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

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki


Hi ! This is a great idea :) I don't know if you know it already, but you can have a look to the Paparazzi Project, which is "a free and open-source hardware and software project intended to create an exceptionally powerful and versatile autopilot system for fixedwing aircrafts as well as multicopters by allowing and encouraging input from the community". Do not hesitate to share your results on Aerial pictures as well :) Léna (talk) 13:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for that, we will surely find that useful, so I will pass this on to our volunteers who have come up with the idea of Wikicopter. --FiliP ██ 16:43, 2 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Secondary funding[edit]

I have read your promising proposal and wonder, if you have any ambition to raise fundings from other sources thãn FDC?Anders Wennersten (talk) 12:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes, getting external funding has always been a wish for us, but I think that at least for now it seems implausible. At least I'm not familiar with any funds that could help us the way FDC can. As for raising funds from donations, that's something that's very hard to do in Serbia (as people here respond mainly to humanitarian issues, not so much for other "charity" or "public benefit" actions), so I don't honestly see that as being something that could bring us anything substantial. --FiliP ██ 20:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Support from Hungary[edit]

As a Wikipedian living in neighbouring Hungary, I would like to give this proposal my warmest support. Bmcln1 (talk) 12:10, 17 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank! :) --FiliP ██ 20:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Suggestions for coordination[edit]

I notice that one of the initiatives is World War I: 100 Years Later, while the Nederland proposal has an initiative to expand coverage of World War II. 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 Military History Wikiproject ( is one of the best organized of the Wikiprojects, and it might be helpful to keep each other informed of plans.--Sphilbrick (talk) 22:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sure, that sounds reasonable :) --FiliP ██ 20:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Diversity, gender gap[edit]

Hello :-) Thank you for the work that you put into writing the proposal. I have one question so far. Looking through the proposal, I don't see any mention in the proposed programs about ways to address the gender gap in the Wikimedia movement or ways to make the movement more diverse in general (such as increasing the number of older people contributing content.) Could you speak to the gender gap as it relates to your organization. Could you highlight any programs that have focused on making the Wikimedia movement more diverse. Again thanks for your volunteer work, Sydney Poore FloNight (talk) 22:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Sydney, thanks for your comment. I could have sworn we put something about gender gap in the Wiktionary project, but I guess it got cut out somehow (for days we were filling out an older version of the form, so when we found out that the form has changed, we had to reformulate some answers during the last days, so it's no wonder some things got lost). So, it's no easy task to bridge the gender gap in Serbia, much like anywhere else, but we have had some progress with that with the ongoing 1001 Arabic Words project, which is dominated (in the positive sense, of course :)) by girls. In the next year, as outlined in the proposal form, we plan to broaden the ties with philology students, and since most of them (at least here in Belgrade) are women, it's more likely than not that we'll get an influx of female volunteers. The good thing about these projects is that people involved are usually quite motivated to work beyond their original plans, so now we have several female volunteers that have started maintaining our blog, helping with translations, doing design stuff and participating in the GLAM projects. Other than that, other projects are not aimed specifically at that particular problem. --FiliP ██ 21:03, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your reply. I wanted to give you the opportunity to highlight some ways that your organization addressed the gender gap. Looking at some of your Academy Board Reports I see that classroom assignments are fairly common. Is the chapter logging demographic information about the students who are contributing content? And are the teachers and professors gender being tracked.
Also I'm wondering if the chapter has developed specific goals related to changing participation levels of women? Ones that can be tracked by gathering demographic data. If so, could you give a link to them. FloNight (talk) 23:51, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
We have not tracked demographic information so far, but we plan on doing it in the future. In some of the previous projects with certain faculties, female participation has been greatly above average for Wikipedia standards, but we don't have exact figures for that. As for the teachers and professors, obviously there are not as many of them as there are students and pupils, so it's comparatively easier to track them down. Although, I don't have a list in front of me, I'd say that participation is roughly equal, in terms of gender. With regards to developing specific goals related to changing participation levels of women, we haven't done much, except for the aforementioned Wiktionary project, with which we consciously target female-dominated demographic. Also, it should be noted that in our cooperation with the GLAM sector, we have come across a lot of women, but we haven't considered their gender/sex to be of crucial importance to the development of the partnerships. --FiliP ██ 20:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

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) 00:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for responding to all the questions! KLove (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

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 (that is, what the entity is requesting from the FDC this year compared with the amount the entity received in WMF grants last year). 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 have been awarded in WMF grants between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2013, and list each grant and the amount awarded here.
    1. Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 — 2,313.78 EUR. --FiliP ██ 22:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
    2. Reallocation of 1,311.57 USD from Capacity building project for the first half of 2012. --FiliP ██ 22:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  2. Please confirm the amount from WMF grants you expect to have spent between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2013, and list each grant and the amount expected here (note that some of these grants may have been awarded in the calendar year 2012 but spent in the calendar year 2013).
    1. Wikipedia in Schools 2012-2013 — we have requested 1,548.91 USD and spent 1,250.00 USD; we are waiting for a decision from WMF regarding reallocation of the remaining 218.53 EUR (if it is approved, it will be spent until the year's end). --FiliP ██ 22:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
    2. Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 — we expect to spend the whole requested amount of 2,313.78 EUR. --FiliP ██ 22:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
    3. GLAM Start Up — we have requested 4,620.12 USD and expect to have spent 3,500.00 USD. --FiliP ██ 22:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
    4. Annual plan 2012-2013 — we have requested 51,000.00 EUR, and expect to have spent about 45,000.00 EUR. --FiliP ██ 22:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your responses here! The information that still need is the following: how much of these four grants that you list will be spent, in total, in 2013? Please exclude 2012 expenditures. Thank you very much! KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:23, 14 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
Around 52,500.00 EUR from this four grants and reallocation from grant for Capacity building project for the first half of 2012.--MikyM (talk) 21:57, 14 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  1. Your total budget in 2013 listed in Table 3 is 60,468.51 Euro and that your total proposed budget for 2014 listed in Table 2 is 88,542.88 Euro. Therefore, we calculate a proposed growth rate in your total budget of 46%. Please confirm that this matches your records.
    Yes --FiliP ██ 22:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

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.

When it comes to the RSD↔EUR exchange rates, they are changing on a daily level and it is possible that they can change significantly in the matter of a few days. So, when we make budgets, it's hard to choose one particular exchange rate. During the budget planning period, the exchange rate was around 114 RSD for 1 EUR, so we chose 114 for easier calculations. When it comes to EUR↔USD exchange rate, we chose an approximate rate on the day of completing the budget. --FiliP ██ 20:39, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

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.
    We (the board and the existing employee) will train the new employee to the extent necessary and get him/her acquainted with the Wikimedia universe. The existing employee will be his/her supervisor and we expect them to closely cooperate. We expect that the board will frequently communicate with the new employee, we expect regular reports from the new employee, and we will hold status meetings to track progress. Also, as a board we now have certain experience in managing staff, so getting one more employee shouldn't be too problematic: transition from 0 to 1 employee is much harder than from 1 to 2. --FiliP ██ 20:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  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?
    Increasing the number of our staff won't change the way we interact with volunteers. We expect that attitude of volunteers towards WMRS will improve, because with one more employee we will be able to better respond to their needs and help them in carrying out projects. The new employee will, among other things, be tasked with helping volunteers in case they are unable to do certain things, but (s)he will also be tasked with "recruiting" new volunteers and motivating existing ones. The role of volunteers won't change significantly, because the new employee wouldn't effectively replace them — (s)he will only be there to offer better support from WMRS. Some of our volunteers have independently suggested hiring one more employee, because the existing employee isn't always available (because of limited work hours and his various other sorts of duties). --FiliP ██ 20:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  3. Who on your staff is responsible for your organization’s fundraising activities in 2014?
    It is very hard to do local fundraising because of poor socio-economic status of the majority of Serbia's population. The Secretary General (our employee) will work jointly with the board and interested volunteers and we will try to attract local partners, donors and sponsors. --FiliP ██ 20:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

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).
    Last year, we asked for an operative grant that was supposed to cover basic expenses, and we are now asking for a development grant. Even though the percentage is 46%, we tried to cut costs wherever possible for the next year (e.g. we didn't include professional office maintenance, hiring an advisory contractor-lawyer etc.), so we focused on projects — we require more money for projects because we plan more of them compared to last year. One of the projects is EduWiki conference, which is the largest project, financially speaking, whereas in the ongoing grant we didn't plan (and therefore host) any conference. Also, part of the increase is accounted by the planned hiring of one more employee (obviously, relative increase is higher when shifting from one to two employees, than it would be when shifting, for instance, from 10 to 11 employees). --FiliP ██ 21:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  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?
    Partnerships can happen in various forms. It can be informal cooperation with an organization which consists of meetings and communication regarding mutual projects, and on the other hand, it can be formal cooperation with organizations with which we have signed contracts/agreements/letters of intentions/cooperation. We don't have a strictly defined process for bringing on new partners — volunteers, especially project managers, and the employee are usually engaged in seeking suitable partners. When it comes to informal cooperation, commitments usually bottle down to basic verbal/written agreements (e.g. in our Educational program, we don't usually sign contracts with educational institutions, because our commitments are basically just holding lectures and workshops and helping students), whereas when it comes to formal cooperation, the signed contract/agreement defines the commitments and rights of the signatories. Depending on the project, the role of partnering organization can be active in greater or lesser extent. --FiliP ██ 21:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  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?
    Until now, we haven't had microgrant requests, but we have set up a Grants committee which is tasked exactly with reviewing smaller grants. They have come up with the following process: They have created a form which is to be filled in on a specially created wiki. After a potential grantee fills in the form, the committee reviews it and gives a recommendation to the board whether to support it or not. Since no one submitted a grant up to now, we don't have outcomes yet. The grant committee consists of three members, including our employee, who has experience with grantgiving. Based on the grant proposal itself (i.e. whether it is aligned with the movement vision, mission and strategies, whether it impacts volunteers and development of Wikimedia projects in Serbia, whether the budget makes sense etc.) and communication with the submitter of grant proposal, the committee is to analyze the submitter's ability to carry out the proposed project. If the grant is accepted, the grantee is tasked with submitting a project report (and, in case the project is longer than several months, one or more mid-project reports), which serve as a way to track progress and evaluate project success. In this budget, we have planned 3500 EUR for microgrants, as per our budget breakdown document. --FiliP ██ 21:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

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.
    Thanks to the detailed budget which covers all planned activities and expenses, we don't require large operating reserves. They are expected to be used in case of unexpected changes in exchange rates, increase of market prices or some unexpected expenses. We planned operating reserves as roughly 3.5% of the budget. --FiliP ██ 21:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  2. What amount of funds are in your entity's operating reserves right now?
    We have set 100.000 RSD (877.19 EUR, 1,075.27 USD, as per our Annual grant request) as operating reserves for the ongoing Annual grant. However, since the grant was supposed to end at the end of October 2013 and FDC grants wouldn't be available until January 2014 (in case this proposal is accepted), we asked for an extension of the Annual grant by 2 months — until the end of December 2013. In order to cover the office expenses during the extension period, we repurposed (or made use of) operating reserves in that regard. Hence, we currently hold no operating reserves. --FiliP ██ 21:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  3. Have you budgeted any funds for your operating reserves in this proposal (your proposal for 2014) and if so, how much?
    Yes, 3,000 EUR. --FiliP ██ 21:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Questions about WMRS’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) 00:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello again, thank you for all your responses! They are appreciated. Cheers, KLove (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Questions about your objectives[edit]

  • Program 1 / Educational Program: Please include one objective that is common to the many different activities listed here.
    Increasing readership/usage and editing of Wikipedia in educational institutions of Serbia, both for students/pupils and professors/teachers. --FiliP ██ 21:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Program 5 / Free content: Please explain the link between the GLAM and Digital Belgrade projects, which are included in the same program.
    GLAM project primarily deals with cooperation between Wikimedia and GLAM institutions. The result of the cooperation will be, depending on the type of cooperation, increasing content in Wikimedia projects through writing new articles and expanding existing ones, increasing the database of free media files, or increasing the visibility of Wikipedia through QRPedia's QR codes. Digital Belgrade, on the other hand, is a project which is realized through cooperation with certain government institutions, universities, GLAM institutions and individuals. The goal of this project is to increase the number of texts and photos and use of QRPedia's QR codes. The goals of these two projects greatly overlap, but the way we reach those goals differs significantly between them (the cooperation part): the former includes cooperation exclusively with GLAM organizations, while the latter only has GLAM organizations as a part of its process and the planned way of cooperation with them is much more lower-level than in the former. --FiliP ██ 21:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Program 4 / Free Photo Content: Please include an objective for this program that is common to the different activities you’ve listed here.
    Obtaining free photos for Wikimedia projects. --FiliP ██ 21:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Program 8 / Community Support:
    • Please explain how you link communications and community support.
      Some of our community members are not following mailing lists or our blog and aren't particularly interested in those means of communication, so live meetups are an excellent way to convey Wikimedia movement news, as well as to make them acquainted with WMRS projects and ways then can participate in them. We are especially interested in reaching out to volunteers not based in Belgrade, who generally don't have a large local community. --FiliP ██ 21:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
    • Please let us know which of the 5 Wikimedia strategic priorities this program is aligned with, and explain how.
      Increasing participation and reach. Because by giving support to the community, we are giving them the sense that someone cares about them, i.e. we are letting them know that their work is appreciated, which we hope will increase their participation; also, we hope that this project will attract more people to join Wikimedia projects, or at least to get informed about them. --FiliP ██ 21:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Questions about programs[edit]

  1. You mention 20 volunteers and 90 members in response to the question about membership, and yet you mention 300 volunteers in response to the question about volunteers. Would you please clarify these numbers and explain the difference?
    The number 300 referred to the number of volunteers we serve — it's a figure that includes more or less active members of online Wikimedia projects primarly in Serbian language (as the main language of Serbia) and members of Wikimedia Serbia. So, 90 is a subset of 300, and represents the number of Wikimedia Serbia members, of which about 20 is more or less active in Wikimedia Serbia projects. --FiliP ██ 22:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  2. Would you explain in more detail what you expect WMRS’ role in the CEE conference to be, considering that another chapter will presumably be hosting it in 2014? Would you provide an estimate of the costs associated with the CEE conference for WMRS?
    As per our budget breakdown document, we have allocated 1000 EUR for the CEE conference next year, which includes travel and accommodation costs for our delegates. All remaining funds (in case there are any), along with additional 2000 EUR (from the "Supporting Regional Cooperation" program) will be transferred to the organizing team, just like we did this year. We plan on helping with the organization if the organizing team requires help, and we plan on actively participating in the conference program. As CEE "pioneers", we feel we should help with supporting regional cooperation. --FiliP ██ 22:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  3. You note that your competitions will “bring attention to Wikimedia projects since the awards offered are somewhat unorthodox for an Internet project.” What are these unorthodox awards?
    In general, giving awards for an Internet competition in Serbia which isn't based on luck or simple voting, but on real effort, isn't really usual. Furthermore, in the previous article writing/improving competitions we held we gave relatively valuable awards (n.b. standard in Serbia is rather low, so any award greater in value than ~30 EUR could be considered valuable), which greatly motivated participants, since they had never gotten anything physical from Wikipedia before. Also, for one of those competitions, we gave an unorthodox award: it was a cough silencer, which we found to be a suitable award for a competition with the topic of writing articles about objects. We plan to give out an even more unorthodox award, but we wouldn't like to publicly announce it yet. If needed, we can privately inform you about it. --FiliP ██ 22:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
    No, let us be surprised! :) We were curious. KLove (WMF) (talk) 23:19, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
  4. Please explain what roles volunteers and staff will play in the implementation of both the Education and Creative Commons programs.
    • Educational program: All the volunteers and staff will act together in organizing EduWiki Conference. On the one hand, they will give their support in logistic work (including technical support and physical work), and on the other, they will actively participate in the program (they will be presenters, hosts, organizers, PR managers: they will manage the accommodation and social program for participants, etc). The role of volunteers is also important in the project Wikipedia in Schools, where they actively help with workshops which are organized for students. Their main contribution here is in helping students in their practical exercises about editing Wikipedia and other projects. When it comes to staff, they are eligible to assist during the realization of the projects or to prepare and hold meetings. In case the Academic Board is overloaded, staff can manage meetings, present projects and look for new partners to cooperate with. Also, they can help during Wikipedia in School workshops if needed. --FiliP ██ 20:54, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
    • Creative Commons project: Volunteers are included in many academic, educational, governmental and non-governmental issues (debates, presentations, research) aimed at intellectual property, copyright, copyright reform and the CC standards promotion and implementation. All the core team members are long time Wikimedians, including the CC Serbia Legal Project Lead, as well as other volunteers who participate as panellists or consultants. Our staff will provide logistic support for the promotional part of the project. --FiliP ██ 20:54, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Reply