[Foundation-l] Chapters

[Nathan]

On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> On 08/28/11 12:17 PM, Nathan wrote:
> > More to the point, according to [1] nearly 80% of the total
> > fundraising take was from North America. Participation by chapters in
> > the fundraiser is not, in anyway, an alternative to concentrating
> > money in the WMF.
> >
> > [1]
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Av5TeXEyGuvpdGRyNDJHS19RZmRqbWlqeHp5ak5uWnc&authkey=CKb59_wD&hl=en_US#gid=0
>
> That link shows 67.75% as being from the USA.
>

That's why I said North America.


> Due diligence requires management to be wary of what they "have no
> reason to expect". For a person who hasn't seen grant request outlines
> you do a lot of speculation about what they don't contain.  To the
> extent that chapters require grants, it is wholly reasonable that they
> establish the need for those grants, and be accountable for them when
> they receive them. Beyond the startup stage chapters should strive to
> have independent core funding. so as not to require WMF grants to fund
> core operations.  That's an important part of being responsible and
> accountable; national laws too play a big role in establishing
> accountability and transparency.  It would be irresponsible for a
> chapter board member to base his policy stands on the suggested
> interpretation of one WMF board member.
>
>
If the WMF plans for grants to be the interim method of funding for
developing chapters (aside from that raised independently by the chapters
themselves) then I expect that they will tweak the process to account for
the specific issues involved (like not wanting to bury chapters in
book-length paperwork requirements). A responsible chapter board member, as
you say, should base his or her assumptions on what is likely and on the
information currently available, not on fears of a worst-case scenario.

Nathan