[Proposal] Ratify Grants Lab Contributor Token Grant Program


With the introduction of Gitcoin 2.0, we have renewed focus as an organization and have set ambitious goals! We are driving towards $50M in GMV this year and a north star of $1B in GMV through Allo over the next several years.

To hit these goals, we need best-in-class contributor talent that is motivated and aligned with our mission and ambition.

Token grants are a key tool we have to create those alignments. After all – the idea that we can program our values into money to ensure alignment is central to our vision for capital allocation.


I propose that every contributor to Grants Lab is eligible for a 4-year token grant. These grants will be subject to linear vesting schedules and a 1-year cliff. Contributors who have been at Gitcoin for over a year and have not previously received a token grant will be eligible for an accelerated 6-month cliff, instead of 1 year.

This proposal covers all current contributors to Grants Labs as well as an option pool for future contributors. In total, 3M GTC is requested. This represents 3% of the supply of GTC and is aligned with (or below) industry standards for team allocations. Though team allocations are typically only done at launch, Gitcoin has evolved substantially since the token launch in 2021. Most of the team that was present in 2021 are no longer active contributors, and the vast majority (80%) of current contributors do not have any token grants.

Potential Risks

  • Operational overhead
    • This will be part of the Grants Lab budgeting process and we will use available tools on the market (Liquifi or Hedgey or Gnosis Safe) to minimize overhead.
  • How can we avoid negative impacts to the organization?
    • Tokens, once earned (including vesting), are wholly owned by the contributor and they have the freedom to do whatever they want with them. This autonomy and ownership are core to the culture we want to build.
    • Additionally, unlocks will occur over a long period of time (4 years) to minimize potential disruption.
  • Why now / how is this fiscally responsible?
    • As mentioned above, we’re at a critical juncture in Gitcoin’s ambition. Token grants are a tool we are deploying to ensure the success of our organization through creating a talented and aligned contributor base. (In fact, we believe it’s irresponsible to have a bunch of contributors who are NOT aligned with the long term org!)
  • COI?
    • The proposer of this plan (Owocki) will not be a beneficiary of it. Owocki will not be requesting token grants through this program.
  • What about individuals who have current token grants?
    • These will be negotiated on an individual basis and may be transitioned to the new structure if the individual consents. This is not a large risk given that there are a small number (3) of current contributors with active token grants.

Feedback welcome.

I welcome feedback from stewards + community members about this plan.


I think token gated grants are a good idea to ensure long term alignment and are most def needed.

Haha, I am here ser :smiley: still believe in Gitcoin, it’s mission and happy to help where I can.

Would like to just share that…Gitcoin has been one of the more special places in web3, IMO it was one of the few DAOs that actually tried to decentralize, which has overall hurt Gitcoin medium term…truth is that people create and also sometimes ruin the things we love.

As a silent observer, loud individual and believer I think that DAOs like Gitcoin should be more careful when onboarding contributors, everybody says they “would love to be here”, but how many actually would love it is the question :smiley: We will see


I think this makes sense. I would be curious to know what the range of grant sizes are and how grants evolve based on performance, tenure, or other variables. However, these aren’t blockers for me to move forward with the proposal.

Supportive of this and looking forward to bringing our contributors closer to Gitcoin ownership and accountability.

1 Like

+1 @ccerv1’s comments that I think a bit more transparency in size and terms would be great. I’m a big fan of driving more alignment between the individuals in the DAO and the token. I’d love for the token allocations to also be driven by impact/outcome and not just unlocked based on time.


I’m supportive of this initiative and appreciate the consideration for core contributors.