Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/General Support Fund/Community User group Uganda Multi Year Grant 2025/27

Dear Wikimedia Community User Group Uganda,

Thank you for submitting your application. The regional funding committee and regional program officers and expert staff reviewed your application and have the following questions and feedback for your response;

Thank you so much for the feedback on our application, please find below our responses. -- Kateregga1 (talk) 14:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• Your proposal was well structured and prepared. For us this was a positive signal to your maturity as an affiliate.

Great to have this feedback, our goal is to improve and become a role model affliate in the region.-- Kateregga1 (talk) 09:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• Please review your metrics specifying the target Wikipedias you are working with.

The target wikipedia are English Wikipedia and Luganda Wikipedia, we will specify this in the metrics. --Kateregga1 (talk) 09:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• We note that the affiliate is positioned to begin thinking about how they measure the progress they are making in closing the gaps in content through programs that are part of their interventions.
• We had questions mostly on your budget which we note is aligned with your strategy;
  • Please explain the rationale for increased budget

We have recently finalized a comprehensive five-year strategy, transitioning to a more sustainable funding model by requesting multi-year funding instead of the annual funding approach we previously followed. This shift will provide stability as we work towards our long-term objectives.

Our focus is now centered on the four core objectives outlined in our strategic plan, resulting in a refined scope of work. While we previously supported a wide range of projects within Uganda, we are now prioritizing those directly aligned with our strategic goals, enabling us to drive our mission forward with greater impact and clarity.

To achieve these objectives, we are expanding our team. Previously, we operated with two key roles; however, we now plan to have four staff members on the monthly payroll, ensuring the capacity needed to deliver on our goals effectively. This expansion will naturally bring an increase in administrative expenses, such as larger workspace needed and additional operational support.

We also plan to invest in new assets, including laptops and a camera, to equip our team for efficient project delivery and to support our organizational growth.

Additionally, we are introducing a Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) component to rigorously track our progress and ensure that we achieve our strategic objectives. This will allow us to assess impact, address challenges in real-time, and demonstrate accountability.

Looking ahead, we aim to become a chapter, which will require a robust operational foundation and diversified funding sources. By pursuing multi-funding, we can further our impact, strengthen our resilience, and build the necessary capacity to meet the future demands of chapter status. Kateregga1 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• • Please clarify the costs related to advocacy policy work activities vs specific personnel costs connected to advocacy.

The costs related to advocacy policy work activities primarily cover expenses for outreach efforts, media campaigns, advocacy events, partnership development, and engaging in policy discussions. This includes organizing educational workshops and seminars to raise public awareness about open knowledge, producing and promoting media content, and conducting research and policy analysis to support advocacy positions. Additionally, funds are allocated for meetings with government officials to influence legislative changes that promote open access to information. Overall, these investments are essential for effectively promoting and sustaining advocacy initiatives aimed at enhancing understanding and support for open knowledge principles.

In contrast, the Advocacy, Partnership, Grant, and Fundraising Manager (Full-time) is a combined role that integrates responsibilities related to advocacy and partnerships with grant and fundraising efforts. Specific personnel costs associated with this position include salaries and benefits for staff. This role is crucial for driving advocacy efforts, managing partnerships, securing grants, and leading fundraising initiatives. By consolidating these responsibilities, we aim to streamline our efforts and enhance efficiency, as the interconnected nature of advocacy and fundraising allows one individual to effectively align community engagement and funding strategies, ultimately advancing the organization's mission more cohesively. Kateregga1 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• • Monitoring and evaluation tracks - 4000ドル - please elaborate on this costs and the deliverables expected.

As we concluded our five-year strategy, to ensure that we are progressing, we introduced the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) initiative, allocating 4,000ドル to support its implementation. This budget covers essential costs, including the development of data collection tools such as surveys and questionnaires to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. The allocation also includes expenses for the actual data collection process, allowing us to evaluate the effectiveness of our initiatives and their impact on our target audiences. Additionally, part of the budget will be dedicated to consultancy fees for experts who will guide us in establishing best practices for M&E, including analyzing the data and preparing detailed progress reports and a comprehensive final evaluation report. Furthermore, we plan to invest in training staff on M&E practices, equipping them to effectively monitor the impact of our work. Overall, this investment in M&E is crucial for assessing the effectiveness of our various initiatives and making informed decisions for future projects.

The expected deliverables from this M&E initiative include the development of a structured M&E framework outlining key performance indicators and data collection methods; data collection tools such as surveys and questionnaires for gathering relevant information; periodic progress reports detailing achievements and insights gained from the data; a comprehensive final evaluation report summarizing findings, lessons learned, and recommendations for future initiatives; and a stakeholder feedback summary compiling input on efforts and suggestions for improvement. These deliverables will provide a solid foundation for assessing our impact and guiding future strategies. Kateregga1 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• • As the affiliate continues to develop we recognize having a board is core to their health and while see the need to cover cost related to facilitate participation we also know many boards are on a volunteer basis and therefore, we would like clarity on the board compensation costs indicated.

To clarify, there are no direct compensation costs for board members, as they will be serving on a volunteer basis. However, there are associated board costs that include expenses for board meetings and allowances.

The board will convene quarterly to provide strategic guidance, ensure accountability, and support the Executive Director in all related work. Their responsibilities will include setting organizational policies, evaluating performance, fostering partnerships within the community, and overseeing specific committee activities such as finance, governance, and outreach. The board costs will include a small allowance for each member to cover their seating and facilitate meals and refreshments during these meetings. This approach ensures that board members can participate effectively while keeping our costs manageable. Kateregga1 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• • Additionally, who are your board members? And who are the paid roles? Overall who is on the team delivering the work proposed?

We have a board in place made up of the founding members of the user group and the organization, these are Geoffrey Kateregga, Erina Mukuta, Douglas Ssebaggala. But according to our new 5 year strategy, we are now in the process to streamline our membership and governance structure, to have a new board in place that is elected by the members. In August we roled out membership registration to identify eligible members who run for the board and also vote in our upcoming board elections in December this year enabling us to start the new year with the new board in place.

The members will elect five board members who will serve a two-year term, these will take up the roles of Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer, and a board member at large. Additionally, the board will be responsible for employing or appointing the Executive Director (Ed) and overseeing their roles, which will include managing daily operations, strategic planning, and ensuring compliance with organizational policies.

As for paid roles, we plan to have an Executive Director (Full-time) who is responsible for the overall management and implementation of our programs. Supporting the Executive Director are the following positions: Community and Communications Manager (Full-time), Finance and Administrative Manager (Full-time), and Advocacy, Partnership, Grant, and Fundraising Manager (Full-time).

Overall, the team delivering the proposed work includes the board members providing governance and strategic support, the Executive Director overseeing daily operations, and the staff members executing specific programs and initiatives in collaboration with our volunteer community. Together, this team is committed to advancing our mission and achieving our organizational goals. Kateregga1 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• • Consultants; we see a number of consultants in the budget including on areas covered as part of regular paid roles and keen to understand what those roles are and their deliverables and how they overlap or not with paid full time roles.

Under Organizational Capacity & Sustainability, we allocate a budget for consultancy services to develop and update policies and operational manuals. As our organization grows, it is essential to establish guidelines, policies, and manuals to enhance governance. Having formal policies created by experts will ensure we are well-prepared to address any issues that may arise.

Under Operational Expenses we have

1. Expert consultant (Human Resource & Strategy ) - This budget line is primarily designated to assist the board in hiring the Executive Director (ED) and to support the ED in recruiting their support staff. Additionally, it will provide any personnel support required by the Administration, as this role is integrated into the Finance and Administration functions.

2. Statutory & legal Consultation on various legal matters - This budget line is set at zero, as all related expenses have already been incorporated into the consultancy budget under Organizational Capacity & Sustainability.

3. Expert consultant (Tax & Audit) Conducting annual audit in compliance with local operational regulations - This budget line is designated for conducting annual audits in compliance with local regulations. In Uganda, companies are legally required to audit their financial statements annually. Therefore, this budget is allocated to ensure our financial statements are audited to meet these legal obligations. Kateregga1 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

• Feedback from Global Advocacy on proposed public advocacy work;
  • Recommendation: None as of now ; applicant to share more information - encouraging them to sharpen their policy targets and narrow their tactics.
  • Lobbying:
    • Explanation: The user group’s plans effectively identify core public policy priorities for the Wikimedia movement such as copyright reform and legislation that promotes open access. However, at present the advocacy areas that they outlined are too vague. They identify themes but they don’t identify existing government policies in Uganda or acknowledge existing campaigns that Wikimedians are running which they could join to further their goals. Their third goal, to ‘encourage the adoption of policies that support open educational resources’, could easily fall into the bucket of advocating for institutions to change their licensing; while important, this explicitly does not fall under the category of public policy advocacy. Moreover, the three goals they identify all seem to focus on the same things - changing open licenses - just in different contexts such as education and government resources. Their tactics also aren’t very clear. For example, if they want to push for public access to government information then it seems remiss for them not to consider adapting a campaign such as "public money, public goods" which Wikimedia Deutschland ran. They could also promote the general theme of their advocacy goals by joining the campaign that Creative Commons is running (with participation from many Wikimedians) to push UNESCO to produce a recommendation on open culture and heritage, which builds on the success of the campaign that led to the recommendation on open educational resources. Another existing campaign they could join is Wiki Loves Broadcast , which recently invited more groups to join the campaign. We would like to see the user group sharpen their focus on existing government policies that they wish to target, and to provide more detail about their tactics. Details we’re looking for include:
  • Are there any bills that have already been proposed related to issues like copyright reform (re their goal to ‘advocate for laws that promote the use of open licenses’) or education?

Thank you for the detailed feeback on our advocacy strategy, its a new area of work for us and we would welcome any support we can get from WMF, including participation in the ongoing projects around advocacy initiated by other groups within the movement

While there are no bills specifically focused on open licensing for Wikipedia content, Uganda is currently reviewing its Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act. This presents an opportunity for the User Group to advocate for amendments that include fair use provisions and align with open licensing principles. Additionally, we will connect our advocacy work with the Global Digital Compact (GDC), focusing on copyright reform, open educational resources, and digital access. This includes:

• Community education: Conducting workshops and online campaigns to raise awareness about GDC principles and their relevance to Uganda.
• Policy engagement: Briefing parliamentarians, preparing policy recommendations, and collaborating with the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance to integrate GDC principles into national policies.
• Coalition building: Partnering with local NGOs and digital rights organizations to amplify advocacy efforts.
• Public discourse: Engaging the public through media appearances and panel discussions to promote GDC-aligned policies.

• • What government entities and relevant parties in Uganda do they plan to engage for this work, and how (do they already have contacts)? They claim they want to participate in public consultations - have any already been announced by the government? What tactics, what timelines do they envision?

We plan to engage with various government entities and stakeholders, including:

• Ministry of ICT and National Guidance: Participate in consultations and policy dialogues to advocate for open knowledge and copyright reform.
• Uganda Communications Commission (UCC): Offer policy recommendations on copyright and open licensing.
• National Curriculum Development Centre (NCDC): Collaborate to integrate open knowledge resources into the education system.
• Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB): Advocate for copyright reform and fair use provisions.

We will also partner with digital rights organizations, educational institutions, and libraries to amplify its message and reach a wider audience.

• • How will they work towards government data openness? What opportunities or existing relationships do they plan to leverage? If none, how do they plan to build these?

We will leverage existing and new relationships to promote open government data:

• Existing relationships: Collaborate with the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance and the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) to advocate for greater public access to government data.
• New relationship-building: Host advocacy training and public workshops on open data, leverage global movements, and participate in public consultations to establish new contacts and build support for open data initiatives.

Thank you and we look forward to hearing from you on the comments shared and if you would like to meet with the regional funding committee, please inform the program officer.

On behalf of the regional funding committee and staff Azogbonon (talk) 08:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC) Reply

Thank you so much @Azogbononand the rest of the regional funding committee members, let us know if there is any more questions from the replies shared on your comments. -- Kateregga1 (talk) 15:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

Dear Wikimedia Community User Group Uganda,

Thank you for submitting your application seeking General Support Funds - Wikimedia Community Fund. The MEA Regional Committee and Staff have reviewed, discussed and deliberated upon your application and made the decision to fund you a 3-year multi-year grant of the local currency equivalent of 120,000 USD per year for the grant period of 1st January 2025 - 31st December 2027.

We will support a max 10% inflation cost YoY for Year 2 and Year 3 of funding.

Here are a few points to note on the decision;

• We appreciated learning about your 5-year organizational and community strategy and look forward to seeing how the strategic direction supports further growth and development of your work.
• We agreed based on input by the advocacy team, to not fund your advocacy work - though we encourage you to be part of ongoing conversations in Uganda on matters related to open knowledge and public policy without your direct intervention. We believe you need more support from the Global Advocacy team to enable you to meaningfully contribute to the ideas you have shared in the application and feedback response. Some of the additional YoY% increase can go to support this advocacy work once it holds more clarity and at an actionable state.
• We are requesting the organization to review the ratio between its operational costs and programmatic costs. We find it important that while we recognize the importance of having operational costs, it is of value to the committee that a higher % of funds goes to program implementation. This review should also be done for your metrics ensuring that it aligns with your capacity and resources made available.
• We caution the organization in having too many roles noting the risk of staff bloat and that you should continue to find ways of engaging volunteers in implementing the programs and of course support their organizing efforts.
• Lastly, we recognize that you have been selected to be part of the Issroff Family Foundation partnership - supporting your participation in the Collaborative Learning Initiative which will support organizational strengthening and leadership development. Please allocate funds to support this program's participation, which at this point we understand is internet data support and in-country meetups where appropriate. During our next learning conversation, we hope to hear and learn about the outcomes achieved from the program.

Once again, Congratulations! We thank you for your participation in the grant application process and hope to continue to journey with you as you embark on a new year of project implementation.

Best regards from the Middle East & Africa Regional Committee and Staff, FElgueretly-WMF (talk) 09:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC) Reply