Project Catalyst 2026 Pilot Uses Decision Panel Instead of Community Voting

Project Catalyst’s 2026 Pilot is entering its decision phase after proposal submissions closed on August 20 at 06:00 UTC. Catalyst’s Danny Ribar reported more than 80 applications by August 19, although the final submission total and the number of proposals that passed Community Curation have not been published.

Applications for the Decision Panel close on August 25 after the original August 17 deadline was extended by eight days. Selected technical and business panelists will review eligible proposals between August 28 and September 7.

Catalyst Pilot Replaces Public Voting With Expert Review

Community Curation serves as the first compliance stage. Experienced community members review proposals against the Category Brief and Fund Rules, privately flagging incomplete or non-compliant submissions for confirmation by the Catalyst team.

Proposals that pass curation receive two forms of expert assessment. The technical review examines whether an integration is sound and can reach Cardano mainnet within the required timeframe. The business review evaluates market demand, the proposed route to users and whether usage can continue after launch.

According to the official Catalyst documentation, assessments from institutional and community panelists are merged into a single outcome. The highest-ranked eligible proposals that fit the available budget and planned cohort are then selected.

The Pilot targets approximately 10 to 15 teams, with individual grants ranging from 50,000 to 200,000 ADA. The available funding is a ceiling rather than a quota, allowing Catalyst to select fewer projects if an insufficient number meets the required standard.

Multi-stage public voting is not part of this Pilot. Catalyst states that community voting has not been removed from the program’s future, with the selection model for later rounds remaining open.

Every Decision Panel Score Carries Equal Weight

Catalyst is recruiting panelists across two tracks. Technical candidates are expected to have experience shipping or auditing systems on mainnet. Business candidates should have experience operating, funding or formally assessing ventures.

According to an official Project Catalyst announcement, every score will carry equal weight and must be supported by a written rationale. Ribar separately stated that the process includes no multipliers or override authority and that each panelist answers the same set of questions.

Ribar also said Cardano Foundation representation is capped at roughly one quarter of the panel seats. He described the Foundation’s position as a safety backstop rather than a controlling voice, leaving the wider ecosystem with the panel majority. Foundation personnel serving on the panel are not compensated.

The Panelist Terms and Conditions disqualify anyone who submitted a Pilot proposal or is closely associated with one. Panelists must also declare any conflict involving an assigned proposal and decline the review so it can be reallocated.

Catalyst has published the broad technical and business criteria, but the complete scoring matrix, numerical scale and minimum thresholds were not publicly available as of August 25. The Panelist Guidance page states that it will be updated before the decision stage begins.

Selection Results Will Be Public, Individual Scores Will Not

Catalyst has said the selection outcomes will be published, including proposals that do not receive funding. Projects may also receive aggregated and anonymized panel feedback.

Individual reviews, scores and their authors will not be published or attributed. Written rationales are mandatory for the internal assessment process, but the public record will not connect those rationales with individual panelists.

Selected projects will proceed to onboarding and receive the initial 40% of their approved grant. The remaining payments depend on delivering a working Cardano mainnet integration and generating verified usage through network fees paid by external users.

The August 28 to September 7 review period will therefore connect two separate experiments inside the Pilot: selecting projects through equally weighted expert assessments rather than public voting, and linking most of the grant to subsequent product usage. When the results are released, the funding outcomes will be public, while the individual scorecards that produced them will remain confidential.