This is the second proposal of the dcSpark team in the Great Migration and this is very much well-aligned with the challenge setting. The problem is really well-defined with the deep understanding of the current team/start-ups in Ethereum ecosystems. The solution is the 4-6 week accelerator program with the commitment from the team not only during but also post of the accelerator. What would be greater is the scope of the Migration should be expanded moreover the US. The team anticipates the main risks of this proposal is the insufficiency of the quality startups applicant. I highly appreciate the team humbleness and leverage the SOSV team for the community expansion and attractions, especially this related a new kingdom of the Ethereum ecosystems.

The total value of assets locked on Milkomeda has dropped from approximately 100 million to about 26 million. Mikomeda needs more teams to develop more useful decentralized applications for users. Therefore, Mikimeda is focusing on supporting startups to help them raise money to develop ideas and create valuable products for users on Cardano. This proposal may help address the challenge's claim: "Projects have planned or launched on an EVM-based blockchain implementation in the Cardano ecosystem and can do that easily." The proposal will help teams or startups that are intending to develop products on ETH that will think about developing on Cardano's Mikomeda sidechain. With the benefits of consulting support from Milkomeda and sosv venture capital fund, at the same time, there is money to cover the initial costs but also support advertising to attract users to use the product. At the same time, support the next round of funding, for future product development. This proposal very effectively addresses the requirement of the Challenge and I love it.

This Proposal has correctly addressed the Challenge Topic of "The Great Migration (from Ethereum)" as it aims to attract start-up projects to join the Cardano Ecosystem. As a serial start-up myself, I find the Team's solution very helpful and practical. There are also acceleration programs in Vietnam which I find very helpful to young entrepreneurs and start-ups. These programs equip Vietnamese start-ups with the basic skills and knowledge to carry out their new ideas and correct their business plans if there are deadly flaws that need to be addressed. Most of the start-ups chosen to be in these programs are doing well in the Vietnamese market. The Team has a good idea to attract start-ups to migrate to Cardano Eco-system from Ethereum, it does not only bring start-up users to Cardano but also promotes Cardano as a platform that is active in encouraging, facilitating, and coaching start-ups to be better funded, better planned, and better executing their ideas and inspiration. I believe this is beneficial to both promote Cardano's reputation and eventually bring about financial benefits.

"I believe the idea can be scaled internationally to every country in the world. A lot of successful and inspiring people around the world would be willing to share their time and experience with younger generations as a whole, and young entrepreneurs in particular.

In addition to this, the Team (supposedly) is made up of English native speakers, which would be vastly beneficial in promoting their ideas and communicating with participants of the program. "

I find the team's objectives unspecific and unmeasurable. While the fund amount that they are asking for is high at USD 120,000, it does not show how Cardano can benefit from this program. In addition, the Team has not demonstrated how the collaboration with an outside partner SOSV can be executed: How is the collaboration planned out? Who will bear the cost? At what amount? Who will take care of marketing and finances? And so on. For the above-mentioned reasons, I give the Team an average of 3/5 for Impact.

This proposal is aimed at startups from other blockchains that need to migrate to the Cardano blockchain; they need the advice and assistance of a reputable and experienced organization to solve problems and work toward a roadmap. The propose will assist startups in moving their projects to the Cardano blockchain more quickly and successfully. Along with that, collaboration with the SOSV organization increases the proposal's credibility and influence, allowing the proposal to select the most suitable startups. However, I'd like to know if the team has a plan in place to mitigate the risk that all five startups will fail on demo day, such as a few extra weeks to advise on improving the idea. This is to ensure that the proposal is effective. This proposal perfectly fits the chapter's challenge, and I have high hopes for it, so it gets 5 points.

Milkomeda C1 is an Ethereum Virtual Machine, EVM, based sidechain connected to Cardano. With this proposal they team up with SOSV (sosv.com), one of the most active early stage investors in the US, to attract new startups.

It is essential that new projects seek to exploit the communication between Etereum and Cardano. This proposal focuses on helping and incubating these types of projects so it fits perfectly with the challenge.

This proposal addresses the challenge by attempting to accelerate the adoption of Cardano and Milkomeda by providing mentorship, funding, technical support and other benefits to projects/startups considering Cardano. There are many barriers to migrating to a new blockchain. This project facilitates the process for adoption by providing the support and expertise needed to successfully launch.
The team has already implemented this idea and have at least 5 startups in queue per their Medium article on 6/7/2022. This proposal would allow them to fund an additional 5 startups in the accelerator program. To better understand some of the marketing strategy, take a minute to read about growth hacking if you're unfamiliar. This project, by it's nature, encourages migration from Eth and Eth compatible blockchains and is deserving of 5 stars in effectively addressing the challenge.

The project is a 4-6 week accelerator program in partnership with SOSV and industry leaders in the Cardano ecosystem to invest in startups growing on Milkomeda, a full sidechain that corresponds to ETH. The project will make a big impact on developers, what can be done on ETH can be done easily, better and cheaper on Cardano. Therefore, the project is completely suitable for the Challenge This is a good opportunity for startups, with technical support from dcSpark, dLab, and the core developers behind Milkomeda. Aside from the main risk that there aren't enough good quality startups to sign up for the program, I think there's also the risk that the whole community is waiting for the Vasil hard fork to come, everything is compressed. In terms of the impact of this proposal compared to the Challenge, I rate it 5

This has been extremely beneficial in drawing numerous new projects and investors to Cardano and facilitating the expansion of the Cardano ecosystem. The proposer will be able to draw in many new projects by running a 4-6 week acceleration program, which will accelerate the growth of the Cardano ecosystem. This proposal can be scaled to meet future challenges because a similar type of acceleration program can be run to draw numerous new projects in the future. The proposal's metrics and goals are in line with the issue. As a result, this proposal effectively addresses the problem.

The proposal is a continuation of the previous Milkomeda accelerator program, a 6-week acceleration program that consisted of various support, guiding, and funding for startups. This time Milkomeda is partnering with SOSV. The proposal is concise but provides enough information on critical parts. With the experience Milkomeda has had on previous accelerator programs and the dire market situation where funding is in high demand, the risk of the project is very low. The proposal provides the main risk of the project as a low number of good quality startups applying for the accelerator. However, they provide a mitigation plan by using an outbound strategy.

The proposer claims that growing an ecosystem is hard even harder is doing it in a speedy manner and claims that some startups that are already in Ethereum need convincing and mentoring to join the ecosystem and grow fast. In this proposal proposer offers a solution, which is to create a program lasting 4-6 weeks in partnership with SOSV (one of the most active early stage investors in the US) that scout, attract, support, guide and fund startups with high potential of growth. In this proposal, key metrics are listed that satisfy the challenge settings and the proposal is able to scale to address future challenges.

How Ethereum Startups Join the Cardano Ecosystem and Grow Fast. The author says that the project is collaborating with one of the most active investors in the US (SOSV) that this project is proposing to support capital from Catalyst. That is, this project is calling for round 2 capital. The project's target audience is quality Statups with the potential to expand to Cardano through the project:

• Acceleration program within 4-6 weeks for startups such as funding, practice, promotions….
• Advertisement As mentioned in the topic section this project seeks to attract, support, guide and fund potential startups. There will be many good projects but not enough development capital so this project is very necessary for them, it can be said that this is the virtual Shark Tank project. The risk is that if the problem is correctly predicted, the project will be difficult to develop if enough potential startups are attracted. I agree with this project

The proposal's goals align with that of the challenge. I'm in agreement that start-ups need to be incentivized and incubated to onboard them onto Cardano-funded solutions. However, I'm not certain that the proposer effectively addresses the challenge.

The proposer explains that they received 60+ proposals yet only funded five proposals. It's not clear what the gap in quality between those that were funded and not funded is, but this is something that should be remedied by revamping the accelerator process.

The proposer goes on to explain that once Catalyst funds are used to incentivize developers, other monies from Dlabs can be used to further fund projects that the team vets and selects. Therefore the proposer currently has access to fund more developers. Finally, as important as it is to support start-ups, the proposer identifies a fundamental problem that they have experienced: "The main risk is to not have enough good quality startups applying for the program."

I'm not convinced that offering more funding or even more support solves this fundamental problem. If I could, I would encourage the proposer and team to come up with more innovative approaches to attracting the quality developers they would like instead of focusing on the known classes of developers. If that new and innovative approach is their partnership with SOSV then that should be emphasized and elaborated upon.

The transition between Ethereum and Cardano is one of the most noticeable events in term of cross-chain integration. As the challenge stated about how significant projects on Ethereum could be benefit from Cardano by utilizing the platform and the problem statement in the proposal, it’s concludable that “Accelerator batch #3” could potentially be a substance that will increase the migration speed. From the Impact viewpoint, it can be inferred that the proposol articulately solve the problem of improve,diversify and expand the ecosystem of Cardano by their work description and also partnership with Milkomeda, SOSV. Even the team listed in the proposal is already collaborating cross chain from blockchain and business organizations. With the listed team in their success in Batch 1 in the medium page, there are already a range of projects that has been participated into the program including Djed (Cardano stable coin protocol). Speaking of linkage, the proposal has linked start up, accelerator features to Cardano but should also specify the targeted amount of Ethereum project they want to bridge and run on Cardano Blockchain to adapt correctly the challenge of “ The Great Migration from Etherum “ from Catalyst. As they stated in the risk manangement section, “..we were able to get over 60 applications to acceleration program. Unfortunately we ere only able to accept 5 startups.” , from this point the project impact could be decrease since the point of the challenge focus on the quantity of transited project into Cardano. In order to manage the program’s own risks, there should be a criteria or investment that would likely expand the capability of the program. Or one feasible suggestion would be the classification of start up based on their size, from that the team could design a specific budget to sponsor for the small size one to continue growing. The team can take the 10th topic in SDG goal “Reduced Inequalities” to boost the impact by explaining that between Blockchain system there are integration process that can be universalized (like this accelerator batch) for business, organization to join into a more sustainable platform.

dcSpark, the creators of Milkomeda have a proposal for an accelerator program for startups that want to transition to Cardano from Ethereum. This will be done in partnership with a company called SOSV that has a lot of experience in this field (over 1000+ investments and multiple acceleration programs). I think this is a great idea and a great fit for this challenge, of course. Transitioning from Ethereum to Cardano will be difficult for lots of developers, due to differences in code, infrastructure etc and having a dedicated company that has already proven itself on this blockchain to support you with the transition would be extremely valuable. The main risk that the proposers identified is the fact that not enough good quality startups might apply to the program. The plan to mitigate this however is to have lots of applications and scrutinize them thoroughly, before ultimately accepting only a few. I fully agree that this proposal effectively addresses the The Great Migration (from Ethereum) challenge. Score: 5.

This proposal addresses the challenge by trying to attract high quality startups from Ethereum to Cardano. The main goal of this challenge is to facilitate the migration of Ethereum dapp to the Cardano ecosystem. The team has partnered with an early stage startup investor organization, to launch an accelerator program for Ethereum startups. This is because building in a new ecosystem can be hard and overwhelming and startups may need mentorship and guidance to be able to properly build on Cardano. That’s why an accelerator program makes sense and should be very useful and add value to the Cardano ecosystem. The chosen startups will also receive great benefits ranging from funding to support from top Cardano developers. In fact each startup will get 20k usdc and 6+ weeks of technical support from the Dcspark team. I think that this is great but, it will only make sense if the projects that get chosen are high quality with awesome potential of growth. There are also other benefits for the startups that will join the accelerator program. They will be promoted through Milkomeda communication channels which is a great marketing opportunity. There is also the possibility to livestream the demo of their products. Altogether, the proposal should have a good impact on the Cardano ecosystem.

Addressing the need to support startups on Cardano to accelerate deployment and rapid construction through Milkomeda (A bridge network between Cardano and Ethereum). When projects are supported through the Milkomeda bridge, it will be very convenient to speed up the implementation as well as be supported by experienced people including both financial and human. In the future, this is really necessary because the previous projects built on ETH are very large and the migration to Cardano is inevitable because of the technical factors of Cardano and Ethereum. This proposal is in line with the Challenge given by supporting the transition from Ethereum over. The plan is well thought out, predictable, and ready to go, but needs more clarity and detail on the content for better practical implementation and future development platform

To grow the Cardano ecosystem quickly and attract developers who have understood and built projects from scratch on Cardano, we also need to convince and support an exodus of Ethereum projects to Cardano. This is one way to have the fastest-growing ecosystem. This proposal aims to build a chapter from search to comprehensive support for Ethereum startups moving projects to Cardano's Milkomeda C1 sidechain. Once this proposal has started, the Cardano user community has more options for using the service. I rate this proposal as excellently meeting and solving these challenging installation requirements. However, it can still be further enhanced if the proponent can build a portal or community to support other developers from Ethereum. They want to migrate to Cardano without receiving direct support from this program.

The proposal addresses a real and well defined problem where startups face challenges to migrate from Ethereum to Cardano ecosystem. Besides the funding required, the proposal highlights the importance of accelerating all activities needed for the migration. Although the suggested acceleration program can attract more projects to the Cardano ecosystem I think it meets partially the goals of this challenge. According to the shared publications in Twitter and Medium.com Milkomeda has already sorted 5 startups in a previous batch and they will utilize the Milkomeda C1 sidechain that connects to the Cardano main chain. However, it is not clear how the selected startups will become part of the Cardano ecosystem. It looks that no implementation will take place to fully deploy projects from Ethereum to Cardano. Also it is not clear the role of SOSV and why partnership is needed with an external VC, as funding has been already requested in FUND9. The above doubts lead me to the conclusion that the KPIs of the challenge are not fully aligned with the proposal.

Milkomeda is doing an important thing in the Cardano ecosystem by creating an EVM bridge for non-EVM blockchains.

This proposal signals the next step in the journey that Milkomeda started. A lot of Ethereum apps might be skeptical about moving to Cardano but this will help hold their hand and lead them safely to the chain.

If successful, this will help in setting off a chain(😏) reaction that will bring other apps on board. Speed and accuracy is at play here and Milkomeda has hit the core of the issue with this proposal.

The OKR/KPI indicators are very simple and easily to be tracked. What should be improved is the number of inputs (the number of applying teams from the whole applying funnels: knowing about the programs/Applying/Selecting/Mentoring/Delivering the MVP.) What could even be more impactful is the end product delivery after MVP stages. There should be a source of tracking so that the Cardano Community can follow and track the project. There should also be mentioned what is the tentative start day and end date so that the community know the milestones instead of just the total duration and a draft budget also it is not sufficient to be audited at the end of the proposal (if funded)

Cardano and Milkomeda need to have more accelerators like this one to make it easier for more teams and startups to join the ecosystem. Help them easily have the cost to maintain and advise on how to create a good product for users. At the same time, support advertising to attract users, help the product generate revenue and profit so that the business model becomes sustainable. Helping these startups create products and good cash flow will greatly accelerate the growth of the Cardano ecosystem. I believe this is an extremely useful proposition that voters should not ignore to help Milkomeda fund this accelerator program.

Since this proposal does not involve technical issues, and the Team seems experienced with relevant background in start-ups, I trust that they will be able to implement the timeline successfully. However, the team needs to clarify the important milestones with more specific details for readers to assess their projects more easily. While the Team has provided the solution to the problem, they have not stated the expected outcome of their solutions. There are no measurable qualitative or quantitative goals after the program has been implemented. How do the Team know if the start-ups have learned and grown from the coaching activities? How can they measure the effectiveness of the program based on the start-ups' key figures? How do they know that they are doing a good/bad job so that they can improve in the next program? I, as a Cardano Community Member, want to know these important details to evaluate the success of this program later on. The Team's solution is not carefully elaborated in their proposal, and I don't think that they have put enough effort into doing so. I think the Team is capable of composing a more detailed proposal with specific cost items, KPI items, and measurable outcomes. While I find the Team's idea very inspiring, I do not value highly their devotion to the presented proposal. For the above-mentioned reasons, I give the Team an average of 2/5 for Auditability.

The group's measurement indicators are adequate for meeting the challenges requirements as well as evaluating the proposal's success. However, if the team can more clearly state the metrics that the team expects the startup ideas to be able to achieve after this training, such as marketing skills, design skills, or important knowledge in the process training program. This provides the community with more information to accurately assess the project's success and understand the quality of this proposal. Because there is a lack of some information and the indicators are not clear for the community to understand how successful demo projects are, I give this section 4 points.

The metrics for measuring project development are sufficient. It is considered successful if at least 3 startups are able to present a demo of their MVP after the programme. If this happens we will benefit from at least 3 new high quality projects interested in Cardano-Etherum interaction.

KPIs monitored will be the number of applications, acceptance of quality projects, teams finishing the program in 6+ weeks and deployment of a MVP. While it's not a big concern due to the public nature of this team, I would have appreciated knowing the location of information to track the progress of this project. The Cardano community will be able to easily track the startups participating in this accelerator program, prompting a 5 star rating in auditability.

The project presents 4 KPIs for evaluation, all of which are easy to quantify and objective. However, the project should provide specific update links for the community to easily track the results and development of the project. The success of the project is very desirable, creating all conditions for the startup to develop, attracting more community, and helping the Cardano ecosystem to be strong. Everything that happens on Milkomeda generates great attention from the ETH community. I give this part 5 points

The proposer has specified key milestones and a timeline for implementing the proposal. One month will be dedicated to interviewing startups, and after a few weeks, a startup will be chosen and the program will begin. The next six weeks will be dedicated to the acceleration program. This rough plan, as well as the proposer's suggestions for measuring project progress, will be sufficient to track the project's progress. The proposal will be successful if 5 good startups are chosen and at least 3 startups complete the program successfully by presenting an MVP at the demo day. The proposer has provided a clear and understandable description of the problem and also a clear explanation of the solution. Cardano has a very strong technical foundation; the only thing it lacks is marketing in order for it to reach its full potential. As a result, the proposer will be able to attract new startups and investors from other chains by implementing this program. Through the program, startups and investors will be able to learn more about cardano and begin developing new projects on the cardano network, which will provide a significant boost to the growth of the cardano ecosystem. As a result, this proposal can be described as a small step in the right direction. Other then budget breakdown the information provided should be adequate to assess the proposal's success and progress.

There is 4 point used to measure the project progress, the number of applications, acceptance of good projects, finishing the program in 6+ weeks, and demo day presentation. All of it is clear and quantifiable. The defined success is very clear and measurable. By selection of 5 startups and 3 startups finishing in the demo day with an MVP.

I would like to see a detailed roadmap with milestones, especially when it comes to larger requested amounts like the one in this proposal. It would be great if the KPIs were worked out in more detail and a public channel was presented through which the community could monitor the development and success of this project.

Indicators to measure progress are given reasonably, what apps have been developed for the accelerator, how many good quality projects have been appraised by the scheme, the program is completed on schedule and finally a demo showcasing the startups. If the proposal provides a more detailed allocation table, it will show the transparency of the project. If 2/3 of the companies are successfully supported, it will create credibility and trust for other startups to grow on Cardana through Milkomeda C1. If successful, you will bring many entrepreneurs to Cardano

I don't believe the proposer provides me with enough information to audit the progress of the project including the desired outcomes. The proposer is looking to evaluate success by increasing the number of applicants beyond the approximately 60 applications received last round. One would expect that to easily be achieved given that they are offering significantly more funding. Going further the proposer describes a measure based on the number of "quality" applicants; however, there is no description of how I am to objectively measure quality applicants.

Given that the team is looking to select the same number of start-ups with double the funding this time around, they could have used the previously funded start-ups (and measures used to audit their progress) as some sort of benchmark. Of course, this assumes that they continue to evaluate already funded projects in an objective way. If that is the case, the proposer should have leveraged that structure for the next round of start-ups, and committed to making such information accessible via public channel to the Cardano community.

For the audit section we need to talk about the quality of the metrics that is being used in the proposal. The first numeric metrics on the number of applications is considered acceptable but when it comes to “Acceptance of good quality projects”, what type of acceptance criteria would there be used to qualify projects? And the last metrics on “demo day presentation and MVP by startups”, what specific number of MVP by startups will there be heading and what criteria is taken into account to measure the success of the presentation day? Speaking of the success for the project, the proposer should explain clearlier on the number 5 that they’d chosen. If that considerably small number was taken, there should be explanantion on the quality of chosen of the selection process (ex : criteria on the size, impact, budget and scalability of the project). PA could also be question about the continuation of the project since there are numerical labels of “batch” like batch 1,2 and now is 3 in the proposal. The proposal have to also specify the difference between each batch to ensure that their goal is cleared. This happens since the project could repeativly be executed after receiving funds, with the same goals but what Catalyst want to sponsor for these pariticularly continous projects are their purpose after each fund. If there are positive, innovative and scalability proven for the batch, the project will be more capability of funding. Or instead of increasing the size of the programme, the project can extend the programme network by building communities, dApps or promoting strategy for their program.

As measures of progress, the proposers suggest the number of applications to the acceleration program, how many of them will be accepted, how many finish the program and how many demos / MVP’s result. My only comment is that for these to be proper key progress indicators, we should have had some estimations of what to expect here so that we can later compare them to the actual results. Success for the project is defined as “at least 3 startups finishing the program successfully by presenting their demo / MVP”. This seems clear enough and I believe the information here is sufficient to audit the proposal. Score: 5.

I think that the proposal is auditable because they have included a roadmap with milestones. They also have included the metrics that should help track the success of the proposal. The roadmap is divided into phases which will start with a proposer vetting of the startups. After the selection of the startups, the program will start with team introduction and various plannings. Then there will be mentoring sessions for the startup teams and other benefits such as marketing boost among other things. Lastly there will be a demo presentation which is great for the startup because they will have the opportunity to showcase their product and attract potential users and investors. The team has also added metrics that they will use to measure the success of this proposal. The first metric is the number of applications to the accelerator program. This number should indicate clearly the demand level of the program. The community should be able to estimate the future of this concept based on the number of startups trying to join the program. There is also the number of good quality projects that join that program. If high quality projects are not willing to join the program, we can consider the project not successful. We will also track the demo of mvps presented by the startups. Altogether, I think that the proposal includes enough information that should help the community track its progress.

There is no clear roadmap for implementation, this is different from the project completion timetable, the proposed roadmap has specific timelines for what the project will achieve, here it could be 3,6,12 months, the milestones that the proponent thinks will achieve specific results, the time to achieve the results should be listed in detail at least by month and each item to be completed, The exporter has not established specific KPI measurement indicators, only talking about the parameters to be monitored in general, this helps both implementers and interested people to monitor the project, making the project easy to implement and transparent. More transparent, there is no public channel for people to track how the project is progressing and what results have been achieved.

This proposal is a program for technical support and funding for potential startups, so this project management team also has perfectly reasonable goals and KPIs that give the community and me thorough evaluation and testing. This is the proposal I would most like to provide them with funding.

Although the proposal provides some metrics to track the progress of the project it lacks some further clarification on specific KPIs. For example, how is good quality justified? How does the number of applications relate to the progress? Also, "Acceptance" is an action, not a KPI. The MVP acronym is also not explained to understand how the KPI gets affected by it, or maybe not? Even further, it would be nice to state the means to view and track the KPIs by the Catalyst community. Measuring the success of this project is quite clear and accurately defined.

While there's confidence in the team delivering the project, it is difficult to track progress based on the information provided. With the kind of budget being asked, it would be great to see a more concrete roadmap that implies the monthly or weekly reports on progress of the project.

Asides that, we can work with the information provided to see how we can track the project.