I want to clarify the grant revocations process and the role played by the Revocations Committee.
Before establishing the Revocations Committee, the Grant Support Squad -according to the goal when the task force was created, one of our goals was to signal to the DAO when a vesting contract needs to be revoked, based on our concerns. Our process involved gathering information, engaging with the grantee, and seeking inputs from advisors who could confirm or refute our findings. This approach served as a double-check on the information available. In that stage, funds related to 13 projects were revoked or recovered, totaling $165,119.
After nearly a year of following this procedure, our team and the community began to recognize that it concentrated a significant amount of power within a single entity. As a response to this concern, the Revocations Committee was established trhough a governance proposal. Its purpose was to review our recommendations and allow grantees to engage with an impartial third party, thus ensuring a more fair and transparent process. In this stage, funds related to 8 projects were revoked or recovered, totaling $303,450 (all made possible thanks to investigations or interventions by the GSS).
Under this new procedure, our responsibilities expanded. We continue to gather evidence from the community through the formal request form, but we conduct our investigations to compare the new evidence with our findings. This comparison is crucial as it determines whether the case is legitimate or not. If the outcome confirms the need for revocation, we send the case to the Revocations Committee for an impartial assessment and to execute a decision. During this phase, grantees can present new evidence or explore alternative arrangements and conditions to fulfill their projects.
It’s worth noting that four cases have been sent to the Revocations Committee, and in each instance, their decisions confirmed our recommendations. Vesting contracts were revoked, and in some cases, new commitments were established to continue. However, none of these cases led to the resumption of the original vesting contracts of the grants.
Here you can check all the information about the cases that had been analyzed.. Thank you @DedHeadJ for mentioned that case. here you can find all the cases.
In response to @dogman Under the new framework of the grants program, the community members can raise concerns and provide evidence. Our role goes beyond investigation; it also involves validating the credibility of these concerns and, when necessary, dismissing subjective comments.
Also, I agree with you that there is room for improvement in how the DAO funds projects, especially when assessing the value of the project presented in terms of technology and community gathering. During this last grant, we have implemented the field of impact metrics in the grants request form, as a strategy to be able to measure the value of the program and be able to make better investments as a DAO in the future. We are always gathering input and making adjustments with the objective of making a better grants program.