Wikimedia Conference 2014/Documentation/4

4 Diversifying fundraising models and sources

Speakers: Kaarel Vaidla (WMEE), Douglas Scott (WMZA), Ichsan Mochtar (WMID)

tl;dr: External funds has advantages, easier than WMF funds. However, it brings a lot of administration and your programmes are influenced by others. Decide precisely and carefully why do you want to have external funds.

Notes

South Africa

WMZA were offered money by Open Society Foundation South Africa (= funds from outside WMF) which they wanted to use towards a full-time paid employee for their young chapter
50% funding -> 50% deposit (had to find matching funding which they received from WMF)
fortunate circumstances (mission alignment, legal structure etc.)
Pros:

easier to access funds than from WMF

reduced risk for everyone involved

Cons:

unfit for core-funding

reporting and auditing cost (takes time to get it done)

not good for experimentation (donors tend to not like that)

requires mission alignment

Indonesia

Chapter history

- 2008-09 survival stage (no measurable/lasting effects)

- 2010-14 continuous existence (writing competitions, collaborations)

WMID early on started with a surviving mode – they had no idea what work and what does not. Media coverage was the first thing that was done.
After 2010 multiple writing competitions were done, socialization of free knowledge collaboration etc. Community training was done, GA and Featured Articles were written.
WMID promote wiki and other free cultures, open licenses and transparency. Reporting gives confidence to other organizations, community and individuals, CC as a license is a solution for growing activities and open & transparent administration attract alliances – other subjects, state-funded also.

Promotion of

- confidence (by financial training)

- Creative Commons License

- attracting alliances

did not receive sufficent funds from government agencies/companies
in order to change that they are looking to hiring dedicated grant manager,
grant sources include: WMF, Ford Foundation, National Oil Company, WMFR, WMCH, (2014) HIVOS (Making All Voices Count)

Estonia

two types of funding:

1) non-targeted funding ('free money')

2) targeted funding (for specific projects)

WMEE receive most of their (targeted) funding from WMF, Council for Gambling Tax, Ministry of Science and Education, Ministry of Culture
PROS: more money; more projects; wider outreach
CONS: insance amount of administration (reports, accounting, paperwork); donors try to dictate goals/structure/content (external influence)

-> Example of why diversification of funding isn't necessarily good

Government is good for core-funding but they like to play political football with you