Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014 round1/Wikimedia Deutschland e.V./Proposal form

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. received a funds allocation in the amount of €1,296,000 (equal to about US$1,750,000) in 2013-2014 Round 1. This funds allocation was recommended by the Funds Dissemination Committee on 15 November 2013 and approved by the WMF Board of Trustees on 31 December 2013.

Basic information

Overview of grant request

In order to support community review, in no more than one paragraph, please provide a brief description of your entity's forthcoming annual plan, with focus areas and key objectives. Please also include the total amount requested in US$.

In 2014 we will implement the following 3 programms:

• Volunteer Support Program: The purpose of this program is to ensure that community support needs are easy to submit and that we meet them as reliably and quickly as possible. The idea is to obtain content and to motivate volunteers in their activities. In order to achieve this, we have set ourselves three operational goals for 2014. Firstly, we will make support opportunities more flexible, comprehensible, and better known by the end of the year. Secondly, we want external people (i.e. people we have not managed to reach so far) to make use of these opportunities. Thirdly, we will support social processes (inner framework, collaboration) within the communities in order to improve the Wikimedia projects.

• Institutional Partnerships Program: The aim of this program is to foster sustainable relationships between Wikimedians and institutions from the arts, education, and science sectors. The desired long-term result is for institutions to actively contribute free content to the Wikimedia projects on the basis of these relationships. We have set ourselves three operational goals for this program in 2014. Firstly, we will work with volunteers to identify content gaps in the Wikimedia projects. Secondly, we will bring institutions and interested volunteers from the communities together on a local level. Thirdly, we will create education, information, and participation opportunities for institutions.

• Legal and Social Framework Program: We want society’s decision-makers to contribute to ensuring that the general conditions for free knowledge do not deteriorate, but instead – in an ideal case – improve. These conditions should serve to ensure that it remains possible to increase the quality and quantity of Wikimedia project content in the long term. The program has four operational goals for 2014: firstly, to increase the exchange of information within the international Wikimedia movement in order to strengthen its position at the EU level; secondly, to improve the movement’s visibility at the EU level, as well as in the science and education sectors; thirdly, to raise awareness of and publish an action plan for state-owned works; and fourthly, to develop a position on open educational resources and open education.

In addition:

• Software development: All three programs include scheduled tasks that are meant to be solved by software development. As our largest technological project Wikidata will continue to play an important role here in 2014. We are planning to develop a tagging system for Wikimedia Commons in order to improve the monolingual categories system, and in particular to address the difficulties of reusing metadata. Software development will also be necessary across all departments for the Digital Openness Benchmark and for the tool for reusing CC licenses. It will also ensure that technical requests from the communities quickly receive the necessary support.

Total amount requested from FDC: 2,430,000 US$. (Exchange rate: 1,35)

Contact information

Table 1

Organization information	Legal name of organization	Wikimedia Deutschland e. V.
	organization's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd)	01/01–12/31
	12 month timeframe* of funds currently requested (mm/dd/yy–mm/dd/yy)	01/01/14–12/31/14
Contact information (primary)	Primary contact name	Pavel Richter
	Primary contact position in organization	Executive Director
	Primary contact username	User:Pavel Richter (WMDE)
	Primary contact email	pavel.richter@wikimedia.de
Contact information (secondary)	Secondary contact name	Kasia Odrozek
	Secondary contact position in organization	Assistant to Executive Director
	Secondary contact username	User:Kasia Odrozek (WMDE)
	Secondary contact email	kasia.odrozek@wikimedia.de

*Timeframe should ideally be for a 12 month period that begins after the FDC decision.

Amount requested

Table 2

Currency requested: EUR

Currency requested is defined as the currency in which you wish to receive funds (e.g., EUR, GBP, INR). Note that the FDC makes grants in local currency when possible.

Exchange rate used (currency requested to $US): 1,35 as of 09/27/2013

Please use Oanda.com on March 1 2014 to determine the exchange rate. Please use five decimal points.

	Currency requested	US$
Total annual expenses of organization	WMDE: 5,170,000 / WMFG: 440,000 (Fundraising costs)	WMDE: 6,979,500 / WMFG: 594,000
Amount proposed to the FDC for the coming year's annual plan	1,800,000	2,430,000
Amount to be raised from non-FDC sources	3,370,000	4,549,500
If applicable, amount of FDC funds allocated to organization last year	1,377,000 (exchange rate: 1,3)	1,790,100

Based on the funding amount you are requesting, what is your entity's proposed rate of growth in budget since last year? Please explain your entity's rationale if your proposed budget will increase this year:

Note the FDC Framework funding guidelines on the rate of growth of year-over-year FDC allocations. These guidelines relate not to an entity's overall budget, but rather to movement resources (that is, what the entity received through FDC allocations or grants or what the entity retained via payment processing in the prior funding cycle).

Our FDC funding request increases by 28%. For rationale see the explanation about the Software Development department in the program section of the proposal.

Background, history, and mission

This section provides the FDC an overview of your entity's background and history. Please respond to each question below with 1-2 sentences to a maximum of a paragraph.

When was your entity established?

• June 13, 2004

What is the mission of your entity, and how does it support the strategic priorities of the Wikimedia movement (infrastructure, participation, quality, reach, and innovation)? We note that Wikimedia movement priorities will be interpreted and addressed differently in each context.

• Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. is a non-profit organization dedicated to the dissemination of free knowledge. Wikimedia Deutschland supports the Wikimedia movement’s mission of creating and disseminating free knowledge throughout the world. We consider the free and open access to knowledge an integral part of the human right to education. We support the Wikimedia projects with fundraising, software development, infrastructure and public relations, as well as with awareness raising campaigns. We assist volunteer projects and represent the idea of free knowledge in the political field. We organize conferences and workshops, award prizes and scholarships, advise cultural and educational institutions and realize projects in cooperation with civil society partners and education projects. Furthermore, we support the German Wikipedia community with technical and administrative assistance. This mission supports the Wikimedia goals of free and accurate knowledge that every human being has access to, and our above listed activities support the following priorities of the movement: infrastructure, participation, quality and innovation.

What is your current leadership structure (e.g., executive staff structure, board / governance structure)? Please explain how budgets are managed and programs are executed between board and staff.

1. General Assembly of Members (Mitgliederversammlung) that meets twice a year and decides on the annual plan (program plan and budget)
2. Board: member-elected Board with one Board President, two Vice presidents, one Treasurer and up to six regular members; one-year term limit.
3. One Executive Director
4. All heads of departments (Politics & Society, Education & Knowledge, Team Communities, Software Development), as well as the Head of Communication form a leadership circle advising the Executive Director.

The Supervisory Board is asked by the Executive Director to endorse the annual plan which contains budgets and program descriptions. The Executive Director submits the annual plan to the General Assembly for approval. If during the year budgets need to be adjusted significantly, the Executive Director submits a supplementary budget to the Board for approval. The staff is executing the programs and budgets and the Executive Director reports to the Supervisory Board, the FDC, the members and the general public about the progress in a quarterly manner. The staff is at the Board's disposal any time they need more information in the meantime.

If applicable, how many members does your entity have, and how do you define membership (e.g., attendance at events, paying dues)?

• As of September 6, 2013 we had 6.917 members (1.705 active and 5.212 sustaining members). One can become a member of WMDE by filling out a membership form (also available online) and paying an annual fee. One can choose to become an active member, entitled to vote on matters of the association (e.g. at the General Assembly), or a sustaining member (so called "Fördermitglied"), supporting the association financially with the member fee.

What is the role of volunteers in your entity (e.g., help develop entity plans, participate in programs, edit Wikipedia)? Approximately how many volunteers does your entity serve?

• Volunteers are playing a key role in all our activities. Inside of the Wikimedia movement WMDE offers many support programs to boost the quality and quantity of the volunteers' work in the Wikimedia projects, mainly Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. This year we supported approx. 250 people directly and approx. 400 people in an indirect way (e.g. participants in supported events). Besides this, WMDE offers various ways to participate in most of our activities beyond the Wikimedia circles (i.e. educational, political and international affairs).

How do you know what the members of the community / communities you serve (including chapter members and broader online volunteers) need and want? How does this influence your strategic planning and decision-making?

• As a member-based organization with two general assemblies a year, WMDE is in a constant dialogue with its members, among them many community members, too. Furthermore, WMDE's projects and statements are permanently discussed within the community. This year we started to integrate the various communities even stronger in WMDE's basic planning. We hosted various events throughout the country flanked by online questionings and discussions. Our intention was to understand the community's attitude better in general and specifically to get input for the Board's strategic process and the annual plan of WMDE. Similar events will follow frequently.
• Furthermore, we use the following online and offline ways to encourage involvement in our budget planning:

a) online: we post the annual plan draft to the Wikimedia Deutschland Forum and to Meta-Wiki for community discussion. Until 4 weeks before the General Assembly our members have the possibiliity to give feedback via talkpages and to submit written motions in case they want to introduce changes to the Annual Plan. The motions may be discussed online by the community until the GA and are then being discussed and voted upon at the GA.

b)offline - after publishing the draft in the Forum and on Meta we organize an "Annual Plan Tour" visiting 5 big cities in Germany, advertising these meetings among our members and the interested public in advance. At these meetings the ED together with the Board members present the Annual Plan to the members and gather their feedback, as well as answer questions. The feedback is then summarized and published on the talkpage and incorporated into the draft.

2013 will be the third time we will do the tour so this is still an experimental format. In 2012 we had around 20-25 participants at each offline meeting, we hope to gather more this year. Both online and offline involvement possibilities generate some interest and feedback but there is definitely potential for more participation and we are still looking for ways to give our members more impact on the Annual Plan while it is still in the draft stage.

Reflection on past activities and innovations

This section provides the FDC with information about your entity's past programs, activities and strategies. Please answer the questions below with your reflections on the past fiscal year. Responses to each question should be one or two paragraphs.

How does your entity define and measure "success"?

• Wikimedia Deutschland defines its success by the outcomes that are achieved for the benefit of the Wikimedia movement. To strengthen this focus on outcomes, our Evaluation Unit has introduced the Theory of Change approach to our long-term planning, monitoring and evaluation efforts (see full documentation here) this year. As a result, our three major long-term programs now include change models. These change models are the main conceptual framework for planning and evaluating our projects. In addition, all major projects are requested to provide logic models mapping their outputs and outcomes. The combination of both will help to ensure that projects are planned towards a program's change model. In terms of measurement, we are most interested in the impacts and long-term outcomes of our work. However, we know that these impacts and outcomes are very difficult to measure and attribute (complex chains of cause and effect in a constantly changing environment with many players). So while measuring outcomes is our declared goal, we know that to date, in many cases it is only feasible to monitor outputs and/or measure short-term outcomes and to assess them in the context of our change models. Our Evaluation Unit, working closely together with the global Wikimedia movement, will help us improve our monitoring processes and build up capacity for evaluation.

Please give at least three examples of successful programs or activities that your entity has completed, and explain why they were successful. If available, provide links to information.

• Wikidata meets Archeology: Our outreach activities aim to convince scientific and cultural institutions of the usefulness of collaborating with Wikimedia communities and the German chapter. In this context, the symposium Wikidata meets Archeology in March 2013 was an important step into the scientific arena. It successfully demonstrated the enormous potential of collaborative projects between leading research institutions and citizen science activists. For example, volunteers can take on specific tasks (geo-referencing objects, updating metadata, writing articles) that are not within the scope of the institutions specialized in this area (due to organizational or budgetary constraints). The symposium included a presentation of an interactive Limes map – which was a citizen science approach conducted by the RENDER project, Wikidata, the German Wikipedia community, and the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI). The role-model nature of this collaboration has already had an impact on many discussions and negotiations with other GLAMs. Success stories like this should be widely publicized in order to inspire other Wikipedians and institutions to follow suit and embark on similar collaborative projects.

• Community support programs: Restructuring and expansion of the Volunteer Support department caused the efficiency of the volunteer support department to rise. The choice of support programs has been enriched by programs like a general insurance for community-driven Wikimedia meetups, developed with and welcomed a lot by the community. With a new start page in Wikipedia and a streamlining of major programs like the literature grant program and the Wikipedia meetup program, the relaunch of WMDE's volunteer support programs has begun. First feedback indicates higher satisfaction of volunteers; first steps towards precise evaluation have been made. This restructuring work will continue as a major part of next year's plan.

• WMDE helped to make large community events a success: The Wikimania scholarship group has been more productive than ever before, as it not only shared its knowledge in many talks and gatherings, but looped back its experiences, encounters and learnings from the Wikimania back home to the community. Measures like running an internationally supported photo project to explore Hong Kong, filming video footage and writing about 20 blog posts in the German Signpost, read about 2.500 times. The WikiCon, Germany's largest community-driven event with approx. 250 visitors to be expected, will this year be run by WMDE in organizational matters, as the community team was unable to finish their work as planned.

• Conference on Open Educational Ressources: The successful organization of the largest conference for open educational resources is one of the highlights of Wikimedia's work in the field of education. 300 national and international representatives of different areas of expertise, organizations and companies discussed the future of open education on September 14-15, 2013. The conference focused on fields of action, development options and strategies for Germany as well as presentations of best practice. The conference is to be considered a success, because the execution was carried by a big network of players - from UNESCO to the Medienanstalt Berlin-Brandenburg, the Werkstatt.bpb and Creative Commons Germany to the Internet and Society Co:llaboratory. This network is not only able to improve the framework for open knowledge in Germany, but will also conduct numerous pilot projects in order to advance the movement and its priorities.

Link to the conference’s page: https://www.wikimedia.de/wiki/OERde13

Program and speakers: https://www.wikimedia.de/wiki/OERde13/Programm#OER_in_the_context_of_other_Open_movements_-_Starting_from_scratch_is_not_obligatory

Livestream: http://werkstatt.bpb.de/category/oerkonferenz2013/

Impressions: http://vimeo.com/74539623

Trailer: http://vimeo.com/71809142

• Wikidata Wikidata (http://www.wikidata.org) aims to create a free knowledge base about the world that can be read and edited by humans and machines alike. It will provide data in all the languages of the Wikimedia projects and allow for central access to data in a similar vein as Wikimedia Commons does for multimedia files. Wikidata has begun to serve the over 280 language versions of Wikipedia as a common source of structured data that can be used in more than 25 million articles of the free encyclopedia. By providing Wikipedia editors with a central venue for their efforts to collect and vet such data, Wikidata leads to a higher level of consistency and quality in Wikipedia articles across the many language editions of the encyclopedia. Beyond Wikipedia, Wikidata’s universal, machine-readable knowledge database will be freely reusable by anyone, enabling numerous external applications. In 2013, we have provided an infrastructure that allowed to centralize language links from Wikipedia and Wikivoyage. This has led to the removal of more than 240 Million lines of wikitext from Wikipedia and Wikivoyage, and to a strong reduction of bot-based edits on these projects. This sharply decreased maintenance cost and quality of the language links, contributing directly to the strategic goals of the Wikimedia movement.

As of 2013, Wikidata has about 3,900 active editors. Although many of these have been Wikimedia project contributors before, Wikidata also managed to bring more than 1,300 completely new contributors to the Wikimedia projects, which have not been Wikimedia project contributors before. Looking at the data, this influx of new contributors has been one of the largest impacts on contributor numbers in the last few years and also directly contributes to the strategic goals of the Wikimedia movement.

What are the plans/strategies that did not work for your entity in the past? What did your entity learn from those experiences? What changes were made after learning from these experiences?

• Fact Check In our quest for "partnerships of excellence", we developed the project "Fact Check", a cooperation with ZDF (Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen). As part of the project, a Wikipedian in residence was deployed at the public broadcaster in order to serve as a bridge-builder between professional journalists and the Wikipedia community. On the new ZDF online platform, statements from politicians are checked for accuracy in a collaborative manner. The resulting content, such as infographics, videos, and texts, is published under a CC-BY license - in order to foster re-use inside and outside Wikimedia platforms. However, the German Wikipedia community severely criticized the launch of the project. Criticism focused mainly on the fact that Wikipedians should not be used to meet the needs of a public television broadcaster. The use of the term "Wikipedia" in connection with a non-encyclopedia project gave rise to widespread skepticism and a feeling of having been co-opted. WMDE had not anticipated the mood of the community prior to the project launch. Poor communication was exacerbated by the fact that a press release about the cooperation issued by the association did not take the loud criticism on board. This gave the impression that the chapter was ignoring the concerns of volunteers. Nonetheless, the criticism of the project led to a better understanding of the dynamics of ownership thinking: We learned that the distinction between "community-driven" and "chapter-driven" projects still matters. Meanwhile, at least 20 Wikipedia authors have contributed to ZDFcheck, according to the stats delivered to us.

Links:

http://zdfcheck.zdf.de/

WMDE blog:

http://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/04/24/was-wikipedianer-besonders-gut-konnen/

http://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/05/13/latet-enim-veritas-sed-nihil-pretiosius-veritate-zdfcheck/

http://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/05/27/14-tage-zdfcheck-ein-zwischenbericht/

Internet conference re:publica: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsdGJc74YiY

Wikipedia:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikimedia_Deutschland_e._V./ZDFcheck

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikimedia_Deutschland_e._V./ZDFCheck/FAQ

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Umfragen/ZDF-Kooperation

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Kurier/Archiv/2013/04/Faktencheck:_ZDF_und_Wikipedianer

• Communication around the restructuring of educational activities: In 2013, WMDE produced a self-critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of its educational activities. The conclusions led to the discontinuation of activities that lacked clearly formulated goals and an accompanying evaluation process. Although from a professional perspective there were many reasons for cancelling these activities, this step was criticized heavily by parts of the community and people directly involved in these projects. Identification with the former activities was surprisingly high and the willingness to initiate a transition and professionalization was very low. In the future, communicative support of processes of change and the sensitive inclusion of the involved community will have to play a greater role, as to not lower volunteer motivation.

Report on educational activities: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Deutschland/Report_on_educational_activities_2010-2012

• Organisational difficulties As a consequence of WMDE's fast growth we encountered structural problems as in some areas we were lacking established processes and not all vacant functional positions could be filled as planned. This delayed the execution of programmatic work. Furthermore, the search for a bigger office space took much longer than expected, which resulted in poor work conditions.

What else has your entity learned or innovated upon that could benefit the broader Wikimedia movement?

• Booklet about CC Licenses The English version of our 24-page booklet "Free Knowledge thanks to Creative Commons Licenses - Why a non-commercial clause often won't serve your needs" was presented and distributed during Wikimania 2013 in Hong Kong. The booklet has been conceived as an easy-to-read manual, aimed at increasing the "institutional readiness" concerning open access and licensing policies in GLAMs. Local Wikimedians, who often serve as a door opener for content liberation, need tools like this to teach and influence institutional decision-makers. Many Wikimedia communities already translated the text on Meta-Wiki – a fact which might serve as an indicator for the booklet's innovative character.

Links:

http://wikimedia.de/images/1/15/CC-NC_Leitfaden_2013_engl.pdf

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Free_knowledge_based_on_Creative_Commons_licenses

• Easy-to-handle support structures: Being fast, flexible and friendly are major virtues of any support programs. But especially when volunteer plans tend to be more ambitious, when the requirements of their plans get larger and their efforts bigger, reliable and easy-to-handle supportive structures are much more needed.

• Diversity Concept draft: The research and development scheme "Diversity in Wikipedia" that was developed together with the Beuth Hochschule Berlin - especially the gender and technology center and the visiting professorship for digital media and diversity - can already be characterized as best practice. Strategies for action and solution approaches are developed together with the community in Open Innovation formats. The involvement of experts in this process is just as necessary as the cooperation of opinion-forming actors within the Wikipedia community.

Links:

This working paper summarizes the first phase of the project "Diversity in Wikipedia". At the moment, we can provide the German version, but we will communicate the English version soon: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arbeitspapier-Wikipedia-Diversity_V05.pdf

Presentations "Wikipedia Diversity", Prof. Dr. Ilona Buchem (Beuth University): http://de.slideshare.net/ibuchem/wikipedia-diversity-25097396, http://de.slideshare.net/ibuchem/e-society-presentation

Poll "Wikipedia Gender Diversity": https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.de/forms/d/1DooN_x-j4wbQMSfwtpk3cmB8kbn_aA3RReWW8PsBUFM/viewform

Wikimedia Diversity Conference hosted by WMDE, WMNL, WMUK, WMF: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Diversity_Conference

Please link to the following to provide supplemental information to the FDC:

How does your entity share its work with your community and with the wider Wikimedia movement? For instance, publishing case studies on Meta, blog posts, newsletters, speeches at conferences, etc.

We use different internal and external channels: To share our work with our communities and the movement, we use German and English mailing lists, Wikipedia:Kurier (Villagepump), Meta-Wiki, events like Wikimania, Wikimedia Conference, Hackathons, WikiConvention (large-scale yearly German-speaking community event), GLAM events and smaller workshops or meet-ups. To present and discuss our work for the broader public (incl. the movement and our community, but also external partners, educational institutions, media and like-minded organizations), we use our website, blog, Twitter and Facebook as well as regular press releases, printed information material and external events.

Discussing and sharing our annual planning: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Deutschland/2013_annual_plan/de

Monthly, quarterly and yearly reports: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland#Chapter_information_and_reports

Updates on Wikidata: http://blog.wikimedia.de/tag/wikidata/ // https://twitter.com/wikidata // https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata

Fundraising tests and results: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraiser_2013

Report on educational activities 2010-2012: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/Report_on_educational_activities_2010-2012

Working paper "Gender – Diversity – Wikipedia": https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arbeitspapier-Wikipedia-Diversity_V05.pdf (German version, English version to come)

GLAM brochure: http://www.wikimedia.de/images/6/6d/GLAM-BROSCHUERE_2013_web.pdf

Free Knowledge thanks to Creative Commons licences: http://www.wikimedia.de/images/a/a2/IRights_CC-NC_Leitfaden_web.pdf (DE) // http://www.wikimedia.de/images/1/15/CC-NC_Leitfaden_2013_engl.pdf (EN)

Chapters Village at Wikimania: http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chapters_Village

Chapters Dialogue: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chapters_Dialogue

RENDER: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RENDER // https://blog.wikimedia.de/category/wissenschaft/render/

Wikimania presentations: http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/A_GLAMourous_year // http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Migrating_from_the_Toolserver_to_Tool_Labs // http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/The_Technology_Behind_Wikidata // http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Promoting_diversity_in_the_German_Wikipedia

People at WMDE http://www.wikimedia.de/images/9/90/WMDE_Flyer_web_120dpi.pdf

Link to most recently completed fiscal year annual plan

• http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/2012_Programme_Plan

Link to most recently completed fiscal year annual report and financial report

• http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/2012_annual_report

Link to most recently completed fiscal year grant report (if your entity has received funds from the FDC)

• https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2012-2013_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland/Progress_report_form/Q2

Link to your entity's strategic plan if you have one

• http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Kompass_2020/en

Note: The Supervisory Board is currently working on updating the strategic plan.

Link to your organogram or organizational chart if one exists

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMDE_organizational_chart_2014_EN.pdf

Link to your entity's current fiscal year plan and budget

• http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/2013_annual_plan/en

Key programs / initiatives and objectives of the upcoming year's annual plan

These tables are intended to provide an overview of your entity's upcoming year annual plan and its alignment with the movement's strategic priorities; please provide short phrases or 1-3 bullet points for each program below. You can also link to any other documents that you think might be helpful as context.

Please ensure that your proposed programs are SMART; that is, specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timely.

If you feel you have a program that fulfills a strategic goal that is not immediately identified with a movement strategic priority ('readership' rather than 'editorship', for instance), please add that in the table and offer us your rationale.

Finally, please also note which programs are the entity's priorities.

Program 1

Volunteer Support Program

What are the objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals.

All the activities within the Volunteer Support Program pursue a joint long-term objective: Volunteers are enabled to create free knowledge as part of the Wikimedia movement. To that end, the community support needs are easily assessed by Wikimedia Deutschland and met as reliably and quickly as possible. As a result content is obtained and volunteers are motivated in their activities.

In 2014 Wikimedia Deutschland will achieve these goals:

• Existing funding opportunities will have been taken up more readily in the Wikimedia movement because they are simple, quick, and easy to understand. The number of funding requests will have increased from around 850 (number of tickets in the OTRS queue from 08.31.2012 to 09.01.2013) to 1,900 (in the same period).

• The funding opportunities will have attracted more volunteers, both in Wikimedia projects and beyond. The number of volunteers receiving funding will have increased from 250 to 400 per year. (Please note that this number does not include the participants in the projects organized by the volunteers receiving funding).

• The need for support for social processes in Wikimedia communities will have been analysed and met. In 2014, the number of supported processes leading to long-term improvements in the conditions in Wikimedia communities will increase from four (in the period from 01.01.2013 to 12.31.2013) to ten (in the same period).

Which Wikimedia movement strategic priority (or priorities) does this program address and how?

• Improve quality (main long-term outcome as explained in the change model)

"Support our volunteer community through technology improvements."

• Encourage innovation

"Increase access to information that drives community, decision-making and action."

"Promote the adoption of great ideas."

• Increase participation

"Develop new features and tools."

"Support the recruitment and acculturation of newer contributors."

"Encourage diversity."

"Support offline and social events."

"Reward excellent contributions."

"Create products and services that support affiliation and excellence among Wikimedians."

"Support volunteer initiatives that fuel the growth of communities and projects around the world, including meet-ups, public outreach activities and other volunteer innovations."

(Source: Wikimedia movement strategic priorities)

What key activities and/or milestones are associated with this program?

Selected activities and/or milestones in 2014 will be:

• Revised structure with simpler criteria for funding and supporting volunteer work
• Tools for support requests from volunteers
• Funding opportunities for Wikipedia’s sister projects
• Guidance and communication on community issues e.g. diversity, software, social issues
• Measures to increase legal certainty (photo handbook, advice, training)
• Local groups – creation and support, e.g. community support points
• GLAM networking events (e.g. Kaufbeuren, Hanover) with volunteers working in the cultural sector
• Volunteer meet-ups at local events on diversity

Technical support through software development:

As our largest technical project, Wikidata plays an important role in this program. We plan to develop a tagging system for Wikimedia Commons in order to improve the monolingual categories system and to address the complicated process of reusing metadata. Software development staff will be available to support volunteers in their work and to deal directly with technical requests from the communities.

How will your entity document, track, and measure successes and challenges of this program?

We will report on our progress and lessons learned in monthly, quarterly and yearly reports.

For details about the change model and indicators of this program see: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/Evaluation/Volunteer_Support_Program

Any additional details:

Program 2

Institutional Partnerships Program

What are the objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals.

All the activities within the Institutional Partnerships Program pursue a joint long-term objective: Institutions are enabled to contribute free knowledge to the Wikimedia movement. To this aim, Wikimedia Deutschland supports the formation of sustainable relationships between Wikimedians and cultural, educational and academic institutions. On the basis of these relationships, institutions actively contribute free content to the Wikimedia projects.

In 2014 Wikimedia Deutschland will achieve these goals:

• We will have identified content gaps in the Wikimedia projects in cooperation with the communities and suitable partner institutions. We will draw up a list of missing content during networking meetings and by contacting specific editorial teams and individual authors.
• Institutions will be in dialogue with volunteers and meetings will have been held to coordinate local activities. We will document successful joint projects and make them available to the Wikimedia movement.
• We will have ensured the implementation of pilot projects by institutions by providing education and participation opportunities, software resources, and clear guidelines on content release. We will document successful joint projects and make them available to the Wikimedia movement.

Which Wikimedia movement strategic priority (or priorities) does this program address and how?

• Improve quality (main long-term outcome as explained in the change model)

"Provide support to the Wikimedia movement in the development of institutional partnerships and alliances."

"Provide project funding for efforts to connect the Wikimedia projects with the work of institutions of culture and learning."

"Give global visibility to these efforts through our communication channels."

"Develop and maintain documentation of best practices, blueprints, standards, and metrics associated with institutional partnerships."

• Stabilize infrastructure

"Help people better understand our work, and motivate them to help us do it."

• Encourage innovation

"Promote the adoption of great ideas."

(Source: Wikimedia movement strategic priorities)

What key activities and/or milestones are associated with this program?

Selected activities and/or milestones in 2014 will be:

• Funding and support programs for institutions: for concepts on digitization and free licensing of content
• Material on image rights or metadata for the culture, education and/or science sectors
• Forms of participation: modules on free licenses, collaborative projects
• Wikipedia Academy in the science sector
• Reuse tool for Creative Commons (CC) licenses

Technical support through software development:

In this part of the program, we will create a reuse tool for CC licenses in order to facilitate the use of CC-licensed pictures.

How will your entity document, track, and measure successes and challenges of this program?

We will report on our progress and lessons learned in monthly, quarterly and yearly reports.

For details about the change model and indicators of this program see: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/Evaluation/Institutional_Partnerships_Program

Any additional details:

Program 3

Legal and Social Framework

What are the objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals.

All the activities within the Legal and Social Framework Program pursue a joint long-term objective: The general conditions for promoting free knowledge must be improved. Decision-makers in society can change the general conditions for the creation, collection and dissemination of free content through legislative acts, institutional rules and specialist recommendations. WMDE wants to help increase the influence that the Wikimedia movement has on these decision-makers, so that the conditions for promoting free knowledge do not worsen, but that, in the best case, they improve. In this way, we want to ensure that people are able to increase the quality and quantity of content in the Wikimedia projects in the long term.

In 2014 Wikimedia Deutschland will achieve these goals:

• The Wikimedia movement will have established binding decision-making processes, regular discussions, and contacts in order to position itself at EU level. There will be guidelines for writing EU statements, as well as designated contact people within the Wikimedia Foundation and in at least 70 percent of the EU chapters.
• We will have achieved visibility for Wikimedia-related issues by enhancing our networks, monitoring, materials, and events. We will create collaborative products (events, pilot projects) and intensify cooperation (frequency of contact, communication intensity).
• Our argument for why more state-owned works should be in the public domain will have been finalized and recognized within the Wikimedia movement. By working together to formulate key concerns and recommendations for action, we will increase the number of specialist skills within the Wikimedia movement.
• Our position on OER will have become clear and recognized within the Wikimedia movement. By working together to formulate key concerns and recommendations for action, we will increase the number of specialist skills within the Wikimedia movement.

Which Wikimedia movement strategic priority (or priorities) does this program address and how?

• Stabilize infrastructure (main long-term outcome as explained in the change model)

"support the advancement of (...) conditions that enable unimpeded access to information online, worldwide"

"Help people better understand our work, and motivate them to help us do it."

"Build internal capacity to better support the movement and achieve its strategic goals."

• Encourage innovation

"Increase access to information that drives community, decision-making and action."

"Promote the adoption of great ideas."

(Source: Wikimedia movement strategic priorities)

What key activities and/or milestones are associated with this program?

Selected activities and/or milestones in 2014 will be:

• Position papers/recommendations for action on OER and free education
• OER conference
• Public campaign day on April 23 – World Book and Copyright Day
• Meet and greet in Brussels
• Open-content brochures
• Think tank on OER and free education

Technical support through software development:

Setting up a Digital Openness Benchmark to present a clear and comparable overview of the contribution public bodies are making to digital common goods (such as data, information, knowledge, and infrastructure). A broad and partially structured indicator matrix should provide a basis for ranking selected regional authorities in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (with partners), and for developing a self-assessment software tool for ranking local authorities that are not listed.

How will your entity document, track, and measure successes and challenges of this program?

We will report on our progress and lessons learned in monthly, quarterly and yearly reports.

For details about the change model and indicators of this program see: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/Evaluation/Legal_and_Social_Framework_Program

Any additional details:

Background on the newly formed Software Development department and its impact on the Annual Plan:

In April 2012, Wikimedia Deutschland started a new undertaking by developing Wikidata. Not only was this the first new Wikimedia project since 2006, but it was also the first large software development project completely done by a chapter, not the Wikimedia Foundation. So we designed the initial project framework, outlined the scope of Wikidata, assembled a team (many of whom moved to Berlin to work on this project) and had extensive and very productive talks with Erik Moeller and other key engineering staff at the WMF. It took some time and effort on all sides, but we are now in a very good position where we have clearly defined communication channels, deployment guidelines, shared code reviews, and a lot more.

Another aspect of Wikidata made the project unique for Wikimedia Deutschland: financing. While usually we budget for our projects and programs out of our regular annual budget (which constitutes itself mostly of various forms of donations either directly to Wikimedia Deutschland or to the movement in general), with Wikidata it was different: The budget was approx. 1.5 million Euros, and there was no way that we would have been able to fund this within the scope of our regular budget. We would have either had to cut a lot of other programmatic work and by this jeopardize the past work and future successes of the organization, or we would have been in a position to aggressively raise more funds through our annual fundraiser, something we wanted to avoid at all costs. So we decided to look for major donors, a first for Wikimedia Deutschland. Thanks to the support of the WMF, and because Wikidata was something that was easy to explain to people not deeply involved with the Wikimedia world as something worthy of support, we were able to secure all necessary funds from the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Google Inc., the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and Yandex.

We want to continue the work we started with Wikidata. We think that Wikimedia Deutschland is best suited to continue supporting, maintaining and further developing the project. We commit ourselves to develop and deploy by the end of 2014 a new tagging system that will bring structured data to Wikimedia Commons, making it easier to locate content. But in addition, we think that we can go even further: We had long talks with Erik Moeller over the last months, and there is so much need for engineering power within the Wikimedia movement that it cannot be provided by the Wikimedia Foundation by itself. That is why Wikimedia Deutschland wants to build a complete software development unit at our offices, focusing on three major areas: development of large software projects (such as, but not limited to, Wikidata) in close collaboration with the Wikimedia Foundation and the movement as a whole; secondly, support for community-driven engineering tasks, such as the transition from tools hosted on the Toolserver to ToolLabs, as well as other engineering projects that our communities might want; thirdly, technical support for ongoing programs and projects by Wikimedia Deutschland (everything from fundraising to developing software tools that make it easier for GLAM institutions to share content with the movement).

Regarding the financials, we think it is best if we return to the regular channels that are open to all movement entities. Not only would it be substantially more complicated to find suitable major donors to support not the start of a new project (as was the case with the first phase of Wikidata), but the continuation of such a project. Making the further development of Wikidata dependent on the support of very few major donors would also put great risk on the future support and development. But, most importantly, we believe that software development could and should be an integral part of what Wikimedia organizations such as Wikimedia Deutschland can and should do. Therefore, we decided to apply for funding for our complete software development department through our regular channels, foremost the FDC.

In 2013, we spent around € 850,000 on Wikidata (including administrative costs, rent, etc.), funded 90% by the major donors mentioned above. Going forward, we want to cover all costs through our regular budget. To achieve this, we reduced growth in other programmatic areas, as well as increased the amount of money we apply for through the FDC beyond the recommended maximum of 20%. Approx. € 500,000 of the 2014 software development budget will be paid for by funds carried over from 2013. This is due to individual cases of programs in 2013 that were not started as planned (WCA, Community Project Budget, etc.), and we do not expect that this will happen for the 2015 budget. But we are confident that we can switch resources in 2014 towards software development, as well as securing third-party funding for some of our other programmatic work, that will allow us to commit a larger portion of movement money towards engineering in the future.

Additional context for the upcoming year's annual plan / SWOT

Please provide 1-2 paragraphs for each response below. SWOT stands for your organizational strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

What organizational strengths enable your entity's plan (e.g., leadership, education program expertise, experience with outreach, governance structure, community participation, fundraising)?

• Strong and detailed experience and know how in open source software development & engineering, especially for Wikidata and technical ambitious technical projects
• Strong organizational structures within WMDE. Leadership is guaranteed with high profiled division managers and staff positions. That enables WMDE to start and manage projects in several and different magnitudes.
• A long-standing and in-depth experience in community support and funding. WMDE builds on lessons learned and best practice experience from several years of small to large scale support via project and program structures, which enables us to streamline our efforts and reach more people in the future.
• With the Communicatons, Evaluation, International Affairs and Event Management units WMDE has etablished a support structure for its departments. This allows the departments to focus on project management and their key activities. Additional necessary expertise is provided for them.
• Large database of donors and members, that can be activated for programmatic work

What external opportunities enable your entity's plan (e.g., socio-political context, community participation, fundraising)?

• WMDE has a proven sustainable, positive reputation as an advocate of free and open knowledge and is well known through valuable input on different topic-relevant events
• In Germany, Berlin is one of the top rated and high profile locations for open source, semantic web and software engineering, which will help in recruting top level software engeneers.
• In recent years openness issues have caught public attention in Germany, especially regarding the limitations of useability of educational material and tax-funded content. While neither of both issues have the potential to make prime time news (just yet), a network of openness advocates is emerging that may serve as a huge scaleability factor for WMDE’s endeavors in advocacy and education.
• Beyond the social media sphere the German public at-large has become highly susceptible to privacy issues, web security and transparency. This is an opportunity for challenging restrictive knowledge paradigms.
• Very good established network within the political and cultural sector in Germany, therefore easy access to stakeholders and recognition of Wikimedia Deutschland as a reliable partner

What are key risks or threats that would prevent you from achieving your plan (e.g., leadership turnover, governance challenges, lawsuits, fundraising, community participation, socio-political context)?

• Key positions in leadership/management leave WMDE
• Fundraiser goals will not be achieved
• Our efforts towards securing a legal and social framework for the sustainable creation of free knowledge fail to meet different community expectations
• The department/unit structure fails to interconnect and information silos emerge, leading to inefficiency
• The sometimes difficult relationship between Wikimedia Deutschland and the editor communitys deteriorates in a way that we do not find sufficiant support for our activitys within the German community
• Competition with the strong startup environment in Berlin when it comes to recruiting developers

How will you minimize these risks and threats?

• Established, sustainable employee development steps
• Continue improvement and analyses of fundraising campaigns; exploring different income possibilities, such as broadening the membership base, or partnering with other NGOs/foundations to fund and execute programs
• Improved community support structures will lead to community satisfaction with WMDE’s volunteer support, which, in turn, may contribute to achieving a reputation of being a long-term advocate for community safe-guarding.
• Regular team leader meetings secure an efficient working relationship between departments and support units. Moreover, all departments and units are involved in collaborative reporting and planning processes.
• As an non-profit organization we attract mission-driven developers. In addition we can attract developers from around the world as Berlin is a higly attractive place to live in.

Financials: year-to-date progress

This section provides the FDC information about how your entity is progressing against the current fiscal year's planned budget (revenues and costs).

Please provide the relevant information below. "Year-to-date" refers to the period between the start of your entity's current fiscal year and the date of submission of the proposal. Actual year-to-date financials should be provided as close to the proposal submission date as possible.

Identify the year-to-date for which you are reporting, month/year to month/year:

Table 3

	Current fiscal year planned budget		Year-to-date actuals		Projected final amount
	In currency requested	In $US	In currency requested	In $US	In currency requested	In $US
Revenues (from all sources)	5,175,000	6,986,250	4,210,930 (Jan-Aug 2013) (represents funds available to WMDE to be spent in 2013).	5,684,775,5	4,500,000	6,075,000
Spending	5,260,000	7,101,000	2,354,010 (Jan-Aug 2013)	3,177,913.5	3,970,000	5,359,500

Table 3 details, if necessary:

Based on the variance percentages above, please describe how your entity is progressing against revenue and spending targets. If your projected final amount shows your entity to be significantly under or over target on either revenue or spending, please provide a detailed explanation.

We count with an underspending in several fields of activity due to a number of factors: We haven’t acquired and spent funds for the House of Free Knowledge (600,000), we haven’t spent most of the WCA funds (150,000), due to a much needed ongoing restructurization process of the Community Project Budget no funds were spent on this matter neither (250,000). Another factor that influenced the spending were structural problems in the Communications Unit and in Team Communities (positions couldn’t be filled) resulting in delayed projects. As for today we count with a non-used amount of 500,000 Euro at the end of the year which we will use for Software Development in 2014. There will be a supplementary budget to adjust the planning to the changes in the forthcoming weeks.

Financials: upcoming year's annual plan

Please note that the FDC staff is currently exploring alternatives to wikitables for financial information. This issue will be addressed by the time the proposal creation tool is launched on September 1, 2013. Provide your financial overview for the upcoming year in the format below.

Please link to your detailed budget in a publicly available spreadsheet file (translation into English highly recommended) in addition to completing the tables below. Detailed budget link:

• see draft of the WMDE 2014 Annual Plan

Financial sustainability

What other donors support your work through grants beyond those in the Wikimedia movement? If your entity does receive funding from other donors, please list a contact person. Note that the donor's contact details can be sent directly to FDCsupport@wikimedia.org if you prefer not to publish it here.

Note that the FDC staff may contact these donors.
In 2012/2013 we had large donors supporting the development of Wikidata:

• Google http://www.google.com
• Allen Institute of Artificial Intelligence http://www.ai-squared.org/
• Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation http://www.moore.org/
• Yandex http://www.yandex.ru

The WMF Donor Relations officer has the contact data of all these donors.

For 2014 we have no donor commitments yet but we are planning to strenghten our efforts to start cooperations with external foundation grants (see next question for more).

What are your entity's plans for achieving long-term financial sustainability?

Long-term we are planning to rely on four pillars of funding:

1. Movement related funding: FDC
2. Direct donations to WMDE
3. Membership fees
4. Cooperations with other associations and foundations in order to implement grant-sponsored projects.

Mid-term we are planning to achieve a parity in our funding so that half of our budget will be coming from funding pillar 1 and 2 and the other half from other sources.

Revenues

Please list anticipated revenues, by source (e.g., FDC, Wikimedia grants programs, grants from institutional donors, public funding, membership fees, local donations, event fees)

Table 4

Revenue source	Anticipated (in currency requested)	Anticipated (In $US)
Transfers from Wikimedia Fördergesellschaft (on 01.01.2014)	1,800,000	2,430,000
Transfers from Wikimedia Fördergesellschaft (on 09.01.2014)	220,000	297,000
FDC Funds	1,800,000	2,430,000
Carry forward from 2013	500,000	675,000
Membership fees	410,000	553,500
External grants/ Thirs-Party-Funds	350,000	472,500
Other	90,000	121,500

Table 4 notes, if necessary:

Current entity staff and long-term contractors

Role/functions might include program administration, finance, fundraising. Please include both part-time and full-time staff and long-term contractors.

Table 5

Role / Function	Number of staff	Percentage of staff time*
Executive Director	2 (ED and assistant)	2 x 100%
Supervisory Board	1 (assistant)	1 x 87%
Team Communities	8	3 x 100%/ 2 x 50%/ 1 x 87,5%/ 1 x 80%/ 1 x 30% (will leave in 2013)
Education and Knowlege	5	3 x 100% / 1 x 50% / 1 x 80%
Politics and Society	5	4 x 100% / 1 x 80%
Research and Development: Wikidata (2014 replaced by Software Development)	8	5 x 100% / 1 x 75% / 1 x 55% / 1 x 92,5%
Research and Development: RENDER (2014 replaced by Software Development)	4	4 x 100%
Communication	2	2 x 100%
Fundraising (WMFG)	3	1 x 100% / 1 x 80% / 1 x 60%
International Affairs	2	2 x 100%
Evaluation	2	2 x 75%
Event Management	2	1x 100% / 1 x 95%
Administration (Office, IT)	3	1 x 100%, 1 x 62,5% / 1 x 80%
Finances	2	1 x 100% / 1 x 50%

*Please include estimates of the percentage allocation of staff members. For example, for full-time staff, you would put 100% in this column. For half time staff, you would put 50% in this column.

Table 5 notes, if necessary:

• In addition we hire up to four interns and up to 15 student trainees who work max. 20h/week in different departments.

Proposed new staff and and long-term contractors for upcoming year's annual plan

Role / functions might include program administration, finance, fundraising. Please include both part-time and full-time staff and long-term contractors.

Table 6

Department (e.g. Programs, Communications)	Number of current staff	Percentage of current staff time*	Number of upcoming staff	Percentage of upcoming staff time*	Rationale for hiring new staff
					Science Relations Project Manager: In the coming year we will focus on the field of cooperations with science and research institutions. The new Science Relations Project Manager will start cooperations in this field and will develop information and educational materials. Furthermore he/she will plan and coordinate Wikimedia activities around the upcoming Science Year 2014 "Digital Society" in Germany. Acquisition of third party funding, co-funding and partnerships are also part of this position's task scope.
					GLAM Project Manager: We want to expand our GLAM activities as they proved to be successful. In order to help institutions license their curated material under a free license, we need more inhouse-capacities concerning metadata structuring, license compatibility and consultation.
					To complete and make the newly formed Software Development Department functional we will hire a Frontend Developer and will raise up work hours of two part-time positions.
					Support Team will extend its competences to assist the community in social processes. In addition, one staff member having a position of 0,3 FTE is leaving WMDE which results in a total increase of 0,45 FTE.
					Both of the current positions working on 0,75 FTE will be increased up to 1 FTE (100%)
					After a series of structural problems due to staff shortage the newly structured communications unit needs to be completed in order to be functional. We want to hire a communications assistant and a material production officer (offline and online).
					The Administration team will be reinforced through the appointment of a third FTE and a head of administration who will focus on HR management. These additional employees will help to improve both our internal processes (procurement, travel bookings, billing, etc.) and HR development.
					Fundraiser to deal with our cooperation with foundations and other donors.

*Please include estimates of the percentage allocation of staff members and long-term contractors. For example, for full-time staff, you would put 100% in this column. For half-time staff, you would put 50% in this column.

Table 6 notes, if necessary:

• In core areas of our work we have almost reached the capacity we need to do our work. That is why for 2014 we are planning just a slight increase in these areas. A new development is that we are starting to build up a software development department that will replace the research and development department. In the last years we grew mostly in the programmatic areas, now we entered a phase where we want to consolidate and stabilize our internal processes and structures to more efficiently support the programmatic work.

Summary of staff and long-term contractor expenses

Table 7

	In currency requested	In $US	Percent increase
Current staff expenses	WMDE: 2,060,000 / WMFG: 140,000	WMDE: 2,781,000/ WMFG: 189,000
Proposed increase for current staff expenses	WMDE: 103,000 / WMFG: 7,000	WMDE: 139,050 / WMFG: 9,450	5% / 5%
Proposed increase for new staff expenses	WMDE: 497,000 / WMFG: 53,000	WMDE: 670,950 / WMFG: 71,550	24% / 37,8%
Total staff expenses	WMDE: 2,660,000 / WMFG: 200,000	WMDE: 3,591,000 / WMFG: 270,000	29,1% / 42,8%

Please estimate the percentage of overall staff time spent on programmatic work, as opposed to administration:

• In 2013: 19,3% (8,32 FTE) administration v. 80,7% programmatic work (34,6 FTE)
• In 2014: 22% (11,32 FTE) administration v. 78% programmatic work (40,4 FTE)

As administration we count finance, administration, fundrasing and executive director's office.

Table 7 notes, if necessary:

• The answer depends on how you define administration. Administration might be part of programmatic work and the other way around, as each project needs some organizational effort to be completed.

Expenses by program / initiative

Expenses are costs associated with any programs, initiatives, or projects your entity manages (e.g., event costs, materials, transportation). Please exclude any staff costs that are included above. “Programs / initiatives” might include education programs, outreach programs, microgranting initiatives, etc. Please include any administration costs (e.g., office space rental, utilities) affiliated with each program along with any overall administration costs that are not affiliated with any particular program (e.g., Administration should be considered a "Program" under the first column.)

Table 8a

Program / initiative	In currency requested	In $US
Volunteer Support Program: Easy support opportunities	590,000 (250,000 for direct community support, the rest for support structures e.g. literature scholarships or WikiCon Community Event)	796,500
Volunteer Support Program: Support for more volunteers.	100,000	135,000
Volunteer Support Program: Support for social processes.	60,000	81,000
Institutional Partnerships: Identifying content gaps	40,000	54,000
Institutional Partnerships: Institutions in dialogue with local volunteers	45,000	60,750
Institutional Partnerships: Pilot projects at institutions	125,000	168,750
Legal and Social Framework: Movement processes for positioning at EU-level	40,000	54,000
Legal and Social Framework: Visibility of Wikimedia-related issues	80,000	108,000
Legal and Social Framework: State-owned works	30,000	40,500
Legal and Social Framework: Position on OER	30,000	40,500
Software Development	40,000	54,000
International Affairs	180,000	243,000
Communications	240,000	324,000
Evaluation	80.000	108.000
Event Management	10,000	13,500
Administration	730,000	985,500
Supervisory Board	90,000	121,500
Fundraising (WMFG)	240,000	324,000
Total program expenses (should equal the sum of the rows)	WMDE: 2,510,000 / WMFG: 240,000	WMDE: 3,388,500 / WMFG: 324,000

Table 8 notes, if necessary:

Summary of total revenues and expenses

Table 9

	In currency requested	In $US
Total cash balance as of proposal submission	2,032,365 (Note: The actual cash (2,422,692) balance contains also donations we fundraised after 07.01. which are meant to be spent in 2014.)	2,743,693
Total revenues	5,170,000 (Money allocated for use in 2014)	6,979,500
Total spending	5,170,000 (In addition WMFG has fundraising costs of 440,000 Euro which are being funded directly from donations.)	6,979,500
Net (revenues less expenses)	0	0
Operating reserves,* if applicable

Table 9 notes, if necessary:

Verification that this proposal requests no funds from the Wikimedia Foundation for political or legislative activities

Enter "yes" or "no" for the verification below.

The term “political or legislative activities” includes any activities relating to political campaigns or candidates (including the contribution of funds and the publication of position statements relating to political campaigns or candidates); voter registration activities; meetings with or submissions and petitions to government executives, ministers, officers or agencies on political or policy issues; and any other activities seeking government intervention or policy implementation (like “lobbying”), whether directed toward the government or the community or public at large. Grants for such activities (when permitted under U.S. law and IRS regulations) should be sought from the Wikimedia Grants Program.

I verify that this proposal requests no funds from the Wikimedia Foundation for political or legislative activities

Yes

Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes. No changes can be made to the documents after the deadlines for completion passes, and documents will automatically be considered 'submitted' after the deadline closes.

--Pavel Richter (WMDE) (talk) 14:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)