Date: 2024-03-13

Time: 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM UTC

Location: Zoom Call

Attendees:

• Sid Shah (Areta)
• Bernard Schmid (Areta)
• Paul Imseih (Daimon Legal)

1. Means Test and RFP Language Alignment

• Discussion: The ADPC discussed the importance of aligning the language between the Means Test and RFP documents, especially when it comes to the process elements. The ADPC noted that some of the language in the Means Test was starting to sound like an RFP, and suggested removing those process elements from the Means Test and including them in the RFP instead.
• Resolved: The ADPC agreed to remove the detailed Means Test rubric from the Subsidy Fund proposal and include it within the RFP documentation to ensure proper alignment.

2. RFP Structure and Funding Proposal Filtration

• Discussion: The ADPC reviewed the structure of the RFP, which is expected to be over 100 pages long and include indemnities previously discussed. The ADPC emphasized the importance of carefully structuring the RFP, as the ADPC is positioned between the community, service providers, and the grant fund. To manage the anticipated influx of funding proposals, the ADPC proposed implementing a filter at the beginning of the process to identify the most relevant proposals. This filter would include the highest-weighted points within the Means Test.
• Resolved: The ADPC decided to implement a filter at the beginning of the process to allow the most relevant proposals to pass through, and apply the entire Means Test to those that make it past the filter.

3. Means Test Sub-Criteria Discussion

• Discussion: The ADPC examined specific sub-criteria within the Means Test:
  • For the "Reasonableness of subsidy amount requested," the ADPC agreed to clarify the wording to indicate that reasonableness will be measured in comparison to the project's revenue, funding, and size.
  • Regarding the "Accuracy of projections," the ADPC changed the weighting from [2] to [1], acknowledging the difficulty in judging the accuracy of financial projections ex-ante, as this is primarily an ex-post exercise.
  • For the "Preferred funding distribution," the ADPC decided to prioritize projects with milestone-based funding. Projects requiring upfront funding will need to provide justification, which will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
• Resolved: The ADPC agreed to make the discussed changes to the Means Test sub-criteria, including clarifying wording, adjusting weightings, and prioritizing milestone-based funding.

4. Subsidy Fund Proposal Presentation and Delegate Communication

• Discussion: The ADPC evaluated the approach to presenting the Subsidy Fund proposal to delegates and seeking their opinions. The ADPC initially considered presenting the proposal at a high level during the delegate call in two weeks but realized it didn't fit their timeline. Instead, the ADPC proposed reaching out to the 10 biggest delegates individually to ask for their opinion on the proposal.
• Resolved: The ADPC decided to present the Subsidy Fund proposal to the 10 biggest delegates and ask for their opinion instead of presenting it at the delegate call.

5. Procurement Platform and Tender Documents