[foundation-board] OKF-DE proposal

[Becky Hogge]

Can I prod the Board for a response to this please?

On 17 December 2011 10:50, Becky Hogge <becky.hogge at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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