# [DRAFT] Evaluation Guideline / Review for Local Chapter Applications

To guide application reviewers (LCCWG and/or OSMF board), improve transparency and avoid bias, the [[Draft] Evaluation Guidelines](https://hackmd.io/Yr6BnDV6SUiSo0A0qd33Fg) is proposed. This will be linked in the LC Application page.

## Evaluation Sheet

Below is the evaluation sheet:

| Criteria | Means of Verification | Evaluation (e.g. scoring, process) / Remarks|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Non-profit incorporated entity or part of larger organisation (as long as that does not have conflicting goals e.g. FOSSGIS Germany and Geolibres Argentina) | Registration Certificate (Incorporation / Association document) | Yes or No; If no, can refer to other affiliation models (WIP)|
Open membership (mass and democratic) | Membership structure / voting rights document (e.g. bylaws) ; Other documentation that can support the application e.g. Board minutes, Annual General Meeting of members, etc | Yes or No |
Dedication to supporting the aims of the OpenStreetMap Foundation and the OpenStreetMap project. | Mission / Vision statement (e.g. bylaws / incorporation) | Yes or No |
| Membership of the organization should be representative of the geographic area the org is operating | Membership structure (e.g. list of members with OSM username / roles) | Check: Yes or No; at least 80% of the membership is a national of the country where the non-profit in incorporated |
The organisation has been actively operating (e.g. contributing to OSM) for at least two years, either as a registered or non-registered group (i.e. local community) | Documentation/Report of previous activities e.g OSM Wiki, OSM Profile / Diaries, Neis stats, websites, etc | Yes or No; At least two members of the community has been actively mapping and promoting OSM in their geographic area for at least two years since OSM sign up |
Fundraising activities? (need to decided) | Fundraising eport, Documentation/Report of previous activities e.g OSM Wiki, OSM Profile / Diaries, Neis stats, websites, etc | LCCWG deliberation and vote - Acceptable or not; Acceptable if....??? |

**If any issues / blockers arise during the application**, LCCWG shall contact and clarify with the community applicant first. LCCWG can conduct community consultation if necessary/need community feedback. All communication should be done in an open manner e.g. Community Forum / mailing list. Reviewers **must** also document these issues/blockers (finding/key discussions report) and resolution, if any.

**After evaluation**, LCCWG will make and send recommendation, along with the evaluation sheet and findings/key discussions (eg challenges and issues that arise) to the board. OSMF Board member/s may opt to do their own review to support their decision.

Board will deliberate and vote on the LC application.

## Important Considerations

It is important to note that each country has different context which affects how they operate/make money. Therefore, evaluators need to assume good faith in reviewing the community's application (e.g. balance between UK laws (or where OSMF is incorporated) and local context).

There might be cases when application to become a non-profit in a certain country is onerous or the effort/cost to become one outweighs the benefits of being a LC / operating as a registered org, or that there are no non-profit model in their country; therefore, OSMF has to improve Affiliation Models in OSM.

## Links

- [Draft] Eligibility Criteria: https://hackmd.io/@XT6NX5TWRciQGzTGjBEnRQ/By59EyMVn
- [Draft] Affiliation Models https://hackmd.io/@XT6NX5TWRciQGzTGjBEnRQ/B1IaqeGEn
- [Draft] Revised Local Chapters Page Text https://hackmd.io/@XT6NX5TWRciQGzTGjBEnRQ/SyBVoeMVn
- - DRAFT Handbook for Becoming a Local Chapter https://hackmd.io/4NfuVm7tSKi3HIB3FKFrNQ