FDC input survey

Results

2014-15

2013–14

2013–14, Round 1

2012–13

Details

Overview and purpose

The WMF FDC staff will administer a survey of involved parties after each funding cycle to gather:

Perceptions of the FDC process's effectiveness based on the evaluation dimensions outlined above;
Perception of the costs (money and time) of the FDC process; and
Input on potential process improvements (e.g., what should continue, what should be stopped, what should be started).

Timing

To be administered at the end of each Round of funding:

January 15–30 for round 1 June 1–15 for round 2

Target participants

All participants in the round of funding:

Applicants
FDC members
FDC and relevant WMF staff
FDC Advisory Group
WMF Board Representatives for the FDC
Interested community members

Survey text

Introduction

Feedback and continuous improvement are a critical part of the FDC process. Because the FDC is an experiment with little precedent in Wikimedia or in other organizations, it is critical to continually assess how the process is working and to make adjustments as needed. A full description of the FDC continuous improvement process is on the FDC portal ((http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Feedback_and_continuous_improvement_of_the_FDC_process).

This survey is part of this improvement process and will gather information and feedback about the most recent round of funding allocations, with application deadline <insert dates>. Please fill out this survey if you were an active participant or observer in the process. The survey results will be shared with the community and the FDC to help in the committee's continuous improvement process.

Background

1. What was your primary role in the most recent round of FDC funding allocations <insert dates>: (can select multiple)

– I helped the entity I was involved with submit a proposal for funding

– I was a FDC member or the ombudsperson

– I was a WMF staff member involved in facilitating the process

- I was an FDC Advisory Group Member

– I was a community member who provided feedback or input during the process (e.g., commenting or asking questions about specific proposals)

– I was a WMF Board Representative for the FDC

– Other (open text box)

(Display for Entities / Community Member respondents only)
1a. Which best describes your entity's experience in <insert dates>?

- Received 50% or more of requested funds

- Received less than 50% of requested funds

- Did not receive funding

- Don't know / prefer not to answer

2. Approximately how many hours did you personally spend on work related to the most recent round of funding allocations, between <insert dates>? Please estimate the number of hours to the best of your ability:

(open text box)

3. Given the scope of your role, do you think this amount of time was:

– Too little

– The right amount

– Too much

FDC’s contribution to movement impact

4. On a scale of 1–4, how much do you agree with the following statements about the most recent round of FDC funding allocations: (1–4 range “Strongly agree to strongly disagree” + “Not enough information”)

4a) The FDC process is enabling greater impact and progress towards Wikimedia’s strategic goals of:

1. Increasing reach

2. Improving content quality

3. Increasing participation

4. Increasing diversity

5. Stabilizing infrastructure

6. Encouraging innovation

4bc.

b) The FDC process is putting movement funds to the most effective and efficient use

c) The FDC process is producing greater movement-wide information about what it takes to achieve impact

d) The FDC process is increasing community voice in how movement funds are spent

Please comment on any low scores you gave (open text box)

Effectiveness and efficiency of the FDC process

5. On a scale of 1–4, to what extent do you agree with the following statements about the most recent round of the FDC process: (1–4 range “Strongly agree” to “Strongly disagree” + “Not enough information”)

The most recent round was fair and transparent

Expectations and deadlines were clearly and effectively communicated

Requirements of participants were reasonable and achievable

Participants had clear avenues to provide real-time feedback

Please comment on any high or low scores you gave (open text box)

Conclusion

6. Overall, how satisfied were you with the FDC process? (1–4 range + “Not enough information”) If answer was 1–2, please answer 6b: Why were you less than satisfied with the FDC process? (open text box)
If answer was 3–4, please answer 6c: Why were you satisfied with the FDC process? (open text box)
7. In your opinion, what can be done to improve the FDC process? (open text box)
8. Based on your experience, which parts of the process were most confusing or difficult? Why? (open text box)
9. Please provide any additional thoughts or suggestions about how to improve the FDC process (open text box)