This article was written by the Climate Coordination Network team.
The Climate Coordination Network team was brought in as a partner to Octant to help evaluate the applications for the upcoming Epoch 7 climate-focused round. Our team of reviewers quickly came together to develop a process for review and evaluation. Here is a little more about the process.
Our Team
- Jon Ruth has a background in renewable energy and sustainable development. He is passionate about projects that help regenerate the planet in the fight against the climate crisis. He has been in the crypto space since 2017 and the regenerative finance space since 2020. He has helped lead CCN in funding and supporting projects in the ReFi space since 2021.
- Tarah Stafford is a screenwriter, climate strategist and communicator and has worked on climate campaigns with many organizations including: political parties, UNEP, ECO, Tsleil-Waututh Sacred Trust, Windstar Foundation, CRED (Conversations for Responsible Economic Development), Columbia/Sony, Warner Bros and Paramount Pictures, Cool Neighborhoods, VoteClimate, Gitcoin and the Ethereum Foundation.
- Marco Gerletti has a background in communication and is a director at All For Climate, one of the biggest Fiscal Hosts for climate activists and grassroots projects in the European Union. He is also behind Solarpunk Nomads, a project that designs and crafts Electric Camper Vehicles for use as Public Goods.
- Pranav Khanna is an active contributor to the ReFi Community and has been part of initiatives at ReFi DAO and ReFibySouth. Pranav organized India's first ReFi Summit in Dec 2022 as well as a Hackathon and Green Pill Festival in March 2023. Pranav Khanna has a background in Sustainability, Circular Fashion, Plastic waste, Crypto, and Climate action.
The Process
We developed a comprehensive application along with feedback from the Octant team. This was a long application and in the future, we might streamline it a bit based on feedback from applicants. That said, this is a big funding round and we felt applicants should invest the time necessary to complete the application.The application period was two weeks, and we received 74 applications. After applications closed, we spent 2 weeks reviewing the applications based on the following criteria:
- Basic Eligibility
- Does the project meet Basic Eligibility of the program?
- Impact to date
- Has this project shown measurable impact that could include IRL work, software/tool development, product development, partnerships, contributors, community growth, GHG reductions?
- Potential Impact
- Rate is the long-term potential for impact in their category (Infrastructure, Nature/Ocean Solutions, Climate Adaptation/Resilience, Renewable Energy)?
- Potential Negative impacts or consequences?
- Rate the potential for negative impacts or consequences. Has the project done appropriate studies on its solution? Do they have appropriate team members or advisors who are experts in the area of impact? Have they explained the process, inputs, and outputs for their project? Are there any other potential negative consequences we can see?
- Scalability
- Assess the project's ability to scale its impact over time globally.
- Team Assessment
- Assess the team's background, climate expertise, and blockchain experience.
- Innovation, Uniqueness or Effectiveness
- Is the solution innovative or unique in what they do, or have they shown to be effective at what they do?
- Do they coordinate and collaborate well with others?
- Do they have a track record of building partnerships and collaboration? and/or Do they have a track record of building community and community support?
Applications were scored based on each of these categories by a minimum of three members of the team. For conflict of interests reasons, certain reviewers abstained from reviewing certain applicants in case they had close or working relationships with those applicants.
Scores were then aggregated and averaged in order to assign projects a score. The projects were sorted from high to low in order to rank them. We then went through the top 40 projects and identified 18 that we wanted to interview for additional information or clarity on their application. These interviews were 20 minutes long and conducted over the course of a week.After the interviews, reviewers went in and adjusted their scores based on the additional information gathered. We then finalized the top 20 projects based on their final scores.
This process was not an easy one, but it was one which we took very seriously, and considered it an honor to work with Octant on this process. In the end, we are excited about the projects chosen but also inspired by the other projects that did not make it into the round. The work all projects are doing is important, and we look forward to seeing them progress.
Feedback for future applications
- Be concise and specific. After writing a draft of your application, review each response and look for ways to shorten it in order to make it more impactful. This is especially important if you are using an AI tool to assist. As a project founder, it is easy to get excited about the 10,000ft view and all you hope to accomplish. The vision is important, but success is in the details.
- Read the directions, eligibility, and any other information provided by the funder/grant round operator. We had several applications that did not meet the basic eligibility. This wastes your time and the time of the reviewers.
- AI should not be the author. Use AI as a companion and tool, but make sure your voice comes through in the final submission.
- Measurable and verifiable results are important. Make sure to be clear about the impact you are making, and if you aren’t tracking everything, be clear about that too and explain why. Many projects shared high-level impacts but didn’t look at the overall impact on the climate. Take a holistic approach looking at all the inputs and outputs. Make an effort to account for the impact in terms of CO2 and other GHG reductions, improvements to soil/air/water, biodiversity or any other impacts your project is having in the communities you serve. If you are planting trees, for example, please specify why you are planting the variety of trees that you are planting rather than another type of tree: does it grow better/faster in the region you are planting? Does it also provide food for a local population that will protect it from the likelihood of being cut down. Is it drought or flood resistant? How much CO2 does it sequester compared to other available species in the area etc…
- Provide adequate references to studies and/or articles to provide context to your project application and activities. This is a step often overlooked which helps to give more legitimacy to your proposal and the work you are doing.
- Look for unintended consequences of your projects. We are. Identify them and explain how you are trying to mitigate those consequences. For example: you have a fantastic project but in order to do it you need to use some kind of fuel/energy…what is your energy source? Is it a fossil fuel? Is there an alternative? Can you work with partners to create an alternative that does not contribute to climate change? What are your options and what are you doing to explore them further?
