‐
ANAO Report No.11 2014–15 The Award of Grants under the Clean Technology Program
73
3. Access to Funding
This chapter analyses the approach to assessing applications, including the reframing
of applications throughout the merit assessment process.
Introduction
3.1 Effective
grants administration is supported by agencies adopting application
and assessment processes that promote open, transparent and equitable
access to grants.
82
It is also recognised as good practice for agencies to
design a grant application process that is cost‐effective, accessible and likely to
maximise the attraction and selection of high quality applications.
3.2 In
relation to the ability of applicants to access funding, the programs were
characterised by:
a high proportion of applications 84 per cent proceeding through the
eligibility checking stage to merit assessment;
a
high proportion of applications 74 per cent that proceeded to merit assessment
being recommended and approved for funding; and
the 2013‐14 Budget bringing forward 160 million in program funding
from 2015‐16 and 2016‐17 to 2014‐15 so as ‘to allow industry to access
support for clean energy investment and research and development
projects earlier and to more closely align funding with anticipated
demand’.
83
3.3 In
this context, the ANAO examined the:
1012 applications that were assessed against the eligibility criteria; and
849
applications that were assessed by the IA committees against the merit
criteria.
82 ANAO Grants Administration Better Practice Guide, op. cit., p. 43.
83 Budget Paper No. 2 2013-14 – Part 2: Expense Measures – Industry, Innovation, Climate Change,
Science, Research and Tertiary Education.
ANAO Report No.11 2014–15 The Award of Grants under the Clean Technology Program
74
Eligibility assessment
3.4 The
department received 1171 applications for funding, of which 159
were not processed due to the closure of the programs in October 2013.
84
The remaining 1012 applications proceeded to the eligibility checking stage.
3.5 As
noted in paragraph 2.36, the program delegate was responsible for determining
whether an application was eligible for merit assessment. In making
this decision, the program guidelines required that the delegate consider
whether the:
applicant was an eligible applicant;
project
to which the application related was an eligible project and involved
eligible activities;
application was complete and contained sufficient information to
undertake a merit assessment; and
application
was in the form required.
3.6 The
responsibility for eligibility assessment was delegated to departmental
officers across the AusIndustry State Office Network. The assessors
used an eligibility checklist that reflected the main eligibility requirements
that were outlined in the program guidelines.
85
3.7 Relatively
few applications 61, or six per cent were identified as not meeting
these eligibility requirements. However, for two per cent of applications
assessed, completed checklists to support the results of the eligibility
checking stage were not available.
86
The checklists for the remaining 938
applications were largely complete, but a relatively small number contained
some shortcomings that did not provide an accurate assessment of eligibility
as the checklists:
84 Of the 159 applications that were not processed due to the closure of the programs, 34 applications
were submitted before 1 July 2013. 85
There were seven versions of the eligibility checklist. Eligibility criteria that were not covered in the checklist or managed through the controls that were built into the electronic application form, included
projects that involved savings during the in-service life of products and decommissioning of plant, equipment or process that have been replaced.
86 Checklists were not available for 16 applications, with: 13 found to be ineligible; three approved by the
program delegate; and two not approved by the program delegate. A further 56 applications were withdrawn.
Kategori