It is also an issue of decentralisation. If Inc is awarded money without specifying what you need it for, then I seriously question whether Inc is "just another ANO".
Keep in mind, Factom, Inc is also viewed in a different light by the US Government than any other organization, since we created the system to begin with. We have a very different risk profile than organizations who formed years after the blockchain started. Comparing the risks other organizations take and expecting Factom, Inc, (who has a lot more to lose) to be as cavalier seems like an unfair comparison.
this would simply be a case of saying "we have x FTE developers being paid y". ... That's all I wanted. It's not a large or onerous task.
As far as how much it costs, thats not something that I can release, but it isn't hard to infer. https://www.builtinaustin.com/salaries/dev-engineer/senior-software-engineer/austin Just looking at this website doesn't take into account the additional overhead that businesses with offices, insurance, accounting departments, etc face, which are part of doing business.
This is what we got in the budget section of your previous grant ... It tells us absolutely nothing other than how much you want.
One of the things that worry executives at Factom, Inc is that potentially this whole distributed blockchain project won't be viewed by the US government as a bunch of independent companies and instead will view the entire project as a single enterprise. If that were the case, the government could compel all the ANOs from all over the world to produce a single tax return. All the various ANOs from all over the world (very few of whom have accountants on staff) would all need to share all their internal finances with each other, figure out exchange rates across a dozen different currencies and jurisdictions using different accounting schemes (cash vs accrual, etc). This would end the whole Factom project.
None of the other ANOs are likely congizant of these kinds of risks. This goes back to the having more to lose. The more that this grant process looks like a department inside a common enterprise the riskier it is from a governmental perspective. What you are asking for is trending more towards something like internal controls that are applied to a department. Other grant recipients may be happy to share fine grained internal details, but it is much riskier for Factom, Inc. to do what you are asking.
Factom, Inc can't participate in things that can be seen as leading that direction. For example, Factom, Inc did not participate in the process for creating a foundation: https://factomize.com/forums/threads/vote-to-create-a-wyoming-non-profit.1374/
The question you should be asking yourself is: "Is this a good price for the value being delivered?" The value being continuous development, maintenence, and reducing the attack surface, leading to more stability and scale.