Eligibility and rules

Every rule that affects your score is published here before you apply. There are no hidden penalties anywhere in KAKA Growth Fund.

Eligibility gates

Fail any one of these and your application cannot enter the top 10, whatever it scores.

Team has exactly five eligible membersG1_five_members

Blocking

Application is substantially completeG2_completeness

Blocking

A clearly defined real-world problemG3_real_problem

Blocking

Credible field validationG4_field_validation

Blocking

A functional prototype existsG5_functional_prototype

Blocking

Prototype maturity is Level 3 or aboveG6_maturity_level_3

Blocking

Real-user testing has taken placeG7_user_testing

Blocking

No unresolved serious safety riskG8_safety

Human review

Critical regulatory requirements are acknowledgedG9_regulatory

Human review

A financial plan is presentG10_financial_plan

Blocking

A deployment plan is presentG11_deployment_plan

Blocking

No indication of materially misrepresented claimsG12_integrity

Human review

Suspicion is never a rejection

An integrity, safety or regulatory concern is routed to a programme administrator for a human decision. Nothing is rejected automatically on an AI’s suspicion.

Score caps

A cap limits a whole section when a specific piece of proof is absent. Every cap that fires appears by name in your report.

Section	When it applies	Capped at
A	No field evidence uploaded	5/15
B	No analysis of existing alternatives	15/20
C	Mock-up or concept only (prototype maturity below Level 3)	6/20
C	Functional prototype with no real-user testing	12/20
E	No unit economics (price, unit cost and break-even)	4/10
G	No deployment timeline	5/10
F	No evidence supporting the scalability claim	5/10

The full rubric

One hundred marks across thirty-seven criteria.

A. Problem importance and validation

సమస్య ప్రాముఖ్యత మరియు ధ్రువీకరణ

A1Problem clarity0–3One specific problem, one specific group, one specific place. Full marks require a problem a stranger could go and observe.
A2Root-cause understanding0–3Distinguishes the root cause from the visible symptom, and explains the causal chain.
A3Field evidence0–4Five or more stakeholder interviews plus photographs or survey data, uploaded and relevant. Self-reported numbers with no file score at most 1.
A4Scale and severity0–3The affected-population number is sourced and plausible, and the consequence of inaction is concrete.
A5Existing-solution analysis0–2Names real alternatives (including 'nothing') and explains specifically why each falls short.

B. Solution effectiveness and completeness

పరిష్కార ప్రభావం మరియు సంపూర్ణత

B1Root-cause alignment0–5The solution attacks the stated root cause rather than the symptom, and the link is explicit.
B2Practical effectiveness0–5It would actually work in the described setting with the described users, infrastructure and skills.
B3Advantage over alternatives0–4A specific, preferably quantified advantage over each named alternative.
B4Technical feasibility0–3The technology or method is achievable by this team at this budget, and the team says how.
B5Sustainability and safety0–3No unresolved safety hazard; environmental effects considered; failure modes acknowledged.

C. Prototype functionality and field testing

ప్రోటోటైప్ పనితీరు మరియు క్షేత్ర పరీక్ష

C1Prototype functionality0–7A built artefact performs the primary function, shown in photographs or video. Level 3+ required for marks above 3.
C2Real-user testing0–5People outside the team used it, in the field, and the count and identity are stated. Team-only testing scores 0.
C3Quality of evidence0–3Test reports, dated photographs or video that a third party could check. Verified files score higher than unverified.
C4Improvement after feedback0–3A specific change traced to a specific piece of user feedback.
C5Demonstration readiness0–2A concrete plan for what will be switched on in front of the jury, and honest limitations.

D. Simplicity and ease of adoption

సరళత మరియు స్వీకరణ సౌలభ్యం

D1Ease of understanding0–2A first-time user grasps what it does without jargon.
D2Ease of use0–3Few steps, few decisions, forgiving of mistakes; the user journey shows it.
D3Training requirement0–2Little or no training needed; where training is needed, who gives it is named.
D4Fit with existing behaviour and infrastructure0–3Works with the power, network, literacy and habits that actually exist at the site.

E. Affordability and financial viability

అందుబాటు ధర మరియు ఆర్థిక సాధ్యత

E1Cost affordability0–3The price is credible against the stated user's income, with a comparison the team makes explicitly.
E2Unit economics0–3Price, cost and margin are stated and arithmetically consistent; break-even follows from them.
E3Revenue sustainability0–2Revenue continues without further grants; the post-grant plan is specific.
E4Responsible grant-use plan0–2Line items total ₹5,00,000 or less and buy things that advance deployment, not salaries alone.

F. Scalability and mass-replication potential

విస్తరణ మరియు ప్రతిరూపణ సామర్థ్యం

F1Replication simplicity0–3A defined replication unit and a repeatable process another district could follow.
F2Supply or delivery scalability0–2Supply chain or service capacity can grow 10× without a new invention.
F3Market or beneficiary potential0–2The addressable group is large and sourced, not an inflated national figure.
F4Partnerships and distribution0–2Named institutions with a reason they would cooperate.
F5Scalability evidence0–1Something uploaded that supports the scale claim — a letter, a pilot result, a costed model.

G. Deployment and production readiness

అమలు మరియు ఉత్పత్తి సంసిద్ధత

G1Pilot plan0–2A named location, a named beneficiary count and ordered steps.
G2Production or operational readiness0–3Suppliers or delivery capacity identified, unit cost built up from parts, QC defined.
G3Permissions and partnerships0–2Required approvals identified correctly, and the path to obtaining them is stated.
G4Risk and maintenance plan0–2Named risks with named responses, and a maintenance owner after handover.
G5Impact measurement0–1Indicators chosen before the pilot, with a baseline already measured.

H. Team capability and presentation

జట్టు సామర్థ్యం మరియు ప్రదర్శన

H1Complementary capabilities0–2Five members whose skills genuinely differ and cover the work required.
H2Clear responsibilities0–1Every member owns a named piece of work.
H3Execution commitment0–1Declared weekly availability and a track record of doing the fieldwork themselves.
H4Communication and presentation0–1The application is understandable and the demonstration requirements are prepared. Judge clarity of thought, NOT English fluency or polish.

Decision categories

85–100Grand Finale Ready

75–84Strong Shortlist Candidate

65–74Promising — Needs Targeted Improvement

50–64Early Stage — Major Gaps

Below 50Not Ready

—Ineligible — Mandatory Condition Not Satisfied

—Human Review Required

A score alone never decides the winner. Final selection includes the live prototype demonstration and the jury’s judgement.

Grand Finale weighting

Set before judging begins and locked once it starts.

35%Structured application assessment

30%Prototype functionality and live demonstration

15%Field validation and user adoption

10%Business, deployment and scalability

10%Jury question-and-answer performance

Tie-breaks

Applied in this order when two teams tie.

Higher prototype score
Higher problem-validation score
Higher evidence-confidence rating
Higher ease-of-adoption score
Higher scalability score
Jury decision with a recorded justification

Fairness rules

Binding on the AI evaluator and on every human scorer.

F1Judge evidence and execution, never English fluency, spelling or polish.
F2Accept English and Telugu equally. Translate internally; never deduct for the language used.
F3Do not favour urban, technology-heavy or professionally designed submissions.
F4Give physical products, digital tools and service innovations equal standing.
F5Do not penalise modest presentation quality from rural applicants.
F6Separate presentation quality from solution quality in every judgement.
F7Never infer or use caste, religion, political affiliation or socioeconomic status.
F8A low-cost solution is not a low-value solution. Judge outcome per rupee.

Start your application