Changes

The FCIG published its [[FCIG_Report |report]] on 23 January 2017. On 25 July 2017, the FCIG updated it to add an Appendix B summarizing its conversation with Educopia. On 25 August, it added an Appendix C with responses from the Open Library Foundation, and on 11 September an Appendix D with responses from DuraSpace. Parts of the analysis section were expanded on 19 September. It is available on the wiki as well as the following formats:

* [https://github.com/gmcharlt/code4lib-/fcig/blob/master/Report_of_the_Code4Lib_Fiscal_Continuity_Interest_Group.md Markdown] === Endorsements === The following members of the FCIG endorse the report and its recommendations for the Code4Lib community to consider. * Galen Charlton* Morgan McKeehan* [[User:highermath|Cary Gordon]]* Coral Sheldon-Hess* Eric Lease Morgan == Fiscal Options Vote == The FCIG held a community vote to choose among several options based on the report. The vote was held via SurveyMonkey from 12 October 2017 to 3 November 2017. A total of 310 responses were received. There were two questions on the ballot, each listing a set of options that voters were asked to score on a range from 0 (least preferred) to 3 (most preferred). === Question 1 ===''In this community vote, the FCIG asks C4L to evaluate the data presented in the FCIG Report, and to choose among the three options for moving forward that the Report outlines:'' * ''do nothing/maintain status quo''* ''obtain an ongoing fiscal sponsorship with an organization external to Code 4 Lib''* ''seek out official status for C4L as an independent, non-profit organization.'' The total score given to each option was * do nothing/maintain status quo: 184* '''obtain an ongoing fiscal sponsorship: 805'''* incorporate Code4Lib as a non-profit organization: 413 === Question 2 === ''Relative to the option of obtaining ongoing fiscal sponsorship from an organization external to Code4Lib (option b, in Question 1 above), the FCIG Report presents possible sponsorship terms that have been offered by four different external organizations. If the community as a whole chooses to go with this option, how would you rank your preferences as far as the terms offered by each organization?Please assign a rank for each of the organizations below, according to your assessment of the terms offered by that organization. Note: If the Code4Lib community instead chooses to maintain the status quo (option a, in Question 1 above) or to incorporate as a nonprofit entity (option c, in Question 1 above), the results of this question will be ignored.'' The total score given to each of the four potential fiscal sponsors was: * ALA/LITA: 210* '''DLF/CLIR: 771'''* Open Library Federation: 423* DuraSpace: 326 === Additional information === * A [[Media:Code4Lib_Community_Vote_on_Fiscal_Continuity_Options.xlsx.zip|spreadsheet]] showing the calculation of the scores

* [[User:highermath|Cary Gordon]]