Budget Process

Approach IdCommons is intentionally a light-weight organization. It has been designed without permanent staff so that it will spend its funds where they are needed most, without creating self perpetuating bureaucracies. The Internet Identity space is in a period of formation and undergoing rapid change. What is needed from IdCommons now is different from what will be needed in the future. One of our goals is to keep IdCommons light and agile. That being said, there are things to be done and these take funding. Therefore we propose that funding be done on a project basis.

Budgeting The current by laws state that the Stewards must approve the allocation of funds. Therefore we need a a budget. Once the budget is funded and approved, then it can be implemented. Funds approved under the scope of the budget can be spend without holding a vote for each check.

We plan to propose an initial minimal budget based on current available funds. We also plan to propose mid level and a high level budgets that would require raising additional funds before they could be implemented. IdCommons has done an admirable job on a shoe string. In order for it to have the visibility it needs to accomplish its mission, it needs to raise more funds.

Receiving Funds
 * Funds may be given to IdCommons for general IdCommons activities.
 * Funds may be given to IdCommons for use by a specific IdCommons working group. These funds will be tracked in a subledger. Funds belonging to a particular working group may be spent by that working group. (We need to amend the ByLaws to formalize this? See also open issues below.)

Open Issues 
 * Current prohibition on soliciting funds. How to proceed in the short and long terms
 * When funds are donated to IdCommons for a particular working group, does IdCommons keep a piece of these funds for general IdCommons expenses and overhead. If so what is that rate?  Harvard's Berkman center keeps up to 65%, which is confiscatory. Ten percent is a minimal overhead rate. It is always harder to get funding for overhead efforts, so we need to balance allowing direct funding of "working groups" with funding of basic overhead.  The Apache Foundation, for example, is a very effective organization, but its core is underfunded and it is hard to sustain large amounts of unpaid volunteer labor over the long term.
 * Are there other ByLaws amendments pending besides allowing donations to specified working groups.