Wikimedia Conference 2018/Documentation/Movement Strategy track/Annexes/Resource Allocation
|WMCON 2018||Core Conference Program||Fringe Events||Registration & Participants
Working Group Input Document: Resource AllocationEdit
Extracted May 1st from Etherpads
This group did not update report on Round 2/3 of Working Groups
- What have we learned from our previous funding structures? What has worked, and what hasn’t?
- What aren’t we good at now? What do we need to achieve our goals?
- What do we need to learn from other movements?
- What are we trying to achieve with funds? What do we want to change?
- Who decides? What kind of movement participation is necessary? And how do we ensure that they are representative?
- What do we need beyond money? E.g. capacity building, tools, access to knowledge
- What are decentralized models of funding to explore?
- How do we understand our own biases and privileges? How do we mitigate them?
- What is the gap between Wikimedia and non-Wikimedia world? How do we work with partners--movements and organizations?
- How do we lower barriers to entry and raise awareness?
- How do we move towards equity?
- What are we willing to give up -- as individuals, as affiliates, as a movement?
DATA FROM STRATEGY TRACKEdit
- Distributed model of fund dissemination
- Control of money closer to where people are
- Abolish the FDC/Funds Dissemination Committee
- We need more people in the conversation to have legitimacy and to explore the questions
- Equity is not existent, systems biased towards people/orgs who have power
- What’s needed is more than monetary support:
- Org development consultants, capacity building.
- Need more trust in people receiving funds
- Needs to be accompanied by accountability
- Reports could be significantly modified
- LANGUAGE: don’t have access to apply for proposals
- People don’t know about grant funds availability
- Lack of ability to apply
- Decentralization of funding -- models under exploration!
- Gender diversity
- Money and power & BIAS: known and unknown
- Pay & equity: being willing to consider paying for people’s time from marginalized communities. Volunteer movement, but we may need to reconsider this issue.
- Example from another funder (Counterpart Intl): set the goals they wanted to achieve. Committee would select a certain # of proposals. Donor had control over the grant implementation -- but we don’t want to do this.
- Would love some program teams to read reports and interact
- More knowledge sharing
- Desire to increase money for regions that don’t get money
- Reducing barriers to getting money
- Fear that $$$ will stop coming in at some point.
- Distributed $$ models should be pursued.
- User group / chapter border -- resulted in global inequity
- Impressed at how much
- Want to think about what is good for the global movement, but hard to not think about one’s own situation.
- from one perspective, there’s a pay gap between NGO sector and Wikimedia world. Need for stability.