Cabinet In The Access to Funding
4. Reduction in Emissions
In the context of the program objective, this chapter examines the assessment of the extent to which applications would reduce carbon emissions intensity. Introduction4.1 As
the primary objective of the programs was to reduce the carbon emissions intensity of manufacturers, the assessment framework developed by the department to score applications heavily weighted merit criterion one. 110 In this respect, the department advised ANAO in June 2014 that: The rationale behind the weightings of the merit criteria was to ensure that only those projects which delivered a significant reduction in carbon emissions intensity as outlined in the Guidelines could be funded. This reflects the Program objective. The weighting for this criterion ensured that applications which scored poorly against this criterion but performed very well against the remaining program criteria could not be funded. This was done at the direction of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.4.2 Accordingly,
ANAO examined the: approach taken to assessing the extent of the reduction in carbon emissions intensity claimed in applications; and consistency of the assessment approach with the published merit criteria, objective of the programs and the original policy intent. Scoring methodology developed for merit criterion one4.3 The
program guidelines described merit criterion one as ‘the extent of the reduction in carbon emissions intensity, including through improvements in energy efficiency arising from the proposed project’. Although carbon emissions intensity was not defined in the program guidelines, it was defined in the customer guidelines as the number of tonnes of greenhouse gases that 110 The weighting was 70 per cent for applications seeking funding of less than 1.5 million, and 58 per cent for applications seeking funding of more than 1.5 million. For the weightings of all merit criteria see Table 2.1 on page 48. ANAO Report No.11 2014–15 The Award of Grants under the Clean Technology ProgramParts
» 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