[Osmf-talk] Seeking your input on the Microgrant program

Wed Oct 10 18:32:23 UTC 2018

Simon,

In our discussions about this grant program, we didn’t envision this to cover large infrastructure projects. Perhaps the document should reflect that more clearly?

I think the scope of such a program is one of the things we seek input about. You see that there are a lot of question marks in the Eligibility section. What would your answers be?

I am not aware of any previous OSMF run programs that are comparable but I am looking forward to your sharing a bit more so we can learn from previous iterations and, as you suggest, mistakes made there.

Thank you for your feedback!
Martijn 

> On Oct 1, 2018, at 4:16 AM, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
> 
> I would suggest taking a step back. 
> 
> I'm on the record ( multiple times) of suggesting that the OSMF should take a more active role in improving the infrastructure for OSM contributors. I don't believe that a grant scheme is a good vehicle for that (the work that needs to be done is not particulary glamorous, the grant amounts too small, and the OSMF is/ should be the project driver, just to mention a couple of the reasons).
> 
> Budgeting £20 '000-50 '000 annually for such work is likely to acheive more. It would require that the OSMF has a way to initiate and run such projects, but that is not more of a challenge than overseeing a half a dozen grants. 
> 
> Now outside of that there might be room for a grant scheme as envisioned, it does need to be more clearly scoped and a mechanism devised that the funds are actually used. The history of such schemes in OSM is rather dismal in the sense that such support has rarely been called upon and as a result they've been disbanded (hack weekend support for example).
> 
> Simon
> 
> Am 30. September 2018 11:43:36 MESZ schrieb Heather Leson <heatherleson at gmail.com <mailto:heatherleson at gmail.com>>:
> Thank you for the comments and questions. 
> Simon, truly, it is time for people to decide more on what they want from the OSMF board. Since I joined, I have been told time and time again that all the major decisions and activities must be driven by the community.  We prepared this document to start that conversation. It seems to me that the best way forward is to 'build with'. Since OSMF lacks a "Community Working Group" which would normally shepherd this type of activity in an open organization, we did need to start somewhere. I truly welcome further discussion and movement. 
> 
> For Pete, OSMF has some money donated which we want to give back to the membership. We also are inspired by the ways that this type of activity has helped other open organizations. Your questions are great. 
> 
> The next steps are really about a shared dialogue and way forward. Thus, we decided to start this in the open knowing that it would take time for us to move it together. 
> 
> Thanks again for all the input. Step by step. 
> 
> Heather 
> 
> Heather Leson
> heatherleson at gmail.com <mailto:heatherleson at gmail.com>
> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson 
> Blog: textontechs.com <http://textontechs.com/>
> 
> 
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 10:40 AM Pete Masters <pedrito1414 at googlemail.com <mailto:pedrito1414 at googlemail.com>> wrote:
> Hi Mikel and all,
> 
> I'd be interested to know what prompted the OSM microgrants initiative? I don't mean this in a challenging way, but it would be easier to think about if I know what problem the initiative is trying to solve or what barrier it's trying to remove...
> 
> I run an internal innovation fund [1] within MSF and so have some thoughts on how these things can work. In this case the make up of the committee is pretty important. Because it's an early stage innovation thing, the committee needs to include decision makers (to make sure that, if a project is successful, there is some buy in for resourcing further development or scaling), and subject matter experts (to be able to assess the feasibility, potential impact and ambition of proposals). However, it is also important that in those selection discussions, the 'softer' aims of the fund are not forgotten (democratisation of opportunity, cultural change, etc). I am not suggesting this as a model for OSM microgrants - just making the point that the committee and the selection process need to be designed to meet the objectives of the initiative.
> 
> In terms of reporting, I agree this should not be laborious. 
> 
> On the admin side, I would suggest a simple template for recording expenses to make sure there is transparency around where the money is spent (this maybe just shared back with the committee).
> 
> In terms of sharing outcomes, lessons learnt, etc I think it should depend on what the microgrant was for. What we have learnt is that project leads and the wider MSF community benefit more when communication happens throughout the process rather than just at the end (has leveraged increased collaboration, expertise and buy in). This is usually done through blogs [2]. Maybe an OSM diary at the start by each grantee to set the scene?
> 
> Hope that helps.... Happy to continue the conversation...
> 
> Pete
> 
> [1] https://www.msf.org.uk/sapling-nursery-grow-your-ideas <https://www.msf.org.uk/sapling-nursery-grow-your-ideas>
> [2] http://blogs.msf.org/en/staff/blogs/msf-innovation <http://blogs.msf.org/en/staff/blogs/msf-innovation>
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 8:32 AM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch <mailto:simon at poole.ch>> wrote:
> I'm very confused by the document. 
> 
> I was expecting to be able to give constructive feedback on at least a semi-complete plan containing a couple of high level goals and a rough delineation of the groups/people/projects that could be potential grant recipients. As is, it essentially boils down to a "somebody should write a Microgrant programme document for us" plea. Your e-mail has more substance that the document, and aiming to let manna rain in a months time is lets say, optimistic, based on the current state of things. You may be able to charter a plane for the throwing out of the window bit by then.
> 
> Simon
> 
> 
> Am 20.09.2018 um 22:49 schrieb Mikel Maron:
>> Hello
>> 
>>  
>> The OSM Foundation Board has been exploring a new Microgrant program, and we are seeking your feedback on the design of this new initiative.
>> 
>> 
>> The overall objective is to enable individuals and teams with actionable ideas for moving OpenStreetMap forward, but need financial support to fully execute those ideas. Grants could cover events, travel, development, teaching, outreach, community engagement, documentation, to give just a few examples. We are looking at programs like Wikimedia RapidGrants [1] and HOT Microgrants [2] as a model: a quick, transparent process with low barriers to entry, open to OSMF members. We are targeting a €50k total budget for the inaugural round.  
>> 
>> 
>> We have written up some of our thinking at this time on the OSMF wiki [3]. Some topics that have generated a lot of thinking and could use more input are:
>> 
>> What is the composition of the selection committee? What criteria and process should we use to form it?
>> What criteria and process should we use to rate and select proposals?
>> Is there a role for Local Chapters in the selection process?
>> What shapes can reporting on microgrants take, that is not overly laborious but informative for the OSM Community.
>> 
>> Look forward to reading your thoughts and ideas. The Board will be collecting feedback over the next couple weeks, and working to finalize guidelines over the next month. We plan to launch microgrants applications next month. Applications would be open for 1-2 months (tbd). Our aim would be to complete selection process and begin dispersals before the end of 2018.
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you
>> 
>> 
>> Mikel and OSMF Board of Directors
>> 
>> 1) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Rapid <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Rapid>
>> 2) https://www.hotosm.org/projects/microgrants_and_community_development <https://www.hotosm.org/projects/microgrants_and_community_development>
>> 3) https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Microgrants_Consultation_document <https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Microgrants_Consultation_document>
>> 
>> * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pete Masters
> 
> @pedrito1414 <https://twitter.com/TheMissingMaps>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk>
> 
> -- 
> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit Kaiten Mail gesendet._______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20181010/52778242/attachment.html>