In my opinion the work of the FDC cannot be limited to compare three years, to evaluate three budgets and to evaluate three impacts.
I would say that it's *out of context*.
I have had this feeling when I have read that the FDC consider that Amical is the best example to follow.
How "to follow"? Amical operates in a different context than other chapters. The question that a good example can be *cloned* is surrealistic.
Ok, nothing to say but: a) Amical operates in small community where the language is a strong glue within the community b) Amical has a strong inter-relation Wikimedia projects = organization c) Amical has no big internal conflicts generated by external or internal questions (may be the opposite) d) the territory where Amical operates is relatively small
A good example to compare Amical is with Wikimedia Israel.
I would not speak in the specific case of WM DE but I suggest to look in the history of the German projects and in the German chapter and to check how many external decisions have had an impact in the German community to generate a bias. I don't think that these decisions have been a good solution to improve the community participation to the projects.
What I see is that the numbers of editors is decreasing a lot in the biggest projects.
It may be caused by a wrong strategy where is privileged the diversity and the Global South but without paying attention that the historical communities and to the "usual" editors. May be I am wrong but there are more online projects becoming attractive for the "potential" editors and the change of the target is not producing a real impact.
So it's not a question of comparison of three budget.
If the problem is critical the solution to limit the decreasing is not beneficial.
regards
Il 24/Nov/2014 19:14 "Sydney Poore" sydney.poore@gmail.com ha scritto:
Hi Patrik,
During this round of the FDC evaluating the requests, the majority of the organizations that we were looking at had submitted requests to the FDC for the past 3 years. While we have seen improvement around strategic planning, budget planning and evaluation, there is still a great amount of room for improvement from everyone in the wikimedia movement (including the WMF.)
If you read the recommendations, FDC is primarily asking the largest organizations to re-evaluate their current capacity to deliver impact to the movement in line with the funds that they are using. In many instances it involves looking at the organizations overall capacity to develop and execute a strategic plan. Because the FDC is making recommendations about unrestricted funds, rather than focusing on a specific project or program, often the reductions in funds is linked to concerns about an organizations capacity to grow (eg., hire and manage more staff, do more complicated projects.)
Warm regards,
Sydney Poore User:FloNight Member FDC