Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Dr Laura Dan
Chief Program Officer
National Competitive Grants Program
Update
3 December 2014
Web: arc.gov.au I Email: [email protected]
NCGP Update• Commonwealth grants
• Streamlining
• NCGP Scheme deliveries
• Postaward
• Scheme calendar
• Challenges and opportunities for 2015
Web: arc.gov.au I Email: [email protected]
Commonwealth grantsIn 2012-2013
•41 Commonwealth entities provided grants through 791 grant programmes
•405 grant rounds advertised
•62,634 grant applications submitted
•Over 12 million pages of grant applications submitted
•26,377 grants awarded
Web: arc.gov.au I Email: [email protected]
NCGP stats 2014
•7000 proposals•22,000 assessments
•1300 new grants•8000 active grants•1600 post award requests
DP13-15 application numbers
Web: arc.gov.au I Email: [email protected]
2014 Special Research Initiatives
• Type 1 Juvenile Diabetes:• Aims to build on the existing Type 1 Diabetes Clinical Research Network and to
establish a coordinated cross–disciplinary competitive research program to work towards finding a cure for Type 1 Juvenile Diabetes.
• Tropical Health and Medicine:• To improve national capacity to identify risks to health security and biosecurity from
re-emerging infectious diseases prevalent in tropical countries by building the Australian research capacity in tropical health and biomedical sciences.
• The Antarctic Gateway Partnership:• To provide facilities and research funding for a partnership focussed on Antarctic and
Southern Ocean research.
Funding duration for current schemes
Scheme Funding duration(years)
DISCOVERY Australian Laureate Fellowships 2014 5Discovery Early Career Researcher Award 2015 3Discovery Indigenous 2015 3Discovery Projects 2015 Up to 5Future Fellowships 2014 4
LINKAGE ARC Centres of Excellence (2014) Up to 7Linkage Infrastructure, Equipment and Facilities 2015 1Linkage Projects 2015 2 to 5Industrial Transformation Research Hubs Up to 5Industrial Transformation Training Centres 3 Special Research Initiatives varies by initiative
Simplifying documents
• Funding rules• The ARC has released one set of funding rules for the Discovery Program and
one for the Linkage Program (excepting Centres and SRIs). These rules detail elements common to all funding schemes under each Program, with attachments specific to each scheme. Previously each scheme released separate funding rules.
• Funding Agreements
Simplifying forms
• Application forms– ways to increase the efficiency of its grant application processes—specifically the format and
content of its application forms.
• Collecting information– what and how
• Eligibility– EER for DE16 in RMS 2.0
• Reporting– new systems for the collection of end-of-year financial reporting information aimed at
improving the requirement for manual manipulation of spreadsheets.
Working together
• Working with the NHMRC– The ARC is working with the NHMRC to ensure, as much as is possible, a consistent approach
between the two agencies. – Some differences result from the different discipline responsibilities.
• Consultations with the sector
Web: arc.gov.au I Email: [email protected]
Scheme calendar• Advance publication of funding rules
–25 August for schemes under the Linkage Program
–13 October for schemes under the Discovery Program
• Advance publication of dates (opening and closing)
• Collaboration with the NHMRC on dates
• Indicative rejoinder dates
Scheme calendar
Feedback to unsuccessful applicantsDiscovery Projects for funding commencing in 2015 Funding Outcomes - University of ExamplelandProject ID Lead CI Outcome 2015 $ 2016 $ 2017 $ 2018 $ 2019 $ Total Comments Unsuccessful BandDP150000000 Example, Prof
ExampleRecommended For Funding
$70,000 $95,900 $100,000 $45,000 $310,900
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Recommended For Funding
$70,000 $71,900 $50,000 $191,900
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Recommended For Funding
$140,000 $105,500 $90,000 $335,500
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Not Recommended For Funding
This proposal is in the band 51% to 75% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Not Recommended For Funding
This proposal is in the band 26% to 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Not Recommended For Funding
This proposal is in the Top 10% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Not Recommended For Funding
This proposal is in the bottom 25% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Not Recommended For Funding
This proposal is in the band 11% to 25% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Ineligible This proposal was deemed ineligible as it did not meet the requirements specified in section C6.3 of the Discovery Projects Funding Rules for funding commencing in 2015.
Feedback to unsuccessful applicantsDiscovery Projects for funding commencing in 2015 Unsuccessful Proposal Feedback by Criterion - University of Exampleland
Project ID Lead CI Score Band by Criterion (Investigator(s))
Score Band by Criterion (Project Quality and Innovation)
Score Band by Criterion (Feasibility and Benefit)
Score Band by Criterion (Research Environment)
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Band 11% to 25% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Band 26% to 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Top 10% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Band 11% to 25% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Band 11% to 25% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Band 26% to 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Top 10% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Band 26% to 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Band 11% to 25% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
DP150000000 Example, Prof Example
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Below Top 50% of unsuccessful proposals within the discipline panel.
Post award development
• Reducing red tape• Reducing paperwork• Combined funding agreements• Combined End of Year reporting/Progress reports by Exception• RMS 2.0 developments
Challenges and opportunities for 2015
• More Consultation• More Engagement• More Collaboration
Thank you for your support in 2014!
We’re looking forward to working with you in 2015!
