Improving the affiliation scheme of the OSMF
The OSMF Local Chapters and Communities Working Group is tasked to improve the Local Chapters affiliation scheme.
> We will review the role of Local Chapters within the Foundation and the interactions between them. Based on our findings we will make recommendations to the Board as to how the affiliation scheme can be improved to provide a stronger case for local communities to eventually become Local Chapters, or possibly suggest creating new affiliation models such as less-formal user groups.
This page documents efforts, research and discussions in improving the affiliation scheme of the OSMF.
Update: LCCWG is looking for volunteers to help improve the OSMF Affiliation Models! If you are interested to join and have the time, please comment on the community forum thread or email local[at]osmfoundation.org
Background
Currently, the OSMF only recognizes geography-based Local Chapters as affiliates of the Foundation (see the Local Chapters page on the OSMF website 4). As of writing, the Foundation has now recognized 18 Local Chapters.
It was observed that having Local Chapters as our only affiliation model is too limiting and sometimes provides a high or unreachable burden for various OSM communities worldwide. Taking a leaf from other open-data and open-knowledge communities, it was recognized that other forms of affiliation model would be good to have to address barriers (ie bureaucratic process in registering as a non-profit organization, commercial activities of non-profit organizations viewed as bad when it is a way to fundraise for the organization, etc) that OSM local communities face. One suggested model is to have a lightweight user group model that can be used in lieu of or as a stepping stone to Local Chapter status. Another model is to also recognize thematic groups or communities such as Youthmappers, GeoChicas, etc.
LCCWG welcome your ideas on how we can improve affiliation scheme in OSMF through this thread and wikipage!
LCCWG highly encourage you to join LCCWG to help us advance this agenda.
LCCWG Sub-committee for OSMF Affiliation Models
Following the various consultations and discussion sessions about the OSMF Affiliation Models, during the November meeting (to be linked once available), the LCCWG has decided to convene a sub-committee to advance this agenda.
With this, LCCWG is looking for volunteers to help us improve the OSMF Affiliation Model/scheme.
Are you interested?
Please comment on the community forum thread or email local[at]osmfoundation.org.
Goal of the LCCWG Sub-committee for OSMF Affiliation Models :
Provide recommendations to the Board as to how the OSMF affiliation scheme can be improved to accommodate less-formal user groups (ie unregistered local communities) and non-geographical/thematic groups.
Overview of the duties/skills we are looking for:
Research, review, and writing a proposal:
- Review affiliation models of other open communities to learn from them and how we can adopt or iterate for the OSMF
- Work on differences and similarities of different types of affiliation (Local Chapters, informal communities, and orgs with some commercial activities), and their benefits, rights, obligations, etc
Coordination and facilitation:
- Coordinate with LCCWG and LWG regarding legal rights (eg trademarks granting and usage for non-registered organizations)
- Conduct and facilitate discussions session in at least 2 timezones and/or possible in different languages with 1) communities - informal and non-registered org and 2) with formally registered orgs (FPOSM, YOuthmappers, etc)
Volunteers list:
LCCWG members / convenors: Arnalie, Cristoffs and Eugene
Research Team (review, and writing a proposal)
- Co-leads: Adi, James Amattey, Saranya Nadaraj
- Members: Levis Ruto, Kasozi Denis, Aldom Onyango, Raquel Dezidério Souto, Wanger Gwakyaa, MODO LEVO ENGELBERT STEVE, Muluba, Arnold Nkwabong
Coordination and Facilitation Team
- Co-leads: Priscovia, Sajeevini Sivajothy, Md Atikuzzaman Limon, Brazil Singh
- Members: Bienvenu DJIKOLOUM
Volunteers who expressed interest:
- Siaosi_Lutui
- Mouonnibe
- Minha_Mahroof
Meeting notes
OSMF Affiliation Models - LCCWG Subcommittee First Volunteers Meetup
Date: 16 November, 15:00 UTC (See you local time)
Facilitator: Arnalie
Notetaker: everyone! :)
Attendance: Arnalie, US and the Philippines; MODO ENGELBERT , Cameroon; Adi, Indonesia; Aldom, Kenya; James Amattey , Ghana; Kasozi Denis, Uganda; Md Atikuzzaman Limon , Bangladesh; Sajeevini Sivajothy, Sri Lanka; Priscovia Ng'ambi from Zambia; DJIKOLOUM BIENVENU , CHAD; Wanger Gwakyaa; Saranya Nadaraj , Srilanka
Notes: https://hackmd.io/gvUpf4FTRKyziev4rSUsBg?both
TL;DR / PRIORITY ACTION: Volunteers @EVERYONE to sign up for the team/s that they are interested in. Please sign up thru the notes, from row 1 to 39: https://hackmd.io/gvUpf4FTRKyziev4rSUsBg?both
# highlights
- about 14 people joined the call :)
- we focused our session in getting to know each, and providing clear guidance and space for questions regarding the sub-committee's goals, volunteer roles, and what to expect
- we created 2 teams and signed up for co-lead/s or member/s role: 1) Research Team and 2) Coordination and Facilitation Team.
# Next steps
- Volunteers @EVERYONE to sign up for the team/s that they are interested in. Please sign up thru the notes, from row 1 to 39: https://hackmd.io/gvUpf4FTRKyziev4rSUsBg?both
Arnalie to update thread, group and osm wiki about the meeting highlights -DONEArnalie to schedule next volunteer meet: ~Dec14Arnalie to meet with Co-leads to ensure alignment with the 2 teams- Co-leads to meet with their team and start the process
Arnalie to create whatsapp group and add team members- DONE
OSMF Affiliation Models - LCCWG Subcommittee Co-leads Expectation Setting
Date: 20 November, 15:00 UTC
Facilitator: Arnalie
Attendance: Arnalie, Adi, Limon, Sajeevani, Nadaraj, Brazil, James, Coco (Priscovia)
Notes: https://hackmd.io/gvUpf4FTRKyziev4rSUsBg?both
# highlights
- we had breakout sessions for each team to get to know their co-leads and to set expectations
- co-leads expressed their enthusiasm to lead teams and identified support needed (e.g. clarity on role, resources, tasks to undertake, time commitment etc)
- Arnalie's expectations to co-leads are: Pilot (be the leaders), Support (their co-leads and team members), and Engage (facilitate and build enthusiasm within their team)
- Time commitment: we ask for minimum 2hours of your time per month until January. Else, it is up to your discretion how you want to participate in this subcommittee.
- Deadline: open ended
- Reminder to read and understand the Call for Volunteers thread that articulates the goals, roles and tasks of this team. If you have any questions, PLEASE ASK after you carefully read the thread: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/call-for-volunteers-help-improve-the-osmf-affiliation-model-with-lccwg/121298
# Suggested next steps:
- Co-leads to meet with their team to build cohesion and start their tasks; can also create a different chat group if preferred
- Research team - start researching about different affiliation models of other open source communities and document findings/analysis : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Improving_the_affiliation_scheme_of_the_OSMF#Affiliation_Models_from_other_open_communities; create your own doc or add the findings in the osm wiki
- Facilitation team - task is to coordinate and facilitate discussion sessions with 1) geographic local communities including Local Chapters and non-local chapters, and 2) non-geographical communities/org or thematic groups (eg youthmappers, FPOSM, HOT, geochicas, etc) - you can start by identifying participants that belong to these group, coordinating the schedule (in December or January) to conduct the discussion sessions, and build an agenda
- Arnalie's tasks - support teams and co-leads -
schedule next volunteer meetup ~Dec14, Saturday, 15:00 UTC - schedule next co-leads meetup ~Dec 4
2020 LCCWG Survey key takeaways and updates
In 2020, LCCWG initiated a survey targeted at local OSM communities and Local Chapters with the goal of improving relationship between the OSM Foundation, Local Chapters and OSM communities.
The survey was conducted in English. Five current Local Chapters, six communities that are in the process of becoming a Local Chapter and nine that are not at this time seeking Local Chapter status responded to the survey.
Below is the table that shows the section/key takeways/recommendations as well as 2024 updates on the suggestion actions.
| Section / Key Takeaways | 2024 Updates: Done / In progress/ Improved? | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Creation
This section looked at the chapter creation process. Organizations still in the process of applying were encouraged to respond. | ||
| Having list of possible things that local chapters should be doing (checklist to choose from) | Done | Handbook for becoming a Local Chapter |
| Have a group of people (wg) liaise on our application relentlessly once we have written to osmf, instead of it being left to an individual. | Done | LCCWG put up 2 focal points per each applications in the current process |
| Support for website and membership management | ? | |
| Funding is not a big issue. The Microgrant program will help going forward. | In progress | LCCWG has an approved budget for Microgrant in 2024; however, it was not conceptualized and implemented |
| Responsibilities
This section asked about Local Chapter's responsibility to the OSM Foundation and the OSM Foundaton's responsibility to Local Chapters. The goal is to see if improvements can be made to the Local Chapter Agreement. | ||
| Reporting requirements are not actively followed up by OSMF. | still not strictly enforced | Compiled reports and published in the OSM Blog in 2023 and took 7months, still some LCs did not respond. Should be enforced by the OSMF Board (eg Secretary, maybe with help of LCCWG?) |
| Need stronger ties. One suggestion is to make it a formal requirement for the Foundation to get input from the Local Chapters | ? | Through the Advisory Board? However, not a lot of participation - 1-2 LCs per meeting |
| The Advisory Board could be strengthened (60% of respondents felt that the OSMF was not making good use of the Advisory Board) | Improved | With AB liaison to really have someone focusing on AB, next question would be continuity |
| Improvements
This section looks at how to improve the Local Chapter relationship with the Foundation. | ||
| The top votes were:
1. Tickets to SOTM 2. Recommend Microgrants 3. LC signup on osm.org |
Not done | Should inform SotM WG, Board to liaise this request |
| 11 respondents are interested in participating in a LCCWG meeting | ? | How many attendees do we have on average? |
| Tools to replace Meetup | ? | Suggestion: osmcal.org |
| Help organizing regional SotMs | Regional communities have formed to organize regional SotMs | |
| Make Local Chapters and communities more prominent on osm.org | Done https://www.openstreetmap.org/communities | In progress - communities tool/Microcosm |
| Negotiate agreement with HOTOSM to become LC | Done | HOT became corporate sponsor in 2023 |
| Community support and IT Infrastructure received the top votes for financial support from OSMF followed by Conference Planning and Hosting of OSMF Servers. Limited responses for financial support for chapters. Note: the need for financial support may be dependent on the ability of the LC to raise funds locally. | ||
| Demographics
-Demographics membership -How to you actively seek new members? -Demographics 3 Administrative -Major Expenses -How is your organization funded? | ||
|
no updates | Another survey for updates? |
| Final Question
Respondents answered the question What is the one thing OSMF should change to be more useful for you and other local chapters and communities? | ||
| More support for Local Chapters and communities - in applications | Revisioning LC application process and reqt in 2023 | How/what kind of support? (see above for top answers: Tickets to SOTM, Recommend Microgrants, LC signup on osm.org |
| More Diversity needed | Diversity Statement embedded on OSMF/WG activities eg membership campaign, LCC Congress | What kind? What does this mean? |
| OSMF needs Code of Conduct | Done | with LCCWG moderation subcom 2021 https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette |
Comments from community forum
Link: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/improving-the-affiliation-scheme-of-the-osmf/105288
Large (recognized LCs) and Small (community chapters/grassroot level communities)
Challenge: (ImreSamu) In the area where I live, nonprofits operate in a highly bureaucratic and polarized setting. This has made our local OpenStreetMap community very cautious, if not lacking in energy. Therefore, I think an inclusive and simplified structure would be beneficial for making our presence known in the community.
- large =~ “recognized Local Chapters”
- small =~ “grassroot-level communities” - community chapter with coordinators eg listing them/connecting them via https://openstreetmap.community/
Benefits and downsides of the LC model?
Benefits
- formal recognition from OSMF
- trademark use
Downsides
- In some countries, incorporation is expensive and involves a significant bureaucratic process.
- small informal groups, how do you even formalize such a status?
- Any agreement has to be between two entities. If there isn’t something that can agree to the LC terms, who is the OSMF entering a contract with? The only way for a group of people to enter a contract is via incorporation.
Recommendation:
- Financial docs requirement to submit so LCs clearly know that OSMF doesnt fund LCs and that LCs should be self sustaining
- How about a city/region-wide local chapter then (but without the burden of establishing a non-profit incorporated entity) The main goal is:
- Uniting mappers in the area to establish a region-specific consensus on how things should be mapped and to collaborate in addressing local vandalism
- Providing formal representation to local government, organizations, or institutions. Perhaps something akin to a “Mapper in Residence” program around here 1
- Ensuring that local data users adhere to OpenStreetMap’s licensing and attribution requirements. (For example, I have seen many local government applications here use OSM layers without proper attribution, and we probably need a reporting mechanism for such cases)
- This city or region-wide local chapter is just an extension of the online-based volunteer work typically done in OpenStreetMap. Therefore, there should be no financial transfers from OpenStreetMap (or any group) to this city/region-wide local chapter at this stage. This limitation simplifies management, as there’s no need to establish a formal legal entity
TLDR: It’s a lightweight version of a local chapter, without incorporation (and no money either, but I guess they’re really fine with that. Acknowledgment alone is more than enough for them)
- P.S : Sure, there are still several drawbacks to this idea. Such as… What if the members go AWOL? (Perhaps we should establish a mechanism to revoke the LC status once its main members have ceased to exist.) Additionally, what if the LC actually damages the OpenStreetMap brand as a whole? (Maybe, once again, we should consider implementing a mechanism to revoke their status.)
- Introducing a simplified community group registration process to accommodate contributors from all backgrounds and circumstances is something that I’ve seen working really well in other open source communities (such as Mozilla 2), where historically only one group was recognized at a country or language level.
- DONE - OSMF, and specifically LCCWG, might consider sponsoring and/or investing in projects like OSM Teams 4 and OpenStreetMap Calendar 2 to build a solid foundation for Local Chapters and beyond.
2024 LCC Congress: OSMF Affiliation Models - Updates and Discussions
Recordings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCh_ZOjcf6A Jamboard: uploaded in LCCWG gitlab and copy pasted screenshots here
Updates
2023 Regional/National SotM Discussions
BOF community session at SotM US 2023
- Participants from: Philippines, US, Malawi, Brazil
- OSM Uganda’s application rejection disappointing - negative thinking on paid work
- Lacking local context - euro-centric views
Recommendations:
- Support & mentorship for communities
- Localized guidelines and handbook, translations
- Ways to modifying the model to take into account local context
- Amplifying community stories; publicity on what is happening not only in OSMF but in local communities, HOT, YM
How to attract applying as LC?
- Support people/communities
- Back support to have grants and partnerships
Questions:
- How does OSMF expect to sustain its members if there is a negative thinking on paid work / commercial activities which are ways to fundraise?
- Recognize which diversity? TIME - Diversity of time availability to contribute (privilege)
Open Governance models discussion at SotM Asia 2023
- Participants from: Philippines, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Turkey
Challenges in forming LC:
- Internal turmoil
- Lack of awareness
- tagging/boundaries/disputes
- Contributors mainly centered in main cities
- Data ownership
- Gender-women underrepresentation
- Communication: language barrier
- Non-profit org is tough, in Bangladesh it it tagged as extremist
- Lots of paper work, bureaucracy, paper works
Recommendations:
- Understand volunteer context
Open Governance models discussion at SotM Africa 2023
Recording: https://www.youtube.com/live/_P7l39bro8s?feature=shared&t=1190
- Participants from: Philippines, Zambia, Uganda, Ghana, Madagascar
Community Challenges:
- Madagascar - Transparency, language barrier, finance
- Ghana
- linking YM to the org
- Diversity of memberships
- Financial constraints
- Zambia
- Resources to grow the community
- Open communication (transparency)
- Inclusive participation
- Discontinuity drains community
- Uganda
- Funding
- Governance and transparency
- Community is not one person
Thoughts/recommendations:
- Train leaders on governance
- Streamline communication
- Draw boundaries to avoid burnout
- Awareness - disseminate informations
- Community engagement person of the OSMF to engage and be part of community discussion
- Differentiate business vs fundraising
- Guide on what is expected of LC eg how to operate as of the case of OSM Uganda application
- Understand local context - voices should be represented
Open Governance models discussion at FOSS4G/SotM Oceania 2023
Recordings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSJ7XaTgAT0
- Participants from: Philippines/Indonesia/HOT, Fiji, Oceania
- Do local osm communities benefit from governance? TO BE ADDED
Community discussion in the forum
Link: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/improving-the-affiliation-scheme-of-the-osmf/105288 See section above
FPOSM signed agreement to use OSM trademark
- Non-geog affiliate, professional org, signed April 2023 and expires 2 years
- Looking at extending/re-applying
- To do: Agreement contract review
Re-application of OSM Belgium as LC
Discussions: Benefits, Challenges and suggestions
Benefits
- Trademarks,
- Having a sit in the Advisory Board
Challenges
- Too much red tape in some countries to be a formal org
- Disunity and power struggles resulting to community conflicts
- Euro-centirc view of being affiliated to the OSMD
- Local policies
- China: setup LC may be illegal and people are less willing to meet offline
- Vietnam: land disputes ie spratly and paracel islands
Comments/Questions:
- How can OSMF and being affiliated with OSMF help sustain LCs and communities?
- Understand local context
- Recognize which diversity? TIME
- Uganda context: hard to register and sustain org - requires resources and funding… how do communities raise funds? See notes: Fundraising & Chapter Sustainability
non-formal/registered affiliation (no legal entity)? Currently none, LCs are required to be legal entity to sign agreement with OSMF
- Raise the sense of belonging in local communities? It’s tough to engage the local communities (esp newbies) in any OSM events
Suggestions:
- Comms and awarenes campaigns
- A common platform to facilitate work and communication based on open source tools (NextCloude)
- Amplifying community stories
- Support and mentorship
- OSMF can buy/support domain name
- Encourage students ie youthmappers
- User groups similar to Wikimedia would be a nice way to mitigate the problems of red tape and of organizing a non-profit
- Could they set an interim situation where a group can register their interest in affiliation and have a OSMF assist them in advancing to full chapter status.
2024 LCCWG Brainstorming Session (30 October)
notes: https://hackmd.io/gvUpf4FTRKyziev4rSUsBg
Highlights:
- Brief Review and insights: LCCWG efforts on improving OSMF Affiliation
- A different affiliation model, with less burden, would really impact us positively.
- Do we need/want different affiliation schemes for community groups (contributors) and for groups with commercial activities? — Eg different small companies eg paid mapping, map services, using OSM in various businesses (different actors would like to use OSM data but they dont know how to use data - it is easier for them to have a group of professional (consultancy)), we want to promote OSM in our business, we do things in the spirit on the rules of the Foundation and being affiliated is something we want to do and apply to so we can comply with OSMF — scope of small business - how big, what you do? who gives you money / who are you making business with? eg program with govt/NGO (not commercial)
Suggested next steps for LCCWG:
- Review affiliation models of other open communities and convene a dedicated team to advance this topic
- Work on differences and similarities of different types of affiliation (Local Chapters, informal communities, and orgs with some commercial activities), benefits, rights, obligations, etc
- consult with LWG re trademarks granting and usage for non-registered organizations
- Conduct discussions session with communities - informal and non-registered org
- Conduct discussion sessions with formally registered orgs (FPOSM, YOuthmappers, etc)
Analysis of inputs
Work in progress
Differences and similarities
| Local chapters | Affiliated organizations | |
| Area of operation |
|
|
| OSM Representation | - Community representation within a geographic area
- Representation of the OSM part of a certain organization |
|
| Legal status | Registered as non-profit of part of one | - Registered as non-profit of part of one OR
- not registered (e.g. user group) |
| Obligations |
|
|
| Rights | - Trademark use
- Advisory board seat - Official rep of OSM in the country - Official recognition from OSMF - LCCWG membership |
- Trademark use?
- Advisory board seat? - For non-formal groups: Community representative of OSM in the country - Official recognition from OSMF - LCCWG membership |
Affiliation Models from other open communities
- Wikimedia's Affiliation Models https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_movement_affiliates/Models
- Mozilla Reps Program https://wiki.mozilla.org/Reps
- Creative Commons Chapters https://network.creativecommons.org/chapter/
- Library Publishing Coalition's Strategic Affiliates Program: https://librarypublishing.org/get-involved/ (thanks to my intern who helped researched :))
- Python Foundation https://www.python.org/community/sigs https://wiki.python.org/psf/NewMembershipModel
- User groups
- Special interest groups
- Django affiliate https://pypi.org/project/django-affiliate/
- QGIS https://qgis.org/community/involve
- They introduced a certification program to involve more organisations but also have local user groups