committee review process
A detailed page outlining conference grants committee member agreements and process is outlined here.
You can find upcoming round schedules towards the bottom of the main conference grants page. (add template)
proposal review rubric
| Evaluation criteria
|
| Community engagement
|
- Is there clear demonstration of community engagement in the planning process?
- Are there endorsements on the request, pages where the event has been discussed, or a space where the community has demonstrated interest in the event?
- Have the organizers done a needs assessment or other survey of interest?
- Are organizers targeting active Wikimedians as participants?
|
| Impact potential
|
- Is there a demonstrated need for the event?
- Are goals and intended outcomes clearly articulated, high priority, and reasonably achievable?
- Is it clear what kind of knowledge would be conveyed to participants, what type of networking would arise, and/or what types of decision-making and strategic development could occur?
- Is there a plan for follow up after the event?
|
| Ability to execute
|
- Are there enough community members with the time and ability to plan and execute the event?
- Are there goals that the participants could act on within a one year period that will likely lead to results or show progress?
|
| Budget
|
- Is the budget aligned with the potential for impact?
- Considering the total Conference Grant budget, would you prioritize this event?
|
conflicts of interest
Each each member of the committee will,
- Review the WMF's Conflict of Interest Policy;
- Disclose any possible personal, familial, or business relationship that could reasonably give rise to a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest in the Conflict of Interest Questionnaire.
WMF and the committee will work together to appropriately address any conflicts of interest or potential bias that committee members identify, to maintain the integrity of the decision making process.
