Regenerant Catalunya

ENCAES

Evaluation Criteria | Regenerant Catalunya

Evaluation Criteria | Regenerant Catalunya

AIM: Transparent, evidence-based evaluation prioritizing local impact while building Web3 capacity in Catalan bioregional context.

1. Overview

Methodology: Adapted from Regen Coordination GG23 ($96k allocated to 50 projects)

Evaluation Process:

  1. Projects submit reports via Karma GAP (Common Approach framework)
  2. Council members (ReFi BCN + Miceli Social + La Fundició advisors) score independently
  3. Scores averaged across minimum 3 evaluators
  4. Allocations determined for Phase 1 (Baseline) and Phase 2 (Adoption)

Collaborative Definition: Criteria and weighting collaboratively defined with Miceli Social and La Fundició/Keras Buti to reflect Catalan regenerative values.

2. Understanding Evaluation Criteria

How Projects Are Evaluated:

Your project will be evaluated based on 4 criteria that reflect Catalan regenerative values. Understanding these criteria helps you align your documentation and maximize your impact.

Visual Breakdown: Evaluation criteria weighting:

pie title Evaluation Criteria Weighting
    "Local Impact (35%)" : 35
    "Web3 Adoption (25%)" : 25
    "Resource Efficiency (25%)" : 25
    "Clear Plans (15%)" : 15

The 4 Evaluation Criteria Overview:

  1. Local Ecological, Social & Economic Impact (35%)

    • Direct impact in Catalan communities (ecological, social, economic)
    • Examples: Ecosystem restoration, community health, cooperative models, food sovereignty
    • What evaluators look for: Measurable outcomes, strong documentation, network integration

  2. ReFi/Web3 Awareness, Adoption & Development (25%)

    • Contribution to Web3 ecosystem through tool adoption and on-chain activity
    • Examples: Wallet setup, Karma GAP usage, tool integration, education
    • What evaluators look for: Regular updates, consistent reporting, tool adoption

  3. Resource Efficiency & Project Maturity (25%)

    • Impact relative to resources and project maturity
    • Examples: Efficient use of funding, strong performance for project size, accountability
    • What evaluators look for: Efficiency, transparency, results relative to resources

  4. Active Goals, Plans & Milestones (15%)

    • Clarity and feasibility of project roadmap
    • Examples: Specific goals, realistic milestones, alignment with bioregional regeneration
    • What evaluators look for: Clear planning, detailed milestones, alignment with values

How to Align Your Reporting:

  • Document measurable impact — Quantify where possible (participants, hectares, etc.)
  • Show Web3 engagement — Document wallet setup, Karma usage, tool adoption
  • Demonstrate efficiency — Show impact relative to resources
  • Present clear plans — Specific goals, timelines, expected outcomes

Self-Assessment: Use the project data collection document (Google Doc) to assess your alignment with criteria before submitting to Karma GAP.

Reference for Workshop #2: This evaluation framework will be covered in detail during Workshop #2: Documenting Impact (December 8-14, 2025).

3. Evaluation Principles

  1. Evidence Over Intention - Reward documented action and impact, not alignment alone
  2. Transparency - Evaluations based on verifiable data and public Karma GAP documentation
  3. Mission Alignment - Contribute to bioregional regeneration, cooperative values, SSE integration
  4. Equity - Value diverse regenerative efforts across rural-urban spectrum
  5. Learning - Living framework refined after Round 1 based on learnings

4. Scoring System

  • Scale: 1-10 per criterion (1-3: Limited | 4-6: Moderate | 7-8: Strong | 9-10: Exceptional)
  • Weighting: Recent work (post-program) weighted 70-80%; historical context 20-30%
  • Scoring: Conservative, evidence-based; 8-10 scores are rare
  • Final Score: Weighted average of 4 criteria
Final Score = (Criterion 1 × 0.35) + (Criterion 2 × 0.25) + (Criterion 3 × 0.25) + (Criterion 4 × 0.15)

5. Core Criteria

Criterion 1: Local Ecological, Social & Economic Impact (35%)

What: Direct or catalytic impact in Catalan communities across ecological, social, economic domains.

Key Dimensions:

  • Ecological: Ecosystem restoration, biodiversity, river stewardship, agroecology
  • Social: Community health, housing, food sovereignty, education, cultural regeneration
  • Economic: Cooperative models, SSE integration, circular economies, community-owned assets
  • Catalytic: Multiplying impact through networks (Miceli Social, La Fundició)

Scoring Guide:

  • 1-3: No/minimal impact; vague claims; no documentation
  • 4-6: Multiple activities; quantified benefits; alignment with Catalan priorities visible
  • 7-8: Measurable outcomes; strong documentation; SSE network integration
  • 9-10: Transformational systemic change; multi-dimensional impact; replication potential

Guidance: Recognize small-scale, well-executed initiatives with strong local grounding and cooperative values.

Criterion 2: ReFi/Web3 Awareness, Adoption & Development (25%)

What: Contribution to ReFi Web3 ecosystem through tool adoption, on-chain activity, reputation building.

Key Dimensions:

  • Awareness: Education, workshops, campaigns promoting ReFi/Web3 tools
  • Adoption: Wallet creation, Karma GAP usage, dApp integration, DAO participation
  • Development: Building tools, training developers, infrastructure contributions
  • Financial Activity: On-chain transactions, local economies, value retention in Web3

Scoring Guide:

  • 1-3: No engagement; minimal tool usage; no Karma GAP profile
  • 4-6: Regular Karma GAP updates; wallet setup; some tool adoption; 10-50 participants
  • 7-8: Consistent reporting; optional tool integration (Silvi, Hypercerts, etc.); strong local traction
  • 9-10: Ecosystem catalyst; hundreds of participants; multiple tool integrations; influence beyond local

Guidance: Prioritize substance over scale. Value gradual adoption for Web3 newcomers.

Criterion 3: Resource Efficiency & Project Maturity (25%)

What: Impact relative to resources, maturity, and past funding. Rewards efficiency, especially for small cooperatives.

Key Dimensions:

  • Funding Efficiency: Impact relative to funding received; lean resource use
  • Maturity Alignment: Results impressive for project size/age; early-stage excellence
  • Team Capacity: Small teams/collectives generating broad outputs; volunteer-driven success
  • Accountability: Transparent fund documentation; conversion of resources to impact

Scoring Guide:

  • 1-3: High resourcing/low return; under-delivery relative to support
  • 4-6: Performance matches expectations; average output for maturity level
  • 7-8: Efficient and effective; small team/early-stage delivering high quality
  • 9-10: Outstanding efficiency; multiplier effect; exemplary cooperative performance

Guidance: Don’t penalize early-stage initiatives; reward strong performance relative to resources.

Criterion 4: Active Goals, Plans & Milestones (15%)

What: Clarity, feasibility, and alignment of project roadmap with bioregional regeneration goals.

Key Dimensions:

  • Clarity: Specific, measurable goals; public visibility
  • Feasibility: Realistic relative to team/resourcing; cooperative governance awareness
  • Alignment: Ecosystem-wide objectives; bioregional regeneration; SSE integration
  • Tracking: Defined milestones; regular updates; Karma GAP progress demonstration

Scoring Guide:

  • 1-3: No clear goals; vague intentions; no milestones
  • 4-6: Basic planning; reasonable milestones; some alignment visible
  • 7-8: Strong planning; detailed milestones; clear alignment with Catalan values
  • 9-10: Strategic roadmap; trackable milestones; model transparency; long-term thinking

Guidance: Value clarity and feasibility within cooperative governance frameworks.

6. Evaluation Process

Reporting Structure

  • Karma GAP reports: Activities, Outputs, Outcomes, Impact
  • Phase 1: Report due December 2025
  • Phase 2: Report due February 2026 (emphasizing tool adoption)

Council Workflow

  1. Projects submit Karma GAP reports
  2. Council reviews and scores independently (min 3 evaluators)
  3. Scores averaged
  4. Allocations determined

Timeline

  • November 2025: Onboarding, Karma GAP setup
  • December 2025: Phase 1 evaluation → Baseline Allocation (50%)
  • January-February 2026: Phase 2 evaluation → Adoption Allocation (50%, optional)

7. Council

Composition:

  • ReFi Barcelona team (Luiz Fernando, Giulio Quarta, Andrea Farias)
  • Oriol (Miceli Social) - Rural resilience expertise
  • Mariló (La Fundició/Keras Buti) - Urban cooperative economics
  • Additional advisors as needed

Approach: Human-centered evaluation (no AI baseline) ensuring nuanced understanding of Catalan context and cooperative values.

8. Allocation & Distribution

Two-Phase Model

Phase 1: Baseline Allocation (50%)

  • Formula: (Criterion 1 × 0.50) + (Criterion 3 × 0.50)
  • Minimum: €1,000 per project
  • Purpose: Support ongoing work, initial Web3 adoption

Phase 2: Adoption Allocation (50%, optional)

  • Formula: (Criterion 1 × 0.25) + (Criterion 2 × 0.40) + (Criterion 3 × 0.20) + (Criterion 4 × 0.15)
  • Eligibility: Score ≥4.0; high-quality reporting; meaningful tool adoption
  • Purpose: Reward continued engagement, deeper Web3 experimentation

Distribution:

Phase Allocation = (Project Score / Sum of All Scores) × Total Phase Pool

Transparency: All allocations documented on-chain (Safe multisig), communicated with score breakdowns, tracked via Karma GAP.

9. References

Methodology:

Program Docs:

Tools:

Partners:

Version 2.0 - Streamlined for practical use. Will be refined after Round 1 (March 2026) based on learnings and partner feedback.

For questions: ReFi Barcelona team

7 min read