Jump to content

Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Wikimedia Nederland/Proposal form

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Wikimedia Nederland received a funds allocation in the amount of 350,000 in 2012-2013 Round 1. This funds allocation was recommended by the Funds Dissemination Committee on 15 November 2012 and approved by the WMF Board of Trustees on 1 December 2012.

Please note that the proposals are now closed to community response. Thanks to all for your engagement with the Community Review process, and for your questions. FDC members, FDC staff, and entity representatives will still be communicating on these discussion pages over the next few weeks, but entities will not be responding to questions from anyone other than the FDC or FDC Staff.

This page should be used to discuss the entity’s submitted proposal. This includes asking questions about the content of the proposal form, asking for clarifications on this proposal, and discussing any other issues relating to the proposal itself. To discuss other components of this proposal please refer to the discussion links below.
  • This proposal has not yet been created.
  • This proposal form has not yet been created.
  • Staff proposal assessments have not yet been published for this round.
  • FDC recommendation discussion page: discuss the recommendation that the FDC gives to the Board regarding all requests.
  • Board decision discussion page: discuss the board's decision.
  • An impact report has not yet been submitted for this funds allocation.

Tony's questions[edit]

Sandra and colleagues, thanks for this interesting application. I think WM Netherlands does some admirable work. The surveys look good (maybe they might be adopted more widely among chapters if they work well). Just a few queries.

Hi Tony. Thanks for showing an interest in our FDC application. See my answers below. Let me know if you have any further questions. Regards. Sandra SRientjes (talk) 11:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • "As of October 1, 2012, Wikimedia Nederland employs three staff (2.5 FTE). It is expected that by June 1, 2013, Wikimedia Nederland will employ five staff (4.0 FTE)". Could you briefly say how this 60% increase will expand the skill-base (or perhaps it's just that you need more people within the existing skill-base to cope with the workload)?
The two additional staff members will focus on (1) office management/admin and (2) project management specifically for GLAM projects. With office management/admin we will be looking for someone with expertise in accounting, contractual issues, planning and reporting for non-profits. As regards the project manager, our volunteers are finding that it would be a great help if there was someone at the office who could provide back-up and support in organising events, maintaining contacts with GLAM institutions, fundraising etc. So, in both cases it is mainly a question of increasing capacity to deal with the workload, rather than bringing in completely new skills. SRientjes (talk) 11:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • Your objectives column comprises many laudable aims. The heading does say "(include metrics)", so I wonder if you could—again briefly—expose your targets for the main objectives by giving numbers. II.1 and II.2 already do this. For example:
  • "To bring in new editors and new volunteers"—what would you be pleased with ... an extra 20 active volunteers for chapter work (percentage increase?). And how would you measure the new editors on the Dutch WP? Presumably ≥ 5 edits a month, and ≥ 100 edits (the two measures on the big stats sheet). What would be happy achieving, even if you don't get there?
For 2013, we are aiming for a 5% increase in WP editors which indeed would fall within the limits of the edit stats commonly used. Of course, the question then still remains to what extent this increase is the direct result of our activities. Therefore we are also planning to track how many of the participants in the seminars/editor training we plan to organise remain active. As to volunteers, we aim to mobilise at least 20 new active volunteers in 2013. SRientjes (talk) 11:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
Just a reminder here on the metrics point, that some WP editors involved with the chapter are active in WP projects other than the Dutch Wikipedia. According to Erik Zachte, about half of all edits made from IP addresses originating from the Netherlands are to non-Dutch WP projects (such as Commons). It would be helpful to link those stats in here, as the chapter actively supports the work of other projects (For example, of the projects mentioned, WLM runs on Commons, and the Teylers project runs on the English WP). Jane023 (talk) 09:38, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • Your stated measure in I.2 is the number of applications received/granted. First, the proportion of applications you grant is under your control, so might not be an accurate objective measure (like a teacher giving out lots of As to their students next year and claiming it's the result of better teaching).
Indeed, WMNL controls how many applications will receive a grant. We will involve the community in judging grants in order to ensure quality and relevance, which is probably more relevant than the number of grants awarded. Our main aim will be to ensure that the community is aware of the possibility to receive a grant for interesting activities and ideas. We want to award at least 15 grants over the coming year. SRientjes (talk) 11:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
I believe there have been grants approved in the past for small projects and of course to WLM (some funding for Dutch "Wiki takes..." and other minor expenses for Belgium or Luxembourg prizes?). I believe most expenses are for drinks&snacks at meetups and/or prizes; I recall discussions for some prizes sponsored for the Dutch WP writing contest. The Teylers get-togethers were paid for by Teylers, and snacks at the edit-a-thon in Utrecht were paid for by WMNL. For clarity it might be good to link to a page with actual expenses vs. results to date. Jane023 (talk) 09:38, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • "Build on ‘lessons learned’ by Wikimedia UK and Wikimedia Deutschland"—which areas did you have in mind?
Wikimedia NL is only just starting on the process of ‘professionalisation’: 2013 will be the first year the community will be supported by an office with a small staff. Wikimedia De and UK are already further advanced in this process. We want to learn from all of their experiences: how office staff can provide effective support to the community, which software to choose for accounting and CRM, good models for working with partner organisations, fundraising.... Our motto is: don’t reinvent the wheel, steal it! SRientjes (talk) 11:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks and good luck. Tony (talk) 08:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Good answers! We appear to need to give applicants with a better idea of how much and what kind of detail to provide in the first place, so this will be useful. Cheers. Tony (talk) 10:45, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Clarifying questions from FDC staff[edit]

Thank you for your proposal! Please respond to the questions below; do not hesitate to reach out in case you need any clarifications.

Budget and finances[edit]

1. Please confirm the following information: a. Current year budget: USD 405,600

Correct - in the FDC form current year budget is stated in table 3 in the line spending as $ 405,600. SRientjes (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

b. Proposed year budget: USD 607,945

Correct - in the FDC form proposed year budget is stated in table 2 in the line Total annual expenses of entity and in table 10 Total Spending as $ 607,945. SRientjes (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

c. Current year grants received/amount retained from the fundraiser: USD 200,818

With thesubmitted Annual Program Plan 2012 WMNL requested a WMF Chapters Grant 2012 in the amount of € 218,123 = $ 283,560. Asked for an estimate of amount needed this year an amount of twohundred thousand dollar was requested. So far, no payment has been received by WMNL. Therefore the amount mentioned in the question can not be confirmed but we are still expecting a transfer to the amount of two hundred thousand dollar ($ 200,000). SRientjes (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

d Proposed year funds requested (from FDC): USD 471,445

Correct. In the FDC form funds requested has been reported in table 2 in the line Amount proposed to the FDC for the coming year's annual plan, and in table 5 in the line WMF/FDC as $ 471,445.SRientjes (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

2. Please explain your entity’s cash reserve position. a. How much do you have in your reserves now?

Reserves to date October 15th, 2012 (interpreted and estimated as current assets minus current liabilities) are $ 143,000. SRientjes (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

b. How much do you expect to have by the start of the planning year period?

By the start of the next planning period, January 1st, 2013 the reserve is estimated to be one hundred eighty five thousand dollar ($ 185,000) including the two hundred thousand dollar Annual Program Plan 2012 Grant part. SRientjes (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

c. What is your long-term policy and strategy on operating reserves?

The long-term policy and strategy on operating reserves has been written in the Annual Progam Plan 2012 as “we would aim to bring down our reserves at the end of 2012 to ca. 156.000 [€] (6 months of expenses under the currently proposed budget)”. Our operating reserves at the end of this year will be below planned reserves. At the start of the next planning period the reserves will be less than 4 months operating reserve.SRientjes (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
Please explain how WMNL defines "cash reserve". Thanks, Wolliff (talk) 21:53, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, SRientjes, we see the definition you have given above. --ASengupta (WMF) (talk) 20:13, 25 October 2012 (UTC) 20:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

3. It appears that local project financing is a significant amount of projected revenues - please share some of your strategies for reaching out to local donors, and how secure you feel these projected revenues might be?

We believe that WMNL has a strong starting position for fundraising:
  • proven track record in delivering successful activities, e.g. WikiLovesMonuments
  • we are increasingly being approached by prominent organisations such as National Library + Archives, Rijksmuseum who wish to cooperate with us
  • funding bodies in Nl are increasingly shifting towards supporting ‘grass root’ initiatives involving volunteers and the general public.
In our Strategy 2013 - 2015, we have prioritised establishing contacts with funding bodies which we will actively approach to introduce them to WMNL and our portfolio of activities.
We will initially target funds focussing on culture: e.g. Prins Bernhard Cultuur fonds http://www.prinsbernhardcultuurfonds.nl and Postcodeloterij http://www.postcodeloterij.nl/GoedeDoelen.htm as our main experience currently lies in that area.
We will, however, also explore funds focussing on social cohesion (Oranjefonds http://www.oranjefonds.nl + Skan Fonds http://www.skanfonds.nl ); projects aimed at promoting diversity in our volunteer and editor groups by increased participation from e.g. women, the elderly and minorities could be of interest to them.
Thirdly, we will be looking towards funding provided by the European Union. Currently, we already participate in an EU funded project (COSYNE - http://www.cosyne.eu ) and we believe there is a potential for fundraising in research+technology projects as well as projects focussing on involving citizens in technology, culture, environment etc..
Next to approaching these funding bodies directly, we will also monitor calls for projects/proposals and will respond when these calls match our profile. We will also be open to requests from other organisations to join their projects as a consortium partner if and when appropriate to our mission.
We realise that the fundraising target we have set for ourselves is ambitious. In developing the 2012 workplan we have set up scenarios which take into account different levels of generated income. However, we do firmly believe that we are in a good starting position. To put a number on it, we feel we have a 50% chance of reaching the 80.000€ target - meaning we are confident of realising at least 40.000€. SRientjes (talk) 12:35, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply


1. For staff that are to be hired for "6 months" - is this for just 6 months out of the year, without renewal, or will these staff become permanent in future years?

We expect the staff to start mid 2013 and work for 6 months during that year, but they will be offered longer running contracts. Common practice in Nl is to initially offer a one year contract, with the option of renewal for another two years if/when necessary and financially feasible. SRientjes (talk) 12:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

2. If these are permanent staff, does this mean that GLAM will continue to be a strategic priority for the organization in the future? What happens if priorities change?

Only one of the additional staff members, the project officer, will work mainly on GLAM. In our Strategy 2013-2015, GLAM is prioritised as a main area of activity for WMNL for the coming three years. Hence the contract of the project manager will not initially extend beyond December 2015. (We will aim to recruit a staff member who will be able to apply her/his skills outside the GLAM area.) The office manager will not work exclusively on GLAM projects SRientjes (talk) 12:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

3. You have made an interesting observation about WMNL undergoing a professionalisation process while being concerned about potential alienation of volunteers. In addition, you talk about the guiding principle of professional staff stepping in only when volunteers cannot reasonably carry out a task. In this context, what is your policy or guiding principles on ratios of efficiency and effectiveness, for instance, overall expenses:staff expenses or annual expenses:program expenses?

This is a difficult question to answer as 2013 is going to be the first full year WMNL will actually have staff and an operational office. We as yet have no experience/data to guide us as to which ratios would be realistic. WMNL operates according to guidelines set by the CBF - a Dutch certification body for fundraising non-profits. The CBF guiding principles for program expenses : fundraising expenses : general administrative expenses ratios are 75 : 15 : 10. On the page http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2012-2013_round1/Wikimedia_Nederland/Detailed_Budget_2013 a detailed budget has been reported for 2013. The budget includes a ‘functional allocation table’ in which is given a Specification and allocation of costs according to appropriation. The planned program expenses : planned fundraising expenses : planned general administrative expenses ration are 72 : 16 : 12, close to the ideal numbers given by CBF. We are entering into a period of transition from an organisation entirely powered by volunteers, to a professionally supported organisation centred around volunteers. In developing the Work Plan 2013, our guiding principle has been that the amount of staff hours needed for implementation of the programme should not exceed the amount of volunteer hours. Our aim for the coming years is to keep staff time level while increasing the input by volunteers. SRientjes (talk) 12:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Key Initiatives, Strategies and Impact[edit]

1. Could you share with us who you might be targeting as "new volunteers from communities/background relevant to WP and Wikimedia Nederland" (in Section I.1 of the Key Initiatives)? Please share your insights into why you are choosing to work with these communities in particular.

We will definitely be targeting women as potential new editors as the gender gap is an issue in the Nl Wikipedia, resulting in a bias in topics covered. A gender gap project is part of the 2013 Work Plan. Therefore womens’ groups will be a focus. The same applies to organisations of other groups we have reason to believe are underrepresented among our current editorship, such as senior citizens and minorities.
We will also be targeting groups that we expect to have a natural affinity with Wikipedia, i.e. volunteer organisations with an interest in gathering knowledge, data and images. Here we are thinking of groups focussing on e.g. (local) history, wildlife, geology. We believe there is good potential to mobilise new editors from such groups: they are already organised, they can be reached through their organisations’ newsletters and meetings and they have a lot to contribute to Wikipedia.
Currently, we have commissioned a survey into the background of our membership, volunteers and editors. We are also planning to stimulate research into thematic coverage of Nl Wikipedia to identify gaps. Both will provide us with additional information to fine-tune our targeting of specific groups. SRientjes (talk) 12:47, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

2. Significantly, you are not only looking at output indicators as metrics of success - for e.g. the number of participants - but also outcomes, for e.g. tracking progress of new editors trained (I.1). Assuming this will give you conversion rates of how many new editors become active and are retained in the community, please give us more details on how you are planning to do this.

We will focus specifically on tracking the new editors that come out of the activities we plan to organise in cooperation with the organisations described above. We will know the names/contact details of participants in training sessions, seminars etc and will be able to contact them to find out if they became active as editors and if so, whether they remained active. This approach will also ensure that their anonymity as editors is maintained.SRientjes (talk) 12:47, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

3. Similarly, when tracking the success of recruiting new members, is WMNL considering dimensions other than the number of members? For example, can WMNL track that its programmes are actually improving member retention over time? In the highly successful Wiki Loves Monuments programme that WMNL pioneered, for instance, has WMNL been able to track editor retention over time? What lessons exist for the broader WM movement in this?

At the moment, information about member recruitment and member retention is ‘anecdotal’. We are setting up a CRM system which will allow us to track (within the limits of NL privacy laws) whether participants in activities eventually become members and/or active volunteers. It will also allow us to assess which ways of recruitment trigger the highest response.
Concerning editor retention following WikiLovesMonuments: some 2/3 of the participants to Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 made their first edit in September 2011 (~3500 users). Of those new participants, 6.6% (231) still contributed in the period November-May. In May 2012, 8 months after the contest: 1.6% – 61 users were still active. http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org/new-editors-thanks-to-wiki-loves-monuments/
This is all extremely helpful and detailed information, thank you! We also appreciate your responding so quickly. Since volunteer retention is such an important aspect for WMNL - and for the movement at large - are you looking at WLM editors specifically in the survey you've commissioned? I will come back to you with any additional queries if needed. --ASengupta (WMF) (talk) 22:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

SRientjes (talk) 12:47, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

--ASengupta (WMF) (talk) 01:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Question about volunteer participation[edit]

Hello WMNL, These are some general questions that I am asking to all the EEs regarding volunteer participation. All the entities have stated in their proposals that low turnover of volunteers in both online and offline activities have been a major obstacle for them. Most of them have also expressed concerns that reducing number of volunteers is a threat to their organizational effectiveness and to the movement as a whole. I feel we need to have short term, midterm and long term plans to tackle this problem.

Does your organization have -

  1. Any short term plan to recruit new volunteers for both online and off line activities?
  2. Any midterm plan to train, motivate and convert them into regular contributors?
  3. Any long term plan to retain them and continue the growth?

If you already have any such plans, please mention them and elaborate how your plan/s is (are) going to achieve the goal of recruiting new volunteers, converting them into regular contributors and retain the volunteers as well as maintain the growth? - Ali Haidar Khan (Tonmoy) (talk) 17:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

I believe you mean "high", not "low" turnover? I for one had to quit the WMNL board because it just took up too much of my free time (and I live pretty far away from the office, making meetups a trial). If you have ideas how to recruit, train, and motivate people into becoming regular contributors that WMNL could then retain, we could sure use those tips! Jane023 (talk) 09:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

This is a very pertinent question! The extent to which we succeed in mobilising and retaining new volunteers is going to be crucial - for WMNL as well as the entire Wikimedia movement. At WMNL we have made it one of the spearheads of our Strategy for the years 2013 - 2015:
'The mission of Wikimedia Nederland can only be fulfilled if people play an active role in making knowledge freely available through Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects and activities. The objective for the years to come: more active editors and volunteers who receive effective support from WMNL. Creating opportunities for editors and volunteers to be active and providing support for their efforts will be a core activity for Wikimedia Nederland, together with motivating and activating new groups of volunteers. There should be a widespread awareness that Wikipedia is a volunteer project in which anybody can participate. Volunteers and editors can count on both online and off-line support from Wikimedia Nederland for their activities: creating content, contacts with (potential and actual) partner organisations and promoting free knowledge in other ways. The organisation is making efforts in this direction by looking for ways of adapting to individual competences, preferences and wishes. A wide range of options and facilities are on tap, both in response to demand and on an individual basis. This includes a social infrastructure in which volunteers can develop and work together in order to achieve results.
Goals 2013 - 2015
  • More volunteers and editors will be recruited: more people will be active themselves in Wikipedia or other activities and projects
  • Volunteers and editors will receive effective, targeted support from Wikimedia Nederland that will enable them to enjoy being active in the optimal way on a continuing basis
  • Lines of communication with volunteers and editors will be short and informal
  • Volunteers and editors will feel that their involvement is appreciated and will not feel that there are obstacles to their initiatives.'
For 2013 we have set ourselves concrete goals: 5% increase of active Wikipedia editors and 20% increase of active volunteers. SRientjes (talk) 13:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Is it possible to participate in the discussion?[edit]

Is it possible for volunteers to participate in the plans for the coming years? For instance I would like to see some concrete plan regarding the Dutch wikiversity. The last year I have been working on this project, but I would appreciate some support. Timboliu (talk) 10:21, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Currently the only way to participate in planning discussions is to attend the meetings. Are you a member of WMNL and do you receive the invitations to the meetings? You can of course also just monitor the "Kroeg" page on the WMNL website, but that does not receive much traffic and face-to-face Q&A is much more efficient. If you want an opportunity to discuss this face-to-face, then I highly recommend you attend the WCN on November 9th. Jane023 (talk) 11:55, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply


'De Kroeg' not much traffic? Au contraire It's always busy there on Dutch Wikipedia. BTW, why having one of the four largest WP-sites and sending people to a real life event? That's almost a contradictio in terminis. Agree with Tim. Discussion should be allowed on Wiki, member or not, moderator or not, just by active Wikipedians for active Wikipedians. We're all participating and have a voice, don't we? Kind regards, Klaas ‌ V 14:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
Klaas: Jane023 is talking about the general discussion page at wmnl:Wikimedia:De kroeg on the chapter wiki and not about w:nl:Wikipedia:De kroeg on the Dutch Wikipedia. Please be aware that we are talking here about Wikimedia Nederland and not the Dutch Wikipedia. Wikimedia Nederland tries to support en and improve Wikipedia with projects (like Wiki Loves Monuments), but is not responsible for Wikipedia-nl itself. It also has nothing to do with moderators, it has to do with how the Wikimedia Foundation wants local chapters in a form (in Dutch: een vereniging) in what members of that organisation can vote. Sending people to real life events makes it much easier to work together in projects and makes it much easier to understand each other. So please be aware, this is about the Dutch Wikimedia and not the Duch Wikipedia. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 15:11, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Reply


Hi Tim, can you elaborate on 'participate in the plans'? What would you like to do? Currently Wikimedia Nederland doesn't have a specific plan to regarding the Dutch Wikiversity. Wikimedia Nederland has a budget to support activities and plans by volunteers. You can submit your plans and proposal for activities or requests for support any time wm-nl AT wikimedia DOT org. We developed a strategic plan 2013-2015 in the past two years with a lot of input from members and other volunteerds. Discussions were through mailing lists, on wiki and IRL meetings. In the past months we developed a plan for 2013 with a lot of input from members and other volunteers. Discussion were through mailing lists, on wiki and IRL meetings. A call for ideas to be included in the annual plan 2013 had been sent out. Ideas have been collected on the Annual Plan page on the Wikimedia Nederland wiki website. What kind of support do you need? Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 12:23, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
Hello Ad, thanks for the information. I had a look at the annual plan 2013 and also added a new plan (http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Jaarplan_2013#Wikiversiteit). Do you know how I can be added to the right mailing lists, so I can participate next year? I'm also curious about how the annual plan will be executed. Where can I find more information? Cheers, Tim, Timboliu (talk) 06:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Questions about current cash position and monthly spending patterns[edit]

Please clarify WMNL's cash position and usual monthly expenditures.

  1. What is WMNL's current cash position (as of 30 September 2012)? In other words, what is the total balance in all of WMNL's accounts (including operating reserves and cash for WMNL's programs and operations)?
  2. What are WMNL's typical monthly expenditures? We would like a sense of about how much money WMNL spends in an ordinary month during the current fiscal year.

Let us know if the questions above require any additional clarification. Thank you, Wolliff (talk) 21:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

  1. The balance in all bank accounts of Wikimedia Nederland on September 30th, 2012 is € 173 thousand.
  2. Ever since Wikimedia Nederland was founded in 2006 there hasn't been any typical month. Every month is different. There have been months with zero expenditure, there has been a month in which Wikimedia Nederland has spent more than € 225 thousand in the past six years. Regarding the current fiscal year there hasn't been an ordinary month either. In the first four months Wikimedia Nederland didn't employ any staff. In the last three months of the current fiscal year we have at least three staff. Current estimate of overall spending this year is 259 thousand euro, 63 thousand euro less than orginally planned. You are asking per month figures, that amounts to 28 thousand dollar per month. We have spend 128 thousand euro in the first nine months of the current fiscal year, see our Report Q3. We are planning to spend at least the same amount in the last three months. That amounts to 57 thousand dollar per month in the last three months of the year 2012. In 2013 we will reduce the amount to $ 607,945/12= $ 50,6 thousand per month.
Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 20:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Ratio salary/non salary cost[edit]

In 2013 budget you intend to spend 206 KUSD on salaries in a total budget or around 607 KUSD (ie 34% of your cost is related to salary). Could you elobarate what the other type of costs (?office space, travel?) is intended to be spend on?. Could you also elobarate on why table 9 ends with a total of 401 KUSD, while Table 10 states 607 KUSD.Anders Wennersten (talk) 09:06, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Elaboration other type of costs
Hi Anders,
We’re happy to provide you with a more detailed breakdown of our 2013 budget, adapted to dollars from page 47 in WMNL annual plan 2013 (in dutch)
Total costs WMNL 2013 $ 607,945
Program Implemenation costs* $338,845 Direct costs (printing, catering, venue rent etc) $ 197,600
Travel and stay $ 55,640
Advice+subcontracting $ 85,254
Operational costs* $ 269,100 Staff $ 206,700
Housing $ 32,500
IT+Telecom $ 22,500
Office supplies $ 5,850
Miscellaneous $ 1,560
  • Note:
Programme implementation costs are cost directly related to implemeting key initiatives
Operational costs are costs related to maintaining the office
Part 7 of the FDC Form “Financials for the upcoming year's annual plan” asks in the third line for a Detailed budget link. Wikimedia Nederland provided: FDC portal/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Wikimedia Nederland/Detailed Budget 2013. That page contains several detailed tables with a lot of numbers. On top of that page is a link to Annual Program Plan (in Dutch). The Annual Plan is 47 page document with a lot of detail in text and very detailed tables with figures, for example on page 46 specifying planned expenses per activity by category.
On the meta detaile budget page you’ll find Specification and allocation of costs according to appropriation (in euro). That tables provides numbers for a functional allocation of expenses, categories by programs, fundaising costs and general administrative.--SRientjes (talk) 09:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
Thansk for a most clarifying table. It is someway raises new questions, but for now it has given my good insight in your numbers.Anders Wennersten (talk) 05:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Expansion rate[edit]

In your propsal you document the challange it is to professionalize an organisation, an experinces you share with severla other chapters. You also write that is first by May 1 2012 you have got the key personlle on board. You are also indicating you will not spend this year accordong to budget but you propose a very substaial increase in budget for 2013, of 50%, and on real outcome almost +100%. Can you please elobarate on, considering your experince of finding professioalism and expanding being hard, the reasons why you for 2013 think it is realistic with such an huge increase in budget?Anders Wennersten (talk) 09:06, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia Nederland is planning for growth. In 2013 we aim to reach the operational level that was envisioned for 2013 in 2010. It is true that we experienced delays and problems in starting the professionalisation process. However, once the main hurdle had been taken (i.e. actually committing to hiring staff) the process has been picking up speed and is now progressing smoothly.
On May 1, I began work as executive director and first staffmember of WMNL. My first months were spent on developing a three year strategy, the annual workplan for 2013 + budget, setting up the office infrastructure and hiring two additional staff members who started on October 1. (We plan to hire two more staff next year, as indicated in the FDC form) .
The last quarter of this year we will update internal and external communications and further develop our administrative organisation to comply with Dutch regulations for non-profits. This means that by January 1 the office will be fully operational and able to provide adequate professional support to the community in implementing activities.
The 2012 Annual Plan will be executed, though on a revised budget as indicated in the FDC form. Quite a few activities are scheduled for the last 4 months of the year 2012. Wikimedia Nederland is working hard to complete them and work toward reaching goals.
It is true that the budget for 2013 is substantially bigger that the budget for 2012 and previous years. Wikimedia Nederland has a strategy for growth. In the past years and specifically the past months we have layed the foundations for the capability to execute increasingly ambitious plans and goals. This professionalisation process - and the availability of support staff - enable WMNL to carry out a much larger portfolio of activities. We do feel that the program of activities we propose is realistic, both in the amount of resources needed and in the amount of involvement by our active community of volunteers. The program also received the support of our membership at the General Assembly held on September 23. Please also note that the planned activities in 2013 will be partly financed through FDC, and partly from local funding. --SRientjes (talk) 09:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)Reply