Skip to content

Commit 760a266

Browse files
mr-cmr-c
committed
grants policy
1 parent ddb07b9 commit 760a266

File tree

1 file changed

+130
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+130
-0
lines changed

‎grants_policy.md

Lines changed: 130 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
1+
Policy:
2+
3+
All applications for funding of the CWL project (grant applications, and
4+
similar) must be submitted by Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) unless
5+
an agreement otherwise has been approved by both the CWL Project
6+
Leadership Team and SFC itself.
7+
8+
Submitting grants and/or getting funding to do the work of the CWL
9+
project without approval from SFC and the CWL Leadership Team can result
10+
in cancellation of sustaining/support member status (without refund),
11+
censure, and/or other consequences as deemed appropriate by SFC and the
12+
CWL Leadership Team.
13+
14+
Motivation:
15+
16+
CWL is a member project of Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. As per the
17+
[membership agreement signed by all members of the initial CWL project
18+
leadership
19+
team](https://github.com/common-workflow-language/governance/blob/ddb07b99ae62006f70cd43987843626ffe08c2f0/CWL-sponsorship-agreement--signed-by-all.pdf),
20+
CWL is a [direct
21+
project](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_sponsorship#Table_comparing_the_models)
22+
of SFC: CWL is owned by SFC, and the project's work is implemented by
23+
SFC employees and volunteers.
24+
25+
Implementation:
26+
27+
This section documents how an entity (the Properser) submitting grants
28+
that involve Common Workflow Language standards (CWL) and the CWL
29+
Project (which for now on will be referred to as the Project) should
30+
seek approval for their Proposal from the CWL Leadership team and SFC.
31+
32+
There are four options for getting Project approval:
33+
34+
1. If a proposal indicates the use of CWL but will *not* be
35+
> contributing substantially to the Project (e.g. code,
36+
> documentation, tutorials), then *no Proposal approval is needed*.
37+
38+
a. If the proposed grant is funded, please consider adding (if
39+
> allowed) your proposal [to the list of
40+
> projects](https://github.com/common-workflow-language/cwl-website/blob/main/content/_data/user-gallery.yml)
41+
> using CWL and publicly [announce the funded grant on the CWL
42+
> forum](https://cwl.discourse.group/c/announcements/6).
43+
44+
2. For a Proposal that indicates substantial contributions to the
45+
> Project, there are two paths
46+
47+
a. The default path is to submit a Proposal via the Software
48+
> Freedom Conservancy (SFC) itself. Please contact SFC & the CWL
49+
> leadership as soon as possible by emailing
50+
> [commonworkflowlanguage\@sfconservancy.org](mailto:[email protected])
51+
> with an initial description of the grant proposal.
52+
53+
b. If the SFC is ineligible to apply for this opportunity, or there
54+
> is another good reason why an external entity should submit
55+
> instead of SFC, then approval by the Project *is* needed
56+
> **and** justification for not submitting via Software Freedom
57+
> Conservancy is required.
58+
59+
i. The Proposer will document and explain why the Proposal can
60+
> not be sent by SFC; for example due to geographic or
61+
> entity type restrictions.
62+
63+
ii. The Proposer will supply the aims of the grants, total grant
64+
> budget and duration.
65+
66+
iii. The Proposer will supply a form (modeled after
67+
> [this](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/GLAM_partnership_evaluation_handout.pdf)
68+
> form by the Wikimedia Foundation) to explain the benefits
69+
> and risks of the proposed contributions to the Project.
70+
71+
iv. The aims and form will be due 2 weeks before any Letter of
72+
> Support (LOS) is needed and should be sent to the
73+
> leadership team
74+
> ([commonworkflowlanguage\@sfconservancy.org](mailto:[email protected])).
75+
> A default LOS will be used unless otherwise requested by
76+
> the grant submitters.
77+
78+
1. If no members of the Project leadership team nor the SFC
79+
> object to the grant proposal, the proposal will be
80+
> approved and the LOS will automatically be provided.
81+
82+
2. The members of the CWL Leadership team will keep
83+
> information about grants that are not funded under a
84+
> reasonable expectation of privacy
85+
86+
v. Note that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (e.g.
87+
> [https://nonprofitdocuments.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/Collaboration-MOU-checklist-SLS-sample-07-05-17.pdf](https://nonprofitdocuments.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/Collaboration-MOU-checklist-SLS-sample-07-05-17.pdf))
88+
> between SFC and the Proposers will need to be developed
89+
> and signed; plan accordingly.
90+
91+
vi. If the Proposal is funded, it is required to publicly
92+
> announce the funded grant on the CWL forum and link to the
93+
> proposal (if it is possible to make publicly available)
94+
95+
For all these proposal options, Common Workflow Language should be cited
96+
using the [proper up-to-date
97+
citations](https://www.commonwl.org/specification/#references).
98+
99+
\--
100+
101+
Expectations for CWL Project Lead or delegate
102+
103+
1. Maintain private log of notifications
104+
105+
2. Check with the Mission & Vision for the CWL project
106+
107+
3. Check for alignment with the community roadmap
108+
109+
4. Confirm a proper statement of how the applicants and the project are
110+
> or are-not related
111+
112+
5. If the details can't be shared with the entire team, then extract
113+
> relevant details and report to PLT
114+
115+
6. Provide quarterly summary to the CWL PLT
116+
117+
7. Follow-up to publicize when appropriate
118+
119+
Recording:
120+
121+
1. Code name to cross-reference with private notes (if needed)
122+
123+
2. Day of submission
124+
125+
3. Expected start & end date
126+
127+
4. Work to be done; aspects of the CWL Community Roadmap that
128+
> overlap/alignment
129+
130+
5. Expected date of application funding decision

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)