Strategy monitoring plan 2014-15: Difference between revisions
MichaelMaggs (talk | contribs) (navbox) |
MichaelMaggs (talk | contribs) ({{clear}} + headings) |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{Strategic plan 2014-2019 links}} | {{Strategic plan 2014-2019 links}} | ||
{{clear}} | |||
==Measures and targets table== | |||
In this low-level table, each of the measures listed defines a '''Key Performance Indicator''' (KPI) for the charity, and will be tracked and reported on. All KPIs that can realistically have numerical targets should have them. Some KPIs can be measured numerically but not realistically targeted, while yet others are amenable only to a best-judgement evaluation (that we call an 'eval score') or are qualitatively assessed using a narrative. Narratives are useful in addition to hard numbers as they enable us to 'tell the story' of our impact. | In this low-level table, each of the measures listed defines a '''Key Performance Indicator''' (KPI) for the charity, and will be tracked and reported on. All KPIs that can realistically have numerical targets should have them. Some KPIs can be measured numerically but not realistically targeted, while yet others are amenable only to a best-judgement evaluation (that we call an 'eval score') or are qualitatively assessed using a narrative. Narratives are useful in addition to hard numbers as they enable us to 'tell the story' of our impact. | ||
Line 529: | Line 531: | ||
|} | |} | ||
==Notes and Definitions | ==Notes and Definitions== | ||
{| style="border-spacing:0;" | {| style="border-spacing:0;" | ||
| style="border-top:0.05pt solid #000000;border-bottom:0.05pt solid #000000;border-left:0.05pt solid #000000;border-right:none;padding:0.049cm;"| '''Ref''' | | style="border-top:0.05pt solid #000000;border-bottom:0.05pt solid #000000;border-left:0.05pt solid #000000;border-right:none;padding:0.049cm;"| '''Ref''' |
Revision as of 09:23, 15 February 2014
![]() |
Strategy |
Strategy
Operational |
Measures and targets table
In this low-level table, each of the measures listed defines a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) for the charity, and will be tracked and reported on. All KPIs that can realistically have numerical targets should have them. Some KPIs can be measured numerically but not realistically targeted, while yet others are amenable only to a best-judgement evaluation (that we call an 'eval score') or are qualitatively assessed using a narrative. Narratives are useful in addition to hard numbers as they enable us to 'tell the story' of our impact.
The various KPIs for each Outcome, when taken together, can give us a qualitative indication of what the charity's impact is against each Outcome. As we collect more data over the coming months, we expect to provide a page showing how the KPIs vary with time and how we are doing against each of the targets listed here. This will build up over time into a history of our charitable impact.
G1.1 The quantity of Open Content continues to increase | Number of uploads | Measure to be tracked and reported, but no annual target since number could vary wildly. | |||
Sum of positive edit size [1] | Measure to be tracked and reported, but no annual target since number could vary wildly | ||||
G1.2 The quality of Open Content continues to improve | Percentage of WMUK-related files (e.g. images) in mainspace use on a Wikimedia project (excluding Commons) | ||||
Number of files (e.g. images) that have featured status on a Wikimedia project (including Commons) | |||||
Number of files having quality Image status on Commons | Reminder: image donations from institutions cannot be tagged as 'quality image'. Most of the images from 2013-14 came from Wiki Loves Monuments | ||||
Number of files having valued image status on Commons | Reminder: can be content from institutions or individual volunteers | ||||
Number of new articles started on a Wikimedia site (eg any of the encyclopedias), excluding Welsh Wicipedia | |||||
Number of new articles started on Welsh Wicipedia inspired by WMUK | |||||
G1.3 We are perceived as the go-to organisation by UK GLAM, educational, and other organisations who need support or advice for the release of educational Open Content. | Sum of reputation ratings [2] of organisations that we are working in partnership with, or were working with no more than than two years ago | ||||
Score in annual national survey of public opinion [12] | Survey questions to be determined in 2014. New initiative - will identify baseline in 2014 | ||||
G2a.1 We have a thriving community of WMUK volunteers. | Number of Friends | ||||
Number of Leading Volunteers [3a] | |||||
Volunteer Activity Units [4] | |||||
Leading Volunteer [3a] Activity Units [5] | |||||
Leading Volunteer [3a] drop out rate [7] | |||||
G2a.2 WMUK volunteers are highly diverse. | Proportion of Volunteer Activity Units [4] attributable to women | ||||
Proportion of Leading Volunteer Activity Units [4] attributable to women | |||||
Volunteer Activity Units [4] in activities to encourage other diversity or minority engagement | 2 activities delivered in 2013-14 (Black British Music & Diversity Conference) | ||||
G2a.3 WMUK volunteers are skilled and capable. | Volunteer Activity Units [4] in training sessions and editathons (ie WMUK volunteers being trained) | ||||
Leading Volunteer Activity Units [5] in training sessions and editathons (ie trainers) | |||||
Annual survey capability score [6] (self-identified) | Questions and score measure to be devised | ||||
G2b.1 We have best practice governance and resource management processes, and are recognised for such within the Wikimedia movement and the UK charity sector. | Progress on targets in the Hudson and Chapman governance reviews | ||||
Progress towards PQASSO 2 | |||||
Level of external recognition | |||||
G2b.2 We have a high level of openness and transparency. | Transparency score [9] as measured by annual survey | Survey questions to be determined in 2014. New initiative - will identify baseline in 2014 | |||
Transparency compliance [10] as determined by Govcom against published transparency commitments | |||||
G2b.3 We have high quality systems to measure our impact as an organisation. | Progress towards full implemention of automated and manual tracking/measuring systems [8] | ||||
G2b.4 We ensure a stable, sustainable and diverse funding stream. | Number of separate donors | ||||
Funds received from sources other than WMF fundraiser or FDC | |||||
Proportion of funds from sources other than WMF fundraiser or FDC | |||||
Proportion of funds from direct debits | |||||
G3.1 Access to Wikimedia projects is increasingly available to all, irrespective of personal characteristics, background or situation. | QRPedia codes scanned [11] | DC - I'm not sure this is the correct estimate, need more info on how the stat tool works | |||
Projects addressed at new readers [16] being enabled to access Wikimedia websites | |||||
G3.2 There is increased awareness of the benefits of Open Content. | Awareness score [12] in annual national survey of public opinion | Survey questions to be determined. New initiative - will identify baseline in 2014 | |||
G3.3 Legislative and institutional changes favour the release of Open Content. | Responses to EU and UK government policy consultations. | ||||
Involvement in EU and UK advocacy activities | |||||
G4.1 Technical communities with missions similar to our own are thriving. | Number of shared activities [14] hosted with technology-based groups or organisations having similar goals to WMUK | ||||
Total Activity Units [13] in shared activities [14] hosted with technology-based groups or organisations having similar goals to WMUK | |||||
G4.2 There are robust and efficient tools readily available to enable the creation, curation and dissemination of Open Content. | Number and availability of the project tools we host or support | ||||
G4.3 There are robust and efficient tools readily available to allow WMUK - and related organisations - to support our own programmes and to enable us to effectively record impact measures. | Uses [15] of the internal or supporting tools we host or support | ||||
G5.1 A thriving set of other Wikimedia communities | Funding to support other chapters and Wikimedia groups | ||||
Activities held for or jointly with other chapters and Wikimedia groups | |||||
Total Activity Units [13] in shared activities [14] with other chapters and Wikimedia groups | |||||
G5.2 An increased diversity of Wikimedia contributors | Activities specifically directed to supporting the diversity of other chapters and Wikimedia groups | 1 in 2013 (Diversity Conference) | |||
G5.3 Wikimedia communities are skilled and capable. | Activities specifically directed to help train or to share knowledge with other chapters and Wikimedia groups | 1 in 2013 (Chapters Conference) | |||
Notes and Definitions
Ref | Term | Definition | Notes | |
[1] | Positive edit size | Sum of edit sizes in characters where text content has been added overall to the mainspace of a Wikimedia wiki. | We are here measuring quantity not quality of educational text content. We ignore all edits where content has been deleted overall, on the basis that deletions cannot generally be equated with the negative addition of content by that editor. We are aware that such an approach is relatively broad-brush, and will actively seek improved tools/measures in this area. | |
[2] | Institution reputation rating | Our estimate of the external reputation of each GLAM organisation or learned society that we work with. This information is solely to enable us to track our own charitable impact consistently, and we will not be publishing the values we use for individual organisations | 1-12 scale of instutitional reputation. | |
[3] | Active Volunteers | The number of volunteers who have worked with us at least once in the preceding 3 month period | ||
[4] | Volunteer Activity Units | A unit is defined as one volunteer attending one WMUK event. For non-event-based volunteering we estimate a rough activity equivalent | ||
[5] | Leading Volunteer Activity Units | A subset of [4], counting only units contributed by vounteers who are the lead or one of the leads on the activity | ||
[6] | Annual survey capability score | To be defined | Questions to be written | Proposed survey to be repeated annually by WMUK |
[7] | Volunteer drop out rate | The proportion of our volunteers that drop out (no longer remain actively engaged with us) annually | Determined for each volunteer one year after first activity, two years and so on. | |
[8] | Tracking/measuring systems | The manual and automated systems by which WMUK tracks Outputs/Outcomes in accordance with the Strategic Plan | ||
[9] | Transparency score | To be defined | Questions to be written | Proposed survey to be repeated annually by WMUK |
[10] | Transparency compliance | Narrative | Commitments to be defined | As measured by Govcom against published transparency commitments |
[11] | QRPedia codes scanned | The number of times QRPedia codes are used to direct to a Wikipedia article | This a is a subset of [15] | Either in aggregate, or when directing to a page in a language other than English. |
[12] | Awareness score | To be defined | Questions to be written | Proposed survey to be repeated annually by WMUK |
[13] | Total Activity Units | A count of the number of units contributed by volunteers (not necessarily WMUK volunteers) on shared activities [14] | With technology-based groups or organisations having similar goals to WMUK | |
[14] | Shared activities | Activities that WMUK jointly lead with some other group | Does not include activities run by other groups that WMUK volunteers or staff simply attend or engage with. Depending on context, the other group could be Wikimedia-related (eg a chapter) or could be external to the Wikimedia movement (eg OpenStreetMaps) | |
[15] | Uses of tools | The number of times in aggregate a WMUK tool is used. | ||
[16] | Eval measure | A best-judgement evaluation on a scale of 1 to 5 (5=best) | Used in lieu of a objective metric where such a metric is impossible or currently impracticable to obtain | |
[17] | New readers enabled to access Wikimedia websites | Our best estimate of the number of new readers of Wkimedia sites after removal by WMUK of their barriers to access | This figure comes from a diverse range of activities for many of which exact numbers of readers cannot be determined as we have no feedback (eg Kiwix installations in libraries, in prisons, or in Africa). We estimate the numbers by multiplying the known number of installations by our best estimate of the expected number of readers for each. |