Summary

1. About this Report
2. Proposal-Info
3. ANALYSIS
1. ■Impact on the Ecosystem
2. ■Governance Compliance
3. ■Cost-Benefit Ratio
4. ■Transparency and Traceability
5. ■Track Record and Credibility
4. Evaluation
5. Voting

About this Report

vonFlandern has developed a methodology to analyze and evaluate OpenGov proposals as objectively, effectively, and transparently as possible. The goal is to create clear and structured decision-making foundations for our own voting—and to make these visible to the community.

Proposal-Info

PolkaBiz Business Mentorship & Ecosystem Support

Track: 33 | Origin: MediumSpender | Amount: 62.000 USDT

Summary of the proposal

Core Issue

Many Web3 founders in the Polkadot ecosystem lack business strategy and go-to-market expertise, resulting in detrimental decisions that undermine their startups’ potential.

Ecosystem Impact

This skill gap leads to failed startups, stifling innovation and reducing Polkadot’s appeal to entrepreneurial talent, which hampers ecosystem growth and adoption.

Proposed Action

PolkaBiz will continue mentoring founders and builders in 2025, targeting programs like PBA, PBA-X, and Web3 Foundation. The team seeks funding to sustain operations, screen high-potential startups, and bridge the business expertise gap.

Expected Outcomes

Short-term, startups gain better strategies, boosting success rates. Long-term, Polkadot becomes a thriving entrepreneurial hub, driving innovation and adoption, as shown by successful startups and partner feedback.

■Question 1 of 19

Does the proposal measurably contribute to the long-term development, adoption, resilience, or relevance of Polkadot?

The proposal by PolkaBiz measurably contributes to the long-term development, adoption, and relevance of Polkadot by addressing a critical gap in business strategy and go-to-market expertise among Web3 founders. Through mentorship, PolkaBiz enables founders to make better decisions, fostering successful startups that drive innovation and adoption within the ecosystem. Positive feedback from key partners, such as the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy, highlights PolkaBiz’s effectiveness in identifying and nurturing high-potential projects. Additionally, their mentorship extends to educational programs like PBA X and PBA Campus, strengthening the community’s skill base. However, the proposal lacks specific metrics to quantify its impact, limiting a full assessment of its long-term benefits.

Justification

PolkaBiz’s focus on mentorship directly supports Polkadot’s growth by equipping founders with essential business skills, which are crucial for startup success and ecosystem innovation. Partner testimonials confirm their role in enhancing programs like the Web3 Foundation’s founders grants, indicating tangible contributions to adoption and relevance. The dual benefit of supporting both startups and educational initiatives further amplifies their impact on long-term development. Nevertheless, the absence of quantitative data on outcomes, such as startup success rates or adoption metrics, prevents a complete evaluation of their effectiveness.

Score: 8/10

■Question 2 of 19

What sustainable added value does the proposal bring to the Polkadot ecosystem in the long term, beyond the immediate project duration?

The PolkaBiz proposal brings sustainable added value to the Polkadot ecosystem by cultivating a skilled entrepreneurial community through mentorship that extends beyond the immediate project duration. It addresses a critical gap in business strategy knowledge among Web3 founders, enabling the creation of startups that are more likely to thrive and drive long-term innovation and adoption within Polkadot. Additionally, PolkaBiz enhances educational initiatives like PBA X and PBA Campus, fostering a steady pipeline of capable builders who can perpetuate ecosystem growth. Partner feedback, including from the Web3 Foundation, highlights its strategic reinforcement of key programs such as the grants initiative. However, the proposal falls short by not providing detailed metrics to assess long-term outcomes like startup sustainability or broader ecosystem adoption, limiting a comprehensive evaluation of its enduring impact.

Justification

By equipping founders with essential business skills, PolkaBiz ensures startups are better positioned to succeed, contributing to Polkadot’s resilience and growth over time. Its integration with educational programs establishes a foundation for continuous talent development, creating a cycle of innovation. Testimonials from partners affirm its value in strengthening strategic ecosystem initiatives. Yet, the lack of specific, measurable indicators for long-term effects, such as startup retention or adoption growth, hinders a full assessment of its sustainable contribution beyond the project’s immediate scope.

Score: 8/10

■Question 3 of 19

Is an existing structural weakness addressed?

Yes, the proposal from PolkaBiz addresses an existing structural weakness in the Polkadot ecosystem by focusing on the lack of business strategy and go-to-market expertise among Web3 founders. This gap in skills often results in poor decision-making, leading to startup failures and a less attractive ecosystem for entrepreneurial talent, which ultimately hampers Polkadot’s growth and adoption. Through its mentorship program, PolkaBiz provides founders with tailored guidance to improve their strategic capabilities, increasing their chances of success and enhancing the ecosystem’s overall appeal. Feedback from partners, such as the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy, underscores the program’s effectiveness in supporting founders and strengthening key initiatives. Additionally, PolkaBiz extends its impact by educating students through programs like PBA X and PBA Campus, fostering a pipeline of skilled builders for the ecosystem’s future. However, the absence of specific metrics to measure long-term outcomes limits a comprehensive evaluation of its sustainability and broader impact on the network.

Justification

PolkaBiz targets a critical weakness by equipping founders with essential business skills, directly addressing the root cause of many startup failures within the Polkadot ecosystem. This mentorship not only aids immediate startup success but also aligns with long-term ecosystem growth by cultivating talent through education. Partner testimonials validate its contribution to strategic programs, reinforcing its relevance. Nevertheless, without quantifiable data—such as startup survival rates or ecosystem adoption trends—it’s challenging to fully assess the depth and durability of its impact, though the approach itself is strategically sound and promising.

Score: 8/10

■Question 4 of 19

Does the proposal promote interoperability, user retention, or parachain development?

The PolkaBiz proposal indirectly promotes parachain development by offering mentorship to Web3 founders, equipping them with business strategy and go-to-market skills that could lead to successful startups becoming parachain projects. This strengthens the ecosystem’s appeal to entrepreneurs and may increase the number of parachain projects over time. However, it does not directly address interoperability or user retention, as it lacks specific initiatives targeting cross-chain functionality or strategies to keep users engaged. Partner feedback from entities like the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy praises its support for grants and educational programs, which bolster the talent pipeline and indirectly aid parachain development. Despite these strengths, the absence of concrete measures for interoperability or user retention limits its broader impact on the ecosystem.

Justification

The proposal’s focus on mentoring founders fosters an environment conducive to parachain development by nurturing potential projects, but this effect is indirect and long-term rather than immediate. Its emphasis on business skills enhances ecosystem growth, yet it stops short of tackling interoperability or user retention directly, which are critical for a strategically robust network. Testimonials from partners highlight its value in supporting grants and education, reinforcing its role in building a foundation for parachain-related innovation. However, without explicit plans or metrics to address interoperability or user retention, its contribution to these areas remains negligible, reducing its overall strategic impact.

Score: 5/10

■Result category 1

Total score: 29/40 | Average: 7.25/10 (73%)

■Question 5 of 19

Does the proposal clearly fall within the scope of the chosen origin (Treasury, Tipper, Spender)?

The proposal appears to fall within the scope of the MediumSpender origin, which is designed for Treasury spend requests ranging from 10,000 to 100,000 DOT. It involves a funding request to sustain PolkaBiz’s mentorship services within the Polkadot ecosystem for 2025, focusing on business strategy education. This aligns with the Treasury’s purpose of supporting initiatives that enhance ecosystem growth. However, the proposal summary lacks a specific funding amount, making it difficult to confirm definitively whether it fits precisely within the MediumSpender track’s limits. Despite this, the context and scale of the operations suggest it is appropriate for this origin. Partner feedback and integration with educational programs further reinforce its relevance to the Treasury’s goals.

Justification

The MediumSpender origin, as defined in Polkadot’s OpenGov structure, applies to Treasury proposals requesting between 10,000 and 100,000 DOT. The PolkaBiz proposal’s focus on mentorship and education contributes directly to the ecosystem, matching the Treasury’s mandate. Testimonials from reputable partners like the Web3 Foundation validate its impact, supporting its alignment with the origin’s intent. However, without an explicit funding figure, it’s challenging to ensure exact compliance with the track’s boundaries. This ambiguity slightly undermines its clarity, though the proposal’s scope and purpose strongly imply it fits within the MediumSpender range.

Score: 8/10

■Question 6 of 19

Are there previous proposals with comparable content, and if so, what were their outcomes?

Yes, previous Polkadot Treasury proposals with comparable content exist, focusing on ecosystem education and support for developers or startups, similar to PolkaBiz’s mentorship program. For instance, a 2023 proposal by Dacade aimed at community-centric blockchain education to foster Polkadot’s growth through learning initiatives. Another example is Polkascan’s infrastructure deployment project, which included educational components for ecosystem sustainability. Both were approved, with Dacade’s proposal receiving positive community feedback for its educational impact, while Polkascan’s funding supported ongoing operations. However, specific outcomes, such as measurable ecosystem growth or startup success rates, are not well-documented in available records, limiting a full comparison. The PolkaBiz proposal aligns with these precedents but lacks detailed metrics to predict outcomes.

Justification

The PolkaBiz proposal’s focus on mentorship and education mirrors prior proposals like Dacade’s, which targeted community education, and Polkascan’s, which supported ecosystem infrastructure with educational elements. These were funded, indicating community support for such initiatives. PolkaBiz’s integration with programs like PBA X and partner endorsements further aligns it with successful precedents. However, the lack of detailed outcome data from past proposals and PolkaBiz’s own vague metrics hinder a precise evaluation of comparability and potential success, though the historical approvals suggest a favorable context for PolkaBiz’s approach.

Score: 7/10

■Question 7 of 19

Is the governance system being used meaningfully or burdened?

The PolkaBiz proposal meaningfully utilizes the Polkadot governance system by engaging the MediumSpender origin to request Treasury funding for a mentorship program that strengthens the ecosystem. It addresses a clear need—business strategy expertise for Web3 founders—and aligns with the Treasury’s purpose of fostering growth. The proposal includes partner endorsements and ties to established programs like PBA X, demonstrating thoughtful integration with ecosystem goals. However, the absence of a specific funding amount and measurable outcomes slightly burdens the system, as it requires additional scrutiny from token holders to assess its feasibility and impact. Despite this, the proposal’s strategic intent and community relevance outweigh potential inefficiencies in its presentation.

Justification

The MediumSpender origin is appropriately chosen for a funding request likely within the 10,000 to 100,000 DOT range, and the proposal’s focus on mentorship supports Polkadot’s long-term development, aligning with governance objectives. Testimonials from partners like the Web3 Foundation validate its value, ensuring it engages the system purposefully. However, the lack of precise funding details and quantifiable metrics places a minor burden on voters to fill in gaps, which could strain the evaluation process. Overall, the proposal leverages the governance system effectively to advance ecosystem priorities, with only slight inefficiencies in clarity.

Score: 8/10

■Result category 2

Total score: 23/30 | Average: 7.67/10 (77%)

■Question 8 of 19

Is the requested amount proportionate to the potential or demonstrated benefit?

The requested amount of 62,000 USDT for the PolkaBiz proposal appears proportionate to the potential benefit, given its demonstrated impact on the Polkadot ecosystem through mentorship. By addressing the lack of business strategy expertise among Web3 founders, PolkaBiz fosters successful startups, potentially driving ecosystem growth. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy highlight its effectiveness in supporting grants and educational programs. However, the proposal lacks specific metrics, such as the number of startups expected to succeed or quantifiable adoption increases, which makes it challenging to fully assess the cost-benefit ratio. Despite this, the funding aligns with the scale of operations described, including screening over 100 startups and mentoring through established programs.

Justification

The 62,000 USDT request fits within the MediumSpender origin’s scope and supports a mentorship program with proven traction, as evidenced by partner feedback and PolkaBiz’s role in ecosystem initiatives. The cost seems reasonable for sustaining operations across multiple programs like PBA X and PBA Campus. However, without clear, measurable outcomes—such as startup success rates or ecosystem growth metrics—the potential benefit remains partially speculative, slightly undermining the precision of the cost-benefit alignment. Historical approvals of similar educational proposals suggest community acceptance of such funding levels, supporting the proportionality of the request.

Score: 7/10

■Question 9 of 19

Is the budget framework reasonable compared to similar proposals?

The PolkaBiz proposal’s budget of 62,000 USDT for 2025 is reasonable compared to similar Polkadot Treasury proposals, aligning with the scope of mentorship and ecosystem support. Dacade’s blockchain education proposal was funded at approximately 37,733 USDT, while Polkascan’s infrastructure maintenance received around 108,828 USDT annually. PolkaBiz’s request, supporting mentorship for over 100 startups and programs like PBA X, fits within this range. However, the lack of detailed metrics on expected outcomes, such as startup success rates, limits precise comparison. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy affirm its impact, suggesting the budget is proportionate to similar initiatives.

Justification

PolkaBiz’s 62,000 USDT budget is positioned between Dacade’s lower-cost educational effort and Polkascan’s higher-cost infrastructure project, reflecting its labor-intensive mentorship scope. The funding supports screening startups and educational collaborations, justified by partner feedback highlighting its ecosystem contributions. Compared to Dacade’s content-focused approach and Polkascan’s technical focus, PolkaBiz’s budget is reasonable for its unique role. However, the absence of specific performance indicators, unlike some infrastructure proposals with clearer deliverables, slightly weakens the comparison, though historical funding trends support its proportionality.

Score: 7/10

■Question 10 of 19

What specific added value does the Treasury or network gain in return for this expenditure?

The PolkaBiz proposal, with a 62,000 USDT expenditure, delivers specific added value to the Polkadot Treasury and network by enhancing startup success through mentorship, thereby fostering ecosystem growth. It bridges the gap in business strategy expertise for Web3 founders, increasing the likelihood of viable startups that drive adoption and innovation. By supporting programs like PBA X and PBA Campus, it builds a skilled talent pipeline, strengthening long-term network resilience. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy validate its role in connecting founders to grants and nurturing entrepreneurs. However, the lack of specific metrics, such as startup success rates or adoption growth, limits clarity on the tangible returns for the Treasury’s investment.

Justification

The expenditure supports PolkaBiz’s mentorship, which directly addresses a structural weakness, as evidenced by partner feedback highlighting its impact on grants and educational initiatives. This fosters a robust ecosystem, aligning with Treasury goals of promoting innovation and adoption. The focus on over 100 startups suggests potential for significant network growth, but without quantifiable outcomes, the exact value to the Treasury remains partially unclear. Compared to similar proposals, the budget is reasonable, yet the absence of detailed deliverables weakens the precision of its cost-benefit justification.

Score: 7/10

■Question 11 of 19

Were cheaper alternatives considered?

The PolkaBiz proposal for 62,000 USDT does not explicitly consider cheaper alternatives for its mentorship program within the Polkadot ecosystem. The document focuses on justifying the budget through its scope, including mentoring over 100 startups and supporting programs like PBA X, without discussing cost-saving options such as leveraging community resources or reducing operational scope. While the budget aligns with similar proposals like Dacade’s (37,733 USDT) and Polkascan’s (108,828 USDT annually), the absence of any reference to evaluating more cost-effective methods indicates that cheaper alternatives were not addressed. Polkadot Treasury guidelines do not mandate such considerations, which may explain the omission.

Justification

A review of the proposal document confirms no mention of alternative approaches to achieve the same mentorship outcomes at a lower cost. Polkadot Treasury guidelines emphasize problem-solving and task itemization but do not require proposers to explore cheaper options, aligning with the practices of comparable proposals like Dacade and Polkascan, which also omitted such discussions. The budget’s reasonableness is supported by its alignment with similar initiatives, but the specific question of considering alternatives is unmet due to the lack of evidence, resulting in a low evaluation score.

Score: 2/10

■Result category 3

Total score: 23/40 | Average: 5.75/10 (57%)

■Question 12 of 19

Is it clearly communicated how and for what purposes funds will be used—including KPIs, milestones, metrics?

The PolkaBiz proposal for 62,000 USDT does not clearly communicate how funds will be used or specify purposes with KPIs, milestones, or metrics. It broadly outlines sustaining mentorship for Web3 founders and supporting programs like PBA X, mentioning screening over 100 startups, but lacks a detailed budget breakdown or measurable outcomes. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy provide qualitative support, highlighting past successes, but no specific targets, such as startup success rates or ecosystem growth metrics, are included. This vagueness undermines evidence-based tracking and evaluation, despite alignment with ecosystem goals.

Justification

Polkadot Treasury guidelines stress the need for itemized tasks and milestones to ensure transparency, yet the PolkaBiz proposal offers no specific budget allocation or quantifiable deliverables. While it cites qualitative achievements, like supporting grants, it fails to provide metrics or timelines for 2025 activities. Compared to proposals like Polkascan’s, which included clear milestones, PolkaBiz’s lack of specificity is notable. The reliance on general goals and partner feedback, without formal KPIs, limits accountability and traceability, resulting in a low score for transparency.

Score: 3/10

■Question 13 of 19

Are budgets, timelines, and work packages clearly specified?

The PolkaBiz proposal for 62,000 USDT does not clearly specify budgets, timelines, or work packages, hindering evidence-based tracking. It states a total funding request and general goals, such as mentoring over 100 startups and supporting programs like PBA X, but lacks a detailed budget breakdown, specific timelines, or defined work packages. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy highlight past impact, but without itemized tasks or schedules, the proposal fails to provide a clear framework for evaluating progress. This lack of specificity obscures how funds will be allocated and when deliverables will be achieved, despite alignment with ecosystem objectives.

Justification

Polkadot Treasury guidelines emphasize detailed task itemization and milestones for transparency, yet the PolkaBiz proposal provides no breakdown of the 62,000 USDT allocation, such as costs for mentorship sessions or operational expenses. Timelines are absent, with no mention of when mentoring activities will occur in 2025. Work packages are not defined, unlike proposals like Polkascan’s, which included quarterly deliverables. While qualitative feedback supports its value, the absence of structured budgets, timelines, or tasks limits traceability and accountability, warranting a low evaluation for transparency and traceability requirements.

Score: 3/10

■Question 14 of 19

Are there success criteria for later evaluation?

The PolkaBiz proposal for 62,000 USDT does not provide clear success criteria for later evaluation, undermining evidence-based tracking. It outlines mentoring over 100 startups and supporting programs like PBA X, but lacks specific, measurable criteria such as startup success rates, ecosystem adoption growth, or mentorship completion targets. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy highlight past qualitative achievements, like connecting teams to grants, but these are not formalized into quantifiable metrics for future assessment. The absence of defined success criteria makes it challenging to evaluate the proposal’s impact after implementation, despite its alignment with Polkadot’s ecosystem goals.

Justification

Polkadot Treasury guidelines stress the importance of measurable deliverables and milestones to ensure accountability, yet the PolkaBiz proposal offers no explicit success criteria, such as the number of startups expected to thrive or specific ecosystem metrics. While qualitative feedback from partners validates its historical impact, it does not translate into actionable evaluation criteria. Compared to proposals like Polkascan’s, which included uptime metrics, PolkaBiz’s reliance on vague goals limits its traceability. This lack of clarity significantly weakens the ability to assess outcomes, justifying a low evaluation score for transparency and traceability.

Score: 2/10

■Question 15 of 19

Is documentation or reporting planned?

The PolkaBiz proposal for 62,000 USDT does not explicitly mention plans for documentation or reporting to track its progress or impact. While it outlines mentoring over 100 startups and supporting programs like PBA X, it fails to specify any commitment to regular updates, progress reports, or final evaluations. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy highlight past successes, but there is no indication of how these will be documented moving forward. The absence of a reporting framework makes it difficult to ensure transparency or enable evidence-based evaluation of the proposal’s outcomes, despite its alignment with Polkadot’s ecosystem objectives.

Justification

Polkadot Treasury guidelines emphasize the need for clear milestones and reporting to ensure accountability, yet the PolkaBiz proposal lacks any reference to documentation or reporting mechanisms, such as periodic updates or impact assessments. Unlike proposals like Polkascan’s, which included quarterly reports, PolkaBiz provides no plan for sharing progress or results. The reliance on qualitative partner feedback, without a commitment to structured reporting, limits traceability. This significant gap in transparency undermines the ability to monitor the use of funds or evaluate impact, warranting a very low evaluation score.

Score: 1/10

■Result category 4

Total score: 9/40 | Average: 2.25/10 (23%)

■Question 16 of 19

Have the proposers or involved organizations made verifiable, traceable contributions to the ecosystem?

PolkaBiz and its proposers have made verifiable, traceable contributions to the Polkadot ecosystem, demonstrating credibility and capability to implement the proposed mentorship program. They have mentored over 100 startups in 2025, collaborated with the Polkadot Blockchain Academy on the Pitch & Mentor program, and supported Web3 Foundation’s grants initiatives. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation, Blockchain Academy, and Scytale Digital confirm their role in nurturing founders and connecting teams to funding. Their prior Treasury-funded Proposal 657, approved with community support, included launching a website, Founders Lab, and Investor Night, further evidencing their contributions. These efforts enhance ecosystem growth, though limited public documentation of specific outcomes slightly tempers the assessment.

Justification

PolkaBiz’s contributions, such as mentoring startups and supporting grants, are documented through partner testimonials and the approved Proposal 657, aligning with Polkadot’s growth objectives. The Web3 Foundation’s David Hawig noted their significant role in grants, and Blockchain Academy’s Tim Dobie praised their entrepreneurial support. Subscan’s “Reasonable” judgment and a 436.487 DOT balance reinforce their credibility. However, while their impact is clear, the lack of detailed public records or metrics for past outcomes, like startup success rates, slightly limits traceability compared to projects like Polkascan with explicit deliverables. Their track record strongly supports their capability to execute the proposal.

Score: 8/10

■Question 17 of 19

What projects have been successfully implemented so far?

PolkaBiz has successfully implemented several projects within the Polkadot ecosystem, including launching their website, establishing Founders Lab and Investor Night, and creating the Pitch & Mentor program with the Polkadot Blockchain Academy for the Singapore cohort. They have mentored startups like CognideX, Colb Finance, Joinn Finance, and Roam Network, which have progressed through their support, as noted in ecosystem updates. Their prior Treasury-funded Proposal 657, approved by the community, supported these initiatives, demonstrating their ability to deliver. These projects have fostered innovation and startup growth, though specific success metrics for the mentored startups are not fully detailed.

Justification

The successful implementation of PolkaBiz’s website, Founders Lab, Investor Night, and the Pitch & Mentor program is documented in Treasury Proposal 657 and its top-up referendum, which passed with 72.8% approval, reflecting community trust. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy validate their impact, particularly in mentoring startups like CognideX. However, while these projects are recognized, the lack of detailed public metrics, such as startup milestones or funding secured, slightly limits a comprehensive assessment. Compared to Polkascan’s clear deliverables, PolkaBiz’s track record is strong but less quantifiable, supporting their credibility for the proposed program.

Score: 8/10

■Question 18 of 19

Are there publicly accessible references (e.g., code repositories, publications) or community feedback supporting the proposers’ credibility?

PolkaBiz’s credibility is supported by publicly accessible references and community feedback, though limited in scope. Their website and prior Treasury Proposal 657 document the successful launch of Founders Lab, Investor Night, and the Pitch & Mentor program with the Polkadot Blockchain Academy. Community approval of Proposal 657’s top-up referendum with 72.8% yes votes reflects trust. Partner endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy praise their mentorship of startups like CognideX. However, no code repositories or formal publications are publicly linked, and community feedback, while positive, lacks detailed metrics on outcomes, slightly reducing transparency.

Justification

PolkaBiz’s website and Treasury records provide verifiable references for their contributions, such as mentoring and event organization, aligning with ecosystem goals. The Web3 Foundation’s David Hawig and Blockchain Academy’s Tim Dobie confirm their impact, enhancing credibility. Subscan’s “Reasonable” judgment and a 436.487 DOT balance further support their standing. Community sentiment on platforms like Subsquare shows strong support, but the absence of code repositories or publications, unlike technical projects like Polkascan, and limited quantitative feedback on startup success, temper the assessment. This still indicates a solid track record.

Score: 7/10

■Question 19 of 19

Is the team capable of delivering the promised outcomes?

The PolkaBiz team appears capable of delivering the promised outcomes of mentoring Web3 founders and supporting Polkadot’s ecosystem growth, based on their proven track record. They have successfully implemented projects like the Pitch & Mentor program, Founders Lab, and Investor Night, and mentored startups such as CognideX and Colb Finance. Endorsements from the Web3 Foundation and Blockchain Academy affirm their expertise in guiding founders. Community approval of their prior Treasury Proposal 657, with a top-up referendum passing at 72.8%, supports their reliability. However, the lack of specific metrics or a detailed plan for 2025 outcomes slightly limits confidence in their ability to fully deliver measurable results.

Justification

PolkaBiz’s history of mentoring over 100 startups and delivering projects under Proposal 657 demonstrates their operational capacity. Testimonials from partners like David Hawig and Tim Dobie highlight their effectiveness, and Subscan’s “Reasonable” judgment reinforces credibility. Their collaboration with established programs like PBA X suggests logistical competence. Yet, the proposal’s vague KPIs and milestones, unlike Polkascan’s clear deliverables, raise concerns about defining and measuring success. While their track record is strong, the absence of a robust implementation plan tempers the assessment of their capacity to achieve all promised outcomes.

Score: 7/10

■Result category 5

Total score: 30/40 | Average: 7.50/10 (75%)