FCIG Report - Revision history

Nowviskie: sub-heading disambiguation

2018-01-25T21:35:58Z

sub-heading disambiguation

MorganMcKeehan: Update Table:Summary of Options with correct information for CLIR/DLF

2017-09-21T21:28:11Z

Update Table:Summary of Options with correct information for CLIR/DLF

Gmcharlt: update table summarizing options; add explanatory paragraph to D/Option 2

2017-09-20T16:09:40Z

update table summarizing options; add explanatory paragraph to D/Option 2

Show changes

Gmcharlt: add appendix D for DuraSpace

2017-09-12T00:10:58Z

add appendix D for DuraSpace

Gmcharlt: add appendix C for Open Library Foundation

2017-08-25T20:35:24Z

add appendix C for Open Library Foundation

Gmcharlt: /* Appendix B — Educopia */ fix typo

2017-07-26T16:09:18Z

‎Appendix B — Educopia: fix typo

Gmcharlt: updated to add Appendix B summarizing results of conversation with Educopia

2017-07-25T20:36:07Z

updated to add Appendix B summarizing results of conversation with Educopia

Joemontibello: /* Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship */

2017-01-23T20:14:41Z

‎Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship

Joemontibello: numbering of options

2017-01-23T20:14:10Z

numbering of options

Gmcharlt: more typo fixes

2017-01-23T16:52:48Z

more typo fixes

@@ Line 122: / Line 122: @@
 . LITA/ALA
-===== Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship =====
+===== Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship, LITA/ALA =====
 The Library Information Technology Association (LITA), a division of the American Library Association (ALA), is willing to serve as a fiscal agent for the Code4Lib conference on either a short-term or long-term basis. There are two models under which this could happen:
@@ Line 144: / Line 144: @@
 . CLIR/DLF
-===== Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship =====
+===== Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship, CLIR/DLF =====
 The Council on Library and Information Resources, the parent organization of the Digital Library Federation, has also offered possible terms for providing ongoing fiscal sponsorship for Code4Lib. The terms outlined below were discussed via email and phone conversations with Bethany Nowviskie, Director, DLF, and Sharon Ivy Weiss, Chief Operating Officer, CLIR, between October-December 2016. In these conversations, the FCIG provided via email an adaptation of the list of questions Coral prepared for potential sponsors (as discussed with LITA/ALA, outlined above). Quotations below are taken from emails written by Bethany Nowviskie in response to these questions, and are used with her permission.

@@ Line 269: / Line 269: @@
 |$5,000 / year to Code4Lib nest egg account
 |CLIR/DLF would not require changes; Code4Lib would need to continue hiring conference mgmt services. CLIR/DLF recommends event insurance.
-|Would need process to identify primary contact to CLIR/DLF
+|No change to current C4L culture would be necessary. CLIR/DLF is fine with C4L’s current practice of local organizing committees and rotating leadership for the conference and other activities. CLIR/DLF requests only that C4L would identify current points of contact for each activity such as conference, listserv, website, etc.
 |yes
 |-

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Code4Lib Fiscal Continuity Interest Group Report
-January 2017, updated on 25 August 2017
+January 2017, updated on 11 September 2017
 == A. Executive Summary ==
@@ Line 591: / Line 591: @@
 Yes

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Code4Lib Fiscal Continuity Interest Group Report
-January 2017, updated on 25 July 2017
+January 2017, updated on 25 August 2017
 == A. Executive Summary ==
@@ Line 513: / Line 513: @@
 First, Educopia’s explicit [https://educopia.org/about-us/mission mission], “to build networks and collaborative communities to help cultural, scientific, and scholarly institutions achieve greater impact” is clearly closely aligned with many areas within Code4Lib’s objectives. In practical terms, this suggests that if Code4Lib decides to pursue some form of organizational structure in the future, Educopia’s expertise, particularly in helping communities to grow and articulate their strengths and purpose from the earliest stages, and to come up with mechanisms to move forward in making connections” across institutions and sectors” for the purpose of knowledge sharing, could greatly assist Code4Lib’s efforts. A specific example discussed in our phone call on January 31 is that Educopia could be a source for recommendations about facilitator/consulting services, to assist with providing neutrality for community development discussions if this avenue is pursued. Another potential area of overlap between Educopia’s work and Code4Lib’s activities would be if the Code4Lib Journal were to become a further developed initiative in the future. Educopia mentioned their interest in the Journal as a vigorous example of sustained, community-driven and practical research by and for information professionals, and their experience in supporting interdisciplinary research efforts in this field could be relevant in supporting this endeavor as well.

@@ Line 502: / Line 502: @@
 This section is an addenda to the Report of the FCIG, which was first shared with Code4Lib on January 23, 2017. After the FCIG shared its Report with Code4Lib in late January, we were subsequently able to follow up on our initial inquiry to Educopia, and have prepared this summary of our findings about that option.
-The Code4Lib FCIG first reached out to Educopia on January 11, 2017 to inquire out if there might be a possibility for a fiscal sponsorship or similar arrangement. We were subsequently able to arrange a phone call for a conversation with Katherine Skinner, Executive Director, Sam Meister, Preservation Communities Manager, and Christina Drummond, Director of Strategic Initiatives of Educopia, on January 31, 2017. In advance of the phone conversation, we sent via email our list of questions for potential sponsors, and our framing questions about duration - to ask about possibilities for short-term or longer-term options for a fiscal sponsorship arrangement.
+The Code4Lib FCIG first reached out to Educopia on January 11, 2017 to inquire if there might be a possibility for a fiscal sponsorship or similar arrangement. We were subsequently able to arrange a phone call for a conversation with Katherine Skinner, Executive Director, Sam Meister, Preservation Communities Manager, and Christina Drummond, Director of Strategic Initiatives of Educopia, on January 31, 2017. In advance of the phone conversation, we sent via email our list of questions for potential sponsors, and our framing questions about duration - to ask about possibilities for short-term or longer-term options for a fiscal sponsorship arrangement.
 Our phone conversation on January 31 confirmed that the aims of Educopia’s partnership program are well-matched to Code4Lib’s commitment to a decentralized, low-cost/low-overhead model for community-led action. The significant scope of services available within Educopia’s model for development partnerships, however, likely exceeds the current scope of the FCIG’s Report, which has been to investigate options for the primary purpose of securing ongoing fiscal sponsorship for Code4Lib’s annual conference. For this reason, the FCIG would recommend that if Code4Lib community members wish to initiate a conversation about pursuing further options relative to Educopia’s partnership program, a process for further investigation and discussion by the community should be undertaken to determine if consensus exists to pursue this option.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Code4Lib Fiscal Continuity Interest Group Report
-January 2017
+January 2017, updated on 25 July 2017
 == A. Executive Summary ==
@@ Line 55: / Line 55: @@
 The FCIG shared communications via a Google group list, and met via videochat 1-2 times per month from July 1, 2016 - Dec. 23, 2016. [https://wiki.code4lib.org/Fiscal_Continuity#Meetings Meeting notes] are shared at the FCIG wiki page within the main Code4Lib wiki.
-In initial discussions, the group brainstormed many potential options to explore as ways for Code4Lib to move forward in establishing, or determining not to establish, an ongoing fiscal entity; the FCIG wiki page contains an [https://wiki.code4lib.org/Fiscal_Continuity#Fiscal_Structures extensive list] of these possibilities. Group consensus determined which of these preliminary possibilities to gather more information about. Individuals volunteered to do the work of investigating each option. In order to provide a consistent and comprehensive template for discussions with potential fiscal sponsors, Coral Sheldon-Hess compiled a list of questions which was reviewed and agreed upon by the group. This list is included in the Appendix section of this report.
+In initial discussions, the group brainstormed many potential options to explore as ways for Code4Lib to move forward in establishing, or determining not to establish, an ongoing fiscal entity; the FCIG wiki page contains an [https://wiki.code4lib.org/Fiscal_Continuity#Fiscal_Structures extensive list] of these possibilities. Group consensus determined which of these preliminary possibilities to gather more information about. Individuals volunteered to do the work of investigating each option. In order to provide a consistent and comprehensive template for discussions with potential fiscal sponsors, Coral Sheldon-Hess compiled a list of questions which was reviewed and agreed upon by the group. This list is included in the Appendix A section of this report.
 == C. Findings ==
@@ Line 497: / Line 497: @@
 <li><p>Are there any significant incompatibilities between your mission and Code4Lib’s?</p></li>
 <li><p>Are you able to readily collect funds in a variety of ways, such as check, bank transfer, PayPal, direct credit card payments, and so forth?</p></li></ol>

@@ Line 138: / Line 138: @@
 If Code4Lib chooses to partner with LITA/ALA, it would be best to do so for at least 2-3 years, to determine whether or not it is a good fit (and to make all of the paperwork worth doing). At that point Code4Lib would be free to continue with LITA/ALA, to find another fiscal sponsor, or to seek its own nonprofit status.
-# Nercomp
+. Nercomp
 The FCIG also reached out to NERCOMP (the NorthEast Regional Computing Program), but after discussion, concluded Code4Lib and NERCOMP were not a good fit.
-# CLIR/DLF
+. CLIR/DLF
 ===== Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship =====

@@ Line 116: / Line 116: @@
 ====== Summary of Findings from Each Organization ======
-# Fractured Atlas
+. Fractured Atlas
 [https://www.fracturedatlas.org/site/fiscal/ Fractured Atlas] (FA) focuses on arts and cultural sector endeavors, and offers fee-based fiscal sponsorship which provides the benefits of 501(c)(3) status to entities that do not have this tax status. Since the range of projects and organizations that FA sponsors encompasses a wide range of cultural-sector activities, the FCIG contacted FA to find out if Code4Lib could be considered for sponsorship, and/or to get recommendations for other options Code4Lib could consider. We contacted Fractured Atlas by phone August 11, 2016. The staff person we spoke to advised us that Code4Lib as an organization would not fall within the scope of Fractured Atlas’ work, and recommended against applying for sponsorship from FA. She recommended that Code4Lib look for a fiscal sponsor within the Fiscal Sponsor Directory. (http://www.fiscalsponsordirectory.org/)
-# LITA/ALA
+. LITA/ALA
 ===== Proposed Terms for Fiscal Sponsorship =====

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 The challenge addressed in this report is that the current process of recruiting each year an external &quot;fiscal host&quot; to bear the burden of financial responsibility for the Code4Lib Conference imposes a very high cost in terms of work, time, and financial risk for those who make the conference possible for the community: the local planning committees and the host institutions. Many community members have expressed significant concern about whether this cost constitutes an unacceptable burden, by hindering the long-term sustainability of the conference, and undermining the overall soundness of the Code4Lib community.
-From June-Dec 2016, the Fiscal Continuity Interest Group of Code4Lib explored a wide range of options for alternative approaches/ways to make running the annual meeting/conference more fiscally sustainable.In this report we present an overview of our investigation, summarizing current practice as well as the strongest options for alternative approaches that we identified. To inform the community’s evaluation of the choices presented here, we first outline the requirements for maintaining the status quo, and then the requirements for implementation for each alternative approach. Based on these requirements and/or possible terms for each option, we then analyze of the pros and cons for each scenario..
+From June-Dec 2016, the Fiscal Continuity Interest Group of Code4Lib explored a wide range of options for alternative approaches/ways to make running the annual meeting/conference more fiscally sustainable.In this report we present an overview of our investigation, summarizing current practice as well as the strongest options for alternative approaches that we identified. To inform the community’s evaluation of the choices presented here, we first outline the requirements for maintaining the status quo, and then the requirements for implementation for each alternative approach. Based on these requirements and/or possible terms for each option, we then analyze of the pros and cons for each scenario.
 Broadly categorized, the three options discussed in this report are:
@@ Line 69: / Line 69: @@
 ====== Description of Current Practice ======
-At present, Code4Lib has no legal status and is not an official organization. In one sense, &quot;Code4Lib&quot; does not exist; there is no governance structure nor even any guidelines for membership. The Code4Lib Conference does have a Code of Conduct that applies to individuals who pay a registration fee to attend this event, but otherwise there are no rules for what Code4Lib is or what its members do. In another sense, Code4Lib is an active and significant professional group;: in addition to the annual conference, there are a number of regional meetings each year, the publication of the Code4Lib journal, and the maintenance of a variety of communications forums.
+At present, Code4Lib has no legal status and is not an official organization. In one sense, &quot;Code4Lib&quot; does not exist; there is no governance structure nor even any guidelines for membership. The Code4Lib Conference does have a Code of Conduct that applies to individuals who pay a registration fee to attend this event, but otherwise there are no rules for what Code4Lib is or what its members do. In another sense, Code4Lib is an active and significant professional group: in addition to the annual conference, there are a number of regional meetings each year, the publication of the Code4Lib journal, and the maintenance of a variety of communications forums.
 The fundraising process employed for the annual Code4Lib meeting reflects the community’s DIY traditions. Recent total budgets for the annual Code4Lib conference have exceeded $250,000, with roughly half of the cost covered by sponsor donations and half by registration fees. These contributions are secured through the work of a Code4Lib Sponsorship Committee, which self-nominates, forming each year as a group of volunteers who spontaneously reply to a call on the Code4Lib listserv. The Sponsorship Committee follows the successful precedents established by the actions of previous years/committees, but has no official guidelines or instructions. However, the LPC will typically pay close attention to the actions of the Sponsorship Committee, as it is ultimately the responsibility of the institution that is hosting Code4Lib to cover any shortfalls. Members of the Sponsorship Committee sign up to take individual responsibility for contacting potential donors, who are chosen from lists of previous years’ donors, as well as brainstormed by the Sponsorship Committee each year based on the committee members’ own contacts, or the geographic location of the conference that year. Perhaps the only limitation on donors is that they must be institutions that do not have requirements for donating only to 501(c)(3) status organizations, because Code4Lib does not have this status.
@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 Since Code4Lib is not an official organization, and therefore does not have any legal capacity to hold funds or to assume responsibility for contracts, it has been necessary each year to secure an agreement from another legal entity willing to take fiscal responsibility for conference expenses (the &quot;fiscal host&quot;). The fiscal host has often been the library or organization that is supplying space for the conference, but that need not be the case. Every year the work of finding and recruiting the fiscal host has been done by local planning committees, who have usually turned to institutions in their own geographic area willing to perform this service. In addition to signing contracts and bearing the financial liability of the contract, the fiscal host has typically done the conference bookkeeping as well.
-Code4Lib has so far been fortunate in the successful hosting of conferences, and has benefited from the goodwill of the community by receiving support from institutions willing to voluntarily provide fiscal hosting. However, these fortuitous circumstances are by no means a given in events planning,and the willingness thus far of institutions to act as fiscal hosts does not mean that the risk an institution takes on should be discounted.
+Code4Lib has so far been fortunate in the successful hosting of conferences, and has benefited from the goodwill of the community by receiving support from institutions willing to voluntarily provide fiscal hosting. However, these fortuitous circumstances are by no means a given in events planning, and the willingness thus far of institutions to act as fiscal hosts does not mean that the risk an institution takes on should be discounted.
 Additionally, the need to secure a new fiscal host each year can add substantial complexity to the planning process, in the event of any irregularities in determining a host site. Preparations for the 2017 conference provide an example of the kind of complications that can ensue, and the kind of liability that the fiscal host takes on. The local planning committee for the 2017 conference includes members from southern California and the southeast U.S. from the original Chattanooga 2017 group. However, the fiscal host for the 2017 conference is UCLA, who is the entity that has signed contracts with an event planner, with the venue, with several hotels, and with providers of other services. As such, UCLA is ultimately responsible for paying on those contracts, and some of those liabilities would not disappear even if the 2017 conference were abruptly cancelled. For example, in order to secure sufficient hotel rooms for attendees, UCLA has guaranteed that a certain number of hotel-nights will be purchased by conference attendees; if a threshold is not met, UCLA would be obligated to pay the difference.