Gitcoin Media and Tech grants both need to be separated on the basis of matching algorithms. Media mostly requires fixed funding except when its expanding or its combination of media+tech project, whereas tech projects require more and more funding as they grow rapidly or succeeding.
So there should be a cap on maximum amount in media funds and also a mechanism to give equal or proportional minimum grant if they are eligible. I suggest media grants to break in two components ( CLR + Fix ) in which fixed funds can be a constant like 25% of total or variable by creating a Fixed grant inside Media and include it in CLR and whatever it gets through CLR then distributed it. The fixed component will be given to only eligible projects.
Example - 100k total grants , 50 projects
- 25% is reserved for fixed
- So 25k is for fixed grant given equally or proportionally
1- Let's consider if it gets distributed equally
Suppose all 50 projects are eligible for fixed grant
- So everyone receives 25k/50 = 500 USD fix
- Rest 75 k will go through CLR matching algorithm so results would be somewhat like
- Project 1- 15k
- Project 2- 13k
- Project 3- 10k
.......
Project 50 - 500
There can also be a cap on max amount raised, such as no project can get more than say 30% of total grant or a fixed amount say 20k because without cap results can be like
- Project 1- 40k
- Project 2- 5k
- Project 3- 2k
Project 4 to project 50 - 500
2- Let's consider if fixed grant given proportionally
Suppose project A has put 2k per month requirement and project B has put 1k as monthly requirements. So, they will receive grants from fixed funds in 2:1.
And project B has put 1k as monthly requirements. So, they will receive grants from fixed funds in 2:1.
If A gets 500 then B will get 250.
Every project will get an amount proportional to the per month requirements. In proportional fixed matching, Projects has to be screened during submission to check if per month requirements asked by projects are fair or too stretched just to exploit the mechanism
Fixed grant can be variable also, instead of fixing a percentage of total or a fixed sum, fixed grant can itself be put as grant and go through CLR matching, so total grants will become now 51
Suppose Fixed grant amassed 20k in CLR matching , so instead of 25k now 20k will be distributed as fixed grant --
- Project 1- 24k
- Project 2(Fixed grant,will be redistributed to other projects)- 20k
- Project 3- 13k
- Project 4- 8k
........ Project 50 - 500
Project 51- 400 ( 20k distributed equally to 50 projects)
What will happen when projects will keep increasing but grants don't increase in same proportion, remains constant or decreases
That's where eligibility come -
All old projects will be monitored on per month or 3 months (whatever suits) basis etc and any ineligible project will lose fixed funding. It will get only CLR matching or none.
Some reasons for ineligibility can be -
1- Already got very good funding in last rounds and will not require further fixed funding for quite a time, they can be included back when need arise
2- They have not fulfilled the projects roadmap or community does not want to continue with this project ( it's a scam or progress is slow or no work)
Also it has to be make sure that if any of the projects are capable of generating revenue or profit they have to put a part(in percentage or fixed) of that back in to the grants, so as to keep increasing grants pool.
Neverthless CLR Quadratic funding is a great experiment and can prove to be a great sustainable funding model if successful.
Reference: