ICF Ecosystem Growth Delegations: Applications Now Open

As part of the overhauled ICF ATOM delegation program announced in February, we are opening applications for the Ecosystem Growth Delegations tranche today. This is the application-only side of the program. It is separate from the default delegations tranche, which is allocated automatically based on on-chain criteria. Ecosystem Growth Delegations are negotiated individually, governed by a written agreement between the recipient and the ICF, and reserved for work that addresses a concrete, near-term ecosystem need. Application: Form What this program is for Ecosystem Growth Delegations are not a general validator support program. They are not a way to recognize past contributions, and they are not a substitute for a grant. They are a mechanism for the ICF and Cosmos Labs to direct ATOM toward specific, forward-looking work where a clear deliverable is on the table. The bar is high. Delegations under this tranche come out of the default tranche pro-rata, so every approval reduces what the rest of the active set receives. Priority goes to proposals that are specific, scoped, and tied to outcomes we can measure within a quarter or two. What to expect after you apply…

Excerpt (1195 of 2982 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

Excellent initiative by the ICF. Efficient capital allocation is exactly what the Hub needs right now to retain talent.

Regarding the specific need for Data Analytics APIs and Indexers mentioned in the RFP: I strongly recommend the ICF delegation committee to look closely at the infrastructure already built by @serejandmyself (Citizen Web3).

While many validators simply spin up cloud servers, this team has been running bare-metal servers and has built a custom on-chain data indexer from scratch, providing public archive endpoints out of their own pocket. They already have the exact product the foundation is looking for.

This is the pure definition of “Ecosystem Growth”. We must direct institutional delegations toward independent builders who are currently bleeding capital to keep critical, decentralized infrastructure alive, rather than just inflating the top 10 validators.

@serejandmyself, make sure your team submits an application specifically targeting this RFP. The Hub needs this infrastructure funded.

Thanks @TRAVE - we are going to submit by tomorrow evening UTC. Honestly, we have 1 small card up the sleeve. Lets see next week if we can play it =)

PS. Thank you separately for the compliment and the recognition. I highly value that

@serejandmyself The recognition is fully earned. True builders running sovereign hardware are the backbone of this network, and capital must flow to where real value is created.

Best of luck with the ICF submission tomorrow! I’ll be watching closely next week to see that “card up your sleeve.”

Keep building. Capital and infrastructure must protect each other. We win together.

Hi @RoboMcGobo, is the first targeted RFP: IBC Transfer Analytics APIs still open for submissions?

We’ve prepared a proposal and would love to submit it if the RFP is still active. We’d really appreciate your feedback when you have a chance.

We’ve contributed extensively to the Cosmos Hub ecosystem in the past, and we’d be excited for another opportunity to build and contribute more for the Hub.

Hi! This RFP is closed unfortunately. I will remove it from this post. Thank you for your interest though!

There are no other RFPs open at this time, but we will likely add some in the coming months.

Thanks for your reply @RoboMcGobo. Will it be posted in the forum, or do we have a group for it?

We will post them here in the forums, as well as on the Cosmos Hub X account! I’d recommend keeping an eye on both!

Cosmos Hub ⚛️ (@cosmoshub) on X

Interchain service provider in @Cosmos and home of ATOM

Thanks again for your interest, hope to see you around more!

We submitted our application for the ICF Growth Delegation Program a while ago and would like to kindly check on the current status of our review.
Could you please let us know how far the application has progressed?

Hey guys! Apologies, I thought that we had discussed this already. I will send y’all a message in our tg group.

Hey @RoboMcGobo! Can I check our application status?

Questions Regarding the 500K ATOM Delegation to Validatier I would like Cosmos Labs and the ICF to explain why Validatier received a 500,000 ATOM Ecosystem Growth Delegation . Validatier is not completely without value. It collects and presents validator reward, self-stake and token-flow data. However, based on the publicly visible product, it remains a narrowly focused validator analytics dashboard rather than critical infrastructure for the Cosmos Hub. The visible scope does not appear proportionate to a 500K ATOM delegation. This raises several questions: • What exact deliverables, milestones and maintenance obligations were included in the agreement? • How was the 500K ATOM amount calculated? • What measurable ecosystem value has the project delivered so far? • How many active users or third-party integrations does it have? • Is this data actually used by the ICF, Cosmos Labs, wallets, explorers or institutional participants? • What methodology is used to classify validator tokens as “sold,” and how are false classifications, address attribution and uncertainty handled? • What criteria will determine whether the delegation continues next quarter?…

Excerpt (1199 of 2321 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

Since we are discussing this topic, we would also like further clarification regarding the 350,000 ATOM allocated to:

“Deliver targeted Cosmos Hub community activation through live programming and follow-up content.”

What does this mean in concrete terms? We would appreciate the same level of detail and explanation for this allocation as well.

Hey y’all! Looks like there may be a little confusion as to how the ecosystem growth delegations are calculated so i want to clarify this. When an ecosystem growth delegation is granted, the validator forfeits their right to a default delegation (currently 288k ATOM and growing each quarter). Because of this, delegations take that into account when we award them. We calculate this internally as (default delegation amount) + (ecosystem growth delegation) = final delegation. If we didnt do it this way, some of these smaller delegations would end up receiving less than they’d get by default and have no incentive to contribute. All of that being said, the actual delegation amounts being allocated to cybernetics and node101, respecively, are roughly 75k and 200k ATOM taking this into account. These delegations are relatively small in the grand scheme of things, reflecting our desire to incentivize smaller, experimental community efforts that we feel will provide an outsized benefit to the Hub above and beyond the small investment that we put in them. As far as what each of these delegations is for: • Cybernetics have been strong advocates for Cosmos for several years now.…

Excerpt (1194 of 3280 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

The program was explicitly presented as being based on specific, clearly scoped and measurable deliverables, formalized through written agreements, or am I wrong ? However, the ICF never stated that those agreements or their detailed terms would be made public. The issue is therefore not that the ICF broke a formal promise of full transparency. The issue is that the community currently has no way to verify whether the standards publicly announced for this program are actually being applied. We cannot see the non-confidential scope of work, the milestones, the success criteria, what has already been delivered, or what remains to be delivered. Regarding Cybernetics, the only concrete achievement publicly highlighted so far appears to be an X Space that attracted more than 1,000 live listeners. But since the event focused on Injective and USDC, it is reasonable to question how much of that audience was actually brought in by Cybernetics, rather than simply coming from Injective’s own established community. From my perspective, Cybernetics has not yet demonstrated any clear additional value for the Cosmos Hub ecosystem or its community that would justify such a substantial…

Excerpt (1193 of 1689 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

Well the hub community has acted cringy in the past. You can’t blame Cybernetics for being skeptical.

когда компания леджер решит проблему с сетью космос, просто деньги зависли, подключать сторонние кошельки к леджер лайф опасно и леджер не несёт ответственность за утерю средств, почему так долго они решают эту проблему, крупная компания, а ведёт себя как щенок