Grants talk:PEG/WM CZ/Czech Outreach

A decision has been made on this grant. Comments are still welcome on this page.

GAC members who support this request

1. the grant proposal seems reasonable and amount requsted seem justified, I support this request rubin16 (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
2. --DerekvG (talk) 12:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC) some clarifications might be in order ( as per questions raised but overal a worthwhile proposal
3. --Ilario (talk) 12:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
4. I support this request. ----Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive • talk • 09:28, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

GAC members who abstain from voting/comment

1. --Packa (talk) 15:06, 18 January 2015 (UTC) – as a participant and coordinator

GAC comments

More quantitative goals in "Measures of success"

Hi WM CZ and thanks for your grant proposal. I'm glad that the activity of Wikimedia France inspired you and the results of Wikitown Přibyslav are great ! I would really like to have more information on the "Measures of success". For instance, 600 pictures were taken, 64 articles were created and 250 kilobytes of text were added by 12 participants during the first Wikitown. What are you expecting these numbers to be for Wikitown 2015 ? How many wikipedians do you want to recrute threw the Senior Citizens program ? I would like to know how you define success as much as how you measure that you reached it :) Léna (talk) 23:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

12 participants proved to be quite a reasonable group size for the WikiTown, although we may go to as much as 15-16. Generally, the price of the event is directly proportional to the number of people involved. Upscaling (improving quantity and quality of the efforts) is better achieved through organizing more events like this, not by increasing the number of people involved in each event.

As for Senior Citizens program, we have already recruited about 10 Wikipedians (if you define someone who we taught Wikipedia in October and continues to edit in December as a Wikipedian) and I expect a similar group of new Wikipedians could be recruited each three months that the project runs. I have just finished a blog post on Senior Citizen program and can include it in this proposal once it is published.

Measuring success is individual - each program requires different metrics. I tried to summarize metrics that we use in the proposal, section "Measures of success". Thanks for your questions! Best regards, --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

just small question: you already achieved 600 images during previous event, why do you set lower amount as a target now? Shouldn't it be more challenging? rubin16 (talk) 17:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

@rubin16 This year's WikiTown may be a bit smaller and less photography-centered because our Mediagrant II team has been planning a workshop specifically on photography. We also shift part of our attention from acquiring pictures towards actually outreaching to people. In another words, this is not a "media acquisition" grant, it is a public outreach grant. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 12:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Some clarifications

Thanks for the submission. In general, the request is very well conceived and I strongly support it. However, I feel there are some things that need to be clarified and thereby I have the following questions:

1. Can you detail how you calculated the item 1.4 (Internet fees, fees for usage of public space)? What is the monthly fee? How many months do you intend to pay for?
2. Can you detail how you calculated the item D (consumables)? What is the quantity of these materials? What is the projected number of people it will be distributed to?
3. Can you give us more details regarding the project WikiTown? Does it include a series of Wikiexpeditions? How many people are going to participate in the project and how many nights are they going to spend?
4. Can you detail how you calculated the item 5.1 (promotional items out of scope of programs above)? Who are the people that will used the business cards? What kind of print-outs you intend to publish?
5. What do you plan with the item 5.2 (grant administration)? Do you intend to pay someone for handling all administrative tasks?

I'd also like to endorse Léna's request for quantifying the measures of success. You seem to include them very well and the only thing remaining is to add numerical thresholds on what would be considered success. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:24, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I must have misunderstood Léna's request, and indeed now I see it - the proposal lacked precise numbers. I added them into the proposal, please review it.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

As for your questions:

1. item 1.4 = roughly 15 EUR per month * 12 months = 180 EUR for a mobile internet. This will probably be needed twice as consulted with my technically skilled fellow Wikipedians :-). That means 360 EUR. Plus a reserve and a sum allocated for usage of public space in the city.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
2. item 1.5 (consumables) = one typical leaflet usually costs about 0.2 EUR, 2 leaflets, each printed 1000 times, cost 400 EUR. The second half of the item will be used for travel costs to get the tent where we need it, promotional items (a batch with the logo of Wikipedia for example, which costs about 0.25 EUR per unit, i.e. about 100 EUR per 400). Generally one item per visitor, meaning 2000 people could be served with leaflets, 400 people served with batches. Refreshment for volunteers does not include food in restaurants, is basically meant to cover snacks and beverages for those who spend the day in the tent, volunteering for us.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
3. WikiTown, as detailed in the proposal, is a weekend-long edit-a-thon + photographic workshop + outreach event. We try to keep the number of participants low because it increases the cost (12 turned out to be a good number). We try to reach to new participants each time.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
4. item 5.1 = business cards are usually printed out annually for active Wikimedia Czech Republic volunteers who ask for them. Personally, I use them when I meet with partners or interested parties. We do not track how each volunteer uses each card (because that would be ridiculously bureaucratic) but expect noone will ask for more cards if they still have enough in stock. Print-outs may include outreach-related projects of Wikimedia Czech Republic, you can get a sense of what we print in this category - this is mainly a reserve category for projects which are being conceived (a leaflet is often one of the first things that an iniciative needs).--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
5. Our grant administrator (Milada Moudrá) collects receipts, catalogues them and hands them over to the accountant. So, not all administrative tasks, but mainly the handling of receipts. As we progress from PEG grants to FDC financing in 2016, we will change this process completely, but we would like to keep this method of grant administration running in 2015. It costs us 1300 CZK monthly (about 50 EUR).--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your answers and for adding quantified measures of success. My only remaining question is on the criteria that you intend to use in identifying new users. Do you plan to use any criterion on the minimum number of edits in a specific period or just to count the newly registered users who have edited anything? Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

No, of course it is not just about editing - every participants edits at least a bit. A Wikipedian is usually defined as someone who independently edits Wikipedia after the courses are over. Usually we give it at least a two-month period. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:09, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Tracking the new users and their contributions in at least a two-month period after completing the project is a good way to measure their activity.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:49, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

WMF comments

Thank you for this thoughtful request. We are glad to see you moving forward in your outreach work, and thinking of innovative ways to bring Wikimedia to more people. We enjoyed hearing about your approach to doing outreach in public spaces: it’s interesting that many of your outreach programs use a multipronged approach that combine several different methods of outreach to reach different audiences. We also see that as you grow your outreach work, you are building methods to better understand your outcomes (e.g. measuring use of photos, conducting some evaluation work around printed materials).

Hello! I am looking forward to answering your questions as good as I can and cooperate on the final version of this proposal. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

The amount requested is much larger than the amount requested for your previous grant, yet the targets set are less ambitious than what you have previously achieved through similar work. The majority of the funds requested are focused on equipment, travel, and consumables (e.g. printed materials, snacks). Some work may need to be done to reduce the budget and/or provide more context for how this increase in funding will lead to greater impact.

For example, engagement of 200 participants in direct editing is more than we have ever accomplished and I consider this to be an ambitious goal in comparison with what most Wikimedia events in the world are able to do. Similarly, other metrics are also fairly ambitious. The number of attendants of a WikiConference is higher than the number in years 2011-2013 and comparable to the attendance in year 2014 (see here).

1. This year’s request seems to represent a heavy investment in equipment used for outreach. Does WMCZ currently have a list of the equipment already owned by the chapter? We would like to know that there is a clear policy in place around the use of this equipment, and also better understand why the chapter can’t utilize some of its current equipment to do outreach work. We understand that you want to have a presence at the events where you are conducting outreach, but 2,000 EUR for an inflatable tent and 850 EUR for furniture, in addition to 1500 EUR for four laptops, is a significant expense. At the same time, we haven’t yet seen such general outreach efforts generate significant impact that would justify an investment of more than 4,000 EUR in equipment. Do you think there are ways you could still achieve good results without this significant investment in a large tent with furniture, and would you consider revising your budget accordingly?

   Yes, WMCZ has a list of equipment owned by the chapter; the list is available to all members, as is all the equipment. Most of the previously purchased equipment (a laptop, a scanner, a camera) are still in use and a good management of the new purchases is ensured. You asked if we could produce good results with a lower budget. Yes. We could achieve good goals with 2-3 chromebooks and approximately 1,500 EUR for a tent. Also the funds requested for furniture currently are about 375 EUR, not 850 EUR as you indicated.

   The amendments to the budget could mean less comfort for our volunteers (eg. more time needed for setting up the tent, heavier tent that would need 2 people to carry, etc, a risk of running out of battery with chromebooks and having to end the event sooner than we wanted). Please consider those when requesting a change in our budget.

   Some prices may go down if we obtain a partnership discount for the purchases. In past, we have always been very careful about our funds and have returned all unused funds accordingly (and not spending them crazily), and this would be the same case with this grant as well.

   Please take into account that the metrics are written down only for this year, however, the purchased equipment can be used for many years. Of course, the metrics in our subsequent outreach efforts (in the following years) will build on the previous purchases! --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

2. In the past, you did some work to evaluate the effectiveness of printed materials in doing outreach work (e.g. Wikimedium survey). We noticed that a lot of funds in the budget might be going to printed materials (e.g. leaflets), so before approving those items it would be good to know what the results of your evaluation work you already did around printed materials were.

   We concluded that "Wikimedium", a printed biannual magazine, is not a good investment of our time and money, and we are not planning on printing further issues. Some of the money is planned for leaflets but we have cut down on the number of these. Generally: the more pieces you print, the lower the prices is. However, our current opinion is that we rather print less for a somewhat higher price, without the risk of having piles of leaflets left in the cupboard. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

3. We are glad to see that you are measuring use of the photos created through the WikiTown project. Given that the outcomes of last year’s project were 64 articles and 600 photos (use rate not specified here) and your target for this year is 500 photos, 2,000 EUR seems like a significant amount to invest. How will you work with your community to determine that this project is addressing an important content gap, or that there is a need for outreach projects in the chosen town? If the main benefit of the project is outreach rather than content acquisition, how will you know if you are successful?

   The previous WikiTown was funded through different grants and aimed at content. This WikiTown, as indicated above, is aimed at outreach in the town. The tent will be used to organize an event for the citizens; a workshop will take place, content generation will mostly be done through direct GLAM work. Success will be measured through the education extension where participants will be asked to enrol. Additionally, content generated through our GLAM work in the wikitown will be an indicator of success.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

4. We noticed you set targets around new editors only for your work with seniors. Is there a reason you didn’t set targets around new editors for your other programs? We note, for example, that you are beginning to track the editing activity of people drawn in through your outreach activities through using tools like the education extension. Are you able to share some of your targets and expectations in this area?

   Yes. As widely known, students do not usually become editors. This fact was admitted by most large education programs; in US, not more than 3% of students continue to edit. Our Wikimetrics analysis of school year 2013/2014 (as explained here) indicates that 5% of students continue to edit one year after they had registered. Because this could be students repeatedly enrolled for our courses or students doing a very small edit (which doesn't really constitute a Wikipedian), we consider these numbers low and not worth setting as goals. Maintaining teachers (politics of "instructor retention" rather than "student retention") and can be measured by bytes added by their students each year. Indeed, our teachers tend to collaborate with us repeatedly (each year) and that could also be tracked somehow, if desired by WMF. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

5. You have 850 EUR budgeted for the evening events at the Havlíčkův Brod Book Fair and Silesian Museum Night, but you mention in your request that you are exempt from fees. Would you give us some information about what these costs are, if they aren’t covering the fees? Are they just covering travel for volunteers? If so, how many volunteers are going to be involved?

   They are not evening events, they are one- or two-day events, respectively. The costs are covering travel expenses, accomodation and food for volunteers. About 200 EUR was also spent on T-shirts on a "Spot a Mistake on Wikipedia" competition which took place during one of the events, similar engaging events are expected to take place this year during the events. Indeed, we were exempt from fees last year but we are leaving the fees in the budget in case the offer is different this year (basically, we always get a big discount, but sometimes it is not a 100% discount) --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

6. Would you please share some thinking around how you might target your future outreach work, to reach certain audiences that may be most likely to become involved with Wikimedia, if that is something that you are thinking about as you plan this work? As your work is evolving, we would be interested to see what you are exploring in this area.

   We are currently exploring almost all key audiences that are likely to become Wikipedians. These are students (Students Write Wikipedia), PC-skilled senior citizens (Senior Citizens Write Wikipedia), institutional experts (GLAM program), semi-formal communities interested in specific subjects (editing workshops and competitions through the 'Communities' grant) and local patriots (planned WikiTown outreach). Targeting specific audiences is a successful approach but we are missing on some of the potential Wikipedians. The activities in the city space are aimed at adressing just that.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience in clarifying these points while we consider your request. By the way, we’re happy to send along some stickers you can use for your outreach work. You can give Janice your mailing address once a decision is made about the grant request.

Thank you Wolliff for your comments, you are pinpointing the most difficult and important points, and we had lengthy discussions about most of them. Some changes to the budget can indeed be made, although they may lead to less flexibility in our planning and somewhat less "comfort" (in the sense of worse equipment etc.) for our volunteers. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Cheers, Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 02:02, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Additional comments

Thank you to the GAC, Vojtěch, and Winifred for the productive discussion above. We appreciate WMCZ's past activities and efforts to think creatively about how to engage more people in the Wikimedia projects. We do however, have a number of remaining questions/concerns:

1. As mentioned above, we have not seen general outreach to be impactful. We understand you are trying different approaches to reach diverse audiences, but we recommend that you continue to focus on target groups that are well-positioned to enjoy editing and content creation. Students, technologically-savvy seniors, historians, librarians, GLAM enthusiasts, topic experts, are all examples of target groups with a higher potential for wanting to participate in and contribute to Wikimedia projects than the general public. Given the limited resources, in both volunteer time and funding, we won't support the Wikipedia in Public Spaces project through this grant. While it is hard to judge the impact of participation in the Book Fair and Museum Night, we do believe these events are worth participating in, as the audience is already more aligned with Wikimedia than the general public.

   :-( This is a central project that was likely to attract many more new participants than any book fairs or student outreach programs ... but all right.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

   Thank you for being open to reconsidering this aspect of the grant proposal. Please update the proposal page accordingly. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

2. Regarding the students program, can you please provide additional metrics on the number of schools, teachers, and students you hope to engage? What percentage increase, if any, is this over last year? The number of repeat teachers, as mentioned above, is also a good metric to track and demonstrates success.

   As we do not increase volunteer forces for our student education program, the numbers are not expected to increase. I expect about 6-8 courses each school term, i.e. about 12-18 courses each year. I expect 75% of these will be lead by "repeat teachers", as was the case in past --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

   Thanks for these details. Can you please add them to the measures of success in the proposal? Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

3. We are less interested in the number of visitors to outreach events, than the number of new editors, active editors engaged, and retained new users (measured 2 months after the activity). Does "200 people actively editing at our events" mean the number of participants in your workshops? Can you measure how many of these people continue to edit in the months following? In terms of visitors to outreach events, what is the plan for follow-up after they have visited your booth?

   Well, "200 people actively editing at our events" referred to the part of the grant that you don't like. The proposal specifically says: "Visitors of the tent will be asked to create an account, sign up in the EducationProgram extension and try editing - so that we can track them later and evaluate the success of public space Wikipedia presentation.". So yes, I could have measured it.--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

4. Wikitown Přibyslav was a great project last year! Now that you are taking a different approach, it makes sense that the measures of success area also different and should be focused on the number of new users and retained users. Are you planning on one Wikitown excursion or multiple? This type of outreach depends on solid partnerships with local institutions who can publicize the event to the appropriate audience and follow-up with participants after the group has left. Have you identified such partners in specific towns?

   Yes we already have partners in more than five regional towns. We have planned to organize one event each year. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

   Great that you already have partners identified in the target towns. Can you please add your proposed metrics around new users and retained users for this project? What are your plans for follow-up with theses users after the event? Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Please let us know if you have questions about the above or would prefer to set up a time to talk about the changes. We look forward to your responses. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 01:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC) I would be happy to set up a Skype call if possible, to talk about the changes. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Changes made

Dear grant administrators and members of the PEG committee

I accepted Alex Wang's suggestion to talk about the suggested changes to this proposal and I hereby want to thank her for that opportunity. As a result of the short chat we had, I suggested several amendments to the proposal. These include:

• Reduction of the budget for "Wikimedia in public space" - because public space efforts are considered less efficient, we chose a more experimental approach and will only *rent* the tent instead of buying it. We will also spend less money for laptops. The resulting budget for tent is a fraction of the original sum and the overall budget for "Wikimedia in public space" is down by 50%
• WikiTown 2015 will continue to be concentrated on content creation, less on outreach. We will still aim to do outreach, such as by contacting local press, organizing a lecture in a library or activizing local community members, but metrics related to content improvements were added to the proposal
• Because my time as a volunteer will be saved a little by not concentrating on acquisition of the tent, I decided to add additional budget for "senior citizen education program". This is in concordance with grant committee's opinion that outreach among target groups is usually more efficient then general outreach. The elevated budget will fund the upscaling of the senior education program by directly teaching librarians to become Wikipedia ambassadors and/or class tutors for senior citizens (more information in the proposal and in the grant's measures of success).

The resulting budget is down by 25%, probably also thanks to changes in the EUR/USD conversion rate.

Please give me your opinion of the changes--Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 18:15, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vojtěch Dostál. Thank you for updating the request.

• We are still concerned with the high costs of the public space program, given our experience with limited returns on these types of activities. However, if community members are really motivated to do this outreach, we don't want to prevent them from doing it. We would fund 2 laptops and the accessories. We do not think a leaflet rack is necessary and would encourage you to look for a more reasonable table. Doing a preliminary search (albeit, here in the US), I found lots of tables for around $50-$100, including this one. We also think this type of tent provides adequate coverage for an outdoor activity. We also were wondering about the cost of the internet fees. 170 EUR per event seems quite high. In terms of the measures of success for public events, the number of visitors does not really give a sense of impact. Tracking the number of people that create accounts and the number of those people that make an edit or subsequent edits over a certain time period is much more relevant. Please set some targets around these measures of success.
• Thank you for re-evaluating and clarifying the goals of WikiTown. The activity is quite expensive, given the metrics that were added. We would hope to see more content integrated online. 250 kilobytes of text is roughly equivalent to 10 articles. Do you think it is feasible that this activity could result in more content -- photos integrated on wiki and articles improved/created? We would like to hear your thoughts about this.

Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 02:07, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Alex Wang (WMF), I feel we might be getting to a finale. Once more, I reduced the budget for "Wikimedia in public space" per your requests (lower budget for: Internet, table, laptops, chairs, miscellaneous). I kept the leaflet rack in the budget - can you please reconsider your opinion? Putting leaflets on the table is risky in windy weather and we may profit from a leaflet rack for years - it is not something that breaks. I expect usage on Wikiconference, in the office, etc...

As for the metrics (Tracking the number of people that create accounts and the number of those people that make an edit or subsequent edits over a certain time period is much more relevant. Please set some targets around these measures of success. ) - we already have those, this is measure number 2. Do you need some other metrics or are these adequate?

I also reduced the budget for WikiTown from 2000 to more modest 1500; we can accomplish all metrics with such budget. In my humble opinion, 250 kilobytes is not equivalent to 10 articles. An average article on Czech Wikipedia is actually around 5,000 Bytes (which makes for 50 articles, if created from scratch). Actually, I have always thought that the metric is quite impressive :)). In 2014, our participants were working on the articles from morning till dawn. Given that these are 250 kilobytes of high-quality content, and not trash, I am very proud of them that they wrote 250 kilobytes. I think a motivation of beating last year could get us to about 300 kilobytes - that's actually not that much more, right? What do you think would be a reasonable number? --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 18:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vojtěch Dostál. Thank you for making these updates. We are still concerned about the budget for the public space activities, given the risk in returns. We're willing to fund a simple tent, that can be purchased and used multiple times by the chapter, similar to the link I provided. We also don't believe that leaflets are that useful and therefore don't see the need for a leaflet rack. If you do print leaflets for information that cannot be found online (I am not clear what type of information that would be), then there are definitely other ways to make sure they don't blow away. Regarding Wikitown, thank you for explaining in more detail the expected metrics. Looking at last year's results, 250-300kb sounds reasonable. We are still concerned it is a very expensive activity. According to the Mediagrant II interim report, last year's Wikitown weekend only cost 450EUR for the same number of people and expected outcomes. Can you please let us know what the difference is this year? Thanks, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I adjusted the budget to a purchase of a tent that you had indicated and removed leaflet rack from the budget. Regarding WikiTown, such event cannot be organized for 450 EUR. That would barely cover the cost of accommodation for 12 people. The full cost of the whole WikiTown was about 900 EUR - it was partially funded through other grants. Mediagrant funded the photographic part. The accommodation will be more expensive this year than it was last year because we are unlikely to get such low prices ever again. However, I adjusted the budget down to 1000 EUR to accommodate to your wishes. Would that be OK? --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 12:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Category

Would it be possible to add this page into Category:Grants:WM CZ. I spent five minutes trying to find it yout and I could do it.--Juandev (talk) 14:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Juandev. We normally add those categories after a grant has been funded, but I did it now. Cheers, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 16:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Huh, thx. There are quite a lot of grant categories...--Juandev (talk) 17:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for a budget change

Hello, I would like to ask for a change in the budget. Currently we do not need a budget for the grant administrator (item 5.2.) - we have consolidated all our 3 grants together into the hands of 1 grant admin and the amount of money we now have budgeted for her (together in all 3 grants) is unnecessarily high (we pay her from Mediagrant and we do not need to touch Czech Outreach money).

Instead, I would like to move the funds from 5.2. into category 4.1 - outreach to seniors and students, which is a quickly growing program and we need more funds there.

Thank you very much in advance, --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 19:01, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vojtěch Dostál, it is good to hear that the outreach to students and seniors is growing, and we approve the request to shift funding from the grants administration budget to cover that program. Can you provide updated measures of success for the outreach to seniors and students program to reflect increased spending in that area? --KHarold (WMF) (talk) 19:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Kacie, for your incredibly fast response; I trust that decreased spending in the administrative area is welcomed by everyone :). I just updated the budget and also added a measure of success involving workshops for librarians, which are mostly to be reimbursed from the increased budget item. Is that all right? Thank you, --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:20, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vojtěch Dostál, Thank you for updating the application. I believe that the program officer is the only one who can make changes to a budget after a grant has been approved - but you made the same revision that I would have. No need to change anything, just keep this in mind in the future. Best, --KHarold (WMF) (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2015 (UTC)