Blockfrost's transformation to not-for-profit

Summary

RCADA votes YES on Blockfrost’s transformation to not-for-profit.

This is a cautious YES.

RCADA previously abstained on Blockfrost: Maintenance and Next Generation Indexing. That abstention was not opposition to Blockfrost. RCADA recognised Blockfrost as important Cardano infrastructure and saw merit in decentralised indexing, but the previous proposal combined public-good infrastructure development with an operational subsidy for a private provider’s free-tier infrastructure. RCADA also disclosed that it participated in Blockfrost API service provision and received income from that activity, making abstention the most appropriate position at that time.

RCADA supports the proposal because it responds constructively to earlier concerns, protects critical developer access infrastructure, and attempts to move Blockfrost from a commercial dependency into a community-governed public good.

RCADA views this as a transition mandate, not a permanent operating subsidy.

Key Considerations

The proposal requests 9,832,979 ADA for an 18-month transition and operations period.
Blockfrost is widely used developer infrastructure for reading from and interacting with Cardano without running a full infrastructure stack.
The proposal reports that Blockfrost adoption in the Cardano developer ecosystem survey grew from 39.3% in 2022 to 71.5% in 2025.
The proposal reports that Blockfrost served 781,000 unique visitors, more than 1.84 billion API requests, and over 7 TB of API data in the previous month.
The proposal states that more than 50% of transactions are submitted through Blockfrost in most Cardano epochs.
The proposal states that 90% of Cardano traffic served through the Blockfrost API comes from the free tier.
The proposal transfers Blockfrost source code, trademarks, domains, and associated assets into community stewardship under an independent, community-governed not-for-profit.
The not-for-profit would provide an open, free public API for Cardano mainnet, preview, and preprod.
The proposal includes public dashboards, board oversight, quarterly reporting, usage metrics, infrastructure-cost disclosure, refund conditions, and third-party assurance.
RCADA sees this as materially different from funding an ordinary private free-tier subsidy.
RCADA continues to recognise conflict and perception risk because of its prior disclosed relationship with Blockfrost API service provision.
The transition must be legally completed, publicly verifiable, and designed to reduce long-term dependency on recurring Treasury support.
Blockfrost’s importance is both evidence of value and a centralisation risk.
The transition should strengthen decentralised operation through Icebreakers and other independent operators, not merely preserve a single dominant hosted endpoint under a new legal wrapper.

What this action does

This Treasury Withdrawal funds Blockfrost’s transformation to not-for-profit.

The proposal requests 9,832,979 ADA, using a reference rate of $0.19/ADA, for an estimated $1,868,266 over 18 months.

The budget is allocated as follows:

Component	Allocation
Staffing	7,780,347 ADA
Ops & Infrastructure	1,894,737 ADA
Legal & Accounting	157,895 ADA
Total	9,832,979 ADA

The proposal funds:

establishment of a not-for-profit entity or host-organization agreement;
transition of Blockfrost into community stewardship;
transfer of Blockfrost source code, trademarks, domains, and associated assets;
operation of a free public API for Cardano mainnet, preview, and preprod;
public usage dashboard;
community board election process;
service transition to the new stack;
quarterly technical and budget reporting;
infrastructure operations;
staffing for transition, maintenance, community support, and development;
sustainability consultation and planning;
third-party assurance and milestone-based disbursement controls.

The proposed delivery sequence includes:

Period	Milestone
Q3 2026	Entity establishment and transition kickoff
Q4 2026	Board election
Q1 2027	Transition of services and IP transfer
Q2-Q3 2027	Sustainability consultation
2027	Sustained operations with minimum 99% monthly uptime SLA

Analysis Findings

Constitutional / Guardrails Assessment

✔ The proposal specifies a clear Treasury ask of 9,832,979 ADA.
✔ The proposal identifies the purpose of the withdrawal: transitioning Blockfrost into a community-governed not-for-profit public good.
✔ The proposal provides an 18-month delivery and operations period.
✔ The proposal provides a budget allocation across staffing, operations/infrastructure, and legal/accounting.
✔ The proposal includes a milestone sequence.
✔ The proposal describes public dashboards, quarterly reports, usage metrics, and budget summaries.
✔ The proposal states that all funds not disbursed by the end of the delivery period will be returned to the Treasury.
✔ The proposal describes proportional refunds in the event of partial delivery or scope reduction.
✔ The proposal includes Intersect administration, third-party assurance, and milestone-based disbursement controls.
✔ Funds are to be administered through the Sundae Labs TRSC/PSSC framework.
✔ The proposal states that it does not breach the applicable Net Change Limit at submission.
✔ The proposal discloses prior Treasury receipts relating to IO and affiliated workstreams.
⚠ The ask is large and funds both transition and ongoing operations.
⚠ The governance transition must be legally completed and publicly verifiable.
⚠ Long-term sustainability is not fully settled at the point of approval.
⚠ Blockfrost’s high usage creates both public-good importance and access-layer concentration risk.
⚠ RCADA’s prior disclosed relationship with Blockfrost API service provision creates perception and conflict-management considerations.

Assessment: Constitutional pass with strong transition-governance and sustainability expectations

Process & Governance Quality

✔ The proposal directly responds to prior community concern about Treasury support for a commercial service.
✔ Moving Blockfrost into a not-for-profit structure is a meaningful improvement over a private free-tier subsidy.
✔ The proposed transfer of source code, trademarks, domains, and associated assets strengthens the public-good case.
✔ A community-governed board structure can improve legitimacy if elections, eligibility, and decision-making are transparent.
✔ Public infrastructure-cost data and usage dashboards can improve accountability.
✔ Quarterly reporting and third-party assurance are positive controls.
✔ The Icebreakers model can support decentralised operation if expanded and governed fairly.
⚠ The preliminary board should remain a transition body and should not become a permanent unelected governance layer.
⚠ Board elections should be transparent, community-legible, and verifiable on-chain where applicable.
⚠ Any future commercial offering must not undermine the free public API.
⚠ Vendor-backed sustainability models must avoid vendor capture or unfair advantage.
⚠ The 18-month funding period should produce a credible sustainability model rather than simply defer the next funding request.

Assessment: Supportable transition to public-good stewardship, with high governance expectations

Impact & Risk Analysis

Developer infrastructure value: High
Public-good value: High
Adoption and builder support: High
Current ecosystem reliance: High
Execution credibility: Medium to High
Treasury ask size: High
Governance transition risk: Medium to High
Long-term sustainability risk: Medium to High
Access-layer concentration risk: High
Conflict/perception risk for RCADA: Medium
Administration/custody risk: Low to Medium
Strategic alignment: High

RCADA believes Blockfrost is critical developer access infrastructure and that keeping reliable, low-friction access available is valuable for Cardano builders, wallets, dApps, tools, and smaller projects.

However, Blockfrost’s importance also highlights dependency risk. A successful transition should not only preserve the service, but also strengthen community stewardship, decentralised operation, transparent governance, and long-term sustainability.

Assessment: High-value infrastructure transition / cautious YES with strong public-good, governance, and sustainability expectations

Ratings (Decision Support Only)

Dimension	Score (1–5)
Constitutional clarity	4
Governance quality	4
Execution credibility	4
Ecosystem value	5
Risk balance	3
Overall score	🟢 80% — Cautious YES for public-good transition of critical developer infrastructure

RCADA Rationale

RCADA votes YES on Blockfrost’s transformation to not-for-profit.

This is a cautious YES.

This new proposal materially changes the governance question. Rather than asking the Treasury to support Blockfrost as a private commercial service, it proposes transferring Blockfrost source code, trademarks, domains, and associated assets into community stewardship under an independent, community-governed not-for-profit. It also proposes maintaining a free public API for Cardano mainnet, preview, and preprod, with public dashboards, board oversight, quarterly reporting, and a path toward long-term sustainability.

RCADA supports this direction because Blockfrost is widely used developer infrastructure. Reliable, low-friction access to Cardano data is a genuine ecosystem public good. Many developers, wallets, dApps, tools, and smaller projects rely on hosted infrastructure because they cannot reasonably operate their own full indexing and submission stack. Keeping a free, reliable public API available can lower barriers to entry, support developer experience, and help protect existing applications from disruption.

RCADA also recognises that the previous commercial/public-good tension appears to be directly addressed here. The proposal states that Blockfrost considered either becoming fully commercial or fully public-good, and chose the public-good path because raising prices or removing the free tier would harm adoption. Moving Blockfrost into a not-for-profit structure with community governance, public reporting, and transferred intellectual property is a meaningful improvement over funding an ordinary private free-tier subsidy.

That said, RCADA’s support is not unconditional. The request is large at 9,832,979 ADA over 18 months, and Blockfrost’s importance also reveals a centralisation risk. A large share of Cardano development and transaction submission flowing through one access layer is both evidence of value and a reason for caution. The transition should reduce dependency and strengthen decentralised operation, not merely preserve a single dominant hosted endpoint under a new legal wrapper.

RCADA also continues to recognise conflict and perception risk because of our prior disclosed relationship with Blockfrost API service provision. This YES vote is based on the proposal’s structural change toward community ownership and not-for-profit stewardship. RCADA expects that any continued or future service-provider relationships, including Icebreaker participation, should be handled transparently under the not-for-profit’s governance, procurement, and conflict-of-interest rules.

RCADA expects the transfer of Blockfrost source code, trademarks, domains, and associated assets to be legally completed and publicly verifiable. The board election process should be transparent, community-legible, and verifiable on-chain where applicable. The preliminary board should act only as a transition body and should not become a permanent unelected governance layer.

RCADA also expects the not-for-profit to publish clear infrastructure-cost data, usage metrics, uptime performance, API request volume, budget summaries, and quarterly reports. Sustainability planning must be treated as a core deliverable, not deferred indefinitely. Any future commercial offering or vendor-backed model should protect the free public API, avoid unfair vendor capture, and return benefits to the Cardano community as described.

RCADA views this as a transition mandate, not a permanent operating subsidy. The 18-month funding period should result in a legally completed community-stewardship structure, public accountability, decentralised operation, and a credible sustainability model that reduces the need for recurring Treasury support.

On balance, RCADA believes this proposal meets the standard for support because it responds constructively to earlier concerns, protects critical developer access infrastructure, and attempts to move Blockfrost from a commercial dependency into a community-governed public good. RCADA votes YES while expecting rigorous transition governance, transparent accounting, independent assurance, open board processes, real decentralisation through operators, and a credible path away from recurring Treasury dependency.