Project Catalyst 2026 Pilot Go Use Decision Panel Instead of Community Voting

Project Catalyst’s 2026 Pilot don enter decision phase after dem close proposal submission on August 20 at 06:00 UTC. Catalyst’s Danny Ribar talk say applications pass 80 by August 19, but dem never publish the final number of submissions and how many proposals pass Community Curation.

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

Catalyst Pilot Replace Public Voting With Expert Review

Community Curation na the first compliance stage. Experienced community members dey review proposals against the Category Brief and Fund Rules, and dem dey privately flag any incomplete or non compliant submissions make the Catalyst team confirm am.

Proposals wey pass curation go receive two kinds of expert assessment. The technical review go check whether the integration dey solid and fit reach Cardano mainnet inside the required timeframe. The business review go check market demand, the proposed route to users and whether usage fit continue after launch.

According to the official Catalyst documentation, assessments from institutional and community panelists go merge into one single outcome. The highest ranked eligible proposals wey fit the available budget and planned cohort na dem go select.

The Pilot dey target about 10 to 15 teams, with individual grants ranging from 50,000 to 200,000 ADA. The available funding na ceiling, no be quota, so e allow Catalyst select fewer projects if no enough proposals meet the required standard.

Multi stage public voting no dey part of this Pilot. Catalyst talk say community voting no comot from the program future, as the selection model for later rounds still open.

Every Decision Panel Score Carry Equal Weight

Catalyst dey recruit panelists across two tracks. Technical candidates suppose get experience to ship or audit systems for mainnet. Business candidates suppose get experience to operate, fund or formally assess ventures.

According to one official Project Catalyst announcement, every score go carry equal weight and must get written rationale. Ribar still talk separate say the process no get any multipliers or override authority and each panelist dey answer the same set of questions.

Ribar still talk say Cardano Foundation representation no go pass about one quarter of the panel seats. E describe the Foundation position as safety backstop, no be controlling voice, so the wider ecosystem get the panel majority. Foundation personnel wey serve for the panel no dey receive compensation.

The Panelist Terms and Conditions disqualify anybody wey submit Pilot proposal or wey close to one. Panelists must also declare any conflict wey involve assigned proposal and decline the review so dem fit reallocate am.

Catalyst don publish the broad technical and business criteria, but the complete scoring matrix, numerical scale and minimum thresholds no dey publicly available as of August 25. The Panelist Guidance page talk say dem go update am before the decision stage begin.

Selection Results Go Public, Individual Scores No Go Public

Catalyst don talk say dem go publish the selection outcomes, including proposals wey no receive funding. Projects fit still receive aggregated and anonymized panel feedback.

Individual reviews, scores and their authors no go publish or attribute. Written rationales dey mandatory for the internal assessment process, but the public record no go connect those rationales with individual panelists.

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

The August 28 to September 7 review period go therefore connect two separate experiments inside the Pilot: selecting projects through equally weighted expert assessments instead of public voting, and linking most of the grant to subsequent product usage. When dem release the results, the funding outcomes go public, while the individual scorecards wey produce them go remain confidential.