Gitcoin Grants 24: Strategic Sense Making Framework

[MathildaDV]

Gitcoin Grants 24: Strategic Sense Making Framework

TLDR

Here the TLDR of the sensemaking structure of GG24:

• Purpose: Identify Ethereum’s most meaningful, urgent, and solvable problems through structured community research.
• Approach: Contributors write reports analyzing a problem’s significance, fundability ($50K+), and whether Gitcoin can uniquely help solve it.
• Criteria: Problems must offer genuine user impact, address root causes (not hype), and pass a “satisfaction test” six months later.
• Validation Tools: Community input, expert feedback, and visibility tests (e.g., can it attract funding or support from ecosystem leaders like Vitalik).
• Output: The best sensemaking reports define domains for GG24 and guide which campaigns get executed.
• Why it matters: This process ensures Gitcoin funds what truly matters—not just what trends—by aligning capital with meaning.

Overview

Gitcoin Grants 24 (GG24) will implement a structured, five-phase approach to revitalize our impact in the Ethereum ecosystem:

1. Sensemaking: Identifying high-impact problem areas through rigorous analysis and validating them through fundraising potential and visibility tests
2. Establishing Domains: Creating specific focus areas through a transparent, community-driven process
3. Campaign Design: Developing targeted funding outcomes tailored to each domain
4. Campaign Execution: Implementing the designed campaigns effectively
5. Retrospective Analysis: Learning from outcomes to improve future rounds

This framework balances structured methodology with practical market validation, ensuring we focus our efforts where we can make the greatest impact while securing the necessary resources and visibility.

Why This Framework Matters

Dedicated Domain Allocation (DDA) is the core function that will drive Gitcoin Grants moving forward. We’re building a system that identifies the most pressing challenges in Ethereum and creates effective mechanisms to address them.

Gall’s Law as Our Guiding Principle

Following Gall’s Law—“All complex systems that work evolved from simpler systems that work”—we’re starting with a minimal, robust foundation that can evolve over time.

What This Process Ensures

Our framework is designed to ensure that:

• We identify genuinely important problems
• We verify our ability to raise funds for these problems
• We attract high-profile advocates to maximize visibility and impact
• We create sustainable funding mechanisms with clear outcomes
• We learn systematically from each round

Phase 1: Sensemaking

Sensemaking is about identifying high-impact areas where Gitcoin can make a meaningful difference. This phase involves:

Problem Identification: Researching Ethereum’s most pressing challenges through multiple methodologies

Practical Validation: Testing whether potential domains can:

• Attract funding from sponsors and ecosystem partners
• Generate visibility through endorsement from influential figures (e.g., Vitalik Buterin)

Theory of Change: Establishing how Gitcoin’s interventions could meaningfully address these challenges

Key Diligence Questions

• Can Gitcoin (or the networks around it) add unique value in this area?
• Is this problem better solved by a network or a hierarchy?
• Is this an immediate problem or one emerging in the next 6-12 months or something further out?
• Can we realistically raise money, or have impact, for this domain?

Areas of Exploration (AoE)

The sensemaking stage is focused around “Areas of Exploration” (AoE). The first and only AoE for GG24 is:

“What are Ethereum’s biggest problems?”

Requirements for Sensemakers

Why sensemake?

• Opportunity to shape the future of the ecosystem
• Raise/deploy $$
• Opportunity to build connections
• Opportunity to build distribution

Eligibility

• All Gitcoin community members are empowered to participate in sensemaking and pitch domains for GG24.
• GTC Stewards are responsible for driving ratification of domains for GG24
• Reports must be published to the Gitcoin forum by July 18, 2025.

Report Requirements: Each sensemaking report must include (800-1,200 words total):

1. Problem & Impact (400-500 words)

• What specific Ethereum problem are you addressing?
• Why is this urgent and significant right now?
• What evidence supports the importance of this problem?
• Meaning Check: How do you know this matters deeply to users, not just captures attention or generates buzz?

2. Sensemaking Analysis (200-400 words)

• What sensemaking tools did you use?
• What sources did you use for this analysis? I.e. blog posts, ecosystem leaders, etc.
• How did you aggregate your data/findings?

3. Gitcoin’s Unique Role & Fundraising (200-400 words)

• How can Gitcoin uniquely help solve this problem?
• Why does a network better solve this than by existing organizations?
• Fundraising Reality Check: Can you raise $50K+ for this domain? Who are the likely sponsors? Have any of them committed already?

4. Success Measurement & Reflection (200-300 words)

• What specific outcomes will show success within 6 months?
• How will we measure genuine impact beyond just activity metrics?
• Satisfaction Test: What will make the Ethereum community genuinely glad we funded this domain long-term?

Evaluation Criteria: Meaning vs. Engagement

Reports will be evaluated using our “meaning awareness” framework (inspired by Kevin Owocki’s research on distinguishing authentic meaning from manufactured significance):

Primary Questions:

1. Genuine Impact: Will solving this problem create lasting value for Ethereum users, not just generate attention?
2. Deep vs. Surface: Does this address root causes or just symptoms that generate buzz?
3. Satisfaction Test: Will people be glad we funded this six months later, even if it’s no longer trending?

Secondary Validation:

4. Fundability: Can we raise $ 50 K+ with identified sponsors?
5. Unique Value: Can Gitcoin add something unique that existing solutions don’t provide?

Note: Problems that optimize for visibility or engagement without meaningful impact will be deprioritized, even if they attract attention.

Submission Format

• Length: 1,500-2,500 words total
• Format: Markdown format, published to Gitcoin forum
• Deadline: July 18, 2025
• Contact: Include TG handle for follow-up questions

Success Measurement Framework

For each domain selected for GG24, success will be measured using the following metrics:

• Milestone Success Rate = (# of milestones achieved ÷ total funded milestones). Disaggregate by domain and intervention type.

• Total funds raised (minimum $50K target per domain)

• Active Retention Rate (ARR) at 3 and 6 months: % of projects with consistent use or updates after initial funding.

• Net Impact Score (NIS): A structured 1-10 scale with open-text rationale, gathered from funders, builders, and users. Weight scores differently (e.g., users 2x). Require explanation for scores <5 or >8.

Secondary Metrics:

• Unique contributor diversity
• Track whether projects continue creating value post-funding period
• Quality of project outcomes (not just application volume)
• Long-term sustainability indicators

Note: We will not optimize for metrics that can be gamed (social media engagement, application quantity) if they don’t correlate with meaningful impact.

Timeline

Phase 1: Sensemaking - June 11, 2025 to July 18, 2025

• Week 1: Framework publication and community onboarding
• Week 2-5: Report submission period
• Week 5-6: Steward review and analysis

Phase 2: Domain Establishment - July 19 - August 1, 2025

• Week 1: Domain proposal refinement
• Week 2: GTC holder voting period
• Week 2: Final domain selection and announcement

Sensemaking Szn is open to the community to participate in, whereafter we will evaluate with GTC voting on Snapshot. Gitcoin will host sensemaking sessions through Twitter Spaces, workshops, etc. This schedule will be released on our channels as the szn progresses.

Next Steps

As we implement this framework and welcome the community’s input, we will:

1. Finalize the infrastructure for seamless round execution
2. Detail how GTC accrues value throughout this process
3. Refine the methodology for GG25 based on our learnings
4. Establish clear communication channels for ongoing feedback

Together, this approach positions Gitcoin to deliver meaningful impact in 2025 while laying the groundwork for even more ambitious efforts in the future.

Please drop your feedback!

[rohit]

I like the intentionality and bottoms-up approach in defining the domains. Irrespective of the voting results, I am certain that the reports will go a long way in driving awareness on some of the key topics across the Ethereum ecosystem.

I had a question on the area of exploration. This distinction is probably largely academic, but I thought I would clarify. I am specifically interested in exploring if the set of problems represented by (b) are eligible domains for GG24 (assuming they pass the evaluation criteria).

Statement a: “What are Ethereum’s biggest problems?”
Statement b: “What are some of the biggest problems Ethereum is primed to solve?”

As an example, climate accountability and transparent funding flows are not Ethereum’s core problems, but Ethereum’s tooling makes it uniquely suited to help solve them. There are probably a few other real-world domains like this that aren’t strictly internal to Ethereum’s protocol or developer/user experience.

Thanks again for pushing this approach forward. Excited to see how it evolves.

[openlittermap]

This is a great opportunity to reflect on the future of gitcoin & ethereum.

I have been in ethereum since the original DAO in 2015 which was probably the most inspiring movement I have ever been a part of. There was talk of funding renewable energy plants and generating passive income returns for token holders. The space was full of new and exciting concepts. I believe that gitcoin has remerged as the platform to facilitate that original sentiment and this is a wonderful opportunity for realignment.

I would like to reawaken that sense of purpose. I think ethereums biggest problems have become relevance and legitimacy. By identifying cost-effective ways to make a high and scaleable impact, we can demonstrate to the world what these emerging tools are capable of.

I would like for citizen science and the tokenisation of impact mapping to become a bigger part of the gitcoin, crypto and web3 narrative. These are 21st century ideals that require innovative 21st century frameworks like gitcoin to help seed and establish them.

I am here for it.
Desci only!

Cheers,

Seán

[maets23]

@MathildaDV

Sensemaking: Identifying high-impact problem areas through rigorous analysis and validating them through fundraising potential and visibility tests

@owocki

Why Sensemaking Matters More in Complex Environments

Traditional analytical approaches fail in complex environments because they assume predictability and linear relationships. You can’t analyze your way to understanding emergence or non-linear effects.

Sensemaking works because it assumes uncertainty and focuses on pattern recognition rather than prediction. Instead of trying to forecast the future, you try to understand current dynamics and adapt accordingly.

I am very worried. The Gitcoin Grants 24 framework, is counter to collective sensemaking as described by @owocki .

These quotes illustrate this. The Gitcoin Grants 24 is a traditional analytical approach that @ococki says “will fail because they assume predictability and linear relationships.”

I Think a new Gitcoin grants 24 framework should be developed that uses the methods described in the "Mastering Sensemaking…discussion.

Here is a possible workflow.

1. Collecting Diverse Information that answers the question: “What are ethereum’s biggest problems?”
   a. Identify a representative group from the community (Sortition), say 200 members.
   b. Ask each selected member to write paragraph long descriptions of 3 problems based on their point of view in the ethereum eco-system. (Survey or AI facilitator)

Now we would have 600 problems that are from diverse sources.

@owocki

Sensemaking assumes you need to first figure out what the problem actually is - or whether there even is a problem.

2. Based on the 600 ideas, use an algorithm to identify the highest priority problems based on a consensus point. Also determine duplicates or quasi-duplicates. This will “first figure out what the problem actually is - or whether there even is a problem.”

At the end of this process we would identify the top problems (and authors) that gitcoin should focus on,

3. then…following the Karl Weick advise run this process as a retrospective every 3 or 6 months.

@owocki

Karl Weick, one of the pioneering researchers in this field, described it as “the ongoing retrospective development of plausible images that rationalize what people are doing.”

[owocki]

I am very worried. The Gitcoin Grants 24 framework, is counter to collective sensemaking as described by @owocki .

my feeling is that sensemaking szn is pretty bottoms-up and choose your own adventure. people are free to come up with their own sensemaking process and submit them. my sense is the people are free to explore any part of the [GITCOIN 3.0] 🌳 The Epistemological Tree of GG24 - leaves, branches, trunks. lmk if i am mistaken @MathildaDV

[MathildaDV]

You’re not mistaken, no @owocki! IMO mine and Owocki’s posts are aligned. The above framework is to help guide everyone participating in sensemaking szn to have consistency amongst all reports coming in. I may be a bit unclear what in this framework you would like to change @maets23. For GG24, we decided to keep it fairly simple to start with. Beyond that, we can scale further and introduce a bit more complexity. LMK if this doesn’t make sense, though!