Yes, I agree that using a consistent tabular form would help us. We would
know what data we were trying to collect (that would help with planning
too), and we could see how we were going as well as report to members and
to WMF. Thanks Toby for starting our version.

I have also made some formatting changes in the hope it is easier to read
and also changed the date format to YY/MM/DD on the first sheet. If people
think this is okay I'll change the other sheets. I will add my own data
when I can. The *Toodyaypedia* event could be added to the relevant section
(see bottom of matrix for event-type
options)<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Toodyaypedia>
.

I wrote back to the PE&D team about using this matrix to collect data (as
opposed to reporting it) and they said this:

*"As for guidance for collecting.  We so far have only recommended the
collection of user names through opt-in consent so that cohorts may be
tracked via Wiki Metrics at any point. Otherwise people should continue
tracking those things already being tracked for the most part but be sure
to document the program dates/times and cohorts in addition to whatever
tracking information has already been in collection (i.e. many people track
which articles are created or improved during an edit-a-thon or writing
contest - or demographic information about participants). Once we analyze
these pilot data and decide what guidance may be appropriate (key vs.
optional reporting points) we will begin developing tracking forms
consistent with the guidance established (Likely before year's end). ... it
is up to you and should align to the priority areas for evaluation you and
your group establish (i.e., your impact targets) and tracking of program
delivery and cohorts so that data may be traced at any future point."

*
Whiteghost.ink*
*


On 10 October 2013 22:39, Toby Hudson <tob...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Kerry,
>
> My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
> should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
> partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
> submitted).  We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
> I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
> to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.
>
> To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
> linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
> the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
> Grants).  I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
> grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
> Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
> about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run.  I'll
> start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.
>
> Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to edit:
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MTdhMEJHcU9ILUE&usp=sharing
>
> Toby
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Toby
> >
> > You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it
> would
> > be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please put
> > their hands up now?
> >
> > [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
> >
> > Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face.
> Volunteers
> > do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from), because
> they
> > do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer
> organisation
> > is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks" and
> > someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person
> didn't
> > want to do.
> >
> > But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect
> another
> > incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster for
> > cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody wanted
> to
> > do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I fear
> that
> > metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need to
> look
> > at outsourcing that task. As you will all know (but maybe don't
> remember) we
> > do now have a contracting policy
> >
> > http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Contracting
> >
> > and, any moment now (drum roll), John V will be outlining the
> arrangements
> > for the contracting subcommittee so we can get outsourcing happening.
> >
> > If there are tasks we need to outsource, we need to do this now while we
> > still have funds to pay for the work that needs doing. If we delay until
> we
> > have no funds, then we are in a serious catch-22 situation. I note that a
> > number of the chapters who receive FDC funding appear to use at least
> part
> > of those funds to employ project management staff, suggesting that this
> is
> > the kind of thing that is hard to resource with volunteers in most
> chapters.
> >
> > Kerry
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Toby
> Hudson
> > Sent: Thursday, 10 October 2013 4:16 PM
> > To: Craig Franklin; Wikimedia Australia Chapter
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
> > <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> wrote:
> >> I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of
> > great
> >> work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the
> head
> >> that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.  Part
> of
> >> any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're going
> > to
> >> measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we
> can
> >> either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or use
> >> that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't
> make
> >> the same mistake twice.
> >
> > and then:
> >
> >> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
> > and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive
> outcomes
> > for the movement.  Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate
> them
> > all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
> >
> >
> > Hi Craig,
> > Although forward planning of outcome metrics is obviously a good thing
> > for the future, I think we should make an effort now to compile
> > outcomes and metrics for projects, programs and grants that have
> > already taken place.  Is there an onwiki page for this, or a table to
> > fill out for each project or grant we have undertaken?  I know there
> > are some reports linked from here
> > http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Reports#Small_grants but surely there
> > are more hanging around?  Even though you can't enumerate them off the
> > top of your head, we *should* be able to enumerate them if everyone
> > writes up the outcomes of projects we've individually been involved
> > with.  I know there are huge outcomes as a result of the SLNSW
> > training and residency.. but maybe they have not been tabulated into
> > reportable dotpoints?
> > Toby
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Reply via email to