[Recap] Partnerships to date - how are these going?

Hey @ceresstation and @vgk - I wonder if you guys are able to offer any updates into the partnerships we have made to date?

I believe GTC was sent to the following teams:

  • CLR Fund
  • Prime DAO
  • Developer DAO

And then it looks like the Snapshot vote was successful for the Radicle alliance/partnership, but I don’t see the Tx on-chain. Did that one end up going anywhere?

I know PGF has been staffing and working on mutual grants for a few seasons now so I would love to get caught up on progress and how these are going. Are there any sort of monthly reports in how we are partnering that I can review?


Hey Kyle - I really appreciate these questions!

Regarding the mutual grants committee, we had our first meeting on May 15th (active for 3 months / 1 season now).

In that amount of time, we’ve:

  • Confirmed and onboarded the following committee members

    • Scott Moore
    • Vishnu Kumar
    • Jeff Morris
    • QZ Hum
    • Maxwell Kanter
    • Dane Lund
    • Ale Borda
    • Simona Pop
  • Created a methodology for considering mutual grants (summarized below):

    • Values Alignment

      • Is the project clearly focused on helping to improve funding for open source software? Does it benefit the narrative of public goods both in theory and practice? (e.g. is this funding shared infrastructure, education, and so on)
    • Strategic Utility

      • Are there clear reasons each project would need to participate in each other’s governance (do we have a shared project together)? Are there strategic advantages to doing so for both projects? (e.g. does this tie into our grants 2.0 vision, are we driving value together in some way)
    • Feasibility & Effectiveness

      • Is it realistic to expect, based on all past actions and statements, that both parties will be able to uphold their end of the bargain and be meaningful participants in each other’s projects for the long term? (e.g. does this require resources / time we don’t actually have, does the project even have enough liquidity)
    • Growth Potential

      • Do we expect that there is meaningful and sustainable potential for growth over time? (e.g. will number go up, do we expect that our partnership will last almost in perpetuity)
  • Evaluated potential 30 mutual grants based on the above criteria

  • Passed 1 mutual grant - in line with our goal of 1 mutual grant / season

Regarding other mutual grants before we established the committee:

  • CLR Fund

    • CLR fund was before my time so don’t have as much context there - but according to this post, that was a pure grant without expectations attached, not a mutual grant :

      “This grant is a no strings attached gesture to the CLR.Fund team. It is possible the two projects may formally work together in the future, but not a requirement for the dispersal of funds.”

  • PrimeDAO

  • Developer DAO

    • IIRC we did the mutual grant with Developer DAO due to the projected success of the project - based on their already impressive community growth + engagement.

    • We were able to secure favorable terms due to our relationship with Developer DAO leadership and hope to see this mutual grant pay off in multiple ways very soon.

    • As far as progress goes - Developer DAO just launched their governance token in the past week - which is a huge milestone - and are currently setting up their foundation.

    • We are looking forward to becoming large stakeholders in Developer DAO governance in the imminent future.

  • Radicle

    • Radicle Snapshot Vote was just passed on their side (Radicle team had some changes due to visa issues).
    • We are about to distribute the tokens from our side.
    • About to start meta-governance coordination - with myself acting as the Gitcoin delegate.

I’d recommend reaching out to @ceresstation directly after he returns from OOO for the notes on mutual grants - we are hesitant to share these in a public forum due to the sensitive nature of evaluating projects in the ecosystem.

As far as non-mutual grant partnerships go - we’ve been excelling there as well. Confirmed matching partners include:

  • Vitalik Buterin
  • Coinbase
  • Momus.eth
  • Ocelot
  • Zora
  • Unlock Protocol
  • ZK Tech Funders coordinated by Anna Rose
  • Figment
  • Celo
  • ENS
  • OP Games/Game7
  • Aurora
  • Chainlink
  • Mask
  • Loot
  • Yearn
  • Polygon
  • 1inch
  • Aave Grants
  • Anoma
  • Stefan George
  • Aragon
  • PlanckerDao
  • Wonderverse
  • Alchemix
  • Krause House
  • Lens Protocol
  • Starkware
  • Forta
  • Wicklow Capital
  • a16z
  • SCRF
  • Molecule
  • And more in the pipeline!

We’re on track for it to be one of the largest rounds yet - without any multisig dependence!

We’d love to give you read access to Hubspot (if you don’t have access already, which you should) - so that you can keep track of our partnerships efforts in real time!

Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns, and thanks again for prompting this conversation!


I just love seeing how many parnetships Gitcoin has :heart_eyes:

Can we as DAO members suggest some mutual and non-mutual potential partnership ideas try to help bring even more of those? :robot:

Thanks for the details. It looks like we are still in the kick off phases with many of them without much real governance involvement yet (by us).

I am not sure who Dane is - I am curious how we decided to staff these and what responsibilities these folks have to report back (ie, bring topics back to our community too).

Thanks again for the update.