GG20 Community Rounds Announced
In order for the Gitcoin team to push more of the decision-making out to the edges, we are excited that the first iteration of the new governance process for community rounds is underway for GG20! ICYMI, to be eligible to run a community round in GG20 and receive matching funds from Gitcoin, each community needed to upload their proposal to our gov forum by March 17th.
The GG20 Community Council took a week to review and vote on which rounds to accept into the round, and how to allocate matching funds to each. The voting for which rounds to accept was conducted in CharmVerse, and was ranked according to average rubric scores. The vote for how matching funds would be distributed was done through a poll at the end of the week.
Thank you to the council @azeem, @mashal, @ZER8, @lanzdingz, @feems, @thedevanshmehta, @wasabi for your engagement, stewarding of this decision, as well as your partnership in writing this post.
Rubrics that were used are the following. NOTE that this will change in the future as some limitations were discovered as reviews were taking place.
Impact
What impact will this round have on the ecosystem if approved and funded? What impact will the round have on the projects they fund?
Note: Impact tracking and evaluation isn’t a mandatory requirement for eligibility, but it is listed in the proposal template to give an overview of what is planned, if anything.
Experience
Does the community have adequate round managers and advisors on the team?
Leverage
Is the matching amount proportional to what they are trying to achieve? (Matching amount the community is bringing in).
Thank you to each and every community for applying to be a part of GG20! It was incredible to witness such a big interest in participating in GG20 as well as read all your applications.
Results
The council voted on whether to either 1) distribute matching funds equally or 2) to distribute the funds according to the ranking of the rounds. 6 out of 7 members voted for equal matching funds. The main reasons for an equal match was based on this being the first experimentation of an outside council therefore an equal share seemed fair, and allows for an equal share in matching
- Climate Coordination Network – Matching amount: $25k
- ENS Identity - Matching amount: $25k
- Token Engineering - Matching amount: $25k
- Hypercerts Ecosystem - Matching amount: $25k
- OpenCivics Consortium - Matching amount: $25k
It also made sense to allocate matching funds equally due to the diverse sectors each round belongs to:
ENS - Identity
CCN - Environment
Hypercerts - Impact Evaluation
Opencivics - Civic Tech
TEC - Token Design
Reasons why the top 5 stood out:
Well-written proposals that highlight the specific impact they are looking to have with the round, positive track record (including previous Gitcoin rounds) as well as the org’s reputation, proof of either broader web3 ecosystem impact or very clear reasoning for there is a narrow scope. Proposals were clear and didn’t require external searching for info. Also included how they would track the impact of this round/their applicant’s progress.
*Noting that most proposals also had these factors, but these 5 had the strongest signals and were the clearest.
– Lana Dingwall & ZER8
What the top 5 had in common and received top marks: I was impressed by the overarching commitment to impactful projects and clear strategies for achieving tangible results within the Ethereum community. The selected grantees each demonstrated a unique approach to leveraging their expertise and resources for the community and public good Their applications stood out due to their clear impact, established track records, and thoughtful project objectives. What made these projects stand out was how they’re not just about new ideas but also about making sure these ideas last and really make a difference. This really matched what we were looking for and showed us they were the right picks for this round.
– Feems
Reflections from the council
After going through the 14 communities applying to the round, I congratulate everyone for coming forward with compelling applications for the council to study, review, and vote on. I loved the diversity of approaches toward their goals. It’s really important to keep improving impact verification in a way that is standardized across the board when it comes to several data verticals, which could allow communities to be future-proof and resilient to the ever-changing web3 landscape. - Wasabi
First off, thank you to everyone who applied, it’s amazing to see so many different corners of our ecosystem working to help fund their communities. We saw 14 strong applications, yet in the end could only select 5 to move forward with receiving matching funds from Gitcoin. For myself, the perspective I used to rank the applications was as follows:
I tried my best to use only the information provided in the application, however, I knew more about some communities than others, so took a bit of time to explore what I could for those that I did not have any previous touchpoints and felt I needed more context.
When ranking impact I looked to evaluate both the impact in the specific community round they are looking to run, as well as the ripple impact the round could have on the broader ecosystem.
For experience, I looked at if they had run rounds before from a logistics perspective but if the operators/team/project executing this were capable of bringing in even more funding via donations. Again thinking of the ripple effects outside of the round, based on what I can see, how strongly can they activate their communities?
Leverage was assessed considering the goals, number of projects expected, operator experience, and current matching fund amount, recognizing the potential impact even with small matching pools if communities can effectively engage larger networks.
Despite limitations, the rubric used for the round was a practical choice due to time constraints, with plans for future expansion and refinement based on feedback from this round within the Council.
My tips for those looking to apply in the next round: Write your application as if everyone reading it has absolutely no idea who you are, what your round is about, who is in your community or how much impact you’ve had in the past. When including your past rounds, link to the Gitcoin report cards (or other summaries if they weren’t Gitocin rounds) and give context and other metrics points if it is relevant. Explain what kind of projects will be in your round and how many, what kind of impact they will have/have already had, why that impact is important, and how this round will be a net positive for them and the broader community.
- Lana Dingwall
Thank you all for applying. I have provided feedback for each of you, independent of how well-known some applications were. I believe that I reviewed each application based on what was written and the applicants’ previous track records within the Gitcoin ecosystem, and also examined the impact they would have on the overall Ethereum community. I also evaluated how well applications considered eligibility criteria, objectives, and the leverage of matching rounds (how projects could benefit from being accepted).
I think a point for reflection would be to add more requirements to the eligibility criteria that match the rubric we were given (impact, experience, leverage), as these are significant factors in the selection process. It would be easier to make them a requirement (e.g., must have run a Gitcoin round, matching should be comparable to the number of applicants accepted).
For those applying, having a well-thought-out application is crucial. Think about your round objectives, clearly define how your project’s eligibility criteria play into that, and show a clearly defined impact assessment and reflection plan. Many missed this, which was one of the less detailed areas. If this is your first round, consider how your previous experience can lead to success as a Gitcoin Grants round operator. Another aspect I looked at was the selection of projects by round operators in previous rounds, something for future applicants to consider.
Overall, it was a great experience, and I am looking forward to discussing it further with the council to make improvements. Thank you to all who voted for me. I evaluated each application fairly and to the best of my ability.
— Feems
We would like to give each round some direct feedback. You will hear from MathildaDV over the course of this week (please check gov forum DM’s if I’m not connected to you elsewhere) for some feedback on your applications. And just because you didn’t get in this round, don’t fret! There will be many more opportunities in the future. And anyone is still welcome to run their round during GG20 (there will be a GG20 round setup walkthrough posted on the forum shortly).
