[Owasp-board] Budget for FY17

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Wed Sep 7 16:32:40 UTC 2016


Andrew,

If I am understanding correctly, you are suggesting that we should allocate
$0 to Chapter funding.  While I understand that there are chapters that
have money in their accounts, there are many chapters who do not.  The
funding bucket that you are looking to eliminate is what enables new
chapters to get started, previous chapters to get restarted, and chapters
with no money in their accounts to do things.  Chapters are a huge part of
OWASP's outreach mission and should be tied to it.  We can certainly
discuss "how much", but I'm not comfortable shafting 100+ chapters based on
the fact that some chapters have money.  I was with you on the budget
approach until this was proposed.

~josh

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:06 AM, Andrew van der Stock <vanderaj at owasp.org>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I want to start the process for the FY17 budget now, so that we have an
> entire quarter to get it right and approved in concert with the new
> incoming Board members in December, so we can hit the ground running in
> 2017.
>
> This year, the biggest change I need us to make is a pie based budget
> instead of just adjusting last year's numbers, as last year's numbers
> reflect the strategic goals of 2013, not what we want to do.
>
> I propose two pies, for 501 (c) 3 reasons:
>
> Administrative pie, capped at 10% of our total budget
> Mission pie, capped at 90% of our total budget
>
> This means that it becomes possible for us to show that we are spending a
> goodly amount of our budget on mission, and capping administrative back
> office costs at 10% of our overall budget. This will require staff who are
> currently paid from general revenue to be allocated within the budget to a
> specific strategic goal, with truly only OWASP Foundation core staff (Kate
> and Alison, primarily) paid from the administrative budget.
>
> We as a Board need to make decisions around the makeup of the mission pie:
>
>    - Education
>    - Outreach
>    - Conferences
>    - Projects
>    - Website redesign
>
>
> I personally think that the above strategic goals should each get 22.5%
> each of the pie, with 10% of the remaining budget for the website redesign.
> Conferences, being a profitable area for us should look to increase the
> number of global events to four in 2017, and increase the number of
> regional events. If anything, giving conferences a budget is more like a
> float rather than a spending requirement, as they return funds to the
> organisation, which I also hope training will do one day, too.
>
> So how big is this pie? We need to make a budget that stretches us to make
> $3m in FY17, which means we need to look at all sources of income, and what
> we need to do to make that a reality. Our revenue in 2015 was $2,478,184.
> If we say we can do $2.7m this year (possible, depends on AppSec USA
> profitability), $3m is within our grasp. So 10% is $300,000 administrative
> costs, and then $610k each for education, outreach, conferences, projects,
> and up to $270k for the website. That is with no contingency, and assumes
> AppSec USA is at least 10% more profitable than last year's.
>
> Income measures will require a properly planned membership drive,
> particularly in desired outreach groups (developers), a proper marketing
> campaign to encourage donations and sponsorships, and I think we should
> invest in a grant writer to get funds for projects, and use some of the
> project funds to do a grant linked work program. We should also be looking
> at using our contacts as a Board to develop relations with other large
> organisations, to properly fund us as we look to grow to $5m per year in a
> few years.
>
> Chapters have many existing sources of income, and they continue to do
> well without additional funds being allocated to them, so I propose that
> none of the mission pie is redirected to chapters as they have more than
> 75% of the available funds already. In fact, the spending pie above does
> not take into account the fact that chapters will be getting funds before
> anyone else.
>
> So I *would* like us to enforce our already approved vote to force
> chapters with large balances to come up with plans to spend the cash, or to
> sweep it back into general revenue, so we can use those unused funds to
> grow the organisation in meaningful ways. This affects a tiny fraction of
> all chapters. Denver is already taking measures to spend their funds on a
> local lab.
>
> So for those of you on the Board who are the champions of a particular
> strategic goal, I'd like you to come up with a plan of action for 2017,
> with associated costs. Let's put it into the budget, and get it done.
>
> thanks,
> Andrew
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20160907/1994564b/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list