I think vetting is a big part of any funding program. You have to know that your funds are going to the right place and being used in the appropriate manner. I think FACTOR has a long, positive history. They have always had good juries, a good board, and good administration. My criticism of FACTOR, if any, is: when do you stop funding?
I'm perfectly fine with startup initial funding for demos and that sort of thing. Again, my bias comes from my own history in the 1960s and 1970s when there was no funding. Someone mentioned it was easier back then. Well, it wasn't easier. It wasn't easy then; and it's not easy now.
The music business is not for the timid. If you can handle rejection, disappointment, humiliation, and years of minimal income with the hopes that hard work will eventually pay off, then you're cut out for the music business.
Startup funding, great, as you said, to see if you have the goods, but I would recommend that FACTOR.... And the information I had regarding Nickelback, Sarah McLachlan, and those people who are accessing FACTOR funding was taken from the FACTOR website, so I'm assuming it's correct. I don't know to what extent they were being funded or for what programs, but if you're an established artist by FACTOR's definition, then I think that is the time to go off and either make it or break it and leave the funding for those who are just getting started.