| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Grant Program Name | ReFi Design Sprint - Batch 01 |
| Application ID | APP-LLDJ3P3C-ZBLBZZ |
| Application URL | https://app.karmahq.xyz/localism-fund/browse-applications/APP-LLDJ3P3C-ZBLBZZ |
| Primary Contact | Izzia Raffaele - Main coordinator |
| Organization | ReFi Italia |
| Submission Date | October 20, 2025 3:22 PM (MDT) |
| Round / Review Cycle | Round 01 – Cycle 1 |
| Total Score | 12.73 / 16 |
| Estimated Disbursement | $9,520 |
| Co-Funding Commit | $8,500 |
”https://etherscan.io/address/0x8CA2712e1c04241d7Cf48d7F82C4229652dB0c66#asset-multichain
We have 6K USDC on OP and 3K USDC on ETH for a total o 9K USDC exceeding the co-funding proof requested of 500$” | | Application Status | Approved | | Operator Contact | Monty - [email protected] / @montymerlin on Telegram |
| Evaluation Check | Status |
|---|---|
| Application Completed Sufficiently | ☑ Yes |
| Meets Program Criteria | ☑ Yes |
| Meets Round Criteria | ☑ Yes |
| Local Program Proceeding / Matching Funds Confirmed | ☑ Yes |
| Overall Readiness | Ready |
→ Total Average Score: 12.73 / 16
| Evaluation Category | Avg Score (out of 4) | Reviewer Comments |
|---|---|---|
| 1️⃣ Program Scope & Strategic Alignment | 3.5 | “This program scope provides a strong roadmap for other programs like Regenerate Cascadia: Phase One LHC Grant Program to build upon. The scope includes a strong combination of education, training, and empowerment with grant funding pools to be stewarded by place-based bioregional hubs and communities. Instead of simply allocating grants or providing education, ReFi Italia is well positioned to onboard place-based communities onto web3 tooling the empowers them to govern their own funding.” |
*”Onboarding local regen orgs into web3 tech is highly strategically aligned with aims of Localism Fund.
However the application mentioned ‘a proven Web3 community finance stack’ but more detail is needed around what this stack is. Primary focus seems to be on adopting multi-sig SAFE which is good start - onboarding 2–3 pilot communities into using multi-sigs is cool but limited impact if not also including deeper work and further integrations. Tools & Methods section mentions Karma GAP, TVF dashboards and Community surveys which is all great but limited further details provided.
Grassroots economics commitment pools are referenced but not fully clear / explained if this is a core part of what the local orgs are onabording into?”
”A very strong proposal with a clear plan for implementation. Clear use of web3 tools for the program. Roadmap to complete within the round timeframe looks good. Only concern is how many people will be onboarded to ethereum. Looks like local hubs will be onboarded but not clear how a broader community gets onboarded.”* | | 2️⃣ Local Co-Funding & Financial Sustainability | 3.0 | *“Strong demonstration of plural funding sources. While Grassroots Econ vouchers are highly experimental, tracking in-kind donations with this type of commitment pool infrastructure adds significant transparency and accountability for in-kind donations that could be a replicable model for other programs to deploy. Given the strong distribution of co-funding sources, even though they are each small on their own, indicates broad community support for this program which will enable it to sustain itself across multiple rounds.”
”Small individually but solid diverse sources of funding. in-kind contributions won’t count towards matching but are still a bonus signal and resource + further web3 adoption with the commitment pool usecase.
Only 50% of funding going into the Community Seed Grants seems low. This means the other 50% going into operations which is a high round fee. The additional operational activities (25% – Facilitation & Technical Stewardship, 15% – Community Stipends & Participation Costs, 5% – Program Management & Operations, 5% – Documentation & Replicability Outputs) are all valuable things but seem potentially on the expensive side - but this depends on the quality of what ends up being delivered. Significant reporting on the delivery of these services will be crucial to assess the effectiveness of this spend.
Budget also mentions ‘15% – Community Stipends & Participation Costs: Travel, food, and coordination for local leaders’ - this seems to imply some sort of in-person event being hosted to convene all the stakeholders but I can’t find any mention or details of this event elsewhere in the proposal / Program Timeline & Key Milestones. A breakdown of in-person vs online engagements and a more detailed program roadmap / outline would be helpful!”
”$11k secured from a diverse set of partners.”*
Operator Note: Two of the confirmed co-funding commits are in-kind which is good but do not count to the hard commit for matching from this round. As such the total co-funding commit for matching appears to be $8,500. | | 3️⃣ Round Operations, Mechanisms & Impact Framework | 3.0 | “Operations combine educational curriculum, democratic decision-making, playbooks and outcome reporting. Additional details regarding specific steps inside of each phase would make the operations plan even stronger but the foundations are very strong.”
*”Pilot Selection Criteria and overall process seems solid. Not fully clear on the how the funding allocation decisions will actually be made but this can be figured out.”
”Overall there is a plan to use web3 tooling to onboard community nodes. One concern I have is it is not clear what tools or process will be used to select the node applicants for funding allocation and educational design sprint.”* | | 4️⃣ Team Capacity & Community Anchoring | 3.17 | “Excellent balance of capacities and strengths spread across the core team and partners.”
*“I know 2 of the core team and they are great but I don’t know the others and for the application more detail could have been given on each of the past experiences and qualifications of the team members”
”Strong team though they don’t provide extensive details on the team members. They have been awarded other grants and appear to have executed on them.”* |
“Overall, this program offers a compelling vision of local training that leads to collaborative stewardship of hyper-local grant pools. By providing web3 education and empowerment to existing local groups, this program is an exquisite example of what Localism Fund aims to serve.”
“Overall there seems to be a need for more cohesive outline of the full sprint and some additional details in the application but at the same time, the core is solid and I trust that specific details can be figured out and executed well by this team.”
“This is a great proposal. Onboarding is a difficult task at times and this seems like a solid proposal that will bring 2-3 new communities into web3. Would like to understand how the participating nodes will be selected and what the plan is for onboarding their communities into web3.”
The ReFi Design Sprint – Batch 01 offers a strong, well-aligned proposal scoring 12.73 out of 16, recognized for its strategic clarity, community grounding, and innovative approach to local web3 onboarding. Reviewers commended the program’s integration of education, facilitation, and participatory funding mechanisms, noting its potential to empower regional hubs to steward localized grant pools. The proposal demonstrates solid co-funding diversity, combining cash and in-kind contributions and a thoughtful operational structure linking community training with decentralized finance tools. However, reviewers requested greater detail on implementation logistics, selection criteria for pilot nodes, and a clearer roadmap for scaling beyond initial participants. Overall, ReFi Design Sprint – Batch 01 was praised as a promising model for local empowerment and regenerative finance education.