[member of blockchain at berkeley]
I think a quarterly system is awesome, but to avoid the dearth of dead dashboards that arise, I think the DAO should consider setting “focuses” each grant quarter as priorities for applicants for grants. Could be a welcome change.
Also I think it would be valuable to set up a “continuation” fund of some sort to fund projects that the dao wants to continue and remain active. From experience on Aave, Compound, and Uniswap, there are so many well made projects that are dead due to lack of use and funding.
We should also do a better job of aggregating the projects that are funded, through perhaps the Morpho UI, to aggregate different grant projects based on project.
I dont believe the DAO needs to preemtively create a committee to understand why certain grants fail/win; at the end of the day, they fail cause no one uses them and they run out of funding. That is typically it. Coming to the conclusion that some teams have less experience than others only limits the applicant pool; crypto should be decentralized and over analysis through overfitting brings out biases.