Scoring guidance for the Proposer

This page provides an overview of what Community Reviewers will consider when submitting their opinions

Community Reviewers will score each proposal between 1-5 for each of the three criteria listed below. They are asked to opine on whether the proposal has clearly outlined its ability to provide a solution within the context of the three criteria:

1. IMPACT

2. CAPABILITY & FEASIBILITY

3. VALUE FOR MONEY

PLEASE NOTE: Do not assume that every Community Reviewer has technical or subject matter expertise.

It is important to consider the following when formulating your proposal:

1. Does your proposal clearly show a positive IMPACT for the Cardano ecosystem and its community? IMPACT means that the work you do on this project has a real, tangible, and positive effect or influence on the ecosystem. Does the project idea seem as if it has the potential to make a difference? Is the proposed impact realistic and achievable? Does the project team give high levels of confidence and assurances they will keep the community properly updated through correct and regular reporting?

2. Is your project proposal FEASIBLE within the plan and budget submitted? As part of your proposal submission, you are asked to submit the key milestones you believe are required in order to successfully complete the project and deliver the solution you propose. If your proposal is successful, you will be required to submit a Statement of Milestones at the onboarding stage. More information on the milestone process is available here. Does your team have the skills, experience, CAPABILITY, and capacity to complete the project successfully? Will your project achieve an outstanding result? Is the plan easily understood? Are the outcomes easily verified? Are your timelines and KPIs reasonable and can they be achieved in the timeframe you propose?.

3. Does the project represent VALUE FOR MONEY for the Community? Are the funds requested properly explained, and is the amount of funding requested justified and reasonable? Has the proposal justified why treasury funds are needed? Do you have the team RESOURCES available, or are there gaps in your team that you need to hire for? Remember that all costs must be calculated in ada.

Your proposal should present a clear path to your project’s successful completion and clearly explain the impact and outputs of what you are developing (‘by developing X we will be able to do A,B,C which can be measured by 1, 2, 3, which will mean Y, Z type of positive impact for the community and Cardano’).

Use links, attachments, and any other relevant supporting evidence to show your capability and capacity to deliver the project successfully.

Each of the three scored sections of your proposal (Impact, Feasibility, Value for Money) will be marked 1-5 stars, with 1 star = very poor answer to 5 stars = great answer.

★ - VERY POOR ANSWER

★★ - POOR ANSWER

★★★ - ACCEPTABLE ANSWER

★★★★ - GOOD ANSWER

★★★★★ - GREAT ANSWER

Scoring guidance for Community Reviewers

Impact

You are reviewing the positive IMPACT this project will have on the Cardano ecosystem.

Has this project clearly demonstrated in all aspects of the proposal that it will have a positive impact on the Cardano ecosystem?

SCORE	SCORE RATIONALE
1	NO - this project has failed to demonstrate the impact it will have on the Cardano ecosystem - the impact has not been properly defined or elaborated. The Impact will be LOW - this proposal element is VERY POOR
2-3	Partially - the project has only partially demonstrated that it will have some impact on the Cardano ecosystem but there are too many gaps and omissions in the proposal. It is likely that the proposed impact is not achievable. The proposal does not clearly explain how the proposed solution will make a real difference. The Impact will be MEDIUM - this proposal element is OK
4-5	YES - this project clearly demonstrates and explains the positive impact it will have on the Cardano ecosystem, including a clear description of how the project will prove its impact with tangible, measurable evidence. The impact of this proposal is realistic and achievable. The project team has demonstrated that it will properly engage with and communicate with the community on progress. The Impact will be HIGH - this proposal element is GREAT

Capability& Feasibility

You are reviewing the CAPABILITY & FEASIBILITY of this project team and the project they are proposing.

Is this project feasible based on the proposal submitted? Does the plan and associated budget and milestones look achievable? Does the team have the skills, experience, capability and capacity to complete the project successfully?

SCORE	SCORE RATIONALE
1	NO - this project is not feasible. There is a high risk that the project will fail to complete. Feasibility is LOW - this proposal element is VERY POOR
2-3	Partially - the project proposal has only partially demonstrated feasibility. Some information is lacking around the feasibility of the project team and/or the project objectives. There is some risk that the project may not be completed successfully. Feasibility will be MEDIUM - this proposal element is OK
4-5	YES - this project is clearly feasible based on the proposal. The project team has clearly demonstrated how it has the capability, experience, capacity, and skills needed to successfully complete the project as described, including an understanding of risks and possible mitigations. Feasibility is HIGH - this proposal element is GREAT

Value for Money

You are reviewing the VALUE FOR MONEY this represents for the treasury and the community

Is the funding amount requested for this project reasonable and does it provide good Value for Money to the Treasury?

SCORE	SCORE RATIONALE
1	NO - this project is not good Value for Money. Value for Money rating is LOW - this proposal element VERY POOR
2-3	Partially - the project has only partially demonstrated the Value for Money it delivers. There is some information missing or unclear regarding how the ada will be spent and there may be some issues with tracking progress because the milestones are too generic. Value for Money rating is MEDIUM - this proposal element is OK
4-5	YES - this project clearly demonstrates good value for money and all financial aspects are clearly explained and defined. The project team is also able to demonstrate that it has the skills and capacity needed to properly manage funds. Value for Money rating is HIGH - this proposal element is GREAT