Round 27 - GMC Call for Grant Applications - Deadline is August 7

This thread is for applications for Rocket Pool’s July 7, 2025 - August 7, 2025 grants. Please only post grant applications in this thread. If you would like to discuss and/or ask questions about any applications you see in this thread, we ask that you do so in this separate forum thread (link) which has been established for all community discussions related to this round of applications. Only those grant applications that are posted in this thread and timestamped by August 7, 2025 at 23:59 (11:59 PM) UTC will be considered. Any grants posted after that deadline will be carried over to the next award period.

This is the expected schedule for round 27:

  • Application Period (July 7 - August 7)

  • Scoring Deadline (August 26)

  • Final Voting Amendments, Discussion and Finalization (August 27 - August 30)

  • Award Announcement (August 31)

Differences Between Grants and Bounties

Grants are intended to be applied for by those who are wishing to carry out the work themselves. Bounties are open-ended goals that could be met by anyone, including those other than the proposing party. In other words, if I believed that Rocket Pool needed a fifty-foot paper mache orange rocket for publicity purposes and I wanted to be the one to built it, I would apply for a grant. If I instead thought Rocket Pool needed a fifty-foot paper mache orange rocket for publicity purposes but I wanted it to be open to whoever built it first to claim the reward (similar to a prize), then I’d apply for a bounty.

To guide you in your application, the GMC has established the following goals and the following scoring rubric:

GMC Goals

Grants, bounties, and retrospective awards should make it easier and/or more attractive to do one or more of the following:

  • become a node operator

  • operate a node, mint rETH

  • hold or use rETH

  • improve the quality of life for the protocol and its community.

Grants Rubric

When evaluating grant applications, the GMC takes into account the following goals:

  • If the application is successful, to what extent does it further the GMC goals?

  • To what extent can the application be feasibly carried out by the person(s) proposed to complete it?

  • If the application is successful, how large is the benefit to the protocol relative to the size of the proposed costs

Grant Application Template

Please copy paste the template below into a reply. Answer the questions there, feel free to remove or add sections based on relevance.


## Name of Grant

### What is the work being proposed?

### Is there any related work this builds off of?

### Will the results of this project be entirely open source ([MIT](https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT), [GPL](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html), [Apache](https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0), [CC BY](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?

## Benefit

<please enter N/A where appropriate>

| Group | Benefits |

|---|---|

| Potential rETH holders | If the grant is successfully completed, how does this help people looking to stake ETH for rETH? |

| rETH holders | If the grant is successfully completed, how does this help rETH holders? |

| Potential NOs | If the grant is successfully completed, how does this help people looking to run a Rocket Pool node for the first time? |

| NOs | If the grant is successfully completed, how does this help people already running a Rocket Pool node? |

| Community | If the grant is successfully completed, how does this help the Rocket Pool community? |

| RPL holders | If the grant is successfully completed, how does this help RPL holders? |

### Which other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals, would stand to benefit from this grant?

## Work

### Who is doing the work?

### What is the background of the person(s) doing the work? What experience do they have with such projects in the past?

### What is the breakdown of the proposed work, in terms of milestones and/or deadlines?

### How is the work being tested? Is testing included in the schedule?

### How will the work be maintained after delivery?

## Costs

### What is the acceptance criteria?

### What is the proposed payment schedule for the grant? How much USD $ and over what period of time is the applicant requesting?

### How will the GMC verify that the work delivered matches the proposed cadence?

### What alternatives or options have been considered in order to save costs for the proposed project?

### Have you already been compensated by the RP protocol in any way for this work?

## Conflict of Interest

### Does the person or persons proposing the grant have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if any member of the GMC would benefit directly financially from the grant).

### Will the recipient of the grant, or any protocol or project in which the recipient has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the grant is successful?

Please Note - Treasury Situation:

During this time of treasury distress, the GMC would like to reiterate its strong preference for grants over retroactive awards—especially for development work. Pre-approval is important and appropriate for development features. Grant applications should be scoped in advance to ensure alignment and accountability.

2 Likes

Saturn 2 - rETH improvements (withdrawals, protection)

What is the work being proposed?

This grant is to cover the costs of research/governance/spec development of the two features below, with the goal of inclusion in the Saturn 2 release:

  • rETH withdrawal liquidity via forced exits
  • rETH protection from underperforming nodes via forced exits

Is there any related work this builds off of?

This work builds off the rest of the tokenomics rework for the Saturn upgrades (Tokenomics Rework | Rocket Pool Improvement Proposals), especially RPIP-44: Integrating Execution Layer Triggerable Exits

Will the results of this project be entirely open source (MIT, GPL, Apache, CC BY license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?

The new RPIP’s will be will be available on GitHub in the same manner as other RPIPs

Benefit

Group Benefits
Potential rETH holders Potential rETH holders are currently deterred by the lack of guaranteed withdrawal liquidity near the peg. With the secondary market often being the only mechanism to withdraw, a discount to peg can rapidly grow which can erase the value accrued from staking yields (an rETH holder may be forced to sell their rETH for less ETH than they started with even after liquid staking for a long period of time). Some users also complain that the protocol does not provide a direct means to withdraw their ETH (unaware of, or afraid to use secondary markets) even when rETH is relatively close to peg. This may deter them from staking more ETH in the first place, or leave them with a bad memory and cause them to dissuade others from staking with rETH. Many potential holders also compare APY when choosing an LST, and exiting significantly underperforming node operators can reduce drag on the protocol, improve the APY to be more competitive with other LSTs, and as a result attract new rETH holders
rETH holders The primary beneficiary of this work is rETH holders. This work would provide stronger withdrawal liquidity guarantees, and could help rETH more consistently stay on peg (less likely for a discount to grow, since there shouldn’t be a fear of the discount growing larger as it could always be returned to peg via forced exits - instead of relying only on voluntary exits from NO’s to capture an arbitrage). This work should also improve rETH yields, since significantly underperforming NO’s could be force exited instead of causing drag on the protocol (while someone could be offline for any number of reasons including lost keys/incapacitation/death)
Potential NOs Potential NOs may be not be able to join the protocol if there is not enough rETH demand due to the lack of features that would be worked on through the funding of this grant. This work could help increase rETH demand which would allow potential NOs to join (with shorter queues)
NOs Existing node operators may be able to stake more nETH once more pETH is available with increased rETH demand. The threat of being exited for significantly under performing may incentivize better performance which would also provide the NO more rewards for their own nETH, and better planning for unexpected circumstances
Community Higher TVL (from increased rETH demand) is the most effective marketing, and when the protocol is succeeding, the community tends to have higher morale
RPL holders With the tokenomics rework, when rETH TVL increases, the amount of ETH earned per staked RPL increases (more revenue split among the same supply of RPL). This work could increase the attractiveness of rETH which is currently the critical blocker of protocol growth (and long term RPL value)

Which other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals, would stand to benefit from this grant?

None

Work

Who is doing the work?

The core contributors will likely be myself, @ramana , @Valdorff , @knoshua , @haloooloolo , but there may be other DAO members who meaningfully participate

What is the background of the person(s) doing the work? What experience do they have with such projects in the past?

These contributors have assisted with similar work in the past, and have expressed interest in completing this work if funding is approved

What is the breakdown of the proposed work, in terms of milestones and/or deadlines?

I recommend payment in full once the RPIPs have been completed and voted on / approved by the DAO.

How is the work being tested? Is testing included in the schedule?

The work will be tested through discussions and implementation by the core team (and audits prior to Saturn 2 release). Testing is not included in the grant schedule, except to the extent that the team engages in discussion

How will the work be maintained after delivery?

The core team will implement the RPIPs in Saturn 2

Costs

What is the acceptance criteria?

RPIPs completed and successfully voted on (passing vote) by the pDAO

What is the proposed payment schedule for the grant? How much USD $ and over what period of time is the applicant requesting?

The request is for $25,000 and the work would likely need to be completed in the next 2-3 months to be included in Saturn 2. I would recommend giving primary discretion to the core contributors on how to split the funding (including expectations on the front end, and judgement after the work is completed). If someone else meaningfully contributes (or one of the core contributors previously listed doesn’t meaningfully contribute), I’d recommend giving the core contributors a chance to revise the list of core contributors after the work is completed, through a discussion/vote.

I would recommend the core contributors rank each other prior to payment (and rank anyone else who meaningfully participates), and try to build consensus on how payment should be divided prior to the GMC making their final decision. For any disagreements, I would recommend the GMC have the final say on the exact amounts paid out per person.

My personal preference would be splitting the funding into categories (something like 50% toward writing the actual specs, 25% for research / discussion (any modeling / consensus building), 25% for governance (updating explainers / forum polls/updated, preparing vote text, etc). But I think this could be up for discussion among core contributors

How will the GMC verify that the work delivered matches the proposed cadence?

The RPIPs will be public along with the final snapshot result.

What alternatives or options have been considered in order to save costs for the proposed project?

I have asked if the core team would consider contributing to funding this grant since the responsibility for this work falls on the team if the DAO does not step up to help (which could delay Saturn 2, or result in these features not being included). I proposed a cost that felt conservative relative to the amount of time required to research, develop, and complete the governance for these features. I also reached out to the contributors to confirm how much payment they would require help complete this work. Without this funding there is a lack of sufficient incentive / motivation for DAO members to contribute, which has led to this topic stalling since the ideas were first discussed last fall in the rETH incubator.

Have you already been compensated by the RP protocol in any way for this work?

No

Conflict of Interest

Does the person or persons proposing the grant have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if any member of the GMC would benefit directly financially from the grant).

Not that I’m aware of

Will the recipient of the grant, or any protocol or project in which the recipient has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the grant is successful?

Not that I’m aware of

4 Likes

Name of Grant

Grant Progress Tracking Platform for Rocket Pool


What is the work being proposed?

This proposal outlines the development of a Grant Progress Tracking Dashboard for Rocket Pool–funded projects, designed to provide the community with a transparent, user-friendly platform to monitor the progress of funded initiatives. The tracker will offer detailed milestone tracking, real-time updates, and automated alerts for deviations or delays. The goal is to provide unified access to all past and active grants, along with their statuses.

Rationale
To address this, we propose building a Grant Progress Tracker with the following features tailored to Rocket Pool’s grant structure and governance workflow:

  • Milestone Tracking: Dedicated pages for each grant showing key milestones, progress bars, percentages, and completion status.
  • Real-time Updates: Live updates on project milestones and overall progress.
  • Automated Alerts: Notifications for overdue tasks or scope deviations, sent via in-app messages and email.
  • Visualizations: Interactive charts and graphs to visualize timelines, risks, and achievements.
  • Risk Detection: ML-powered analytics to identify early signals of delays, deviation, or misuse of funds.

Grant Overview Features

  • Project List View: Includes completion rates, risk scores, and last update timestamps.
  • Filterable Dashboards: Allow users to zoom into individual grants or view overall grant portfolio health.

Risk Assessments:

  • Smart risk scores and automated red flags.
  • Visual indicators of grant health.

Grant Details Pages

  • Milestones & deliverables
  • Funding history & current status
  • Linked community discussions (Rocket Pool Forum, GitHub, etc.)

Organization and Admin Tools

  • Admin controls for the Rocket Pool Grants Committee or designated stewards
  • Tools to set alerts, filter dashboards, and take corrective action
  • Permissions-based views for different stakeholder levels (public, stewards, builders)

Is there any related work this builds off of?

This project builds off the Rocket Pool governance framework and grant process. It will aggregate data that is currently fragmented across the Rocket Pool forum, Discord, GitHub, and individual update threads. It does not directly fork or build on an existing open-source codebase but will integrate with Rocket Pool’s existing community infrastructure.


Will the results of this project be entirely open source MIT, GPL, Apache, CC BY license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?

Yes, the entire project will be published under the MIT license. The front-end code, risk detection logic, and all data structures will be open-sourced for transparency and community contribution.


Benefit

Group Benefits
Potential rETH holders Increased transparency into the Rocket Pool grant ecosystem helps build trust in the protocol’s ecosystem development and governance.
rETH holders Demonstrates responsible stewardship of grant funding, promoting long-term sustainability and growth of the Rocket Pool protocol.
Potential NOs Offers assurance that Rocket Pool is funding useful ecosystem tools and infrastructure through a visible, monitored process.
NOs Enables visibility into funded projects that may affect node operation or provide helpful tools.
Community Empowers the community to monitor grant-funded initiatives, hold grantees accountable, and engage proactively in governance.
RPL holders Encourages responsible allocation of RPL-based grant funding by offering full visibility and reporting of project outcomes.

Which other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals would stand to benefit from this grant?

The platform will be tailored for Rocket Pool but could serve as a model for other DAO grant programs (e.g., Uniswap, Optimism, Lido) seeking transparency and accountability tools. However, our initial MVP will focus exclusively on Rocket Pool.


Work

Who is doing the work?

Build Union a collaborative collective of talented developers, designers, strategists, and innovators dedicated to shaping the future of the decentralized web.

What is the background of the person(s) doing the work? What experience do they have with such projects in the past?

Project leader Emmanuel was part of the pioneers of Dash, the first ever DAO, where he contributed to early work in decentralized governance. At Pi Network, I led a cross-functional team to launch the Pi Ad-server, aligning business needs with technical execution. His experience spans both governance systems and product delivery in Web3.

LinkedIn: Emmanuel E. - Eclipse Web | LinkedIn

What is the breakdown of the proposed work, in terms of milestones and/or deadlines?

Milestone Deliverable Timeline
M1 Requirements gathering, UI mockups, data model Week 1–2
M2 Front-end dashboard with project list view, filtering Week 3–4
M3 Milestone tracking pages and progress visualizations Week 5–6
M4 Risk detection engine with alerts and notifications Week 7–8
M5 Admin tools for GMC: status updates, overrides Week 9
M6 Public interface with permissions-based views Week 10
M7 Final testing, polish, and deployment Week 11–12

How is the work being tested? Is testing included in the schedule?

Yes, testing is included in the schedule:

  • Unit and integration testing for the front-end and data logic
  • Manual user testing by GMC volunteers or selected community members
  • Feedback loop before final deployment

How will the work be maintained after delivery?

The grant includes 12 months of basic maintenance, covering:

  • Bug fixes
  • Minor improvements
  • Support for new grant entries
  • Community onboarding documentation

Future feature expansion can be supported through follow-up grants or community bounties.


Costs

What is the acceptance criteria?

  • Dashboard is live and accessible via the Rocket Pool governance forum or related domain
  • Grants can be browsed and filtered, with milestone tracking visible
  • Admin tools function as specified (alerts, risk flags, edits)
  • Community-facing pages and documentation are complete
  • Code is published under MIT license

What is the proposed payment schedule for the grant? How much USD $ and over what period of time is the applicant requesting?

Total Requested: $2,999 over ~12 weeks.

Payment Milestone Amount
Project kickoff $750
Front-end and dashboard delivery $750
Milestone tracking and risk engine $750
Final delivery, testing, and documentation $749

How will the GMC verify that the work delivered matches the proposed cadence?

  • Regular public updates via forum or GitHub (biweekly)
  • Milestone-based deliverables reviewed by GMC before payment
  • Final code review and deployment walkthrough

What alternatives or options have been considered in order to save costs for the proposed project?

To minimize costs:

  • Open-source components and lightweight analytics are used
  • No backend server infrastructure beyond what’s needed for data aggregation
  • UI/UX based on pre-built design systems
  • Solo/lean team to avoid overhead

Have you already been compensated by the RP protocol in any way for this work?

No.


Conflict of Interest

Does the person or persons proposing the grant have any conflicts of interest to disclose?

No conflicts of interest. We are not members of the GMC, and no GMC members are financially connected to this project.

Will the recipient of the grant, or any protocol or project in which the recipient has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the grant is successful?

No. The grant work is Rocket Pool–specific and does not benefit any other project or protocol financially.

2 Likes

Notice: This message marks the closing of the twenty seventh (27) round of Rocket Pool grant applications. Any applications submitted after this will not be considered for this round. The GMC will announce the award recipients in a new thread here on the forums around August 31. The community will then have two weeks to issue any challenges before funds are disbursed. Thank you to all who applied and thank you to everyone who has followed along. Anyone who would like to comment on existing applications is encouraged to do so in this thread.