What should I expect from the review process?

• After you submit your application, a notion page will automatically be created for it which is only visible to the grants committee. The committee regularly reviews new submissions, granting view access to the email provided and performing an initial evaluation to filter spam and low-quality applications.
• If passed through initial evaluation, your grant will be appointed a champion who will serve as the primary point of contact between you and the committee. The champion will assist you in optimizing your application and assist the committee in gathering information required to reach a decision.
• After sufficient information has been gathered, your grant will move to formal evaluation, where committee members and the champion write opinions as to whether or not your grant should be approved or rejected.
• The committee will then vote, the outcome of which will determine the final decision on your application.
• If the committee approves your grant, the committee will contact you to finalize the grant agreement and facilitate payment. If the committee rejects your grant, grantees must reapply - though they are encouraged to do so only after incorporating any feedback received from the committee.

How do I know my application is being considered fairly?

• Accountability and transparency are priorities of the grants committee. Committee members write opinions as to whether they believe a grant should be approved or rejected, which will be available for your review. If you have any questions or concerns you can contact the committee via email at [email protected] or a member of the DAO council.

What sort of projects would likely not be considered for grant funding?

• Our priority is to fund the development of technological and social infrastructure that will allow the community to self-organize more effectively over the long term. As such, the grants committee will prioritize public or common goods that benefit the SuperRare and CryptoArt ecosystems broadly. Determination of that is up to the committee’s interpretation of each application.
• Grants should have clear success criteria, and as such projects with ambiguous milestones are less likely to be approved, especially if the project requires substantial resources or time.

Is there a time limit for how long the project lasts?

• Projects should have clear success criteria that can be evaluated by the committee. Lengthy projects should be broken down into separate grant proposals, or smaller milestones. The shorter and more realistic a grants timeline is, and the more clearly defined its documentation, the more likely it is to be approved.

What qualifications (if any) are needed from the applicant for them to be deemed suitable to carry out a project?

• It should be clear to the committee that the applicant(s) possess the subject matter expertise, resources, and general ability to complete the project. This will be primarily determined via the application itself, though the committee may also request interviews in order to better understand the proposed project.

What happens after the completion of the project?

• The appointed champion, or a substitute determined by the committee, will continue to be available after the grant is approved. Most grants will split funds between an initial payment and further payouts contingent on milestone or project completion. Grantees should maintain active communication with the committee while working on the project. It is the applicant’s responsibility to request milestone review, at which point the committee will evaluate whether relevant success criteria have been met and whether payment for that milestone should be given.