Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Wikimedia Österreich/Impact report form

Thank you for this report

Thank you for submitting this complete report on time. We did notice that you did not provide an answer to the quesiton, “1. As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.” Is this because you have no changes to report, or because that information is included elsewhere in the proposal?

We look forward to reviewing the report in more detail in the coming months, and learning more about your accomplishments in the past year. Please monitor this page for questions and feedback about this report, and reach out to us at any time if you have any questions or concerns.

Cheers, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 17:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Winifred, sorry it was not clear to me that this was a question, I thought it was rather an admonition. There were no deviations apart from hiring a second staff member (which was not planned originally) this fact together with the according rationale has been communicated in various reports. --CDG (talk) 08:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying! We saw more than a few entities were confused by the way we worded this question, and so we will strive to improve this in future iterations of this form. Looking forward to learning more soon! Cheers, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Comments on WMAT’s impact report from FDC staff

Thank you for submitting this complete report! This report is thoughtful and reflective and includes a good level of detail. It is clear that WMAT is using lessons learned to improve future programs as well as its internal processes. WMAT is thinking about issues like the roles of volunteers and staff in program work, especially as volunteers are not always able or willing to thoroughly plan, document and evaluate a project. On that note, while we are glad to see WMAT’s processes and approaches are continuously improving, and that WMAT is working to strengthen governance and accounting systems, in future reports, we look forward to a greater emphasis on the quantifiable data demonstrating the impact of WMAT’s work on increasing participation, increasing reach, and improving quality.

As WMAT has acknowledged, it is difficult to understand if many of these programs are successful since specific program objectives were not provided in the proposal; however, we do appreciate the detailed numbers provided now in terms of content uploaded with support from WMAT and contributors reached (particularly in Free Content Generation programs like WLM and WLPA). This is a great start, and it establishes baselines for future measurement. In future reports, we hope to also see more data on the retention of contributors and the quality and use of the content supported through WMAT’s activities. We are very excited to learn about WMAT’s systemic approach to evaluation that is being developed. WMAT’s programs are tightly focused, and the organization has strong partnerships in place, and we see these as major strengths.

We noted WMAT is poised to make impact next year in its open government data work, and we look forward to hearing more about this. We also noted your request for help and guidance from the WMF program and evaluation team on surveys, and we are glad you have been able to work with them.

We especially enjoyed the insightful learning pattern provided about strategies for broader community engagement with photo contests! Thanks again for the thoughtful approach.

With thanks, and warm regards, KLove (WMF) (talk) 23:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)