As The Program Design
2.50 To
facilitate the assessment of applications by the IA committees, the department provided committee members with an assessment template. This template did not provide a basis for scoring applications; rather it provided a means of the committee member, who was allocated as a spokesperson for the application, recording recommended scores. Using the template, committee members could: record a score for the application against each merit criterion after considering the departmental assessment report, the original application and any relevant attachments; and provide their scores against each criterion to the Secretariat in advance of the relevant meeting. 722.51 In
addition, the template enabled committee members to do more than simply record an assessment score against each criterion and indicate whether the member supported or did not support the award of funding. In particular, the template provided a means for committee members to record the rationale for their scoring, which is important in promoting accountability in assessment processes. However, the department advised ANAO in May 2014 that: The [templates] were not designed to be provided back to the Secretariat to keep as a permanent record and were not kept by the Secretariat. Members are told that they can leave papersdocuments at the end of the meeting to be destroyed should they not wish to keep these themselves. Scores are placed by the Secretariat into a template that lists all applications for that meeting these are kept as a record by the Secretariat. At the meeting the scores are then moderated following discussion of each application by the committee those members with conflicts did not provide scores and were not present during the discussion or the final decision of the committee on an application where they had a conflict. The final decision and recommendation of the committee is put into a decision sheet and recorded in minutes.2.52 Where
templates were provided by committee members to the department, they were not retained in departmental records. In this respect, in October 2014, the department advised ANAO that: 72 Prior to a meeting, the Secretariat and the Chair of the meeting would allocate two or three spokespersons to each application. The allocation of applications was influenced by the conflicts of interest that had been reported and the size of the project being considered.Parts
» The After The Program Design
» The The Program Program Design
» The However, A Program Design
» The situation in relation to the programs was similar to that identified in
» The department accepted the subsequent recommendation made in the earlier
» The program guidelines and IA’s disclosure of interest guidelines set out
» Notwithstanding the requirements of IA disclosure of interest guidelines,
» There Further, Program Design
» The The Performance Program Design
» Effective In In Access to Funding
» Relatively Access to Funding
» Determining Access to Funding
» However, The Access to Funding
» Consistent Access to Funding
» Specifically, In Access to Funding
» In Consistent Access to Funding
» Cabinet In The Access to Funding
» Accordingly, The Reduction in Emissions
» The The Reduction in Emissions
» In This The Reduction in Emissions
» In November 2013, the department noted in a review of the programs that:
» For example, one applicant that received funding under the programs initially
» In The Reduction in Emissions
» Another Reduction in Emissions
» As In In Reduction in Emissions
» However, The Reduction in Emissions
» As The Reduction in Emissions
» The In Reduction in Emissions
» Further, Reduction in Emissions
» There This Reduction in Emissions
» Agreed. Reduction in Emissions
» The In In Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» In Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» Given Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» The The Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» In The Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» Further, following the then Government’s decision to bring forward the introduction
» From the information provided in paragraphs 5.9 and 5.10, it is clear that
» However, this indicator was inconsistently applied in assessing applications,
» A Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» In In In Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» Overall, Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» The Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» Following The Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» The most common reason recorded for not recommending an application
» As Against A Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» Nevertheless, Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» To Part Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» Part Advice to the Program Delegate and Funding Decisions
» The Reporting and Funding Distribution
» Website In Reporting and Funding Distribution
» Reporting In Reporting and Funding Distribution
» Publication The Reporting and Funding Distribution
Show more