Dear Wikimedians, Some responses here on Meta [1] on behalf of CIS. I have also commented in my individual capacity on the statutory aspects to the best of my knowledge. Also see some in-line replies. On Monday 12 May 2014 05:45 PM, Hari Prasad Nadig wrote: As may of you know, please note that CIS has proposed the said budget to implement 21 plans of which there are 7 language area plans, 8 stand along projects, 3 community strengthening initiatives, etc. As you may have already seen in the budget, please note that the salary proposed is for 7 employees on the CIS-A2K team and the average per person salary would come to less than 1 lakh per month, per person and not as stated above. CIS-A2K welcomes your feedback and suggestions. Thank you, Vishnu

Dear Hari, Please see my replies in-line. On Wednesday 14 May 2014 12:51 AM, Hari Prasad Nadig wrote: Yes, it is no secret how much salary I draw or what the CIS-A2K program budget is and what we have proposed. Members on this list will remember that once I took over as the Program Director of CIS-A2K, I have ensured that we bring transparency to the entire CIS-A2K program including the project budget. We shared the entire A2K budget with the community in May 2013 on this list [1]. Staff salaries which also includes my salary were disclosed. Members on the list do know that we have taken this transparency measure much before the current FDC application (or at a time when we were not thinking about this FDC application). Neither I nor the current CIS-A2K team had any say in determining the salaries. There has been an extensive discussion on this here [2]. I am afraid that in your earlier mail the proposed A2K program plans number was wrongly quoted along with the per-person salary and I was merely highlighting the right facts. We appreciated this effort on Meta here [3]. Again let me appreciate the community members and your effort to throw light on these concerns. As stated in the reply on Meta [3], and I quote here for the benefit of the members: "CIS has never compromised in getting the best available professional expertise in complying with the various statutory requirements. So at the outset we need to state that CIS has always complied with the statutory advice received from our legal adviser and whenever required also sought second opinion. Thus to our current understanding we are in the best possible compliance with the statutory requirements for the not-for-profits in India. However, because a few of the community members, in the interest of continuing support to Wikimedia movement in India, expressed serious concerns, CIS will take every effort to share these with our legal advisers for their professional opinion. This could take some days, but we are certainly committed to sharing our legal advisers' opinion on these matters with the community and FDC at the earliest. This exercise is also important for CIS as it will help us to put ourselves in much better compliance, if required." We are committed to seeking the opinion of our legal advisers on the concerns raised, as we respect the voice of the community members, including you. Also it is more in the interest of CIS to better comply with the statutory requirements. Please note that CIS has never kept its documents closed to open them again. CIS gets its financial and institutional documents scrutinized every year and reports to multiple authorities as part of various statutory compliances. The Income Tax department periodically scrutinizes CIS's accounts. All the documents are always open for scrutiny by the donors. We have made every document available that was asked by the WMF's visiting team to CIS (which includes WMF's CFO Garfield Byrd) in February 2014. We had also thrown open all our document to the general public for scrutiny during May 2013. I have written to members on this list and other Wikimedia lists, inviting them to come and scrutinize all our documents during this Open Week. Please see the announcement here [4]. Thanks for engaging with CIS-A2K's work, which we always appreciate. Best, Vishnu [1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2013-May/009980.html [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/… [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/… [4] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2013-May/009980.html

Dear Hari, On Wednesday 14 May 2014 02:11 PM, Hari Prasad Nadig wrote: We do not have the property ownership documents (no. 4) as CIS does not own the building. These are with the owners and we cannot provide them. As stated on this list many times we cannot share the WMF Grant Agreement (no. 5) without the explicit permission from WMF. Rest of the documents could be made available. But the admin team is in the middle of audit. Let me consult Sunil (he will return to office mid next week) and get back on this. Best, Vishnu

On Wednesday 14 May 2014 10:11 PM, Hari Prasad Nadig wrote: Dear Hari, Yes, this should be very much possible. Cheers, Vishnu