Treasurer's report

copied from here: [Osmf-talk] Treasurer’s Report (openstreetmap.org)

Hi all,

I noticed there were some mixed feelings about the treasurer’s report during the last board meeting.

For those who’d like to review, it’s here: Board/Minutes/2023-09/Treasurer's report - OpenStreetMap Foundation

The report discussion seemed to suggest we’re in the red this year, and the report is not in a standard GAAP-like format. I have a specific question:

Actual Amount Description Remark
66 367.91 521 000 Donations Planned target of the donation drive

This implies we’ve hit about 13% of our donation goal. Is that the correct interpretation or can we represent this in a clearer, more standard way?

Best,

Steve

1 Like

Moving a mailing list question on to here

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 at 23:34, Simon Poole simon@poole.ch wrote:

  • To nip some confusion in the bud: the OSMFs financial year -is- actually the calendar year (it was changed to that a couple of years back). With other words the current financial year is 2023 and the donation drive will be, for the funds received in 2023, as income in this period.*

So wouldn’t it be much easier to just drop FY & simply refer to the year?

It had me confused as in Australia, the standard FY runs 1 July > 30 June, so Q4 2023 actually finished on 30 Jun 2023!

Please forgive me for having layman’s thoughts on a professionalish subject though! :grinning:

The expression is used because it often is offset from the calendar year, not using it wouldn’t really help as then people would be asking what our financial year is if you just used “year” :-).

BTW the reason that the OSMF general meeting tends to be late in the year is mainly due to it originally being held in person at SOTM. .

Simon

For anyone not following the mailing list, it turns out that’s just a straight-up error, comparing apples to oranges. The “521 000” is the target for income from all sources, while the “66 367.91” is donations to date that don’t fall into any more-specific category.

(Another thing that was clarified on the mailing list is that the expense numbers are for this year, while the donations are for next year’s expenses. The money for covering this year’s expenses is money that was raised in prior years.)

IMHO you are jumping to conclusions in the other direction.

I would suggest that we wait till the board has actually issued a statement on how it intends to frame the donation drive for further discussion. Some of the implications from the mailing list thread would be scary if taken and meant seriously.

What I posted seems like a straightforward summary of Courtney’s email. Is Courtney not actually knowledgeable on the subject of fundraising, or am I misinterpreting the statement that “broad base” fundraising is being incorrectly conflated with overall fundraising goals?

Courtney is undoubtedly knowledgeable about fundraising and her statement wrt the funds receive till now being near target for the donor segment that has been worked on, matches my understanding of the planned process. With other words Steve is missing out that the large sums are expected to be coming from other quarters (larger institutional and corporate donors).

But there is obviously an issue with how the whole undertaking relates to the OSMFs financials for this year. The labelling itself doesn’t really matter (if you call it the 2023 or 24 donnation drive), but if the plan leads to drawing down reserves systematically without a plan to replenish them, then that would not be good.

But there is obviously an issue with how the whole undertaking relates
to the OSMFs financials for this year. The labelling itself doesn’t
really matter (if you call it the 2023 or 24 donnation drive), but if
the plan leads to drawing down reserves systematically without a plan to
replenish them, then that would not be good.

The overall plan is simple, details will follow in the form of a FAQ.

The Foundation decided in 2021 to employ a full-time sysadmin, which
started mid-2022 and results from 2023 on in yearly minimum viable
expenses of about 300.000 GBP.

The exact amount can be discussed, but the important observation is that
the recurring income of the foundation in 2021 and 2022 has not nearly
been that amount.

The board of 2022 has therefore decided to set fixing the finances as
top priority. Traditionally, corporate memberships are the lion’s share
of the Foundation’s income, hence scaling these is the most prospective
short to mid term candidate. In addition, donations from individual
members assert the Foundation’s independence.

Money from governments or wealthy individuals is a source that similar
organizations tap. But given that we have zero experience there, it
would be unlikely to achieve results in 2023 or even 2024 from that
direction. Building a network of trust is the first step there.

The volunteers Mikel, Courtney, Kate, and several others have been
extremely hard-working and successful in building a donation campaign.
But as explained before, this is a highly dynamically process, and not
all income from there is already visible. The corporate tiers have been
risen by 50%, and this has at large been accepted by our corporate members.

There is a good chance that we will meet the target for recurring income
from 2024 on.

It has been understood already in 2022 that we are unlikely to fix the
income situation in 2022 or even in 2023. The income situation in the
incomplete year 2023 is already better than 2022.

A side effect from the various efforts to ensure the Foundation’s budget
is to make sure everyone understands where the money goes. There is
still much room for improvement, because the forms of presentation used
so far all have confused people one way or the other. We have by far
underestimated the number of ways the presented numbers can be
misinterpreted. I’m sorry for that. Our next approach is a FAQ to set
every figure into context.

So no, there is no plan to jeopardize the Foundation’s reserves. What we
have seen last year and see this year is the consequence of accepting
growth, having a full-time employee, and the work to get funding in line
with that. As the gap is real, but closing and still a fraction of the
Foundation’s reserves, we can overcome this difficult years of growth.