Money. Identity. Technology.
Follow the money. Find the decision.
Community participants selecting projects within a funder's process
The Digital Freedom Fund Community Peer Group is the peer-selection body described in DFF's participatory grantmaking process. Peers deliberate with staff support, access other assessments and budgets, and sign terms covering confidentiality and conflicts.
DFF's retrospective describes ten peers choosing three pre-litigation projects, followed by seventeen choosing thirteen projects across pre-litigation and litigation tracks. It attributes the June 2026 round to the Peer Group. Staff facilitate discussion and provide prior-grantee information and assessments. DFF says members receive compensation and sign Terms of Reference; the operative recusal rules, amounts, appointment details and any named Liberty vote were not acquired. Members' affiliations are not treated as reserved corporate seats.
DFF Community Peer Group → DFF participatory grant-selection process
2025 rounds; exact selection dates unknown.
DFF retrospective reports ten peers choosing three pre-litigation projects, then seventeen choosing thirteen projects across both types. These are reported selections, not inspected award contracts or evidence all2025 DFF decisions used peers.
DFF grant-team facilitation → DFF Community Peer Group
Retrospective published25March2026; exact practice interval unknown.
Staff facilitate discussion and supply previous-grantee information, other assessments and budgets. Published participant accounts describe judgment factors, not a binding scoring rubric or budget-setting authority.
DFF Community Peer Group → DFF June2026 grant round
June2026 selections; individual selection days unknown.
Previously accepted DFF announcement attributes the June round to the Peer Group. The staged-governance records clarify the process; they do not disclose a named Liberty vote, legal signatory or payment.
Peer Group Terms of Reference → DFF Community Peer Group
DFF says all members sign Terms of Reference containing confidentiality/conflict policies and receive compensation. Signing is publicly described; operative recusal rules and amounts were not acquired.
DFF allocation governance: a real selection role, incomplete legal delegation ↗
DFF supports a specific limit on compelled encryption access ↗
DFF Community Peer Group → reportedly selected projects in two 2025 rounds → DFF participatory grant-selection process
2025 rounds; exact selection dates unknown.
Reported by the cited source
DFF retrospective reports ten peers choosing three pre-litigation projects, then seventeen choosing thirteen projects across both types. These are reported selections, not inspected award contracts or evidence all2025 DFF decisions used peers.
DFF grant-team facilitation → provides review information and facilitation → DFF Community Peer Group
Retrospective published25March2026; exact practice interval unknown.
Reported by the cited source
Staff facilitate discussion and supply previous-grantee information, other assessments and budgets. Published participant accounts describe judgment factors, not a binding scoring rubric or budget-setting authority.
Peer Group Terms of Reference → is described as requiring confidentiality and conflict commitments → DFF Community Peer Group
Reported by the cited source
DFF says all members sign Terms of Reference containing confidentiality/conflict policies and receive compensation. Signing is publicly described; operative recusal rules and amounts were not acquired.
DFF Community Peer Group → is credited with selecting the June 2026 grants → DFF June2026 grant round
June2026 selections; individual selection days unknown.
Reported by the cited source
Previously accepted DFF announcement attributes the June round to the Peer Group. The staged-governance records clarify the process; they do not disclose a named Liberty vote, legal signatory or payment.