The Cycle 13 Preliminary Review has been completed. Cycle 13 showed strong turnout: the community submitted 106 proposals (compared to 151 proposals for the entirety of Season 3).
The Grants Council congratulates the 49 proposers that will be considered for Final Review.
Here is the list of proposals for Final Review organized by Sub-Committee:
Builders Sub-Committee Final Review List
Experiments Sub-Committee Final Review List
Over the next two weeks, the Grants Council will complete review of each of the final grants proposals. During the Final Review, each reviewer in a given sub-committee will consider each remaining proposal and assign it a score. After each proposal has been scored by each reviewer, the sub-committee will rank the list by average score and choose the number of proposals (“n”) that will receive a grant. Proposals 1-n will be finalists eligible to receive grants.
Proposers will be permitted to make edits to their proposals based on reviewer feedback; however, all edits should be made by Friday, July 7, to ensure reviewers have time to consider any updates. Proposers should make sure to comment to their CharmVerse proposal confirming that they have made updates in order to notify reviewers as well.
Significant attention will be paid to all factors listed on the rubric. The Council will look to grant size requests and attendant plans, along with milestones, particularly closely. Proposers will be asked to identify their Collective Trust Tier and are reminded that Experiments grants greater than 150k OP require a majority vote of all nine council reviewers (rather than a simple majority vote of the relevant sub-committee) to pass, which presents a higher bar than the typical sub-committee process.
Cycle 13 Preliminary Roundup
Of the 106 proposals received for Cycle 13:
- 58 were for Builders Grants, and
- 48 were for for Experiments Grants
Both Sub-Committees worked hard to filter the proposals to determine which would be viable for Preliminary Review. Of the initial proposals:
- 50 proposals passed Intake Filter for Builders (~86% pass rate), and
- 32 proposals passed Intake Filter for Experiments (~67% pass rate)
Relative to Cycle 11, the number of Builders grants increased significantly (~49%). The sharp increase in Builders may be the results of this Season’s emphasis on novel use cases, which may attract projects in earlier stages. Experiments grants increased by 23%.
Intake Filter passage rate for Experiments decreased by ~12%. While many high-caliber proposals were included in the submissions, some proposals were drafted without an eye to the emphasis on novelty and tangible use cases; others were written without attention to the rules. We expect to see more speculative proposals in Experiments given the higher grant thresholds; accordingly, the Grants Council holds these proposals to a high standard.
A notable theme of this Cycle’s preliminary review was the professionalism and focus of the grants reviewers. Despite a surge in proposals, all proposals were reviewed within the allotted time, and the sub-committees had substantive considerations and recommendations for the rubrics and review processes for the next two cycles. In addition to the workload of reviewing proposals for other intents, it is worth acknowledging the difficulty of making it through more than 100 additional proposals as part of reviewers’ elected duties.
The Grants Council will notify the proposers whose proposals did not pass intake or make it to the Final Review within the next week. The Council will aim to deliver high-level observations and rubric scores within that time. As with other Cycles, the focus will turn to the Final Review. Nevertheless, proposers who feel they can improve their proposals are welcome to submit for Cycle 14. Proposal forms for Cycle 14 will be live by July 14 or earlier.