This makes a lot of sense to me. And I would add a further point towards suggesting that smaller/younger projects require more than just capital to thrive.
The STIP advisors are a good step in this direction but I imagine in many cases not sufficient for small project. (When an organisation is smaller and less funded, it’s less likely to have in-house the variety of skills and perspectives needed to thrive).
We have an example of addressing this in the RnDAO+ThankARb Co.lab programme where idea stage entrepreneurs and PoC stage ventures are given loads of support on top of some funds.
What if the Small Incentive Programme grants were distributed via programmes like this (not necessarily exclusively, and RnDAO’s only focused on collab tech (community, ops, and governance tooling) so other can focus on other areas too). Maybe this could ensure small grants have maximum impact?
We learnt from web2 investment that cash alone rarely lead to the best results and hence now we have incubators, accelerators and now even beuind replaced by venture builders/startp studios (even more support to the point of the studio being a cofounder). So maybe something in that direction makes sense?
Not sure the stage at which someone would apply for a 100k grant for the incentive programme, so curious about your thoughts on this direction.