Unawarded Factom Grant Proposal Triall

Status
Not open for further replies.
Secured
#1
Dear Factom community,

Please find enclosed our grant proposal for the first Factom grant round of 2019.

Triall is building an online multi-sided platform for clinical research professionals, offering blockchain-enabled applications and APIs that are designed to tackle several major issues that hinder the quality and efficiency of clinical trials. For the past four months, we have been working with Sphereon on the development of our first application: a document processing & data management application for clinical trials. By using the Factom protocol, this application allows clinical research professionals to establish proof of the authenticity and integrity of their clinical trial data.

The primary purpose of this project is to finish developing our document processing & data management application in collaboration with Sphereon, and subsequently use it in a real-life clinical trial provided by our partner CR2O. To the best of our knowledge, this will be the world’s first-ever clinical trial that applies blockchain technology in its operations. Reaching this objective will be instrumental in the strategic marketing of Triall and will contribute to the branding of the Factom protocol and its aim of becoming the global standard for data integrity.

We will be more than happy to answer any questions you might have regarding this proposal in the public grant discussion.

Best regards,

Hadil Es-Sbai
CEO Triall

Triall: www.triall.io
Sphereon: www.sphereon.com
CR2O: www.cr2o.nl


UPDATES ON THE GRANT PROPOSAL [07-02-2019]:

Dear Factom Community,

Please find enclosed our adjusted proposal.

In consideration of your feedback, we have adjusted the proposal to focus solely on the finalization of our MVP and its subsequent use in a clinical trial. The requested funding is thereby lowered to 3000 FCT.

As suggested, other objectives have been removed from the proposal and may be submitted in later grant rounds, following a positive reception of our MVP.

We would like to emphasize that the development of our MVP has been funded from our internal resources (both in-cash and in-kind) over the past four months, and that the application is nearing completion. The Factom Grant funds will be used to finalize the MVP/eTMF, and demonstrate its functionality in a real-world setting.

Thank you kindly for all your valuable feedback.

Best wishes,

Hadil


Update [07-02-2019]:
Indemnification & waiver added to proposals


As required by document 153 that governs Factom grant round 2019-01: This is the thread for grant proposal FACTOM-GRANT-TRIALL-001.
The review process starts at Â
2019-01-31 00:00, so please refrain from starting public review or questions before that time. If you notice clear errors in the proposal you can contact the author of the grant proposal directly.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Secured
#2
Thank you for your proposal.

This is a generic question I ask in each grant thread.
This is currently the 3rd grant round. I consider that one of the very important criterion to select a grant (apart from its potential value) is the capacity of the grantee to deliver in time what it pledged. Therefore past grants can be used as an indicator.

If you did receive grants in previous rounds, could you please fill the following fields? This would increase transparency and help the standing parties to select grants.

- Have you, or one of your partners, previously received grants : Yes/No. If No, then you can stop here :)
- List of grants received : grant X1 from round Y1, grant X2 from round Y2...
- Status for each grant : grant X1/Still ongoing or Completed, grant X2/....
- Description of the work accomplished so far and Links supporting it : Discord Group/Factomize thread/Github/Reports/...
- Description of the residual work to be completed : XXXXXX

Thank you for your cooperation.
 
Secured
#3
I like this project and probably De Facto will support it.

But I have a question.
If I understand correctly, this is a commercial project. (fix me if I'm wrong)
So why does it need a grant to get developed? Why it's not in your business model?
I.e. you fund development, as a normal business, and then receive profit from this project that covers expenses and earn a profit.
 
Secured
#4
I like this project and probably De Facto will support it.

But I have a question.
If I understand correctly, this is a commercial project. (fix me if I'm wrong)
So why does it need a grant to get developed? Why it's not in your business model?
I.e. you fund development, as a normal business, and then receive profit from this project that covers expenses and earn a profit.
Dear Anton,

Thank you for your interest and inquiry.

We are currently in the start-up phase of what will become a non-profit ecosystem for clinical research professionals. While each team member has invested (pro rata), we are now reaching out in various manners (e.g. Horizon 2020 SME, Factom Grant) to continue our development of the eTMF. This will provide us with a strong enough basis for the non-profit foundation to initiate the ITO and further developments. Once launched, our business model is self-sustaining, where excess income is re-invested into the ecosystem and community.

I hope this answer helps.

Adding to that, we are very interested in your feedback (and others of course) and would love to further discuss the current proposal and the Triall Ecosystem itself, either here or in person.
 
Secured
#5
Hi @Hadil Es-Sbai
We're huge supports of everything Sphereon has been involved in. However, considering the strained FCT grant round resources, we have a really difficult time supporting a grant for a private endeavor. Therefore, we would like to suggest that you suspend this grant for this round and come back in Grant Round 4 seeking a grant for the finished project. At that point, hopefully there will be a product you will be able to demo for the community also. Thank for your consideration and best of luck with the build-out!

Matt
 
Secured
#6
Hi @Hadil Es-Sbai and thank you for your application!

I, personally, do not have a problem with this project being a private endeavor and you looking for partial funding through the Factom Grant Pool. I think that's fair, given that you will be utilizing Factom in your offering and thus will (hopefully) bring further usage and visibility to the protocol, which directly benefits the standing parties & token holders.

However, I also agree with @Matt Osborne's point above to an extent. If you would be willing to:
  • split your grant proposal in two parts, where you apply for 30-40% of the amount you're currently asking in this grant round, and for the remainder in the next grant round upon completion of the MVP/pilot
  • prominently feature Factom on your website (e.g. put "Powered by the Factom (R) protocol" or something similar with a link to the protocol website)
Factomatic would be very happy to support your application.

Thank you for your consideration!
 
Secured
#7
Thank you for the very interesting application @Hadil Es-Sbai.

We believe something like this would be very beneficial for the Factom ecosystem and a very good match from a tech perspective.

Due to this grant round being severly oversubscribed (partly because the grant pool has some debt to pay off) We will support your grant, but it will be hard for us to rank it very high, as we feel we must prioritize core development and it takes up a significant part of the ask.

Splitting the grant into two as suggested above (MVP now, rest later) is maybe something to think about.
 
Secured
#8
Hi @Hadil Es-Sbai and thank you for your application!

I, personally, do not have a problem with this project being a private endeavor and you looking for partial funding through the Factom Grant Pool. I think that's fair, given that you will be utilizing Factom in your offering and thus will (hopefully) bring further usage and visibility to the protocol, which directly benefits the standing parties & token holders.

However, I also agree with @Matt Osborne's point above to an extent. If you would be willing to:
  • split your grant proposal in two parts, where you apply for 30-40% of the amount you're currently asking in this grant round, and for the remainder in the next grant round upon completion of the MVP/pilot
  • prominently feature Factom on your website (e.g. put "Powered by the Factom (R) protocol" or something similar with a link to the protocol website)
Factomatic would be very happy to support your application.

Thank you for your consideration!

Hi Valentin,

Thank you for your reaction and feedback on our proposal.

I think this is an excellent suggestion to split up the current proposal over two grant rounds, also considering the feedback of Matt Osborne, Cryptologic and others.

We will divide our proposal in two parts, over two grant rounds:

· First, focus on finishing the MVP and demonstrating its utility to the Factom Community, thereby lowering the requested FCT.

· Then continue with the remainder of our application in the next Grant round, following success of the MVP.

We also understand the benefits for the Factom community in outreaches like this to increase visibility. We will make sure to prominently feature that we use the Factom Protocol in our continued (marketing) outreaches, starting with the "Powered by the Factom (R) protocol" on our website (temporary design now).

I’m furthermore glad to hear there is interested and support for our initiative, and we look forward to continuing development!

Kind regards,

Hadil
 
Last edited:
Secured
#9
Hi @Hadil Es-Sbai
We're huge supports of everything Sphereon has been involved in. However, considering the strained FCT grant round resources, we have a really difficult time supporting a grant for a private endeavor. Therefore, we would like to suggest that you suspend this grant for this round and come back in Grant Round 4 seeking a grant for the finished project. At that point, hopefully there will be a product you will be able to demo for the community also. Thank for your consideration and best of luck with the build-out!

Matt

Hi Matt,

Thank you for your feedback on the proposal.

We understand the resources of the current FCT grant may be strained and therefore suggest an adjustment to our current proposal. We will lower the requested FCT, and split the proposal over 2 grant rounds, as proposed by Valentine.

I also want to emphasize that although our initiative may be considered a private endeavour, we strongly believe it will benefit the Factom Protocol, both through increased visibility and exposure, and through the utilization of FCT/EC in our applications.

Kind regards,

Hadil
 
Secured
#10
Thank you for the very interesting application @Hadil Es-Sbai.

We believe something like this would be very beneficial for the Factom ecosystem and a very good match from a tech perspective.

Due to this grant round being severly oversubscribed (partly because the grant pool has some debt to pay off) We will support your grant, but it will be hard for us to rank it very high, as we feel we must prioritize core development and it takes up a significant part of the ask.

Splitting the grant into two as suggested above (MVP now, rest later) is maybe something to think about.
Thank you for response. Provided your feedback and that of others, we have indeed decided to split the grant into two parts. I’m glad to hear the proposal was of interest.
 
Secured
#11
Hi Valentin,

Thank you for your reaction and feedback on our proposal.

I think this is an excellent suggestion to split up the current proposal over two grant rounds, also considering the feedback of Matt Osborne, Cryptologic and others.

We will divide our proposal in two parts, over two grant rounds:

· First, focus on finishing the MVP and demonstrating its utility to the Factom Community, thereby lowering the requested FCT.

· Then continue with the remainder of our application in the next Grant round, following success of the MVP.

We also understand the benefits for the Factom community in outreaches like this to increase visibility. We will make sure to prominently feature that we use the Factom Protocol in our continued (marketing) outreaches, starting with the "Powered by the Factom (R) protocol" on our website (temporary design now).

I’m furthermore glad to hear there is interested and support for our initiative, and we look forward to continuing development!

Kind regards,

Hadil
Thank you for your consideration and flexibility. You have our support and good luck with your endeavor!
 
Secured
#12
@Hadil Es-Sbai
You mentioned:
We will divide our proposal in two parts, over two grant rounds:
· First, focus on finishing the MVP and demonstrating its utility to the Factom Community, thereby lowering the requested FCT.
· Then continue with the remainder of our application in the next Grant round, following success of the MVP.
Do I understand correctly:
1) On current stage you started the development of MVP
2) You want to split grant on 2 parts, first part will be used for developing MVP
3) After developing MVP you're going to submit 2nd grant in the next grant round to deliver the service to production?

Question #1:
All above is correct?

Question #2:
I think there are some Operators in community (e.g. De Facto), who is interested in the processes of issuing & using asset tokens. If we (community) decide to fund the development of your MVP, I would ask you to share source (privately) with interested parties for exchange of experience and education.

Is it possible in your case?
(It's about MVP source only, not the full project)
 
Secured
#13
Thank you for your proposal.

If you did receive grants in previous rounds, could you please fill the following fields? This would increase transparency and help the standing parties to select grants.

Thank you for your cooperation.
Hi Matthias,

Triall has not yet before entered (or been awarded) the Factom Grant rounds, but our development partner Sphereon(/BIF) has received previous grants.

I therefore want to quote their answer from a different thread:

Grant round 1, BIF: Java Enterprise Client Library, awarded 1200 FCT, We delivered more than specified against a price that was 1/4th of original grant request. We are maintaining the library and providing support for it (from ANO income).

https://github.com/bi-foundation/fa...RANT-BIF-001/FACTOM-INITIAL-GRANT-BIF-001.pdf

https://github.com/bi-foundation/factom-java/blob/develop

Grant round 2, BIF: Factom Alfresco Content App, awarded 750 FCT. BIF sponsored ¾ of the total budget for this development from ANO income. The grant is progressing nicely an we should be able to provide the complete open-source end product in roughly a month.

https://factomize.com/forums/threads/bif-003-open-source-alfresco-integration-for-factom.955/

Grant round 2, BIF + Factomatic DIDs on Factom, awarded BIF 4500 FCT, Factomatic 4000. This grant has started later than initially planned because of resource constraints by both parties. This grant mentioned milestones and no specific delivery dates. Having said that both parties have decided to ramp up the available resources for this grant, as both parties feel this solution is vital for future expansion/usage of the protocol. Currently we foresee no problems whatsoever to deliver this grant within the milestone limits set and with the functionality promised.

https://factomize.com/forums/threads/bif-factomatic-001-decentralized-identifiers-dids.968/

Grant round 2, BIF+Sphereon, 2 core devs, awarded 18,500 FCT. As explained we have had problems finding good golang developers. This was more of a problem than we expected based on experience with hiring software developers, despite having multiple parties looking for these roles. As this is a grant for direct work being done by developers who will provide insight into their work, we do not provide additional intermediary updates, since the work and transparency should speak for itself. As stated in the application we have 1 core developer and hope to finalize our talks with a second one next week. We have been completely transparent about how the funds for the initial round will be used in the subsequent round, so the total request for that round is minimal. We used excess income because of a higher FCT price in there as well.

https://factomize.com/forums/threads/bif-001-factom-core-development.953/
 
Last edited:
Secured
#14
@Hadil Es-Sbai
You mentioned:

Do I understand correctly:
1) On current stage you started the development of MVP
2) You want to split grant on 2 parts, first part will be used for developing MVP
3) After developing MVP you're going to submit 2nd grant in the next grant round to deliver the service to production?

Question #1:
All above is correct?

Question #2:
I think there are some Operators in community (e.g. De Facto), who is interested in the processes of issuing & using asset tokens. If we (community) decide to fund the development of your MVP, I would ask you to share source (privately) with interested parties for exchange of experience and education.

Is it possible in your case?
(It's about MVP source only, not the full project)
Hi Anton,

Question 1: This is indeed correct. We have been developing the MVP over the past four months on internal funds, and in fact are nearing the final stages of MVP development. This grant will be used to finish the MVP. Other objectives of the current proposal may be submitted in a later grant round.

Question #2: The eTMF application will be an integral part of Triall Ecosystem for clinical trials, together with various other applications. Parts of these projects will be made open-source and available to the community, but we cannot share the entire source of these applications to interested parties. We are of course interested in collaborating with others and sharing our experiences.
 
Secured
#15
You are missing the required I&W section from your grants:

Indemnification & waiver

By submitting a grant proposal or participating in the grant proposal process, the
submitter hereby agrees to release, waive, discharge the Guides, Authority Set
Members, Standing Parties, and their respective employees, contractors, agents,
representatives, successors, and assigns (collectively, the “Releasees”) from any and
all liabilities, claims, and demands of whatever kind of nature, either in law or in
equity, which arise or may hereafter arise from participating in the grant proposal
process, except for those caused by the willful misconduct or intentional torts of the
Releasees. The submitter further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the
Releasees against all liabilities, obligations, losses, damages, penalties, claims,
actions, judgments, costs, or expenses which may be imposed on, asserted against
or incurred by any Releasee as a result of, or arising out of, or relating to this grant
process contemplated by this document, including without limitation, any judgment,
settlement, attorneys’ fees and other costs or expenses incurred in connection with
the defense of any actual or threatened action or proceeding, except for the liabilities
caused by the willful misconduct or intentional torts of the Releasees.

Note: Please see Governance for proper definitions of Guides, Authority Set
Members, and Standing Parties. Grant proposals submitted in another format shall
have this indemnification and waiver.
 
Secured
#17
I think it is rather important for the Factom protocol to have respectable people from the Clinical Trials world coming over from another blockchain that is way bigger by marketcap to Factom to bring a complete ecosystem on top of it. The ecosystem is fueled directly by Entry Credits and by bringing the first ICO on top of FAT and thus also burning ECs.

The team has invested a lot of money, time, dedication and expertise into this and IMO these types of teams/solutions is exactly what Factom needs for adoption. I hope people have taken the time to look into https://triall.io to see the team and partners involved.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.