Climate Solutions Review Results: https://bit.ly/gg19ClimateSolutionsReviews
Form to Provide Additional Information: https://forms.gle/PuDSFNvJ5rP8caio9
The Climate Coordination Network (CCN) is a team of seven people from different countries/regions who share a mission to help fund and support early stage climate projects. The team helped manage multiple Gitcoin climate rounds — and also many Web3 community rounds — and we are committed to the newly decentralized Climate Solutions Program.
This document outlines our grant review process, a crucial step to ensuring that the funds we allocate are used effectively and contribute to addressing climate change. Our reviews are conducted by an experienced team of round operators from multiple regions who are committed to supporting impactful projects. We are continually improving this process and welcome suggestions and input.
For GG19, here is how we are evaluating Climate Solutions Round grant proposals:
Rating Scale
There are four categories in our Climate Solutions Eligibility Criteria: 1. Age of project; 2. Climate Solution Focus; 3. Update Provided; 4. Viability.
Grant proposals will receive a numerical rating for each of these categories from at least 2 members of our Climate Solutions Review team. If the team members disagree on whether or not the grant should be approved, then a third team member will evaluate the proposal. Here are the meanings of the rating scale:
- No Brainer (5): The proposal aligns perfectly with the round Eligibility Criteria and demonstrates a clear path to positive impact.
- OK (4): The proposal is good and shows potential, but may require some refinement or further clarification.
- Doubts (3): There are uncertainties or concerns in the proposal that need to be addressed before approval.
- Noise (2): The proposal lacks clarity or a clear plan, making it challenging to evaluate its potential impact.
- Totally No (1): The proposal does not align with our mission or lacks a viable plan for impact.
Multiple Reviewers
- Each grant proposal is reviewed by at least 2 members from our group of 7 reviewers. This diverse group brings different perspectives and expertise to the evaluation process.
Reviewer Independence
The CCN team is composed of people who are committed to taking action to address our global climate crisis; therefore, many of us have our own projects and grant proposals. We believe not only in our individual initiatives, but also in the urgent need to build, support and scale climate projects in every corner of the world. This is why we are also involved in the Climate Solutions Program, and in the interest of transparency, we would like to clearly state that:
- Reviewers do not review their own grant proposals to maintain objectivity and prevent conflicts of interest.
- Reviewers do not evaluate grants they have a personal connection with to ensure impartiality.
Constructive Feedback
- Some notes will be included in cases where comments are provided to help grantees understand the concerns and areas for improvement. This feedback is intended to be constructive and supportive and we hope that grantees will address the concerns and then consider reapplying to future grants rounds as applicable.
Appeals Process
Our grantee review process aims to maintain transparency, fairness, and accountability while ensuring that our funds are allocated to projects that have the potential to make a meaningful climate impact. We appreciate the dedication of our reviewers in this important endeavor. If after the review your project is rejected you will be able to learn more by reviewing this doc (link soon) and we will also be sending emails with the reason for rejection and a form to provide additional information.