Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2013-2014 round1/Wikimedia Nederland/Proposal form

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Clarification of some numbers[edit]

I like your proposal and your concrete goals in alignement with the movement strategy goals. Also to read of your cosolidation in 2013. I also think it is very wise of you looking into if efforts in the edcuations area make sense. If this is done well it could be of help for other chapters and the movement in general. My main question is a little confusuion over numbers. You talk of 17% increase of expected outcome for 2013. At the same time your runrate is below budget, for first half a runrate of 75%. Could you explain the expected expected costs for q3 and q4 and the expected cost for the full 2013?Anders Wennersten (talk) 11:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear Anders. Thanks for your positive feedback. I understand your confusion about the numbers. We reviewed our financial targets for 2013 after completion of the Q2-report and modified them based on our experiences over the first six months. We will include the amended numbers in our Q3 report but I will also post them here asap. SRientjes (talk) 21:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Dear Anders,
As promised, I am providing additional information concerning the most current prognosis of revenue and expenditure for WMNL in 2013. After the completion of Q2, WMNL reviewed its financial planning and made a new prognosis. We were not raising the amount of external funds we had planned for, and therefore modified both our revenue target and our spending. Currently, we expect a revenue of € 309,231 in 2013. Our prognosis of expenditure for 2013 is € 309,828 (= 100.2%)
Revenue
Original budget Revised budget after Q2 Current revenue Q1-Q3
membership 4,000 4,000 3,800
donations 6,000 6,000 3,650
FDC 269,231 269,231 269,231
Local 80,000 30,000 28,200
WMF grant WLM intenational 15,500 - -
Total € 374,231 € 309,231 € 304,881
Explanation:
We expect to raise 50.000€ less in local funding than originally expected. WLM - international is funded directly by WMF, therefore the projected grant of 15.000€ became null and void.


Costs
Original budget Revised budget prognosis Expenditure Q1-Q3
Programme 178,150 111.628 87,728
Staff 144,000 144,000 102,722
Office 25,000 20,000 15,628
Other 14,200 34,200 14,950
Total € 361,350 € 309,828 € 221,028
=76% of total
Explanation:
We overall cut costs. It is also our experience that many activities can be organised cheaply through the involvement of volunteers and in-kind contributions by partners. The increase in costs under ‘other’ include the development of our crm-system and website.
All costs in the tables above are in Euro.
SRientjes (talk) 09:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Objectives of the upcoming year's annual plan[edit]

First of all, congratulations for producing such a detailed proposal! Having participated in one of the planning discussions I can imagine this was not an easy task. Reading over WMNL's objectives for the coming year, I would like to point out that "focus on one or two ( new ) thematic areas outside the traditional GLAM range" can also simply be to take the usual GLAM thematic areas (freely licensed images or texts) and stretch them out over *all* GLAM contacts. This could achieve several objectives at once, as probably all of the current major GLAM institutions could contribute *something* to the WWII initiative, for example. So instead of WMNL waiting to see what the GLAMs want to donate, WMNL can actively state what it hopes to receive from GLAMs. This could potentially make it easier for volunteers (both GLAM-related volunteers and other Wiki(p/m)edians) to contribute, as some folks may be interested in WWII for example, but only be familiar with one or two of WMNL's GLAM contacts. Jane023 (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jane. Thanks for your remarks. You are absolutely right that the new thematic areas we want to explore in 2014 (one of which will very likely be WWII) would also extend into our current GLAM work. We definitely want to involve our current GLAM-partners and Wikipedians in Residence; also adding content to WikiSource and Wikimedia Commons is included in our targets for the 'new' activities. We in no way plan a break with the past, but rather build and expand on our experience. SRientjes (talk) 21:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions for coordination[edit]

I notice that one of the initiatives is to expand coverage of World War II, while the Serbian proposal has an initiative World War I: 100 Years Later. It would obviously be sensible to chat with each other, as efforts in one projects (such as outreach to media, coordination with veterans associations, outreach to university miliatry history departments or other such initiatives) might be transferable. In addition the en.wiki Military History Wikiproject (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiProject_Military_history) is one of the best organized of the Wikiprojects, and it might be helpful to keep each other informed of plans.--Sphilbrick (talk) 22:57, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

The lack of detail and context for the World War II proposal is a shame. 2014 marks the 70th anniversary of the major battles which were fought in the southern areas of the Netherlands (most notably Operation Market Garden), as well as the V-2 missile campaign against the UK which was conducted largely by German units based in the Netherlands and, of course, the arrest of Anne Frank and the start of the tragic Dutch "hunger winter". In Asia 1944 also marked the beginning of the "liberation" of the Dutch East Indies. These events provide important focal points for work on the subject of World War II in the Netherlands during 2014, and it would be interesting to know how this proposal would align with the upcoming anniversaries. In regards to partners, it may be worth trying to link up with the excellent Verzetsmuseum. Nick-D (talk) 08:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks to User:Sphilbrick and User:Nick-D for your comments. We would like to provide an international framework for our WW II plans, so cooperation and exchange would be appreciated! Feel free to contact me on my talkpage or via rientjes[at]wikimedia[dot]nl to explore further. Our plans are still in the development stage - how much we will be able to do will obviously also depend on the funding we are able to generate. We are going to start a project page on the Wikimedia.nl wiki to stimulate community involvement in developing this project. As mentioned above in the comment by Jane, the WW II work will overlap with our ongoing GLAM work. Verzetsmuseum is an obvious partner. We are also fortunate that NIOD(the National Institute for War Research) will have a Wikipedian in Residence next year. I like the idea of using upcoming commemorations in 2014 as a focal point for activities. SRientjes (talk) 17:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
The potential NIOD link looks very promising, and would be a good way of maximising this project's outcomes. Nick-D (talk) 10:09, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikiversity[edit]

Is it possible to get the Dutch wikiversity (https://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Hoofdpagina) in the 2014-plan? It would be great if we could get out of beta in 2014. I think Wikimedia Nederland should do more to promote the sisterprojects of Wikipedia. In the proposal I see the ambition to explore the feasibility of becoming active in the field of education, start a pilot activity. I would like to suggest to do a pilot using the wikiversity. What's nice about the wikiversity is the lack of rules: information does not have to be 'encyclopedie waardig', you can ask questions. This makes the wikiversity a very friendly place for new users. Timboliu (talk) 22:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Timboliu. It is true that Wikiversity does not feature in the WMNL annual plan 2014 or this FDC application. However, it is possible for members of the community to suggest additional activities to WMNL - those activities could receive (financial or logistical) support. I agree with you that Wikiversity will feature in the feasibility study WMNL wants to carry out concerning activities in the field of education. We want to involve the community in that study as much as we can and it would be great if you would take part. The exact nature and content of the pilot study will be part of the discussions. SRientjes (talk) 11:21, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Stimulate participation of members[edit]

I think Wikimedia Nederland can improve the participation of its members. In the current situation meetings are organised in weekends. Why not also arrange some virtual meetings (Skype, Google Hangouts). I also think that making a plan and provide regular updates will improve the participation of its members.Timboliu (talk) 22:09, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tim,
Such meetings sounds like something you can take initiative on (be bold). However, this would barely have any budget implications, so I don't think it is very relevant in this discussion. Effeietsanders (talk) 09:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)


Questions for all entities from FDC staff[edit]

Please answer a few questions about your entity that we are asking of all entities. The purpose of these questions is to gain clarity about the information provided in your proposal, and also to request information that we can easily understand across all entities. We ask that you respond to these questions within 14 days, so that the FDC will have time to consider your responses during the deliberations. We apologize if any of these questions seem redundant. Thank you for your attention to these questions, and please let us know if you need any clarifications or have any questions for us. Thank you! KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:36, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Please confirm your rates of growth[edit]

The FDC reviews rates of growth, which are calculated using the amounts provided in the currency requested in the proposal, to understand each entity’s proposed growth in total budget, and proposed growth in movement resources (what the entity is requesting from the FDC this year compared with what the entity received from the FDC last year) requested. We are asking you to confirm these numbers here so we may be sure we are understanding your request.


1. Please confirm the amount you received from the FDC for the current FDC funding period in the currency you received it. Our records confirm the amount you have listed in Table 2 of 269,231 Euro.

We can confirm that we did indeed receive € 269,231 in FDC funding for the current period. SRientjes (talk) 15:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


2. Your total budget in 2013 listed in Table 3 is 361,350 Euro and that your total proposed budget for 2014 listed in Table 2 is 356,068 Euro. Therefore, we calculate a proposed growth rate in your total budget of -1%. Please confirm that this matches your records.

In our Q3 report we have adjusted the total budget for 2013 from € 361,350 to € 309,828, which consequently affected our proposed growth rate. While we can confirm that calculations using the old budget would result in a negative growth of 1,5 % (-1.46), calculations using the adjusted budget yields a growth of just under 15 % (14.92). A detailed breakdown of the revised budget can be found in the tables below. SRientjes (talk) 15:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


3 Your movement resources in 2013 are 269,231 Euro, and your request for 2014 listed in Table 2 is 323,000 Euro. Therefore, we calculate a proposed growth rate in movement resources of 20%. Please confirm that this matches your records.

We can confirm that your calculations match with our records. SRientjes (talk) 15:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Clarity around exchange rates used in this proposal[edit]

Please state how you calculated the exchange rate used in your proposal to provide the estimates provided in this proposal. Note that FDC allocations will be made in your requested currency (your local currency, in most cases), and amounts in US dollars are provided only so that entities and the FDC may understand allocations across entities. The FDC will use the exchange rate on the date of the proposal submission (1 October 2013) as calculated by Oanda, to ensure consistency across proposals.

We calculated the exchange rate using Oanda. The basis was the average exchange rate during the period we were drafting the FDC application. SRientjes (talk) 15:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Questions about your entity’s staffing plan and strategy[edit]

Many entities plan to grow their staff in the coming year, and we would like some more information about each entity’s staffing strategy.

1. If your entity is increasing its staff by one or more people, please explain how your board and, if applicable, the staff person managing your new staff, will handle the increased responsibilities of managing more staff.

WMNL does not plan to recruit any additional permanent staff next year. We do plan to hire two temporary contractors (see table 6 of our FDC application). Staff is managed by the Executive Director. With the 4 permanent staff members now well established and requiring less guidance, we do not feel these two temporary staff members will overstrain the ED's span of control. SRientjes (talk) 12:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

2. Do you think the decision to increase the number of your staff will change the way your organization or your staff interacts with volunteers or change the attitude of volunteers toward your organization? Will the role of volunteers shift as a result of the change in staffing? How were community members a part of the decision to grow your staff?

Both contractors will work directly with the community; the Community Liaison position in fact is created specifically to improve relations with the community. We hope that these temporary post will result in a structural improvement of the relations between WMNL and the community. The decision to hire these two temporary contractors was part of the discussions we had with the community in drafting our Annual Plan 2014 which formed the basis for our FDC application. SRientjes (talk) 12:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

3. Who on your staff is responsible for your organization’s fundraising activities in 2014?

Fundraising is a shared responsibility between the Executive Director and the Board, in particular the Treasurer. SRientjes (talk) 12:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Organizational context[edit]

We have noticed a few ideas that are included in many of this round’s proposals, and would like more information about each entity’s context.

1 Growth: We have reviewed your response to the question in the proposal form about your proposed rate of growth in budget and in movement resources. The rates of growth in movement resources for all entities in this round are at or significantly greater than the recommended maximum of 20% in the FDC Framework funding guidelines. It would be helpful to the FDC and FDC staff if you have any further details to justify your proposed rate of growth. Why do you believe your rates of growth are sustainable and that your plans are feasible? This request is also informed by the context of current underspending of movement resources (FDC allocations and WMF grants).

WMNL made a conscious decision not to aim for exponential growth in 2014. Now that the start-up phase of organisational development is more or less complete, we think a moderate growth (20%) of activities and related costs is feasible. As explained in the introduction to the programme description in our FDC application, we want to focus on increasing the number of volunteers and strengthening relations with the editing community. We believe this to be the basis on which any future organisational growth has to be built. SRientjes (talk) 12:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

2 Partnerships: How does your entity define partnership? Do you have a process in place for bringing on new partners? What commitments do you require from the partner to begin the relationship?

We have no formal definition of partnership as yet. What we require of a partner is first of all a genuine commitment to free knowledge, and the willingness to enter into a longer-running cooperation with WMNL. In our experience, many organisations are keen to be associated with 'the Wikipedia-brand'. We are becoming more selective as to the organisations we enter into partnership with. The partnership should have the potential to contribute substantially to quality and quantity of free knowledge or to recruiting new editors. SRientjes (talk) 12:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

3 Grants: If your entity has a microgrants, minigrants, travel grants, or other grants program, how much funding in your budget is committed to grants? What is your process for selecting who is able to receive grants and which grants to fund? How do you know if your microgrants are leading to good outcomes?

In 2014 , we will have a microgrant budget of € 10,000 and a scholarship (travel grant) budget of € 15,000. All community members can apply for these grants by submitting a request to the Board Member in charge of community relations. The main condition is that the grant relates to a priority outlined in the WMNL annual plan or three-year strategy. Grantees are requested to submit a report on their activity or travel which is published on the WMNL wiki. SRientjes (talk) 12:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Questions for all entities about operating reserves[edit]

We need more clarity on the state of the operating reserves of all entities. Operating reserves are defined as liquid, unrestricted assets available for an organization to use as a cushion, and to cover the costs of operations in case of unanticipated expenses or loss of revenue.

1. Please summarize your strategy or policy around holding operating reserves, and your procedure for determining the amount of operating reserves needed by your organization.

Our policy regarding operating reserves is based on the Dutch guidelines for fundraising organizations referred to as 'Richtlijn 650 Fondsenwervende instellingen'.
'316 An operating reserve will be created to cover all short-term risks and to ensure that the fundraising organization will be able to upholds its future obligations. The organization is required to disclose the reasoning as well as the assumptions made, regarding the amount of operating reserves.'
We aim for an operating reserve equal to six months operational costs. If the reserve exceeds this amount, we will discuss with WMF how to deal with the surplus. SRientjes (talk) 16:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


2. What amount of funds are in your entity's operating reserves right now?

The operating reserve, as of 31st of December 2012, amounted to € 186,052. SRientjes (talk) 16:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


3. Is your entity planning to use money from your 2013 FDC funds allocation (your current funds allocation) to add to your organization’s reserves, and if so approximately how much money are you planning to add to your reserves?

We currently have no intention to add any external funding to our operating reserves. SRientjes (talk) 16:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


4. Have you budgeted any funds for your operating reserves in this proposal (your proposal for 2014) and if so, how much?

There is no budget for funds to be added to the operating reserves in our 2014 proposal. SRientjes (talk) 16:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Questions about WMNL’s proposal from FDC staff[edit]

These are some questions and points of clarification that arose while reading your proposal. These questions are an opportunity to clarify information in your proposal for the FDC and for FDC staff. Thank you in advance for your attention to these questions. We ask that you respond to these questions within 14 days, so that the FDC will have time to consider your responses during the deliberations. In a few cases, we may need to follow up with you after you respond to gain further clarity around your answers. Thanks again on behalf of FDC staff! KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:36, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Questions about the financial information in this proposal[edit]

Please answer a few clarifying questions about the information you presented in this proposal about your revenues and planned expenses. Please answer this question here: it is applicable to WMNL since you project to spend about 80% of your planned budget.


1:Based on the variance percentages above, please describe how your entity is progressing against revenue and spending targets. If your projected final amount shows your entity to be significantly under or over target on either revenue or spending, please provide a detailed explanation.

As a consequence of our mid-year budget adjustment our current spending is just under target.
Old budget : € 221,028 / € 361,350 = 61.17%
New revised budget: € 221,028 / € 309,828 = 71.34%


Revised budget and spending prognosis
We reviewed our financial targets for 2013 after completion of the Q2-report and modified them based on our experiences over the first six months. We were not raising the amount of external funds we had planned for, and therefore modified both our revenue target and our spending. Currently, we expect a revenue of € 309,231 in 2013. Our prognosis of expenditure for 2013 is € 309,828 (= 100.2%)
Original budget Revised budget after Q2 Current revenue Q1-Q3
membership 4,000 4,000 3,741
donations 6,000 6,000 3,539
FDC 269,231 269,231 269,231
Local 80,000 30,000 27,691
WMF grant WLM intenational 15,500 - -
Total € 374,231 € 309,231 € 304,202
Explanation:
We expect to raise €50.000 less in local funding than originally expected. WLM - international is funded directly by WMF, therefore the projected grant of €15.000 became null and void.
NB: the numbers in this table are slightly different from the reply we gave Anders Wennersten earlier. This is because we finalized the Q3 accounts after replying to Anders.


Costs
Original budget Revised budget prognosis Expenditure Q1-Q3
Programme 178,150 111,628 87,728
Staff 144,000 144,000 102,722
Office 25,000 20,000 15,628
Other 14,200 34,200 14,950
Total € 361,350 € 309,828 € 221,028
=76% of total
Explanation:
We overall cut costs. It is also our experience that many activities can be organised cheaply through the involvement of volunteers and in-kind contributions by partners. The increase in costs under ‘other’ include the development of our CRM system and website.
All costs in the tables above are in Euro.


2 In your detailed budget, you list ‘Purchases and acquisitions’ for several of your programs. Please list purchases and acquisitions for,

  • Community:
  • Work:
  • World:
Purchases and acquisitions (in Dutch aankopen en verwervingen) is a mandatory cost category listed in the guidelines for budgets and annual financial reports of fundraising organisations in the Netherlands. It comprises of all direct costs related to a specific activity which are not contracting or costs related to publicity/marketing for the fundraising organisation itself. Purchases and acquisitions are mainly 'material' costs such as costs of printing, catering, venue, travel costs, rent of equipment etc. SRientjes (talk) 16:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


3 Why, in your detailed budget, do you list ‘Accommodation’ expenses as a separate appropriation, but do not list an appropriation for other types of travel expenses?

Accomodation actually refers to costs of renting office space. Apologies for the confusion! SRientjes (talk) 15:53, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Question about strategic priorities[edit]

Thank you for clearly listing strategic priorities that align with each of your programs. Please also share with us briefly how these strategic priorities and goals listed are achieved through your programs. We understand that each program may contribute to more than one strategic priority. In some cases when you list three or more strategic priorities, we would like to know which strategic priority is _most_ closely aligned with your work and why. We are asking this because your rationale for choosing these strategies is important to understanding the impact and feasibility of your plan. It also helps the FDC track progress against movement-wide goals. ** Please offer a brief explanation of how each of these priorities are related to this program.

  • Program 5 / GLOBAL: You list ‘Stabilize infrastructure’ and ‘Improve quality’.
    • Please offer a brief explanation of how each of these priorities are related to this program.
Stabilize infrastructure: with our international involvement we want to participate in an interactive way in the internal capacity building processes within the Wikimedia Movement, both by sharing our learning experiences and by learning from others.
Improve quality: by seeking international cooperation for our programme activities on World War II, we hope to improve content in several language versions of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Likewise, we want to improve coverage on topics related to nature, wildlife and biodiversity through active support of an international Wiki Loves Earth campaign
SRientjes (talk) 12:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Program 6 / ORGANIZATION: You list ‘Stabilize infrastructure’.
This programme aims to ensure that WMNL is a solid and reliable entity within the Wikimedia movement and minimise the risk of any potential reputation damage to WMNL and the Wikimedia movement due to financial or governance mishaps. SRientjes (talk) 12:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Questions about programs[edit]

  1. Please share three more examples of that you think best illustrate the kind of support WMNL provides community members.
    • Creating opportunities for community members to meet and interact. The annual Wikimedia Conference Nederland creates an opportunity for community members to meet, get to know each other and share experiences. On a smaller scale, so do our Wiki-Saturdays when the office is open to community members, and the Wikipedia Café's in different cities.
    • WMNL office staff support community members in organising events, media-contacts, communications etc. This ranges from large scale events as the 2013 Hackathon to an editathon on a specialised topic.
    • WMNL provides minigrants and scholarships for community members.
      All these activities are advertised and reported on our new website and wiki in order to reach as many community-members as possible.
  2. Tell us more about the feasibility study you have planned to explore an education program. How will the community be involved in this work?
    • For this study, we will set up a working group of community members, Board members and staff who will provide guidance and feedback for the temporary contractor we want to hire for this activity. Obviously, we will be particularly keen to involve community members working in the education sector. In addition, we will create an activity page on the WMNL-wiki where community members can participate in discussions, ask questions and give feedback. We will also organise meetings and workshops. SRientjes (talk) 13:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Proposal 2013-2014[edit]

As a Dutchman, and regular editor on Wikimedia Commons (Citypeek), I am happy that there is an organisation that thinks about improving the Dutch Wikipedia. After having read the proposal, I came to conclude that the projects are limited, and well-defined and seem therefore feasible. Whether or not Wikimedia Nederland needs that much money to stay in business and achieve its goals for the next year is beyond my scope alltogether. --Wereldburger758 (talk) 12:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello Wereldburger. Thank you for taking the time to read and comment on our FDC application. We stellen het op prijs! SRientjes (talk) 11:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)