Questions grant reviewers ask, and how to answer them

The questions, and what a good answer contains

A good answer to any reviewer question has a claim, a number or name, and a link. Here is the short version for each question, with fictional examples; the sections after explain what programs look for.

Why this ecosystem?

Reviewers fund their own network, so show what your project does for it that it could not do elsewhere. The Solana Foundation makes this an eligibility rule on its grants page: you must explain why the project needs Solana rather than another chain. Name the feature, users or integration that ties you to the chain.

Why you?

Answer with shipped work, not adjectives. The Compound Grants Program, whose main domain has been paused since April 2026, wants verifiable experience relevant to the proposal, dYdX's technical grants need a prior history of technical projects, and Maelstrom asks for at least one reference. Link the repository, the deployed contract or the product, and say what part you built.

What already exists?

Reviewers check for duplicates, so name the alternatives before they do. The Stacks Endowment asks you to check its public grants tracker so you don't duplicate funded work (its Q4 2026 dates were not announced as of October 2026), DoubleZero funds work that complements rather than duplicates core development, and 1inch's Aqua incubator says novelty is its first screen. Explain the difference in one or two sentences.

How will you measure success?

Give a baseline, a target, a date and where it will be measured. Flow's grants require you to say how you will measure success (its grants page has not changed since August 2025, so ask before you build), and Kaia's IOK Fund has you set target KPIs such as users, wallets, transactions or TVL. Our guide to grant impact metrics covers which numbers reviewers trust.

Why this budget?

Show the arithmetic: hours, rates and costs per milestone. Rocket Pool's grants committee scores the benefit relative to the cost, and the Akash community pool asks for a breakdown in hours and hourly rate, though no outside team has won an Akash vote since August 2025. Know what each program will not pay for: Ink Spark excludes salaries, runway and routine hosting. The Web3 grant budget guide has a format.

What happens after the grant ends?

Reviewers want to know the work will not die with the last payment. Walrus asks for a path to sustainability, such as other funding or resources, and the Canton Development Fund wants a plan for who maintains each output. DoubleZero states that its grants are not meant to fund full-time roles or open-ended maintenance. See funding after the grant ends.

Is the work open source?

Say which license, when the code goes public and which parts, if any, stay closed. Rocket Pool's grants committee asks you to say whether results will be open source; note that its funds are tight, and Round 41 declined every application. Our guide to open source licenses for grants covers the options.

What could go wrong?

Name two or three real risks and what you will do about each. "No major risks" reads as inexperience. Security comes up often: RootstockCollective asks you to disclose past security incidents, the Tezos Foundation requires DeFi projects to pass a third-party audit of all smart contracts, and the Stacks Endowment's Builder track excludes teams with unremediated major security breaches.

What other funding do you have?

List received, pending and planned funding with amounts and what each covers. RootstockCollective requires this disclosure, and Tezos Commons asks whether you have approached other Tezos organizations for the same project. Our guide on whether you can apply for multiple grants explains how to split scope.

Who in the community knows your work?

Many programs weigh community presence. Rocket Pool's committee has said it favors applicants who engaged with the community before applying, Stellar's Community Fund says a referral code helps, and Walrus ecosystem grants ideally come recommended by someone on its team. Point to calls you presented at, forum threads you started and people who can vouch for you.

How do you prepare for a grant call?

Prepare for a grant call as you would for a technical interview: know your own application cold and have the numbers on one page.

1. Re-read your application. Reviewers ask about what you wrote, including the parts you would rather they skipped.
2. Make a one-page fact sheet. Metrics with sources, budget totals, milestone dates, links.
3. Have a demo ready, live or recorded, and a fallback if it breaks.
4. Send the person who will do the work. Reviewers want to hear from the builder, not only the business lead.
5. Expect to rescope. The Ethereum Foundation's ESP reviews sometimes include an interview, rescoping or budget talks (it had no open items as of October 1, 2026), and dYdX uses the call to agree cost. Decide in advance what you can cut.
6. Don't guess. "I'll check and send it today" beats a wrong number.
7. Follow up in writing within a day, with answers to open questions and any changes you agreed.

What should you ask the reviewer?

A call is also your chance to learn how the grant works in practice. Ask about:

• Payment. Currency and schedule. As of 2026-10-31, 55 of the 99 programs in our directory pay in milestone tranches, and 33 can pay in stablecoins or USD alone or as one option.
• Paperwork. When KYC happens and what agreement you will sign.
• Milestone reviews. Who reviews them and how long payment takes; Reactive Network pays within five working days of an approved milestone, and TheDAO Security Fund within 14 days of acceptance.
• Reporting. What updates they expect and where.
• Gaps. "What would make this proposal stronger?"

For the written side, start with how to write a Web3 grant proposal, and find programs that hold calls in the directory.

FAQ

What should you do if you can't answer a grant reviewer's question?

If you can't answer a grant reviewer's question on a call, say so and promise a written answer by a specific time, then send it. A guessed number that later proves wrong does more damage than a short delay. Follow up within a day, and if the question exposed a real gap in the plan, say how you will change the proposal.

How long is a typical grant interview?

A typical grant interview or intro call is short: the Hashgraph Innovation Program and Palladium Labs Canton Grants both use 30-minute calls. Plan for 5 minutes on the project, a short demo, and the rest on questions. Some programs add steps afterwards, such as Hashgraph's weekly go/no-go call and due diligence, so one call is rarely the final decision.

Do grant reviewers ask about token plans?

Grant reviewers often ask about token plans, and some programs have written rules. TRON Builders League assesses projects with live tokens on their tokenomics and distribution, Polymarket's Builders Program requires you to tell it before any token launch, and the Uniswap Foundation, now spending down its budget, does not fund token launches through Open Grants. Answer plainly: whether a token exists or is planned, and how grant funds relate to it.

Should your whole team join a grant call?

Your whole team does not need to join a grant call, but the people who will do the funded work should. Reviewers use calls to judge whether the team can deliver, which means hearing technical answers from the builder, not only the founder. Two or three people is usually enough; agree beforehand who answers which kind of question.