Approve Cardano Foundation as New Managing Entity of Project Catalyst
198 DReps voted · 78 with a rationale · 6 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes17.3M ₳Rationale
Approve Cardano Foundation as New Managing Entity of Project Catalyst
- Yes16.7M ₳Rationale
One of the easiest votes this year.
I hope CF won’t just finish what IOG started - i.e., milestone processing and payments for projects funded in previous rounds. I wish CF would also bring fresh ideas into the next Catalyst rounds.
Catalyst should be more than a funding mechanism: make it more VC-like in practice by actively connecting funded builders with the network and partners CF has access to.
We are setting the bar high - best of luck, CF team.
- Yes16.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes14.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes13.3M ₳Rationale
RCADA supports this Info Action as a necessary step to ensure continuity and responsible administration of existing Project Catalyst commitments.
This proposal addresses an operational requirement rather than a strategic or funding decision. It enables the transition of Catalyst management from Input Output Global to the Cardano Foundation in order to maintain uninterrupted administration of Funds 10–14, including milestone reviews and payments to funded projects. Without this transition, Catalyst operations may face disruption, creating delays and uncertainty for active participants.
We consider this action to be a matter of stewardship and continuity. It does not introduce new funding, expand the scope of Catalyst, or define its future direction. Instead, it ensures that previously approved commitments are fulfilled in a timely and responsible manner.
The Cardano Foundation is an established and capable ecosystem entity with relevant governance and operational experience. In the absence of clearly defined alternative managing entities within the required timeframe, we consider this transition to be an appropriate and pragmatic solution.
Importantly, this approval should not be interpreted as endorsement of any future structure, funding model, or long-term governance framework for Project Catalyst. Decisions regarding the future of Catalyst remain open and should be addressed through separate governance processes with full community consideration.
RCADA’s YES vote reflects support for operational continuity, responsible fund administration, and protection of ecosystem participants currently engaged in Catalyst-funded projects.
RCADA’s full vote assessment can be found here: https://brolloks.github.io/rcada-drep-votes/
- Yes12.1M ₳Rationale
As Wada DRep, we vote yes on the proposal to approve the Cardano Foundation as the new managing entity of Project Catalyst. Our support is grounded in the immediate need to ensure continuity of operations, particularly for ongoing commitments under Funds 10 - 14. At this stage, maintaining the integrity of existing grant agreements, ensuring timely milestone reviews, and preventing disruption to disbursements are critical to preserving trust in Cardano’s funding ecosystem. Given the statutory requirement for community approval to effect this transition, we consider this proposal a necessary step to avoid operational uncertainty.
We recognise the Cardano Foundation’s institutional capacity to assume this role and appreciate the intention to facilitate a smooth transition from IOG without interrupting active processes. The narrow scope of this proposal; focused purely on operational reassignment rather than expansion or additional funding, also provides clarity and reduces the risk of unintended commitments. Additionally, the stated intention to work toward returning unused allocations for Funds 15 - 16 to the treasury reflects alignment with broader ecosystem priorities around fiscal responsibility.
That said, our support should not be interpreted as a blanket endorsement of the current structural framing of Catalyst governance. The proposal leaves several important areas underdeveloped, particularly regarding transition execution details, accountability mechanisms, and long-term governance design. There is limited clarity on how the handover will be operationalised, what performance expectations will be placed on the new managing entity, and how the community can effectively monitor and evaluate this role over time. Furthermore, the absence of a clearly articulated framework for oversight, reporting, and potential future transition pathways introduces risks of continued centralisation under a different entity.
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.4M ₳Rationale
I applaud CF for using governance and putting this to a vote.
I want to make it clear however that Catalyst is a broken system and needs to be removed completely from Cardano governance. We need to pave way for KPI based proposals like CB DAO.
- YesRevoted9.2M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes3mo agoSuperseded
- Yes8.8M ₳Rationale
本提案に賛成票を投じます。本提案は、Project Catalystの運営主体をIOGからCardano Foundationへ移管し、既存の助成プログラムの継続性と支払いの円滑な実行を確保するための現実的な措置であると考えます。運用停止や遅延のリスクを回避する観点からも、本提案を支持します。\n\nI vote Yes on this proposal. This proposal represents a practical measure to transition the management of Project Catalyst from IOG to the Cardano Foundation, ensuring continuity of existing grant programs and timely execution of payments. I support this proposal as it helps avoid the risk of operational disruption or delays.
- Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes7.6M ₳Rationale
Yes, this is a good move by IOG and Cardano Foundation to request approval from the community. This would help to close out the ongoing projects from Fund 10 to Fund 14. Funds for unused funds Fund 15 and Fund 16 are being returned to the Treasury - as they should be. Catalyst should outgrow its experimental nature and it does fit squarely under the mandate of Cardano Foundation, not so much under IOG's umbrella. Kudos to IOG for maintaining Project Catalyst so far and for graciously reaching a deal with the Cardano Foundation. Congrats to the CF also for agreeing to take over this responsibility. I do have a small conflict of interest in this matter. I am active as a Milestone Reviewer in Project Catalyst from Funds 10 to 14, monitoring some projects that have not been closed out yet. I do stand to benefit if these projects continue successfully submitting Proofs of Achievements. However, I abstained from voting YES to Catalyst funding for Fund 14 to Fund 16 due to conflict of interest and this vote here does not propose any new treasury withdrawals or disbursements from the treasury.
- Yes7.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.9M ₳Rationale
I’m voting YES on the Cardano Foundation taking over Catalyst. This is to ensure continuity for existing Catalyst funds (10–14). Not approving this is unnecessarily punitive to the past commitments already made and unfair to those projects.
As for Fund 15–16 being “unrelated” while also being mentioned. My read is: those funds are already committed to be returned (with Intersects Administration), and this proposal doesn’t change that—it just ensures there’s a clear operator in place to execute responsibilities cleanly.
- Yes5.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.4M ₳Rationale
Cardano foundation is the perfect entity in our ecosytem to take the lead on this feature.
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
Combining the budget under the CF makes sense given all current frameworks.
- Yes5.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.4M ₳Rationale
The Cardano Foundation's info action seeking community approval for transitioning the Catalyst processes demonstrates genuine respect for the community. I strongly approve this step forward for our ecosystem's most vital funding mechanism. I also recognize the numerous challenges and shortcomings in the current Catalyst model. At the same time, I have observed the Catalyst team's consistent efforts over the years to iterate, refine, and improve the system.
I hold high hopes for this evolution and place my trust in the Cardano Foundation to execute the transition thoughtfully and effectively, in the best interest of the entire ecosystem. - Yes4.2M ₳No rationale
- No4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.8M ₳Rationale
I support transferring Catalyst to the Cardano Foundation.
Catalyst is fundamentally a Treasury capital allocation mechanism, and it should sit with an institution designed for long-term stewardship and neutrality. From a governance standpoint, this is a cleaner and more coherent structure than leaving it with Input Output Global, whose core role is protocol development, not capital allocation.
IOG’s historical role in operating Catalyst was necessary and valuable—particularly when the Foundation lacked the operational capacity to manage it. That constraint has now changed. The Foundation appears sufficiently mature to assume this responsibility.
However, this transition raises the bar significantly on fiduciary responsibility.
Catalyst must evolve into a disciplined capital allocator, not a broad grant distribution system. This requires:
• Clear separation between public goods funding and investment activity
• Defined, measurable ROI expectations for all capital deployed
• Strong capital restraint and prioritization
• Transparent reporting linking funding decisions to outcomesApproval of this proposal is not just structural—it is a mandate for higher standards of capital discipline and accountability.
The Foundation now carries responsibility for maximizing long-term Treasury returns for the ecosystem.
- Yes3.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.1M ₳No rationale
- No3.1M ₳Rationale
As per my previous voting rationale, I view the Cardano Foundation as a bad actor in the Cardano Ecosystem, who uses their genesis ADA to influence governance in their favor. See their previous use of genesis ADA in Catalyst Fund 13 to act as kingmaker in determining votes of most proposals.
I see the CF now managing Catalyst as a serious conflict of interest, and would rather Project Catalyst be managed as an independent entity funded by the treasury or managed by Intersect. An entity who does not have a financial incentive via genesis ADA to affect voting and the entire Catalyst process would be ideal.
- Yes3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳Rationale
私は本Info ActionにYESで投票します。これはProject Catalystの長期的な未来像を決める投票ではなく、既存の約束の責任ある履行と運営継続を確保するための判断です。本移行を支持することで信頼を維持し、混乱を回避し、Voltaire時代への安定した橋渡しにつながると考えます。
I vote YES on this Info Action. This decision is not intended to define the long-term future of Project Catalyst, but to ensure continuity and the responsible fulfillment of existing commitments. Supporting this transition helps maintain trust, avoid operational disruption, and provide a stable bridge toward the Voltaire governance era.
- Yes2.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
CF has agreed to take this on and it is certainly my opinion that Catalyst needs a bit of a rework. I look forward to new ways of driving innovation in a sustainable manner.
- Yes2.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳Rationale
I support this proposal as a necessary and pragmatic step to ensure the continuity of Project Catalyst operations. The transition of the managing entity from Input Output Global to the Cardano Foundation is required under the Catalyst Foundation Company’s statutes and helps prevent disruption to ongoing Fund 10–14 project delivery and payouts.
This action does not introduce new spending or alter governance structures but instead safeguards existing commitments and protects the integrity of the ecosystem. It aligns with the principles of accountability and responsible stewardship outlined in the Cardano Constitution.
While broader improvements to Catalyst’s effectiveness and impact may still be needed, maintaining operational continuity is the correct and responsible course of action at this stage. For these reasons, I am voting YES.
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2M ₳No rationale
- Yes2M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳Rationale
Vote YES for this proposal because Catalyst needs an organization capable of operating more transparently and effectively than the previous group. The community expects that the operational capability of the Cardano Foundation will enable Catalyst to function efficiently and better support ecosystem growth.
- Yes1.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳Rationale
I am voting Yes on this proposal. While I have concerns about how well the Cardano Foundation reflects the best interests of Cardano, Project Catalyst is too important and shouldn't be disrupted.