Hello Nora,

One of the key roles of the FDC is focusing the Wikimedia movement on developing sound measurable goals that match the mission of the movement, and to then have the organizations use a evaluation process that is hearty but not too burdensome for volunteers who are likely to be heavily involved with projects. 

The Wikimedia movement as a whole is in an infancy stage of figuring out how organizations can achieve the right balance between time spend on administrative and bureaucratic activities and the time spent creating content for the various Wikimedia Foundation projects.

In my opinion every organization in the movement, small or large, can benefit from the type of comments that you shared in your email. I encourage you and other interested people to push up your sleeves and help the organizations develop meaningful measurable goals around the topic of the gender gap (or anything else.)

It would be really useful for a group of interested people to review the organization various activities and make suggestions about how goals related to increasing the diversity of the movement can be added. 

If you or anyone else is interested, I will help you figure out the best way to accomplish this task. The Wikimedia Foundation had staff dedicated to assisting the movement with the general evaluations of projects and programs. But their numbers are few and the task is large!!! Plus the involvement of volunteers is an important ethos of the movement.  So the involvement of volunteers is key to getting this done in a meaningful and timely way. 

Regards,
Sydney

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 22, 2013, at 13:38, "trueself56 ." <trueself54@gmail.com> wrote:

I reviewed some of the proposals that have been submitted for funding from the aspects of concrete goals. I have a background in United States Human Service charities as an Operations Manager and database administrator. One of the most challenging activities for an agency is to identify goals in a manner that is meaningful to all constituents and can be tracked. If a goal cannot be defined with an action statement and specific target numbers and the result that proves the target numbers, then the goal language must be modified and/or the result that proves the goal changed. At the time of goal identification the tracking methods should be determined and reviewed for feasibility.

A goal should be so clearly written that anyone who is a member of the organization understands how to collect the data that proves the goal. A common failing is creating goals that sound really impressive but are so vague that the people responsible for doing the work and collecting the data don't know which activity proves the goal and what form or question or whatever, they have to do to get the information back to the Main Office. (And "don't they understand that I am very busy and who reads this, and oh lord, what did I do last time I filled out this form and ...")

For example: Efforts will be made to increase the participation of women and other minorities in monthly workshops by 30%. This goal will be verified by sign-in sheets that ask for gender and (ethnicity, cultural group or whatever concrete statistic defines the goal).

From an operations standpoint the sign-in sheets should be sent to the Main office after every workshop, the results tabulated and reported to the appropriate constituents. At minimum, the board and the sponsoring group should receive feedback on goals on a quarterly basis. This keeps the goals in front of everybody and lets everyone know what progress is being is being towards achieving those goals while there is still time to improve their methods.

The most effective grants I worked with tied achievable goals to monetary rewards. If quarterly goals weren't met, future financial allocations were jeopardized and indeed, in cases of egregious inactivity, programs lost funding mid-fiscal year.

The preceeding goal language was created in a vacuum without consultation with any constituents in the space of approx. one hour and is to be used only as an example.

Organizations tend to use too many words to describe what they are trying to accomplish. Grant language must be straight-forward and easily understood. If the average user/volunteer/staff member doesn't understand the goals at first reading then further refining is of the highest importance

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to be of service.

Regards,

Nora (Norawashere)
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap