Fd-advisorygroup

fd-advisorygroup@lists.wikimedia.org

22 discussions

Update and next steps
by Barry Newstead 13 Jul '12

13 Jul '12

Dear FDC Advisory Group members, Thank you again for all of the time and thoughtfulness you brought to our weekend working session in San Francisco and via video. From our perspective, the meeting was a tremendous success, and I hope you feel that it was an effective use of your time. If you’ve been following the development of the FDC proposal and associated templates on Meta, you’ll know that much of what we deliberated and discussed has made its way into the draft proposal– so you truly have contributed to make this work better. I wanted to highlight for you the immediate next steps for this process. Bridgespan and the WMF team have be making adjustments to the FDC proposal. Yesterday, we did a thorough simulated walk-through of the process and refined a number of areas to address some process challenges that presented themselves. On 29 June, Sue will submit her formal recommendation for the Board of Trustees consideration. If you are able to, please review the current draft proposal [1] and provide feedback on the talk page [2]. I’m glad that several of you will be at Wikimania (sadly I won't, but a strong WMF contingent will), and I hope that there will be an opportunity there for those who have volunteered to hold an information/discussion session on the FDC process, as I’m sure many who are attending will be curious about it. Please let me know if there is anything you need from us to support you in preparing for this. Finally, we had tentatively discussed having two more Advisory Group teleconference calls, one in mid-July and one in mid-August. It’s my sense, at this point, that it would be best for us to continue to engage instead, on Meta, where others can participate in the conversation. The logistics of conference calls makes it difficult to have a quality discussion. Bridgespan may reach out to some of you regarding specific ares we'd like your advice. Beyond that, we don’t think we need to schedule another group meeting at this time. Please do let me know if you have questions on this or would suggest otherwise. I look forward to our continued work together to develop this process, and appreciate all of the contributions you have made thus far. [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Draft_FDC_Prop… [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Draft_FDC… Best, Barry -- Barry Newstead Chief Global Development Officer 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! Donate to Wikimedia <https://donate.wikimedia.org/>

4 3

Etherpad status and suggestion
by Richard Ames 16 Jun '12

16 Jun '12

I think the Etherpad record of our meeting is a valuable resource and should be reserved. The 'on web ' version has line numbers and contributor colours which make it easier to refer too. See http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/Notes-20and-20discussion-20for-20Advisory-20G… Can this version be write locked so none of us alter it???? Regards, Richard.

2 2

Detailed agenda and preparation materials for our upcoming Advisory Group
by Landles-Dowling, Libbie 05 Jun '12

05 Jun '12

Dear Advisory Group, We are looking forward to seeing you in San Francisco this coming weekend! Our meeting will be held at the Wikimedia Foundation offices and starts on Saturday at 9:30, with breakfast at 9:00. We've outlined a detailed agenda of the weekend here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/FDC_Advisory_G… In advance of the meeting, we hope you do several things to prepare for our conversation: 1. Read the full draft of the FDC recommendation being drafted on Meta: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Draft_FDC_Prop… 2. If you have time, read the additional input materials that have been developed in support of this work: * Drafts of key templates to support the recommendation: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Templates * The talk page discussion of the recommendation: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Draft_FDC… * Notes and insights from interviews: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Additional_Inf… * Notes and insights from benchmark interviews: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Benchmarking_a… * Financial data and responses from the chapter finance survey: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Key_financial_… 3. Provide your insights on the key issues left to discuss by answering Sue's three questions: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Draft_FDC… 4. Bring a Wikimedia-related item (a story, an article, a photo, etc.) to share in opening exercise Please set aside several hours to prepare. The objective of our meeting is to provide input to Sue to solidify and finalize the FDC recommendation to the Board at the end of June. The more prepared and up-to-date everyone is on the recommendation that has been drafted and the input that has informed this work, the deeper the conversation we have on the remaining issues to be discussed. We're excited to see you! Please don't hesitate to reach out with questions in the meantime. All the best, Libbie Libbie Landles Manager The Bridgespan Group 465 California St., 11th Floor | San Francisco, CA 94960 Phone:415.627.4585 libbie.landles(a)bridgespan.org www.bridgespan.org Bridgespan's free newsletters offer topics and tools for leaders in nonprofits and philanthropy. www.bridgespan.org/subscriptions ___________________NOTICE____________________________ This electronic mail transmission, including any attachments, contains confidential information of the Bridgespan Group ("Bridgespan") and/or its clients. It is intended only for the person(s) named, and the information in such e-mail shall only be used by the person(s) named for the purpose intended and for no other purpose. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by any other persons, or by the person(s) named but for purposes other than the intended purpose, is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and then destroy this e-mail. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Bridgespan shall be understood to be neither given nor endorsed by Bridgespan. When addressed to Bridgespan clients, any information contained in this e-mail shall be subject to the terms and conditions in the applicable client contract.

1 0

FDC Draft proposal on meta: please participate
by Sue Gardner 01 Jun '12

01 Jun '12

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Draft_FDC_Prop… Hey folks, This is just a quick note aimed at drawing your attention to the draft proposal to the Board on the construction of the FDC. Bridgespan has been doing some very good work at the URL above: it's worth you reading the draft-in-progress if you haven't been. The discussion is happening mostly on that talk page, although there are a few bits and pieces of discussion happening elsewhere -- for example, on the talk page of the notes related to my interview with Bridgespan. I think the discusssion is good. A hald-dozen advisory group members have been active there, as well as some community members who aren't on the advisory group. What I've read has been very constructive and thoughtful, and really useful in helping shape my own thinking. To recap: I'm expected to send the Board the final proposal on or before 30 June. The proposal will be a version of what's currently on the meta page, accompanied by draft documents that will be used to support the FDC process --- documents such as the "letter of intent" form fund-seekers will be asked to fill out, the criteria Wikimedia Foundation staff will use to determine whether an entity is eligible for FDC funding, a draft funds request template, the criteria Wikimedia Foundation staff will use to determine whether a funding request is eligible for consideration by the FDC, the evaluation grid the FDC will use to assess funding requests, a commitment pledge FDC members will be asked to make before agreeing to serve on the FDC, an "annual calendar" of deadlines and milestones for the FDC process, a plan for assessing and course-correcting as the first 18 months of FDC work plays out, and so forth. All the materials will be posted and refined on meta throughout the next six weeks as they are developed, and will be presented to you for your discussion and feedback at our meeting in San Francisco in June. That F2F meeting, and your discussions on-wiki between now and 30 June, will be your major initial contribution as advisory group members: my expectation is that after that point, your role will shift more towards observing the process as it plays out, and giving feedback throughout the 18-month evaluation cycle. Here's what you can do to help the process: * Please read the talk pages and contribute to the discussions there are you see fit. There are currently some particularly interesting conversations happening around how FDC membership should be determined, what the annual cycle should look like (particularly, how two funding periods can be supported), and how community member feedback could be incorporated into the funding request evaluation process. There are probably other interesting discussions happening, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head. There are probably also areas that aren't currently being discussed, that should be. * I've put out an informal request on the meta page for people to nominate candidates for the inaugural FDC, which I am expecting will likely be appointed by the Board, perhaps with special support from this Advisory Group. My guess is that the Board will vote on the proposal sometime around mid-July, and we will want to have the FDC fully up-and-running by 1 October. That leaves only about 10 weeks for the Board to determine FDC membership: that may sound like a lot, but it isn't really. I am assuming that many people will be approached and need to decline, either because they're not interested or are too busy. I am also guessing that some desired characteristics will be easy to recruit for, and others more difficult. Plus, potential members may have other entanglements, including potential conflict-of-issue or perception-of-conflict, that will take time to sort out. That's why I'm asking for nominations now: so that we don't start from zero in mid-July. So, if you can help brainstorm potential names on that wiki page, I think that would be useful for the Board. * You have probably seen that a week ago, Bridgespan started a survey of chapters that will potentially be requesting funds, here. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Chapter_Financ…. It's been publicized on meta, mailing lists, and I believe also by individual e-mails to chapter heads. Bridgespan is hoping that chapters will be able to fill out the survey by 25 May. To date, I think nobody has filled it out yet. That's fine: obviously it'll take time for chapters to gather the relevant information. But, if you are involved with a chapter, or in close communication with a chapter regardless of personal involvement, it might help if you could encourage people to get the survey filled out. That'll give us information that'll help us design a process in a way that meets the needs of fund-seekers. I don't know if the archives of this list are yet public. On the assumption they may not be, and in a spirit of transparency, I will likely post this note to meta sometime this weekend -- or anybody else should feel free to do it, if they're on meta before I am. And a heads-up for you all: I'll be travelling (WikiGenero, in Buenos Aires) for six days, starting Tuesday this week. That normally makes it harder for me to edit the wikis, since I tend to be more e-mail active and less wiki-active when I'm travelling. So, I'll aim to do some editing before I leave San Francisco Tuesday afternoon, but my editing will likely be pretty light for the week following Last thing: thanks for all your help in this process thus far, and thanks in advance for the meetings we'll be having in June. The construction of the FDC is a heavy lift, and we are definitely not going to get it right at launch: it will need lots of fine-tuning as we go. But I'm excited by its potential, and I'm happy with the shape it's taking so far. CCing Asaf so he's in the loop: I'm not actually sure if he's on this list, or not. Thanks, Sue

4 3

This list will become public soon
by Asaf Bartov 17 May '12

17 May '12

Hi. As we discussed in our recent meetings, there is a desire to make this mailing list a public mailing list. This is consistent with everyone's interest to make these important discussions transparent and visible to our wider community. In order to make that change, we would like to inform you that all previous communications on this mailing list and your email addresses will become part of the newly-public mailing list archive. As a result, your data and those communications will not be confidential and will be shared publicly. If you do not agree to this, please notify Winifred Olliff via email at wolliff(a)wikimedia.org, of your desire to opt-out and your name and information will be removed from the mailing list prior to making it public, after which we shall have to figure out a way to support your participation without exposing your e-mail address. If you don't mind the discussions being public but would like your e-mail address to remain protected, please consider writing to Winifred with an alternate e-mail address we can subscribe you with, and we will unsubscribe your existing one and re-subscribe you with the new one. Please opt-out by May 15, 2012; after that date, the list and its contents will be made public. Cheers, Asaf -- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>

4 3

First message :-)
by Richard Ames 09 May '12

09 May '12

'Gday' to you all - Thought I would jump in and test the new list. I presume it is for our use..... I would prefer to use it as a central copy (archive) of all messages is kept for all see. Can be referenced, etc. Maybe a short bio from each of us would be in order? Regards, Richard Sydney, Oz.

5 4

Comments please on Sue's interview
by Barry Newstead (WMF) 09 May '12

09 May '12

Hi FDC Advisory Group: I just saw that Bridgespan has posted interviews with board members and with Sue. Sue, in particular, laid out a rather specific set of recommendations for the FDC[2]. It would be great if you would review them and comment in the talk page[3]. I think they are a good basis for discussion. Note: Bridgespan interviewed me too and the notes should be up soon. Best, Barry [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Additional_Inf… [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Additional_Inf… [3] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Additiona… -- Barry Newstead Chief Global Development Officer Wikimedia Foundation

2 2

List archives are not public
by Richard Ames 02 May '12

02 May '12

I have delayed adding the link to Meta because the list archives are private; please change tham to public. R/R

1 0

FD-advisory group list usage
by Richard Ames 02 May '12

02 May '12

I suggest this list be used for conversations and temporary communications and the Meta wiki be used for more permanent collaborative document / policy / process creation. I think both should be public so our community can see it.... I will add a link on Meta to the list archives. Regards, Richard.

1 0

Recent teleconference thoughts
by Richard Ames 02 May '12

02 May '12

Hi all - I think the recent teleconference went very well .... suggestions: If we do it again I would ask people to identify themselves as they start speaking. I had trouble distinguishing between speakers (sometimes). I would also suggest only one meeting is necessary and would insure all hear the same information. Two meetings was considerate of the organizers but very expensive in terms of those who did it twice. I think pick a time that is OK for the majority and those living on the other side of the sphere will lose some sleep. Thanks and regards, Richard.

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

Fd-advisorygroup