The proposal outlines a collaboration between Gitcoin and Aave Grants DAO (AGD), allocating $25,000 from Gitcoin’s matching pool, matched by AGD, for a total of $50,000 to support Aave ecosystem projects through a Quadratic Funding Round, aiming to enhance community engagement, support past AGD grantees, and establish a precedent for how we might grow and foster other strategic partnerships.
Round Details
This collaboration between Gitcoin and AGD aims to support the growth and development of the Aave ecosystem through a strategic funding round, leveraging Gitcoin’s platform and AGD’s commitment to enhancing the Aave ecosystem. The initiative will utilize the $50,000 matching fund for impactful contributions to projects on Aave, emphasizing retroactive grants and support for past AGD grantees who continue to contribute to the protocol. In launching this round, Gitcoin and Aave follow the trend of other RPGF programs that have redirected some of their funding toward their communities. We’re also onboarding AGD, a highly respected grants program, as a Grants Stack partner and part of our grants ecosystem.
Objectives:
Retroactive Grants and Eligibility: Prioritize retroactive grants for previous AGD grantees with ongoing contributions to Aave, making all past AGD recipients eligible if they have an active or new project proposal.
Maximize Project Onboarding: Aim to onboard as many projects as possible to support a wide range of initiatives within the Aave ecosystem.
Boost Engagement: Increase engagement across social platforms such as X, Lens, and Farcaster, enhancing visibility and community participation.
Aave Community Engagement: Encourage the Aave community’s involvement through donations to projects, using donation volume as an indicator of engagement.
Community Approval Requested
Before proceeding, we seek approval from the Gitcoin community to allocate $25,000 from Gitcoin’s matching pool for the proposed partnership with Aave Grants DAO (AGD). Your input is vital in ensuring transparency and alignment with our collective goals.
Please share your feedback to help shape this collaboration.
As both a long time Gitcoin contributor and Aave Grants DAO reviewer, I look forward to seeing this partnership be pushed forward and benefit both eco-systems!
So, since my brother is sleeping, I am forwarding his article into the thread.
Very curious if he could apply for the round, or this would again be met with stern criticism and subsequent ban on aave forum.
If this is YES, then I am absolutely furious and against such “collaboration”
I do not think that Aave has a bandwidth to deal with grantees in a polite manner and Gitcoin does not have a competency to know reliably what Aave needs.
I’m a “yes” but I’d love to know more about how we plan to leverage this partnership for a win-win beyond the brand recognition we’ll get from partnering with a stellar brand like Aave
How are we defining and tracking success of our partners, both in support of their growth but also to validate our hypothesis/publicised stance that Grants = Growth?
As an org, what learnings are we hoping to pull from this partnership in particular?
I think it would be really exciting to frame future partnerships as experiments and outline the experiment in those proposals. Ex: “X ecosystem is currently struggling with Y problem and we’re testing a program designed around A,B,C to see how it impacts Y”
Just some food for thought in order to we work together towards solidifying our narrative further through intentional experimentation w/ grants program design :1:
Sure, the objectives for this round are focused on rewarding past Aave Grants DAO grantees who are still actively building in their ecosystem.
All previous grants have been via Direct Funding Mechanisms so this round brings a new approach via QF to help fund these grantees and drive continued incentives for builders in the broader Aave Ecosystem.
In terms of lessons learned, we can use this opportunity to gain insights from one of the most established grant programs in Web3 today (Aave Grants DAO) and use that feedback to improve products and processes.
I understand your comment on solving a problem, but in this case, I feel we are more likely to partner to experiment with and try new funding mechanisms than to address a problem that exists in our partner’s current approach.
I will be voting YES on this proposal. I’d love to see more collaborations like this. I have a few tactical questions about project themes and eligibility that I will park until the time comes.
I have voted yes on this for practical considerations, but did want to flag that it should have ideally gone through the GG20 council that has the power to award matching on matching funds.
Esp since the amounts (25k) fell within the 125k budget of community rounds that we can award
Yes, this proposal predated the work with the Community Council, so I will consider that moving forward.
I also think there may be situations in which we would like to request funds for strategic partnerships that would run rounds outside the normal cadence of GG, so, in those instances, we may see more of this (but would be the exception more than the rule).
