Voting Service Provider RFP

Title: Compound DAO Voting Service Provider (VSP) Selection

Please go to the respective forum post to see a more in depth breakdown of the process and options.

Details on the Snapshot Options

Aragon (read full proposal here)

Aragon Enterprise

In order for Compound to effectively transition from its current governance voting interface, and attain a branded UI, the most seamless manner to conduct this shift would be to subscribe to Aragon’s Enterprise tier, even though some of Aragon's stack can be adopted in a self-serve manner.

This tier costs $5,000/month for 12 months, totaling $60,000, streamed over the duration of the year-long contract.

The Enterprise tier allows Compound to deploy a fully customized, branded governance frontend integrated with Aragon OSx, their modular DAO operating system. This includes plugin support for advanced governance mechanics such as optimistic governance, permissioned parameter adjustments, and diverse decision-making flows. The Compound-specific frontend would offer a tailored user experience, mirroring the DAO’s current structure, enabling proposal creation, voting, and tracking.

In addition to the UI layer, Aragon commits to maintaining 99.9% frontend uptime and guarantees a 24-hour response time for critical issues that affect the DAO’s governance operations. The team also offers a detailed offboarding pathway to ensure any future transition to an alternative provider is frictionless—or if the DAO decides to opt into the Self-serve tier later, the infrastructure built during the Enterprise phase will sustain.

While Aragon’s Self-serve tier is cost-free, it would place the burden of development and maintenance on the DAO during year-one of Aragon adoption. The Enterprise tier, by contrast, provides white-glove service and technical support for at least a year. Afterwards, the DAO may reevaluate its tier selection.

Note that Aragon will take one month to complete the initial Enterprise integration.

Tally (read full proposal here)

Tally Self-serve (This is effectively the “abstain”/status quo option)

While Tally’s interface is publicly accessible and already supports Compound governance, further feature development, dedicated support, and UI improvements require an enterprise engagement. As such, relying on Tally without an active relationship would limit Compound’s ability to evolve or customize its interface and tools over time. However, the basic functionality that Tally provides today would remain intact based on this fee tier.

Going forward, Tally’s self-serve default option would introduce a 0.25% fee on every transaction send proposed using their platform. This will be automatically deducted and routed to Tally’s multisig wallet. This would mean that every proposal that is directly proposed on the Tally UI and uses the transfer() function would be subject to the stated fee, given the funds being transferred are OUT of the Treasury Address (0x6d903f6003cca6255D85CcA4D3B5E5146dC33925).

Compound governance’s native contracts (Comptroller, Timelock, Governor) don’t include Tally’s fee logic since fees are applied at the application layer. The 0.25% protocol fee is applicable only if a proposal is proposed on Tally and ends up being executed.

Note that the DAO has also contracted Tally in the past via the Compound Grant Program. Last year, they received $32k to make enhancements for Compounds UI. Enhancements completed from this program will NOT be backtracked or removed in the event the Self-serve option is voted in.

Tally Enterprise

Tally proposes a full-service engagement priced at $12,500/month for one year, totalling $150,000, streamed evenly over the course of the contract.

This service includes continued support for Compound’s existing on-chain governance interface, along with additional features outlined in the linked post. The proposed deliverables span four main workstreams.

• Proposal UX: Tally will deliver Compound-specific simulations, support for scripted proposals and custom calldata, automatic decoding of externally submitted proposals, and automated execution of passed proposals.
• Voting UX: Features include gasless voting, a custom-branded domain, Karma delegate score integration, a forum bot, enhanced notifications, MarketAdmin proposal display, and support for the Emergency Upgrade Rollback UI.
• Governance Resilience: Tally will deploy “Tally Zero,” a decentralized, IPFS-hosted frontend that ensures governance continuity without relying on Tally’s servers.
• Transparency & Reporting: Tally will provide Safe multisig dashboards, DAO analytics, success metrics on the homepage, and real-time treasury reporting with balance and runway insights.

To strengthen governance resilience, Tally will launch “Tally Zero,” a decentralized, IPFS-hosted frontend for on-chain voting without reliance on Tally’s servers. For transparency, it will provide Safe dashboards, real-time analytics, homepage success metrics, and detailed treasury reporting. The engagement includes clear service-level guarantees: 99% monthly uptime, a 4-hour response time for critical issues, resolution of critical bugs within one business day, and regular monthly maintenance. Tally will also hold monthly office hours for community feedback and report on both platform usage and adoption of new features over the course of the contract.

Lighthouse Labs (read full proposal here)

Lighthouse Labs’ proposed budget is $9,500/month, totaling $114,000 over 12 months. They note that this pricing reflects their current offering, with a capped renewal increase of no more than 30% in future terms.

Lighthouse proposes a mobile-native governance interface. Their offering includes a fully functional iOS and Android app that enables users to receive push notifications, track proposals, and vote on both Snapshot and on-chain Governor proposals. A core feature of their platform is the “Dispatch” messaging system, which allows DAO contributors to send secure, targeted announcements directly to tokenholders, without needing access to their email addresses. This aims to improve engagement while maintaining privacy and decentralization.

Lighthouse also introduces a governance R&D initiative called “Signals,” a still-developing coordination tool meant to help communities surface preferences and resolve ambiguity around proposals. They also commit to 99%+ uptime and offer service-level support for any platform or governance issues that arise.

Note that the Lighthouse proposal reads more as a supplementary interface for Compound users as opposed to a full-stack governance platform for proposing and executing votes. Therefore, if this option was voted in, an alternative free service model would likely end up being used as well.

Snapshot Labs (read full proposal here)

Snapshot Labs’ proposal includes a 12-month engagement priced at $80,000, with a milestone-based payment structure: $40,000 upfront and $40,000 upon successful delivery. Snapshot also outlines an optional annual subscription fee of $6,000 beginning in year two, which would cover ongoing support and maintenance for the integration. In the event of opting out of the subscription, all integrations conducted during the first year will remain intact, so individuals will be able to continue voting, delegating, and proposing—but the enterprise SLA component would be removed.

Their proposal focuses on integrating Snapshot with Compound’s governance architecture to support both informal signaling (e.g. temperature checks) and formal on-chain proposal workflows, providing an end-to-end governance experience in a single user interface where proposals can be submitted, executed, and voted on. Note that this would in effect allow Compound to conduct off-chain and on-chain votes in the same venue, even though at the present time Snapshot is solely run for off-chain votes.

The core feature set includes a branded Compound voting space with a custom URL, full Governor integration, syncing on-chain proposals to Snapshot automatically, and developing frontend modules that make it easier for users to view, evaluate, and participate in governance. Snapshot also commits to supporting cross-platform notification systems (e.g. email, Discord), wallet/treasury tracking, and a delegation interface. Voters would be able to see clear breakdowns of proposals, quorum thresholds, and real-time vote counts.

Snapshot includes operational commitments, offering 99.99% monthly uptime for both frontend and API services, 3-hour response times for technical support, and a 7-day advance notice policy for any updates that could affect Compound governance. In the event that the DAO discontinues the partnership or chooses not to renew the annual support fee, Snapshot commits to a 2-month offboarding grace period, during which they will assist any successor team and provide full data portability.

Note that Snapshot Labs would take 3 months to complete the integration. Not selecting Snapshot at the dedicated VSP does NOT mean Compound will lose access to its current off-chain voting setup on Snapshot.