Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2013-2014 round1/Wikimedia Serbia/Impact report form

Extension

Can we please have an extension for finishing the financial section of your impact report. We need time to solve our financial issues and finalize the report. April the 15th can be the new deadline. Thanks in advance for you patient and understanding. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 21:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Ivana, thank you for the request. This extension until 15 April is approved. Please take the extra time to get this done well. Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 21:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Feedback from FDC staff

The FDC staff (Katy and Winifred) shared their thoughts and feedback and asked questions about both the 2013-14 Impact Report and the 2014-15 Progress Report over a Skype call / Hangout held with each organization receiving an Annual Plan Grant. This is a summary of the conversation covering these two reports. We thank Ivana and Filip for speaking to us! Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 01:23, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Appreciation

• We see WMRS’ major strength in mobilizing a small group of active volunteers toward content creation activities, through programs like education and wiktionary work. We also recognize WMRS’ potential to create longer term change through some of its work, through achievements like having Wikipedia included in the national curriculum.
• WMRS has a lean organizational structure with an engaged, dedicated board. The board’s leadership and the hard work and expertise of staff has sustained this organization even during difficult staff transitions. We appreciate that WMRS is a volunteer-driven organization, both in its strong volunteer leadership and the participation of volunteers in all of its activities.
• WMRS’ education program is strong, and is gaining momentum. We see not only content-focused results, but potential for long term change through achievements like achieving inclusion in the national curriculum and through the growing dedication of volunteer ambassadors and partner-educators. There is also potential for innovation here, like the collaboration on Wikibooks.
• We note that while the education program is now supported by staff, the work is still very volunteer-driven. As with WMRS’ wiktionary work, we appreciate the commitment of WMRS’ core volunteers that make its activities happen.
• We were interested to learn about WMRS’ work with contests. While focused primarily on content rather than editor retention, we were intrigued by the connection between participation in contests and community health (changes to attitudes and behaviors in existing editors). WMRS achieved an impressive use rate for content generated through Wiki Loves Earth.
• We appreciate some ways that WMRS has grown in its ability to show the results of its work. For example, WMRS is now including more baselines for repeated projects like Wiki Loves Earth, and we say better quality reflections in this report.

Concerns

• Lack of program focus continues to be a significant concern. We would like to see WMRS focus on the programs that lead to the strongest outcomes, namely education, contests, wiktionary, and GLAM. Beyond discontinuing unsuccessful projects, WMRS may consider combining smaller projects in a different way, so they are not overemphasized in the proposal.
• While we appreciate improvements in WMRS’ reports, we encourage WMRS to improve its ability to tell stories about its work rather than providing long lists and detailed descriptions of activities rather than outcomes. We know many good stories are there (and we have heard some of them), but it will continue to be important for WMRS to showcase them in its reports.
• In a few cases, important achievements aren’t emphasized enough in these reports. One example is the inclusion of Wikipedia in the national curriculum. Another example is the growing momentum of WMRS’ volunteer-driven work.
• Clearer metrics and targets are needed for each program to better understand the outcomes, and a more consistent approach is needed across programs and reports. For example, it was difficult to understand the outcomes achieved through the education program from reading these reports, and the results of the creative commons / awareness work were also unclear.
• We’re concerned that we’re not yet seeing strong results in GLAM, despite the investment (e.g. number of articles for events and Wikipedians in Residence are low). We realize there may be potential here, as WMRS is still building relationships, but we hope to see some significant outcomes soon.