Dear FDC Advisory Group,
Greetings from San Francisco! It has been a very busy past few months for
us here as FDC support staff, and I am glad to share the progress of the
FDC with you. A quick recap of the second round of recommendations: the FDC
met in Milan in late April; after extensive analysis and intense
deliberations, they recommended that two of the four submitted proposals be
funded. Their recommendations were followed by an official complaint and
appeal which were handled by the Board Representatives and Ombudsperson
respectively. The Board published their decision about the FDC's
recommendations and endorsed the recommendations in full.[1]
In the meantime, and over the next few months, we are learning from this
year's experience and using the feedback to improve our systems and
procedures. In addition, we are planning for Round 1 in the fall by
instituting a new Letter of Intent process and having conversations with
interested applicants. We have received 17 Letters of Intent. In addition,
with the FDC community elections, we have two new members on the FDC (which
brings the FDC up to its final size of 9 members). The Ombudsperson was
also re-elected for her second term.[2] Finally, we've been delighted to
welcome a new staff member - Katy Love, the Senior Program Officer for the
FDC - and she's had an exciting onboarding with the second round of the
FDC, after joining us in January. :-)
As you will remember, the Advisory Group was scheduled to review the
progress of the FDC both in its inaugural year and finally, to re-convene
in March 2014 to make a recommendation to the Board on the continuance of
the FDC. While the initial review was originally scheduled for March 2013,
it seemed prudent to wait till both rounds were over so that we would learn
from the whole inaugural year of the FDC. I'm glad we did so, since Round 2
tested some of our processes as Round 1 didn't, including the critical ones
of appeals to the Ombudsperson and complaints to the Board representatives.
For the overall review process, what I'd like to suggest is this: that you
offer your perspectives and insights on the inaugural year of grants, and
that we hold a face-to-face convening of the Advisory Group in *May 2014*
in order to make your final recommendation to the Board. The reason for
this is that we find it is extremely labour-intensive working on each round
of FDC proposals, and it would be helpful to meet post the FDC
deliberations for Round 2. Please let us know if you're comfortable with
moving the face-to-face meeting originally intended to be for March 2014 to
May 2014.
*Re the Advisory Group's review of Year 1:* *we'd like to suggest that a
brief report is finalised by end July (so we can present it at Wikimania),
with a draft completed by mid-July*. In order to support you in this as
best as possible, we will shortly share with you the feedback we've
gathered through
surveys conducted with FDC members, AG members, applicants and others for
both rounds. As you know, we most recently asked you to complete a survey
for Round 2, and are currently conducting some initial analysis for you.
We believe the most critical framing questions the FDC Advisory Group can
support the FDC and the movement in answering are:
* Is the FDC proceeding in the right direction for the movement, both in
terms of process as well as building up learning around impact?
* Are there critical challenges or gaps that the FDC should be mindful
about for the coming year?
You may well feel there are other key issues that need addressing, of
course. We felt that after we share with you all the feedback, it would be
useful to do a call with you that will help you all in discussing the
inaugural year. The notes from this call can form the basis for your
report. Would this be the best way to proceed? If so, *i**t would be very
helpful if 2-3 of you would volunteer to design the agenda for this call
with Katy and me, so that it is most useful to all of you**.* Please let
Katy and me know if you'd be interested in helping us with this. Katy will
then also follow up to schedule the call with the entire FDC Advisory
Group.
It's been a tremendous pleasure and privilege to work with the FDC members
over the last year, and I've been inspired by the level of commitment and
integrity they bring to this process. As someone who joined WMF after the
creation of the FDC Framework, I've also been hugely impressed with the
thoughtfulness of design in the FDC process itself: so thank you all for
the wisdom and insight that you brought to its creation! We have now tested
most if not all of the FDC systems and believe we have come out stronger
because of it. The experiences have not always been easy, but I believe we
are learning from them and improving as we go. We look forward to
continuing to improve and refine the process with your support and
suggestions.
Please don't hesitate to reach out to me should you have any questions
about the Advisory Group or the FDC process itself. I look forward to
speaking with you all. Katy will be in touch with more information very
shortly.
Warmly,
Anasuya
[1]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Board_decisions/2012-2013_round2
[2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2013/Results
--
***Anasuya Sengupta
Senior Director of Grantmaking
Wikimedia Foundation*
*
*
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
Support Wikimedia <https://donate.wikimedia.org/>
Hello members of the Funds Dissemination Advisory Group!
I hope this finds you well, wherever you are, enjoying a lovely weekend. I
wanted to share a draft version of the paragraphs for the FD Advisory Group
in the FDC Annual Report which should be published next week. As a base, I
used Richard's text from the summary of the call (thanks so much for
writing it up, Richard!). From there, I added more text from the minutes of
the meeting to add a bit more depth and context to share a bit more
perspective in the report.
I propose the text below as a draft for you to edit/correct/revise. I have
also put it on the top of the minutes from the etherpad. [1] *Please make
any suggestions and edits by end of day UTC Tuesday Sept 24,* so that we
can move forward with this piece completed. If you use the etherpad, it
would be ideal if you could note your initials by your comments so we can
follow up with you if we have any questions about the content created.
Please let me know if you have any concerns or questions. And thank you,
Advisory Group, for your input and feedback on this section of the report!
Warmly,
Katy Love
--
[1] https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/bUK9d3SRUd
*
The Funds Dissemination Advisory Group
[[LINK]]<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/FDC_Advisory_G…>plays
an important role for the first two years of the FDC’s existence. The
Advisory Group helped to develop the FDC process, and now provides guidance
and feedback to help refine the process. The Group is comprised of
interested community members, current FDC grantees, external grantmakers,
and WMF Board members. Two members of the Advisory Group joined the FDC,
and they therefore resigned from the Advisory Group.
As a whole, the Advisory Group felt that the FDC Year 1 Process Review [[
LINK<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/FDC_Process_Review%2C_2…>]]
accurately covered the current state of the FDC process. They strongly
emphasized a need for increased communication between applicants and FDC
staff. The Advisory Group noted that communication is the most challenging
aspect of the relationship, as new and inexperienced entities have a
difficult time meeting the requirements. The Advisory Group therefore
recommended that the FDC staff work more closely with applicants,
particularly the new applicants.
The Advisory Group noted concern around the fact that smaller entities
faced the same rigorous review treatment as larger entities, even when the
smaller entities were all or mostly volunteer-run. They also noted that
some entities may not be ready for annual plan grants with unrestricted
funds. They recommended to the FDC staff to help to steer smaller (possibly
less developed) entities to simpler Wikimedia grant programs, like the
Project and Events grants program.
Another concern is the lack of overall community involvement. One member
noted that only the applicants seemed to be paying significant attention to
the process.
The Advisory Group noted many positive aspects of the FDC. First, they feel
that the FDC Framework has been useful and well utilized as a foundational
document for the process. In addition, they were impressed with the
thoughtfulness of the FDC’s work and decisions. Furthermore, despite a
range of personalities, all viewpoints were respected and recommendations
are agreed jointly. Finally, they were also impressed with the maturity of
the applicants from the first round, including those that were rejected
from funding. *
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Katy Love <klove(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hello again FD Advisory Group,
>
> It was wonderful to speak with you all last week and hear your
> perspectives on the progress of the FDC. Thank you, again, to Richard, for
> both co-facilitating the call and for providing a good summary of the
> meeting, too.
>
> At this point, as mentioned before, we'd like to suggest that the Advisory
> Group share some perspective on the first year of the FDC's existence
> through some brief inputs for the annual FDC report.
>
> Would one of you be willing to take what Richard has started with the
> meeting summary and turn it into a few paragraphs for the AG's input to the
> FDC report? Anasuya posed two questions that could be a useful starting
> point for your reflection:
> * Is the FDC proceeding in the right direction for the movement, both in
> terms of process as well as building up learning around impact?
> * Are there critical challenges or gaps that the FDC should be mindful
> about for the coming year?
>
> Kindly let me know if one of you is able and interested to lead this
> effort. We are hoping to have a few paragraphs in the next few days to get
> input from the other AG members to then include in the FDC Annual Report.
> Of course, Anasuya and I would be happy to support you.
>
> Many thanks!
>
> Katy
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Pavel Richter <pavel.richter(a)wikimedia.de
> > wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>>
>>
>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>>
>> Pavel Richter
>> Vorstand
>>
>> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
>> Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260
>> Twitter: @pavel
>>
>>
>> 2013/7/11 Richard Ames <richard(a)ames.id.au>
>>
>>>
>>> Funds Distribution Comittee (FDC) Advisory Group (AG) teleconference of
>>> 11 July 2013
>>>
>>> The group met to review the FDC process to date; the FDC AG members
>>> present were Richard, Osmar, Pavel, Kathy, Jan-Bart. Wikimedia Foundation
>>> (WMF) FDC staff present were Katy, Winifred, Anasuya. An etherpad summary
>>> of the discussion is at [1].
>>>
>>> The FDC Year 1 Process Review, 2012-13 [2] formed the basis of the
>>> discussion and the group felt the survey covered the current state of the
>>> FDC effort correctly. There was universal agreement regarding
>>> communication between applicants and foundation staff - that this is the
>>> most challenging aspect of the relationship; new and inexperienced entities
>>> have a difficult time meeting the requirements and communication is the
>>> solution. Steering smaller (possibly less mature) entities to simpler
>>> grant possibilities may be part of the solution.
>>>
>>> The group agreed we were making good progress using the 'framework' [3].
>>> The 2014 review scheduled for March will be delayed to May to better fit
>>> the FDC staff workload.
>>>
>>> 1. http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/**bUK9d3SRUd<http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/bUK9d3SRUd>
>>>
>>> 2. http://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/FDC_portal/Feedback_and_**
>>> continuous_improvement_of_the_**FDC_process/Process_Survey/**
>>> 2012-13_Year_Review<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Feedback_and_continuous_improveme…>
>>>
>>> 3. http://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Funds_Dissemination_**
>>> Committee/Framework_for_the_**Creation_and_Initial_**
>>> Operation_of_the_FDC<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_…>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Fd-advisorygroup mailing list
>>> Fd-advisorygroup(a)lists.**wikimedia.org<Fd-advisorygroup(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/fd-**advisorygroup<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/fd-advisorygroup>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fd-advisorygroup mailing list
>> Fd-advisorygroup(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/fd-advisorygroup
>>
>>
>