Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2016-2017 round 1/Wikimedia Argentina/Staff proposal assessment

Thanks to the Foundation staff for your assessment on our annual plan. As usual, it is really helpful for us to have an outsider look, and to know where we may need to reinforce or re-focus our efforts.
We would like to point out some issues to clarify certain aspects that we can see and consider that were not clear enough in our proposal, and that may have affected your capacity to evaluate it accordingly.

Complexity of our proposals and reports

After the last FDC process --with this same feedback of complexity-- we contacted different fellow affiliates that had had very good results, to learn from them and to be able to apply their models. WMAR is committed to continue working and coordinating with other chapters and with the WMF so that from now on, the reports and the next annual proposal represents and is done according to the requested format.

We also want to make it clear that complexity does not mean not paying attention to your observations. Foundation staff once told us "the plan is ok if it works for you". From WMAR we feel that we made and presented a much simpler plan compared with last year’s. We regret not having been able, after two years of modifying our reports and plans according to WMF staff feedback, to comply with the expected format. We will work so that this does not happen again.

We understand that it has a weakness when it comes to submitting annual plans according to WMF standards. The plans we have presented are always the result of both staff and community work, as both participate in the definition of our programmatic work. We want to make it clear that during the planning of this proposal, we had 40+ interventions and feedback through different channels such as surveys, the discussion page and our Annual Meeting that involved 25 direct participants where we discussed and jointly designed and defined the Annual Plan. We also shared it with other chapters involved in this same process and with WMF staff who helped us a lot with their comments.

We may like to highlight, however, that the possible complexity of the presentation of our plan and its associated metrics in no way should affect its feasibility, and our track record shows that WMAR has been able to exceed goals in most fields for our 2016 Annual Plan, which was similarly criticized for its complexity. In any case, it’s not unreasonable goals and projects that we are proposing --we fear too much insistence on the envelope could end up being distractive.

Concerns: implementation and staff

We consider the present plan to be completely achievable. We have been pushing for quality metrics since 2016 and we are not having trouble implementing them. The difficulties that have emerged are generally subject to changes occurring with our partners (mostly as the consequence of a resounding change of government), but not because of our plan’s complexity. We will improve and simplify how we tell our stories. We get your message: less is more.

Metrics-wise, it’s worth pointing out that our results have been significantly higher during 2016 when compared with 2015:

• In Education we have just exceeded 800 edited articles, of which half are new articles.
• In Glam we have surpassed the 200 complete books released and we have edited +9.000 articles.

We understand that we have not done a good job in explaining more clearly the results from the Community Support program, so we would like to give you some more concrete figures from this year, as of November 2016:

• 8 conferences have been led by members of the community.
• We have awarded 10 mobility grants.
• We have supported 2 grants to attend international events.
• We have supported 8 projects and initiatives led by our community that have resulted in 5000+ articles improved and created.
• 2 of these projects are specifically focused in reducing the gender gap: the Wikiproyecto Mujeres and the Women in Architecture project. Since June 30, 500+ articles have been created in the Wikiproyecto Mujeres and since the project of Women Arquitectas began we improved their representation in Wikipedia in more than 250 new articles and 17 new categories in Wikimedia Commons.
  

We have much to improve, that is true, but given our community and context we consider that we are on the right track. Also, when we point out that we have different communities, we have a challenge and opportunity, not a complexity. Maybe we do not make it clear, but like our offline community, we have a retention rate of 72% for our online community, meaning that 7 in 10 people who take part of one online WMAR activity takes part in another during the same year. But we are also aware of our limits. For example, we do not have a large community of photographers that is why we have allied to work in December with Open House Argentina and build a new community.

Staff

We believe that we have not explained well how the WMAR staff works. In fact, after reviewing how other chapters define their staff, we could say that WMAR has a staff of 3.2 since our administration manager only works in the office two mornings per week.

We have a full time Education Manager whose work is directly related with programmatic activity.

Our Communications Officer is not only responsible for making known what we do and being in contact with the media (PR), but she is also the person who leads our relationship with GLAM partners, and who helps designing and implementing activities such as edit-a-thons. In that sense her work is also very closely related with programmatic work and measurable outcomes --it could be very misleading to assume otherwise.

We think of incorporating a new person in a half time position to be able to assist and reach better to the online community. As your assessment correctly points out, it has been difficult at times for WMAR to actively engage “online-only” Wikipedians in chapter activities (we understand the same is true for most chapters), even if most chapter members are themselves active Wikipedians, including almost all Argentine administrators from the Spanish Wikipedia. The new half-time person that we are proposing to incorporate would precisely be in charge of establishing regular and stronger communication channels with online Wikipedians and any other volunteer communities outside from the chapter’s organic structure.

I as ED am full time dedicated to the three programs, with a very strong support for GLAM program provided our communication officer and the Education Program managed by the coordinator. As well, ED’s work is focused in formulating and monitoring projects, as well as seeking new financing alternatives, involving new counterparts in our work, and securing new alliances that help to project and expand our work.

We also want to clarify that we never divided the budget line of staff by programs, it was always a differentiated item in our budget. That does not mean that we do not know the amount of work of our staff per program, a metric we track at the end of every year, according to the number of activities done and the staff members involved per activity.

Iberocoop

Wikimedia Argentina has been promoting a coordinated work with the Iberocoop network. But it is important to understand how the network works. Iberocoop is a network of chapters and user's groups of different sizes and development that are not always active. Wikimedia Argentina proposes and encourages the entire network equally when we design projects we believe are interesting for all. Another very different thing is that there are chapters and user groups that decide or not decide to participate. We can not force it.
In this sense, it is no coincidence that we work more closely with certain chapters of the Latin American region, this depends fundamentally on the capacity and time - take in mind that WMAR is the only chapter with paid staff-of each of the chapters and user groups involved.
In this sense, and in order to clarify what we have done to date through the network, we would like to share with you the following projects and results:

• La mujer que nunca conociste: this contest framed in the month of the woman, is promoted by WMAR along with Iberocoop. The results were 1264 new women's articles created in 2016.
• Translating Ibero-America: the first Ibero-American culture edition competition promoted by WMAR with the Iberocoop. It meant 424 new articles in +15 different languages ​​on topics of Ibero-American culture.
• #HerStory initiative: along with Wikimedia Mexico and Wikimujeres and as part of Iberocoop we joined #HerStory campaign creating +80 new articles in 15 days.
• Initiative Women in Architecture: Driven by WMAR and Iberocoop, we promoted activities with Wikimedia España and Wikimedia Uruguay. 48 new articles in Wikipedia and 17 categories were created in Wikimedia Commons.
• Wiki Loves the Olympics: Proposed by Wikimedia Spain along with Iberocoop. 1335 articles were created, 64% on women.
• First Mentoring Program: We promoted the I Mentoring Program with Wikimedia Mexico, where we established our annual inter-chapter strategy. Thanks to the strengthening of this alliance we are working with Wikimedia Chile, Bolivia User Group, Ecuador User Group, Wikimedia Venezuela and Wikimedia España to launch the first Ibero-American online education course in 2017.
• During 2016 we have developed resources - we are currently developing didactic resources in neutral language - so that they can be used in all chapters of the region.

In total we have organized 5 major activities during 2016 so far with a result of 3151 new articles edited. 89% are new articles.

We hope these clarifications will help the FDC and the WMF staff to better understand the WMAR proposal. We are also attentive to any questions they may have. Thanks you in advance for reading --Anna Torres (WMAR) (talk) 01:23, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Hola Anna! Gracias for this complement of information/these clarifications, I will be reviewing them in detail shortly (I've been travelling to San Francisco preparing for the deliberations) and get back to you. Best! Delphine (WMF) (talk) 08:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)