An independent community initiative, governed in public
The DRep Standards Institute is a voluntary professional association founded by practising representatives. It is not an official Cardano, Intersect, Cardano Foundation, IOG, or Emurgo body, and it holds no formal role in on-chain governance.
Raise the floor of representative practice
We exist so that any DRep who wants to do the job well has a route to do so: shared standards, real education, access to expertise, and honest peer feedback.
Better representation is not a matter of electing better people. It is a matter of giving the people already doing the work the infrastructure that every other consequential profession takes for granted - and then staying entirely out of the decisions themselves.
Six commitments the Institute makes to itself
Independence is the foundation, not a feature
Every programme is designed so that it remains useful to two members who reach opposite conclusions from the same evidence.
Process is reviewable; judgement is not
We observe whether commitments were kept. We never assess whether a conclusion was correct.
Public by default
Drafts, funding, minutes, and disagreements are published as they happen rather than summarised afterwards.
Voluntary and revocable
Membership is opt-in, and members may leave at any time without penalty or public sanction.
No rankings, ever
We publish no score, no league table, and no recommended-DRep list. Delegators draw their own conclusions.
Correct in the open
When the Institute is wrong, the correction is published in the same place as the error.
Five functions, clearly separated
Authority sits with the membership. Everything else is delegated, time-limited, and revocable.
Sovereign body
Membership Assembly
Every full member, one vote on Institute matters
Standards Council
Drafts and maintains the framework
Education Council
Owns the Training Lab curriculum
Operations Steward
Runs day-to-day services
Process Review Panel
Reviews process complaints only
All bodies are accountable to the Assembly. None of them may consider how a member voted.
Sovereign body
Membership Assembly
Not yet convened
All full members. Adopts and amends standards, approves the annual work programme and budget, elects council members, and may overturn any decision of any other body.
Drafting body
Standards Council
Seats open
Seven members on staggered one-year terms, two-term limit. Drafts standards, runs public comment, and publishes responses to every substantive objection. It cannot adopt a standard by itself.
Curriculum function
Education Council
Seats open
Owns the Training Lab curriculum: what is taught, how it is assessed, and when material is corrected. Others in the ecosystem also teach; this council speaks only for Institute material and never for a voting position.
Executive function
Operations Steward
Interim stewardship
A small operational team running publications, member services, events, and the expert directory. It holds no standards-setting or disciplinary authority.
Review function
Process Review Panel
Seats open
Handles observable membership-process violations only - for example, an undisclosed material interest or a commitment publicly abandoned. It cannot punish political disagreement, ideological position, or the direction of any vote, and it has no jurisdiction over the substance of a member's judgement. Outcomes are limited to guidance, a correction request, suspension of membership status, or removal from the register.
These seats are empty, and we are looking for people
The Institute is brand new. Nothing below is staffed. If you want one of these, say so - there is no queue to join and no seniority to wait out.
Standards Council member
VacantFortnightly, ~3 hrs
Draft and revise standards, read public comment, and write the response to every substantive objection - including the ones you disagree with.
Education Council member
VacantMonthly, ~3 hrs
Own a curriculum area: check lessons for accuracy, set the assessment bar, and file corrections when the ledger or the Constitution moves.
Curriculum reviewer
VacantPer artefact
Read one course or one standards draft and mark what is wrong, unclear, or unsupported. No ongoing commitment; credited by name and artefact.
Process Review panellist
VacantAs cases arise
Assess observable process complaints against the standards. Requires the discipline to ignore whether you agree with the member's votes.
Register verifier
VacantWeekly, ~1 hr
Verify DRep ID ownership before an entry is admitted to the Public Register, and record what was checked.
Operations volunteer
VacantFlexible
Publications, member services, events, or the expert directory. Practical work, no standards-setting authority.
The people behind the Institute, named in public
DSI is in its Founding Phase. Rather than invent a team, we list the roles that exist and publish each name only once that person has actually agreed to be listed.
Founders
None listed yetThe people who started the Institute, wrote the first draft of the standards, and are accountable for it during the Founding Phase.
No founder has been published here yet. Names appear with a short statement of interests as soon as each person confirms.
Contributors
None listed yetAnyone writing curriculum, building tools, or maintaining the resource library. Contributions are credited by name and by artefact.
No contributors listed yet. If you have written or reviewed material used here, ask to be credited and we will publish it.
Reviewers
None listed yetIndependent readers who check standards drafts, course content, and research for accuracy. Reviewers are never asked to endorse a vote.
No reviewers listed yet. Review is being arranged for the v0.1 standards draft and the first training tracks.
Founding DReps
None listed yetPractising representatives who have signed the standards and agreed to appear in the public member directory.
No founding DRep has been confirmed yet. Applications are open, and the directory stays empty until real members join.
Where the money comes from, and what it cannot buy
The Institute has received no funding to date. This table states the rules that will apply when it does. Annual accounts are published in full, and any single funder above ten percent of income is named.
| Source | Status | Condition |
|---|---|---|
| Member contributions | Voluntary, capped | No contribution level changes rights, standing, or profile placement. |
| Ecosystem grants | Published in full | Source, amount, term, and deliverables published before funds are drawn. |
| Expert network | Unpaid or at cost | Experts are never paid to reach a conclusion, only to explain a subject. |
| Prohibited sources | Declined outright | Funding contingent on outcomes, endorsements, or access to members is refused. |
Recusal is routine, not an accusation
Conflicts are expected in a small ecosystem. What matters is that they are declared and stepped away from.
- Council and panel members recuse themselves from any matter touching their own funding or affiliations.
- Every recusal is recorded in the published minutes.
- No body member may review a complaint concerning a proposal they authored or funded.
- Institute funders receive no standing, no early access, and no influence over standards.
- Members disclose material interests on their public profile, and the Institute does not interpret those interests for delegators.
Minutes, decisions, and dissent
No meetings have been held or minuted yet. This is the schedule and format records will follow once the bodies below are formed. Dissenting statements are published alongside the decision, not beneath it.
Assembly - quarterly session
Agenda, decisions, vote counts, and dissenting statements, published within 5 days of the first session.
Standards Council - fortnightly
Draft changes, comment responses, and open questions, published once the Council is elected.
Process Review Panel - as required
Anonymised outcome and reasoning; no political content is ever recorded.
What happens next, in order
- Now
Standards v0.1 open for input
Public comment on the ten standards, founding member cohort, and the first Training tracks.
- Next
Assembly formation
First Assembly convened, councils elected, v1.0 of the framework adopted with an effective date.
- Later
Peer review at scale
Structured review circles, mentorship pairing, and a public research programme with open datasets.
Independent votes. Shared professional standards.
Questions, corrections, or an interest in supporting the work? We read everything.