Hi community:
The Grant Support Squad was created to support the grantees in achieving their goals and take care of the the DAO treasury.
The Squad wants to communicate that we request to revoke the grant because of the management and execution of the grant. As part of this restructuring, we propose to revoke the vesting contract and make 1 payment (without step or cliff) to the grantee of the funds that correspond to April (the currently paused step)
After careful review and assessment, it has become apparent that the scope and scale of the project are beyond the capacity of a single individual to manage effectively.
Additionally, there have been instances indicating a failure to meet professionalism in project management, which has raised concerns about the successful completion of the project as outlined in the initial proposal.
In that sense, the Grant Support Squad helps the grantee to gather the information to be accountable in their project (statistics, number of attendees, budget allocated per event, budget allocated per artist, payments, etc) and demonstrate that there is no budget plan. But that does not constitute good management of the funds because we never truly gauge the real impact between budget allocation, project execution, and observing the results. Also, on several ocassions Grantee complains about the time and energy required to demonstrate accountability. This leads us to the conclusion that the grantee is too expensive for an influencer with limited reach and lacking experience in leading teams for a project as large as this.
During the last weeks, we requested information about objective things in terms of their project and this was the first answer:
After some back-and-forth, we helped gather the information; as you can see, this should be done by the grantee, who should be ready to summarize the information as the requirement said.
The grantee commited to create blogs, however, to read it the community has to pay. In other words, the DAO is paying to create the post, but then has to pay another extra fee to Medium to read it.
The course is in the final stage. However, had not been foreseen by the Grantee that they would need to pay a subscription to maintain the website/page.
These are examples, but the point that we want to make is that we recommend restructuring the project into smaller, more manageable components for the future, each with a clear goal, allocated budget, and assigned project manager or destined funds to build a team. This approach will enable better oversight, increase accountability, and improve the likelihood of successful project delivery.
As part of this restructuring, we propose to revoke the vesting contract and make 1 payment (without step or cliff) to the grantee of the funds that correspond to April (the currently paused step).
Our recommendation is to reallocate the funds might provide the necessary resources to refund and pay this month (April) and to focus on the current events that work.
We understand that this decision may come as a disappointment because there are goals that have been successfully achieved, but please know that our intention is to ensure sustainability of all projects funded through the Decentraland Grants program. We are committed to working collaboratively with the grantee to find the best path forward and support your efforts to contribute to the Decentraland community.
We genuinely appreciate the effort and enthusiasm of this grantee in creating this project. We hope that the money and experiences gained during their time in the program contribute to personal development and will be great to have her again in the future. However, in the DAO financials, we do not consider it essential to continue investing money and monitoring this project until July 2024.
The case will be elevated to the Revocations Committee (@maryana @bay @dax @MetaDogeisme ) and there is no need to pause the vesting contract since it is already paused.
Best Regards