[foundation-board] OKF-DE proposal

Sat Dec 17 10:50:06 UTC 2011

To be clear, I'm asking the Board to (improve and) approve this
approach before we engage with OKF-DE on amending their proposal.

On 17 December 2011 10:48, Becky Hogge <becky.hogge at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Further to our discussion of the OKF-DE proposal at this week's Board
> meeting, here's the feedback I would propose we send to OKF-DE. As
> discussed, I am in Berlin later this month, and happy to connect with
> Daniel Dietrich if that's helpful for OKF-DE to understand our
> concerns.
>
> The proposal I'm talking about is here:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fKvdB7r0a3QpADFt72UCPmJgXAf4-M3qq-clsLST6HA/edit?hl=en_GB
> (shared with okfn.board)
>
> Since the meeting, I've also had a chance to look at the proposed
> budget for the project here, which was linked to from the document:
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApbQZxbNri2RdFZEdE9XMmoxdWpqR01RempLTW1GX1E&hl=en_GB#gid=0
>
> Sidenote: I missed the budget initially, as it was just a link in the
> document. I'd prefer it if all vital information the Board needs to
> review for any given proposal is contained in a single document.
>
> Okay, so here's the feedback:
>
> 1) The proposal needs to be clearer about what it's asking for, and
> what it intends to deliver against that. Right at the top it needs to
> say "We're asking for x euros to fund us for y time to achieve z" This
> is not just window-dressing - OKF Board central need to be able to
> look at this document at the end of 2012 and evaluate whether the work
> following from this proposal was successful. Clarity here will aid
> accountability down the line.
> ---Having dived into the materials, it's still not clear to me how
> much they want and what they're going to do with it. There's a
> document called "2 year operational plan" (why 2 years, when the grant
> is for one year?), linked out to from the proposal
> (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtMts_R3W2qxdEpHdFR4b20ycG12S183VDk5ZUJBZFE&hl=en_GB#gid=0)
> that is cryptic to me. And the budget appears to suggest that in the
> worst case we give them 60K Euros in 2012, and in the best, we give
> them that plus 37.5K euros for a chapter coordinator in 2012.
>
> 2) Matching the funding: Looking at the budget, OKF-DE appear to be
> saying they have guaranteed income of 35K euros from two organisations
> labelled KfW and OIW. They also think it's possible to raise a maximum
> of 120K euros from other organisations. But they don't appear willing
> to adjust their outgoings depending on how successful they are.
> Instead, they posit that in the worst case scenario, they will lose
> 41.25K euros, and in the best, they'll end the year 116.24K euros in
> the black. The former seems unfeasible and the latter seems like a lot
> of cash to be sitting on. I don't think they've thought this through.
>
> My recommendation is that we ask the OKF-De team to address the
> proposal in these two areas. Essentially, we probably want them to
> come back with a proposal that is shorter and clearer more generally
> plus a budget that adds up in the worst case scenario.
>
> We also need to think about how to encourage sustainability. One idea
> might be to release the budget in two tranches, with the second
> tranche contingent on them achieving the matched income they say they
> can achieve from KfW and OIW. This could be a principle we apply more
> generally in making grants to chapters
>
> Two things that someone closer to the ground needs to do on our side
> before we can progress this is:
> -Provide the Board with a rough breakdown of the demands they expect
> on the Omidyar pot in 2012 (how many other chapters do we want/need to
> fund in that year? How much are we reserving for core?) - Is Kat the
> best person to approach here?
> -Get clarity on whether we need a change to the Omidyar contract in
> order to fund chapters like this - Is Jason the best person to
> approach here?
>
> If Rufus is confident that the two points above are actionable, then
> we can undertake them in parallel to advising OKF-DE on their revised
> proposal.
>
> Finally, if we expect to receive proposals like this from other
> chapters over the coming years, I'd be pleased to work with Kat on
> developing guidelines for how they should be structured, so that this
> process can be as painless as possible for all concerned in the
> future.
>
> Cheers
>
> Becky