Grants talk:PEG/WM IN/Bootstrap Grant

Active discussions

Strategies and not strategiesEdit

To have a good strategy one goal is the maximum. I see a program with a lot of objectives but in my opinion the most important strategy it's missed.

This strategy is to have a financial incoming in a short period receiving funds and donations.

The question of grant seems to be a collection of good proposal, like a brainstorming, but I don't see a big and well structured strategy. It means that, at the end of the defined period, it's difficult to decide if this grant has been successful. --Ilario 20:01, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[]

I agree with Ilaro - the grant's proposal is missing the overall general strategy plans - i.e. - for example - you are about to produce 10000 promotional brochures. This is OK - but - how is it going to change anything in Indian scale in terms of popularity of Wikimedia projects in the country of more than 1 billion inhabitants? Are you going to spread them in say top 10 Indian universities and then prove that this action is successful because there are – say new 1000 editors from these universities? Or - you are about to produce 10 000 brochures for potential donators. This is OK. But how are you going to effectively reach them? Do you believe that after sending these brochures to selected potential donators you are about to raise enough money to not to ask for similar grant from WMF next year and start to be financially independent? Polimerek 21:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[]

Thank you Ilario and Polimerek for the comments. These are good questions and I will try and answer the common thread. The basic strategy is one of awareness at this stage. India is still at the point where awareness of Wikipedia is low (even if it is the 5th of 6th most popular site but that is mostly thanks to Google's search algorithm) and that you can edit it, how one edits it etc. The goal for the Chapter in its first year, is to increase that awareness through outreach - the brochures are only a support for outreach. I wish we could state, unequivocally, that we will be able to get X new editors and Y new donors on board but given that this is our first year of operations, we are not entirely sure how successful these outreach activities will be and how we will have to tailor them for maximum impact. As for donors, there is a very long regulatory marathon to run with many many hurdles so we don't see that as happening for another year, at least. Gkjohn 04:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[]
I agree specifying X new editors would be a bit arbitrary. However, perhaps we can see more of a plan for these outreach activities? How many outreach events would be held, and where? Having 10000 brochures to support outreach (as Gautam says), seems to suggest you have some numbers in mind. Also, what about the Wiki conference being planned? Do you not intend to divert a more significant portion of this requested grant to finance that event? Ijon 17:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[]
Perhaps we can and would be grateful for inputs - in our plan this is something that scales only when Chapter members actually start to do outreach as well. Without that, it'll always remain small. Given that we are looking at community to scale outreach, we aren't really sure how big this will get and hence planned for a number that is large while also knowing that the collateral can be reused next year and beyond as well. As for the Wiki Conference, a small part of our budget has been apportioned for scholarship support. We are given to understand that the event will both raise its own funding and apply to the WMF for a grant too. Thank you! Gautam John 05:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[]
Can you offer a more explicit answer to Ilario's and Polimerek's questions about strategy? Specifically, we are looking for better-defined measures of success, or milestones you are setting yourselves, to measure against, at the end of the grant work, so assess how effective it was. Thanks. Ijon 17:58, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[]
We'd be grateful for inputs on this as well. As we see it, this is really year 1 for us and we're not sure what meaningful measures of success are in this context. The fundamental underpinning of the strategy continues to be on of awareness and to build a Chapter that has an active member base that will help scale outreach and more. In terms of measures of success, I had suggested a kind of sentiment analysis for precisely this reason, that our year 1 goals are not, and IMHO, cannot be explicit, with hard metrics to drive it. We'd be grateful for inputs on this as well. Gautam John 18:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[]
A "sentiment analysis" is certainly a good feedback to collect; for one, it will allow the presenters to hone their skills and match their own perceptions and expectations to the way their talk was received. But it doesn't seem like a primary, but rather a secondary goal to me.
A good primary goal for an outreach event is to attract new contributors to the projects. This can be in the form of Wikipedia editors, Wiktionary editors, Commons contributors (image uploaders, post-processors, etc.), or even money donors. It is fitting that an outreach event's success be measured by whether it drove people into action.
Note that actually measuring the number of new editors arriving thanks to an outreach event is a little tricky. I think the best odds are when, as you explicitly invite people, during the event, to join and participate in the projects, you ask them to first contact a designated contact person (every outreach event should have at least one extra-patient and newbie-friendly volunteer who is willing to "adopt" and guide any willing newbies the event may generate). That person, then, can keep track of people approaching and citing this outreach event as the trigger for their joining.
So, do you think WMIN could set itself recruit new editors as a tangible measure of success? Ijon 05:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[]

More details neededEdit

This request comprises several different things, and we'd like to see a little more detail. For example:

  • You intend to provide sub-grants at the chapter's discretion. Sounds good. Please describe the governance planned for this -- how do people request a sub-grant, how is it decided, how do people report about sub-grants, and how to handle over- and under-spending.
  • You seem to plan 100(?) Wiki Academies, costing, it seems, ~$20 each? Could you describe the plan for these academies in greater detail? Who would produce these events? Who would speak at them? What do these $20 cover?
  • Have you tried obtaining some of the operating expenses as in-kind donations from local providers (e.g. hosting)?

Thanks! Ijon 17:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[]

  • The current thought process is to adopt the foundation grant process but simplify it for small amounts. As the amounts budgeted are small, the idea is to provide grant/reimburse the expenses for books, which can be used as sources for wikipedia articles.
  • The thought process is to encourage Wikimedians across the country to conduct academies at educational institutions in their city/town. The amount being small, is intended to support incidental expenses with the event like local travel, snacks etc. Brochures will be supported by chapter. Draft projects are published recently. Over the course of next 1-2 months, the community/members will be engaged to firm up the projects.
  • Currently our chapter wiki is hosted by Wikimedia Switzerland chapter. Domain charges are supported by one of the members of Executive committee. We have explored support for consultants but were not successful, as some of the institutions who provide such support were keen on working with large non governmental organizations only. For Wiki Ten celebrations, EC members as part of the community were able to raise funds/in kind support from institutions (National Institute of Advanced studies) and companies (Microsoft Research). It is going to be a challenge to get donations for operational expenses and EC is exploring the same.
  • Hope the above clarifications are helpful. Thanks: Arjunaraoc 04:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[]
Thank you, this is clear now. Please update us if your efforts to find free hosting reach a dead end. Ijon 18:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Operating ExpensesEdit

Hi guys.

First i need to say is a very nice and detailed grant. Congrats for that. But i have a couple of questions about this particular section.

You say that you will hire a consultant for book keeping and liason with Government authorities, a auditor and a legal consultant. Those will be full time employees of Wikimedia India? Or contractors for "one time jobs" only when you need them? If they are full time, the cost in grant cover all the necessary (payment, taxes, other necessary fees)?

Thanks for answer. Béria Lima msg 12:22, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Thanks, Béria Lima. These people will not be full time employees - they will be consultants, so to speak. The auditor is a statutory requirement, the consultant for book keeping is someone who will give us some time a month to maintain our books of accounts and more and the Government liaison is for specific approvals that are needed - for example, to get tax exemption status, receive foreign money and similar such one time approvals. 17:15, 1 July 2011 (UTC) Whoop! Gautam John 17:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[]

WikiConference India 2011Edit

Hi there again. (two different sections to be easier to follow the discussions about each topic)

You people mention the WikiConference India 2011 in the grant, and says that this will be part of another grant. That grant was already started? We have only 140 days to the conference, and despite your amazing skills to organize anything, would be quite difficult do anything without money. I suggest you people to start that specific grant request asap. Béria Lima msg 12:28, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[]

We're working on it, Béria Lima! Gautam John 17:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Wiki-Academy planningEdit

I'd like to see more explicit planning for the Wiki-Academy events in question (realizing they would not all be alike). To give one possible example, please look at Public_outreach/Academy/Goals -- you'll notice goals are clearly identified, and each goal has a measure of success attached, so we can know whether the goal was achieved. Can WMIN provide similar planning for these events? Or at least one model that would be a basis for most of them? Also, what is the timeline for these academies? When and where are they to be held, and where is planning for them going on? Thanks. Ijon 21:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Goal of Wiki academies is to increase awareness about Wikipedia. These are typically 3-4 hours in duration as per current practice in Telugu Wiki for example. First 1.5 hours would be dedicated to presenting about Wikipedia, policies, Input methods for typing in Indian languages if applicable. Next 1.5 hours would be devoted hands on session where participants can get practice of creating article in user sandbox pages, editing existing pages. These are typically held in academic institutions where infrastructure for classroom session(projector) and lab session (Computer with internet connectivity) exist. Brochures on Wikipedia and Chapter will be distributed. Presentation decks already prepared for such events will be reused where available. Participants will be encouraged to become members and also participate in monthly meetups and future events. Having said that the structure will be adopted based on context. Chair persons of City/Language SIG being formed are expected to play a key role in rolling this out in their specific geographical/language areas.
Measure of success is based on satisfaction rating from participants/institution that is collected at the end of the event. An appropriate electronic feedback form will be setup.
Detailed plans will be done on Community Wiki/language Wiki and shared through relevant mailing lists. First Phase of Wiki academies will be July 2011 - Sep 2011. --Arjunaraoc 16:28, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Various FactorEdit

Importance and ValidityEdit

This grant is asked for Wikimedia India related movement by India chapter members, As this chapter was just registered this year, it need financial support from Wikimedia Foundation to proceed further for Wikimedia India movement. So I think this Grant request is valid and should be granted.


25000US $ are asked for from this grant, Amount is not much High for One year functioning of the chapter.But Main thing is how they are utilizing it.All provisional data has been provided by gautham and its a valid requirement as per Indian Cost standards.

Amount ValidityEdit

I think every amount asked for each Activity is valid, Lets see their this year report for this funding, it will be very important for any funding in future. Best of Luck to This chapter for utilizing this funding in a best way they can--Mayur (talkEmail) 12:23, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Thanks, Mayur. Gautam John 12:56, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]


Can this be told that would chapter concentrate on untouched region like Delhi which is the largest education hub in India after they will be granted this grant? Vaibhav Talk 12:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Vibhajain, that is not a question for GAC. That is something you should discuss inside WMIN community. you people don't have a mailing list to discuss that? Béria Lima msg 12:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]
Hi Vaibhav - the usage of this grant will be founded strongly on principles of equity and community participation. I do not have exacting break-ups of how we will use this for specific projects, as of now, but it will be transparent. Gautam John 13:00, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]
I mean that how will be this grant divided into sections like increasing community, reliving small wikis as I do not see a much description of that. Vaibhav Talk 13:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]
Hi vaibhav, India chapter is just registered this year, they haven't started functioning properly. Let see their this Year Activities.I hope they will surely concentrate on this area too.Cheers--Mayur (talkEmail) 13:10, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Again, for more that the suggestions would be appreciated by WM India board (i know they will take those in consideration), this is not the right place to discuss WMIN annual plan. Can you please move that discussion to somewhere else? Béria Lima msg 13:33, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Agreed. Could we move further discussions on this, if any, to the India mailing list? Gautam John 15:41, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]
No need for that i think. Lets concentrate on this grant currently. Vaibhav Talk 17:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Grant request partitionEdit

The request apparently deals with projects of a different kind that could make some difficulties during the perform of its measures of success. Seems like the scope of the projects is fine defined, but some details really are missed, so if we have a separate grant request for the WikiConference India 2011 with more detailed information only about it, or a separate request about some of the other projects, I think we'd have a better view on the all projects that warrant funding. My initial impression is not that something huge is missed, but the variety of projects, strategic planning and goals hardly comply with the various measures of success. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski 14:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]

I think they are planning for separate grant request for WikiConference India 2011, bcoz its a very big event and require a huge amount.Specially grant for WikiConference India 2011 in this request consists of scholarships for this event which can be either included in this grant or a separate grant for WikiConference India 2011.But I think India chapter should be given this credit to arrange scholarships for different participants across India--Mayur (talkEmail) 14:55, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]
Kiril Simeonovski, thank you for your feedback. I am not sure I understand what you mean - could I please ask for a clarification? Gautam John 15:42, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]
Well, seems like the grant comprises things related to more than one project, and that a possible solution is to split it into more than one request with more detailed information about the strategic planning, the goals of the project and its measures of success. That would probably make us more ease in evaluating the application(s). Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski 16:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[]
Understood now. I see your point. We'll reply soon on this. Gautam John 18:59, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[]
The information was provided based on the contributions from few of the EC members. Detailed plans will be done, as Chapter's City/Language subcommittee is formed and gets active in a month. As regards Wiki Conference India, separate Grant request is under preparation and will be updated soon. --Arjunaraoc 16:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[]
Thanks. Sounds promising and I think that such a big project should be reviewed separately. If something else is prepared in a distinct manner, you're encouraged to do the same.--Kiril Simeonovski 18:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[]

Outstanding issuesEdit

Attempting a round-up of still-outstanding issues about this grant request:

  • The GAC has asked for more detailed planning of the proposed activities. For example, you plan to hold about 100 Wikipedia Academies, asking for funding for travel related to it. That sounds fine, but where are these Wikipedia Academies being planned? Who is going to do the actual work? and are the closest pages I could find (though they do not actually mention the Wikipedia Academies), and no one seems to have signed up so far. Are we confident 100 Wikipedia Academies can actually take place in the coming year? The grant talk page mentioned July as the start date for these Wikipedia Academies -- it's July; what is to take place this month, and where is it being discussed/planned? Ijon 00:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Reply Well, without any visibility of funding available for this, it would have been irresponsible of us to start to plan these, right? But your point is well taken. This is something that we had planned to run not just by ourselves but also community run and we can't really ask people to reach out if we can't support them, yet, right? However, the EC will do it's best to take a leadership role in this space. Gautam John 07:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    I think you can certainly plan before securing a budget. So long as you don't make financial commitments (e.g. down payments for venues), there's no harm, and indeed great value, in planning. In this particular case, funding is actually directly dependent on there being a degree of solid planning for this.
    Let me stress that WMIN is not expected to come up with a list of 100 Wiki Academies with dates, locations, venues, and full schedules. But it would be good to see at least a "skeleton" for such an event, some basic model which would be adapted to circumstances of available time, linguistic concerns, and speaker preference. At the moment, I don't see WMIN has something like that in place. We would very much like to see some such general planning take place before we commit to support WMIN with funds for this activity.
    This should not be much of a strain on WMIN, as such planning is required before the first Wiki Academies are to take place anyhow, and your intent is (was?) to hold the first ones round about now anyway. Ijon 21:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    A brochure inviting institutions to co-host Wiki academies is available, which addresses some parts of your question. The course material for Telugu wiki academies is available as per the following details a) Telugu Wiki Introduction, b)Input methods for Telugu, c)wiki policies and creating articles and d) a brochure for distribution. Reports of the previous academies are available -Arjunaraoc 08:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Basis an email discussion with the WMF, we are reducing the number of planned Academies to 5. Gautam John 10:46, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[]
  • The Foundation would like the measures of success to include not just membership growth (itself important), but our movement's more general strategic goal, i.e. editor numbers growth. Ijon 00:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Reply Our thoughts on this are whether such a cause-effect linkage are even possible and if so, how one would link them with specific activities of the Chapter or within the general eco-system? Membership growth is something that could happen little easily. Editor growth can only happen slowly. Can we expect 10% of people who attend academies turning into active editors (>5 edits per month) over a six month period. Gautam John 07:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    I agree we cannot know whether a possible rise in editorship is due to a particular event or not. We can't, and therefore aren't interested, in tracking this on a per-event level. But we can and should expect that the aggregate impact of activities such as 100 Wiki Academies throughout India to serve, among other things, the goal of reversing the editor decline. I agree that setting a specific numeric goal is necessarily somewhat arbitrary, and yet we should set one anyhow, just so we have something to work toward. I assure you no one would consider your work a failure if it turns out only 8% of the attendees became editors! (indeed, at this point, merely achieving a positive figure for the change in editors would be an achievement). Ijon 21:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Thanks, Change in active editors growth can happen due to several factors (including the programs of Wikimedia foundation, India) and it will be difficult to attribute it to Wiki academies. We will go with Gautam's suggestion as target. 10% of attendees becoming active editors over a six month period. We will collect the contact addresses of people attending Wiki academies and will do a poll to ascertain the impact. -Arjunaraoc 08:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[]
  • Could you explain the "participation in global events" item? It comes to about $1100 -- what is it intended to fund? Ijon 00:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Reply Chapter Conference and events of that nature where Chapter representation is required - in particular, This was kept keeping in mind the Fundraising summit, for which chapters are expected to fund their representatives. Gautam John 07:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    So, basically one trip by one person to Europe/US? Ijon 21:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Yes. Arjunaraoc 08:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[]
  • The WMF support of the Mumbai conference should be part of an entirely separate grant, so please remove that item from the grant request. Ijon 00:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Reply The reason for it being here is also because since our Grant Application had a head start, the event could use some money till such time as their grant application came through. The idea is to use it as a seed fund for the conference so even if we don't use it this year, we can use it for next year's conference. Gautam John 07:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Now that the Conference grant is ready, we do ask that you remove this item from the request, so we can handle the requests separately, and more efficiently for both. Ijon 21:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    I suggest that instead of editing the application, it will be better for the grants committee to reduce the grant amount by that amount, if it is not satisfied with the explanation. -Arjunaraoc 08:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[]
    Basis an email discussion with the WMF, we are decoupling the Conference portion of this budget from the current grant application and moving it to a new grant application page. Gautam John 10:46, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[]

Re-purpose of GrantEdit

From this bootstrap grant, as of now, some money is not utilised and we wish to repuspose it as follows: Amount remaining: INR. 143,626.00 Repurpose for A. Staff salary, B. Grants expenses, C. Other pending expenses claims.

  • A. At the time of submitting the Bootstrap grant, there was no requirement of having any staff. However, during the grant period, there was a change in EC and there was a need of staff member as all the new EC members were not from Banglore (office location). Accordingly, our Executive Manager was appointed as part time staff.
  • B. Some grants were approved already and the payment for the same is due.
  • C. Some pending expenses details came in late and need to be paid.

Request to approve repurpose so that these expenses can be cleared quickly. Sudhanwa (talk) 18:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[]

I'm afraid we need a little more than that to approve this repurposing. As discussed earlier, we'd like to see:
  1. a description of the executive manager's duties, the extent of the part time position (is it 4 hours a month or 100?), and a clear rationale for his employment.
  2. a description of "some pending expenses".
  3. an actual budget showing how much is to be spent on these three items.
As an aside, I am surprised to learn that WMIN has approved grants it was not able to actually pay. I understand this puts you in an awkward position, and am happy to make a quick decision about this, but you do need to make the case first, on this talk page, in a reasonable level of detail. The above is inadequate.
(please respond below, and not inline, for better clarity. You can use the numbers to clarify what part answers which question.) Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 19:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[]

Here are the required details:

Executive manager's primary role is to support the members and the community in organizing and running the various promotion programs. Apart from this, he is supposed to see the administration part of the organisation. He is working on part time basis is spends about 100 hrs a month.

As stated earlier, at the time of submitting of Bootstrap grant, there wasnt any need for a staff member. However, later on as it was clear that all the new members of EC will be outside of Banglore, staff was needed to handle and co-ordinate activites in Banglore. Office administration related work is required in Banglore itself. Other community activity support is also handled by him. eg. interacting with various agencies and organisations for planning/organising/co-ordinating/executing various events. He is acting as a single point contact in many such cases.

Details of expenditure:

A. Van yatra by Malayalam community. Amount Rs. 17000

This grant was approved but report came in after Dec. end. Due to this, payment for the grant is pending.

B. Domain renewal - Rs 3961
C. Expenses incurred but to be paid to Arun Ram - Rs 8512.
D. Expenses incurred but to be paid to Viswa Prabha - Rs 5100.
E. Staff salaries - (till previous month) Rs. 84000.

Hope this clarifies your queries. Sudhanwa (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[]

Paying the expenses and grants is approved. The staff expenses will be reviewed this coming week. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 20:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[]

A clearer definition of the executive manager's roleEdit

To approve the remaining portion of this re-allocation request, we would like to see a (much) clearer definition of the role and responsibilities of the executive manager position.

As an example for the lacking clarity, I observe that on the one hand you state above that he will be in charge of the "administration" of the organization, but on the other hand, despite his working for WMIN for months now, your executive manager has not been part of this conversation (nor of others we have had in the past couple of months, e.g. re the recent Pune event), and we find ourselves still engaging only with the Executive Committee. Is this expected to change soon?

More generally, to justify the expenditure on staff, we'd like to see his role as executive manager (as distinct from bookkeeping assistant) clearly defined, and specifically what duties he is to relieve the EC from bearing. I am sure such clarity must exist within the EC, and we ask that it be shared with us and the community.

Also, funding for future months of this salaried position would need to be secured via a separate grant anyway, and these clarifications we are asking for would be needed for that too. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 23:23, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[]

Thanks for the note:

  1. Here is the link to the job description of our Executive Manager 1

2. He has already begun coordinating events for WMIN, our association with IIT Kharagpur for Springfest 2013, Kanya Wizard 2013, BITS Pilani, Goa for Quark 2013 and Creative Commons to name a few.

  1. On a question of policy, such as dealing with Affcom etc, the EC will continue to directly correspond until the Executive Manager has spent some more time in his role.
  2. In terms of administration, Sowmyan takes care of day to day accounting, such as processing of payments for grants etc., meeting statutory requirements with relevant authorities.
  3. Sowmyan is not a Charted Accountant, he only manages the accounts on behalf of the EC, something that was managed by Arjuna and Naveen in the past EC. The Charted Accountant is a person qualified and authorised to make our accounting statements which are shared in our annual report and with relevant authorities once the Auditor approves them.

In the coming months we see Sowmyan:

  1. Continuing to assist us with day to day banking transactions and meeting statutory requirements
  2. Coordinating events across the country
  3. Working with various city and indic communities to see how the chapter can help them in their endevours
  4. Help us aquire our own office space in Bangalore
  5. Mentor interns in case we plan to hire any in the coming year
  6. Any other work that we may deem fit

Ideally, we would have preferred the FDC route, without that option we have to rely on a grant. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 13:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[]

Thanks for this clarification. So despite appearing in the linked job description, I note that your list of current and future duties does not include strategic planning and leadership; it seems rather to be restricted to executing on the wishes of the EC as those are made known. I would respectfully suggest this befits a project manager rather than an executive manager, and point you to The Compass report about WMUK's governance, and specifically about their struggle with devolving responsibilities from the board to their executive director.
Nevertheless, I approve this re-allocation, despite the irregularity of hiring the executive manager before securing his pay.
I look forward to a revitalized WMIN with Sowmyan. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 00:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[]
Thank you, Asaf! In terms of strategic planning and leadership, as I said above the EC is still majorly involved at the moment and will continue to do so until_he_has_spent_more_time_in_his_role. We find it essential that he has a little more experience within the organisation and its surroundings until he begins to handle that responsibility. That said, he has already been invited to take part in a board meeting scheduled later this month where we intend to plan out activities for the upcoming year in detail. We feel that would help him gain exposure to something we see him leading in the future. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 05:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[]
Thank you. I am glad to hear that. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 01:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[]
Return to "PEG/WM IN/Bootstrap Grant" page.