Cardano Innovation Budget Proposal

Innovation Budget

Here you can find all the details about the proposed Innovation budget for 2025

The budget process and supporting documentation represent a collaborative work-in-progress,

compiled from inputs across Intersect committees and working groups. All figures, timelines, and proposals are strictly indicative and subject to community feedback, market conditions, and on-chain approvals. Nothing herein is finalized.

More details can be found here and the detailed spreadsheet can be found here

Membership and Community Committee members

This proposal was defined by the Membership and Community committee via community consultation

Chair: Nori Nishigaya
Co-Chair: Darlington Wleh
Secretary: Terence McCutcheon
Voting Member: Katarina Ciric
Voting Member: Yuki Oishi(Yuta)
Voting Member: Ben Hart
Voting Member: Matthew Capps
Voting Member: Ha Nguyen
Voting Member: Sheldon Hunt
Voting Member: Sanjaya W
Voting Member: Akheel Fouze


Proposal Summary

The proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal period will encompass all funding requests made by the Members and Community Committee (MCC). The main goal of the innovation budget is to enhance community engagement by organizing events, forums and online platforms, all facilitated by Intersect. It encourages collaboration, knowledge-sharing, and meaningful contributions whilst ensuring members feel connected and valued. The MCC oversees Intersect’s Membership; In turn, the MCC manages the tiered membership levels with tailored benefits and participation opportunities. This promotes inclusivity and aligning engagement with members’ interests. Additionally, the MCC manages the Community Incentive Program. The goal of the program is to recognize and motivate valuable community contributions; This is to drive and strengthen active Cardano community participation whilst fostering innovation.

The proposed Innovation Budget is 77,526,800 ada. This is to be managed by two Treasury withdrawal actions using smart contract:

June 2025: ₳ 75,500,000 - Catalyst (includes 3, 20m ada funds and costs associated)

June 2025: ₳ 2,026,800 - MCC


Abstract

The MCC of Intersect is proposing to break down the innovation budget for the following four sub buckets:

  • Community Hubs: To build and expand the Cardano Community Hubs

    • Expand existing and establish new community hubs to broaden access.

    • Gather input from the community to help prioritize new product and feature requests to drive ecosystem innovation.

    • Facilitate ecosystem input through the quarterly budget and priorities review cycle.

  • Education Programs: The goal is to educate the community for greater agency and participation.

    • Launch Intersect membership education programs to ensure members understand the opportunities that membership confers.

    • Create educational internships and an accessible membership tier.

    • Provide educational materials to help the community learn and have more agency and increase participation

    • Creative Commons licensed Cardano Educational materials

  • Membership Services: The goal is to grow and support the Intersect Membership

    • Host annual member meetings and town halls to foster collaboration.

    • Run Town Halls in multiple timezones and languages

    • Drive membership campaigns to grow the Cardano community.

    • Helping facilitate quarterly budget review cycles

  • Catalyst: Community Grants, supporting the Cardano Blockchain Ecosystem innovation.

    • Support ecosystem innovation through Project Catalyst

    • Experiment with a retroactive funding model to support impactful projects

    • Facilitate community grants and support builders through direct funding and mentorship.

    • Continue to upgrade the technical infrastructure and voting stack to empower Cardano communities with new open source capabilities

Motivation

The MCC goals align with Cardano’s strategic objectives for decentralization, innovation, and adoption. By focusing on education, outreach, and builder support, the initiative contributes directly to ecosystem sustainability and community growth. Moreover, it ensures Intersect’s goals are closely integrated with the community’s needs, fostering a culture of collaboration and trust.

The MCC have identified how the investment in each of the sub-buckets can produce the value into Cardano’s community and ecosystem. The motivation stems from historical success from things such as Community Hubs.

The MCC goals and core motivators are:

  • Intersect membership education programs

  • Regional community hubs expansion

  • Workshops, hackathons, and meetups

  • Community grants and builder support framework

  • 2nd Annual members meeting(s)

Catalyst’s goals and core motivators are:

  • Run 3 Project Catalyst funding rounds in 2025

  • Launch new Retroactive Funding experiment

  • Deliver on improved tooling, voting and engagement methods

  • The number of initiatives funded through the MCC grants program, and the number of community members involved in the quarterly ecosystem budget review.

Rationale

Community Hubs sub-bucket

The proposed budget for the Community Hubs sub-bucket is 3,226,667 ada.

See: Community hubs | Intersect - Knowledge Base

  • Associates and Individual and Enterprise memberships increased

  • The volume of events and engagements delivered

  • Feedback and surveys conducted to capture member wants and needs

  • Support and delivery of events on behalf of Intersect around the globe

  • Hubs around the world conduct town halls etc. and have the capacity to serve multiple time zones.

Education Programs sub-bucket

The proposed budget for the Community Hubs sub-bucket is 1,116,667 ada.

  • The volume of people (Associates, Members and non-members) that use the created educational content.

  • The volume of content delivery based on open source materials created by the community to increase community agency and participation

Membership Services sub-bucket

The proposed budget for the Community Hubs sub-bucket is 1,109,333 ada.

  • Membership numbers

  • Voting engagement

  • Ensuring that qualified members represent each committee

  • Town Hall community engagement

Catalyst sub-bucket

The proposed budget for the Community Hubs sub-bucket is 75,500,000 ada.

Video presentation of Catalyst Team’s Cardano Budget Proposal Presentation Slides

Catalyst 2025 Catalyst Team’s Cardano Budget Proposal Presentation slides

Catalyst 2025 goals are to continue driving significant innovation and impact in the Cardano ecosystem through a comprehensive approach to funding, governance, and infrastructure development. The proposed initiatives offer objectives that will foster ecosystem growth, enhance community participation through transformative technical advances that empower and include Cardano token communities to be able to participate in distributed decision making, incentive-driven building, while continuing to ensure efficient fund allocation for the core Cardano startup ecosystem.

Funding Impact and Innovation Support

The allocation of ₳60M across three funding rounds (Fund 14, 15, and 16) is expected to support 500-700 new Cardano projects in 2025. This substantial investment aims to yield tangible results:

  • 30-40% of allocated funds (₳24-₳30M) are projected to result in real-world adoption or industrial use-case partnerships.

  • Funding will be strategically distributed across four key areas: early-stage R&D, later-stage product development, grassroots ecosystem initiatives, and open-source software development.

The introduction of a Retroactive Public Goods Funding (RetroPGF) model, with ₳5M allocated, will incentivize high-quality contributions by rewarding completed, high-impact work. This approach ensures that valuable public goods such as open-source software, developer tools, and educational content receive appropriate recognition and provides abilities to address underrepresented regional support.

Infrastructure and Technical Advancements

Catalyst 2025 Technical Upgrades and Fund Roadmap

Four key technical milestones will enhance Catalyst’s infrastructure:

  1. CAT1: Catalyst Native Mobile App is expected to increase participation by 30-50% by improving accessibility for mobile-first users.

  2. CAT2: CNT Ecosystem Support will enable decentralized funding campaigns for Cardano Native Tokens, enhancing their utility for governance and ecosystem growth, empowered to launch new co-funding initiatives.

  3. CAT3: Hardening Hermes will decentralize and enhance voting security, reducing governance manipulation risks.

  4. CAT4: Alternative Voting Mechanisms will introduce Quadratic Voting and Time-Weighted Stake models, improving project success rates by fostering better-informed voter decisions, reducing the risk of fund misallocation in each funding round.

Governance and Participation Enhancement

Project Catalyst aims to significantly improve governance and community participation:

  • Voter participation is expected to grow from 7,000+ to 10,000+ wallets, increasing the legitimacy of governance decisions by improving UX

  • The implementation of Decentralized Representatives (DReps), Quadratic Voting (QV), and Time-Weighted Stake models will lead to more representative decision-making, reducing potential whale dominance.

  • Each funding round is projected to see 300,000-400,000 votes cast, reflecting up to 30% growth in fund-on-fund participation.

Community Empowerment and Regional Support

The allocation of 500,000 ada for community hubs through the Intersect RFP process will create funding opportunities tailored to regional and emergent needs. This initiative will empower underrepresented communities and foster localized innovation. The Membership and Community Committee will collaborate with the community and Catalyst Team to define and implement scope and strategy through Catalyst.

Operational Efficiency and Infrastructure Upgrades

The ₳10M allocated for operating expenses is strategically distributed to ensure efficient fund operations and technical development. This budget supports a team of 32 full-time employees (FTEs) and additional subcontractors, divided into two main groups:

Fund Operations Team (12 FTEs)

Estimated budget allocation: ₳3.3M

This team is responsible for the overall management and execution of Catalyst funds. Their roles include:

  • Leadership and Management

  • Fund Administration Operators

  • Product Owners

  • Community Managers

  • Communications

  • ProjectCatalyst.io maintenance

Technical Team (20 FTEs + Subcontractors)

Estimated budget allocation: ₳6.7M

This larger team focuses on the technical aspects of Catalyst, including development, design, and quality assurance. The team comprises:

  • Architecture and Engineering Leads

  • Product Managers

  • Rust and Flutter Engineering

  • UX Product Designers

  • QA Testers and Engineers

  • Full-stack Developers

  • Site Reliability Engineers

This technical team allocation includes funds for subcontractors who provide specialized skills or additional capacity as needed.

The budget distribution reflects the complex and multifaceted nature of Catalyst operations, ensuring comprehensive coverage of all aspects from fund management to technical infrastructure. This allocation aims to maximize efficiency in delivering the milestones and activities outlined for each Catalyst fund cycle, including parameter setting, campaign launches, proposal submissions, community review, voting processes, regulatory compliance, project onboarding, accountability, funding distribution, and technical upgrades.

2025 Funding Rounds.

The proposal comprises three rounds of community funds of 20m ada each. The funds are focused on supporting community-decided open innovation opportunities, centred around four core workstreams, categorised as:

  • Cardano Concepts: supporting early stage use-case application development and demonstration from proof of concept (POC) to minimum viable product (MVP)

  • Cardano Partners & Products: supporting later stage market-ready products and use-case implementation for single applicants or in collaboration with industry leading partners to deliver real world pilot-trials

  • Cardano Open: Developers: Focused on supporting Cardano’s open source developer ecosystem efforts. Intended for the scope of this category to be set in consultation with the Open Source Committee.

  • Cardano Open: Ecosystem: Focused on non-technical proposals for grassroots Cardano regional growth and community-building projects. Intended for the scope of this category to be set in consultation with the Membership and Community Committee and relevant working group participants.

New funding initiatives:

  1. 5m allocated for Retroactive Public Goods Funding (RetroPGF) RetroPGF is a mechanism used in other ecosystems to reward and fund impactful work after it has been completed, rather than providing funding upfront. This approach incentivizes individuals and teams to create high-quality public goods by ensuring they will be rewarded based on the value their contributions generate. Public goods that provide significant value, such as open-source software, developer tools, and educational content, are key candidates. RetroPGF occurs in structured funding rounds, each round targets specific types of contributions, such as ecosystem tools or educational initiatives. RetroPGF fills a gap for Cardano whereby builders are rewarded post-fact, even if they weren’t approved to deliver the project via the general Catalyst funding streams in Cardano Use Case and Cardano Open categories. Additionally RetroPGF could become regionally focused, whereby portions of the funding allocation can be ringfenced for projects centred on and/or originating from specific regions. RetroPGF will mark an exciting evolution and extension to the kinds of programs Catalyst can facilitate on behalf of and for the betterment of the Cardano community.

  2. Cardano Committee RFPs Catalyst can also enhance the operations of Cardano committees by offering a comprehensive suite of tools to streamline and professionalize their workflows. By providing a structured framework for setting the scope of requirements and administering contracts, Catalyst enables committees to define clear objectives and align resources effectively. Facilitating with tools for drafting and distributing Requests for Proposals (RFPs) or Invitations to Tender (ITTs) the collection of responses, ensuring that all submissions meet predefined criteria. This allows committees to efficiently evaluate proposals while maintaining transparency and accountability. Additionally, by incorporating mechanisms for Expression of Interest (EOI) submissions and whitelist-based filtering, Project Catalyst ensures that only qualified entrants move forward, reducing administrative overhead and improving the quality of submissions. Beyond managing incoming proposals, Catalyst offers to support committees in automating the allocation of proposals to Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) for thorough evaluation. This ensures a fair and consistent assessment process, where solutions align with the defined objectives. Furthermore, Catalyst can streamline the administration of milestone-based Statements of Work (SOWs), ensuring that deliverables are tracked and tied to project outcomes. The Catalyst platform’s tooling enables committees to monitor progress and enforce accountability at every stage, from generating solutions to implementing them. By integrating these capabilities, Catalyst provides Cardano committees with an end-to-end solution for managing complex projects, fostering efficiency, and driving impactful outcomes.

Fund Operations services and Catalyst platform R&D

The Catalyst team proposes to continue its involvement as the Catalyst Fund Operations service provider for the Cardano community and provide baseline infrastructure including operating services for proposal submission, community review, privacy preserving voting, cohort management, and funding administration.

  • Coordinate, launch, and fully execute the next three Catalyst funding round campaigns at a level of 20m ada per fund

  • Maintain all existing Catalyst voting system infrastructure and tools so they are readily available for use during each funding round.

  • Coordinate and manage the milestone-based funding and proof-of-achievement accountability model to onboard newly approved projects and oversee the ongoing funding disbursement requirements for all pre-existing, active projects from Fund2-Fund13 and all newly approved projects (Fund14-Fund16)

  • Extend the capabilities of Catalyst user experience and underlying infrastructure (CAT1-4)

CAT1: Catalyst Native Mobile App

This will deliver an open source native-mobile version of the proposal, commenting, and voting experience for community users in Fund16, that leverages existing UX design system and Flutter for its cross-platform portability.

Outcome: unlock the full end-to-end Catalyst experience for mobile-only community members to reduce barriers to entry and boost adoption (especially in emerging markets with low rates of desktop ownership).

Features:

  • Mobile Wallet Connect Research: understand existing solutions and challenges to determine best approach

  • Mobile Design Research: test and validate approaches to translating desktop UX to mobile

  • iOS / Android SDKs: implement enabling SDKs for mobile wallet connect and other platform-specific needs

  • Deployment Pipeline: enable seamless native app deployment, without reliance on other teams

  • Account Restoration: allow a user to easily restore an existing account to a new device

  • Teams, Proposals, Comments: allow a user to create proposals, alone or with a team, and comment on them

  • Voting, Dreps, Delegation: allow a user delegate voting power, and vote on behalf of themselves or others

CAT2: Alternative Voting Mechanisms:

Implement research for Quadratic Voting + Time weighted stake, and provide a choice of mechanism configurable by campaign administrators

CAT3: CNT Ecosystem support:

This will deliver Cardano Native Token (CNT) communities support to administer funding using the Catalyst suite of community decision-making tools,

Features:

  • Cardano Native Token Support: index Cardano holdings and make them available to Catalyst tools

  • Campaign Admin, Setup Native Brand, Build Forms: external admin can launch and operate campaign

  • Discover, Subscribe, and Interact w/ Brands: allow user to find and participate in many programs

  • Legacy Integrations & Deployments: upgrade legacy tools and integrations to support concurrent programs

CAT4: Hardening Hermes:

Hermes is the underlying infrastructure for decentralising UX, enabling high-availability of an application engine that provides distributed storage and event processing for voting events, proposals, and role-based actions in a responsive user interface. This initiative will extend the MVP capabilities developed to date and get Hermes into a redistributable, production ready state for delivering fully decentralised voting.

Budget Details

Requested budget: ₳ 77,526,800

The detailed spreadsheet can be found here

2 Likes

The MCC Budget is evolving daily, and currently published MCC Budget descriptions and figures are outdated.

We are working on an MCC internal poll so that we can share the latest numbers and explanations. It may be more correct to post this post after an internal MCC vote, but I decided to post it so as not to unnecessarily consume DRep’s resources.:pray:

MCC Budget は毎日進化しており、現在公表されているMCC Budgetの説明と数値は古いものです。

最新の数値と説明の共有できるように私たちはMCC内部投票に取り組んでいます。このポスト自体もMCC内部投票後に行うほうが正しい可能性がありますが、DRepの皆さんのリソースを不要に消費しないようにポストすることにしました。:pray:

3 Likes

Community Hubs has a lot of FIAT expenditure, and what I recall for 2024 hubs the grant was capped at 20k ADA per hub. Why are we not showing ADA payments for hubs in rows 5 & 6?? Are the current/expired agreements renewable, and if so under what terms? We need to know the detailed costs associated with them and what they deliver in return to the ecosystem. What is the proposed grant cap for 2025/6 per new workshop, and the duration of support? It is also important that Hubs do not become reliant solely on grants, we need to encourage ways for them to prosper as stand alone entities.

MCC Budget v3.9.4 - MCC has approved sharing the latest MCC Budget :pray:

MCC budget published by the Budget Committee is a bit old. The old MCC budget had some rate errors, overlaps, and incomplete descriptions that have been corrected to some extent, but I agree that there are still many areas that need clarification, and MCC is looking for more feedback.

v3.9.4 is the latest version approved by MCC.

v3.9.5 is a work in progress to further improve the sheet and we welcome your feedback.

I actually wanted to post this from MCC’s X account, but I’ll post this from my X account this time in order to make it to the Japan Budget review session in 2 hours :pray:

Thank you very much for your feedback :pray:

Community Hubs has a lot of FIAT expenditure, and what I recall for 2024 hubs the grant was capped at 20k ADA per hub.Why are we not showing ADA payments for hubs in rows 5 & 6??

⇨The breakdown amount is listed in column H.

Are the current/expired agreements renewable, and if so under what terms?

⇨Currently being discussed in the Community Hub Working Group. It is highly likely possible, but the terms for renewal may vary depending on how efficiently the KPIs and target values ​​defined in the Budget are achieved.

We need to know the detailed costs associated with them and what they deliver in return to the ecosystem.

⇨In v3.9.4, we have detailed KPIs and targets. We welcome feedback on whether this is really attractive🙏

What is the proposed grant cap for 2025/6 per new workshop, and the duration of support?

⇨Currently, grants are provided according to the possibility of meeting KPIs and targets. In other words, KPIs and targets are everything, and there are currently no restrictions on the means or caps for achieving this. However, geographic diversity is to be taken into consideration, and even if all KPI targets are met in a single workshop in a specific region, it is highly likely that it will not be approved. In addition, Hubs may have the opportunity to apply for various grants other than the MCC Budget, such as the Civic Commission Budget.
However, we are currently seeking feedback on this approach🙏

It is also important that Hubs do not become reliant solely on grants, we need to encourage ways for them to prosper as stand alone entities.

⇨This is something that Thiago, in particular, has been discussing in the working group. It has been suggested in the working group that this is likely to be a very ambitious goal, but I think it is a very important perspective.

Your feedback has been added to the feedback list :pray:

Still trying to find the KPI’s. especially for renewals…what have they delivered v/v their existing agreement? How is/was this measured. KPI’s also have to be achievable and/or quantifiable, how much research has been done to understand the differing levels of society in the regions, in particular Africa and Asia in order to set the indicators? You have already made a clear statement that anyone who meets the possibilities is highly unlikely to be approved. This does nothing to encourage participation or inclusion, it is almost dystopian. It almost creates a competition for the Community Hubs applicants. If we dont encourage hubs to become independent information centres, they become dependent on the treasury…if they dont meet KPI’s they will lose their grant…which creates a brand issue on a larger scale…because the KPI’s are just unattainable. There needs to be a clear and concise way to determine who and what will assess the viability of the numbers/KPI’s, because I do not sense anyone truly understands the dynamics of the two population centres I refer to, or the grass roots (community) perception of the expectations.

The breakdown of [Catalyst Operations and improvements 10m ADA] and ROI is now more detailed.

Please let us know what you would like to know more about.

Thank you so much :pray: I think this is important feedback. I will reflect it in the feedback list and share it with the Community Hub Working Group.

Zero-based discussions are currently being held again in the Community Hub Working Group, and the results of these discussions will likely result in changes to the Community Hub figures, descriptions, and KPIs in the MCC Budget.

If possible, I would be very grateful if you could join the Community Hub Working Group :pray:

Of course I will be happy to be involved. When we think about Africa and Asia, very few realise they represent more than 75% of the global population - and therefore, in my view, shall demand a greater amount of our time and resources in order to bring some balance. The application process too needs to be streamlined and transparent, as well as responsive. I applied for a Community Hub grant in 2024, and never heard anything else, even after recent emails, no response. This is not how I would wish others to experience or feel when introducing them to Cardano and its future.

1 Like

Hello everyone,
Innovation Budget Proposal is updated today with the latest budget proposal numbers (v3.9.4) which is approved by MCC committee.
Requested budget: ₳ 77,526,800
We would like to encourage everyone to review the budget again with the updated numbers. :pray:
We will continue collecting feedback and refining the budget proposal here. You can review changes via the ‘History’ features here on Cardano Forum accessible via the pencil button on the top right corner of the post.

That’s absolutely true, thank you very much :pray: We look forward to your participation in the Working Group :pray:

How do I participate in the working group meetings? please share a link or post!

Please enter as follows, thank you :pray:

STEP1) join here

STEP2) Click here

1 Like

Thank you, I’ll ask the question on Discord :pray:

2025年2月15日(土) 14:13 Deane Thomas via Cardano Forum <notifications@cardano.discoursemail.com>:

Innovation Budget POLL - Vote for all that apply to you :pray: (Anonymous vote)

Community Hubs $658,400

  • Community Hubs $658,400 This is a high priority so the budget should be increased.
  • “Community Hubs $658,400” The amount and description are fine.
  • “Community Hubs $658,400” The amount is fine, but the explanation is insufficient.
  • “Community Hubs $658,400” The explanation is insufficient so the amount should be removed or reduced.
  • “Community Hubs $658,400” This is considered a low priority so the amount should be removed or reduced.
0 voters

Education programs $235,000

  • Education programs $235,000 This is a high priority so the budget should be increased.
  • Education programs $235,000 The amount and description are fine.
  • Education programs $235,000 The amount is fine, but the explanation is insufficient.
  • Education programs $235,000 The explanation is insufficient so the amount should be removed or reduced.
  • Education programs $235,000 This is considered a low priority so the amount should be removed or reduced.
0 voters

Membership support $120,000

  • Membership support $120,000 This is a high priority so the budget should be increased.
  • Membership support $120,000 The amount and description are fine.
  • Membership support $120,000 The amount is fine, but the explanation is insufficient.
  • Membership support $120,000 The explanation is insufficient so the amount should be removed or reduced.
  • Membership support $120,000 This is considered a low priority so the amount should be removed or reduced.
0 voters

Community Grants-MCC led Grants ₳500,000

  • “Community Grants-MCC led Grants ₳500,000” This is a high priority so the budget should be increased.
  • “Community Grants-MCC led Grants ₳500,000” The amount and description are fine.
  • “Community Grants-MCC led Grants ₳500,000” The amount is fine, but the explanation is insufficient.
  • “Community Grants-MCC led Grants ₳500,000” The explanation is insufficient so the amount should be removed or reduced.
  • “Community Grants-MCC led Grants ₳500,000” This is considered a low priority so the amount should be removed or reduced.
0 voters

Community Grants-Catalyst ₳75,000,000

  • “Community Grants-Catalyst ₳75,000,000” This is a high priority so the budget should be increased.
  • “Community Grants-Catalyst ₳75,000,000” The amount and description are fine.
  • “Community Grants-Catalyst ₳75,000,000” The amount is fine, but the explanation is insufficient.
  • “Community Grants-Catalyst ₳75,000,000” The explanation is insufficient so the amount should be removed or reduced.
  • “Community Grants-Catalyst ₳75,000,000” This is considered a low priority so the amount should be removed or reduced.
0 voters

MCC are conducting a poll in the MCC general chat regarding the amount of each MCC Budget item. Please vote on whether you think the amount is too much or too little, or if you think the item should be deleted :pray:

(Only 5 items, can be completed in under 2 minutes)

We are checking if it is possible to create a poll in the X account of MCC :pray:

1 Like

Education and HUBs are all part of the Growth and Marketing budget as well. Is there a reason why it’s been duplicated?

And what would you define as “community led grants” that is not covered by Catalyst and G&M?

Thank you, this is a really good question.

My current interpretation is as follows:

1. Possible overlap in Community Hub

The Community Hub in the MCC budget is basically focused on membership expansion, Intersect participation, and other matters related to Intersect membership, as stated in the current KPIs.

At the same time, the Community Hub may access the GMC budget or the Civic budget to conduct on-chain governance workshops or some Cadrano marketing. This is not included in the MCC budget.

However, the Community Hub WG is currently being launched and is exploring the expansion of KPIs that are not limited to Intersect membership.

Depending on how this KPI expands, it may begin to overlap with the GMC and Civic committee objectives.

I plan to keep an eye on the Community Hub WG’s resolutions.

2. Possible overlap in education

The GMC budget and the Civic Committee budget also include a broad education budget. If you look closely, you will see that the budgets of other committees also include things that can be subtly interpreted as education budgets.

Education in the MCC budget may refer to education excluding any education that other committees may provide, such as education about the Intersect, and currently it is likely to refer to the following two.

  • Education other than on-chain governance and technology for those inside the ecosystem
  • Education focused on the Intersect, such as membership-only education and how to run a working group in the Intersect

The GMC is basically aimed at those outside the ecosystem, and education for those inside the ecosystem seems to be something like education for “developing marketers”. Also, while there may be a secondary educational effect as a result of implementing the GMC budget, the purely educational purpose is limited.

Personally, if we interpret it strictly like this, MCC education is very limited, and I think there is a possibility of further reducing the budget. As MCC members, we have agreed to gather feedback on what kind of needs there are for the MCC budget before reducing it, and this is now public.

3. community led grants

There were two developments:

・The issue of whether it is really okay for Catalyst alone to make a single open grant was raised.

・Since MCC had the role of “supervising grants,” the flow was that MCC, not G&M, would make the grant.

However, this is a slightly reluctant reason. I am leaning toward reducing the amount. However, at the same time, I would like to keep an eye on how much need there is for grants that do not go through Catalyst.

X- Feedback

Cerkoryn

Patrick

therealdisasm

1 Like