ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRS
1
Kusama - Treasury Proposal Audit
2
Funded by:
OpenGovernance Proposal #67
3
Auditor:CoinStudio
4
GRADE:Project name:
5
0Meets CriteriaProponent:
6
Proposal URL:Insert URL link
7
Audit date:Insert Date
8
Requested funding KSM/USD:KSMKusama Treasury status:KSM
9
USD
Requested % of Treasury :
#DIV/0!
10
11
Average Score per CategoryTotal Score per Category
12
Grade Criteria Legend
13
Excellent>=15
14
Above Average>5
15
Meets Criteria>-5
16
Needs Improvement>-15
17
Unacceptable<=-15
18
19
Score Criteria Legend
20
Excellent2
21
Above Average1
22
Meets Criteria0
23
Needs Improvement-1
24
Unacceptable-2
25
26
General Comments:
27
28
29
DescriptionScore criteriaComments
30
210-1-2(explain reasons why score differs from default score 0)
31
1. Information
32
1.1 Project description and category, requested allocation and referenda origin call clear and accurate.
33
1.2 Discussion topic open for a minimum period of one week. All the questions and concerns addressed and answered.
34
Score0
35
2. Context
36
2.1 Project context and background presented in a clear terms which can be fully understood and assessed.
37
Score0
38
3. Problem
39
3.1 The problem the proposal is trying to solve is explained in a clean and concise terms.
40
Score0
41
4. Proposal
42
4.1 Proposal solution is described with a sufficient amount of information.
43
4.2 Similar projects or proposals listed and explained how they differ from this proposal
44
4.3 Milestones to achieve the goals of the project are clearly defined.
45
4.4 Milestones are split into the smaller detailed work tasks with deliverables, resources and description.
46
4.5 Timeline with tasks/activities listed in a chronological order is clear and accurate.
47
Score0
48
5. Budget
49
5.1 Budget is clear and transparent and broken down into direct cost categories.
50
5.2 Budget costs are comparable to the similar treasury proposals.
51
5.3 Final payment calculations and conditions are in line with proposed milestones.
52
Score0
53
6. Deliverables
54
6.1 Key deliverables are clear and outline progress towards the proposed solution.
55
6.2 Project objectives/success criteria is clearly defined with measurable targets where possible.
56
6.3 Awareness of known conditions that may affect the project schedule, milestones, determined budget or project timeline.
57
6.4 Reporting process is defined to inform the community about the progress and current status of the project.
58
6.5 Clear communication strategy - where, when, what and who is going to present the information to the community and other relevant parties.
59
Score0
60
7. Team
61
7.1 Team members that will actively work on the project are introduced with all relevant information.
62
7.2 Reputation from previous involvements in the Kusama/Polkadot grants/bounties/tasks/treasury proposals.
63
Score0
64
8. Overall
65
8.1 General quality of the proposal content (i.e. can you make an educated opinion on the proposal in less than 5 minutes?)
66
8.2 How important and valuable is the presented problem and proposal solution to the ecosystem.
67
8.3 Promised work on defined budget presents a good ROI for community.
68
8.4 Other remarks
69
Score0