Thank you, Gonna, for taking the time to put this proposal together. We’re excited about the changes for the next season and how the council’s restructuring has been approached, incorporating lessons learned from past seasons. As part of our commitment to the Feedback Commission, we’d love to share some thoughts and reflections.
Could you please clarify what X refers to?
After reviewing the table, we noticed the total is 370,000 OP instead of 390,000 OP. We kindly suggest correcting the extra 20,000 OP.
We are optimistic that the restructuring of the Grants Council, which includes reallocating responsibilities to the DAB and establishing an independent Council for Milestones and Metrics, represents a strategic shift toward decentralization. It is encouraging to see how the retrospectives from the DAB and GC teams have played a role in this realignment, promoting closer collaboration.
The same roles for season 6 Grants Council Operational Budget were:
We’d like to make a small clarification to gain more context, as your input is important to us. During Season 6, the Lead role was initially set at 30k OP. However, due to specific circumstances and the fact that Bunnic enthusiastically stepped up to take on the role of Ops Manager, 10k OP was allocated to this position. From what we understand, 5k OP of that amount went to the Lead for supporting the new role as part of their training. This means the Lead’s total compensation for S6 was effectively 35k OP, even though this wasn’t the original plan.
Our question is, looking ahead to this season, will the Ops Manager role continue in a training phase, or will it now function as a fully independent role?
About the reflections:
The introduction of a specific role to cover this need is a great improvement facing the needs of this new season.
Regarding this:
Adjusting the roles of new reviewers into two categories—one with greater expertise in general grants knowledge and the other with a more technical focus—is a great move, and the budget allocation for each makes a lot of sense too.
We also believe it’s essential to encourage more responses and insights from applicants, as highlighted in the reflections from Season 6:
Given that there will be more input and interaction, it seems reasonable and logical to expect a slight drop in the Net Promoter Score (NPS): 7/10 for S7 compared to 9/10 in S6, as outlined here for S6:
Renaming to grant applicants feels like a great step forward! It allows us to better understand their pain points and improve the processes.
Could you please provide a rationale behind the projected number of applications expected to be in demand?
In Season 5, there were 548 applications, and in Season 6, based on what we gathered from the forum, the Grants Council reviewed 557 proposals. Of these, 221 were declined, 336 were voted on, and 133 successfully passed governance (you can check the details here).
Looking ahead to this season, as we move to a single intent, what’s your high-level estimate for the volume of proposals to review? Additionally, how do you foresee managing the workflow with responsibilities now distributed to other structures like DAB and M&M?
On top of that, we would like to hear your thoughts on the BD role idea you mentioned in the GC retrospective post. We are interested in your perspective on the decision not to pursue that role further and how you plan to address the problems you addressed in the Season 6 Grants Council Final and Retrospective Report.
Finally, when taking a general look, there is a 39.34% reduction in the budget compared to the previous season. This decrease is partially due to the reduction in scopes and the reorganization of responsibilities toward other structures. To get a clearer understanding of the actual reduction, we’ve consolidated the budgets of the migrated entities for a more accurate assessment. You can see the whole analysis below:
By doing this, we aim to understand the overall expenditure for the Grants Council in a broader context. While roles have been reorganized across various entities, the expenses persist.
When considering the roles per season, with the proposed changes, the Grants Council would go from 21 members to 9. However, if we normalized the numbers, including +4 members from Milestones and Metrics and +2 for the DAB which have been moved out from the GC, the total number of members in roles would be 15, representing a reduction of -28.57%.
Regarding the 11.4% salary increase for the lead and 50% increase for the Ops Coordinator, we’d like to ask about the expected workload for this season. Considering that the council has been reduced in size and some responsibilities have also decreased, what is the rationale behind those increases?