Name (or Topic/Theme) of Proposed Round
OpenCivics Consortium Round
How many times has this round been run during a Gitcoin Grants round?
This will be our second round, GG19 having been our first. See the report card of our previous round here.
How big is your team that will run this round? Who is your team?
We will have four round operators: Patricia Parkinson, Benjamin Life, Renee Davis, and Spencer Saar Cavanaugh (Clinamenic). Clinamenic LLC will handle the deployment of the contract and the calling of the functions, in lieu of an established OpenCivics entity to assume liability.
Patricia Parkinson - https://twitter.com/polyparkinson
Benjamin Life - https://twitter.com/omniharmonic
Renee Davis - https://twitter.com/reneedaos
Spencer Saar Cavanaugh - https://twitter.com/clinamenic
OpenCivics: Twitter | Website
OpenCivics Mainnet Multisig: 0x04f45dB8b906838787405d8B47336153b95F95F1
How does this round align with Gitcoin’s mission?
This round will utilize quadratic funding as a means of channeling the wisdom of the crowd in determining grant funding for impact projects in the broad field of civic impact and technology. This grant round will be the second in a series of grant rounds, over the course of which a dialogue will be maintained between grantor (OpenCivics) and grantee (the consortium members).
Additionally, we plan on implementing certain attestation (EAS) and certification (Hypercerts) mechanisms to better track and recognize impact onchain, in the interest of transparency and accountability.
What do you anticipate the size of the matching pool will be (either fundraised from partners, raised independently through your connections, or a combination of both)?
The matching pool will be at least 5 ETH (approx. $20k at the time of writing), in addition to any funds from matching donors or sponsors we manage to secure.
Who will be advisors for this round, if anyone?
While the round will be managed by the four individuals mentioned above, there will not be any formal advisors for this round.
Please describe the eligibility criteria you envision for this proposed round.
We plan on reusing, and perhaps slightly revising, the eligibility criteria of our previous round:
- Requirement 1: Projects are creating impact through public goods, civic service, civic works, civic innovations or civic utilities.
- Requirement 2: Projects exhibit clear relevance to the broad framing of civic innovation.
- Requirement 3: At least one project steward is a member of OpenCivics consortium (Application link: OpenCivics Membership Application )
- Requirement 4: Project team size and skills correlates to use of funds and desired impact.
- Requirement 5: Project demonstrates a clear track record of previous work.
How large is your community approximately?
Several dozen members, not all of whom are associated with projects applying for or included in this grants program.
What type of projects would you like to fund?
We aim to fund projects driving civic innovation, and projects making civic impact. Civic innovations can be infrastructure, technology, social processes, educational curricula, or initiatives available to all members of a society.
For more information about how we define civic innovation, please see this document.
Approximately how many grantees do you believe will be eligible to apply to this round?
We aim to include 5 grantees in this round. Given the size of the matching pool, we would rather a smaller number of grantees receive substantial grants, than a larger number of grantees receive insubstantial grants. We are also generally targeting earlier stage impact projects, for whom these relatively low levels of funding can make more of a difference.
Impact Assessment: If and how do you intend to assess grantee impact over successive rounds? This could include, but is not limited to Hypercerts, GAP, Deresy, etc.
We intend to ask grantees, in their application for this round, to articulate their goals regarding the impact or results of the funding they receive in this round, and we intend to periodically check in on this progress, and ultimately conduct an evaluation before the following round starts.
We also plan on issuing tailor-made Hypercerts for grantees that meet their impact goals, and we hope these certifications will demonstrate a track record of impact for the grantee, better enabling them to apply for future funding.
We also intend to implement a Request for Attestation (RFA) mechanism, whereby the general public is invited to make attestations to the impact and activities of the grantees, which we hope will function as a grassroots form of impact evaluation to complement the centralized evaluation OpenCivics will conduct via Hypercerts.
Is there anything else that community members should consider when voting for which rounds to focus on in the upcoming GG20 grants round?
Even if this OpenCivics Consortium Round is not accepted into the Gitcoin Community Round and is not given matching funds, we will still be actively working alongside other grant round managers and impact evaluators in this space. We also hope that any effective practices we develop over the course of this and future rounds may prove useful to other grant round managers.