My understanding is that nobody has suggested that if WM-UK were to
give an unrestricted donation to this committee that it would
supersede our current practices for offering non-UK grants, such as
the grant for GLAMcamp in December.

As well as having little or no control over outcomes or (probably) how
they are reported, this represents a move away from allowing our
volunteers to assess the suitability of grants (with minimal staff
support) to paying chapter and WMF staff to spend their time every
week sitting on a funding committee. Though I have asked for an
estimate of end to end costs and associated increase or saving on
transaction costs the only answer received so far was "negligible"
which leads me to suspect there is no plan for WMF or WM-DE staff to
book or report on the time they spend every week dealing with the
analysis of proposals against the WMF mission (presumably not against
the WM-DE mission) or the associated reporting requirements needed for
tax and governance purposes.

Though I understand that 3 grants have been given, in addition to any
reports by grantees, it is unclear at this point how these grants are
openly reported by the PGC though presumably these reports will
clarify how the assessment of proposals against the mission was
achieved.

My understanding is that as a newly conceived committee, the PGC has
yet to publish a stable policy that we could access against, say,
Charities Commission guidelines or judge as an effective or efficient
use of our charitable funds. I remain unclear as to why the money
WM-UK provides to the WMF requires an additional supplement beyond the
amount that the WMF has earmarked for the PGC ($25,000) as it would
seem more effective to increase our grant to the WMF with the
exception that they would in turn increase their grant budget if we
feel the money is better placed there rather than the complexity of
going through this unproven process.

Until the processes are stable and there is a track record of
successful outcomes, donating money to a new committee of this type
seems to introduce risk rather than providing any efficiency savings
even though there are obvious benefits to chapter staff working in
this way with WMF staff.

I have raised some questions at
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:Participation> and I
encourage anyone interested to read through the most recent questions
and answers there and consider taking part in improving the proposed
process.

Cheers,
Fae
--
http://enwp.org/user_talk:fae
Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/faetags

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to