Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/General Support Fund/Open Foundation West Africa Multiyear Grant 2024/26

< Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund‎ | General Support Fund
Latest comment: 4 months ago by Bovlb in topic Review of Wikidata experience
Learn more about this page

Proposal Feedback & request for response edit

Thank you for submitting your application. After the review process please find the feedback - comments and questions below for your response;

  • Which local languages will be included in the language community project?
  • What are the outcomes of the Wiki Challenge program? And where the activities conducted and their impact? Do you have any program reports that you can share with us to understand the impact of the program.
  • How are they going to measure the volunteers' retention? And if there are any clear metrics from past experiences that you have found to be the most useful in measuring.
  • How many schools are using Kiwix in their institutions? What’s its impact so far and how have you been measuring it?
  • The plan also includes activities on Wikiquotes and Wikisource, but not indicated in the proposal.
  • Is the staff going to work full-time or part-time, or both? More details are needed and with it an understanding of volunteers' roles.
  • Do the metrics concern only the first year or the whole duration? Or do you hope to continue or change them after every year?
  • Is there any strategy to ensure inclusivity across the regions?
  • Why choose not to work with international partners, especially for the ones that have executed similar programs in the past?
  • Please share how in the past you have measured the impact of the work from a participant perspective in the past and if not, how are you planning to measure the impact of projects on the participants, and get their feedback? Where can this information be found by other community members keen to learn about the impact of your work?
  • We are keen to learn about how you assess for organizational and community health? Especially as an established organization seeking to continuously grow and support more communities.
  • How much are they participating in the most important things that are happening in the movement, specifically in the MCDC?
  • In the budget;
    • We find items related to accommodation to be unclear? Would you say more , especially since there is not additional information provided.
  • We see that 3 programs have a micro-grants element to it including - Africa Wiki Challenge / Kiwix / Localised Campaigns - what is the sustainability of the micro-grant program, who would be participating , what are the expectations of those participating and how about the capacity in the organization to actually manage successfully the programs? We are unclear on the purpose.
  • The metrics are very low - compared to last years metrics.
  • We are keen on the involvement of the community in informing the work the affiliate focuses on and how you report back to them and their involvement in the leadership of the programs. With this in mind, please share the rationale used for the personnel costs which we find high in comparison to similar organizations in the region.
  • Lastly, we see OFWA interest in significant growth including through multiple programs and are keen to learn how you are ensuring that there is a meaningful and deep analysis of the impact of the programs and in a manner that ensures quality delivery and efficiency of all resources, including team capacity. How can we learn that the programs you are working on and have been working on for years now are actually working and delivering the value needed by community members and the movement at large?

Response to Proposal Feedback & request for response edit

NB:The responses below are arranged chronologically to correspond to the questions above

  • Our language community comprises mainly the Akan and Ga community.
  • Over the course of the last three years, the Africa WIki Challenge has had a major influence on the continent.
    • The project has ensured reach to our French communities by ensuring all activities are planned online and with French interpretation assistance.
    • We host a number of virtual trainings as part of the AWC Campaign, specifically for novice and seasoned Wikimedians looking to improve their abilities on diverse Wikipedia projects. The AWC Africa Day Campaign this year also included a training session on how to use materials from the AU library to reference/cite Wikipedia articles. A librarian from Uganda was invited to conduct the session
    • We have also seen increased participation from over 20 countries in Africa since the inception of the project and put a huge focus on reaching countries without a Wikimedia community.
    • In the coming years we look forward to the following outcomes:
      • Expand our work in 3 new African countries (that may not currently have a Wikimedia presence)
      • To further build capacity of volunteers on the continent
      • To further mentor and support the formation of a planning group in Ethiopia that emerged as a result of the work on the AWC. We want to help them realize their goals and to be self-sustaining.
      • We want to support new communities that need help organizing their communities
      • Increase content in local languages (specifically GA and Twi) on Wikipedia through thematic campaigns


  • We utilize the events dashboard as one tool to track volunteer participation and retention. We keep track of every username we've recruited, developed, and trained over the years, as well as their contributions on an annual basis. Annually we award active and exemplary editors to encourage editors to keep editing. To keep track of their engagement and contributions, we additionally employ additional contribution tracking tools including keeping a database that allows us to engage any member that is inactive for a while. We also recognize that not all volunteer efforts can be monitored by the metrics dashboard. All volunteer efforts, whether on or off the wiki, have collectively aided in the development of the community, and we make an effort to ensure that even those contributions that are not monitored by the metrics dashboard are acknowledged. Additional contributions that we take into account are: organizing events; having our volunteer hub leaders assist with event preparation and community outreach; volunteering for juries; mentoring new community members; speaking on community calls; leading training sessions, amongst others. We ensure that their efforts are rewarded and supported where needed.
Another approach that we use is our volunteer journey, so when someone joins our community we have a series of training that they must complete after which they receive certification and are fully added to the community. They are then introduced to 2 tiers of membership and are encouraged to be in the active tier which comes with perks such as being invited for the active editor training (advanced Wiki training), Annual community awards, the right to vote at AGM, etc.
  • We have about 35+ schools using Kiwix at the moment. There are various ways we measure impact. Before the official launch of the program we conduct a need assessment during the pilot project. To measure impact and track progress there are various activities the volunteers do. One is to conduct a needs assessment at each school; this includes understanding the resources that will be helpful for the students and educators. We also ask them to collect data on various information that will enable us to analyze our impact and conduct follow-up calls. Some of these include the number of working computers that were successfully installed with the software, information about student-to-computer ratio, how students do research, etc. For every school we visit, we conduct these assessments to understand the situation on the ground and the challenges. We also stay in touch with the ICT teachers and head teachers to follow up on how the resources are being utilized by the students in the school, whether they are still working well, and if there are updates or new computers that need the software installed. We run post-project evaluations after 6 months and at every 6-month interval to understand the usage of the software and the newer needs of the students (to inform future updates and resources). These are ways we measure and track usage and impact. Even though we recognize that there is no easy way to track usage, our ad hoc approach seems to work and informs us on what resources seem useful to students and what needs lie ahead in the future.
  • We have been hosting community trainings on Wikiquote because most of our community initiatives, such as the Africa Wiki Challenge and Hub events, incorporate this training even if it isn't stated clearly in the program. We are eager to explore Wikisource as a new field with the community and have invited professionals to contribute by sharing their knowledge through our training sessions.
  • The roles mentioned on the current grant request are not new staff roles, these are existent roles and are all full-time.
  • Kindly find below a copy of the updated metrics as the metrics were not updated. These are reflections of our annual metrics with a growth rate of 10%. These metrics are for the first year with anticipated projections year-on-year.
Metrics name Target Description
Number of all participants 1000 Our initiatives will seek to draw participants beyond Ghana and involve participants in other African countries and hopefully beyond the continent as well.
Number of all editors 600 Editors will include people of different nationalities, gender, region, and other groups to highlight the importance of diversity.
Number of new editors 800 ✔
Number of retained editors 300 ✔
Number of all organizers 50 Through our flagship projects like Kiwix4schools Mentorship Program, Africa Wiki Challenge and the Africa Wikimedia Technical Community, we intend to involve 50 organizers
Number of new organizers 20 ✔


Wikimedia project Created Edited or improved
Wikipedia 6000 8000
Wikimedia Commons 2000 500
Wikidata 5000 2000
Wiktionary
Wikisource 100
Translatewiki 5000 5000
Wikimedia Incubator 500 400
MediaWiki
Wikiquote 1000 500
MediaWiki
Wikivoyage
Wikibooks
Wikiversity
Wikinews
Wikispecies
Wikifunctions / Abstract Wikipedia
  • we don't have any other qualitative or quantitative metrics for now.


Other Metrics Description Target
How volunteers organizers felt supported and appreciated Provide a support system for volunteers. We have done in the past by providing support like;Letters of recommendations for school or job, Transportation support eg transportation for hub leaders esp, Data support to participate in selected events and trainings, letters for travel support, short term volunteer work with data stipend eg campaign Jury work, interpretation work, etc At least 100-200 people will be supported for various request aspects by the end of the year
New Wiki accounts created Ability to help volunteers create their Wikipedia account is the first step. Through our programs we want to ensure that as many people get to create their Wikipedia account to kickstart their editing journey Create over 400 new wikipedia accounts in the year.
Advocacy and awareness creation of Wikipedia Awareness creation is of significant important as we have seen from previous trainings there is low awareness that everyone can edit Wikipedia. For most people although they have used Wikipedia for their research, they have never realised the edit button was a call. Wikipedia Awareness in secondary and primary schools through our Kiwix Program,Engaging Universities and other tertiary institutions for training and awareness campaigns.

Partnering with Education bodies to collaborate on program eg UNESCO WorldBook Capital program etc

More inclusive opportunity for women and underrepresented communities We will organise women focused trainings to bridge content and skill gaps with women from our community and beyond. We also want to include the voices and participation of disability groups All trainings will include women, 3 women focused trainings in a year, mini contest and campaigns to bridge content gap about women, 2 training for disability communities and including disability communities in our town hall meetings.
Skill building Offering Skills building opportunities for the community including relevant skills for organisers. Eg grant writing, community engagement skills management, etc At least 50 people will receive specialised skills to enhance their work as organizers including new organisers
Volunteer feel appreciated Including awards, souvenirs during training and having our local community Wikimedian of the year award and Hub of the year awards One Hub leader and Hub of the Year Award, Top contributor of the year, other sub categories awards

Link to theory of change:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qPY9Ur_VJc0dzk3ThIGLQb4Ahl6mZhvSvBaZEyL7e5w/edit?usp=sharing

  • We have employed several strategies to ensure inclusivity in the region. While our headquarters is in Ghana, and most of our training has historically benefited this location, we represent an organization with a regional focus. Despite this, we've taken steps to promote inclusivity through international campaigns and programs spanning over 30 countries across the continent and the diaspora. These initiatives have not only enhanced capacity but also involved collaboration with user groups and organizations, gathering valuable insights and encouraging participation from both wikimedians and non-wikimedians. Below are some othert inclusivity strategies we employ:
    • To ensure community voices shape our programs and meet their needs, we conduct annual community and program evaluations, seeking feedback at the end of each program. This process aids our understanding of how to keep the community engaged and address their current and future needs.
    • Our mentorship program e.g. the Kiwix4schools Africa Mentorship program embraces a hybrid learning environment, eliminating time and location barriers to skill-sharing which allowed many participants across the continent to participate and complete the program successfully. Our virtual newbie programs have ensured that location does not become a barrier to accessing skills. Our virtual trainings have not only benefited participants in Ghana but also beyond (including but not limited to Nigeria, Cote d’ivoire, Togo, Liberia, Gabon, Tanzania, etc.). Constant feedback gathered has helped us identify areas for improvement.
    • We've decentralized our hub activity training sessions to make hands-on training opportunities accessible to members in other regions with limited Wikimedia training. By partnering with Tech Hubs in those regions, we have been able to secure spaces where community meetups are at a minimal cost making it sustainable.
    • We also ensure that the community is supported to participate in international conferences, a notable one is Wikimania. Since Covid 19 we have supported our hubs to host pockets of in-person Wikimania and provided data scholarships to participate virtually. We have even supported scholarship recipients in ways that the WMF hasn't, like providing financial support for visa purposes and actual monetary support for areas that their scholarships don’t cover.
    • We have also ensured that we have in-house interpretation support for our international campaigns. This has helped us provide interpretation support and reached out to many non-english speaking participants through our programs.
    • During our programs and AGM, we award the highest female contributor as a form of motivation to female participants and also encourage other females to actively contribute.
    • Our work focuses on also activating communities and we have done so with communities in more than 3 countries till date.
    • We hold a key place in creating a developer community on the continent, our flagship Africa Wikimedia Technical Community (AWMT) is a way to connect with Wikimedians who wish to contribute beyond the regular pathway of editing.
    • All of these strategies will be intensified and adjusted to meet prevailing needs of the community after every annual evaluation.
  • We work with several international partners to achieve the goals of our projects. For example, we have partnered/collaborated either formally or unofficially with organizations like Africa Union & Afrocrowd to scale the Africa Wiki Challenge in the diaspora and the Americas, Kiwix, and UNESCO Ghana to localize content on the Kiwix software for our Kiwix4schools project, WhoseKnowledge and Wikimedia Sweden for our gender campaigns and Wikimedia Norway for support on photographic campaigns, etc. We very much look forward to more collaborations as our arms are wide open for collaborations where our projects align
  • We gather information and input for the majority of our initiatives both before and after our programs/projects, and then we analyze the data to determine the impact we are having. We normally don’t publish those internal evaluations but we use the data to provide learnings through blog posts like this Kiwix evaluation blog post. Some have also been shared during grant discussion meetings, annual mid-point and annual grant reports, Wikimedia Education newsletters, Social media handles, during training, office hours, and conversation time.  We also conduct annual evaluations of our work by surveying the community to learn more about what is or not working.
The list below include some of the evaluations we have conducted over the years:
  • We assess the community health through our town hall meetings, AGM, and Annual Evaluations Program. These Town Hall Meetings are meetups where the community get to meet the staff to share their approvals, concerns, or praises for the work being done. This year we have also engaged an external evaluator to conduct an independent evaluation on our programs and community health. While we understand that not everyone is comfortable showing their face to speak to things, various ways and tools have been used to gather feedback from the community. Our friendly and transparent work environment also allows team members to share their views and air their grievances at will through the appropriate channels. Weekly team meetings also serve as check ins on team members. The annual team retreat is a great way to help team members reflect, bond and share ideas for organizational success
  • Members from our team and community members have joined previous  conversations around the MCDC. We invite community members to attend these conversations by sharing the invitations to our community page. The recent MCDC presentations at the Africa Baraza is an example. In the future we plan to organize virtual office hours to engage and enlighten community members  about the ongoing MCDC. The organizational leadership has been critically paying attention to the conversations and will be participating in the Wikimedia Summit 2024 to contribute towards the conversations.
  • Ghana has 16 regions but OFWA is headquartered in Accra. As such, programs that require the presence of members across the country like our Train the Trainers require accommodation for members coming from different regions.
  • About OFWA Micro Grants:
    • These 3 programs have microgrant programs incorporated to ensure inclusivity in participation and enable us to provide support for smaller communities especially who may not have access to consistent funding support.  For the Africa Wiki Challenge, we realized from our experience during this year's AWC implementation of the Africa Day’s campaign that it increased participation of local organizing as we were able to support many communities including smaller communities ensuring inclusivity. This also meant that these groups did not apply for a rapid grant which directly takes pressure away from the WMF
    • Previously we have supported community microfund with the Kiwix program. We have always adopted a microfund process to support volunteers to take Kiwix to schools in their communities. Through this volunteer model and microfund process of implementation, we have been able to take Kiwix to different regions in Ghana and beyond its shores without burdening volunteers with the need for writing proposals and lessening the burden of multiple rapid grants to the WMF around this initiative. This has also made it easy for volunteers who require funds less than the rapid grant threshold. This method has proven to be cost-efficient and sustainable.
    • The microgrant allocation for the Localized campaign is meant to create an outlet or room for community members to freely think and be innovative with project ideas. Under this grant they are allowed to tag their project ideas to existing ones such as the Founders Day writing contest, Wiki Loves Festivals, etc. but are also allowed to come up with completely new ideas. This is meant to give them the free will to think and not worry about meeting the current rapid grant thresholds and now also burdening the rapid grant process.
  • The current metrics were from the previous year and was not updated. This was an oversight on our path and has been updated accordingly.
  • The salaries mentioned in our request are competitive and correspond to the market value of these roles within the NGO space in Ghana. For example, the salary of the ED of OFWA is comparable to the salaries of WiR’s in the region and lower than the professional rate for a Project Manager tabled for a WMF-curated project such as the Wikidata4Education.
  • We acknowledge OFWA's interest in the substantial growth and implementation of multiple programs. Ensuring a comprehensive analysis of our program impact is our core mandate which is crucial for delivering quality and using resources efficiently. This includes looking at our team's abilities. We use clear goals and important indicators to see if our programs are working as they should. We always collect feedback at the end of every program to understand how our programs are making impact and how they are being perceived by the participants/community. We also listen to what the people in the community think about what we're doing through our annual internal evaluation and external evaluation to assess our brand and community health. We have realistic KPIs for staff to ensure that their goals and objectives can be tracked and impact can be measured.
Additionally, up until 2022, we have had limited staff capacity, with the 3 full-time team members, 10 volunteers managing our hubs, and board members, we believe we have the capacity to efficiently and meaningfully manage the aforementioned programs using KPI’s .
We're always keeping an eye on how things are going and making changes if we need to. Our team is always learning new things to get better at what they do, so our programs run smoothly.
We regularly share reports about how our programs are doing. These reports show what's going well and where we might need to improve. We're happy to share more details or stories about how our programs are helping people and making a positive impact.

Expert reviewer - GLAM edit

I was pleased to read about the past collaboration here (https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/04/24/ofwa-and-goethe-institute-host-wiki-skills-for-librarians-workshop-ghana/) however, I'm curious about how these trainings are building on other offerings in the region (i.e. https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Global_Open_Initiative_Foundation/Wikidata_workshop_in_Ghana_for_Librarians_(27_Februay_2020)/home or https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Community_Fund/General_Support_Fund/GOIF_2024_Annual_Grant )

Moreover, it would be interesting to reflect on sustainability. For instance, rather than implementing the course in the North. Why not reflect on what happened with the 20 trainees from the southern sector? Did they keep editing? Do they use Wikidata now to query for resources? Also, can this course be turned into a Learn Wiki platform or a Booklet?

Related to this last point, I think it would be very beneficial to pair the participants’ quotes (like the ones they selected in their diff post) with some reflection on the products (Wikipedia edits, Wikidata items, or SPARQL queries) that were created by trainees. Beyond Outreach Dashboard data (which would also be useful) it would be nice to have some insights on the edits, and editors.

ANS - Thank you for the recommendations. All are well noted for future improvements. One of the ways we have ensured the sustainability of participants in these programs is by enrolling them on our main community platforms, where they get the opportunity to participate in other online and in-person programs and receive training to further build their capacity. This has been very helpful and impactful in ensuring continued engagement. At the moment, the librarians who have been recruited and trained from both the southern belt and the northern belt have been grouped into one WhatsApp group for further training engagements. During the Africa Day campaign, for instance, some of the librarians participated in the ongoing trainings that were organized. In the coming year, we have developed strategies to continue to improve their skills and work on bridging specific content gaps on Wikidata. One of the librarians in the Upper West region collaborated with the Tamale Wiki Hub to take Wikipedia training to their institution to train other librarians. We have some librarians who continue to do small edits and are still learning new things to improve their editing skills. We have also observed that they try to do some of the editing during training, especially when there is a contest. We hope that as part of our future strategies, we can organize mini-contests for them to challenge them to put their skills into practice. Additionally, we plan to organize workshops and webinars to address the specific needs and challenges faced by librarians. These training sessions will focus on advanced editing techniques, citation guidelines, and best practices for contributing to Wikidata. Our goal is to empower the librarians with comprehensive knowledge and ensure their continuous growth on their volunteer journey. We are also going to be working with these librarians to improve the course content and publish for usage by other communities or the larger movement.
We plan to also engage one more year with them to check their impact on the Wikis as it's not easy for a complete newbie to start and get it right immediately. We will guide and engage them through mini activities.

Expert reviewer - Education edit

Latest comment: 6 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Reviewer 1: Overall Feedback and recommendations;

The proposal had a gap in how volunteers are involved in the planning and form of communities endorsement.There are also no feedback mechanisms in the proposal.The element of community involvement is not stated clearly.

Clearly, the proposal looks at recruitment, but if they could provide a comprehensive sustainability plan and outline how they have retained members or editiors to contribute with over 1000 editors trained according to the proposal.

The proposal lacked the aspect of how the Train the Trainers implement the Kiwix project in their hubs.This needs to be explained.

Kiwix4Schools need to be looked at critically in its implementation and also there should be an independent evaluation on the project after it has been inplemented in the various institutions. 3 months to 6 months after it has been implemented.That is how the true impact on Kiwix can be measured.

Strengths of the proposal:

The proposal articulated well-thought-out education. However, the alignment with the various education projects and integrating curriculum into Kiwix is not very feasible, as is the thought process of working with experts within the curriculum development sectors.

In governance, what is the role of the board, and are there any inputs the board makes that are documented on Kiwix? Kiwix4Schools implementation comes with both wikimedians and non-wikimedians What are the technical gaps that have been identified in the past while running the project, and do you offer a transparent structure where volunteers can apply for funds to implement the project?


Other questions: I also noted that I was concerned about the currency in the local currency, which is in dollars, but the local currency is the cedis in Ghana.

Is there funding already received for KIWIX4Schools from other sources? if so it should be stated in the proposal.

ANS -The model of implementation of the Kiwix project has been explained in this Diff blog. Regarding the Train the trainers, we only adopted the model for the Kiwix4schools Africa Mentorship program as the Train the Trainers is a completely different program. It was essential in replicating that model in providing mentorship support aside from the self paced learning and online training. The selected mentors of 10 were trained and coached to be mentors. Most of them have had previous experience with implementing Kiwix. This experience was very crucial skills needed to ensure the momentum of practically imparting it to others.
As mentioned in our responses above, we currently run post-project evaluations after 6 months and at every 6 months interval to understand the usage of the software and the newer needs of the students (to inform future updates and resources).
The Kiwix program makes available complementary educational resources to schools including tailored content from Wikipedia and its sister projects, Tedx videos, Project Gutenberg Library, Phet interactive simulations, etc.
The board of OFWA doesn’t make direct inputs into the programming of Kiwix as these decisions are normally made based on the data collected through our evaluations. For example we realized through our evaluations that the Phet interactive simulations were more useful for highschool students taking the science, as this directly imparted their learning. This informed the decision around installing that for highschools that offer science. The microgrant program is open and can be applied to by anyone, with set criterias of who can merit the fund. The applications are reviewed in 2 stages and final candidates announced.
Yes, the local currency of Ghana is the cedi but some vital expenses like rent are incurred directly in dollars and as such our funds are held in a dollar account to limit devaluation due to depreciation of the cedi. You will notice from the budget that the expenses incurred directly in cedis are quoted both in cedis and their dollar equivalents.
There is no funding that we have received yet for the Kiwix4Schools program. We however have remaining funds from the Wikidata4Education project which we are currently in communication with the WMF to see if it can be applied in some sense towards experimenting content creation and localisation of resources for the Kiwix program. So our discussions with the WMF doesn’t currently affect our mentorship and installation programs, however if it's approved to apply this area of work we can definitely work with the grants team to exclude that from our final grant amount requested.


Reviewer 2: Overall Feedback and recommendations;

Measures to maintain or improve community health, safety, and inclusivity are considered.In OFWA case, the community is growing fast. So the risks associated to community health, safety and inclusivity might be mostly related to underdevelopped governance of the UG.

  • For example, I could not find any public information regarding the board, the history of the board, the election system, the resolutions or any process generally... This might create seeds of disagreement within the membership, in particular with budget and visibility increase. A situation not unknown in other countries...
  • OFWA delivers a significant amount of money through micro-grants and intends to increase this in the coming years. But there is at the moment a clear lack of transparency with regards to which groups are being funded and which are not, and what the criterias are. Not only can this creates seeds of disagreement within the local communities, but it could also create instability within the general micro-funding ecosystem.. The issue is not to question whether mentors should receive money, or how much, or for what. The issue is more about which decisions are necessary to have a process which would be fair and somewhat transparent, so as to avoid creating tensions between beneficiaries and non beneficiaries, or between members and leadership
  • It is probably not illegal at all in Ghana (in some countries, it would be illegal). But from a wikimedia collective perspective, it is not suitable. I would consider that as very highly problematic for the safety of the UG members. But from the perspective of the grant, I would mostly see it as a sign of a rapidly growing organization which has not yet put into place governance policies that would be needed at this point and where staff might not be aware of the risks that can exist when disclosing private information of others.
  • I have zero idea whether friendly space policy is mentionned and/or enforced during events.
  • On the bright side
  • on the representativity side : I notice there is an Education related person on the board, which is a net positive given the importance of Education programs for OFWA.The leadership is mixed female/male.

Feedback from the community

The currently running Education programmes are;

Beyond Education programmes, it has been difficult for me to find evidence of how projects impacted volunteers. The Africa Wiki Challenge portal page still refers to 2021 and does not provide any specific feedback from former participants : https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Africa_Wiki_Challenge . Today is the first day I hear about Wiki Loves Festival and I could not find any info on meta about it.

Generally speaking, I believe OFWA is actually collecting volunteers feedback, and is providing report or final summary of many of their activities, on their blog, or on meta, or on diff.

But they do not seem to store this evidence in a central place, nor provide links for evidence in their grant submission or in their annual plan.

Valuable transferable methodologies, tactics, or strategies are applied (e.g. in a thematic area or in community revitalisation). It does not feel like a strong point of OFWA.

  • Some programs seem to be very upskilling oriented (eg, Kiwix mentorship program in the Education sector, or AWMT on the tech side). But the upskilling is for the individual
  • Some team members (eg, Ruby) regularly presents the Kiwix program in conferences, webinars etc. which is a great way to learn more about the program and how it is implemented (tactics/strategy)

The OFWA meta page is outdated and very empty (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Foundation_West_Africa ) Picking up the flagship program of OFWA (Kiwix4School), the meta page contains only basic information and none that would include valuable transferable methodologies (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Kiwix4Schools_Project). The website blogposts are not really designed for knowledge transfer either (https://www.ofwafrica.org/blog/kiwix4schools-mentorship-africa-graduation-ceremony-of-mentors) In short, none of the three portals include links to some of the valuable info shared by OFWA elsewhere (such as a webinar, training slides, tools used by the org), making it difficult to reapply the experience.

In practice, Wikimedia organizations which wants to know more about what another Wikimedia UG is doing, go visit their meta portal page, their website, but also their GFS report or GFS grant request. Those two latter may be valuable places to find summaries and links of interest.Not the case for OFWA, which hardly provide information (eg, last year report: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Community_Fund/Open_Foundation_West_Africa_Annual_Plan_2022/Final_Report )


Rather than (or before) growing too much and multiplying programmes, OFWA should take the time to create or refine its processes and governance framework. Adopt suitable policies to its state of development. And be transparent about its decision processes to facilitate learning and interaction with the rest of the wikimedia communities and organizations.

The proposed scale and significance of the contributions are realistic. The Kiwix4Schools program seems realistic and very significant.

The proposition regarding the AWMT seems very interesting and engaging. With clear support of the WMF (training), plans for final documentation, mentorship program, it seems a valuable, unique, and feasible program to implement, of high value for the African communities.

The HUB approach with micro-funding, training the trainers workshops, thematic meet-ups, support to join « external » programms (such as WLA) seems a totally relevant approach for a growing community accross the country. Supporting the new Ethiopia UG with training and mentorship seems also logical and helpful.

I would be a little bit more cautious with regards to Africa WikiChallenge. First because the contest seems to have frozen at some point in 2021, and never occured (or if it did... participants, results, impact, announcement etc. are missing. Whatever the reason why it « stopped », it would have been relevant to mention it and to draw lessons in the Annual Plan or in the Grant request. It does not seem to have run in 2022 (why?). In 2023, it was essentially replaced by the Africa Day programme carried by WMF/African Union.

Second because the WikiChallenge is presented at including photo shoots but is happening at the same time than Wiki Loves Earth and just before the WPWP program (July-Aug) thus being a duplication/overlap with similar projects). Third because the current proposition does not present any figures/metrics that would allow me to estimate whether it is realistic or not, and whether the end result would be significant. I would suggest that this program needs clarification. Am I missing something ?

From an educational perspective, I would also suggest to OFWA to associate with the recent initiative led by WMF and announced in August, to « train » african editors with the basics of Wikipedia editing.

Wiki Loves Festivals overlaps greatly with the Wiki Loves Folklore initiative.

Last, the metrics are vastly underused. Metrics are a very complicated matter. But limiting them to a very vague « number of editors » or « number of entries to wikidata » is really sad. Also the figures given seems to come out of nowhere. For example, wikidata improvement: 500... is very bizarre as this figure can be reached with next to zero effort. In last year report, OFWA reported 113,151 improvements.

OFWA has great programmes and could imagine more challenging and interesting metrics reflecting its objectives. For example « Integrate Kiwix into school curricula in Ghana » could be a yes/no metrics. « Wikimedia Ethiopia is recognised as affiiliate ». « we adopt a data privacy policy for our members ». « satisfaction survey responded by at least 80% of our members show a satisfaction of at least 2/3rd of our respondants  » etc.

The timeline of the delivery demonstrates feasibility.

This question is difficult to answer as the timeline is fairly vague (very). https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJRNBXujaWJzJnVnZJHm3-8qFb60xzgAw79sIpN9i4g/edit#gid=0

Budget:

Main point of attention would be the high number of « micro-grants » that would be distributed by OFWA. Either for

  • Kiwix4School 5 microgrants
  • AWC : 15 microgrants
  • other microgrants : 20

When those micrograntees are selected without disclosure, it participates to a culture of « non transparency ». Some grantees might receive grants from other wikimedia « funders » : bad apples may not be detected or micrograntees might have too many engagements, leading to underperformance or to burn-out. Or great grantees might not be revealed. There used to be a time when WMF limited rapid grant to 3 max per individual. Current set-up with multiplication of micro-funding plateforms is in effect cancelling this limit. A quick look at the Africa Day microfunding shows micro-grantee « organizers » who are recipiendary of way more than 3 grants at a given time.

It also creates more risks of COI when juries are not disclosed.

Second point of attention would be on the apparent lack of governance policies (such as COI policy for board members)


Strengths of the proposal: Kiwix4Schools is a major programme for Education. Currently implemented at a rather straightforward level (set-up in schools and light awareness programme). It would deserve deepening the programme and extending it with more partners.

The country is big, with youth full of energy and desire to learn and grow. OFWA strength is a growing network of hubs, with many volunteers willing to take on the rôle of local leaders and trainers. OFWA has a unique position in that network and the ability to impact.

OFWA is well positionned to grow a network of African techs and developers it would propose training to.


Other questions:

OFWA does not seem to share any public information about its governance principles. The information about the policies and processes adopted are not described on the meta page, nor on the website, not mentionned in WMF 2022 report, nor on the annual plan. How is the board elected ? Replaced ? Is there is COI policy ? Publications of general assembly decisions ? GA agendas ? Processes to help decide distribution of microfunding ? Money management rules ? Data retention policy or at least description of principles followed ? It is well noted that an AGM and Team retreat is anticipated, with the main objective being team evaluation, but what's the plan with regards to the development of a good governance, needed when an organization very nicely grow, in particular with regards to transparency and accountability ?


Reviewer 3:

Overall Feedback and recommendations; Wiki Clubs at schools have faced challenges in other regions as well, especially as dedicated volunteers at one school graduate and leave. I encourage the grantee to communicate with others facing similar challenges around the world for more insight.


Strengths of the proposal: The Kiwix4Schools Africa program is excellent, and this grantee has been a leader in the space, well positioned to grow impact in the coming years. Partnerships with other organizations like the Teacher Training Association of Ghana are great steps to create scalability and sustainability in the impact of this work. The plans seem well thought out and in line with Movement Strategy

Other questions and comments: Great plan, and I'm really looking forward to seeing the education work enacted!

We highly recommend you get in touch with the regional program officer to support you in understanding the questions raised or if you find it useful to meet with the committee as well, please let them know and they can organize a conversation meeting.

Thank you and we look forward to receiving your responses to support us in the next steps. On behalf of the MEA Regional Committee and Staff - VThamaini (WMF) (talk) 11:01, 25 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Response to Expert Reviewer 2 & 3
VThamaini (WMF) Due to the duplication of some questions, we resolved to answer them altogether below:
Microgrants
We acknowledge your concern and while we understand you, we want to assure you that there is no need to worry.
  • As an example, the Kiwix4Schools mentorship program is an upskilling initiative, and its impact must be evaluated and its continuation must be guaranteed. A small number of mentees—particularly those from unreached countries—are able to trial the initiative in their own nations thanks to the program's microgrant policy. Without it, the program's knowledge is retained by the participants alone and cannot be put to any use. Thus, the microgrant functions as a mechanism for guaranteeing the program's expansion and sustainability.
  • Team members have always guided and supported communities to apply for grants during the AWC. However, with the AKI and AU partnership this year, we had enough funds to support the communities, which meant that they did not have to come to the WMF for funds to organize their campaigns anymore. Selection was done fairly using the answers applicants provided in a questionnaire. We believe that this eased the burden on the WMF in providing rapid grants for this purpose and supported communities that needed below the current rapid grant threshold. With the growing participation of communities in the program year on year we believe this micro-grant approach experimented through the Africa Knowledge Initiative can be maintained to ensure the ease of access and remove backlogs/pressure on the rapid grant systems. However, if this approach does not seem reasonable we could revert to our initial mode of implementation for the AWC, which is to encourage participating countries/communities to apply through the rapid grant system.
  • The Localized microgrant comes after calls for support from our community members as indicated in the proposal. In the past, we guided our community members to apply for rapid grants to implement their initiatives but we realized that some initiatives do not meet the criteria (for example no flexibility to experiment locally), the set timelines, minimum request threshold of application for rapid grants, etc. This would mean, keeping them on the shelf or disembarking entirely. This initiative is to ensure continuous support for our community and will also limit the amount of rapid grant requests, while keeping the spirit of locally experimenting and being innovative.
Board
  • Board members are appointed following a clear criteria stipulated in our organizational bylaws. The board comprises of one of the founding members, appointed subject matter experts and representatives from the community. The term of the current members of the board are ending this year and is currently under reconstitution (which is why the new website has not yet been updated with its current members). The full and newly reconstitued board members are scheduled to be published after AGM this year when new community representated are voted.
Website and meta page:
  • Plans are underway for a new website interface that supports uploading reports. We will share our reports on our website once this is completed. Even though there is not one place to find all our reports currently, we publish our reports annually as directed by Affcom and the WMF, but we admit to do a better job to make them visibile and readily accessible to key stakeholders and contributors to our organisation.
AWC break
Membership security
  • The open access document was an oversight and was possibly shared unknowingly by a member of our community. We have immediately reviewed the right of users that have access to the document as we take data security very seriously. We value and uphold the security of our community members and are putting sytems in place to ensure that this does not repeat itself.
Overall, we value your candid feedback and the opportunity to provide a response top them. We believe in transparency and accountability as an affiliate and these comments gives hope of what to expect from our movement in the years that lie ahead of us. We always strive to strengthen our areas of strength and address our weaknesses and thank you all for the concerns and opportunity to improve.--Jael28 (talk) 17:18, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

General Support Fund Approved at 5,852,220.00 GHS edit

Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dear Open Foundation West Africa,

Thank you for submitting your application seeking General Support Funds - Wikimedia Community Fund. The MEA Regional Committee and Staff have reviewed, discussed and deliberated upon your application and made the decision to fund you at 5,852,220.00 GHS for the grant period of 1st January 2024 to 31st December 2026

Here are a few points to note;

  • We need OFWA to evaluate their impact in a manner that moves beyond quantitative metrics and think about qualitative measures of their impact.

For instance - once students and teachers access Kiwix and have access to Wikipedia and other OER materials - what does this result in terms of education outcomes?

We also hope to see better articulation of the numbers in the future - providing more clarity on per-program metrics, for instance.

  • Kindly review your staff costs and align those with other groups in the country, such as the Global Open Initiative.
  • As discussed and agreed in previous conversations, we will be deducting from this grant the underspends from the Wiki Data For Education grant;

We need a comprehensive financial report

Rudolph Ampofo will be providing technical support for the Kiwix Program. We look forward to learning more about the progress you make and how this work is contributing to shaping your other work with the community.

Beyond this, we hope to continue having regular conversations over the course of your grant implementation. Do set up a regular schedule to connect with your MEA Programme Officer based on your needs.

The reporting requirements for the grant will shared in your grant agreement and on Fluxx. All reports are to be completed and submitted via Fluxx.

Once again, Congratulations! We thank you for your participation in the grant application process and hope to continue to journey with you as you embark on a new year of project implementation. Azogbonon (talk) 11:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Review of Wikidata experience edit

Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As this proposal mentions Wikidata, I have performed a review of the experience and record of team members on that project. I note that several of the team members are not identified by username.

  •  ? There is no global account for Kweku Berko
  •   Endorsed Rberchie: They have significant experience on Wikidata. I reviewed their last ten item creations and found one duplicate and none that fail to establish notability. I found no significant issues with their contributions.
  •   Neutral Jael28: They have little experience on any WMF project, and none on Wikidata.
  •   Oppose Ruby D-Brown: They have moderate Wikidata experience. Reviewing their deleted items, I see they created a spam page and a vanity page. Reviewing their other item creations, I found that almost all of them made no attempt to establish notability. This was brought to their attention a month ago, but they did not respond to feedback.

The project appears to have one person who is a good candidate for Wikidata expert and one who should definitely play no role in Wikidata training. Would it be possible to provide user names for the rest of the team and clarify what role the various members will play with respect to Wikidata? Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 06:29, 5 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:Programs/Wikimedia_Community_Fund/General_Support_Fund/Open_Foundation_West_Africa_Multiyear_Grant_2024/26&oldid=26027070"
Return to "Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/General Support Fund/Open Foundation West Africa Multiyear Grant 2024/26" page.