Verksamhetsplan 2014/Ansökan till FDC

Från Wikimedia
Hoppa till navigering Hoppa till sök

På diskussionssidan till denna sida diskuterar vi utformningen av ansökan till FDC.

Overview of grant request

In order to support community review, in no more than one paragraph, please provide a brief description of your entity's forthcoming annual plan, with focus areas and key objectives. Please also include the total amount requested in US$.

In 2014 Wikimedia Sverige seek to expand and deepen the activities that have proven to be successful. These are in the areas content liberation, community support, reach and readers, free knowledge in education and free knowledge awareness. We have during the years gained contacts and partnerships making our continued effort in these areas more efficient. Besides continuing on what has worked well we will explore some new projects e.g. the Wikibus as well as trying to import projects that has been successful for other chapters e.g. WikiAir from Wikimedia Israel. Our objectives over the year is to establish free knowledge, through the Wikimedia projects, within all these areas as something that is natural and that is something to embrace. Requested amount from FDC is 413,589 US$.


What organizational strengths enable your entity's plan (e.g., leadership, education program expertise, experience with outreach, governance structure, community participation, fundraising)?
  • Well motivated and competent staff that are gaining a lot of experience.
  • Engaged board with important community connections.
  • Diversity of skills and knowledge within the board.
  • Proactive work by the staff concerning transparency towards the community and the public in general.
  • Clearly defined responsibilities both within the board and among the employees.
  • Ready and stable infrastructure (office, phones, internet etc.)
  • Staff and board has a broad network.
  • Staff come from the community knows the movement by heart.
  • Good experience in applying for grants.
What external opportunities enable your entity's plan (e.g., socio-political context, community participation, fundraising)?
  • Strong interest from GLAM institutions.
  • Strong interest from the Education sector.
  • Possibility to get co-funded for GLAM and Education work.
  • There is a lot of funds that we are eligible to apply for.
  • Sweden has a high internet / computer maturity, potential for a very large user base.
  • Culture of joining non-profits, potential for many members in the chapter.
  • The acceptance of Wikipedia is high, a lot of people use it as readers.
What are key risks or threats that would prevent you from achieving your plan (e.g., leadership turnover, governance challenges, lawsuits, fundraising, community participation, socio-political context)?
  • The plan requires Wikimedia Sverige to raise additional funds over two million SEK to achieve all the set goals.
  • Not getting funds we are granted paid in time or getting grants approved too late in the year.
  • Even though being members of non-profits is usual, doing volunteer work is not that common.
  • Large country may lead to a lot of travel time.
How will you minimize these risks and threats?
  • Make the fundraising more efficient and diversify revenue sources, for details, see the section about Financial_sustainability.
  • Split volunteer work into small work chunks and clearly show where a volunteers work is appreciated. This will go hand in hand with keep travel at a low rate.

Not till tabell 9

The cash balance includes tied-up funds for projects 2013 and 2014. For comparison, the equity as of June 30 was 513,104 SEK, including xxx SEK reserves transferred from the 2012 grant.

Nya frågor

Questions about objectives and strategic priorities

  1. Please explain how helping “institutions getting Wikipedians in residence,” contributes to the objectives of Program 2 / Content Liberation?
  2. For Free knowledge in education, you list 4 out of 5 strategic priorities. If you needed to select one or two priorities that were most aligned, which would you select 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.
  3. Please explain why the different activities and goals listed in your Community Support program are contained in the same program. Many of them appear to be aligned differently with the strategic priorities and have very different objectives.
  1. We believe that by having a Wikipedian in residence the knowledge gain for the institution is both greater and faster. This means that their attitude towards free licenses is getting better. The WiR is also a very good guide for the institution that wants to make their collections (or parts of them) available under free licenses. One example of this is the Swedish National Board of Heritage. In 2012 they had two Wikipedians in Residence and a few weeks ago when they published their new internal guidelines for digitization not only were the guidelines themselves under a CC license it also included this statement: "The default is to use a free license. Material that is covered by copyright shall be released under Creative Commons Attribution unless law or contracts state otherwise." We are in the acknowledgments and our publication Cultural treasures on the net is in the reference list.
  2. Improve quality and Increase participation. Improve quality fulfills immediate needs and are of use for readers directly. Increase participation has effect in two parts; firstly we believe that by making more people come in contact with Wikipedia through the educational environment it will be less strange to be a Wikipedia contributor and we will both getting more occasional users, just because they know how to do it and find more people becoming very active users. Secondly, the teachers and the Wikipedia ambassadors that get trained will be multipliers in that they will engage others to contribute to Wikipedia and do it regularly and continuously.
  3. Yes, the activities are quite diverse, however we grouped them that way because the main objective for all of them are to support the community and this should help us in doing the activities with that central thought first and foremost, even if there can be sub-goals in the activities.

Detta svar har lämnats!

Questions about programs

  1. A goal for Program 1 / Community Support is to “help at least 20 different community members getting access to resources they need to solve specific problems.” Please provide three examples of the types of specific problems you are referring to.
  2. What are the roles of staff and volunteers in the activities listed for Program 2 / Content Liberation?
  3. What are the roles of staff and volunteers in the activities listed for Program 3 / Reach and Readers?
  1. So some typical resources we have provided community members in the past is access to reference litterature, high quality cameras and video recorders and other equipment in our technology pool. In this goal we would also include getting access to restricted areas for photography and similar activities. New for this year is that we also want to give the community members access to the staff as a resource e.g. staff solving a technical problem the community is struggling with.
  2. For both this and next question I would like to highlight a routine we have established; all projects should have identified tasks suitable for volunteers before they start. That being said, we are not on that level of detail on activity planning yet. For content liberation staff will mostly be used for activities that require physical meetings in day time with the GLAM institutions. For online activities we will try to engage as much volunteers as possible.
  3. In reach and readers, volunteers has a more central role. Almost all activities revolves around volunteers in one way or another.
Please let me know if this answered your questions. If you do like a breakdown for the role off staff and volunteers in each activity, it will take a little longer time to expand.

Det här svaret är lämnat.

Questions for all entities about operating reserves

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.
  2. What amount of funds are in your entity's operating reserves right now?
  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?
  4. Have you budgeted any funds for your operating reserves in this proposal (your proposal for 2014) and if so, how much?
  1. For operating reserves there are two boundary conditions: A lower one recommended by our auditors, KPMG, of at least 3 months of our costs (25% of the budget), and a upper legal one for non-profit charity organizations in Sweden needing to spend about 80% of the income over 5 years. As we are well below the recommendation, our first goal is to have the equivalent of 3 months spending in our reserves.
  2. As of 31 December 2012, our unrestricted operating reserves were 332 063 SEK (which means well below 10%), and around 30 000 SEK higher by 30 June 2013. Then there are 150 941 SEK left from the 2012 grant (corresponding to less than 7% of our costs 2012) for us to keep as reserves, too. However, after discussion with KPMG, these funds are not considered as reserves but liabilities as they come with several restrictions.
  3. No. We are planning to use up all FDC funds by the end of the year. However, as any losses would need to be balanced by our reserves (as there is no way to increase our FDC allocation in this case) we have to stay on the safe side and will most likely go with a small plus. The exact amount will be known by the end of February. If possible, it would be wise to add this amount to the (restricted) reserves.
  4. No.

Det här svaret är skickat.

Clarifications needed about your staffing plan

We had some questions about the information on your proposed growth in staffing. We understand that you are consolidating some positions, eliminating others, and changing the time allocation for others, while at the same time adding some new positions.

  1. Please edit the proposal form in order to complete Table 7, which we need all entities to complete so we can understand staff expenses across all entities. Note that if you expect a decrease in the costs of your current staff for this year, you may mark a decrease in that row. If you like, you may provide additional information about this in the Notes section.
  2. Please also add the following information to the notes for Table 6:
  • List each new position for 2014 and the percent of time allocated:
  • List each changed position for 2014 and the percent of time allocated in 2014:
  • List each position from 2013 eliminated in 2014:
  1. One reason we left it blank is that we do not understand your definition of "current staff" and how it should be used. E.g. if we have one role working 50% right now and it decrease to 20%, is that an decrease in current staff expenses? Another example: if we have one role on 60% right now and it increase to 100%, is that an increase in current staff expenses or would you regard it as new staff expenses?
  2. New positions:
  • GLAM-technician 100%
  • Communications officer 100%
Changed positions:
  • Program Manager 60%, becomes 100%
  • Financial Administrator 50%, becomes 20%
Eliminated positions:
  • Project Managers 15%
  • Project Assistants 10%

Detta svar har lämnats.

Svar på Staff proposal assessment


Although it is correctly observed that we underspent from the movement budget in 2012 (~7%) our prognosis for 2013 are not to do it. The number 18% of underspending for this year’s FDC allocation is factually wrong. The reason there is a prognose of underspending at all is that we also prognose our income from sources outside of FDC to be 18% lower than budgeted, i.e. all underspending is in regards to money outside the movement which we haven't received. We have ongoing projects for all FDC funding.

Planned synergies

It is also noted that we have many activities and that combining ideas would be helpful. Unfortunately, we did not go into that detail on project plans in the proposal, but indeed we do plan to combine several projects to bring out the most of it. For example, the Umepedia project would probably do very well in combination with WikiAir in regards to enthuse the local community. We will try to find these synergy effects in as many places as possible, and where we take the wikibus will probably be decided by what other activities would benefit most out of it.