Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/General Support Fund/Wikimedia France-Funding request 2023-2026/Yearly Report (2024)
|
|
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.
Wikimedia France aims to establish itself as a leading voice for free digital knowledge in France, particularly in the fields of culture, science, and education. Progress has been strong in culture and science. The network of institutions awarded the “cultural label” continues to grow, with internal practices showing steady improvement. The renewal of the first cohort in 2026 will provide an opportunity for a deeper three-year impact assessment. However, reaching major national institutions remains difficult due to political barriers. Our strategy is to continue expanding the network until it reaches a critical mass, strengthening our political leverage for broader change.
In science, collaboration with the Ministry of Open Science continues through residency programs. Many staff members have been trained and introduced to Wikimedia projects, but the long-term impact on institutional practices remains unclear. Evaluating this change will be a priority for this year’s residents.
The educational field remains the most challenging. A promising pilot project with schools in Rennes on Wikidata will likely continue next year, but scaling up is still limited. We are still searching for the right strategy and clear objectives to fully engage with the school system.
Significant progress has been made in supporting the online community. We continue to provide legal and psychological assistance, while also expanding into conflict management training, supporting the re-establishment of a French Wikipedia arbitration committee, and developing moderation and anti-disinformation tools. New services include access to legal experts, reporting harmful content to Pharos, and training on personal data protection. We closely monitor community health, particularly the number and diversity of active administrators and moderators, though tracking the latter remains complex.
Local volunteer groups remain active and effective. The annual Wikicamp has become a cornerstone of the Wikimedia community in France. Upcoming bylaw reforms aim to give local groups more flexibility and resources. Membership has grown steadily in recent years, and we plan to build on this momentum through targeted campaigns, initiatives like Wiki’Live, and stronger onboarding efforts.
This year, Wikimedia France also launched a national grantmaking system to transparently support associations pursuing similar goals. Coordinating a nationwide movement remains complex, but we continue working with partners to address this challenge.
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)
At this stage, we cannot say that there is a comprehensive plan covering all areas, as many projects are still in the implementation phase. Our current focus is to follow existing thematic strategies while gathering insights that will shape the next strategic plan. For the online community, our approach is straightforward: respond to their needs as best we can, maintain close ties through initiatives like AdminConfs and PatrolConfs, raise partner awareness, and seize opportunities to expand and improve the services we provide.
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).
Our annual reports is not yet ready. But it's possible to find all information between our website, meta pages and project pages on Wiki :
Wikimedia France is actively engaged in Wikimedia Europe for advocacy at the European level. We also work on European project calls in collaboration with other Wikimedia affiliates. In addition, we are actively involved in WikiFranca. Within this framework, Wikimedia France acts as the fiscal sponsor for two other affiliates, Wikimedia DRC and Wikimedia Madagascar. Our support goes beyond simple financial transfers: it also includes training and advising these new affiliates in developing their activities.
We also maintain a wide network of partners, including cultural institutions, scientific and academic organizations, government agencies, other associations, and private companies. A stakeholder mapping is regularly updated to monitor, sustain, and continue expanding this network of partners.
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)
Of course :) but for that, we would need clear requests specifying on which aspects our feedback is expected.
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.
Every year, we conduct a large survey among Wikimedia France members and track indicators to measure their level of engagement, especially whether they feel heard by WMFR. We have not yet replicated this format on online Wiki projects. We also collect feedback after our events, either from participating volunteers or from the partner institutions we collaborate with. I put two examples in additional files.
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, people with disabilities, neurodiverse people, speakers of minority languages, underrepresented geographical regions (ESEAP, LATAM, SSA, MENA, SA)
- 6.2 Develop content about the following underrepresented topics or groups of people: indigenous groups, speakers of minority languages, underrepresented geographical regions (ESEAP, LATAM, SSA, MENA, SA)
- 6.3 Support the retention of: Editors, Organizers, Partnerships, Wikimedians in Residence positions
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)
These are different tactics each time. For minority languages, these are adapted actions; for people with disabilities or neurodiverse people, these are mainly adaptations during events or social occasions to encourage them to stay; for the participation of women, it's supporting organizations that already do this very well.
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):
Permanent staff outreach, Partners proactive interest
Part 2: Metrics for Year 2
[edit]| Wikimedia Metrics | Target (Year 2) | Results (Year 2) | Comments and tools used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of all participants | 5000 | 5791 | Registration and participation in events organized by Wikimedia France or local groups |
| Number of all editors | 2000 | 2500 | Almost all of Wikimedia France's members and volunteers are active contributors to projects, and a good third participate in at least one of the association's activities each year, or around 160 people. In addition, there are contributors to online projects involved in technical projects such as moderation, competitions supported by the association, online events, and training.Still struggling to track retention. We've been working for a year on a centralized process for collecting new users nationwide between local groups and staff in order to track contributions, but this has raised ethical and value issues that we haven't yet resolved to fully involve our members in this process. |
| Number of new editors | N/A | 2500 | |
| Number of retained editors | N/A | 2500 | |
| Number of all organizers | 60 | 53 | These are the official event organizing teams or the volunteer event organizers in the region. |
| Number of new organizers | N/A | 53 |
| Wikimedia project | Target - Number of created pages (Year 2) | Target - Number of improved pages (Year 2) | Result - Number of created pages (Year 2) | Result - Number of improved pages (Year 2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wikipedia | 1000 | 4000 | ||
| Wikimedia Commons | 150000 | |||
| Wikidata | 10000 | |||
| Wiktionary | 1500 | |||
| Wikisource | ||||
| Wikimedia Incubator | ||||
| Translatewiki | ||||
| MediaWiki | ||||
| Wikiquote | ||||
| Wikivoyage | ||||
| Wikibooks | ||||
| Wikiversity | ||||
| Wikinews | ||||
| Wikispecies | ||||
| Wikifunctions or Abstract Wikipedia |
11. Did you set other quantitative and qualitative targets for your project (other metrics)? (required): Yes
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 | Description | Target | Results | Comments | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of professionals active on Wikimedia projects having been trained by Wikimedia France | The professional audiences targeted by Wikimedia France are those of national education, culture (museums, libraries, archives...) of the scientific world (universities, research laboratories...) | 150 | 3500 | Mainly thanks to the partnership with the MESR and with the wiki residences | N/A |
| Number of active local and thematic groups | A local or thematic group is considered active when it is made up of at least 2 members and has carried out at least 2 activities over a year. | 35 | 20 | Progress is slow and difficult, which is why we are thinking of reforming the functioning of local groups in a more profound way in order to facilitate their development and autonomy. | N/A |
| Percentage of volunteers or employees who participated in at least 1 project of the association during the year among those who declared a diversity criterion | Diversity criteria: (gender, language, geography, level of study, socio-professional category, disability)
Number of volunteers or employees ticking at least one diversity criterion who participated in a project / Number of volunteers or employees ticking at least one diversity criterion |
70 | 33 | It is difficult to really compare because the percentage is based on the number of members of Wikimedia France, which has increased significantly, mathematically lowering the percentage. | N/A |
| Number of volunteers who declared having participated in at least 1 project of the association | Percentage obtained during the survey sent to all members up to date with their subscription in September of each year | 60 | 7 | Associations supported by the WMFR funding system or by memberships and other mechanisms | N/A |
| N/A | N/A | N/A | 27 | same difficulty, the number of members having increased this influences the percentage | N/A |
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).
Difficult to state clearly. Let’s say that the flexibility provided by the WMF grant allows us to do two things: continue our advocacy efforts, which in turn create project opportunities that go beyond advocacy alone, and seize those opportunities to develop projects that help Wikimedia France grow (both the team and volunteers) through the acquisition of new skills. For example, in the areas of disinformation or AI. We now work within a well-established network of French stakeholders, which provides us with valuable opportunities to learn. We made progress on this gender bias last year, with the Board reaching 25% women compared to just 8% the previous year (1/12). The staff team, on the other hand, is perfectly balanced. Among our members, we track relevant indicators and provide financial support to Wikimedia organizations working to reduce gender bias. Wikimedia France is fortunate to hold the IDEAS label, an external certification that recognizes our good management practices in governance, finance, and evaluation monitoring. There are 70 best practices to follow, and we are supported by experts. Each year, IDEAS offers training and workshops to its certified organizations, and we send our new board members to take part. We are also considering opening these trainings to our members in preparation for future board candidacies. However, there is not yet a clearly defined succession plan.We have a conflict-of-interest management committee. This year has been particular, with extensive reflection on its evolution and strengthening towards a broader ethics committee that would also address whistleblowing issues. The Board and part of the staff team received training on this topic this year, focusing on the definition of conflicts of interest, and some of our members also took part in a session during the last Wikicamp.
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)
One of the remaining challenges within WMFR is our capacity to carry out tech projects fully autonomously. At present, we rely on external partners, but whenever we need to handle such projects internally, we quickly face difficulties. If we are to provide increasing technical support to the community, we will necessarily need to: continue strengthening our internal capacity in tech project management, which differs significantly from traditional project management, and eventually recruit an in-house developer. We will have no other choice.
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).
most of the documentation and or governance process are well documented on Meta Wiki : [5]
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 | Amount spent (EUR) |
|---|---|
| Personnel costs | 779891 |
| Operational costs | 289198 |
| Programmatic costs | 279445 |
| Total (Year 2) | 482000 |
| Other revenue | 878105 |
| Remaining funds (Year 2) | N/A |
15. Please state the total amount spent from this fund in your local currency. (required)
482000 EUR
16. Please provide an overview of the amount spent from this fund in the following budget categories in your local currency. (required)
- Operational costs: 289198 EUR
- Programmatic costs: 779891 EUR
- Staff and contractor costs: 279445 EUR
17. Did you have any other revenue sources (e.g. other funding, membership contributions, donations)? (required): Yes
- 17.1. Provide the total amount received from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): 907499 EUR
- 17.2. Provide the total amount spent from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): 878105 EUR
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)
This is not the official financial report because it must be voted on by the board of directors on October 18. It is therefore the booklet of accounts which was sent to the board of directors by our accountant and validated by the auditor.
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.