevant links to our activities and programs for 2024-2025:
- WAP Official Website
- WAP Meta-Wiki page
- WAP Wikimedia Commons
- GSF Midterm Conversations
- WAP Annual Report 2024-2025
- Volunteer Hours
4. Are you interested in sharing what you achieved or learned this year with the wider community through different peer learning programs (e.g. Let's Connect program, Diff)? (optional)
Yes.
5. Did you collect feedback from your community or target groups on how the activities implemented impacted them? If yes, please attach/provide information on the results (e.g. community surveys, stories, impact booklets/reports, interviews with partner institutions, etc). Did you collect other impact-specific data? (required)
For affiliates, the response to Question 5. also partially addresses Affiliate Health Criteria 4.1 (Internal Engagement), 4.2 (Community Connection), or 4.3 (Partnerships & collaboration), where applicable.
Yes
- Volunteer experience - ESEAP Summit
- WAP Internship program
- WikiDunong: Digital Wellbeing Essentials for Senior High Students
- Human Rights Day 2024 Report
6. During the fund period, did your efforts do any of the following? (required):
For affiliates, the response to Question 6. also partially addresses Affiliate Health Criterion 2.2 (Diversity balance).
- 6.1 Bring in participants from the following groups: women, LGBTQ+ groups, people from lower socioeconomic status, young people, speakers of minority languages
- 6.2 Develop content about the following underrepresented topics or groups of people: women, LGBTQ+ groups, underrepresented geographical regions (ESEAP, LATAM, SSA, MENA, SA)
- 6.3 Support the retention of: Editors, Organizers, Partnerships
7. What, if any, effective tactics or approaches can you share that worked well when dealing with the programs under points 6.1-6.3 that you selected? (optional)
The most effective tactics we employed revolved around shifting from general outreach to highly localized and culturally resonant engagement.
Here are three core effective tactics and approaches we can share:
- Deep Community Embedding via Immersive Fieldwork
- Approach: Instead of inviting contributors to come to us, we went to the source of the knowledge. For the Documenting Capalonga Bamboo Weavers program, the effective tactic was building trust through physical presence and co-creation. We treated the process as immersive fieldwork, which allowed our advocates to spend significant time with the Capalonga community. This direct, respectful collaboration was the only way to surface knowledge about intangible cultural heritage, which often remains undocumented because the knowledge-holders (in this case, the women weavers) are not active on Wikimedia platforms.
- Key Takeaway: Authenticity and high-quality content are directly proportional to the depth of community partnership.
- Approach: In the Cooking ng Ina Mo: Food Fest, the effective approach was using a relatable and celebrated cultural activity—Filipino home cooking—to frame participation. We avoided intimidating terms like "editing" or "licensing" initially. Instead, we focused on documenting recipes from mothers, who are the traditional knowledge-holders in this domain. This lowered the barrier to entry and successfully attracted a completely new demographic of contributors by validating their everyday expertise.
- Key Takeaway: Frame Wikimedia contribution not as an intellectual task, but as an act of celebrating and preserving existing cultural identity.
- Approach: Recognizing that content gaps stem from both a lack of content and a lack of skilled contributors, the Digital Literacy for High School Students program was an effective tactic for future-proofing our community. We proactively addressed the foundational challenge: digital literacy and critical thinking. By partnering with schools, we weren't just running a one-off edit-a-thon; we were equipping young individuals with the skills necessary to become sustained, thoughtful contributors to the information ecosystem, thereby addressing the long-term content gap challenge.
Key Takeaway: Investing in foundational digital and critical literacy skills creates a healthier, more capable pool of future Wikimedia contributors than simple one-time recruitment drives. 8. If you developed partnerships, which of the following factors most helped you to build partnerships? Please pick a MAXIMUM of the three most relevant factors (optional): Board members’ outreach, Staff hired through the fund, Volunteers from our communities
Part 2: Metrics
[edit]| Metrics name | Target | Result | Comments and tools used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of all participants | 100 | 209 | Summary of Participants per event:
Wikidata - 29 editors - https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Wiki_Advocates_Philippines_User_Group/Wikidata_2024_Philippines Shesaid - 15 editors - https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Wiki_Advocates_Philippines_User_Group/SheSaid_Philippines_2024 Wikidata2 - 12 editors - https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Wiki_Advocates_Philippines_User_Group/Wikidata_12th_Birthday_Philippines WPWP - 33 editors - https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Wiki_Advocates_Philippines_User_Group/WPWP_Campaign_2024_Philippines DW - 50 students HRD - 70 participants Wikimania - 18 participants |
| Number of all editors | 100 | 33 | |
| Number of new editors | 50 | 27 | |
| Number of retained editors | 30 | 20 | |
| Number of all organizers | 15 | 14 | |
| Number of new organizers | 5 | 8 |
| Wikimedia project | Target - Number of created pages | Target - Number of improved pages | Result - Number of created pages | Result - Number of improved pages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wikipedia | 100 | 50 | ||
| Wikimedia Commons | 3000 | 500 | 1600 | |
| Wikidata | 2000 | 500 | 1770 | 1810 |
| Wiktionary | 1000 | 500 | 442 | 2060 |
| Wikisource | ||||
| Wikimedia Incubator | 1000 | 500 | ||
| Translatewiki | ||||
| MediaWiki | ||||
| Wikiquote | 1000 | 500 | 82 | 276 |
| Wikivoyage | ||||
| Wikibooks | ||||
| Wikiversity | ||||
| Wikinews | ||||
| Wikispecies | ||||
| Wikifunctions or Abstract Wikipedia |
11. Did you set other quantitative and qualitative targets for your project (other metrics)? (required): No
11.1. Other Metrics.
In your application, you outlined some other open metrics that you would like to measure. Please fill out the achieved results for each of the open metrics you defined.
| Other Metrics name | Metrics Description | Target | Result | Tools and comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expertise on campaign tools | These are mastery in certain tools being used in campaign organizing, such as list-building, petscan, etc. | 5 | ||
| Identified gaps | This is not limited to article-related gaps but also to gender-related gaps on the scope of participation in activities and on editors involved in improvement of Wikimedia projects | 3 | ||
| Wikimedia Incubator projects Development | These are the both the existing incubator projects under the Wikimedia Incubator and the possible languages that can have an official incubator project to work on. | 2 | ||
| Alignment to Movement Strategy | These are programs that directly aligns to the implementation of the Movement Strategy | 7 | ||
| Leadership Development among members | Having an administrator in wikiproject and campaign organizer to lead events | 5 |
Part 3: Skill Development / Capacity Building
[edit]12. Reflecting on your programmatic (external) and organizational (internal) work, did your grant support you to undergo any skill development that made a difference to your success? If yes, what skill was developed, and how did it lead to success? (e.g. received coaching on public speaking, attended training on nonviolent communication, hosted professional development conversations on leadership, learned and used a new tool for project management, etc.)? Can you share any materials? (required)
For affiliates, use this space (Question 12.) to address Affiliate Health Criteria 2.2 (Diversity balance) and 3.1 (Diverse, Skilled, and Accountable Leadership):
- Describe actions taken to prioritize gender balance in affiliate leadership, as well as any areas of diversity relevant to your affiliate's context (2.2).
- Describe the management, financial, or other leadership skills of your affiliate leaders. If you have a succession plan, please include it here (3.1).
- Describe any training or skill development (as outlined in the question above) (3.1).
- Incorporate into the annual report a disclosure of conflict of interests (if any) from the leadership (3.1).
Yes, the grant support was instrumental in elevating both our programmatic and organizational capabilities, particularly by requiring us to execute a large-scale international event.
Skill Developed: High-Level International Event and Strategic Stakeholder Management
[edit]The most transformative skill development came from our opportunity to host the Wikimedia ESEAP Strategy Summit Manila 2025. This effort was far more than logistical; it demanded advanced skills in organizational diplomacy, strategic financial management, and high-level community coordination.
How it Led to Success:
- Organizational Maturity (Internal): Successfully coordinating an event of this magnitude required us to professionalize our internal processes, specifically in complex budgeting, vendor management, and risk mitigation. Our team developed a much stronger proficiency in utilizing new project management tools and adhering to international grant reporting standards, moving us toward greater organizational maturity and efficiency.
- Strategic Diplomacy (Programmatic/External): The Summit required managing diverse stakeholders, including regional leaders, foundation representatives, and multiple international partners. The team developed crucial skills in cross-cultural communication and strategic negotiation, ensuring consensus on key regional strategies. This success has significantly raised Wiki Advocates Philippines's profile and reputation within the ESEAP regional movement, positioning us as a reliable leader capable of facilitating complex, high-stakes discussions.
In essence, the skill developed was the ability to transition from running localized community projects to successfully executing a major international conference, which served as a massive accelerator for our internal team's professional development.
Shareable Material
[edit]The primary material demonstrating this skill development and success is the Final Report submitted for the conference, which details the logistical and strategic outcomes:
1. ESEAP Strategy Summit Impact Summary
2. Volunteer Engagement Feedback Report
13. What is one capacity/skill area that you would like to focus on for the next year? And how do you plan to achieve this capacity? (required)
Our primary focus for capacity development in the upcoming year is centered on three interconnected items essential for organizational growth, technical resilience, and global relevance. However, we will focus more on:
Technical WikiProject Capability:
We need to enhance our team's skills in diagnosing technical issues and creating a more welcoming environment for new editors. Our focus is on developing technical proficiency in WikiProject editing and tool-building. With this, we plan to identify certain areas in Wikimedia projects where we can create simple tools for beginners and end users, where they can navigate Wiktionary or Wikimedia Commons, either through simple edits or merely for viewing.
14. If you have additional information or reflections that don’t fit into the above sections, please write them here. Use the space below to upload any additional documents that would be useful to understand your report.
For affiliates, also use this section (Question 14) to fulfill the Affiliate Health Criteria requirements.
- Describe and link to any public-facing documentation for affiliate governance, including affiliate leadership and membership with a breakdown of the demographics; how elections are conducted; how conflicts of interest are declared; and how decisions are made and communicated (2.2, 2.3, 3.1).
- Describe and link to any public-facing documentation for activities incorporating, promoting awareness about, or enforcing the Universal Code of Conduct in your affiliate's activities (3.3).
- Describe and link to any public-facing documentation for internal membership engagement, such as notes from your regular meetings and how you communicate to or involve your membership (4.1).
Part 4: Financial reporting
[edit]For affiliates, also use this section (Part 4: Financial reporting) to address Affiliate Health Criterion 3.2 (Financial & Legal Compliance).
| Description | Planned / received budget for this category (PHP) | Amount spent (PHP) |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel costs | 2304000 | 2126265 |
| Operational costs | 2720800 | 412363.55 |
| Programmatic costs | 5024800 | 977244.86 |
| Total General Support Fund | 3800000 | 3902388.41 |
| Other revenue | ||
| Remaining funds from General Support Fund | N/A |
15. Please state the total amount spent from this fund in your local currency. (required)
3902388.41 PHP
16. Please provide an overview of the amount spent from this fund in the following budget categories in your local currency. (required)
- Operational costs: 412363.55 PHP
- Programmatic costs: 2126265 PHP
- Staff and contractor costs: 977244.86 PHP
17. Did you have any other revenue sources (e.g. other funding, membership contributions, donations)? (required): No
- 17.1. Provide the total amount received from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): PHP
- 17.2. Provide the total amount spent from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): PHP
18. Provide a financial report document which will provide the details of funds received and spent in the currency of your fund. (required)
- Upload Documents, Templates, and Files.
- Report funds received and spent, if template not used.
18.2. If you have not already done so in your financial spending report, provide information on changes in the budget in relation to your original proposal. (optional)
N/A
19. Do you have any unspent funds from this funding?: No
20. Final confirmations (required)
- 20.1. Are you in compliance with the terms outlined in the fund agreement? You must be in compliance with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Funds as outlined in the grant agreement. In summary, this is to confirm that the funds were used in alignment with the Wikimedia Foundation mission and for charitable/nonprofit/educational purposes.
- Yes
- 20.2. Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement?
- Yes
- 20.3. 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 Funds as outlined in the grant agreement? In summary, this is to confirm that the funds were used in alignment with the WMF mission and for charitable/nonprofit/educational purposes.
- Yes
This is an automatically generated Meta-Wiki page. The page was copied from Fluxx, the web service of Wikimedia Foundation Funds, where the user has submitted their report. Please do not make any changes to this page because all changes will be removed after the next update. Use the discussion page for your feedback. The page was created by CR-FluxxBot.