When a company grows above a certain size it gets to a point where every cost spend can’t be put before the board anymore. They haven’t got time to think it all through in the required detail. They create cost centres, with monthly budgets. The budget goes up and down a bit from time to time, but it is managed by a budget holder who spends it and reports using a reporting document. This is what we have to do. This idea is similar to DashForce by @mastermined. DashForce was a cumulative proposal of many small things done to promote Dash with total budget of 205 DASH per month. I am proposing we think a bit bigger, and create a real change to our processes by enabling the idea with a change to our processes. We will invent a new entity called a Funded Budget Holder. Anyone will be able to apply to be a FBH by submitting a request to the Masternodes in the same way as people currently submit Budget Proposals. An FBH will normally cover a proposed area/type of spend. Examples of these might be: Software Development Advertising Charity Donations Website development Training videos Legal Defense I made these up, but anyone will be able to propose anything, so this won’t be the list. People are inventive. Submitting a request for a new FBH will be more or less the same as submitting a current Budget Proposal. Put a request in front of the masternodes and they vote yes or no. In the request will be an explanation and a spend in DASH and everyone will vote Yes or No. No problem. The proposal might be slightly different in that it will be selling us on idea that we need a budget and describing the sort of things it will be spent on. The price will be the proposed price for the first month. The difference comes once the FBH is running. There will be a budget spend breakdown document that will be completed by the FBH manager that will show: Spend on tasks this month The progress on each task, and estimated % complete Costs incurred Wages paid Dash retained for spend next month Narrative for what was achieved The FBH manager will then submit this document along with a requested budget for next month. The masternodes will review performance and will be offered to vote for one of three options: Approve Requested budget Reduce budget by 10% Cancel this FBH Whichever option gets the most votes wins. This means that when the proposal is first submitted the price is for the first month only. It could be a low budget, just a few dash to get started, a request in the second month could be made for a higher figure once the ball is rolling. The advantages of this approach are: The manager of the FBH can take a wage. It may be part time, or full time, but it can be a wage. This may seem like extra cost, but its worth it. We need people to manage our processes. The masternodes won’t put up with unreasonable numbers. FBH managers will be able to plan for the longer term, because they will be able to expect ongoing revenue if they perform well. They will achieve a lot more than one-off projects do. If an FBH is failing or underperforming they will be voted down, or voted out. Simple is good. New Budget Proposals can still be submitted to the masternodes as they are now, but there will be a discussion going on about more specialised subjects inside each FBH, and a quickly available budget with stored funds. People will not be expected to submit small requests if there is an obvious FBH which covers that subject. We can retain a fee for submitting requests to the masternodes, to keep out the spam, and leave the micro-management to the FBHs. What if there were 1000 new Budget Proposals being submitted a month? How would we cope? We will need to move faster using stored funds, we will need people’s time and attention, and we need people who specialise in knowing a lot about a subject. Masternodes are paid so that they care about the success of DASH, but they get paid whether they vote or not, and we can’t change that, so we have to ensure they are not swamped with requests. Instead we will use our money to create processes and people to do the work.