✅ Top picks with fast approval
1. VitaDAO (focus: longevity / biotech)
- VitaDAO states that if a project is a “good fit”, it can be funded in a few weeks. vitadao.com+2vitadao.com+2
- Their FAQ says: after the initial review they “quickly (< 1 month) vote on whether to fund it”. vitadao.com+1
- Their website says: “applications receive an answer within 2 weeks of submission.” vitadao.com
- Because you are working in a research-deep area (you mentioned your mathematics + blockchain + etc), this could be a good fit (depending on domain).
- Caveats: “Few weeks” is still somewhat vague; being a good fit matters. Also biotech/ longevity may differ from pure mathematics.
2. ResearchHub Foundation (focus: general research/DeSci) fastest approval
- Their blog outlines the process: join community → apply → review → vote. They emphasise “save time … worry less about opaque decision-making” compared to traditional grants. ResearchHub Foundation Blog+2AI Certs+2
- While explicit timeline referral for full funding is less clearly published, they emphasise speed and simplicity over traditional grants.
- For peer-review payments (not full project grants) their timeline is: “Payment is typically made within 7 days …” for reviewers. docs.researchhub.com
- So for small grants/funding it may be quite fast; for bigger research funding the timelines may vary.
🔍 Key considerations & caveats
- “Fast” vs. “really fast”: In the traditional academic grant world, waiting many months (6-12 months or more) is common. DeSci platforms compress that to weeks or a month, but you still need to submit, be reviewed, get community vote, etc.
- Fit matters: The better aligned your research project is with the DAO’s focus (longevity, biotech, open science, etc.), the faster and easier approval tends to go.
- Scale of funding matters: For large-scale projects, even a “fast” DAO may still take more time, more scrutiny. Smaller grants tend to be quicker.
- Governance & token dynamics: These funding DAOs often involve community governance (token holders vote) and the timeline may depend on when the next funding round or voting window occurs.
- Risk & due diligence: DeSci is still relatively new; you should check terms, IP rights, how funding is disbursed (crypto vs fiat), reporting obligations, etc.
👉 Help fund the next public test of AIIM.
Help Test a New Way to Fund Science
AI Internet-Meritocracy (AIIM) is an operational beta designed to allocate available donations to researchers and open-source developers using AI-assisted evaluation of documented contributions. Payment transactions are already recorded on-chain.
The next major evidence milestone is a proposed five-month public adversarial test of the allocation model, with $1,000 distributed to eligible funding recipients. Donations help pay for the development, infrastructure, reviewer and participant recruitment, outreach, and operating work needed to reach and evaluate that milestone.
You do not need to assume AIIM is already proven to support the project. Your donation helps turn the proposal into evidence: what works, what fails, and what should change.
Support the next testing milestone → Read the test proposal →
Independent review
Researchers and technical reviewers: independent criticism is welcome, including negative conclusions. Review AIIM’s assumptions, governance, failure modes, and testing plan →
Research status: AIIM remains experimental. AI-generated evaluations can contain factual errors or biases, and decentralized governance and non-custodial components remain under development. That uncertainty is why public testing, auditability, and external criticism are central to the project.