Reports 17Nov12

Fae

Based on a direct recommendation in Garfield Byrd's audit (WMF CFO), from October 2012 I have taken a step back from programme activities and will not be presenting the GLAM report, this will be delegated to the GLAM sub-committee. The "budget holder" for GLAM is to be determined as far as I am aware.

Providing more time in my role as one of 2 trustees with no portfolio, I am asking the following questions to be addressed in public November reports to the Board on behalf of the Chief Executive so that the Board can consider the evidence to support long term improvement plans:

This list is draft @11:04, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

1. Midas Training Solutions is our supplier for Train the Trainers and have been used as general facilitators.

   a. As they may be our largest supplier in terms of money spent on programme related activity, what is the current cost breakdown of all spend (including expenses and feedback sessions, which are charged by the hour) since we started using them as a supplier in 2011 and what future contract commitments exist?

   b. What is the running cost per head of Train the Trainers including all expenses as well as Midas fees?

   c. How many volunteers that took part are interested in using their received training to gain personal benefit in their future commercial or career purposes (noting that being a paid WIR would be counted as such a benefit)?

   d. It was recently confirmed that our agreements with Midas have no effective termination clause, meaning that cancellation or moving an event is impossible without paying the entire fee. Have any contracts for future events been agreed and are these on the same basis?

2. The reported cost of business cards for 17 people was £1,335 and the reported cost for 4 ink cartridges was £291. These appear to be a failure to make the most effective procurement choices. What changes have been made to policy and process as a result?

   (supplementary) Have the business cards issued this summer with vanity titles, that run the risk of misrepresenting the charity, been removed from circulation?

3. There has been no agreed action plan from the Chief Executive's last performance review with the Board in April 2011, will this be agreed before the next performance review in November 2012, so that actions taken can be measured and the performance review can be more evidence based?
4. There are a number of confidential and public declarations of interest for Trustees, are there any financial and non-financial interests that Staff or Volunteers have in relation to recent and future planned events that remain undeclared and do we intend to declare these in the future? For example, do we have any events with institutions where staff, trustees or involved volunteers have previously been paid by, or have volunteered with, in the past?
5. The office purchased 3 laptops for volunteer use. To assess the value of this capital expenditure, how many days per month have these been in use by volunteers?
6. Over the last year, we have been using legal firms quite a bit. What is the cost breakdown against firm and purpose, for charged legal advice so far this financial year?
7. This financial year, what is the current proportion of administrative spend (including office rent, staff salaries, developer contract, legal fees, accountant fees etc.) compared to programme activity (event costs, venue hire, travel and accommodation for volunteers etc.)?
8. After questions were repeatedly raised by me over a period of more than eight months in 2012, it has recently been confirmed by staff that a significant number of emails were lost after the 2011 fundraiser.

   a. What is the current average and maximum monthly response time for email, phone and written enquiries to the office?

   b. Where are emails logged/archived and are these available for later audit?

   c. Taking response time as a key metric for the charity, can we show the improvement trend for the last six months?

9. QRPedia has been under negotiation in some form since summer 2011.

   a. Why are the Wikimedia Foundation involved in reviewing the agreements when they are not a party to the agreement? Are the WMF under a non-disclosure agreement?

   b. What are the forecast costs going to be in 2012/13 for the charity in hosting the service for QRPedia?

   c. How do we explain and define the boundary between related services that Roger Bamkin and Terence Eden might offer in the future and the charity's promotion of QRPedia as a free open knowledge related service?

10. A contract for development and security related consultancy was recently awarded to one of the active volunteers for the charity. How is their interest being managed and declared?