DAO Grants Program — Quarterly insights

Learnings from the Grant Program after six months of its last change in the framework.

The DAO’s Grants Program is one of the best vehicles to help grow the Decentraland ecosystem. A community vote approved the current categories; now is a good time to have a preliminary analysis and propose improvements.

By reviewing the results of Q2 that run on April, May, and June 2023, and excluding Q1 as it only included March 2023 when the changes from the program were executed, some conclusions and questions can be drawn:

• The funds were not used in the expected categories.
• The current categories are too broad and sometimes misused.
• Each category should have better requirements and impact measurements.
• Improve the documentation regarding the Category’s requirements
• Does the Grant Program need a new Category?

The funds were not used in the expected categories:

Making an Analysis of Q2, we noticed the following data points:

• 1st request grants: eight (8) Grants were funded for the first time allocating to this cases $375.925 DAI
• Wrong Category grants: from those, four (4) Grants requested funds under a wrong Category allocating $287.700 DAI
• From those four (4), one (1) Grantee requested a Grant under a wrong Category because the correct one was out of budget (Accelerator): $110.000 DAI
• Grant Renewals:
• Renewals: four (4) Grants requested funds for the second time for the same project they first executed, allocating $352.100 DAI to these renewals.
• Second Renewals: two (2) Core Unit Grants requested funds for the third time to serve the community, allocating $213.100 DAI
• Funds recovered: one (1) grantee has stepped down from their grant and wasn’t funded again during Q2, which allocated $110.000 DAI back to the DAO.

Disclaimer: The following is a snapshot taken on July 3rd, after the end of Q2. However, four grants, which started in Q2, and will finish in the next week, can change these allocations of budgets.

Another view:

Link: Pivot Table — Graphic -

• Platform: 47.7% was used to finance projects. However, considering the misallocated $, 19.83% ($177,100) is the actual percentage that has been requested.
• In-world Content: 88.65% was requested ($395,900)
• Accelerator: 96.96% was requested ($150,000)
• Core Unit: 63.62% was requested ($213.100)
• Social Media Content: 4.5% was requested ($5,025)
• Documentation: 57.77% was used to finance projects. However, considering the misallocated $, 0% ($0) is the actual percentage that has been requested.
• Sponsorship: 0% was requested.

Finding: We should ask the Community through a governance proposal to redistribute the allocation of funds per category in our Grants Program budgeting system. For example, providing more funds to the Accelerator Category and fewer funds to those not used.

The current categories are too broad and sometimes misused.

During Q2, we detected grant proposals that could fit into two or more categories. We need to define the categories better, for them to be self-explanatory.

One example is the type of grant that aims to onboard new members to Decentraland for specific target audiences, like DCL Brazil. In this case, the grantee requested a Documentation Grant, which was not compliant with the Category but was valuable for community building and onboarding new members. There are also valuable DAO members that make community-building experiences and events, like ABC Decentraland or DCL Brazil, who share knowledge with newcomers and ignite interaction among Decentraland users and DAO members.

On the other hand, in the near past, the community has voted YES for the Ambassador Program, and one of the principal objectives is to empower community members.

Finding: We should create a DAO governance proposal to add the Community Building category, to empower community members and, in partnership with the Facilitation Squad to define requirements and performance metrics, redistribute the percentages of the allocation of the Grants Program budgeting system.

This category would be dedicated to recognizing and supporting individuals or groups who actively contribute to the growth, development, and engagement of the Decentraland community, fostering collaboration and positive experiences within the metaverse.

As a kickstart, the Grant Support Squad made an analysis. The following could be used as a first draft:

The working group should define the Requirements for Community Building Category, such as:

• Demonstrated commitment to community building within Decentraland: Proven track record of organizing and facilitating community events, initiatives, or educational programs.
• Define the criteria of relevant participation in community forums, social media groups, or other channels to provide support and guidance to community members.
• The proposal should include the development of resources, tutorials, or guides that help onboard and engage new community members.
• The proposal should include how they will collaborate with other community builders, Core Units, or projects within Decentraland to foster cross-community partnerships.

The working group should define the Performance Metrics:

• Number of community members engaged or impacted through Community Building initiatives.
• Feedback and testimonials from community members regarding the value and impact of their contributions.
• Attendance and participation metrics in community events, workshops, or educational programs.
• Growth and activity metrics of the community platforms, forums, or social media groups facilitated by the Community Builders.
• Number of successful cross-community collaborations or partnerships facilitated by community builders.

What is the difference between this Community Building Category and the current In World Content?

Basically, the Category In World Content is for developing builds in-world that bring experiences to Decentraland, and doesn’t support gatherings of the communities which is essential to keep engagement over Decentraland.

Each category should have better requirements and impact measurements.

As the Grants Framework launched in March 2023 states, each category has its own requirements for the proposals to be set, and impact metrics. During this Q2, three (3) projects have finished. Two (2) from the In-world Category (Meeple Madness and Second Escape Room) and one from Platform Category.

Both In-world grantees have asked for $1500 USD, and they have demonstrated to comply with their proposals. Nevertheless, the Performance Metrics for the category are “Newly populated land, Active Users, Returning Users, Time on Scene, events created, and number of attendees to the event.” In the case of Meeple Madness, they have minted wearables in-world, igniting interactions, and engagement and providing a fun experience to our virtual world. So we are adding minted wearables and claimed wearables as part of the metrics to this category, to include this on the impact measurements on how the grants program adds value to Decentraland.

The Core Unit Category: We would like to define common impact metrics that are suitable for all the Core Units, based on their work. So far, each Core Unit defines their own metrics based on the contributions they make to the DAO, and they are very different from one another. We’ll put a pin on this topic as we are waiting on the strategic planning that a DAO working group is designing, so we can define metrics for this category that align with those areas of focus defined by the community.

Improve the documentation regarding the Category’s requirements.

The Category Documentation: as we started to work with the new framework of the grant program, we noticed that the category says:

“Creation of free educational content about how to contribute, build and play on Decentraland. The content should be published on official mediums to be found and preserved for posterity.”

• Requirements:
• The topic shouldn’t be already well-covered in the official documentation.
• Provide examples of documentation done in the past.
• Describe the format of documentation to be produced.
• To be published in official mediums.
• Performance Metrics:
• The number of contributions to Decentraland Documentation
• The number of contributions to the Awesome Repository.”

The description could have various interpretations. However if we analyze the requirements and the performance metrics, the spirit of this category is clear. This should cover document topics that shouldn’t be already well-covered in the official documentation.

Finding: We need to define better what Official Medium means and add it to the Grants Program Documentation category.

Oficial mediums are those managed by the Decentraland DAO and Foundation, such as:

• Decentraland Foundation Blog
• Awesome Repository
• Decentraland Documentation
• Decentraland DAO youtube channel / social media
• Decentraland Foundation Youtube Channel / social media

The impact metrics say “The number of contributions to the Awesome Repository,” and the guidelines on “How to contribute” to the Awesome Repository are written in Contributing.md.

Learnings: according to the guidelines, the content should be written in English to ensure the majority of the users-audience, and this should be included in the requirements.

Also, the number of contributions to Decentraland Documentation means the number of pull requests made. The idea is that the person making the pull request could be reasonable for the number of requests. The Grant Support Squad will add this to the Grants Program Documentation to make it explicit for grants in the future to avoid submissions in the wrong category.
Last but not least, a pitch proposal is waiting to be escalated to a tender to translate documentation.

Conclusion:

After analyzing the Decentraland DAO Grants program complete Q2, several insights and areas for improvement have emerged. The funds allocated to grants were not always used in the expected categories, indicating a need for a redistribution of funds. The current categories were found to be too broad and occasionally misused, highlighting the necessity of better defining the categories to avoid ambiguity and misclassification of projects.

One notable observation was the importance of community builders and their valuable contributions to the Decentraland ecosystem. To recognize and support these individuals and groups, a new category called “Community Building” was proposed inside the Grant Support Squad team, and we are proposing it through a governance proposal. This category aims to empower community members and foster engagement, collaboration, and positive experiences within the Decentraland. Defining clear requirements and performance metrics for this category will be crucial to ensure its effectiveness. The Grant Support Squad and the Facilitation Squad should collaborate to define the requirements and performance metrics for the new Community Building category and ensure a balanced allocation of the Grants Program budget.

Improving the documentation regarding category requirements is another important step. Clarifying the definition of “official mediums” for publishing content and specifying that the topics covered should be new and not already well-documented. Additionally, the inclusion of explicit language stating that content should be written in English to be explicit and avoid grant proposals in the wrong category will be beneficial..

Furthermore, the need for better-defined requirements and impact measurements for each category was emphasized. This includes the Core Unit category, where common impact metrics need to be established to align with the strategic planning efforts of the DAO.

In conclusion, by addressing these identified areas for improvement, the Decentraland DAO Grants Program can become more effective, better aligned with community needs, and facilitate the growth and development of the Decentraland ecosystem. Regular reviews, community feedback, and ongoing evaluation will be essential to improve and adapt the program to achieve its goals continuously.

The Grant Support Squad