Cycle 10 Grant Review Roundup

The Grants Council congratulates 31 proposers for reaching the Cycle 10 Final Review.

Over the next two weeks, these proposals will be assessed by each reviewer in the relevant Sub-Committee (Growth Experiments or Builders). Each reviewer will review each proposal and assign a score based on the Sub-Committee’s rubric. Proposals will be ranked based on the average of the reviewer scores in order to guide the Council’s determination of grant recipients. Reviewers will reach out to proposers during this time to work toward ensuring the proposals include discrete milestones that enable the Council to determine whether grantees have performed the actions outlined in their proposal sufficiently.

Here is the list of proposals for Final Review organized by Sub-Committee:

Builders Sub-Committee Final Review List

Atomic Links

Attestation Station Interface

Clique

DeFunds

Edge Wallet

ENS Wildcard Domains

fam.

Front-running Protection

Karma

Longship

Marsbase

Mava

Metronomo

Optimism Educational Video

Pairwise

Pass On

Poolz

Praise

rotki

Growth Experiments Sub-Committee Final Review List

Crypto LDFM

KyberSwap

Mux Protocol

Nested

Opweave

Parcel

Premia

Rubicon

Sonne Finance

Thales

The Optimistic Series

Via Protocol

Cycle 10 Roundup

We received 73 proposals for Cycle 10. Of the proposals:

  • 26 were for Builders Grants,
  • 46 were for for Growth Experiments Grants, and
  • 1 was not updated to include a grant type

Both Sub-Committees worked hard to filter the proposals to determine which would be viable for Preliminary Review. Of the proposals received, 49 passed through the Intake Filter to receive a Preliminary Review. Of the Preliminary Review proposals:

  • 24 were for Builders Grants, and
  • 25 were for Growth Experiments Grants

The primary reasons for attrition between the Intake Filter and Preliminary Review were (a) incomplete proposals that were not updated; (b) grant size requests that exceeded the Cycle maximum and did not merit an increase in this Cycle; and (c) violations of the no sale rule. A preponderance of proposals that did not meet the minimum standards were directed to the Growth Experiments Sub-Committee. This may be due to the greater grant size maximum, which could draw moonshot applications.

All proposers who applied to Cycle 10 are eligible for consideration in Cycle 11. The Council will publish guidance on Cycle 11 submissions aimed at clarifying the parameters for each Sub-Committee’s assessments and at eliciting responses most relevant to each Sub-Committee’s mission. Guidance and any changes to the proposal submission process will be published on February 17.

The Grants Council is here for any proposer who wants to seek greater clarity on the Cycle 10 process or to seek information about Cycle 11. To access more information on the grants process for Season 3, the best place to begin is this post, which outlines the resources available to the community.

38 Likes

Thank you for the update!

1 Like

Thank you for the update, is there any action required for the applicants on the final review list?

1 Like

No action item on your behalf. It is worth making sure that your contact information on the post is the best contact information for the reviewer to reach out to.

4 Likes

Thank you for the info!

1 Like

Thanks for the update!

re: Growth Experiments
One of the highlights of the committee review process is the evaluation rubric. Perhaps the committee could release their scored rubrics to projects that passed the intake filter? It would be an efficient and valuable way to provide feedback, particularly for projects did not fall into any of the primary reasons for attrition mentioned above.

(a) incomplete proposals that were not updated; (b) grant size requests that exceeded the Cycle maximum and did not merit an increase in this Cycle; and (c) violations of the no sale rule.

4 Likes

Congratulations to all the protocols for making it this far, we’ll be cheering you guys and supporting the growth of this ecosystem and keep building on OP

Regards
Team DefiEdge

3 Likes

Contribution to all the nominees! For projects who didn’t reach the final review, it would be very helpful and efficient to get feedback from the committee with identified areas for improvements.

1 Like

We will be making review rubrics + intake results available this week to help those applying for Cycle 11.

6 Likes

Hi Danelund.eth,

Your post is awesome. Save a lot of time!!!

Would you be able to estimate when the sub-committee will have funding decisions for the public?

Thanks,
X

1 Like

Intake Filter and Preliminary Review Forms have been posted to the Council’s site, here.

1 Like

Thanks for the update, fingers crossed!

1 Like

@WizPrince1 this is the Grant Roundup for cycle 10.

There is a discussion in the Grants channel of discord for OP governance you may want to take a look at in reference to the rubric scores for NFT projects.
Some valuable information and feedback for those who did not make it on the list and wish to revise their grant with the help of the governance members for the next cycle is being provided via discord with one on one meetings.
Also if you wish to setup a meeting before the next submission date on the 2nd of March for cycle 11please let me know. I am available if you want to brainstorm ideas together.

1 Like

Thanks @FractalVisions for providing me this information. Brainstorming ideas together is a great idea and i look forward to that! We can set the meeting as soon as possible, whichever way is fine by me.

1 Like

I tried to find you on Twitter but was having a hard time. Please connect with me via my bio here.

1 Like

Alright, @FractalVisions I just sent you a DM on twitter pls check right away.

1 Like

looking good. thanks for keeping us in the loop with this update.

2 Likes