User:Mike Cline/USCAN Working Group Drafts/Phase I Task Forces/Structure

This page lays out the various potential proposals for the legal/organizational structure of the future Education Program.

Summary
This structure option would see an incorporated non-profit organization established. This organization would have a board of directors with representatives from the various constituencies (make-up to be determined). It would have a relatively small but paid staff that focuses on growing the program, raising funds for its own sustenance and, more importantly, for the support of stipends, etc. at locations where the program is in place. The organization could also pursue incorporation or registration in Canada for purposes of permitting Canadian citizens to contribute to the organization while still obtaining individual tax benefits from doing so.

Pros

 * The Fund Dissemination Committee (which has substantial resources) could accept and fund a proposal from the organization. [Question: how much money can realistically be obtained this way?]
 * Broader possibilities for raising money from donors who want to focus their donation impact in the United States.
 * Program and stakeholders have control over the program (independence)
 * Recognizes that the Foundation would like to spin this off, and feels that it can't make this project a priority

Cons

 * Cannot make use of existing structures such as the legal support, accounting, fundraising, etc. of the WMF. Where WMF would create economies of scale, this may cause duplication of effort.
 * The Working Group lacks experience and expertise in some important dimensions, although the planning process can incorporate plans to obtain that experience and expertise.
 * A closed system leaves less of a scope for bottom-up volunteer participation, and there is a disadvantage to starting a new organization without direct Wikipedia community involvement.

Questions to Address

 * 1) How long should the transition be to full independence?  May or would later be better?
 * 2) What should the exact theme be?  Do we want to include close ties with museums and libraries?
 * 3) What sort of relationship should the organization have with US regional chapters?

Summary
Like the above, but based at a general-purpose Wikimedia United States Federation, Inc, on the model of international Wikimedia chapters like Wikimedia Germany and its financial planning processes. Its structure includes professional central coordination (which can partner with other English-speaking chapters like Wikimedia Canada and Wikimedia UK), and also local community-based efforts. This would combine supporting national education coordination with the complementary cultural coordination of a GLAM-Wiki US Consortium (for the Galleries, Libraries, Archives & Museums initiative).

See also: Wikimedia Education Program proposal by Wikimedia DC.

Pros

 * The Fund Dissemination Committee (which has substantial resources) could accept and fund a proposal from the organization. [Question: how much money can realistically be obtained this way?]
 * Possibilities for raising money from donors interested in the US
 * Program and stakeholders have control over the program (independence)
 * Recognizes that the Foundation would like to spin this off, and feels that it can't make this project a priority
 * Allows greater volunteer participation
 * Allows broader definition of educational participation from libraries and museums

Cons

 * Longer-term plan with no certainty or control over the US Federation's formation
 * We can incorporate the US Federation as early as September
 * Potential for geographic jealousy and impressions of undue U.S. hegemony
 * U.S. hegemony over the U.S?

Summary
Convince the Wikimedia Foundation to retain the US/CAN Education Program within the Foundation for the time being in order to permit completion of longer-term plans to turn the Education Program over to an in-development future North American geographic-based organization, or to establish the structure needed for an independent organization.

Pros

 * Initial Funding
 * Established working structure (legal, fundraising, accounting, payroll) ~ efficiencies due to non duplication of effort
 * Access to people with needed expertise, existing employees could be retained under same structure

Cons

 * Limited by objectives and priorities of Wikimedia Foundation and its priorities
 * Without a policy change, would not be able to accept earmarked money
 * Some donors would rather give money to a US focused program (so less easy to raise money ~ untapped potential here)
 * Foundation likes to encourage volunteers and wants to avoid a perception that they want to control all activities

Task Force Sub-Recommendation
[Tentative]. The working group feels that permanent incorporation in WMF is not likely or desirable and recommends that this option only be pursued if a small amount of additional time is needed.

Remaining tasks and next steps

 * 1) Add and provide more details for other pros and cons
 * 2) Develop proposal for governance of 501c3 (if that is our option) ~ list pros and cons of different options: e.g. Executive Director/CEO vs. other management form and selection/election process for Board of Directors
 * 3) Flesh out this page in pro and con format by Saturday night, August 25, 2012.
 * 4) After Sunday discussion, transform descriptions into narrative (mostly-non-bullet-pointed) form.