Grants talk:IEG/Consolidate wikiArS to involve art schools

Congratulations! Your proposal has been selected for an Individual Engagement Grant.

WMF has approved partial funding for this project, in accordance with the committee's recommendation. This project is funded with 7310€

Comments regarding this decision:
We look forward to supporting the wikiArS initiative to experiment with ways to scale and sustain into a global program. As discussed, the budget has been scaled back slightly. Funding is not included in this grant for 1) student gifts beyond Wikimedia merchandise, as these do not appear to be a sustainable contribution to the program as currently designed, though we're interested to see if you're able to get these items donated instead, and 2) the 3% buffer, as you may request reallocation of funds from your translation budget if needed for other purposes instead. Can't wait to see how this phase of the program works out!

Next steps:

1. You will be contacted to sign a grant agreement and setup a monthly check-in schedule.
2. Review the information for grantees.
3. Make any necessary scope adjustments to your proposal page, as discussed with grantmaking staff.
4. Use the new buttons on your original proposal to create your project pages.
5. Start work on your project!

Questions? Contact us.

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Consolidate wikiArS to involve art schools

Scoring criteria (see the rubric for background)	Score 1=weakest 5=strongest
Potential for impact
(A) The project fits with the Wikimedia movement's strategic priorities	4
(B) The project has the potential to lead to significant online impact.	4
(C) The impact of the project can be sustained after the grant ends.	3
(D) The project has potential to be scaled or adapted for other languages or projects.	4
Ability to execute
(E) The project has demonstrated interest from a community it aims to serve.	5
(F) The project can be completed as scoped within 6 months with the requested funds.	4
(G) The budget is reasonable and an efficient use of funds.	3
(H) The individual(s) proposing the project have the required skills and experience needed to complete it.	4
Fostering innovation and learning
(I) The project has innovative potential to add new strategies and knowledge for solving important issues in the movement.	3
(J) The risk involved in the project's size and approach is appropriately balanced with its potential gain in terms of impact.	3
(K) The proposed measures of success are useful for evaluating whether or not the project was successful.	2
(L) The project supports or grows the diversity of the Wikimedia movement.	3
Comments from the committee: Some concerns about the lack of measures of success - perhaps giving numbers in terms of quality images etc will help. Can bookshelf translation not be done by volunteers? We appreciate the strong community support from Commons, Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia. With some results already generated from last year, we anticipate the project would be able to demonstrate impact. For wikis where there is no Fair Use, this is an interesting approach to provide illustrations to articles.

Response to aggregate scoring feedback

Hi, thanks for your evaluation. I want to comment some points:

• 1. I enumerated quality and quantity measures of success here (quantity of images, schools, and people, quality feedback, quality of images, media coverage). Maybe I'm missing something. In quantity aspect I gave expected numbers in Project goals.
• 2. The amount for translations only will be for a part of the translations to be done. This is for texts than should to be translated in other languages after. And also for relatively long texts that will have a deadline. I hope that the translators who have been collaborating so far will continue for other texts. If you look the amount in terms of current translation rates in Spain you'll notice that is not so much.
• 5. Yes, but not only the wikis without Fair Use; we are betting on educational images, specially scientific and historical ones, that are useful for all projects.

--Dvdgmz (talk) 15:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi David. Thanks for these clarifications. You may want to update your measures of success section with the targets that you've listed in the project goals area - I do see that you've specified them more clearly there, so please just consider the measures of success section = targets, and update with the specific goals as you see fit. In addition, I see this proposal is really about capacity building to enable WikiArs to grow for years to come, ie, the funding would not be just so that you can make 50 images at the end of 6 months, it would be so that you can spend time finding what works best to make those 50 images, so that in the future WikiArs can make 5000 images and keep growing as a working model. If you agree, you might want to set some specific targets in that measures of success section that demonstrate the scalability that you're aiming for as well. That might be x # of successfully demonstrated strategies documented for re-use by the end of the grant period, x # of new partnerships or programs in development by the end of the 6 month period, x # of volunteers signed-on to help lead the Catalan WikiArs program for the following semester, and so forth. Seem reasonable? Siko (WMF) (talk) 19:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I rebuilt the section following your suggestions. --Dvdgmz (talk) 08:17, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, these look much clearer to me now. Siko (WMF) (talk) 18:21, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Project duration

Hi David, I'm curious about the intended duration of this project - you mention looking for renumeration March through November. Eligible projects should be scoped to 6 months, and because grants are announced at the end of March, that would mean a project is likely to run April - October. Will that scope work for your project? If you are in need of something different than this, please provide more information to help us assess. Cheers! Siko (WMF) (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Siko. I'm already working on the project as a volunteer. I'm willing to step up my dedication from March, "risking" if I don't get the Grant finally. Because this dedication is important to attend the schools that asked to collaborate. Then on autumn maintaining this level of dedication until November will serve to set up the collaborations for the next academic year. After November I would reduce my level of collaboration as a one more volunteer. I know that I must to write a final report on October and have achieved the goals. If having something past October don't match with the IEG I can leave November from the budget, but provably I'll spent my time anyway :-) --Dvdgmz (talk) 09:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, that is helpful. It would be simplest to specify on your project page that this IEG will run w/ renumeration until October, in keeping with the 6 month scope requirement. But of course we expect lots of projects may continue in volunteer capacity beyond 6 months - perhaps part of your 6 month exercise would be to find more volunteers to help you with setup in November so that you don't have to work as hard for the next academic year? Siko (WMF) (talk) 17:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The idea for the next academic year is to do the most of the contacts with schools to decide the students to involve during autumn. And I'm agree with you, one of the aims of the project is to increase the number of volunteers, the priority is to increase the number of advisors and wikimedian tutors, and will be good also if we can build a networks where the coordination tasks will be small and/or shared. I hope we can achieve this!

However I've excluded November and reduced the budget to match the condition of ending the IEG period on October. Thanks for your feedback. --Dvdgmz (talk) 09:16, 19 February 2013 (UTC)