Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014 round1/Wikimedia UK/Progress report form/Q2

< Grants:APG | Proposals | 2013-2014 round1 | Wikimedia UK | Progress report form



Purpose of the report

edit

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

edit

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

edit
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

edit

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)

edit

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)

edit

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

edit

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

edit

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

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

Resources

edit

Resources to plan for measurement

edit

Resources for storytelling

edit


Basic entity information

edit

Table 1

Entity information Legal name of entity Wikimedia UK
Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd) 02/01-01/31
12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy) 02/01-01/31
Contact information (primary) Primary contact name Jon Davies
Primary contact position in entity Chief Executive
Primary contact username Jon Davies (WMUK)
Primary contact email jon.davies@wikimedia.org.uk
Contact information (secondary) Secondary contact name Richard Symonds
Secondary contact position in entity Office & Development Manager
Secondary contact username Richard Symonds (WMUK)
Secondary contact email richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk


Overview of this quarter

edit

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 first quarter.

 
Some of the participants and trainers at the Barclays editathon

HIGHLIGHTS:

  • Barclays editathon. In June one of our leading volunteers ran an editing event of unprecedented scale for the chapter. The training took place over the conferencing system for Barclays, allowing more than 200 people in dozens of locations to learn how to edit and resulting in more than 400 edits across 380 articles. Overall 18 different language Wikipedias were edited. It broke the mould for events run by WMUK volunteers, and encouragingly the event organiser hopes for follow up events.
  • Review of the Wikimedian in Residence programme. In Q1 the chapter began the process of reviewing its WiR programme, it was finalised towards the end of Q2. It pulled together three strands of information – seeking input form the community, the WiRs themselves, and the institutions they worked with – to assess the impact of the programme, and look at in depth lessons to see how it could be run better by the chapter. A deep research including a SWOT analysis was carried out jointly with the residents, and some key findings and recommendations were produced which may be of interest to other chapters with WiR schemes. Since the review was circulated at the end of July, the chapter has been receiving expressions of interest to find out more from other chapters, the printed booklet has also been circulated to UK based institutions.
    • Another important element of the sharing of WIR learning is that several residents have managed to finalise their end of project 'case study' documents, sharing the summary of what they've done, reflections on that, and recommendations for the future. The reports are Natural History Museum and Science Museum [1], Jisc Wikimedia Ambassador [2], York Museums Trust [3], National Library of Scotland [4]. These will serve as an useful record of the projects in the future, and will be promoted further within the relevant communities.

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

  • en.wp: The editing events in Q2 focused mostly on introducing people to the English Wikipedia.
  • cy.wp: Our Wales Manager and the Wikimedian in Residence at Coleg Cymraeg have been focused on the Welsh Wikipedia. On top of this, competition was held to improve coverage in relation to the Living Paths project across 20 different Wikipedias.
  • Commons: Our Wikimedians in Residence have been working on releasing content onto Commons and appropriate licencing. Two project grants were active in Q2 relating to content on Commons, one supporting mass uploads and the other supporting top-quality photographs.
  • Wikimania: a significant amount of volunteer and staff time has been spent on preparations for Wikimania and helping out at the fringe events taking place in Q2.

GROWTH:

  • 16 editing and training events held
  • 21,036 files uploaded with a Creative Commons licence
  • 1,790,824 bytes of information added to the article space
  • Featured Pictures increased by 6
  • Quality Images increased by 8
  • Valued Images increased by 5
  • 415 people attended editing and training events in Q2

Financial summary

edit

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

edit

Provide exchange rate used:

  • 1 GBP = 1.66 USD

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
Incoming Grants GBP 353000 88250 88250 176500 585980 292990
Donations Received[1] GBP 240000 63846 58266 122112 398400 202706
Membership Income GBP 0 774 155 929 0 1542 Not budgeted for in plan.
Discounts GBP 0 0 30 30 0 50 Not budgeted for in plan.
Conference Income GBP 0 150 400 550 0 913 Not budgeted for in plan.
Recoveries GBP 0 12 0 12 0 20 Not budgeted for in plan.
Bank Interest Received GBP 0 152 183 335 0 556 Not budgeted for in plan.

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Spending during this quarter

edit

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
Community GBP 247476 63339 135378 198717 410810 329870 80 Wikimedia UK is absorbing a proportion of the costs for Wikimania - this includes salary for some UK-based staff and also any expenditure where a UK office or UK credit history are required. This accounts, in part, for the much higher Q2 spend. The rest can be attributed to the 'Wikimania Fringe' events which were paid for by Wikimedia UK.
Promoting Free Knowledge GBP 251892 36850 34465 71315 418141 118383 28 Less staff time has been available - due to Wikimania - to run our major projects (such as Wikimedians in Residence). This in turn has led to less expenditure on these major projects. However, we have several projects ready to launch, and have started some in Q3 already.
External Relations GBP 64624 24667 14709 39376 107276 65364 61 No variance.
Fundraising GBP 73444 15348 14731 30079 121917 49931 41 No variance.
Governance GBP 169760 15400 14692 30092 281802 49953 18 Governance costs are markedly down this year, in general because board meetings have become more strategic (and thus less frequent) and legal expenses are much lower. We view this as a good thing!
Total GBP 807196 155604 213975 369579 1339945 613501 46 No overall variance.

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Terminology

edit

The text below is copied from wmuk:WMUK activities and volunteers. It defines terms used in the following report.

Extended content

The charity and its activities

edit

WMUK activity

A WMUK activity is an activity or event that is arranged by, carried out, hosted or run in conjunction with WMUK, or which WMUK has significantly sponsored or paid for. To count as a WMUK activity, the charity or its volunteers, staff or trustees must have taken some leading role: merely attending is not enough.

The charity does not claim as a WMUK activity external events or activities that fall outside the above definition, even if WMUK staff, trustees or volunteers attend or are involved in a non-leading capacity. That is the case regardless of whether the individuals attend or are involved on behalf of WMUK.

Examples:

  • UK Wikimeets are mostly not WMUK activities, as they are not arranged by, carried out, hosted or run in conjunction with the charity, and the charity does not sponsor or pay for them. That is so even though some, many or even all of the attendees may be WMUK volunteers.
  • An OpenStreetMap conference (run independently of WMUK) does not count as a WMUK activity merely because the charity pays for a volunteer to attend, or merely because it sends a staff member.
  • The Wiki Loves Monuments contest 2013 in the UK was a WMUK event as WMUK volunteers were closely involved in running it, with staff support, and the charity sponsored the prizes.

Tracking of volunteer activity

edit

Activity units

Rather than tracking the raw number of activities that the charity and its volunteers get involved with, without regard for their size, we instead focus on a measure of personal engagement that we call an activity unit. An activity unit is defined as one person attending one event. So, a score of 5 units may represent one person attending five separate events, or five people attending one event. For this purpose, no distinction is made between people who lead or help to lead an event, and those who simply attend.

If the event is a WMUK activity, then all attendees contribute one activity unit to the overall count.

If the event is a non-WMUK activity, we count only the activity units contributed by volunteer attendees who are working with us in some way for that activity.

Activity units at advocacy events are given a 0.1 weighting.

As we are primarily interested in external volunteer engagement here, we exclude the activities of WMUK staff or trustees when they are acting in their professional capacities. However, the following are not in themselves reasons to exclude from our activity counts:

  • The contributor has a grant, scholarship, or is claiming expenses from WMUK or any other organization for the activity
  • The contributor is being paid to contribute by some other organisation (eg as an employee)
  • The contributor is a staff member or trustee of WMUK, provided that they are contributing on a voluntary basis outside the scope of their professional duties.

Examples:

  • A WMUK GLAM editathon that attracts 10 editors is jointly run by one WMUK staff member, one GLAM staff member, and a volunteer. That is recorded as 12 activity units (all those who are involved apart from the WMUK staff member each contribute one activity unit).
  • WMUK pays the expenses of one volunteer to attend an externally-run open knowledge event. That is recorded as one activity unit.
  • Two WMUK trustees help to organize the Wiki Loves Monuments contest, with support from three staff members. 500 people submit entries. That is recorded as 502 activity units (the staff support is not counted as it was contributed by staff acting in their professional capacities. The trustee activity is counted, as the trustees were acting not in their professional capacities but as volunteers).

Leading activity units

A leading activity unit is defined as one person taking a leading role in one event. That may include running or helping to run the event, or being one of the lead organisers of an online activity.

Leading activity units are recorded as a subset of activity units, so a person taking a leading role is counted as contributing both one activity unit and one leading activity unit.

Examples:

  • A WMUK GLAM editathon that attracts 10 attendees is jointly run by one WMUK staff member, one GLAM staff member, and a volunteer. That is recorded as two leading activity units (all those who take a leading role apart from the WMUK staff member each contribute one leading activity unit).
  • Two WMUK trustees help to organize the Wiki Loves Monuments contest, with support from three staff members. 500 people submit entries. That is recorded as two leading activity units (the staff support is not counted as it was contributed by staff acting in their professional capacities. The lead trustee activity is counted, as the trustee were acting not in their professional capacities but as volunteers).

WMUK volunteers

A WMUK volunteer is a person who has, at least once during the preceding 12 month period:

  • Contributed at least one activity unit, and
  • Has provided us with contact details, including at least an email address, to allow us to record them as a unique individual on our database.

Examples:

  • A WMUK GLAM editathon that attracts 10 attendees is jointly run by one WMUK staff member, one GLAM staff member, and a volunteer. All involved (apart from the WMUK staff member) are asked for contact details, and those who supply them are included in the WMUK volunteer count for one year after the date of the editathon. People who attend but who decline to provide contact details are counted as contributing one activity unit but are not counted as WMUK volunteers.

WMUK leading volunteers

A WMUK leading volunteer is a person who has, at least once during the preceding 12 month period:

  • Contributed at least one leading activity unit, and
  • Has provided us with contact details, including at least an email address, to allow us to record them as a unique individual on our database.
Ref Term Definition
To do
 Notes
[1] Positive edit size Sum of edit sizes in characters where text content has been added overall to the mainspace of a Wikimedia wiki. We are here measuring quantity not quality of educational text content. We ignore all edits where content has been deleted overall, on the basis that deletions cannot generally be equated with the negative addition of content by that editor. We are aware that such an approach is relatively broad-brush, and will actively seek improved tools/measures in this area.
[2] Institution reputation rating Our estimate of the external reputation of each GLAM, education organisation or learned society that we work with. This information is solely to enable us to track our own charitable impact consistently, and we will not be publishing the values we use for individual organisations
[3] WMUK volunteer WMUK:WMUK activities and volunteers#WMUK volunteer
[3a] Leading volunteer WMUK:WMUK activities and volunteers#WMUK leading volunteer
[4] Activity unit WMUK:WMUK activities and volunteers#Activity unit
[5] Leading activity unit WMUK:WMUK activities and volunteers#Leading activity unit
[6] Annual survey capability score To be defined Questions to be written Proposed survey to be repeated annually by WMUK
[7] Leading volunteer drop out rate The proportion of our leading volunteers volunteers that drop out (no longer remain actively engaged with us) annually Determined for each volunteer one year after first activity, two years and so on.
[8] Tracking/measuring systems The manual and automated systems by which WMUK tracks outputs/outcomes in accordance with the strategic plan
[9] Transparency score To be defined Questions to be written Proposed survey to be repeated annually by WMUK
[10] Transparency compliance As measured by Govcom against published transparency commitments Commitments to be defined
[11] Scans of QRpedia codes The number of times QRpedia codes are used to direct to a Wikipedia article This a is a subset of (15)
[12] Awareness score To be defined Questions to be written Proposed survey to be repeated annually by WMUK
[13] Shared activity units A count of the number of units contributed by volunteers (not necessarily WMUK volunteers) on shared activities (14) With technology-based groups or organisations having similar goals to WMUK
[14] Shared activities Activities that WMUK jointly lead with some other group Does not include activities run by other groups that WMUK volunteers or staff simply attend or engage with. Depending on context, the other group could be Wikimedia-related (eg a chapter) or could be external to the Wikimedia movement (eg OpenStreetMaps)
[15] Uses of tools The number of times in aggregate a WMUK tool is used.
[16] Eval measure A best-judgement evaluation on a scale of 1 to 5 (5=best) Used in lieu of a objective metric where such a metric is impossible or currently impracticable to obtain
[18] WMUK activity WMUK:WMUK activities and volunteers#WMUK activity

Progress toward this year's goals/objectives

edit

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 past, the FDC has used the term 'initiative', but we are using the term 'program.'


Key

edit
Outcome (from our Strategic Goals) Outcome Measure
Green Annual target expected to be met; or good outcomes
Yellow Some issues but annual target should still be achieved; or reasonable outcomes
Pink Annual target in danger of being missed; or outcomes require urgent attention
Grey KPI not yet being tracked, or is no longer considered useful

Notes and definitions

edit

For explanatory notes and definitions (reference numbers in second column) see wmuk:Strategy monitoring plan#Notes and Definitions.

Report card for this quarter

edit
The number in squares brackets refer to the definitions above
Outcome (from our Strategic Goals) Outcome Measure 2014 target (to 31 Jan 2015) Results Q1 2014 (Feb to April) Results Q2 2014 (May to July) Activities and what worked and what did not
G1.1 The quantity of open knowledge continues to increase Number of uploads Report only 37,715 images (650.7GB) to Commons this quarter 21,036 images (946.1GB) to Commons this quarter 19,113 of the files Q2 were uploaded as a result of the avionics project grant. The "photographing cathedrals" project grant has resulted in 99 uploads so far, with significant impact against the quality metrics (see below). A further 1,130 files were uploaded by the Wikimedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland. The Library are currently experimenting with the mass upload tool, preparing for future image uploads. A further 392 files have been uploaded by Cancer Research UK as part of the Wikimedian in Residence programme there.
TEXT - Sum of positive edit size [1] Report only 4,382,374 bytes this quarter 1,790,824 bytes this quarter Wikimetrics shows that 292,013 bytes were added to Wikipedia as a result of editing and training events in Q2. This does not take into account the number of bytes added during the Barclays editathon as we do not have that information. (Excluding the Barclays event, there were 748 edits made as a result of editing or training events, giving an average of 331.6 bytes of text added per edit. Scaling this up to include the Barclays editathon gives a projected total of 449,000 bytes.)

Additionally, the Living Paths project, which focuses on creating Wikipedia content around the local areas, resulted in 968,294 bytes of text added to the Welsh Wicipedia. A further 373,530 bytes of text was added to the same site by local communities supported by our activities in Wales. moving beyond the Welsh Wicipedia, the Living Paths project ran an article writing competition (the 20 - 20 Challenge), highlighting 20 articles across 20 different Wikipedias for improvement, covering topics such as Snowdonia, the Wales national rugby team, and Conwy Castle. In all, 36 people took part.

G1.2 The quality of open knowledge continues to improve Percentage of WMUK-related files (e.g. images) in mainspace use on a Wikimedia project (excluding Commons) 13% 6.5% this quarter[2] 3.1% this quarter 649 (3.1%) of the files uploaded in Q2 are currently in use. When excluding the mass upload projects, this usage rate increases to 38.3%.

It is worth noting that the photos uploaded as part of the Residency in the National Library of Scotland have a usage rate of 7.6%, which is high for a mass upload, and the Cancer Research UK images have a usage rate of 43.4%. Another general learning point for content is that Residency activities and grants that had very focused intended outcome of generating content were successful in reaching this. In particular, where the intention was on quality of image reuse, it was visible that these goals were reached - e.g. active promotion of image release in Scotland lead to its higher usage on Wikimedia projects, and the cathedral photography grant also succeeded in producing high quality material that was recognised on Commons.

Number of files (e.g. images) that have featured status on a Wikimedia project (including Commons) 20 2 in year to date 8 in year to date The six Featured images break down into two Featured on the English Wikipedia (not Commons), and four Featured on Commons. All six have been a result of the Photographing UK cathedrals project grant. The goal of the project is to "greatly improve the photography of the cathedrals in the UK in the South and the Midlands". The initial success of the project led to it being extended, and there will be further images to report on in Q3.
Number of files having quality image status on Commons 70 53 in year to date 61 in year to date Three quality images recognised in Q2 were produced by volunteers borrowing Wikimedia UK's photography equipment, and four were uploaded as part of Wiki Loves Monuments 2013

NB: There was under-reporting of Quality images promoted in Q1 as 32 images from WIKI loves parliaments/European Parliament 2014 were recognised as Quality images were not categorised properly.

Number of files having valued image status on Commons 50 46 in year to date 51 in year to date All the images recognised with valued status in Q2 were uploaded as part of Wiki Loves Monuments 2013. (Promoted in May, promoted in June, none in July)
Number of new articles started on a Wikimedia site (eg any of the encyclopedias), excluding Welsh Wicipedia 200 341 in year to date 437 in year to date 96 articles created on the English Wikipedia this quarter. This breaks down into 60 as a result of editing and training sessions, and 36 as a result of the Living Paths! project.
TEXT - Number of new articles started on Welsh Wicipedia inspired by WMUK 10,000 over the course of the project 2,182 in year to date (3,353 overall) 3,250 in year to date (4,428 overall) 2,808 created in year to date and 442 as a result of editors from local communities writing articles. The project began in June 2013 and will conclude in December 2014. The target of 10,000 articles takes into account activity across that 19-month period, hence a second figure is reported in brackets reflecting progress since the start of the project as well as this financial year.
G1.3 We are perceived as the go-to organisation by UK GLAM, educational, and other organisations who need support or advice for the development of open knowledge. Sum of reputation ratings [2] of organisations that we are working in partnership with, or were working with no more than than two years ago 693 (5% increase) 497 708 This covers working partnerships with 85 organisations, (26 educational institutions, 20 GLAMs, 9 learned institutions, and 30 other organisations). Most of the activities undertaken by the chapter were run with external institutions (events, uploads, WIRs), which helps with scaling our reach and building future projects. (E.g. institutional event hosts often move on to consider other activities like cooperating on the WIR partnership).
Awareness score in annual national survey of public opinion [12] n/a Not collected Not collected Survey still to be designed. Volunteers were invited to help design the survey. This was not successful, and of the three replies, two questioned the need for the surveys, and one was temporarily employed supporting Wikimania so unable to help in Q2.
G2a.1 We have a thriving community of WMUK volunteers. Number of friends 420 176 833 The spike in the number of friends of Wikimedia UK has mainly been driven by the call for volunteers around Wikimania, linked with the newsletter promotion.

Note: Wikimania activities in terms of pre-conference events started in May and continued throughout Q2. Pre-conference weekends (Fringe) should be noted in particular when we mention Wikimania throughout this report.

Number of volunteers [3] 250 187 360 Events around editing and Wikimania Fringe have drawn in lots of people who are new to the charity. What worked here is that pre Wikimania activities have succeeded as a tool of attracting new volunteers, which could be likened to the Olympics effect. Volunteers that have registered to help, new to the chapter, often opted to hear more about Wikimedia UK events - it is hoped that we will able to carry come of these volunteers through to future events.
Number of leading volunteers [3a] 140 (30% increase) 54 104 Wikimania attracted many new volunteers, and has been successful in engaging them in leading roles, particularly around the Fringe weekends.
Number of activity units [4] 1200 (24% increase) 663 in year to date 1,470 in year to date An extremely busy Q1 and Q2 means we have easily exceeded this target. Of particular note this quarter was the Barclays editathon, which alone accounts for 233 activity units. (As mentioned we have not, however, been able to capture usernames of the participants, due to the technical complexities of how that may be done, focusing instead on learning how to run such a big scale training event online.)

Other events can be seen on our events list. The event statistics show that in Q2, despite preparations for Wikimania, we were still able to deliver Wikipedia outreach training events and organise a variety of events, so our approach to try and spread the capacity over various activities worked, even if in August many ongoing activities needed to be parked for later.

Number of leading activity units [5] 145 (5% increase) 115 in year to date 418 in year to date A very large spike in leading activity units was driven by Wikimania and the volunteers surrounding it, who lead on areas such as media, tech support of indeed volunteer coordination for the conference. Volunteers often worked at the office alongside staff several times a week, and were integral to the organisation of Wikimania in the crucial quarter before the event.
Leading volunteer [3a] drop out rate [7] <10% No data yet No data yet The drop-out rate is based on year-to-year figures, so cannot be determined until the end of the year
G2a.2 WMUK volunteers are highly diverse. Proportion of activity units [4] attributable to women 20% 35% in year to date 41% in year to date Collecting this information is now easier through CiviCRM, and we can see that we are attracting female volunteers to the chapter's activities, possibly because of a higher demographics of women in e.g. GLAM sector in general. However we only have this information for a minority of volutneers, due in part to the fact that some events have not been set up to take registration through CiviCRM.
Proportion of leading activity units [4] attributable to women 15% in year to date 19% in year to date 25% in year to date We have seen that volunteering around Wikimania led to more women taking part.
Activity units [4] in activities to encourage other diversity or minority engagement[3] 15 5 in year to date 9 in year to date A project grant supported a workshop to train speakers of Scottish Gaelic to use Uicipèid (the Scottish Gaelic Wikipedia).
G2a.3 WMUK volunteers are skilled and capable. Activity units [4] in training sessions and editathons (total count, including people being trained) 575 (5% increase) 297 in this quarter 433 in this quarter This count is heavily influenced by a single event: the Barclays editathon with 230 attendees. It was an exceptional event which has significantly boosted this figure. Excluding this events, the number of activity units in editing and training sessions would have decreased from Q1, reflecting the charity's shifting focus in the lead up to Wikimania.
Leading activity units [5] in training sessions and editathons (ie trainers only) 95 (6% increase) 104 in year to date 136 in year to date The increase in leading activity units in training sessions and editathons during Q2 was not proportional to the number of overall activity units. This is largely due to the Barclays editathon, which resulted in a very large number of activity units. The total of 31 leading activity units for Q2 in training sessions and editathons can be attributed to the charity spending more time on preparations for Wikimania.

Thirteen of the 37 available trained trainers have supported at least one event in Q2, four of which has supported at least two events. In total, 23 leading activity units have been delivered by trained trainers. In contrast, 9 leading activity units were delivered by trainers who have not attended one of our Training the Trainers course.

Annual survey capability score [6] (self-identified) To be decided Not collected Not collected Survey was being prepared in Q2 with the aim to circulate it in Q3. It is planned for it to combine questions around skill, with some demographics queries so we can improve our database.
G2b.1 We have effective and high quality governance and resource management processes, and are recognised for such within the Wikimedia movement and the UK charity sector. Progress on targets in the Hudson and Chapman governance reviews All targets that we agree with have been completed and independently reviewed. See narrative See narrative Stage three of review tendered for and awarded to Rosie Chapman, assessments to commence in September for final review publication and board training in December.

One remaining Hudson target being reviewed by Governance Committee on August 14th.

Progress towards PQASSO 2 Complete all internal preparations for PQASSO 2 ready for external accreditation See narrative See narrative Daria Cybulska received initial training on PQASSO and this will continue in October/November, after which we should be able to start preparing for an external accreditation process for 2015.
Level of external recognition Narrative + eval score [16] Eval: 1.8 / 3 Eval: 1.8 / 3 See above. Level 2 accreditation yet to be attained.
G2b.2 We have a high level of openness and transparency, and are recognised for such within the Wikimedia movement and the UK charity sector. Transparency score [9] as measured by annual survey n/a Not collected Not collected Survey still to be designed. Volunteers were invited to help design the survey. This was not successful, and of the three replies, two questioned the need for the surveys, and one was temporarily employed supporting Wikimania so unable to help in Q2.
Transparency compliance [10] as determined by Govcom against published transparency commitments Narrative Eval: 2/5 this quarter Eval: 4/5 this quarter This quarter, we ensured that our published expenses lists are clearly defined and are regularly updated, we defined formal new transparency commitments, we published an explanatory table of Matters reserved for the Board and delegated to the Chief Executive, we published old in camera resolutions of the board, and we ensured that new in camera resolutions are published as soon as possible, in redacted form if need be. Against that, the costs of the Berlin conference were not reported promptly and openly, as they should have been.
G2b.3 We have high quality systems to measure our impact as an organisation. Progress towards full implementation of automated and manual tracking/measuring systems [8] Narrative + eval score [16] Eval: 55-60% achieved Eval: 60-65% achieved The main source of automated data is CiviCRM. Staff are now using the database more often to set up events so that people can register there rather than on a wiki page. This reduces the amount of time spent drawing information from various sources. There is the potential to use the database to allow people to register themselves as volunteers int he same way people register for events. Processes for recording interactions with partner organisations have been drafted and are being implemented.

The evaluation is no higher than 60-65% as we are not yet at the stage of entering everything as and when it happens. While there will always be some events for which the charity does not run registration for example, using the database to run events from the start requires staff to depart from the more familiar mediawiki platform. It takes time for staff to become familiar with CiviCRM and its various features.

G2b.4 We ensure a stable, sustainable and diverse funding stream. Number of separate donors 6000 (9% increase) 5266 in this quarter 5110 in this quarter Figures are regular donors and single gifts. For this number to increase in Q3 and Q4 the charity will undertake activities to solicit increases in both types of gifts.
Funds received from sources other than WMF fundraiser or FDC £295000 (7% increase) £63,846 this quarter £58,991 this quarter The figure for Q2 is down 13% from Q2 in 2013–14. Gift Aid has yet to be claimed, so income in Q3 will likely be higher as a result.
Proportion of funds from sources other than WMF fundraiser or FDC 47% 56% in this quarter 33% in this quarter As above this is lower because the FDC grant amount is fixed but external income is lower. This has removed from consideration income rebated to us by WMF for Wikimania costs (if included the figure is 47%)
Proportion of funds from direct debits 45% 28% in this quarter 94% in this quarter This is of all external income that is not FDC income.
G3.1 Access to Wikimedia projects is increasingly available to all, irrespective of personal characteristics, background or situation. Total number of scans of QRpedia codes [11] 14000 monthly 17503/month this quarter 15112/month this quarter The statistics are complete for Q2. QRpedia badges were purchased to help with outreach; the GLAM booklet which was designed and printed in Q2 contains a section on the use of QRpedia codes. As the booklets were only delivered at the end of July they did not have a direct impact on Q2's statistics, but may encourage future traffic.
Projects addressed at new readers [16] being enabled to access Wikimedia websites 3 activities 1 in year to date 1 in year to date The use of Kiwix in Young Offenders Institutions is an ongoing project, still with concerns about content with violent themes.
G3.2 There is increased awareness of the benefits of open knowledge. Awareness score [12] in annual national survey of public opinion n/a Not collected Not collected Survey still to be designed.

In the meantime, we have run many initiatives aimed at raising awareness of open knowledge. Presence at key sector conferences was secured - GLAM, education ([5], [6]). Additionally, Open Coalition Coordinator has been recruited at the end of Q1 and is now in post. As a result the Coalition and Wikimedia UK have been represented at the Open Knowledge Festival and of the Wikimania fringe.

G3.3 Legislative and institutional changes favour the release of open knowledge. Responses to EU and UK government policy consultations. Narrative See narrative See narrative Wikimedia UK are working with the think tank Demos to write a submission to the Commission on Digital Democracy. Submissions are being prepared on three themes. The first has already been submitted, and the second is currently in draft form. More information can be found here.
Involvement in EU and UK advocacy activities; Involvement in advocating legislative change within GLAM, Education, and other organisations Narrative + eval score [16] Very difficult to estimate a number for such a slow burning project. As to schedule, Eval: 4/5 Eval: 5/5 Through various projects we have been very active in this area. For Wikimedians in Residence:
  • In the course of liaising with two organisations about images releases, we have persuaded an institution to adopt open licensing for images of notable people with whom they have connections. We are expecting an announcement later this year.
  • As the pilot image releases from the National Library of Scotland continue, the resident is working more closely on internal advocacy and changing the library towards more openness. Four workshops were delivered with the Library's Intellectual Property Office. In addition to informing staff about the change in policy and the resulting release of content to Wikimedia Commons, the workshops prove useful in identifying issues with regards to digitisation and release procedure which would make the process more efficient in future. The IP Office is crucial in approving future uploads and the resident is working closely with it.
  • Throughout Q2 the WiR at Coleg Cymraeg was working on applying CC-by-SA licence to learning resources hosted by the Coleg, to be used on Wikimedia projects. Convincing various departments to became more open was successful especially in the areas of theatre, drama, television, geography, television. This content in turn enhances or makes it possible to create Welsh Wikipedia articles. (Key details here).
  • In general Wikimedians in Residence have been successful in implementing changes to legislation at their host institutions. These processes often take months and require continuous presence, which the Residents is normally able to provide.

In terms of wider policy work, we are also lining up meetings with UK MEPs, building connections that in the long term may hep with soliciting legislative change. The work with Demos resulted in a representative delivering a talk at Wikimania, which made more people aware of the project we are working on.

G4.1 There are robust and efficient tools readily available to enable the creation, curation and dissemination of open knowledge. Number and availability of the project tools we host or support Narrative See narrative See narrative Wikimedia UK hosts QRpedia and the Virtual Learning Environment. The latter is still in beta testing and progress has suffered from limited developer resources. This situation is being assessed by the scoping activity mentioend in the Q1 report. We have also supported the developments around the Mass Upload Tool. A volunteer has also helped the chapter by preparing tool for discovering sites eligible for Wiki Loves Monuments in the UK.
G4.2 There are robust and efficient tools readily available to allow WMUK - and related organisations - to support our own programmes and to enable us to effectively record impact measures. Uses [15] of the internal or supporting tools we host or support Narrative See narrative See narrative As in Q1, the main tools are CiviCRM, piwik, and the Virtual Learning Environment. Use of CiviCRM has increased, with more events and activities being recorded in advance rather than after the fact, and working on the process for automated emails relating to events and other activities. There has been limited technical development on these tools in the quarter, so that state of the tools remains much the same.
G5.1 A thriving set of other Wikimedia communities Funding to support other chapters and Wikimedia groups £10000 £10,149 in year to date £10,443 in year to date This spending does not take into account £355 granted to Douglas Scott to support Wikimedia ZA transporting 50 WikiIndaba conference attendees to a Creative Commons event as this came out of the project grants budget.
Activities held for or jointly with other chapters and Wikimedia groups 7 (including G5.2 and G5.3 events) 4 in year to date 6 in year to date As a result of our sponsorship for 50 people to attend WikiIndaba 2014, Wikimedia UK was an official partner of the event.

Jointly with the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wiki Education Foundation we run the Future of Education Wikimania Frindge event.

The time in Q2 was largely spent in preparations for Q3 events: an inter-chapter governance workshop (based on the one which took place in Q1 due to popular demand), an international Training the Trainers event, a workshop on volunteer support, and two education workshops for prospective campus ambassadors and course leaders. This glut of events in Q3 was made possible by Wikimedia chapters coming together for Wikimania.

Total shared activity units [13] in shared activities [14] with other chapters and Wikimedia groups 150 (including G5.2 and G5.3 events) 103 in year to date 125 in year to date In Q2 Wikimedia UK supported WikiIndaba 2014 (the 50 attendees the charity directly sponsored have been given a weighting of 0.1 as it was an advocacy event).

Future of education workshop [7] was done in collaboration with the Wikimedia Foundation and Wiki Education Foundation. We had recruited a very enthusiastic UK volunteer to help with the event, and additionally three of the WMF and Wiki Ed staff supported the event, giving 17 activity units in total.

In the context of our EU advocacy work in collaboration with other chapters, it is worth noting that ongoing working group meets regularly by phone to discuss EU-related activity including funding.

As noted above, Q3 will see a large spike in activities.

Number of UK based Wikimedia events other than WMUK events Report only 15 this quarter 17 in this quarter These events consist of meetups (15 across 10 cities), an editathon, and a photo walk. Of the meetups, those at London and Oxford are held monthly, with two taking place in Manchester in Q2. Of the rest, two took place in Scotland and one in Wales and one was held in Portsmouth for the first time. In Q2 the Wikimania staff took an active role in organising some of the meetups to help generate interest around Wikimania and volunteering, but are reported here for consistency with other quarters. It should be noted that this number of events is probably under-reported. For instance, we recently learnt of a group of people in Edinburgh who hold monthly editing sessions and are self-taught. It is easy to envisage other groups that we do not know about doing the same.
G5.2 An increased diversity of Wikimedia contributors Activities specifically directed to supporting the diversity of other chapters and Wikimedia groups 1 1 in year to date 1 in year to date Preparations were underway for an international Train the Trainers session in Q3, helping other chapters train new editors and engage in outreach. Giving people the tools and the confidence to train others allows them to target areas in which they would like to improve diversity. For instance women are well represented in our editing and training events.
G5.3 Wikimedia communities are skilled and capable Activities specifically directed to help train or to share knowledge with other chapters and Wikimedia groups 1 1 in year to date 1 in year to date No activities (as events) in Q2 fall under this metric, however preparations were underway for an international Training the Trainers session and a board governance workshop   modelled on that which took place in Q1 – to take place immediately before Wikimania (early Q3).

Substantial amount of work, in collaboration with the Wikimedia Foundation, went into sharing the Wikimedian in Residence report with the international community (e.g. via blog) to help other chapters learn about that programme and its evaluation in the UK context.

G5.4 Open knowledge communities with missions similar to our own are thriving. Number of shared activities [14] hosted with groups or organisations having similar goals to WMUK 5 0 in year to date 5 in year to date In the lead up to Wikimania, five fringe events took place drawing together people within the Wikimedia movement and people from other organisations to discuss topics such as the Future of Education and Open Scholarship. The weekends were mostly open in structure, and were created by the participants. Each of the weekend events had at least one representative of an 'open knowledge' organisation present, contributing and shaping the workshops (such as Open Access Button, Open Corporates, Open Data Institute). This made the events broad in remit and particularly useful in discussing future projects.
Total shared activity units [13] in shared activities [14] hosted with groups or organisations having similar goals to WMUK 40 0 in year to date 96 in year to date The Wikimania fringe events had an average of 19.2 activity units per event (looking at the attendee data across the weekends, giving an average of 10 people per weekend day). In this context engaging with other open organisations, and likeminded institutions from other sectors (e.g. GLAM) worked well for the Wikimania Fringe events. We were able to use the appeal and energy of Wikimania to bring our key collaborators together and work on future ideas over focused weekends.

Several organisations have already signed up to participate in the Open Coalition and the mailing list has over 60 members. Ongoing activities include mapping the open sector (with OKF and others) (progress reports here).

Lessons learned

edit

Lessons from this quarter

edit

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?

  • Organising Wikimania. This was a quarter like no other we can expect to experience again. Staff and volunteers were stretched to make sure that Wikimania delivered for a community with high expectations. Through all this, the charity was able to maintain its core programme, delivering training events and buildings partnerships with cultural and educational institutions. We also undertook strategic planning in the form of writing Shaping our Programme document, published in Q3 for community consultation over August. One of the accomplishments then was being able to protect the community from high burnout by proving additional capacity and support. The other was keeping perspective on the overall of chapter's activities and the future of our programmes, which will keep us active for the remaining of the year and beyond.
  • In a broad sense, we have learnt from producing a series of review documents this quarter. One was the Wikimedian in Residence review, which will hopefully help the whole movement learn from other reflections. The others were long term effect report on the GLAM-Wiki 2013 conference (here) and EduWiki 2013 conference (here). Looking back it is motivating to see how many open knowledge projects and collaborations have been started by these events.

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

  • There have not been many GLAM Programme image uploads (beyond WIR programme, Wales and grants programme) to date in this activity year, which is disappointing bearing in mind that it should be one of the focuses of this area. In general, this setback results from caution around Mass Upload tool as the tweaking continues, and we don't feel ready to roll it out to our UK GLAM partners. In Q2 we have been working on a big upload with one of our partners, but this in particular has been delayed by technical problems around firewalls. It is hoped that this will be resolved in Q3.
  • As visible from the report card, we have not been able to deliver any of the surveys that we committed to yet. The specialised focus of these, and the fact that most of the volunteer community has been focused on Wikimania, meant that we have not received much feedback on these. We have put in motion plans to work on at least some of the surveys in Q3, however.
  • Another area that we would like to improve on in the long term is the G4 technology programme. Due to limited developer time, we have made little progress on developing the back end of civiCRM and VLE. We have ambitions to make civi better suited to our needs and reporting requirements, however, the progress has been slow and it still doesn't match our needs.

What factors (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?

  • Perhaps most important was the strong core team of volunteers and staff that, in WMUK had been preparing for Wikimania especially Stuart Prior. The office was a hive of activity in the closing weeks of Q2, as volunteers and staff undertook the monumental task of organising an international conference. While some of the activities and metrics will fall in Q3, to put things in perspective the volunteers group which delivered Wikimania was in around 180 people, and three additional staff for organising Wikimania and supporting volunteers were hired. The additional capacity from these staff meant that it was possible to pick up some delayed tasks, such as visa applications from the attendees.

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

  • There was an unexpected number of volunteer offers for work. We received offers from hundreds of people wanting to help with Wikimania and this needed to be managed appropriately while having limited capacity to communicate with everyone.

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

  • Because this is an unusual year for the charity, Wikimania will impact particularly heavily on Q2 and Q3. The conference takes place in the first two weeks of Q3, but will have a lasting impact. Q3 is set to be a period of assessing the impact of Wikimania, assessing how to maximise its influence, and building on the contacts established through the conference. New leads will require capacity to develop and support. This may result in fewer events in Q3, but in turn we will spend the time building new ideas, perhaps influencing our Strategy discussions. EduWiki 2014 will also be heavily influenced by the links and workshops developed during Wikimania.

Additional information

edit

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).

UK press coverage (and coverage of UK projects & activities)

edit

Blog posts

edit

Compliance

edit

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

edit

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.

  • None.

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.

Notes

edit
  1. ↑ This does not include Gift Aid received in the quarter, which is accrued for in the accounts and is only included at same time as the donations to which the Gift Aid relates. Future reports to the FDC will amend this figure as necessary to accurately reflect Gift Aid received.
  2. ↑ This includes files on Commons and those uploaded to the Welsh Wicipedia with WMUK support. Further details can be found in the Q1 report.
  3. ↑ ie: excluding events aimed at promoting gender diversity

Signature

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


Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round1/Wikimedia_UK/Progress_report_form/Q2&oldid=15333628"