[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-06-08 Thread টিটো দত্ত Tito Dutta
Greetings,
Hope this message finds you well. The questions were pretty clear, the
answer was not that much clear to me. However I understand that answers
will be updated once the reports are published, preferably in an inline
answer format.

(A comment in general) I see, these days, more and more questions are taken
from mailing lists to talk pages and are answered there. I'll be very happy
if we use talk pages more to discuss.
But, while a thread is being copied from a mailing list thread to a talk
page, we can perhaps think of a standard procedure.
On thing we may add at the top:
{{Hatnote|1=This was originally posted on [FULL_URL| Wikimedia-l] and is
being answered here for }}
This can also be done creating an easy template with a couple of variables
such as
{{Mailing_list_post| list= |posted_by= |date= }}


ইতি,
টিটো দত্ত
(মাতৃভাষা থাক জীবন জুড়ে)


মঙ্গল, ৮ জুন, ২০২১ তারিখে ৩:১০ PM টায় এ Julia Brungs 
লিখেছেন:

> Hi SJ,
>
> We posted an answer to your questions on meta [1] and will update that
> answer when reports become available in the next few months.
>
> Best wishes,
> Julia
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_2030/2021_Call_for_Movement_Strategy_Implementation_Grants#Making_progress_on_questions_of_resource_allocation
>
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 5:51 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
>
>> Adam: well put.
>>
>> We may want to translate '*Service and equity*', from recent strategy
>> discussions, more widely: into a range of contexts as well as languages.
>>
>> 
>>
>> On Thu., May 20, 2021, 3:19 a.m. Adam Wight, 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In case there really is a question about whether we should be working
>>> towards greater equity, please see the Wikimedia Foundation's vision
>>> statement [1],
>>>
>>>  > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
>>> the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment
>>>
>>> and in more detail [2],
>>>
>>>  > ... our goal is to impact the largest-possible number of readers and
>>> contributors, and to eliminate barriers that could preclude people from
>>> accessing or contributing to our projects ...
>>>
>>> Since sj's point is in the context of Wikimedia, "goals of increasing
>>> equity across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities"
>>> should be understood as "goals of increasing equity [to read and
>>> contribute to Wikimedia projects] across the world, and supporting
>>> underrepresented [Wikimedia] communities".  Please correct me if I've
>>> misunderstood these affiliate review suggestions.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> [[mw:User:Adamw]]
>>>
>>> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Vision
>>> [2]
>>>
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles#Serving_every_human_being
>>>
>>> On 5/20/21 7:34 AM, Alexander N Krassotkin wrote:
>>> > Dear Samuel,
>>> >
>>> >   Just a note...
>>> >
>>> > "The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
>>> > people around the world to collect and develop educational content
>>> > under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it
>>> > effectively and globally".
>>> > https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/mission/
>>> >
>>> >   But not "increasing equity across the world".
>>> >
>>> >   You can create separate funds for this and other good purposes.
>>> >
>>> > sasha.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:05 PM Julia Brungs 
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Dear SJ,
>>> >>
>>> >> Thank you very much for your questions here and on meta. We are
>>> working on answering them and will post the answers on meta (don't worry I
>>> will reply to this thread again when the answers are live so people can go
>>> and find them).
>>> >>
>>> >> Best wishes,
>>> >> Julia
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:32 PM Samuel Klein 
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> :)   Dimi, do you know of reports on subsets of this, for groups and
>>> projects in Europe?   I discovered to my delight a beautiful summary of WMF
>>> grants made up to 2020 -- thanks Guillaume! -- which partly answers the
>>> first question. But this does not include donations + external grant
>>> funding that directly supports affiliates.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> One other point -- It was noted that 3a and 3d seem similar.  I
>>> updated these Qs on meta to be clearer.  I meant:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>   3a:  What groups do we envision making individual funding
>>> recommendations?  [timing, who decides, what constraints]
>>> >>>   3d:  How do we envision reviewing how things are going?   [peer
>>> feedback on budgets and plans, reflection on the overall balance of funding
>>> across the movement.]
>>> >>>
>>> >>> These inform one another, but are distinct.   And the first is more
>>> than just updating current processes: major gaps to fill include funding
>>> for projects under $500, and multi-year funding for infrastructure and
>>> projects -- among the most common requests.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> SJ
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:52 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
>>> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-06-08 Thread Julia Brungs
Hi SJ,

We posted an answer to your questions on meta [1] and will update that
answer when reports become available in the next few months.

Best wishes,
Julia

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_2030/2021_Call_for_Movement_Strategy_Implementation_Grants#Making_progress_on_questions_of_resource_allocation


On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 5:51 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Adam: well put.
>
> We may want to translate '*Service and equity*', from recent strategy
> discussions, more widely: into a range of contexts as well as languages.
>
> 
>
> On Thu., May 20, 2021, 3:19 a.m. Adam Wight, 
> wrote:
>
>> In case there really is a question about whether we should be working
>> towards greater equity, please see the Wikimedia Foundation's vision
>> statement [1],
>>
>>  > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
>> the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment
>>
>> and in more detail [2],
>>
>>  > ... our goal is to impact the largest-possible number of readers and
>> contributors, and to eliminate barriers that could preclude people from
>> accessing or contributing to our projects ...
>>
>> Since sj's point is in the context of Wikimedia, "goals of increasing
>> equity across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities"
>> should be understood as "goals of increasing equity [to read and
>> contribute to Wikimedia projects] across the world, and supporting
>> underrepresented [Wikimedia] communities".  Please correct me if I've
>> misunderstood these affiliate review suggestions.
>>
>> Regards,
>> [[mw:User:Adamw]]
>>
>> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Vision
>> [2]
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles#Serving_every_human_being
>>
>> On 5/20/21 7:34 AM, Alexander N Krassotkin wrote:
>> > Dear Samuel,
>> >
>> >   Just a note...
>> >
>> > "The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
>> > people around the world to collect and develop educational content
>> > under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it
>> > effectively and globally".
>> > https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/mission/
>> >
>> >   But not "increasing equity across the world".
>> >
>> >   You can create separate funds for this and other good purposes.
>> >
>> > sasha.
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:05 PM Julia Brungs 
>> wrote:
>> >> Dear SJ,
>> >>
>> >> Thank you very much for your questions here and on meta. We are
>> working on answering them and will post the answers on meta (don't worry I
>> will reply to this thread again when the answers are live so people can go
>> and find them).
>> >>
>> >> Best wishes,
>> >> Julia
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:32 PM Samuel Klein 
>> wrote:
>> >>> :)   Dimi, do you know of reports on subsets of this, for groups and
>> projects in Europe?   I discovered to my delight a beautiful summary of WMF
>> grants made up to 2020 -- thanks Guillaume! -- which partly answers the
>> first question. But this does not include donations + external grant
>> funding that directly supports affiliates.
>> >>>
>> >>> One other point -- It was noted that 3a and 3d seem similar.  I
>> updated these Qs on meta to be clearer.  I meant:
>> >>>
>> >>>   3a:  What groups do we envision making individual funding
>> recommendations?  [timing, who decides, what constraints]
>> >>>   3d:  How do we envision reviewing how things are going?   [peer
>> feedback on budgets and plans, reflection on the overall balance of funding
>> across the movement.]
>> >>>
>> >>> These inform one another, but are distinct.   And the first is more
>> than just updating current processes: major gaps to fill include funding
>> for projects under $500, and multi-year funding for infrastructure and
>> projects -- among the most common requests.
>> >>>
>> >>> SJ
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:52 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
>> dimitar.parvanov.dimit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>  Hi Samuel,
>> 
>>  Thanks for structuring these questions regarding funding and
>> fundraising. I just wanted to pitch in a +1.
>> 
>>  It would be very useful to have answers to some of these for our
>> public facing work. Such questions pop up naturally in conversations and
>> the more granular we can be in our answers the better the reaction we get.
>> 
>>  Cheers,
>>  Dimi
>> 
>>  На пн, 17.05.2021 г. в 21:13 ч. Samuel Klein 
>> написа:
>> > Dear list,
>> >
>> > Risker posed an excellent question in the AffCom thread about
>> review and development of movement funding, which could use its own
>> dedicated thread.  Riffing on the theme, here are a dozen questions for
>> anyone who knows part of the answer -- particularly those who helped
>> develop the 2019 recommendations on resource allocation , the 2020 approach
>> to hubs and participatory resource allocation, and the grants strategy
>> relaunch.
>> >
>> > We can move this discussion to meta if 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-05-20 Thread Samuel Klein
Adam: well put.

We may want to translate '*Service and equity*', from recent strategy
discussions, more widely: into a range of contexts as well as languages.



On Thu., May 20, 2021, 3:19 a.m. Adam Wight, 
wrote:

> In case there really is a question about whether we should be working
> towards greater equity, please see the Wikimedia Foundation's vision
> statement [1],
>
>  > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment
>
> and in more detail [2],
>
>  > ... our goal is to impact the largest-possible number of readers and
> contributors, and to eliminate barriers that could preclude people from
> accessing or contributing to our projects ...
>
> Since sj's point is in the context of Wikimedia, "goals of increasing
> equity across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities"
> should be understood as "goals of increasing equity [to read and
> contribute to Wikimedia projects] across the world, and supporting
> underrepresented [Wikimedia] communities".  Please correct me if I've
> misunderstood these affiliate review suggestions.
>
> Regards,
> [[mw:User:Adamw]]
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Vision
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles#Serving_every_human_being
>
> On 5/20/21 7:34 AM, Alexander N Krassotkin wrote:
> > Dear Samuel,
> >
> >   Just a note...
> >
> > "The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
> > people around the world to collect and develop educational content
> > under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it
> > effectively and globally".
> > https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/mission/
> >
> >   But not "increasing equity across the world".
> >
> >   You can create separate funds for this and other good purposes.
> >
> > sasha.
> >
> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:05 PM Julia Brungs 
> wrote:
> >> Dear SJ,
> >>
> >> Thank you very much for your questions here and on meta. We are working
> on answering them and will post the answers on meta (don't worry I will
> reply to this thread again when the answers are live so people can go and
> find them).
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >> Julia
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:32 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> >>> :)   Dimi, do you know of reports on subsets of this, for groups and
> projects in Europe?   I discovered to my delight a beautiful summary of WMF
> grants made up to 2020 -- thanks Guillaume! -- which partly answers the
> first question. But this does not include donations + external grant
> funding that directly supports affiliates.
> >>>
> >>> One other point -- It was noted that 3a and 3d seem similar.  I
> updated these Qs on meta to be clearer.  I meant:
> >>>
> >>>   3a:  What groups do we envision making individual funding
> recommendations?  [timing, who decides, what constraints]
> >>>   3d:  How do we envision reviewing how things are going?   [peer
> feedback on budgets and plans, reflection on the overall balance of funding
> across the movement.]
> >>>
> >>> These inform one another, but are distinct.   And the first is more
> than just updating current processes: major gaps to fill include funding
> for projects under $500, and multi-year funding for infrastructure and
> projects -- among the most common requests.
> >>>
> >>> SJ
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:52 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
> dimitar.parvanov.dimit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  Hi Samuel,
> 
>  Thanks for structuring these questions regarding funding and
> fundraising. I just wanted to pitch in a +1.
> 
>  It would be very useful to have answers to some of these for our
> public facing work. Such questions pop up naturally in conversations and
> the more granular we can be in our answers the better the reaction we get.
> 
>  Cheers,
>  Dimi
> 
>  На пн, 17.05.2021 г. в 21:13 ч. Samuel Klein 
> написа:
> > Dear list,
> >
> > Risker posed an excellent question in the AffCom thread about review
> and development of movement funding, which could use its own dedicated
> thread.  Riffing on the theme, here are a dozen questions for anyone who
> knows part of the answer -- particularly those who helped develop the 2019
> recommendations on resource allocation , the 2020 approach to hubs and
> participatory resource allocation, and the grants strategy relaunch.
> >
> > We can move this discussion to meta if the thread becomes unwieldy.
> (:
> >
> > 1. Current state of movement funding
> >
> >   1a. Roughly what % of global fundraising is currently allocated to
> affiliates, or other entities + projects not run by the WMF?  (my poor
> guess)
> >
> >   1b. Roughly how much regional fundraising goes directly to major
> affiliates?
> >
> >   1c. Which affiliates with annual plan grants have been growing
> over time, and how is the expansion of existing budgets approved?
> >
> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-05-20 Thread 4-Webd
| -Original Message-
| From: Alexander N Krassotkin [mailto:krassot...@gmail.com]
| Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 7:34 AM
/
| Dear Samuel,
| 
|  Just a note...
| 
| "The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people
| around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free
| license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and
| globally".
| https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/mission/
| 
|  But not "increasing equity across the world".

Of course support from me.

Reg., Janusz "Ency" Dorożyński 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-05-20 Thread Adam Wight
In case there really is a question about whether we should be working 
towards greater equity, please see the Wikimedia Foundation's vision 
statement [1],


> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in 
the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment


and in more detail [2],

> ... our goal is to impact the largest-possible number of readers and 
contributors, and to eliminate barriers that could preclude people from 
accessing or contributing to our projects ...


Since sj's point is in the context of Wikimedia, "goals of increasing 
equity across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities" 
should be understood as "goals of increasing equity [to read and 
contribute to Wikimedia projects] across the world, and supporting 
underrepresented [Wikimedia] communities".  Please correct me if I've 
misunderstood these affiliate review suggestions.


Regards,
[[mw:User:Adamw]]

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Vision
[2] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles#Serving_every_human_being


On 5/20/21 7:34 AM, Alexander N Krassotkin wrote:

Dear Samuel,

  Just a note...

"The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
people around the world to collect and develop educational content
under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it
effectively and globally".
https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/mission/

  But not "increasing equity across the world".

  You can create separate funds for this and other good purposes.

sasha.

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:05 PM Julia Brungs  wrote:

Dear SJ,

Thank you very much for your questions here and on meta. We are working on 
answering them and will post the answers on meta (don't worry I will reply to 
this thread again when the answers are live so people can go and find them).

Best wishes,
Julia


On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:32 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:

:)   Dimi, do you know of reports on subsets of this, for groups and projects 
in Europe?   I discovered to my delight a beautiful summary of WMF grants made 
up to 2020 -- thanks Guillaume! -- which partly answers the first question. But 
this does not include donations + external grant funding that directly supports 
affiliates.

One other point -- It was noted that 3a and 3d seem similar.  I updated these 
Qs on meta to be clearer.  I meant:

  3a:  What groups do we envision making individual funding recommendations?  
[timing, who decides, what constraints]
  3d:  How do we envision reviewing how things are going?   [peer feedback on 
budgets and plans, reflection on the overall balance of funding across the 
movement.]

These inform one another, but are distinct.   And the first is more than just 
updating current processes: major gaps to fill include funding for projects 
under $500, and multi-year funding for infrastructure and projects -- among the 
most common requests.

SJ


On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:52 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov 
 wrote:

Hi Samuel,

Thanks for structuring these questions regarding funding and fundraising. I 
just wanted to pitch in a +1.

It would be very useful to have answers to some of these for our public facing 
work. Such questions pop up naturally in conversations and the more granular we 
can be in our answers the better the reaction we get.

Cheers,
Dimi

На пн, 17.05.2021 г. в 21:13 ч. Samuel Klein  написа:

Dear list,

Risker posed an excellent question in the AffCom thread about review and 
development of movement funding, which could use its own dedicated thread.  
Riffing on the theme, here are a dozen questions for anyone who knows part of 
the answer -- particularly those who helped develop the 2019 recommendations on 
resource allocation , the 2020 approach to hubs and participatory resource 
allocation, and the grants strategy relaunch.

We can move this discussion to meta if the thread becomes unwieldy.  (:

1. Current state of movement funding

  1a. Roughly what % of global fundraising is currently allocated to 
affiliates, or other entities + projects not run by the WMF?  (my poor guess)

  1b. Roughly how much regional fundraising goes directly to major affiliates?

  1c. Which affiliates with annual plan grants have been growing over time, and 
how is the expansion of existing budgets approved?

  1d. Which affiliates have gotten their first APG in the past five years, and 
how has that developed over time?

2. Current review process

  2a. How is funding by WMF of movement affiliates (general operations, and 
large specific projects) currently determined?  Does the Board engage with this?

  2b. Is the funding of affiliate work linked to goals of increasing equity 
across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities? If so, how / how 
is this visualized?

  2c. What other mechanisms for focusing and allocating resources are good 
examples to replicate?

  2d. What other bilateral projects (such as joint projects, and grant  or 
microgrant 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-05-19 Thread Alexander N Krassotkin
Dear Samuel,

 Just a note...

"The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
people around the world to collect and develop educational content
under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it
effectively and globally".
https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/mission/

 But not "increasing equity across the world".

 You can create separate funds for this and other good purposes.

sasha.

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:05 PM Julia Brungs  wrote:
>
> Dear SJ,
>
> Thank you very much for your questions here and on meta. We are working on 
> answering them and will post the answers on meta (don't worry I will reply to 
> this thread again when the answers are live so people can go and find them).
>
> Best wishes,
> Julia
>
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:32 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:
>>
>> :)   Dimi, do you know of reports on subsets of this, for groups and 
>> projects in Europe?   I discovered to my delight a beautiful summary of WMF 
>> grants made up to 2020 -- thanks Guillaume! -- which partly answers the 
>> first question. But this does not include donations + external grant funding 
>> that directly supports affiliates.
>>
>> One other point -- It was noted that 3a and 3d seem similar.  I updated 
>> these Qs on meta to be clearer.  I meant:
>>
>>  3a:  What groups do we envision making individual funding recommendations?  
>> [timing, who decides, what constraints]
>>  3d:  How do we envision reviewing how things are going?   [peer feedback on 
>> budgets and plans, reflection on the overall balance of funding across the 
>> movement.]
>>
>> These inform one another, but are distinct.   And the first is more than 
>> just updating current processes: major gaps to fill include funding for 
>> projects under $500, and multi-year funding for infrastructure and projects 
>> -- among the most common requests.
>>
>> SJ
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:52 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov 
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Samuel,
>>>
>>> Thanks for structuring these questions regarding funding and fundraising. I 
>>> just wanted to pitch in a +1.
>>>
>>> It would be very useful to have answers to some of these for our public 
>>> facing work. Such questions pop up naturally in conversations and the more 
>>> granular we can be in our answers the better the reaction we get.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dimi
>>>
>>> На пн, 17.05.2021 г. в 21:13 ч. Samuel Klein  написа:

 Dear list,

 Risker posed an excellent question in the AffCom thread about review and 
 development of movement funding, which could use its own dedicated thread. 
  Riffing on the theme, here are a dozen questions for anyone who knows 
 part of the answer -- particularly those who helped develop the 2019 
 recommendations on resource allocation , the 2020 approach to hubs and 
 participatory resource allocation, and the grants strategy relaunch.

 We can move this discussion to meta if the thread becomes unwieldy.  (:

 1. Current state of movement funding

  1a. Roughly what % of global fundraising is currently allocated to 
 affiliates, or other entities + projects not run by the WMF?  (my poor 
 guess)

  1b. Roughly how much regional fundraising goes directly to major 
 affiliates?

  1c. Which affiliates with annual plan grants have been growing over time, 
 and how is the expansion of existing budgets approved?

  1d. Which affiliates have gotten their first APG in the past five years, 
 and how has that developed over time?

 2. Current review process

  2a. How is funding by WMF of movement affiliates (general operations, and 
 large specific projects) currently determined?  Does the Board engage with 
 this?

  2b. Is the funding of affiliate work linked to goals of increasing equity 
 across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities? If so, how 
 / how is this visualized?

  2c. What other mechanisms for focusing and allocating resources are good 
 examples to replicate?

  2d. What other bilateral projects (such as joint projects, and grant  or 
 microgrant programs), run by large affiliates and hubs other than the WMF, 
 currently exist?  Which seem like examples to replicate?

 3. Desired futures!

  3a. What movement bodies are expected to play any role in recommendations 
 about funding (extending, withdrawing, denying funding) to new and 
 existing affiliates, now that the FDC is inactive?

  3b. Is there a possibility of the FDC returning? How do past FDC members 
 have about this? What was found to be good and bad about the FDC process?

  3c.  What elements of this is the global council expected to take up in 
 its first year? What elements are hubs expected to take up, now and in the 
 future?

  3d. What roles do we envision each of {WMF, hubs, affiliates, community 
 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-05-19 Thread Julia Brungs
Dear SJ,

Thank you very much for your questions here and on meta. We are working on
answering them and will post the answers on meta (don't worry I will reply
to this thread again when the answers are live so people can go and find
them).

Best wishes,
Julia


On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:32 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:

> :)   Dimi, do you know of reports on subsets of this, for groups and
> projects in Europe?   I discovered to my delight a beautiful summary of WMF
> grants made up to 2020
>  -- thanks
> Guillaume! -- which partly answers the first question. But this does not
> include donations + external grant funding that directly supports
> affiliates.
>
> One other point -- It was noted that 3a and 3d seem similar.  I updated
> these Qs on meta  to be
> clearer.  I meant:
>
>  *3a*:  What groups do we envision making individual funding
> recommendations?  [timing, who decides, what constraints]
>  *3d*:  How do we envision reviewing how things are going?   [peer
> feedback on budgets and plans, reflection on the overall balance of funding
> across the movement.]
>
> These inform one another, but are distinct.   And the first is more than
> just updating current processes: major gaps to fill include funding for
> projects under $500, and multi-year funding for infrastructure and projects
> -- among the most common requests.
>
> SJ
>
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:52 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
> dimitar.parvanov.dimit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Samuel,
>>
>> Thanks for structuring these questions regarding funding and fundraising.
>> I just wanted to pitch in a +1.
>>
>> It would be very useful to have answers to some of these for our public
>> facing work. Such questions pop up naturally in conversations and the more
>> granular we can be in our answers the better the reaction we get.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dimi
>>
>> На пн, 17.05.2021 г. в 21:13 ч. Samuel Klein  написа:
>>
>>> Dear list,
>>>
>>> Risker posed an excellent question in the AffCom thread about *review
>>> and development of movement funding*, which could use its own dedicated
>>> thread.  Riffing on the theme, here are a dozen questions for anyone who
>>> knows part of the answer -- particularly those who helped develop the 2019
>>> recommendations on resource allocation
>>> 
>>>  ,
>>> the 2020 approach to hubs and participatory resource allocation
>>> ,
>>> and the grants strategy relaunch
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>> We can move this discussion to meta
>>>  if the thread becomes unwieldy.
>>> (:
>>>
>>> *1. Current state of movement funding*
>>>
>>>  1a. Roughly what % of global fundraising is currently allocated to
>>> affiliates, or other entities + projects not run by the WMF?  (*my poor
>>> guess*)
>>>
>>>  1b. Roughly how much regional fundraising goes directly to major
>>> affiliates?
>>>
>>>  1c. Which affiliates with annual plan grants have been growing over
>>> time, and how is the expansion of existing budgets approved?
>>>
>>>  1d. Which affiliates have gotten their first APG in the past five
>>> years, and how has that developed over time?
>>>
>>> *2. Current review process*
>>>
>>>  2a. How is funding by WMF of movement affiliates (general operations,
>>> and large specific projects) currently determined?  Does the Board engage
>>> with this?
>>>
>>>  2b. Is the funding of affiliate work linked to goals of increasing
>>> equity across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities?
>>> If so, how / how is this visualized?
>>>
>>>  2c. What other mechanisms for focusing and allocating resources are
>>> good examples to replicate?
>>>
>>>  2d. What other bilateral projects (such as joint projects, and grant
>>> or microgrant programs), run by large affiliates and hubs other than the
>>> WMF, currently exist?  Which seem like examples to replicate?
>>>
>>> *3. Desired futures!*
>>>
>>>  3a. What movement bodies are expected to play any role in
>>> recommendations about funding (extending, withdrawing, denying funding) to
>>> new and existing affiliates, now that the FDC is inactive?
>>>
>>>  3b. Is there a possibility of the FDC returning? How do past FDC
>>> members have about this? What was found to be good and bad about the FDC
>>> process?
>>>
>>>  3c.  What elements of this is the global council expected to take up in
>>> its first year? What elements are hubs expected to take up, now and in the
>>> future?
>>>
>>>  3d. What roles do we envision each of {WMF, hubs, affiliates, community
>>> members} to play in reviewing movement budgets/plans and the volume 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-05-18 Thread Samuel Klein
:)   Dimi, do you know of reports on subsets of this, for groups and
projects in Europe?   I discovered to my delight a beautiful summary of WMF
grants made up to 2020
 -- thanks
Guillaume! -- which partly answers the first question. But this does not
include donations + external grant funding that directly supports
affiliates.

One other point -- It was noted that 3a and 3d seem similar.  I updated
these Qs on meta  to be
clearer.  I meant:

 *3a*:  What groups do we envision making individual funding
recommendations?  [timing, who decides, what constraints]
 *3d*:  How do we envision reviewing how things are going?   [peer feedback
on budgets and plans, reflection on the overall balance of funding across
the movement.]

These inform one another, but are distinct.   And the first is more than
just updating current processes: major gaps to fill include funding for
projects under $500, and multi-year funding for infrastructure and projects
-- among the most common requests.

SJ


On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:52 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
dimitar.parvanov.dimit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Samuel,
>
> Thanks for structuring these questions regarding funding and fundraising.
> I just wanted to pitch in a +1.
>
> It would be very useful to have answers to some of these for our public
> facing work. Such questions pop up naturally in conversations and the more
> granular we can be in our answers the better the reaction we get.
>
> Cheers,
> Dimi
>
> На пн, 17.05.2021 г. в 21:13 ч. Samuel Klein  написа:
>
>> Dear list,
>>
>> Risker posed an excellent question in the AffCom thread about *review
>> and development of movement funding*, which could use its own dedicated
>> thread.  Riffing on the theme, here are a dozen questions for anyone who
>> knows part of the answer -- particularly those who helped develop the 2019
>> recommendations on resource allocation
>> 
>>  ,
>> the 2020 approach to hubs and participatory resource allocation
>> ,
>> and the grants strategy relaunch
>> 
>> .
>>
>> We can move this discussion to meta
>>  if the thread becomes unwieldy.
>> (:
>>
>> *1. Current state of movement funding*
>>
>>  1a. Roughly what % of global fundraising is currently allocated to
>> affiliates, or other entities + projects not run by the WMF?  (*my poor
>> guess*)
>>
>>  1b. Roughly how much regional fundraising goes directly to major
>> affiliates?
>>
>>  1c. Which affiliates with annual plan grants have been growing over
>> time, and how is the expansion of existing budgets approved?
>>
>>  1d. Which affiliates have gotten their first APG in the past five years,
>> and how has that developed over time?
>>
>> *2. Current review process*
>>
>>  2a. How is funding by WMF of movement affiliates (general operations,
>> and large specific projects) currently determined?  Does the Board engage
>> with this?
>>
>>  2b. Is the funding of affiliate work linked to goals of increasing
>> equity across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities?
>> If so, how / how is this visualized?
>>
>>  2c. What other mechanisms for focusing and allocating resources are good
>> examples to replicate?
>>
>>  2d. What other bilateral projects (such as joint projects, and grant  or
>> microgrant programs), run by large affiliates and hubs other than the WMF,
>> currently exist?  Which seem like examples to replicate?
>>
>> *3. Desired futures!*
>>
>>  3a. What movement bodies are expected to play any role in
>> recommendations about funding (extending, withdrawing, denying funding) to
>> new and existing affiliates, now that the FDC is inactive?
>>
>>  3b. Is there a possibility of the FDC returning? How do past FDC members
>> have about this? What was found to be good and bad about the FDC process?
>>
>>  3c.  What elements of this is the global council expected to take up in
>> its first year? What elements are hubs expected to take up, now and in the
>> future?
>>
>>  3d. What roles do we envision each of {WMF, hubs, affiliates, community
>> members} to play in reviewing movement budgets/plans and the volume and
>> focus of future funding [re]allocation?
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement funding questions

2021-05-18 Thread Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov
Hi Samuel,

Thanks for structuring these questions regarding funding and fundraising. I
just wanted to pitch in a +1.

It would be very useful to have answers to some of these for our public
facing work. Such questions pop up naturally in conversations and the more
granular we can be in our answers the better the reaction we get.

Cheers,
Dimi

На пн, 17.05.2021 г. в 21:13 ч. Samuel Klein  написа:

> Dear list,
>
> Risker posed an excellent question in the AffCom thread about *review and
> development of movement funding*, which could use its own dedicated
> thread.  Riffing on the theme, here are a dozen questions for anyone who
> knows part of the answer -- particularly those who helped develop the 2019
> recommendations on resource allocation
> 
>  ,
> the 2020 approach to hubs and participatory resource allocation
> ,
> and the grants strategy relaunch
> 
> .
>
> We can move this discussion to meta 
> if the thread becomes unwieldy.  (:
>
> *1. Current state of movement funding*
>
>  1a. Roughly what % of global fundraising is currently allocated to
> affiliates, or other entities + projects not run by the WMF?  (*my poor
> guess*)
>
>  1b. Roughly how much regional fundraising goes directly to major
> affiliates?
>
>  1c. Which affiliates with annual plan grants have been growing over time,
> and how is the expansion of existing budgets approved?
>
>  1d. Which affiliates have gotten their first APG in the past five years,
> and how has that developed over time?
>
> *2. Current review process*
>
>  2a. How is funding by WMF of movement affiliates (general operations, and
> large specific projects) currently determined?  Does the Board engage with
> this?
>
>  2b. Is the funding of affiliate work linked to goals of increasing equity
> across the world, and supporting underrepresented communities? If so, how /
> how is this visualized?
>
>  2c. What other mechanisms for focusing and allocating resources are good
> examples to replicate?
>
>  2d. What other bilateral projects (such as joint projects, and grant  or
> microgrant programs), run by large affiliates and hubs other than the WMF,
> currently exist?  Which seem like examples to replicate?
>
> *3. Desired futures!*
>
>  3a. What movement bodies are expected to play any role in recommendations
> about funding (extending, withdrawing, denying funding) to new and existing
> affiliates, now that the FDC is inactive?
>
>  3b. Is there a possibility of the FDC returning? How do past FDC members
> have about this? What was found to be good and bad about the FDC process?
>
>  3c.  What elements of this is the global council expected to take up in
> its first year? What elements are hubs expected to take up, now and in the
> future?
>
>  3d. What roles do we envision each of {WMF, hubs, affiliates, community
> members} to play in reviewing movement budgets/plans and the volume and
> focus of future funding [re]allocation?
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org