VBRLteam

Project Owner

Asia Regional Community Hub

Expert Rating

n/a

Type Community RFP
Funding Request n/a
RFP Guidelines Deep Funding Community Hubs

Details locked. Check back later to view.
Details locked.Check back later to view.
Details locked.Check back later to view.

Overview

VBRL proposes to establish an Asia Regional Community Hub at its Chiang Mai, Thailand location, aiming to foster a vibrant and engaged community within the Deep Funding ecosystem. The hub will serve as a regional epicenter for education, collaboration, and proposal development, aligning with Deep Funding's mission to decentralize funding opportunities and expand its reach in Asia. Our hub will address key regional challenges, including time zones, language barriers, and cultural nuances, ensuring a more inclusive environment for Asian contributors. Through regular events, workshops, and mentoring sessions, we aim to expand Deep Funding's reach and cultivate quality proposals from the region.

RFP Guidelines

Deep Funding Community Hubs

Internal Proposal Review

Type Community RFP
Total RFP Funding $50,000 USD
Proposals 40
Awarded Projects n/a

Rafael_Cardoso

Jan. 8, 2025

Rafael_Cardoso

rfp owner

Deep Funding Community Hubs

Internal Proposal Review

Tags:
Community and Collaboration

We are seeking individuals to lead and manage Deep Funding Community Hub initiatives. These initiatives aim to establish and foster decentralized Deep Funding Communities centered around specific topics or areas of interest where a dedicated community would be valuable.

Examples of potential hubs include:

Sustainability Community Hub,
Women in AI Community Hub,
Africa Community Hub,
Asia Community Hub
French-Speaking Hub.
Among many other options

The primary objective of these Community Hubs is to expand Deep Funding in a decentralized way. This involves engaging new members, providing information, sharing best practices for submitting funding proposals and building strong, collaborative communities. Regular online meetings will also be an integral part of these initiatives to connect, grow, and support the community.

View Full RFP

Examples of potential hubs include:

Sustainability Community Hub,
Women in AI Community Hub,
Africa Community Hub,
Asia Community Hub
French-Speaking Hub.
Among many other options

Proposal Description

Proposal Details Locked…

In order to protect this proposal from being copied, all details are hidden until the end of the submission period. Please come back later to see all details.

Total Milestones
4
Total Budget
$10,800_USD
Last Updated
5 Feb 2025

Milestone 1 - Foundation Building and Infrastructure

Description

Establish core physical and digital infrastructure at VBRL Chiang Mai facility. Configure hybrid event space, set up multilingual communication platforms, and launch initial community engagement. Focus on creating foundation for sustainable growth in Southeast Asian tech ecosystem.

Deliverables

Configured hybrid event space with streaming/recording setup Established multilingual community platforms (Telegram/Discord) Created initial content library in Thai, English, Mandarin Completed community guidelines and management systems Launched partnerships with local tech communities Organized inaugural hybrid event

Budget

$2,700 USD

Success Criterion

Active community of 50+ members Successful inaugural event with 20+ attendees 2+ established local partnerships Functional multilingual platforms Complete technical infrastructure 80% positive event feedback

Milestone 2 - Growth and Program Implementation

Description

Scale community engagement through regular events, workshops, and content creation. Implement mentorship program and begin proposal development support. Focus on building active participation across Asian time zones.

Deliverables

Regular event series implementation: Mentorship program launch Multilingual educational content Partnership expansion Workshop curriculum development Community engagement programs

Budget

$2,700 USD

Success Criterion

15% monthly member growth Average 20+ attendees per event 5+ active mentorship pairs 3+ new regional partnerships 75% member participation rate Established content creation pipeline

Milestone 3 - Proposal Pipeline Development

Description

Establish comprehensive proposal development support system. Create structured programs for guiding community members through Deep Funding proposals. Implement feedback and review mechanisms.

Deliverables

Proposal development workshop series Case study database creation Peer review system implementation Mentor network expansion Documentation in multiple languages Proposal templates and guides

Budget

$2,700 USD

Success Criterion

3+ quality proposals submitted 10+ members in proposal pipeline Established review process Active mentor engagement Comprehensive resource library Strong workshop attendance

Milestone 4 - Integration and Long-term Sustainability

Description

Focus on Circle member development, establishing sustainable growth mechanisms, and ensuring long-term community health. Create pathways for leadership development and regional expansion.

Deliverables

Circle member onboarding process Leadership development program Best practices documentation Sustainability plan Regional collaboration framework Performance analytics system

Budget

$2,700 USD

Success Criterion

Self-sustaining community processes Documented growth strategies Strong engagement metrics Clear succession planning Replicable community model

Join the Discussion (0)

Expert Ratings

Reviews & Ratings

No Reviews Avaliable

Check back later by refreshing the page.

The weighted average of the 4 perspectives Overall

0.0
Each RFP defines a maximum allowed budget, but teams can differentiate their proposal by offering a solution with a lower budget or a wider scope.Value for money

0.0
This rating indicates compliance to 'Must haves' but also adaptation of 'Nice to haves' and Non-functional requirements defined in the RFP.Compliance with RFP requirements

0.0
RFPs will offer varying degrees of freedom. This rating indicates the quality of the team's specific solution ideas, the provided details, and the reviewer's confidence in the team's ability to execute.Solution details and team expertise

0.0

Review Headline

0 /50 chars

Review Summary

0 /5000 chars

The weighted average of the 4 perspectives Overall

0.0
Each RFP defines a maximum allowed budget, but teams can differentiate their proposal by offering a solution with a lower budget or a wider scope.Value for money

0.0
This rating indicates compliance to 'Must haves' but also adaptation of 'Nice to haves' and Non-functional requirements defined in the RFP.Compliance with RFP requirements

0.0
RFPs will offer varying degrees of freedom. This rating indicates the quality of the team's specific solution ideas, the provided details, and the reviewer's confidence in the team's ability to execute.Solution details and team expertise

0.0

Review Headline

0 /50 chars

0 /5000 chars

Warning: Adding final group rating for this project will prevent expert users from adding new or editing existing reviews

Reviews and Ratings in Deep Funding are structured in 4 categories. This will ensure that the reviewer takes all these perspectives into account in their assessment and it will make it easier to compare different projects on their strengths and weaknesses.

Overall (Primary)
This is an average of the 4 perspectives. At the start of this new process, we are assigning an equal weight to all categories, but over time we might change this and make some categories more important than others in the overall score. (This may even be done retroactively).

Feasibility (secondary)

This represents the user\'s assessment of whether the proposed project is theoretically possible and if it is deemed feasible. E.g. A proposal for nuclear fission might be theoretically possible, but it doesn’t look very feasible in the context of Deep Funding.

Viability (secondary)

This category is somewhat similar to Feasibility, but it interprets the feasibility against factors such as the size and experience of the team, the budget requested, and the estimated timelines. We could frame this as: “What is your level of confidence that this team will be able to complete this project and its milestones in a reasonable time, and successfully deploy it?”
Examples:

A proposal that promises the development of a personal assistant that outperforms existing solutions might be feasible, but if there is no AI expertise in the team the viability rating might be low.
A proposal that promises a new Carbon Emission Compensation scheme might be technically feasible, but the viability could be estimated low due to challenges around market penetration and widespread adoption.

Desirability (secondary)

Even if the project team succeeds in creating a product, there is the question of market fit. Is this a project that fulfills an actual need? Is there a lot of competition already? Are the USPs of the project sufficient to make a difference?

Example:

Creating a translation service from, say Spanish to English might be possible, but it\'s questionable if such a service would be able to get a significant share of the market

Usefulness (secondary)

This is a crucial category that aligns with the main goal of the Deep Funding program. The question to be asked here is: “To what extent will this proposal help to grow the Decentralized AI Platform?”

For proposals that develop or utilize an AI service on the platform, the question could be “How many API calls do we expect it to generate” (and how important / high-valued are these calls?).
For a marketing proposal, the question could be “How large and well-aligned is the target audience?” Another question is related to how the budget is spent. Are the funds mainly used for value creation for the platform or on other things?
Examples:

A metaverse project that spends 95% of its budget on the development of the game and only 5 % on the development of an AI service for the platform might expect a low ‘usefulness’ rating here.

A marketing proposal that creates t-shirts for a local high school, would get a lower ‘usefulness’ rating than a marketing proposal that has a viable plan for targeting highly esteemed universities in a scaleable way.
An AI service that is fully dedicated to a single product, does not take advantage of the purpose of the platform. When the same service would be offered and useful for other parties, this should increase the ‘usefulness’ rating.

VBRLteam

Project Owner

The VBRL team will work together to deliver a successful DeepFunding community hub.

View Profile