Environment The Grant Assessment and Selection

       ANAO Report No.10 2014–15 Administration of the Biodiversity Fund Program 67 created a ranked listing of applications for the NATI, Round 2 and Investing in Tasmania’s Native Forests rounds once the moderation process had been completed, with the listing provided to the Minister. 93

4.24 The

ranked listing of those applications recommended by the Moderation Group for funding, which was prepared by the department for Round 2 and Investing in Tasmania’s Native Forests rounds, reflected the initial scores from highest to lowest allocated by the merit assessors. However, the listing provided to the Minister for the NATI round was not aligned to the initial merit scores, with lower scoring applications appearing higher in the list than higher scoring applications for example, an application that scored at 8.45 was ranked at number four in the list, while an application scoring 8.95 was ranked at number seven. While the records retained by Environment did not indicate the basis on which the ranking of NATI round applications was undertaken, the department informed the ANAO that the recommended applications were grouped by state, rather than in merit order.

4.25 The

‘reserve’ list was drawn upon in Round 1, as the Moderation Group had recommended that the department ‘review further the proposed expenditure in the out‐years and consider whether any projects within the reserve list could be included’ in the funding recommendation. In response to this recommendation, the department selected 18 projects from the reserve list that could be accommodated in the funding profile. The department’s selection was endorsed by the chair of the Moderation Group in an Addendum to the Moderation Group’s report, and subsequently included in the list of recommended projects provided to the Minister for consideration although the 18 projects that had initially been ranked as ‘reserve’ were not identified as such in the overall list of projects recommended for funding.

4.26 An

addendum to the Moderation Group report briefly stated that the 18 reserve projects had been selected as follows:  location of the project and whether or not it was within an under ‐represented geographical area in particular Western Australia, Victoria and Queensland;  applicant type and whether or not it was an under‐represented group in particular indigenous applicants and individuals; 93 A ranked listing was not prepared by the department for Round 1. ANAO Report No.10 2014–15 Administration of the Biodiversity Fund Program 68  the project was considered of high quality and represented strong value for money; and  in addition, funding consideration had to be made to the proposed expenditure in the out‐years of the program.

4.27 The