"It was an interesting idea of linking crypto world with tangible assets in the physical world, in this case are trees. From my point of view, NFT-izing trees have several benefits: i) the values of trees may be increased, ii) these tree values contribute to the environment, since planting trees reduce the risk of high-erosion areas, iii) increase the awareness of people to sustainable development as well as the NFT and the Cardano ecosystem. The proposers described quite clearly the procedures by separating the project into three phases. In terms of the risks, the proposers had not yet found out the specific strategies to mitigate the risk. The adoption ability in terms of crypto world in the target country (Congo in this case) was the major problem. Similarly, the risk that the project team could not protect the trees was remained unsolved. Nevertheless, the success of this project can boost new users into the Cardano ecosystem to participate in tree owning activities. Therefore, this offered solution was aligned with the challenge setting. "

The proposer is looking at a challenge in the real world called erosion. Erosion is something that every nation on earth encounters and has to deal with. The proposal would effectively resolve the erosion issue, but for only one area on the earth.

This could be later expanded into other areas, and eventually in every nation on earth, but that would be a very long term concept.

The proposer has proposed to use a nursery to plant seedlings and grow trees like any other nursey out there, but would like to create an NFT for each tree in the nursery enabling an NFT owner, to basically adopt a tree from the nursery and have some say-so in what is done with that tree.

It would be better for the proposer to give us a bit more detail as to what an NFT owner can do with their NFT, but the basic concept would effectively address the challenge set out.

I think that those who love and care about environmental issues will be interested in this project as the main purpose of this project is to encourage users to plant and passively nurture plants that can prevent soil erosion through the purchase of an NFTree associated with a tree in the exporter's nursery. I appreciate the relevance of this project to the key metric Challenge which is solutions to help solve environmental problems with an activity integrated on Cardano that can motivate users to participate because of its usefulness and interest. The process for an NFTree to be cultivated and cared for is also clearly described, besides planting trees, the proponent also plans to develop educational materials to raise environmental awareness for users. This idea is amazing. The risks and mitigations are also presented here, however, I am concerned about the risk that the covid epidemic may limit meetings and exchanges with indigenous peoples as well as tree planting activities, what is the solution for this case if it really happens, examples of building online exchange methods; set up a tree planting and data collection team consisting of local people, sending seedlings and authorizing tree planting activities for them when travel is restricted by epidemic for example.

It is explained that soil erosion is a big cause of the degradation of soil which leads to natural disasters. This is a campaign that utilizes the funding of Catalyst to help establish a project that will benefit GOMA. There is a plan to plant trees in order to help fight erosion. This proposal addresses the challenge by identifying this problem and receiving the means/funds to plant trees and help the world. I would ask how this project directly benefits the Cardano ecosystem. There could be an inclusion of Cardano promotion that would help people realize that this project is possible through Cardano in hopes that it helps the project while helping the world. For this reason. I give this section 4 out of 5 stars.

The mission of this project provides for an outcome that is beneficial to earth, however a potentially overwhelming feat of "managing trees" exposes the reality that if we have reached a point in humanity where we have to do that - maybe we are already doomed.

I have seen the same resources presented on other proposals from Goma, and while this proposal is relevant to Africa, it could be more appropriate in the Grow Africa, Grow Cardano challenge. Although they mention scaling, its not mentioned which geographies could potentially benefit from scaling as far as the current challenge also scales.

The proposal is well aligned with the specific objective of the challenge, which deals with questions of “Environment - Total number of users, total CO2 sequestered, amount of awareness being produced, number of people changing an environmentally damaging habit” (present in the challenge summary) . The problem raised is precisely the erosion (wear and tear) of the soil, which unfortunately causes intense and direct damage to the flora and fauna; this erosion process is natural, but it is more accelerated due to climate change, direct consequences of the unbridled exploitation of the environment by man. So, to solve this, it is suggested that fast growing trees be planted in areas where the erosion situation is more intense, and the place where the activity will focus is in the Democratic Republic of Congo, because the place is very affected with the erosion process (according to the proponents there are 250 thousand hectares of land affected by this phenomenon there). And how would Cardano relate to all this? The idea is that each tree is an NFT, so that specific characteristics can be tracked more easily (as they would be minted on the Cardano blockchain) and the tracking process is also facilitated. In my view, this initiative can bring a lot of benefits to the Cardano ecosystem, as it will work specifically on the KPI of “increasing the number of dapps and products available for the community to use that help to enrich the ecosystem with new use cases”. As the trees are NFTs, the number of active tokens on our blockchain will increase, naturally the number of active members of our community will also grow, as people come interested in the project and the environmental cause and not necessarily in the blockchain and in their technologies. With this, there will be a community engagement and a new use case will be made available for our technologies, the project also serves Cardano's more holistic goals of providing environmental protection and an investment in causes that relate to the preservation of fauna and flora, and we know how Cardano is a blockchain aware and concerned with this type of issue. It is very positive that the proponents already have experience with reforestation situations - according to them, they have been doing the activities since June 2020; and also already have some familiarity with the “production of educational content about Project Catalyst, Haskell and Plutus”. It is very positive as the proposal is already well defined in relation to which phases would compose the whole and these are well informed here. The first phase would be based on establishing contact with the local population of the erosion areas where we intend to work: “we will go to the Masisi area east of the city of Goma to meet the people who live in areas at risk of erosion and start a conversation with them. We will focus on gathering information on the most used trees and areas of high erosion risk. Each of our actions and experiences will be captured through (videos, images, text and audio) that will serve as the starting point for each dynamic NFTree story.” The second phase would be based on “returning to previously visited areas at the appropriate time of year for seedlings and conditioning our current nurseries”; and the third would be the most involved in Cardano's technologies, based on the NFTs minting process (NFTrees) and the determination of documents necessary for the execution of the project. That is, we know in a satisfactory way what will happen, it is explained to us with an adequate level of detail for the part of the script, so that we can better understand the processes. The risk part is a little confusing, it is not so explained what the possible difficulties to be faced and how they would be solved would be. However, the impact here is really strong.

It was good that the research documentation and white paper were published to prove the integrity of the project. The provided KPIs/metrics were sufficient, and had the specific target in a given time. I just would like to recommend the proposers attach some KPIs/metrics regarding to soil quality; since the stated problem was about soil erosion. These metrics will demonstrate the effectiveness of planting trees to solve the soil problem.

The auditability of this proposal needs to be laid out a little better in my opinion. The proposer has said they will have research and development posted within 3 months, 120,000 seedling growing in one year and a whitepaper established at around 18 months.

These long distances in time make it very difficult to audit the progress of the project. It would be better if the proposer would establish a monthly forum, or github account where they could record each months progress. They could also make videos, or have audio calls where they discuss the current progress. As the proposal currently stands I do not see the auditability as be unsuccessful, nor successful.

For me, the auditability section of the proposal needs to be updated before the success of auditability can be determined.

The entire concept that the proposer has come up with is excellent, and a needed idea in the world, but I would recommend a little more planning and research and more specific proposal moving forward.

The auditability of this project is very high, a roadmap after the project is funded has been designed very clearly including stages, and expected results to be achieved. The timeframe and quantification outlined are ideal for measuring success. Tools that allow the community to measure project progress are also provided by proponents like Github.

I like that this proposal includes lots of relevant data. It is concise, but inclusive in all the necessary information. It gives a descriptive budget breakdown which helps give a visual on where the $25000 is going. It helps the assessors to recognize exactly what is going to happen with the project and how it will be beneficial. If the proposer can include more information on how they will remain accountable to this project, there will be more room for trust and it will be a bigger turnout. I give this section 4 out of 5 stars as I believe that it can be executed properly with the implementation of a few minor changes.

Auditability metrics are basic but well defined, in terms of 120000 seedlings and 30000 NFTree mints on the project timeline.

Voters should also note that the GomaCardanoHub Github account has been used as a transparency forum on a number of proposals, and showcases little performance history as it relates to project activity.

Finally, talking about auditability, once again the topic is not so suitable because of the lack of specific detail on both parts - the monitoring of progress and success. Talking about progress, firstly, it is said that “research documentation published on GitHub within 3 months of funding”. What would that documentation look like, exactly? How would the Cardano community know when information is released, how can we ensure direct outreach in this regard? Regarding the excerpt “120,000 seedlings growing in our nursery within 12 months after funding”: a lot of important information is missing here. First, we would need to audit the entire planting process, which includes the acquisition of seedlings, the planting itself, care for the growing trees, their strengthening, when they would be bearing fruit… NFTress, just “White Paper Publishing and Mining Platform Completed 18 Months After Funding” is not enough for us to properly monitor this activity. In general, there should be more detail on the roadmap, so that we know more precisely what would be done and how, and that way we have the ability to better track what should be developed and delivered. The existence of more exact deadlines would also be essential, the information given about temporality here is quite abstract and inaccurate - for example, until month 3 the documentation would need to be available, and only in month 12 that the seedlings should be cultivated and etc; what would have to happen in each month between the range from month 3 to month 12? Therefore, in addition to understanding the partial results to be achieved, we need to understand the processes behind them, I suggest that any of the proponents prepare monthly reports with updates on all this and that they can make this information available directly and simply to our community, for example through our already established communication channels (discord, telegram, etc.). Speaking now about the success scenario, once again the information is passed on superficially, we know some data necessary for the proposal to be considered a success ("Planting (coining) 30,000 in the first years of launch + Launch of a commercial seed operation / tree seedlings + Integrating farmers, schools and public institutions in our vision“). But a much deeper study would be needed on what the project would produce both for environmental improvement and in order to achieve the objectives of the challenge. I suggest that the proponents do a research on two fronts: 1) they can do a study on how the planting of trees contributed to an improvement of the soil of the Democratic Republic of Congo, in which way the situation of soil degradation was being gradually converted ; 2) whether the specific objectives of the challenge would have been achieved. Did the project contribute to an increase in active members in our community, who would be those people who would buy NFRess? How would this audience be relating to our technologies, in what way would they be fostering ecosystem activities? In addition to the greater number of active tokens minted in our network, there would be a greater circulation of Ada, the people who were involved in this project would have been interested in studying more about our ecosystem, getting involved for example in Catalyst, whether PAs or as members of project teams? All this needed to be understood and reported to us. A final presentation containing these two surveys should be made for our community, as the proponents cite that they will use youtube as a means of communication, a video with these presentations could be created, posted there and widely disseminated within our community. For these reasons, despite the past information being relevant and necessary, so many other equally important ones are not taken into account, a good improvement is needed and more research is carried out so that the monitoring of the proposal is more adequate and efficient.