Over Background and Context

ANAO Report No.10 2014–15 Administration of the Biodiversity Fund Program 30 criteria by both an internal departmental officer and an external community assessor. 29 Those applications that were highly ranked at the merit assessment stage were subsequently subjected to a moderation process 30 , which was designed to, among other things, ensure that there was an appropriate: geographic distribution of projects; balance of funding across program themes and project types; and mix of large and small scale projects. Applications that were recommended for funding following the moderation process were then assessed for eligibility. 31 Once eligibility was determined, recommended applications were provided to the Minister the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities and, subsequently, the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Water 32 for approval.

1.8 Environment

received over 2200 Expressions of Interest EOIs and full applications over the four completed funding rounds. Of these, 334 projects received funding at a total cost of around 324 million over six years from 2011–12 to 2016–17. Awarded funding was broad in range, varying from 7103 to 5.72 million—of the 334 awarded grants, 73 22 per cent received 100 000 or less, while 57 17 per cent received over 2 million. Grant recipients included: state government agencies; catchment management authorities; local councils; Landcare groups and other environmental interest groups; Indigenous land management groups; co‐operatives of public and private landowners; and individual landowners. Projects are being undertaken in all states and territories, involving activities such as revegetation and pest control plants and animals, erosion protection and establishment of wildlife corridors. Figure 1.1 shows an example of a Biodiversity Fund program project site visited by the ANAO as part of audit fieldwork. 29 The two scores were then averaged to provide a merit score for each application. Where the two