Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Wikimedia Österreich/Progress report form/Q2

Purpose of the report

This form is for organizations receiving Annual Plan Grants to report on their results to date. For progress reports, the time period for this report will the first 6 months of each grant (e.g. 1 January - 30 June of the current year). For impact reports, the time period for this report will be the full 12 months of this grant, including the period already reported on in the progress report (e.g. 1 January - 31 December of the current year). This form includes four sections, addressing global metrics, program stories, financial information, and compliance. Please contact APG/FDC staff if you have questions about this form, or concerns submitting it by the deadline. After submitting the form, organizations will also meet with APG staff to discuss their progress.

Global metrics overview - all programs

We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our grantees' programs. Please use the table below to let us know how your programs contributed to the Global Metrics. We understand not all Global Metrics will be relevant for all programs, so feel free to put "0" where necessary. For each program include the following table and

1. Next to each required metric, list the outcome achieved for all of your programs included in your proposal.
2. Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome.
3. In addition to the Global Metrics as measures of success for your programs, there is another table format in which you may report on any OTHER relevant measures of your programs success

For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.

Overall

Metric	Achieved outcome	Explanation
1. # of active editors involved
2. # of new editors
3. # of individuals involved
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects

Telling your program stories - all programs

Please tell the story of each of your programs included in your proposal. This is your chance to tell your story by using any additional metrics (beyond global metrics) that are relevant to your context, beyond the global metrics above. You should be reporting against the targets you set at the beginning of the year throughout the year. We have provided a template here below for you to report against your targets, but you are welcome to include this information in another way. Also, if you decided not to do a program that was included in your proposal or added a program not in the proposal, please explain this change. More resources for storytelling are at the end of this form. Here are some ways to tell your story.

• We encourage you to share your successes and failures and what you are learning. Please also share why are these successes, failures, or learnings are important in your context. Reference learning patterns or other documentation.
• Make clear connections between your offline activities and online results, as applicable. For example, explain how your education program activities is leading to quality content on Wikipedia.
• We encourage you to tell your story in different ways by using videos, sound files, images (photos and infographics, e.g.), compelling quotes, and by linking directly to work you produce. You may highlight outcomes, learning, or metrics this way.
• We encourage you to continue using dashboards, progress bars, and scorecards that you have used to illustrate your progress in the past, and to report consistently over time.
• You are welcome to use the table below to report on any metrics or measures relevant to your program. These may or may not include the global metrics you put in the overview section above. You can also share your progress in another way if you do not find a table like this useful.

Target	Last year (if applicable)	Progress (at end of Q2)	End of year (projected or actual)	Comments
Example	Example	Example	Example	Example

Revenues received during this period (6 month for progress report, 12 months for impact report)

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

Table 2 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

• Please also include any in-kind contributions or resources that you have received in this revenues table. This might include donated office space, services, prizes, food, etc. If you are to provide a monetary equivalent (e.g. $500 for food from Organization X for service Y), please include it in this table. Otherwise, please highlight the contribution, as well as the name of the partner, in the notes section.

Revenue source	Currency	Anticipated	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Cumulative	Anticipated ($US)*	Cumulative ($US)*	Explanation of variances from plan
A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Spending during this period (6 month for progress report, 12 months for impact report)

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

(The "budgeted" amount is the total planned for the year as submitted in your proposal form or your revised plan, and the "cumulative" column refers to the total spent to date this year. The "percentage spent to date" is the ratio of the cumulative amount spent over the budgeted amount.)

Expense	Currency	Budgeted	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Cumulative	Budgeted ($US)*	Cumulative ($US)*	Percentage spent to date	Explanation of variances from plan
A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	J2	K
TOTAL	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	J2	N/A

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Compliance

Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?

As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Grant funds as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

Signature

Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.

Resources

Resources to plan for measurement

• Global metrics are an important starting point for grantees when it comes to measuring programmatic impact (Learning Patterns and Tutorial) but don’t stop there.
• Logic Models provide a framework for mapping your pathway to impact through the cause and effect chain from inputs to outputs to outcomes. Develop a logic model to map out your theory of change and determine the metrics and measures for your programs.
• Importantly, both qualitative and quantitative measures are important so consider both as you determine measures for your evaluation and be sure to ask the right questions to be sure to capture your program stories.

Resources for storytelling

• WMF storytelling series and toolkit (DRAFT)
• Online workshop on Storytelling. By Frameworks institute
  • The origin of storytelling
  • Story frames, with a focus on news-worthiness.
• Reading guide: Storytelling and Social change. By Working Narratives
  • The uses of the story.
  • Case studies.
• Blog: 3 Tips on telling stories that move people to action. By Paul VanDeCarr (Working Narratives), on Philanthropy.com
• Building bridges using narrative techniques. By Sparknow.net
  • Differences between a report and a story
  • Question guides and exercises.
• Guide: Tools for Knowledge and Learning. By Overseas Development Institute (UK).
  • Developing a strategy
  • Collaboration mechanisms
  • Knowledge sharing and learning
  • Capturing and storing knowledge.

Basic entity information

Table 1

Entity information	Legal name of entity	Wikimedia Österreich
	Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd)	09/01/12-08/31/13
	12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy)	01/01/13-12/31/13
Contact information (primary)	Primary contact name	Claudia Garad
	Primary contact position in entity	Managing Director
	Primary contact username	Claudia.Garad
	Primary contact email	claudia.garad@wikimedia.at
Contact information (secondary)	Secondary contact name	Kurt Kulac
	Secondary contact position in entity	President
	Secondary contact username	Kulac
	Secondary contact email	kulac@wikimedia.at

Overview of this quarter

The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of this report. Please use no more than 1-2 paragraphs to address the questions outlined below. You will have an opportunity to address these questions in detail elsewhere in this report.

CHANGES: Please describe how you changed your plans and budget based on the FDC allocation approved by the Board in December 2012, and your rationale for these changes. You can then use the changed plans and budget as the basis on which to report back on the second quarter.

• We decided to spend more money on staff than budgeted by turning our intern position into a full-time position. Administrating the FDC funds and maintaining an office increased the workload for the chapter disproportionately. Together with the fact that the ED was also hired to take work of the board we realizied that this is to much for one employee to handle, especially because it didn't leave enough time for innovation, strategy and proactive planing. In addition, the experience of for example WMCH showed that other chapters face similar challenges with their first employees, which in worst case can lead to their resignment. We took advantage of the fact that our intern, who was already successfully integrated into the team was available for a full-time position. As he is an experienced Wikipedian, he is also a perfect complement to our ED, who hasn't been part of the movement but contributes a valuable external perspective and skills in leadership, management and communications. This "overall package" often can't be found in one person, we believe that the current "tandem"-solution of WMAT is the perfect mix and might be recommendable for other organizations which think about hiring staff.

HIGHLIGHTS: What were 1–2 important highlights of the past quarter? (These may include successes, challenges, lessons learned.)

• Wiki Loves Public Art contest (see our monthly reports and also below)
• State Parliament Photography Project in Lower Austria (see our monthly reports and also below)
• Good Governance Kodex (see our monthly reports and also below)
• Zedler Award nomination (best international community project) for the WikiCon 2012 organizing team

WIKI-FOCUS: What Wikimedia projects was your entity focused on (e.g., Wiki Commons, French Wiktionary) this quarter?

• German-language Wikipedia
• Wikimedia Commons

GROWTH: How did your entity grow over the past quarter vs. the previous quarter (e.g., Number of active editors reached/involved/added, number of articles created, number of events held, number of partipants reached through workshops)?

• New articles: At the Austrian portal site site in de.wikipedia 645 new articles focussing on Austrian topics have been registered in the second quarter of 2013. Some of them were supported by the book grant and the library project of WMAT.
• New photographies: By June 30 there were 19.080 files in our Commons-category Supported by Wikimedia Österreich. As we wrote in our Q1 report, by the beginning of 2013 there have been about 12.000 files there. This leads to a growth of circa 7.000 files in the first half-year of 2013 which accounts for an increase of 58,33 %. This does not include photographies which were made in contests like WLPA or WLM.
• WLPA outcome: WLPA brought us to a progress of 84.35 % (1040 of 1233 objects in our lists got at least one picture now). Overall there have been 2410 pictures uploaded in the WLPA-contest by 108 uploaders. 26.04 % of all uploaded files in the contest came from Austria and we were able to win the most uploaders of all participating countries for WLPA. For detailed statistics please visit stats.wlpa.at
• Landtagsprojekt results: The Landtagsprojekt in Lower Austria resulted in 731 photos, of which 574 were portrait pictures of the politicians. As there were elections taking place in May, it was a goal to complete all new articles about first-time elected politicians until the photography-session took place. This goal could be reached by our volunteers. You can find detailed results at the de.wiki-site of the Landtagsprojekt Niederösterreich

Financial summary

The FDC requires information about how your entity received and spent money over the past year. The FDC distributes general funds, so your entity is not required to use funds exactly as outlined in the proposal. While line-item expenses will not be examined, the FDC and movement wants to understand why the entity spent money in the way it did. If variance in budgeted vs. actual is greater than 20%, please provide explanation in more detail. This helps the FDC understand the rationale behind any significant changes. Note that any changes from the Grant proposal, among other things, must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."

Revenues for this quarter

Provide exchange rate used:

• 1 Euro : 1.3081 US$

Table 2 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

• Please also include any in-kind contributions or resources that you have received in this revenues table. This might include donated office space, services, prizes, food, etc. If you are to provide a monetary equivalent (e.g. $500 for food from Organization X for service Y), please include it in this table. Otherwise, please highlight the contribution, as well as the name of the partner, in the notes section.

Revenue source	Currency	Anticipated	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Cumulative	Anticipated ($US)*	Cumulative ($US)*	Explanation of variances from plan
Membership fees	Euro	2,100.00	230.00	80.00	F	G	310.00	$ 2,746.97	$ 405.51	on track, membership fees not due yet
Donations	Euro	25,000.00	4,271.78	2,400.71	F	G	6,672.49	$ 32,702.01	$ 8,728.15	awaiting fundraiser 2013/2014
WMF/FDC	Euro	186,890.00	99,483.00	0	F	G	99,483.00	$ 242,957.00	$ 129,327.90	"anticipated" or "plan" is as decided by WMF board
Interests	Euro		1,182.54	7.35	F	G	1,189.89		$ 1,556.47

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Spending during this quarter

Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

(The "budgeted" amount is the total planned for the year as submitted in your proposal form or your revised plan, and the "cumulative" column refers to the total spent to date this year. The "percentage spent to date" is the ratio of the cumulative amount spent over the budgeted amount.)

Expense	Currency	Budgeted	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Cumulative	Budgeted ($US)*	Cumulative ($US)*	Percentage spent to date	Explanation of variances from plan
Staff expenses (including on-costs, labour taxes, etc.)	Euro	74,000	9,443.35	29,577.11	F	G	39,020.46	$ 96,745.05	$ 51,053.99	52.73 %
Community support	Euro	40,610	3,762.97	17,149.91	F	G	20,912.88	$ 53,121.94	$ 27,356.14	51.50 %
Free content generation	Euro	40,610	602,14	11,790.76	F	G	12,392.90	$ 53,121.94	$ 16,211.15	30.52 %
Resources	Euro	7,770	6,615.18	1,330.23	F	G	7,945.41	$ 10,163.94	$ 10,393.39	102.26 %
Organisation	Euro	51,000	9,444.38	16,178.84	F	G	25,623.22	$ 66,713.1	$ 33,517.73	50.24 %	K

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Explanations

Progress toward this year's goals/objectives

This section addresses the impact of the programs / initiatives* and objectives your entity has implemented over the past quarter and the progress your entity is making toward meeting this year's goals. We understand that some metrics may not be applicable in this quarterly report, so please add metrics here if they are applicable.

*In the last round, the FDC used the term 'initiative', but this round, we are using the term 'program.'

Program 1

Community support

What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.

• Expand and diversify the community of editors and volunteers
• Community building

Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

• In the second quarter of 2013 there have been 3 monthly Wikipedian meet-ups in Vienna, each with 10-26 participants, one meet-up in Linz with 8 participants and the "Lower Austrian travelling circus" in Orth an der Donau and St. Pölten which were all supported by WMAT (in varying degrees).
• At the WLPA-contest there have been 108 users uploading pictures. Of these about 60 % contributed to a Wikimedia project for the first time, 20 % were just contributing in WLM before and another 20 % were established useres either from our Commons- or Wikipedia-community.
• Diversifying comunication channels: We exceeded 100 likes on facebook (increase of 300 %).

Activities conducted.

Meet-up in Vienna in May with special guest Peter Turrini

A part of the WikiCon 2012 organising-team at the award ceremony of the Zedler Preis

• Assistance of wikipedians in organizing local meet-ups all over Austria, board members and staff are regualrly visiting these events, in order to inform about WMATs activities and to collect ideas and stimuli for our work from the community.
• WikiCup: As last year, we support the WikiCup in the German Wikipedia with little rewards for the participants. For the participants of the first round we contributed special Austrian WMAT chocolate. This year we also rewarded volunteers of the so-called "Wartungsbausteinwettbewerb" with T-Shirts.
• WLPA: As already stated above the WLPA-contest was not only a project for gaining new free-licensed pictures (see Program 2 - Free Content Generation), but also for winning new photographers for our future projects. This is also going to be assisted by giving awards to the winners of the contest.
• Book grant: WMAT supported several authors by providing necessary literature resources
• Organizing of photo-accreditations for our community-photographers and providing technical equipment (see also Program 2 - Free Content Generation). We also expanded the pool of our technical equipment, based on the feedback of our volunteer photographers, in order to improve the support of their various projects. As spring and early summer are busy times for photographers it was the best time to make these investments.
• Social media channels divide our community - while one part avoids facebook and the like, another part of the community uses them quite frequently in order to exchange relevant information. We started to diversify our communication channels early this year and began to intensify our communication on facebook complementary to established channels such as mailingslists and Wiki-pages.

What worked and what did not?

• We see the first-time-held WLPA-contest as a full success regarding the numbers of contributers and especially the fact that many of them contributed to a Wikimedia project for the first time. Unfortunately we were only able to get lists of public art for two (larger) Austrian cities, Vienna and Linz. With more lists available we would most certainly be able to reach a lot more participants all over the country.
• The team of volunteer organizers of our 2012 WikiCon was nominated for this year's Zedler Preis as best international community project. It was the second nomination of a WMAT-supported project in a row (last year the WLM-related project "Österreichische Denkmallisten" won).
• Due to our activities the number of "fans" on facebook increased by 300 %. Especially the international community uses this quick and easy channel to monitor the activities of WMAT, therefore we will post more news in English in future.

Any additional details:

Program 2

Free content generation

What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.

• Increase content in the Wikimedia projects, especially articles for de.wikipedia and pictures for Commons.
• Valorization of the volunteer's work and involvement

Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

• In the second quarter of 2013 there have been 645 new articles registered at the Austrian portal site in de.wikipedia. These articles are all focussing on Austria-related topics (persons, organisations, landmarks, monuments, etc.) and are partially supported by WMAT in various ways (through the bookgrant or the library project for example).
• By monitoring our Commons-Category Supported by Wikimedia Österreich we get a quite good insight in the number of new photographies. By June 30 there were 19.080 files included in the category. Compared with the beginning of 2013, where there were 12.000 files included, this leads to a growth of circa 7.000 files in the first half-year of 2013 which accounts for an total increase of 58,33 %.
• Beyond the quantitative figures, we are also happy to see that 22 photos from the Landtagsprojekt are classified as quality images.

Activities conducted.

Wikimedians explaining something to a politician at the Landtagsprojekt in Lower Austria

This picture of A.geh Wirklich at the Donauinselfest was supported by Wikimedia Austria

• WLPA was as well a contest with the goal of free content generation as it was a way to reach new photographers.
• The first Landtagsprojekt which was organised with the support of WMAT took place in May at the regional parliament of Lower Austria. The collaboration with the Administration of the regional parliament was really excellent and opened some doors for our future projects in the other eight regional parliaments of the Austrian states.
• At the end of April the Kick-off-event of WLM Austria 2013 took place in Vienna. A participant from Germany wrote a short article for the German-language signpost (the Kurier), which can be found here.
• Wikimedia Austria continued providing its high-quality photographic equipment to community-photographers and organizing accreditations for the admission to the press area at larger events. In the second quarter of 2013 for example the famous Life Ball in Vienna, the Austrian football cupfinals, a Handball european championships qualification match between Austria and Russia, some performances at the Donauinselfest and the Jazz festival in Vienna have been photographed with the support of WMAT.
• Wikimedia Austria supported the scanning of old books at the library of the Federal Authority for the Monuments, which brought numerous historical pictures and drawings of monuments to Wikimedia Commons.

What worked and what did not?

• It has to be pointed out, that the collaboration with the Administration of the Lower Austrian regional parliament was excellent. It opened us doors for our upcomming Landtagsprojects and helped us reaching this good results at the current project.
• For our internal organisation the Landtagsprojekt was also quite important: As it was a new project that we started from scratch, it was also a test run how volunteers, staff and external partners (State Parliament administration) could work together effectively. Especially the divison of tasks between volunteers and staff worked really well. In order to keep it a volunteer project, staff resources mainly went into financial administration, reporting and public relations. The project manager was further assisted in networking and some organizational tasks.
• We feel like there is still a lack when it comes to reporting by our volunteers. Unfortunately most of them still do their best to bring the projects to a success but don't feel like reporting afterwards. This has to be improved by facilitating this process by our staff (e.g. organizing lessons-learned meetings).

Any additional details:

Program 3

Resources

What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.

• Generate € 25 000 funding for Wikimedia Österreich mission and activities
• Extend the base of loyal donors

Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

• Local donors frequently donate smaller amounts to Wikimedia Austria. Each month we are able to gain 203.20 Euro through standing orders of our frequent donors (in the second quarter of 2013 the sum of donations through standing orders was 609.60 Euro). Additionally there are some donors each month which are donating only once.

Activities conducted.

• To extend the base of loyal donors we started sending each donor a postcard stating "Danke" (Thank You) at the front side and with a little hand written text about our recently conducted projects on the backside.

What worked and what did not?

• We see that most of our donors are quite loyal and donate frequently to Wikimedia Austria. However, there are not as many of them as there are at chapters which run the fundraiser on their own.

Any additional details:

Program 4

Organisation

What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.

• Professional acting of the organization
• Improve administrative task treatment
• Meet reporting requirements of Wikimedia Foundation, certification body and other donors

Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

• An important step towards a growth of professionalising the administration in this quarter was the employment of our intern Thomas Planinger as a full employee by May. Wikimedia Austria has now two full-time employees and two part-time contractors (one for design and IT and one for accounting).
• The Good Governance Kodex, which the board decided to set up in June, addresses various topics related to the administrative task treatment, such as the financial scope of the ED and how internal conflicts of interest should be resolved.

Activities conducted.

• Employment of the former Intern Thomas Planinger as a full-time employee for administrative support of the ED and as a community-manager by May 2013.
• At June 8 we had an internal strategy-meeting of the board and the staff together with an external moderator. In this meeting the draft of the Good Governance Kodex was set up and redacted as well as we talked about general topics regarding the task treatment in our organisation.
• Draft of a Good Governance Kodex for responsible organisational leadership which is currently set up for discussion with the community.

What worked and what did not?

• The full-time employment of our second employee was a very necessary step. Until now it has been shown that the step was not only necessary but also very useful for the daily administrative work at WMAT's office (see also our remarks on "CHANGES" above).
• We feel like the strategy-meeting and the resulting Good Governance Kodex are some good steps for the future of task treatment at WMAT. It has been decided to take this step quite early and without any special case forcing us to do it, but we think that it is a good thing to ensure our own awarness of such topics even if they are not present yet.
• As on other similar occasions, the Good Governance Kodex is not very intensely discussed by the community. We got some positive reactions on the initiative but no detailed feedback on the content. Although the community wants to be involved and have the possiblity to have a say in such matters, nobody hardly ever makes use of it. Most volunteers rather concentrate on their projects instead of participating in discussions of meta issues. An exception is the general assembly, hence we will discuss this topic at this occasion later this year.

Any additional details:

Lessons learned

Lessons from this quarter

A key objective of the funding is to enable the movement as a whole to understand how to achieve shared goals better and faster. An important way of doing this is to identify lessons learned from entities who receive funds, and to share these lessons across the movement. The purpose of this section is to elicit some of these insights, which will be shared throughout the movement. Please answer the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs each.

What were your major accomplishments in the past quarter, and how did you help to achieve movement goals?

• The past three month were a quite productive time for WMAT: We conducted two major photography projects (Wiki Loves Public Art and our first State Parliament project) with great success. The success consists in motivating a significant number of volunteers (both total newbies and Wikimedians who haven't participated in offline projects before) who provided our projects with numerous (mostly high quality) images. Both projects also resulted in new or improved Wikipedia articles or in the case of WLPA in the availablity of open data on public art in two major Austrian cities. All this contributed to our two main goals of generating content and fostering volunteers. In addition, we could expand our network of partnerships with Austrian institutions and organizations (e.g. by involving them as members of the WLPA jury or by talking with the politicans and high-level civil servants during the State Parliament project).

• Another important achievement was the draft of our Good Governance Kodex. This involved discussing the status quo of collaboration between the different stakeholders of the chapter and setting up standards for the future. Another aim was to suggest proceedings in cases of conflicts of interests. For us this was an important step in our professionalization process that provides a sound basis for our further development.

What were your major setbacks in the past quarter (e.g., programs that were not successful)?

• One big challenge was to obtain open data for the Wiki Loves Public Art contest. Although there is probably an abundance of data available in the different institutions we found it hard to find supportive staff that helped us to gain access to it - despite the fact that we already had very successful cooperations with other institutions in this regard that we could relate to (WLM with the Federal Monuments Office). In most cases, a lack of time on the side of the officals was the major obstacle. This resulted in the contest being limited to only two cities in Austria. And it is questionable whether the contest although or rather because it was quite successful (many objects are now documented) can be repeated next year, unless the data basis can be extended further in the meantime.

• Our cooperation with the Austrian public broadcasting (ORF) is on hold at the moment. Again, a lack of time on the side of our contact person at the ORF is the main reason. They are also currently restructuring their internal processes and program planing and it was reasonable to wait and see how this proceeds and how we would fit in. We learned from other projects that the timing is quite important for successful cooperations and that quite often a "dormant phase" is followed by very productive collaboration once the institution is "ready" for us.

• Although WMAT offered travel scholarships for interested community members, no Austrian volunteer took part in this years hackathon in Amsterdam.

What factors (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?

• WMUK openness concerning their governance audit and the resources they provided to the movement was very helpful for us, in order to gain an understanding of the issues and challenges and possible ways to adress them in our governance strategy. We also had a chance to participate in a chapters peer review conducted by Fæ from WMUK. This review adressed many related questions and was also very helpful for us.
• WMSE facilitated the organization of WLPA a great deal and provided us with many useful information and resources. Our own experiences, processes and tools from WLM were also very beneficial.
• For the State Parliament project we benefited from Austrian members who participated in various similar projects of WMDE and used their experiences to modify the concept for WMAT. In addtion, a German photographer offered his expertise and help (e.g. concerning the technical challenges).
• The site visit of Anasuya, Garfield and Katy as well as the exchange with other entities during the evaluation workshop in Budapest made the writing of the Q2 report somewhat easier for us. It became clearer what is expected and useful and we gained a better understanding of different ways to tell our (success) stories and share our learnings.

What unanticipated challenges did you encounter and how did this affect what you were able to accomplish?

• It took the Lower Austrian State Parliament longer than we expected to finally decide on the date of the project. We advised the parliamentary session in May, as it would have been the only possible occassion in the first half of this year (and it was our goal to have one State Parliament project in the first half-year), but as the State Parliament was only elected in March and their constitution took longer than expeted for several reasons they could not commit to date until approx. two weeks before the session. Fortunately, this didn't have a negative effect on the project, as we were well prepared and had experienced volunteers from the German projects and also because the Parliament administration was also very supportive and well organized.

What changes might you make in executing your initiatives into the next quarter?

• We are looking for ways to implement more systematic ways of evaluation in our initiatives. However, this will not happen overnight, but certainly there will be some first changes in this regard in the next couple of weeks and months.

Additional information

Provide any other relevant information that may be helpful or relevant for the FDC (e.g., links to any media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, more detailed financial information).

• Reports (Apr-June):
  • April 2013
  • May 2013
  • June 2013
• Press coverage (in German)
  • Collection of press coverage at WMAT's Wiki
• WMAT News (in German)
  • http://www.wikimedia.at (News for a general public)
  • News for and from community members
  • ED's update for members and community

Compliance

Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?

As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

• Yes

Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Grant funds as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

• Yes

Signature

Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.

• --CDG (talk) 10:04, 29 July 2013 (UTC)