[07:59:52] <SRientjes> Just for good measure and to cover all time zones: good afternoon from Nederland
[07:59:58] <wolliff> Hi, Sandra!
[08:00:04] <KatyLove> Hello everyone, thank you for coming to our office hours. We will be here for the next hour talking about the Funds Dissemination Committee, specifically the Letter of Intent process.
[08:00:05] <SRientjes> HI Winifred!
[08:00:10] <wolliff> Nice to see you here.
[08:00:24] <wolliff> (Sandra and also Anasuya.)
[08:00:31] <Anasuya> Nice to see you too, Winifred :-)
[08:00:36] <Anasuya> And everyone else!
[08:00:39] <Steven_Zhang> Hi again Anasuya
[08:00:42] <TheCavalry> Hi all - Richard S here from WMUK
[08:00:48] <wolliff> Hello, Richard!
[08:00:49] <KatyLove> Hi Richard!
[08:01:03] <KatyLove> I am Katy Love, and I am the Senior Program Officer with the FDC. Can my other colleagues introduce themselves?
[08:01:20] <wolliff> This is Winifred, the Grants Administrator.
[08:01:37] <Anasuya> Hi, I'm Anasuya Sengupta, and I'm the Senior Director of Grantmaking
[08:01:58] <MaggieDennis> Hello all, Maggie Dennis. I imagine many of you know me - senior community advocate.
[08:02:03] <KatyLove> Great--thank you!
[08:02:09] <Anasuya> Steven_Zhang: Hi!
[08:02:10] <KatyLove> Do we have any members of the FDC here today?
[08:13:52] <Anasuya> To make it easier on everyone, the Finance team in the past two rounds has reached to only the entities that become eligible.
[08:14:07] <Arnaugir> I am asking this because Amical is about to finish the second grant (mid-June) and we are worried whether this could interfere with the LOI.
[08:14:40] <KatyLove> @Steven_Zhang - sure thing.
[08:14:47] <Anasuya> There are two rounds of asking for this information (both of which are secure): first, Finance is checking on governing board members, senior management and key employees for eligible entities.
[08:15:03] <KatyLove> So, Steven asked me about why the FDC would like to see the amount of funds that are likely to be requested.
[08:15:10] <Arnaugir> btw as I understood in Milan, the two grants have to be completed succesfully, so looks like the Sample letter of intent wording is not accurate
[08:15:28] <KatyLove> The reason that we ask for a "notional figure" (a best guess at the point of submission) is to help the FDC plan.
[08:15:37] <Anasuya> Secondly, Winifred comes back to the entities who are awarded FDC allocations and asks for details of those who sign the grant agreement, handle the account and anyone else that might be required in terms of the grant process itself.
[08:16:14] <KatyLove> The FDC will get the LOIs for Round 2 *before* making the decisions for Round 1. That will help to ensure that sufficient funds are available for the Round 2 entities.
[08:16:24] <SRientjes> Thanks Anasuya - so we don't have to submit any info on Board members as yet? Just wait for Finance to approach us?
[08:16:29] <KatyLove> The figure is notional, and is not binding.
[08:16:57] <Anasuya> Yes, that would be right, but I will confirm with Finance on this.
[08:17:05] <KatyLove> While the LOI is mandatory, it is non-binding. If an entity submits an LOI with a figure of $100,000 USD, it is not mandatory to stick with that figure in the application.
[08:17:47] <wolliff> Hello, Arnaugir. Regarding eligibility, the requirement is to successfully complete two grants before the time eligibility is announced. As in, both grants must have been executed before the date eligibility is announced (15 July). Reports may be submitted *and accepted by WMF* between the time eligibility is announced and confirmed (between 15 July and 15 September),
[08:18:01] <Steven_Zhang> And it won't be looked upon badly if that's the case, right?
[08:18:13] <KatyLove> You are correct, @Steven_Zhang
[08:18:23] <Steven_Zhang> :)
[08:18:24] <KTC> having said that Katy, I'm guessing you guys would not be impressed if the submitted figure is $100,000 and the actual application is for say $500,000?
[08:18:31] <KatyLove> There's no assessment or evaluation of the figure provided and how much it varies.
[08:18:49] <Anasuya> KTC: Yes, that would make sense :-)
[08:18:53] KTC has userhost ~ktc@wikipedia/KTC and realname Katie Chan
[08:18:53] KTC is on #wikimedia-office
[08:18:53] KTC is connected on holmes.freenode.net (London, UK)
[08:18:53] KTC signed on at May 29, 2013 1:58:51 AM PDT and has been idle for 30 Seconds
[08:18:53] KTC is logged in as KTC
[08:19:11] <Jan_Ainali> Does the LOI need to be paper via snail mail or is email ok?
[08:19:23] <Arnaugir> wolliff: thank you that was really clear.
[08:19:23] <wolliff> On Meta, Jan.
[08:19:31] <Jan_Ainali> great!
[08:19:39] <KatyLove> @Jan_Ainali - you can create the LOI by going to teh FDC portal
[08:19:40] <KTC> uk
[08:19:47] <KTC> oops, sorry, wrong window
[08:19:53] <wolliff> Arnau: if you have any other questions about eligibility, please contact us at any time. FDCsupport@wikimedia.org.
[08:20:30] <SRientjes> Last year, it was stated that in order not to destabilise chapters, the FDC would aim to allocate within +/- 20 % (I think..) of last years spendings. Does the same general rule apply this year?
[08:20:31] melistey is now known as schiste
[08:20:42] <Steven_Zhang> I think that covers my questions...I'm gonna run...speak to you soon Katy
[08:20:47] <KatyLove> Hi @SRientjes - thanks for asking this really important question.
[08:20:54] <MaggieDennis> Goodbye, Steven_Zhang! Take care. :)
[08:20:57] <wolliff> Bye, Steven.
[08:21:10] <KatyLove> (Bye Steven)
[08:21:28] <KatyLove> The FDC has recommended guidelines of growth of no more than 20%.
[08:21:51] <KatyLove> The FDC framework, that is.
[08:22:07] <TheCavalry> KatyLove, does the guideline apply to 'Growth of the total organisation budget' or 'Growth of the grant'?
[08:22:09] <KatyLove> These are guidelines.
[08:22:23] Krinkle|detached is now known as Krinkle
[08:22:42] <TheCavalry> I hope it's the former - but I need to make sure!
[08:28:35] <wolliff> We will likely be able to share feedback by 10 June.
[08:28:58] <KatyLove> Our team has been reviewing all of the reports and getting different inputs and comments.
[08:29:26] <Kasia_WMDE> ok thank you
[08:29:46] <MaggieDennis> More questions?
[08:30:10] <KatyLove> Let me thank everyone here who submitted a quarterly report.
[08:30:15] <KatyLove> Thank you!
[08:30:35] <KatyLove> Any other questions?
[08:31:00] <mglaser> I have one. when looking at the WMHK case, it seemed to me that a lot of effort could have been saved if the fdc had known about the plan to use the grant for 3 staff members.
[08:31:40] <mglaser> so my question is, are there any plans to include some kind of key points in the loi as to what is intended to be funded?
[08:32:06] <KatyLove> Hi @mglaser - this is a good point. Most other grantmaking institutions who require LOIs do include more information than we have requested in the LOI.
[08:32:19] <KatyLove> We wanted to keep it straightforward and simple this time around.
[08:32:30] <mglaser> that's a good start :)
[08:32:44] <KatyLove> Let's see how it goes this time and then see if it will need to be changed.
[08:33:07] <mglaser> thanks
[08:33:28] schiste highfives JeanFred
[08:33:55] <schiste> Is it ok to ask about the feedback process? Or should we save that question for the mailing list?
[08:34:06] JeanFred highfives schiste & all
[08:34:22] <KatyLove> Hi @schiste - which particular feedback process are you asking about?
[08:35:04] <KatyLove> Also mglaser - we are here to work with entities ahead of the proposal deadline.
[08:35:08] <schiste> it was planned that there would be a feedback process between Year 1 and 2.
[08:35:34] <Anasuya> schiste: Ah, understood, Christophe! Thanks for bringing that up.
[08:35:44] <schiste> (I believe we called it "evaluation process" or something alike, but that was 1 year ago ^^)
[08:35:51] Krinkle is now known as Krinkle|detached
[08:36:23] <mglaser> KatyLove: I see. So entities should get involved in an informal kind of conversation alongside the FDC proposal?
[08:36:34] <Anasuya> We've done a round of feedback with Round 1 applicants, are about to get back feedback from Round 2, the Ombudsperson is doing an annual report, we are just in the process of sending out mail to the AG about their feedback (yes!)
[08:36:56] <Anasuya> ...and all of this will come together in a report on the first year of the FDC that we aim to have ready by Wikimania
[08:37:36] <KatyLove> mglaser, we will continue to have periodic IRC conversations that will be open to all.
[08:37:54] <KatyLove> Entities are welcome to approach us with any questions as appropriate, but it is not required.
[08:38:14] <KTC> AG = ?
[08:38:26] <KatyLove> Also I strongly recommend that interested applicants look at the feedback from the previous two rounds from the FDC
[08:38:33] <Anasuya> KTC: Sorry, KTC - acronym wonderland - the FDC Advisory Group :-)
[08:38:40] <KatyLove> As well as the framework, which has a lot of guidance
[08:39:41] <KatyLove> There is more in the recommendations text than just recommended amounts of funding .
[08:39:44] <schiste> Awesome :) Waiting for the email then :p
[08:39:50] <mglaser> Will you also be guiding entities on an individual basis? I'm wondering whether the Chapters Association could be of help here.
[08:40:04] <Anasuya> schiste: :-) ...on its way...
[08:40:13] <KatyLove> You'll see there some comments from the deliberations that will give good insight.
[08:40:19] <schiste> Will you work on meta? I believe it would be awesome to allow the larger community to be able to step in and provide their own feedback ^^
[08:40:29] <schiste> Great Anasuya thanks :)
[08:40:58] <Anasuya> mglaser: Happy to talk to you on this, Markus!
[08:41:15] <mglaser> Anasuya :)
[08:41:24] <KatyLove> Hi schiste. We will certainly publish on Meta - and the feedback has been on Meta thus far
[08:42:17] <Anasuya> schiste: So we've already asked the community at large to comment on the process a few times - both through the survey, and through the Ombudsperson reaching out on Meta to ask for feedback
[08:44:13] <KatyLove> (this is what happens when you switch from window to window!)
[08:45:01] <KatyLove> Also we are looking forward to sharing the Year 1 learning with the community at Wikimania
[08:45:08] <SRientjes> I have to sign off now. Bye and thanks!
[08:45:13] <wolliff> Goodbye, Sandra.
[08:45:14] <wolliff> Thanks for coming.
[08:45:17] <schiste> Bye Sandra
[08:45:30] <Kasia_WMDE> one last question regarding teh Q1 reports - will the feedback be shared on meta on June 10?
[08:45:32] <Anasuya> Bye Sandra!
[08:46:18] <KatyLove> Kasia_WMDE we expect to do so!
[08:46:39] <Kasia_WMDE> And the feedback will be coming from teh FDC staff or from teh FDC members?
[08:46:48] <KatyLove> It will be from the FDC staff.
[08:46:48] <Kasia_WMDE> or all together?
[08:47:04] <Kasia_WMDE> ok thanks so much, I'm done with my questions:)
[08:47:09] <wolliff> Thanks, Kasia.
[08:47:19] <KatyLove> No problem--we've still got 13 minutes!
[08:47:31] <KatyLove> And we're always around to answer more questions. FDCsupport@wikimedia.org
[08:47:47] <wolliff> Any more questions?
[08:48:09] <everton137> wolliff, the question I made in Milan was answered somewhere?
[08:48:28] <everton137> it was about finding a balance of the money from FDC that goest to global north and south...
[08:48:44] <everton137> I just saw KatyLove e-mail now :P
[08:48:57] <everton137> indeed, too many acronyms, hehe
[08:49:05] <KatyLove> No problem, everton137 . And yes, we agree.
[08:49:11] <KatyLove> Too many acronyms
[08:49:12] <KatyLove> ;)
[08:49:38] <everton137> hehe. so, I didn't find the answers of the following discussions that happened on Sunday
[08:49:44] <Anasuya> everton137: Tom, this is one of the issues that is part of the grantmaking strategy overall. We're currently at 8% of our overall funding going to the Global South, and obviously we want to improve this. :-)
[08:49:48] <everton137> I participated only in Saturday
[08:50:21] <everton137> Anasuya, but my question was what were the strategies to do that...
[08:50:39] <schiste> Well, that fits the creation and developement of chapters
[08:50:39] <everton137> I guess it was answered and documented somewhere
[08:50:59] <everton137> schiste, I hope it was that simple :)
[08:51:46] <schiste> So far it does I think (but it all depends on you define that "Global South" thingy ;))
[08:51:47] <everton137> I also had my concerns regarding the metrics, since WMF is too en.wiki centric, then it can try to fit metrics to other realities
[08:52:12] <Anasuya> everton137: More to come in our annual plan. :-) We are looking at a Global South strategy in which we work across a few geographies and languages (not only India, Brazil and the Arab region) supporting community initiatives with grants.
[08:52:51] <everton137> Anasuya, OK. Last question, although I will need more detailed answers...
[08:53:22] <Anasuya> evert
[08:53:30] <everton137> is there any plan of FDC be meritocratic based? For instance, if you see a group with smaller resource is doing better, would you try to approach and supported them better?
[08:53:34] <Anasuya> everton137: oops - Tom, always happy to answer more!
[08:53:45] <Anasuya> everton
[08:54:04] <Anasuya> everton137: oops again, <enter> rather <tab> problme
[08:54:27] <MaggieDennis> (Five minutes to go, folks. Any final questions to launch while they're answering this one?)
[08:54:36] <Anasuya> everton137: I think the idea with the FDC is to look for good outcomes and high impact, no matter where that exists
[08:54:39] <everton137> I barely listen the word meritocracy at Wikimedia movement and I'd love to hear your thoughts on that... then it comes the problem of how to measure things with such diversity of places and communities
[08:55:05] <Anasuya> everton137: The FDC's guidance is pretty clear on this...
[08:55:36] <everton137> Anasuya, and who will support local group to see how to measure and how? WMF tried recently the catalyst, without knowing very well how to measure things. So I guess there were some learning about that.
[08:56:07] <everton137> local groups*
[08:56:52] <Anasuya> everton137: That's part of what we're hoping to do with the Analytics, Program Evaluation and our own Grantmaking Learning and Evaluation teams: create self-assessment tools that will help the communities measure themselves
[08:57:12] <everton137> and I guess expensive trips from people at SF office won't be enough to discover, so I strongly believe a closer relation and communication improvement to local gruops will be fundamental.
[08:57:18] Krinkle|detached is now known as Krinkle
[08:57:32] <everton137> Anasuya, great.
[08:58:43] <everton137> then a general suggestion. I think it would be good when WMF try to set goals, instead of working on closed documents and then seeing what happen, we should try to find way to listen local on what is achievable. For instance, just see how the education program try to set goal, based on the number of classes. That is totally wrong. :)
[08:59:29] <KatyLove> Thank you for the suggestion.
[08:59:31] <everton137> I know how difficult is to do that, because the process become slow and we have to have a timeline, but it will grow with strong roots, I think
[08:59:42] <wolliff> Everyone, thank you for coming!
[08:59:43] <KatyLove> We would like to thank everyone for joining.
[08:59:44] <everton137> no a sand castle ;)
[08:59:46] <wolliff> Thanks for your questions!
[08:59:49] <KatyLove> And suggestions
[08:59:52] <everton137> needa go, good week!
[08:59:57] <KatyLove> You too!
[08:59:58] <wolliff> You too!
[09:00:11] <KatyLove> Thank you too to MaggieDennis for joining us and helping to facilitate the questions
[09:00:14] <mglaser> Thanks a lot!
[09:00:19] <wolliff> Yes, thanks to Maggie!
[09:00:23] <MaggieDennis> :) My pleasure.
[09:00:28] <KatyLove> And thank you to you, my friends and colleagues all around the world for joining!
[09:00:31] <Anasuya> Thanks, everyone!
[09:00:39] <wolliff> FDCsupport@wikimedia.org
[09:00:44] <KatyLove> Excellent.
[09:00:47] <KatyLove> Alright, goodbye everyone.
[09:00:50] Nischayn22|Away is now known as Nischayn22