Grants talk:APG/Proposal form v4

This is a list of issues identified by key stakeholders as needing to be changed.

Language change for clarification

• CHANGE Goals/objectives question. Need input from Program Evaluation and Design team on this one. ”What are the objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals” → Change to “What is primary objective of this program? In other words, as a result of the activities planned as part of this program, what specific, timebound and measurable outcome will your entity achieve? For instance, “We plan to increase the number of active editors on Turkish Wikipedia by 15% by December 2014.” Done
• CHANGE “How will your entity document, track, and measure successes and challenges of this program?” TO “How will your entity measure and report the results of this program?” Done
• CHANGE ”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?” → What are the programs or activities 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? Done
• CUT "What else has your entity learned or innovated upon that could benefit the broader Wikimedia movement?" (Note that there is a question above about learning) Done
• COMBINE: RISK question under SWOT analysis Done
• CUT: How does your entity define and measure "success"? Done
• CUT: question about donor contacts from the FDC proposal form, but inform applicants that FDC staff may request donor contact information. It was revised. Done
• CUT: question about long term financial sustainability, since this information can be adequately covered in reports and in the specific questions around revenues. Done
• COMBINE: staffing tables to clearly show staffing changes, and clearly explain the distinction between current and proposed staff. Accept a detailed staffing plan in lieu of this table. Done
• ADD: Include a question about operating reserves in the proposal form. Definition: "Operating reserves are liquid, unrestricted assets available for an organization to use as a cushion, and to cover the costs of operations in case of unanticipated expenses or loss of revenue. Operating reserves are not meant to be considered a solution to everyday cash flow issues; in most cases, they are meant to be held over from year to year, accumulating interest and growing based on each individual organization’s operating reserves policy.” Done
• INCLUDE: a mandatory link to annual plans, and clearer requests for links by using a table. Done
• CHANGE: Administration should not be considered a program, in the budget section. We can have a separate table. Done
• ADD: Include an optional question for entities to describe their plans around administration and governance in a narrative section distinct from programs. “OPTIONAL: You may provide a high-level overview of important plans or developments in your organization’s operations here. This would include, for example, plans related to operating your office, plans around finance, plans around meeting legal and regulatory requirements, board development plans, and fundraising plans. This information, which affects the organization as a whole, should not be included in the sections about your programs that impact the Wikimedia movement." Let's see if the table helps to get around this and avoid adding another questions. N
• CHANGE: consider adding a column to the programs budget to indicate staff time per program. Entities already indicate their priority programs. It would make the table much more confusing to add a column here. N
• CHANGE membership question: How many members does your organization have, and what is the role of members in your organization? Done
• CHANGE volunteer question: How many volunteers are engaged with your organization’s work right now? How are volunteers engaged with your organization’s work right now? Done
• CHANGE: How does your program (1) increase reach, (2) improve quality, (3) encourage innovation and/or (4) increase participation? Your program may address one or more of these priorities, but please tell us which one of these four priorities your program best addresses? This was addressed in the revised version, with contribution from PED team. Done
• Change heading “Reflection on past activities and innovations” Done
• CHANGE: Program expenses table to denote operations/admin costs should be in a separate table, and create that table. Otherwise this conflates programs with admin/operations. Done
• CUT: When was your entity established? Done
• CUT: What is the mission of your entity; add to table. Done
• CUT: 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. Done
• ADD after new table: According to your proposed budget, how much funding will be devoted to non-travel-related re-granting (giving grants, reimbursements, or microgrants to other individuals, groups, or entities)? Done
• ADD after new table: According to your proposed budget, how much total funding will be devoted to travel (staff travel, board travel, volunteer travel, travel grants and reimbursements)? Done
• ADD: a question about online focus. Done

Notes

• Consistency around exchange rates in the proposal form. FDC staff to provide entities with instructions for using the correct exchange rate. Include this information about Table 2. Done
• Timeline as an option (Mediawiki extension) under programs. Done
• Translation -- this will need to be in an email about the proposal form.

Design help

Heather, can you kindly help me with these parts?

• Take out the “Program 1” above title of program--it's confusing, and applicants should simply list the name of the program and not have PROGRAM 1 above it.
  • I can! It is meant to allow them to edit each table individually, but if you want to remove it, that is fine. heather walls (talk) 00:35, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Awesome. Yes, I understand the intent. The thing is sometimes applicants write their title twice, making it a bit more confusing. Thanks! KLove (WMF) (talk) 18:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
      • Done
• Add question #s by section
  • Done

More design help

Things I thought I could do that I can't do...thanks for your help, Heather!

• NOTE that FDC will make recommendations in local currency. Can you change "Currency requested is defined as the currency in which you wish to receive funds (e.g., EUR, GBP, INR)." to be "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. Done
• CUT: Take out table 3 “variance” columns” -- this is not being properly calculated. And remove following question about variance. Done
• CHANGE: "Exchange rate used (currency requested to $US) and date accessed (mm/dd/yy): This exchange rate should be used throughout the form." Should be reworded to include a note that says "Please use Oanda.com on March 1 2014 to determine the exchange rate. Please use five decimal points." This should ensure more consistency. Done
  • These should be Done heather walls (talk) 08:01, 30 January 2014 (UTC)