Research Budget
Here you can find all the details about the proposed Research budget for 2025
You can provide feedback on this proposal on the Cardano Forum here
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.
The detailed spreadsheet can be found here
Cardano Product Committee members
This proposal was defined by the Cardano Product Committee via community consultation
Chair
Samuel Leathers
Co-Chair
Kyle Solomon
Secretary
Lorenzo Bruno
Committee Member
Romain Pellerin
Committee Member
Naushad Fouze
Committee Member
Juan Sierra
Proposal Summary
The proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal period will encompass all funding requests made by the Cardano Product Committee. The primary mandate for allocating these requested funds is to cover several key areas: Vision creation focuses on financing the efforts and expenses necessary to develop an open and transparent process led by the community for evolving a five-year vision for the Cardano ecosystem. Academic research is aimed at supporting mid- and long-term research that has a forward-looking approach, providing essential long-term direction for the ecosystem. Product research targets funding for short- and mid-term user and market research, which is crucial for gathering concrete insights into user needs, market gaps, and opportunities, as well as for collecting data that will inform the proposed goals for 2025 and the vision creation process. Lastly, the Overhead section allocates funds for the work and operational expenses associated with this committee's efforts in supporting and managing the aforementioned activities.
The proposed Research Budget is ₳ 26,961,364. This is to be managed by one Treasury withdrawal action using a smart contract:
June 2025
₳ 26,961,364
Abstract
The Cardano product committee of Intersect is proposing to break down the research budget for the following four sub-buckets:
Academic research: This is aimed at funding all the mid and long-term academic forward-looking research. This will be useful in providing long-term direction to the ecosystem
Product research: This is aimed at funding all the short and mid-term user and market research. This will be useful in providing concrete insights into user needs and problems, market gaps and opportunities, as well as collecting data to inform the 2025 proposed goals and the 5year vision
Vision creation: This is aimed at funding all the work, effort, and expenses needed to create and facilitate the first version of an open and transparent process to create a dynamic 5-year vision for the Cardano ecosystem, effectively creating a structured community lead ‘replacement’ for the role that Charles Hoskinson had so far
Product committee: This is aimed at funding the work and overhead this committee will have in supporting and managing the activities above
Motivation
Academic research Expected outcomes
The Vision and Impact plan for Cardano is committed to ensuring Cardano is able to meet and exceed the blockchain industry's aspirations. The plan is informed by impact assessments and extensive stakeholder consultations, reflecting on lessons learned over the past five years.
RWG proposes 9 thematic focus areas, each outlining specific R&D directions that will position Cardano as a global blockchain leader for the next decade and beyond. Within each focus area, we detail the motivation, technical challenges, and benefits for Cardano, demonstrating how each direction aligns with specific blockchain tenets and Product Committee goals. These thematic focus areas provide a roadmap for research and development, ensuring that efforts are not only innovative but also relevant to the Cardano mission. Each thematic focus area is chosen to tackle critical issues, drive technological advancements, and ultimately enhance the platform's capabilities, sustainability, and global impact.
Over the next five years, these directions should be thoroughly explored, leading to their integration as functional components and extensions of the Cardano platform. They serve as strategic pillars that guide advancement and development and concentrate on specific, high-impact challenges and opportunities, ensuring that research efforts are aligned with long-term goals and needs. By defining clear thematic focus areas, resources can be effectively directed toward exploring cutting-edge solutions, fostering innovation, and addressing key technical and societal challenges.
Each R&D direction or workstream within the 2025 work plan is designed with a clear motivation, identifying the technical challenges it aims to overcome and the benefits it will bring to Cardano. The objectives of each work plan are clearly defined, focusing on creating specific deliverables such as enhanced protocols, improved tokenomics, or new functionalities for DApp developers. The tasks and deliverables are structured to meet minimal requirements essential for successful implementation, with considerations for staffing, cost, references, and timelines. This structured approach allows for efficient resource allocation and progress tracking, ensuring that each workstream contributes effectively to Cardano's long-term vision of a robust, secure, and scalable blockchain platform.
Given the early-stage nature of research and the inherent uncertainties that come with pioneering new developments, it is essential to remain adaptable and responsive to changing circumstances. To this end, a 'portfolio approach' to the management and allocation of research resources and the prioritization of specific research workstreams is requested. This ensures funds are optimally allocated across thematic focus areas and workstreams and that resources are directed where they can have the most significant impact.
Product research expected outcomes
For year 1, 2025, the research conducted in this sub-bucket aims to provide insights into the direction and refinement of the proposed goals for 2025 and support other committees with information on user needs. In addition to this short-term need, the insights from this first year will directly inform the Cardano strategy in the short term (2025 and 2026) and help create a longer-term vision. The outcome of this research will also lead to clear problem statements which will be documented as Cardano Problem Statements (CPSs).
Vision creation expected outcomes
For year 1, the work conducted in this sub-bucket aims to provide a first-tested process for the Cardano community to brainstorm, set, track, and evolve its own vision and roadmap. The outcome of that process is the first version of a 5-year Cardano vision and a 2026 roadmap based on that.
Product committee overhead expected outcomes
This sub-bucket aims to cover any overhead the product committee itself might have in facilitating and managing the three buckets above as well as delivering against its core objectives (support vision and roadmap creation as well as keeping track of its progress)
Rationale
The full research bucket proposal by the Cardano product committee can be found here .
Academic Research sub-bucket
Overview
The Academic research bucket aims to fund all research activities that can provide long-term insights into the Cardano ecosystem. This will be guided by a five-year Strategic Research Agenda which adheres to an "evidence-based engineering" methodology focusing on scalability, sustainability, and interoperability. The methodology from initial design through to engineering implementation ensures a funnel of high-quality, efficient, and proven products and features that deliver long-term fundamental value to the Cardano ecosystem.
To continue to position itself as a leading third-generation blockchain, Cardano requires a robust five-year research agenda that focuses on sustainability, scalability, and interoperability. This vision builds on Cardano's track record of 100% uptime, ensuring continuous improvement and maintaining its position at the forefront of blockchain technology. To achieve this, advances in certain focus areas are required including consensus algorithms, such as Ouroboros Omega, zero-knowledge proofs, quantum-resistant cryptography, and enhanced smart contract functionality. The goal is to reinforce Cardano’s positioning and leadership that addresses global and societal challenges while driving innovation and maintaining high security and efficiency standards.
The impact of this planned approach is severalfold; a targeted and ever-growing presence in a global research community, and direct outputs in the form of papers, technical recommendations, and validated prototypes. Commercializing deep technologies such as Web3 cannot just be demand-led. Scientific and technical excellence, a prerequisite in Cardano’s case, can take years to achieve by which time opportunities can be lost. Strategic investments in research areas with high potential for future innovation not only establish a strong foundation for growth but also create a competitive advantage through accelerating time to market. This enables opportunities to be seized in a timely manner and enables the resulting economic, societal, and environmental impact to be realized.
Broad acceptance criteria
Each year RWG's goal is to generate a robust pipeline of at least 20 research opportunities at SRL2, underpinned by comprehensive research papers and technical reports. From this funnel, we aim to validate and prioritize 6 key innovation opportunities for implementation that have been thoroughly validated through a multidisciplinary team across engineering, product development, customer engagement as well as research.
This funnel approach is designed to lay a strong foundation for Cardano, ensuring a continuous pipeline of high-impact and strategic opportunities with global ambitions that address the most significant challenges in the blockchain space. The outputs and deliverables outlined below are focused on reinforcing and advancing Cardano's leadership in the blockchain industry.
Research
Papers published within this context can vary significantly in terms of length, complexity, and strategic importance, with the average paper taking at least two years to publish. This timeline is influenced by the peer review process, which can extend over several months and often requires multiple submission cycles, reflecting the high standards of academic publishing.
The landscape of research conferences is also evolving, becoming increasingly competitive, particularly in key areas relevant to blockchain and cryptography. This heightened competition underscores the need for quality and excellence in research outputs. Given this variability, we are committed to maintaining a consistent output of at least 20 research papers and technical reports per year across the research workstream portfolio, ensuring that we continue to contribute meaningfully to both the global research community and more specifically the Cardano ecosystem.
In addition to producing high-quality research, RWG recognizes the importance of visibility and impact within the academic and broader technology communities. Citations are a key measure of a paper's influence, and we are actively working to increase the reach and recognition of our research. To support this, we are enhancing our marketing efforts, ensuring that our work is not only published but also disseminated effectively across the relevant channels. By doing so, we aim to foster greater engagement with our research, amplifying its impact and solidifying Cardano's position as a leader in blockchain innovation.
Innovation
The innovation deliverables include the creation and dissemination of 6 prototypes, technical reports, and Community Improvement Proposals (CIPs) as a result of these workstreams. Please note workstreams starting in the second half of the year will be delivered the following year.
These technical reports will provide in-depth analyses and documentation of each emerging technology and supporting methodologies that are critical to the continued advancement of the solution by product teams within the Cardano ecosystem. Each report will serve as a foundation for future development and inform the community and stakeholders of the requirement for implementation. The prototypes developed alongside these reports will demonstrate the practical application of these innovations, providing tangible examples of how theoretical advancements can be translated into real-world solutions.
In addition to the technical reports and prototypes, Community Improvement Proposals (CIPs) are a key component of our innovation strategy. CIPs are vital for fostering collaboration and transparency within the Cardano community, allowing for community-driven enhancements to the platform. By submitting well-researched and strategically important CIPs, we aim to address specific needs and challenges within the ecosystem, ensuring that Cardano remains at the forefront of blockchain innovation.
Proposed items
Academic Research:
Full details and descriptions can be found here
State-Machine Contract Environment
Location-based services and smart contracts
Ouroboros Peras (Vision)
Ouroboros Leios
Fair transaction processing
Multi-resource consensus - Minotaur
Proofs of useful work
Congestion control
Tokenomics design
Rewards sharing and transaction fees
Decentralized identity and reputation management
Next-level governance protocols
Governance incentives
Hydra Tail
Inter-Head
Optimization tools
Auditing tools
Light client infrastructure
Consensus Innovation
Academic innovation
Full details and descriptions can be found here
Leios
Anti-Grinding
fastBFT
RSnarks
Proof of Restake
Proof of Useful Work
BitCoin OS[29] [30]
Requested Budget
We propose a budget of $13.42M. The total budget proposed is to finance all supplier activities across both academic research and innovation with a total of 56.1 FTEs. This equates to an average of circa $239k per FTE (or $1,030 per day based on 232 working days per year) including all costs as outlined below. This includes a shared services allocation of 15% (below industry standards of 20-25%) as well as all other costs including equipment, software licenses, server costs, any sub-contracting that may be required (for example to academic partners or third-party engineers), travel costs, events and program and portfolio management.
Research Streams The research departmental budget is circa $5.895M for a total of 27.5 FTEs in terms of labor resources. This is approximately $295k per workstream per year, at an average of circa 1.3 FTE, where it takes on average 2 years or more to publish a research paper, and includes:
an average of $180k per FTE
all sub-contracting and strategic partnerships with universities
$175k team travel budget to attend conferences
15% shared services allocation
Each of the research workstreams requires a mix of academic experience that can include distributed systems, consensus, protocol design and security, applied cryptography, game theory, and formal specifications/verification. The resources allocated to each workstream can vary from 2-6 team members, and typically include the following roles:
Chief Scientist - oversees research strategy, drives innovation, and academic excellence
Professors - world-renowned experts in their field
Senior Research Fellow - leads advanced research projects, mentors researchers, and publishes findings.
Research Fellow - conducts specialized research, collaborates on projects, and contributes to publications.
Researcher (Associates and PhDs) - pursues doctoral research, assists in studies, and develops expertise.
Engineers - Research, Formal Method or Software - develops and implements technical solutions, supports research, and ensures software quality. At the start of a research workstream the FTE scope can be very wide due to the high level of uncertainty, and as the workstream develops this is then narrowed as investigative directions are realized.
Innovation Streams The innovation departmental budget is $7,525,000 for a total of 28.6 FTEs in terms of labor resources. This is approximately $1.25M per innovation workstream for 6-12 months of intensive effort and includes:
an average $200k per FTE
2 on-site workshops per year costing $60k that facilitate planning, knowledge sharing, and collaboration sessions
15% shared services allocation
Each of the 6 innovation workstreams requires specific dedicated skill sets which might vary depending on development requirements (for example, not all require cryptographic knowledge). The resources allocated to each workstream typically range from 4.6 - 6 FTEs and include the following roles:
(a) Product manager / Developer relationship - Develops product discovery, market fit, builds the use cases, and identifies supporting customers
(b) Technical Architect - define and provide inputs on the prototype/target environment
(c) Prototyping engineer (software) - Prototyping, Modeling and Simulation Engineer(s)
(d) Applied Cryptographer - define and provide inputs on the cryptographic primitives implementation and benchmark
(e) Researcher liaison - author and support the team on additional research and paper publications
(f) Formal methods engineer - define formal models, specifications, and executable models to be used in performance testing.
Product Research sub-bucket
Overview
The product research bucket aims to fund all research activities that can provide user needs and market insights into the Cardano ecosystem. This research will be conducted with rigorous standards, following user and market research best practices. It will provide direct insights and direction to the ecosystem, as well as to projects within the ecosystem.
Broad acceptance Criteria
Because this data will be used to influence and inform the whole Cardano ecosystem, by being shared with committees and anyone working on Cardano as well as being made public and available for everyone to use, this research needs to be conducted by expert user and market researchers following best practices. Requires rigorous standards and a structured approach which needs to be published ahead of the research itself starting
Insights need to be shared and documented in a timely manner in order to be used to inform decisions
Any assumption or question that needs to be informed or validated via this research needs to be reviewed by such experts, challenged and properly structured before a tender of any size is published
It is not necessary for any of this research to be run from scratch. Existing data need to be always taken into account either to provide the insights needed or to act as a foundation for further investigation
The work, approved to be conducted after review, can either be paid in ADA or be given to volunteers (perhaps even from the product committee), with a preference to funding organizations that are already in or connected to the ecosystem
The proposed items, the progress, and the outcomes, including all the insights and learnings, need to be published in a consolidated space for easy fruition and so to allow the ecosystem to take advantage of them
Proposed items
Items to inform and refine 2025 goals
To inform the broad topic: Get more Usage Related Goal: Attract dApps and users - product market fit Related Problem to solve: How Might We attract more dApps, users, and protocols to Cardano (to increase transaction activity which will ultimately fund the treasury)?
Questions:
What are the existing Cardano use cases (of any size)? Which ones have been successful and which ones have not? What are the reasons behind this?
What are the existing use cases that have been tried on blockchains?
Identify defi use case opportunities for Cardano (e.g. inter-chain transfer) and identify the product gaps for Cardano with respect to these use cases.
Create a feasible list of target businesses with actionable scopes and product fit already established.
How easy is it to find companies with the expertise to build on Cardano for businesses outside of the ecosystem?
Where do transactions in competitor chains come from? Which one might we be interested in depending on other research?
What is the relationship between transaction fee/settlement speed and bots activity? Is bot activity good for the chain overall?
Transaction and TX price modeling: Model the number of transactions required to keep Cardano sustainable (and sensitivity to Tx price)
Is there a need/opportunity for settling other chains' transactions into Cardano's L1
How many people participate in the Cardano community at different levels?
Related Goal: Easier to build on and to use Cardano Related Problem to solve: How Might We reduce barriers and simplify processes for using and building on the Cardano blockchain?
Questions:
What are the limitations, barriers, and issues of the existing tooling to build on Cardano?
What are the existing barriers and limitations to build on Cardano L2?
What is the current developer onboarding process? What are the barriers to entry about that? What are the differences between different geographies?
What are the most popular developer tools that we should integrate with and what are the barriers to achieving that?
Which tools and SDKs could simplify and speed up building on Cardano?
Related Goal: Cardano competitive option Related Problem to solve: How Might We make Cardano meet the needs of apps that want to build on it (in terms of speed of transactions and speed of development), so being competitive with other options and getting more users?
Questions:
What are the L2 potential use cases for transactions that settle on Cardano?
What customers could benefit from Cardano's current qualities/value?
How interesting is ‘security’ as USP for Cardano?
Which web2 applications can directly benefit from blockchain, and identify tech gaps / market gaps / barriers relevant to enabling opportunities for market penetration?
Why do so few interoperability solutions target Cardano? How can we improve it?
What is the critical missing infrastructure to meet crypto-wide standards?
What are the barriers to making Cardano and Cardano Native Tokens a viable product for exchanges to list?
What use cases will interoperability open? What are the barriers to achieving interoperability?
Which elements make us competitive and which make us weak?
Related Goal: Clear funding mechanisms Related Problem to solve: How might we develop effective funding mechanisms for Cardano projects and businesses (both from inside and outside the ecosystem)?
Questions:
What are the existing funding mechanisms in Cardano? What are the limitations and barriers of entry to those?
Are existing projects and businesses aware of these existing funding mechanisms? How easy and clear it is to access them?
Which types of projects need funding and at which stages? What needs do these projects have?
What other funding mechanisms do other ecosystems have and which one could match Cardano’s project needs?
What are the potential funding avenues outside of Cardano and which ones are viable? Also, what are the best ways to inform the community about them?
What are the current challenges in talent acquisition and talent retention?
How might we build a commercial partnership with a star enterprise (specific use case scope)
Related Goal: Make Cardano more recognizable Related Problem to solve: How might we increase the recognition and reputation of the Cardano ecosystem and ADA token? Questions:
How much awareness does the general public have of Cardano and its core qualities? And how much awareness do businesses that can benefit from Cardano have of it?
What is the public perception of Cardano?
Which brands can we partner with to increase our reputation and recognition?
Which use cases should we market to increase awareness?
To inform the broad topic: Governance Related Goal: Reliable decentralized governance Related Problem to solve: How Might We make the new Cardano governance strong enough to support the newly formed Cardano government?
Questions:
What is the right level of participation in governance? What should we expect and what should we aim for?
What are the existing barriers to participation in Cardano’s governance?
What are the needs that need to further be supported by tooling?
How many people in the community know about Cardano’s governance? How much do they understand of it?
How easy is it to find documentation about governance? How easy is it to use that?
How can we make governance simpler, is there a way to create engagement around it, what have other chains done well (Wallet integrations, standalone apps, participation, etc.)
To inform the broad topic: Business as usual
Related Goal: Maintain Cardano’s current qualities Related Problem to solve: How might we ensure Cardano remains trustworthy, reliable, and competitive? Questions:
What are Cardano’s core qualities? Which of these are unique? Which one is also our USP and makes us competitive?
…
To inform the broad topic: Vision Related Goal: Process for a shared community-driven vision Related Problem to solve: How might we create the next path to move Cardano forward as a community? Questions:
What other ecosystems have run a process like this? What can we learn from that?
What other processes similar to this have we run in our ecosystem? What can we learn from those?
What frameworks should we leverage?
Items to inform long-term vision
Questions:
What are the existing insights from academic research that can inform this process?
Where does the current community think Cardano should be in 2030?
Based on the insights to inform 2025 what are the key customers we should focus on (businesses and projects that have value building on Cardano and that get us closer to our goals)?
Which one are the key personas Cardano should focus on and what are their key ‘jobs-to-be-done’?
Requested Budget
The product committee requests an overall budget of $200k to get insights related to the research above, plus any other questions that will be brought to the committee from other committees in 2025, as well as to cover costs for managing the process and making the outcome easily accessible to the community.
Vision Creation sub-bucket
Overview
The vision creation bucket aims to fund all activities needed to facilitate the first version of a community-led open and transparent process to create an evolving 5-year vision for the Cardano ecosystem.
Broad acceptance criteria
A process has been defined to create as a community a 5year vision
The broader community had many opportunities to provide insights to inform the vision proposal and as many opportunities to feedback and adjust the proposal itself before being submitted to vote
A proposal for the 5year (at least) Cardano vision has been submitted on-chain for approval with at least the following characteristics:
Key objectives Cardano aims to have achieved by the year 2030 (at least) providing for each objective context and rationale
The broad steps to achieve the objectives are divided into eras. For each era explain what broad key deliverables are expected, how they get us closer to the objectives, and the dependencies to previous or future eras
References the insights used to inform the proposal itself (coming from community, users or customer interviews, from existing research, from the market and SWOT analysis, etc)
Proposed items
The current proposed process steps include:
Insights collection Collect insights into where the community thinks we need to be by 2030 based on pain points and opportunities
Proposal drafting
Based on the insights collected in the previous step, and data from user research and academic research, any data from the market and SWOT analysis draft a proposal following the acceptance criteria above
After the Product Committee review start the second series of virtual workshops to critique and adjust the proposal as well as propose names for the eras
Info action submission Based on the feedback adjust the final draft and submit it on-chain as an info action for community ratification
Some examples of what this budget will cover include but are not limited to:
Defining a set of key data points to collect
Properly analyzing, documenting, and storing the supporting data for the vision proposal
Creating a framework for remote and in-person workshops to collect insights and direction from the community
This will also include translations
Requested Budget
We're budgeting for up to 100 workshops (in-person and remote) supported by Intersect hubs, coming to a total of $75k requests for vision creation with a commitment to return the remaining funds at the end of the vision creation process if the funds are not fully spent. We don't see a need for professional services as we're going to be developing this in an open-source volunteer fashion.
Product Committee Overhead sub-bucket
Overview
This sub-bucket aims to cover any overhead the product committee itself might have in facilitating and managing the three buckets above as well as delivering against its core objectives (support vision and roadmap creation as well as keeping track of its progress)
Potential Proposed items
(This list is subject to change and adjustments as more data are collected and become available the list will get refined too)
Examples of items that might be covered with this small overhead budget are:
Academic Research tenders proposals review
Product research tenders proposals review
Vision creation process coordination and management
Product research analysis
Requested Budget
Considering an estimation to cover the examples above, plus anything small that is currently unforeseen the committee asks $100k.
Budget details
Requested budget: ₳ 26,961,364
The detailed spreadsheet can be found here
Academic Research sub-bucket
The Academic research bucket aims to fund all research activities that can provide long-term insights into the Cardano ecosystem. The Academic Research sub-bucket is separated into Academic research and Academic innovation. We propose a budget of $13.42M. The total budget proposed is to finance all supplier activities across both academic research and innovation with a total of 56.1 FTEs. This equates to an average of circa $239k per FTE (or $1,030 per day based on 232 working days per year) including all costs as outlined below. This includes a shared services allocation of 15% (below industry standards of 20-25%) as well as all other costs including equipment, software licenses, server costs, any sub-contracting that may be required (for example to academic partners or third-party engineers), travel costs, events and program and portfolio management. The committee aims to start funding this work from June onwards via a tendering process (assuming that's the time when the budget will become available)
Expected outcomes The Vision and Impact plan for Cardano is committed to ensuring Cardano is able to meet and exceed the blockchain industry's aspirations. The plan is informed by impact assessments and extensive stakeholder consultations, reflecting on lessons learned over the past five years.
₳26,211,304
Academic research
This group is to fulfil the following projects: The Academic research sub-bucket aims to fund the foundational long term research to support Cardano's long term growth. It's common output are research papers. The budget is equates to an average of circa $239k per FTE (or $1,030 per day based on 232 working days per year) including all costs as outlined below. This includes a shared services allocation of 15% (below industry standards of 20-25%) as well as all other costs including equipment, software licenses, server costs, any sub-contracting that may be required (for example to academic partners or third-party engineers), travel costs, events and program and portfolio management.
₳11,161,300
Academic research: State-Machine Contract Environment
As part of the work on Hydra protocols, we observed that we can greatly simplify the development of smart contracts for Cardano by utilising a state-machine-based abstraction that hides many of the intricacies of the EUTxO model [1, 2] and provides a more declarative notion of smart contracts. This has led to the development of a formal framework tentatively called EasySM that takes care of all recurring mechanisms required for state-machine-based contracts on EUTxO.
More convenient smart contract development & engineering for Cardano that facilitates formal reasoning.
₳669,200
Academic research: Location-based services and smart contracts
(1) Location-based services describe interactions and state-transitions in a blockchain which are dependent on the location of the node (or the user of said node) during the point in time when the state-transition is elicited (ie. location-based payments or smart contracts). Examples includes (a) a user being automatically billed when walking through a turnstile gate to access shared infrastructure (b) the execution of a smart contract which leads to a different outcome depending on the location of (the majority of) the consensus nodes. (If the consensus layer becomes too “decentralized”, funds might stay ‘locked’) (c) location information obtained from the user’s node can facilitate governance and country or zone specific rules in decentralized finance applications. (2) In addition to location-based user functionality, node location in a blockchain is crucial for the consensus layer. Geographic diversity can mitigate geo-political influence, natural disasters, and potentially even eclipse attacks on the network. Geographic diversity can only be assessed truthfully when taking the Internet topology (underlying architecture such as submarine cables, etc) into account. The main open questions are therefore: (a) how can we measure the geographic diversity of a decentralized system that is built on the Internet (b) how can we design incentives such that the stakeholders of the system gravitate towards a stable equilibrium where the locations of the nodes are as diverse as possible
Location information is becoming increasingly important: decentralization, geopolitics, legal, access control, etc. DApps & user growth.
₳478,000
Academic research: Ouroboros Peras (Vision)
The Cardano ledger is currently maintained by Ouroboros Praos, a longest-chain type of proof-of-stake consensus protocol. These protocols exhibit several desirable robustness features including tolerance to fluctuating participation and self-healing from temporary periods of adversarial dominance. However, a well-understood downside of longest-chain consensus is that it only provides gradual settlement, requiring a sufficient number of blocks to appear on top of a transaction of interest to consider it settled. This property of the mainchain might impede adoption and complicate deployment of various layer-2 functionalities envisioned for the Cardano ecosystem.
The immediate effect would be better user experience for parties transacting on chain. Moreover, such settlement times would also be an enabler for various layer-2 functionalities and for bridging to other blockchains further increasing growth and interoperability.
₳430,200
Academic research: Ouroboros Leios
The current Ouroboros design (Praos) is almost at its limits with respect to throughput, as increasing the block production rate or block size further may negatively affect the protocol’s security. Moreover, Praos only partially takes advantage of the available resources in the network (network bandwidth / cpu / memory); on expectation one block of size ~100 KB is sent every 20 seconds. On the other hand, increasing throughput to meet demand is key to serving Cardano’s vision of being part of the infrastructure of an ecosystem of blockchains / sidechains. To this end, Leios aims to be the first protocol in the Ouroboros family where throughput is proportional to the resources available to individual nodes. Moreover, the goal is for throughput to scale vertically, i.e, the system’s performance should scale as more resources are provided to the machines running the system–doubling the resources of all machines in the system should result in approximately double the throughput.
This will increase throughput in order to develop the ecosystem (partnerchains, etc).
₳788,700
Academic research: Fair transaction processing
Ouroboros, similar to Bitcoin or Ethereum L1 consensus protocols, does not offer any guarrantees regarding "fairness" in terms of transaction processing. In particular this means that there are no guarrantees against front running or preferential ordering in the way transactions are organized in the ledger. In the Ethereum ecosystem this has been described as both a problem and opportunity in the context of Miner Extractable Value (MEV). Nevertheless, the resulting modifications such as proposer builder separation have also negative effects such as increased centralization of the L1 operation. In this thread, we develop techniques for ensuring fairness of transaction processing as a default feature of the underlying blockchain protocol. This will require modifications in the L1 as well as novel cryptographic techniques to be developed, analyzed and implemented.
If this research result is achieved and realized it can be a unique selling point for Cardano, as there are no public blockchains at the moment offering fair transaction processing.
₳764,800
Academic research: Multi-resource consensus - Minotaur
Multi-resource consensus refers to permissionless consensus where the right to produce a block is derived from proving possession of different resources, e.g., a mixture of proof of work (PoW) and proof of stake (PoS), as opposed to just standard PoW or PoS. Relying on more than one single resource can give stronger security guarantees than relying just on a single resource. For example, consensus solely based on PoW cannot tolerate a dishonest majority of computing resources, while basing it on PoW and PoS can tolerate it (by compensating with a lower corruption level on the PoS side). Multi-resource consensus is particularly useful to secure the bootstrapping of new blockchains as follows. Assume you want to launch a new PoS blockchain to be eventually controlled by its native asset. Initially the asset is illiquid, the stake distribution might be very imbalanced, and not all stakeholders might be ready to actively participate in stake delegation or block production. Initially mixing in different assets to control the sidechain via (restaked) PoS now helps to keep the system stable as the holders of those assets are already up and running, and prepared to support the new sidechain.
Multi-resource sidechains consensus will make it easy to bootstrap new Cardano sidechains, helping to attract them to the Cardano ecosystem.
₳358,500
Academic research: Proofs of useful work
The main motivation for this research direction is to employ any significant computational effort performed to solve real-world problems such as, scheduling, protein folding, and others, as a resource for securing an underlying consensus protocol. Via multi-resource consensus, this can benefit the Cardano ecosystem both in terms of increasing security and in terms of providing an on ramp to the ecosystem via computational effort, while simultaneously not incurring any energy wastage as in the case with PoW systems. The main mechanism to do this is Proof-of-Useful-Work (PoUW) schemes, which allow securely integrating blockchain protocols with useful computations. While long being discussed, manifestations of this idea have been limited to non-widely useful computations, such as those employed in Primecoin. In 2022, IOG researchers published the first instance of Ofelimos, a provably secure PoUW protocol, focusing on local search algorithms for hard computational problems such as SAT. Future research will investigate extending PoUWs to other domains, such as proving zero-knowledge succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge (zk-SNARKs) for blockchain state proofs, training large machine learning models and solving large scale hard optimization problems.
In terms of impact, we expect PoUW-based blockchain to attract high-value industrial businesses into our ecosystem, as they are in need of regularly solving optimization problems cheaply, e.g., transportation companies.
₳1,529,600
Academic research: Congestion control
Current congestion control solutions typically employ transaction fees, primarily based on two designs: flat fees (e.g. on Cardano) or dynamic fees set through a per block auction (such as Bitcoin or Ethereum). In either design, all associated costs, such as storage, bandwidth or computation are lumped together into one final price that the transaction issuer needs to pay. In addition, transactions have no way to declare their urgency and must either accept the current level of fees for immediate service or pay less, anticipating lower congestion in the future. Because dynamic fees increase with demand that cannot be met due to limited blockchain scaling, they are generally unpredictable and harder to budget for. Flat fees can offer a more predictable experience, but only during periods of low to moderate demand. Otherwise, they are susceptible to cheap DoS attacks, cannot provide the immediate service required for DeFi and cannot differentiate between high and low value traffic.
A successful design would enable increased ecosystem growth due to the ease of participation for a variety of applications, e.g., low urgency, business, DeFI.
₳764,800
Academic research: Tokenomics design
We will investigate first principles in tokenomics to inform optimal long-term macroeconomic token policies for the Cardano ecosystem. The evolution of token prices over time is crucial in all blockchains in order to (i) maintain system security and (ii) incentivize larger adoption by the users.
This research will enable; economic, adoption and ecosystem growth, more diverse and broader tokenomics capabilities and improved governance.
₳573,600
Academic research: Rewards sharing and transaction fees
An important component in blockchain systems in order to achieve a successful level of decentralized operation is the proper incentivization of participating users. Towards this goal, the main toolkit for incentivizing desirable behavioral patterns is the design of appropriate reward schemes, e.g., as used for distributing revenues from block production and transaction fees. Reward schemes within blockchains introduce additional challenges related to anonymity, player asymmetries (i.e., SPO vs delegators of a pool), and the desire for decentralized solutions. But Sybil attacks and decentralization aspects are often ignored in the more traditional models of revenue distribution and coalition formation. Although we have seen the emergence of more appropriate reward schemes in the last few years, there is undoubtedly ample room for improvement and for coming up with better solutions that would achieve even more satisfactory performance.
The outcome of this research is aimed at improving, in the long term, the current reward sharing scheme of Cardano, which is an important component of the entire protocol. This in turn can affect user experience and satisfaction. Furthermore, this research has the potential to create impact for other types of payment schemes that are used within Cardano, such as the Voltaire dRep rewards or the rewards issued for reviewers and delegates under project Catalyst.
₳191,200
Academic research: Decentralized identity and reputation management
A global identity system is expected to allow everybody access to a reliable identity that can be used seamlessly through different digital platforms, and gives full control of their identity(ies) to end users, including letting them choose what information is made accessible by third parties. Foundations: The notion of global identity we derive must be independent of concrete instantiations. However, it is also desirable to, at this point, think of generic ways to build it. In this regard, leveraging abstractions of related lower-level building blocks is desirable. For instance, a construction of a global identity notion will (most likely) require roots of trust and credentials. For the former, we will need to rely on formal notions of generalized PKIs, likely including DID-based PKIs. Similarly, for the latter, we will need to rely on formal notions of generalized credential systems, including VCs and ACs. Therefore, as a second derivative of defining a notion for global identity, we will be looking into formally defining generic and formal abstractions of these components. It can be expected that, by formally defining these components, we identify tradeoffs in the different ways to build them: for instance, an X509-based PKI may not achieve certain properties that a DID-based achieves, or vice versa. Thus, this study may serve to establish guidelines for building a global identity system, depending on the desired properties. Concrete Instantiations: With a well-defined notion of a global identity, including a first general design built on top of ideal (and also general) building blocks, we can start looking at possible constructions. While during the definition of the global identity notion and its building blocks we will likely come up with generic constructions, they will likely not be the most efficient ones, and fine tuning will be needed for them to achieve practicality. The focus of this work package will be to come up with concrete instantiations that do achieve practicality – both in terms of computational and communication costs, as well as the required engineering effort to bring them to reality. Applications: The questions we will try to answer in this work package are devoted to studying the concrete needs that these applications may have from a global identity system, and the mutual relationship between the global identity system, and the applications themselves – for instance, as sources of further identity information. Concretely: “What properties from the global identity system are needed by the chosen applications?”, “How can the global identity system extract identity information from these applications?” Concretely, the latter may have an interesting variant, which looks into “How can identity information in system A be ‘moved’ to system B?” (where system A and system B may, for instance, be different blockchains). Integration: For a global identity system to be really global, it needs to be integrated within the larger identity space. This has two variants: (1) integrating the derived notion of global identity into the existing identity space; and (2) integrating the constructions achieved in concrete instantiations into the applications designed.
Establishing the foundations of (decentralized) identity systems, and associated frameworks, such as PKIs. This domain has lacked formalization. This research will equip Cardano's broader ecosystem with the (theoretical, and PoC-level code) tooling to augment everything we do with identity-related information, in a privacy-preserving manner.
₳645,300
Academic research: Next-level governance protocols
A central theme in Cardano’s vision is the deployment of systems that help the management and long-term sustainability of its blockchain ecosystem, clarifying how its core and external contributors should collaborate. Governance protocols, and in particular voting protocols, can support a variety of decision-making procedures (representative, stake based, or delegative/liquid amongst others) with participation from most of the blockchain stakeholders and thus, are a key enabler of this vision. Existing e-voting protocols, however, are typically designed for non-blockchain settings, and often assume centralized services for tallying and/or recording of the votes. Recent proposals aim to make use of off-the-shelf protocols and additionally utilize a ledger to decentralize some aspects of the voting. Implementing such solutions and integrating them with Cardano may come with an unacceptably high main chain footprint, which in turn makes their running costs too high for blockchain governance.
A desirable impact would be the use of one or more of these protocols for running elections/governance efforts more effectively within the Cardano ecosystem (eg. Catalyst/Cardano Foundation elections).
₳525,800
Academic research: Governance incentives
Governance incentives refer to the alignment of the goals of participants of a blockchain ecosystem. While sufficient robustness has been achieved, it is difficult to balance swift and effective decision making with the fundamental blockchain principles of decentralization, security, transparency, and fairness. This is particularly challenging now that the set of blockchain participants has been expanded and cannot be adequately captured just by the number of tokens owned by each wallet.
The outcome of this research is aimed at improving in the long term the current procedures that are in place for project Catalyst and at the same time the voting procedures for the governance actions during the Voltaire era. Both Voltaire and Catalyst are significant components for the entire Cardano community, and therefore it is of utmost importance to have well thought out election procedures that can reduce the risks and dangers arising from malicious users.
₳382,400
Academic research: Hydra Tail
The Hydra suite of protocols is a key component of Cardano’s layer-2 scarling solutions. Hydra Tail follows the states-channel Hydra Head protocol. Tail is a zk-rollup solution that processes a batch of transactions off-chain and reduces on-chain computation and storage needs by providing a summary (roll-up) of the transactions performed. Clients can safely move funds and smart contracts back and forth between the blockchain and the off-chain protocol. Hydra Tail, like Hydra Head, will provide safeguards against censorship of clients and reduce trust assumptions on servers through a (sound) ZK proof system. We expect the Hydra Tail state machine to take a form as follows. The contract starts at the initial state. And after appropriate checks it transitions to the open state where clients can commit funds to L2; the server can collect committed funds, and in regular intervals updates snapshots to L1. In case of a recall (e.g., because a transaction gets censored by the server) a client can advance the state machine to the failed state. In this state, all clients have the opportunity to reclaim/recall their committed funds. Once a sufficiently long period of time passes (or the server decides to “retire”), the state machine transitions to the closed state. A special registered transaction (regTx) operation allows users to circumvent censorship.
By increasing the number of transactions processed per second at reduced fees, zk-rollup forms a core technology to support Cardano's scalability needs.
₳525,800
Academic research: Inter-Head
Layer-2 refers to a family of blockchain protocols that aim to improve the blockchain's scalability. These protocols let parties lock their funds on-chain into a channel structure, which facilitates interactions between participating parties that can transact with another off-chain a potentially arbitrary amount of times and only result in a footprint of at most a constant number of on-chain transactions. Solutions range from simple two-party payment channels to isomorphic multi-party state channels [1], i.e., the Hydra Protocol. Further work builds up extends it, for instance, creation of multi-party state channel networks [2], i.e., the Interhead Protocol. However, a common drawback of these works - with the exception of a few cases - is a lack of formal security treatment, where formalization in the Universal Composability (UC) Framework [3] is considered the state of the art in the field.
This project is to determine the security of Hydra and Interhead while composing with other protocols to construct more complex applications. Layer-2 is one of the best approaches to increase the number of transactions. It can be used as the foundation for creating applications/protocols, acting as a middle ware to the consensus layer. In order to safely rely on such a design to safely compose with other applications, it is paramount to investigate the universal composability of Hydra and Interhead.
₳286,800
Academic research: Optimization tools
The Hydra Suite of protocols is a family of protocols for layer-2, and therefore it shares common characteristics of other existing layer-2 protocols, such as payment channels, state and virtual channels. For a smooth operation over the Hydra based network, optimized protocols are required to address issues like funds rebalancing, message routing and head synchronization. For example, the locking of collateral funds can be essential to enable securing transactions. Furthermore, the capacity of such a multiparty, or pair-wise, channel funds the transactions, however the accumulation of asymmetric flows of funds may deplete such capacity, hence no further transactions occur in the channel. While other channel capacity securing a different channel may still be allocated but unused. Other potential limitations exist.
Similarly, to hydra and interhead which can be used as a foundation for more sophisticated application, therefore its universal composability needs to be thoroughly analyzed. In addition to the design with Hydra and interhead, more specific auxiliary protocols can also be used, hence they need their composability to be proven. The goal of this project is to establish the security of auxiliary protocols with respect to our base layer-2 protocols, Hydra and Interhead.
₳191,200
Academic research: Auditing tools
Layer-2 solutions such payment channels, state channels, or virtual channels provide increased throughput and settlement speed to layer-1 of a blockchain system by having parties perform off-chain payments (or in general: state transitions), only coming back to the layer-1 chain if the funds must be claimed for a different context. As such they are the prime solution for scaling. In the context of Cardano, the Hydra protocol suite is realizing the full potential of layer 2. Such state channels have, however, a drawback that cannot be ignored: after committing funds on layer-1, all transactions are off-chain and potentially private and discussions emerge about the balance between privacy and accountability in this context. Instead of state channels behaving like black holes with respect to the actual transaction history, it would be beneficial if the Hydra protocol suite is equipped with a new mode that allows for controlled and reliable access to the crucial information about its transaction history by an accredited auditor; a mode that strikes a good balance between privacy, auditability, and accountability.
Accountability is a topic that has gained a lot of traction in the past couple of years and is actively researched right now. Various privacy-preserving yet auditable systems have been suggested most notably on layer 1 or in the context of CBDCs. This research proposal takes such proposals to a next level as a layer-2 solution. Since layer 2 solutions encompass multi-party computations of arbitrary kind, it will be able to integrate state of the art cryptographic algorithms and equip them with checks that enable audits and accountability. Such solutions will not only be able to have industry partners and financial institutions to endorse scalability solutions of Cardano, but can enable other systems to access the Cardano network and its technology to realize a compliance layer of their own system.
₳1,099,400
Academic research: Light client infrastructure
This project has the potential for several publishable units spanning a duration of at least three years. The starting position is the lack of light client functionality in the Cardano ecosystem. The research proposed in this project shall address said shortcoming with the aim to devise a client infrastructure that is prepared for future needs and developments such as the looming asymmetry in data retention of different clients, bandwidth and processing limitations of certain devices as well as competitive end-to-end latency goals for user applications.
Resources to monitor a blockchain and construct proofs are growing at an alarming rate. Light clients are needed for wallets, Dapps, etc.
₳478,000
Academic research: Consensus Innovation
The research on consensus protocols in the blockchain era has sparked a variety of new paradigms, both from the distributed computing community and from the cryptographic community. The seminal Bitcoin paper let the communities rethink under what assumptions achieving consensus is possible. Roughly, two main paradigms have emerged over the past decade: one paradigm is the so-called Nakamoto-consensus, which, roughly speaking, are protocols where participants are supposed to extend a longest chain, where the resources dictate with what probability a particular party is allowed or elected to extend the chain. Consensus is reached over time, where parties agree on the blocks on the longest chain, except for possibly the most recent couple of blocks. The second paradigm is porting prior results on BFT consensus to the blockchain setting, either taking Feldman-Micali style BFT protocols as basis, or PBFT by Liskov as a foundation. A large body of literature has followed both paradigms and brought them into the permissionless and permissioned, most notably the Hotstuff line of work represents the evolution of PBFT, while Algorand represents the evolution of graded-consensus in the blockchain era. It is clear that by no means we have reached the peak in the innovation and development of new paradigms for consensus. This research stream captures several directions in which known consensus approaches can be developed and implemented, and new paradigms can be investigated.
For the long-term objective, the research can yield new types of consensus algorithms relevant for the future of Cardano backbone itself.
₳478,000
Academic innovation
This group is to fulfil the following projects: The Academic innovation sub-bucket aims to fund the validation of the academic research step. This is approximately $1.25M per innovation workstream for 6-12 months of intensive effort and includes: - an average $200k per FTE - 2 on-site workshops per year costing $60k that facilitate planning, knowledge sharing, and collaboration sessions - 15% shared services allocation
₳15,050,004
Academic innovation: Leios
Ouroboros Leios is a high-throughput protocol for Cardano. It is designed to maximise the use of available network bandwidth and therefore maximise overall throughput of the network, all while maintaining the strong security properties of the Ouroboros family of protocols. Being agnostic of the underlying Nakomoto consensus protocol, Ouroboros Leios can support a wide range of applications. This innovation workstream for Leios aims to evaluate the protocol’s viability for practical use and to advance the protocol’s maturity from the research stage to a stage where development for eventual deployment can begin.
The overarching goal of the innovation project is to demonstrate the viability of implementing on Cardano the Leios protocol as described in the research paper.
₳2,508,334
Academic innovation: Anti-Grinding
The theoretical estimates for Cardano mainchain settlement times are significantly influenced by the potential impact of a "grinding attack." To reduce this effect and achieve faster settlement times, this stream focuses on evaluating protocol changes that would make such attacks considerably more expensive for adversaries. By increasing the cost of a grinding attack, the protocol limits adversaries—who possess a certain amount of computational power—forcing them to carry out a much weaker form of the attack.
The scope of this initiative is to focus on the first improvement and provide details of implementation for an eventual integration in Ouroboros-consensus
₳2,508,334
Academic innovation: fastBFT
fastBFT workstream is targeted to research and prototype a secure, fast and secure finality consensus module for Partnerchains.
Prototype a fast BFT consensus protocol to allow fast settement for Partnerchains.
₳2,508,334
Academic innovation: RSnarks
This stream focuses on recursive SNARKs, which enable iterative aggregation of multiple proofs into a single, succinct proof, broadening the range of applications for privacy and scalability. A key application is the efficient proving of state progression in blockchain systems, such as enabling a trustless zk-bridge between Cardano and partnerchains. To achieve this, the workstream adapts the Halo2 proving system, utilizing Pluto-Eris curves and KZG commitments for smaller proofs and faster verification. The current focus is the translation of Halo2-Pluto proofs into Halo2-BLS proofs, which can be efficiently verified on Cardano. This involves complex recursive arithmetic and smart contract development, aiming to demonstrate feasibility and scalability of these innovations for blockchain ecosystems.
This workstream specifically focuses on the final translation step from Halo2-Pluto proofs to Halo2-BLS proofs
₳2,508,334
Academic innovation: Proof of Restake
Hybrid consensus systems combine two or more different consensus algorithms to leverage their strengths and mitigate their weaknesses. This approach enables the creation of a more robust, scalable, and secure consensus mechanism. The Minotaur project aims to provide tooling for bootstrapping a new Proof-of-Stake (PoS) blockchains called Minotaur Chains. The primary challenge is the initial lack of stake distribution, which poses a security risk for a new chain. To address this, the project proposes leveraging existing stakes from established chains like Cardano and Ethereum to create a "Virtual Stake" on the Minotaur chain. This allows initial participants to secure the Minotaur network using their existing stakes on these chains. The solution involves a dynamic conversion rate between the actual stakes on Cardano, Ethereum, and Minotaur, based on USD price oracles. The Virtual Stake is also defined by a list of weights for each chain. Validators from Cardano and Ethereum can register their participation on the Minotaur chain using their existing stakes (process called re-staking) and engaging with smart contracts on Cardano and Ethereum, ensuring the initial security of the Minotaur network. Over time, as Minotaur coins are minted and staked, the Virtual Stake will gradually shift to prioritize Minotaur stakes.
The scope is limited to determining technical requirements and formal verification of the Minotaur consensus protocol.
₳2,508,334
Academic innovation: Proof of Useful Work
To design a consensus protocol where, instead of doing useless computations (e.g., hashes), one performs useful work during the mining process. In addition, to solve real-world problems such as, scheduling, protein folding, and others, as a resource for securing an underlying consensus protocol. Via multi-resource consensus, this can benefit the Cardano ecosystem both in terms of increasing security and providing an on ramp to the ecosystem via computational effort, while simultaneously not incurring any energy wastage as in the case with PoW systems.The requirements for this novel approach to "useful" compute within MLOps is a desirable, viable and sustainable forward-path as part of a progressive AI strategy.
Demonstrate feasibility and total addressable market depending on which Neural Networks (RNN, CAN, LLM, SLM, etc.) can run in the constraints of the protocol.
₳2,508,334
Product Research Sub-bucket
The product research bucket aims to fund all research activities that can provide user needs and market insights into the Cardano ecosystem. This research will be conducted with rigorous standards, following user and market research best practices. It will provide direct insights and direction to the ecosystem, as well as to projects within the ecosystem. The product committee requests an overall budget range between $200k to get insights related to product research, plus any other questions that will be brought to the committee from other committees in 2025, as well as to cover costs for managing the process and making the outcome easily accessible to the community. This budget is small being this the first year Cardano run's product research. This will allow us to structure a process and collect initial key insights.
For year 1, 2025, the research conducted in this sub-bucket aims to provide insights into the direction and refinement of the proposed goals for 2025 and support other committees with information on user needs. In addition to this short-term need, the insights from this first year will directly inform the Cardano strategy in the short term (2025 and 2026) and help create a longer-term vision. The outcome of this research will also lead to clear problem statements which will be documented as Cardano Problem Statements (CPSs).
₳400,000
Structure research strategy and perform research to give insights to key questions from this list
This will provide a structure for the future cardano product research and it will actionable insights to be either used immidiately or to inform the long term vision.
Vision Creation Sub-bucket
The vision creation bucket aims to fund all activities needed to facilitate the first version of a community-led open and transparent process to create an evolving 5-year vision for the Cardano ecosystem. We're budgeting for up to 100 workshops (in-person and remote) supported by Intersect hubs, coming to a total of $200k requests for vision creation with a commitment to return the remaining funds at the end of the vision creation process if the funds are not fully spent. We don't see a need for professional services as we're going to be developing this in an open-source volunteer fashion.
For year 1, the work conducted in this sub-bucket aims to provide a first-tested process for the Cardano community to brainstorm, set, track, and evolve its own vision and roadmap. The outcome of that process is the first version of a 5-year Cardano vision and a 2026 roadmap based on that.
₳150,000
Support for up to 100 workshops (in-person or remote), and management of the process.
These workshops will allow the community to share their thoughts and knowledge about the future of Cardano. These will be added to the other insights already collected and will inform the committee in generating a first draft for a long term cardano vision. The other set of workshops will allow the community to comment and critique the draft proposal in open discussion
Product Committee Overhead Sub-bucket
This sub-bucket aims to cover any overhead the product committee itself might have in facilitating and managing the three buckets above as well as delivering against its core objectives (support vision and roadmap creation as well as keeping track of its progress) Examples of items that might be covered with this small overhead budget are: - Academic Research tenders proposals review - Product research tenders proposals review - Vision creation process coordination and management - Product research analysis Considering an estimation to cover the examples above, plus anything small that is currently unforeseen the committee asks $100k
It ensures that the product committee can manage the work and items outlined in this proposal.
₳200,000
Last updated