Section Navigation
National Competitive Grants Program
Breadcrumb Navigation
Linkage Projects
Round 1
Selection Report for Funding Commencing in 2009
Overview
Selection Process
Selection Criteria
Funding Levels and Duration
Approved Funding
Project Size
Components
APAI and APAI-IT
APDI
LIF
Outcomes by Administering Organisation
Partnerships
Leverage of ARC Funding
International Collaboration
Age and Gender
National Research Priorities
Rural and Regional
Summary of Outcomes
Overview
The Linkage Projects scheme funds collaborative projects between university researchers and Partner Organisations. Proposals in Round 1 for projects commencing in January 2009 closed on 23 May 2008. This report outlines outcomes from the selection process for that round.
As indicated in the funding rules for this round, Linkage Projects aims to:
- encourage and develop long-term strategic research alliances between higher education organisations and other organisations, including within industry, in order to apply advanced knowledge to problems and/or to provide opportunities to obtain national economic, social or cultural benefits;
- support collaborative research on issues of benefit to regional and rural communities;
- enhance the scale and focus of research in National Research Priorities;
- foster opportunities for postdoctoral researchers to pursue internationally competitive research in collaboration with organisations outside the higher education sector, targeting those who have demonstrated a clear commitment to high-quality research;
- provide outcome-oriented research training to prepare high-calibre postgraduate research students; and
- produce a national pool of world-class researchers to meet the needs of the broader Australian innovation system.
Linkage Projects provides funding support for:
- Australian Postdoctoral Fellowships Industry (APDI) for researchers with less than three years postdoctoral experience;
- Australian Postgraduate Awards Industry (APAI, or as APAI-IT for those in the field of information technology and communications) for postgraduate research students studying towards a Masters or PhD degree;
- Linkage Industry Fellowships (LIF) which provide support for costs involved in a temporary transfer from one of the eligible higher education organisations listed on a proposal to one of the partner organisations on that proposal, or vice versa; and
- Collaborative Research Grant (CRG) which includes general research project costs.
A single Linkage Projects proposal may contain research project costs and/or one or more of the component costs above. This report provides summary statistics for Linkage Projects proposals that involve project, and/or APAI, and/or APDI, and/or LIF funding.
Selection Process
Assessment of proposals was undertaken by the ARC College of Experts, which:
- assigned independent readers/assessors to review proposals;
- sought applicants' comments on assessors' reports;
- identified ineligible proposals;
- ranked each proposal relative to the others on the basis of the proposal, the assessors' reports and applicants' responses to those assessments;
- assessed and recommended budgets;
- where applicable held panel interviews; and
- prepared funding recommendations.
The ARC and the College of Experts ranked each proposal relative to all other proposals on the basis of the proposal and prepared funding recommendations.
Selection Criteria
Selection criteria and corresponding weights for Linkage Projects proposals are:
- investigator track record (20%)
- significance and innovation (25%)
- approach and training (20%)
- national benefit (10%)
- commitment of partner organisation (25%).
Funding Levels and Duration
Funding for Linkage Projects may be awarded for one to five years subject to parliamentary appropriation and the provisions of the ARC Act. APDI's are awarded for a standard duration of three years, except where applicants specifically request a shorter duration. APAI stipends may be awarded for two years (Masters) or three years (PhD), with provision under certain conditions for an extension of an additional six months' support for PhD students. Unless otherwise specified, funding amounts presented in this document do not include amounts covering six-month extensions for APAI stipends.
Approved Funding
Of the 441 Linkage Projects proposals considered, 218 (49.4%) are approved for funding and represent an ARC commitment of $71.7M over the life of these projects.
Table 1: Numbers of proposals and success rates for Linkage Projects Round 1 by Discipline Panel
Panel* |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
Requested funds over project life (all proposals considered) |
Approved funds over project life (approved proposals) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSB |
85 |
37 |
43.5% |
$42,209,729 |
$14,422,502 |
EE |
100 |
55 |
55.0% |
$42,221,107 |
$17,049,460 |
HCA |
32 |
18 |
56.3% |
$11,985,968 |
$5,310,210 |
MIC |
45 |
24 |
53.3% |
$18,161,993 |
$8,265,420 |
PCG |
39 |
16 |
41.0% |
$14,150,304 |
$6,917,420 |
SBE |
140 |
68 |
48.6% |
$50,086,557 |
$19,739,675 |
Total |
441 |
218 |
49.4% |
$178,815,658 |
$71,704,687 |
*BSB = Biological Sciences and Biotechnology; EE = Engineering and Environmental Sciences; HCA = Humanities and Creative Arts; MIC = Mathematics, Information and Communication Sciences; PCG = Physics, Chemistry and Geoscience; SBE = Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences
Project Size
The average first year funding allocation for approved Round 1 2009 Linkage Projects proposals is $110,082 which represents 71.2% of the average first year request. The average first year funding allocation has increased from $87,217 in Round 2 2006 to $110,082 in Round 1 2009.
The average funding allocation over the project life for approved Round 1 2009 Linkage Projects proposals is $328,921 which represents 67.6% of the average request. The average funding allocation over the project life has increased from $262,040 in Round 2 2006 to $328,921 in Round 1 2009.
Table 2: Comparison of the average first year funding allocation and the average funding allocation over the project life for approved Linkage Projects proposals from Round 2 2006 to Round 1 2009
| 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rd 2 |
Rd 1 |
Rd 2 |
Rd 1 |
Rd 2 |
Rd 1 |
|
Average year 1 request |
$110,737 |
$130,161 |
$130,051 |
$129,088 |
$144,942 |
$154,573 |
Average year 1 allocation |
$87,217 |
$96,131 |
$92,157 |
$103,942 |
$100,952 |
$110,082 |
% Allocation |
78.8% |
73.9% |
70.9% |
80.5% |
69.6% |
71.2% |
Average project life request |
$343,242 |
$404,557 |
$417,241 |
$388,846 |
$449,110 |
$486,387 |
Average project life allocation |
$262,040 |
$285,745 |
$277,940 |
$308,257 |
$306,332 |
$328,921 |
% Allocation |
76.3% |
70.6% |
66.6% |
79.3% |
68.2% |
67.6% |
Components
The components that can be funded in Linkage Projects are APAIs, APAI‑ITs, APDIs, LIFs and other CRG funding. The following table shows numbers requested and success rates for these components.
Table 3: Numbers of and success rates for Linkage Projects Round 1 2009 components
Component |
Number requested |
Number approved |
Success rate |
|---|---|---|---|
APAI |
368 |
125 |
34.0% |
APAI_IT |
32 |
29 |
90.6% |
APDI |
27 |
14 |
51.9% |
LIF |
5 |
3 |
60.0% |
CRG |
412 |
198* |
48.1% |
*Of the 218 proposals which are approved, not all were funded the requested CRG component.
APAI and APAI_IT
The 2009 Linkage Projects Funding Rules stipulate that, subject to an adequate number of requests of the requisite type and of sufficient quality being received, the ARC will allocate at least 50 APAI places in the field of information technology and communications in addition to other APAI funding. These APAI-IT places are to be filled over both selection rounds. For this round (Round 1 2009), 125 APAI and 29 APAI-IT places are approved for funding, representing success rates of 34.0% and 90.6% respectively.
APDI
The Linkage Projects Round 1 2009 proposals included requests for the award of 27 APDIs, of which 14 (51.9%) are approved for funding.
LIF
The Linkage Projects Round 1 2009 proposals included five requests for a LIF, of which three (60%) are approved for funding.
Outcomes by Administering Organisation
Table 4: Numbers of proposals, success rates, ARC approved funding and Partner Organisation contributions for Linkage Projects Round 1 2009 proposals by Administering Organisation
Administering Organisation |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
ARC approved funding over project life |
Total Partner Organisation contributions (cash & in-kind) pledged over project life |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Australian Catholic University |
1 |
1 |
100.0% |
$120,000 |
* |
Charles Darwin University |
4 |
1 |
25.0% |
$78,420 |
* |
Charles Sturt University |
1 |
0 |
0.0% |
$0 |
n/a |
Curtin University of Technology |
8 |
1 |
12.5% |
$600,000 |
* |
Deakin University |
10 |
4 |
40.0% |
$1,167,000 |
$1,761,103 |
Edith Cowan University |
2 |
0 |
0.0% |
$0 |
n/a |
Griffith University |
13 |
8 |
61.5% |
$2,778,000 |
$4,279,221 |
James Cook University |
6 |
1 |
16.7% |
$78,420 |
* |
La Trobe University |
6 |
4 |
66.7% |
$1,188,913 |
$1,805,349 |
Macquarie University |
6 |
3 |
50.0% |
$950,000 |
$3,020,036 |
Monash University |
34 |
19 |
55.9% |
$6,098,033 |
$12,505,940 |
Murdoch University |
9 |
1 |
11.1% |
$290,000 |
* |
Queensland University of Technology |
16 |
8 |
50.0% |
$2,610,680 |
$6,758,518 |
RMIT University |
16 |
5 |
31.3% |
$959,723 |
$1,514,192 |
Southern Cross University |
3 |
0 |
0.0% |
$0 |
n/a |
Swinburne University of Technology |
7 |
2 |
28.6% |
$169,420 |
$203,120 |
The Australian National University |
21 |
16 |
76.2% |
$6,505,341 |
$10,022,248 |
Flinders University |
4 |
2 |
50.0% |
$428,420 |
$698,400 |
The University of Adelaide |
15 |
12 |
80.0% |
$4,329,082 |
$9,659,227 |
The University of Melbourne |
40 |
26 |
65.0% |
$9,843,100 |
$18,195,352 |
The University of New England |
5 |
1 |
20.0% |
$90,000 |
* |
The University of New South Wales |
38 |
20 |
52.6% |
$5,860,524 |
$10,491,807 |
The University of Newcastle |
14 |
6 |
42.9% |
$2,526,964 |
$4,260,226 |
The University of Queensland |
35 |
19 |
54.3% |
$6,937,000 |
$12,886,514 |
The University of Sydney |
29 |
19 |
65.5% |
$8,107,042 |
$10,836,490 |
The University of Western Australia |
19 |
8 |
42.1% |
$3,140,000 |
$5,465,834 |
University of Ballarat |
2 |
1 |
50.0% |
$150,000 |
* |
University of Canberra |
2 |
0 |
0.0% |
$0 |
n/a |
University of South Australia |
14 |
6 |
42.9% |
$1,018,420 |
$2,047,569 |
University of Southern Queensland |
3 |
1 |
33.3% |
$235,773 |
* |
University of Tasmania |
10 |
3 |
30.0% |
$915,000 |
$1,129,591 |
University of Technology, Sydney |
17 |
6 |
35.3% |
$1,722,000 |
$3,577,460 |
University of the Sunshine Coast |
3 |
1 |
33.3% |
$92,012 |
* |
University of Western Sydney |
12 |
6 |
50.0% |
$920,560 |
$1,258,935 |
University of Wollongong |
8 |
4 |
50.0% |
$1,338,000 |
$2,650,462 |
Victoria University |
8 |
3 |
37.5% |
$456,840 |
$563,437 |
Total |
441 |
218 |
49.4% |
$71,704,687 |
$128,877,735* |
*For confidentiality reasons, total contributions by Partner Organisations are not shown in instances in which Administering Organisations are associated with one approved proposal only. The total does, however, include the total contributions by Partner Organisations on approved proposals associated with those Administering Organisations.
Partnerships
Linkage Projects proposals represent partnerships between university researchers and other organisations, as well as partnerships between Partner Organisations within projects. On average, there are 2.1 Partner Organisations involved in each proposal approved in this Linkage Projects round. A summary of the ANZSIC categories identified by applicants for these Partner Organisations is shown in Table 5.
Table 5: Partner Organisation data by ANZSIC category for Linkage Projects Round 1 2009
ANZSIC category |
Proposals considered | Proposals approved | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
No. of Partner Organisations* |
Total contribution (cash & in-kind) |
No. of Partner Organisations (Govt, non-profit, private) |
Total contribution (cash & in-kind) |
|
Accommodation, Cafes and Restaurants |
2 |
$455,609 |
0 (0, 0, 0) |
n/a |
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing |
80 |
$25,050,350 |
26 (4, 2, 20) |
$8,135,440 |
Communication Services |
6 |
$1,311,790 |
5 (0, 0, 5) |
$1,232,350 |
Construction |
23 |
$2,444,210 |
13 (0, 3, 10) |
$1,451,310 |
Cultural and Recreational Services |
71 |
$13,623,729 |
51 (24, 11, 16) |
$10,892,492 |
Education |
76 |
$14,167,056 |
37 (18, 18, 1) |
$8,546,698 |
Electricity, Gas and Water Supply |
40 |
$14,590,795 |
20 (5, 1, 14) |
$10,790,759 |
Finance and Insurance |
9 |
$1,559,739 |
7 (0, 0, 7) |
$876,299 |
Government Administration and Defence |
143 |
$25,878,869 |
60 (58, 1, 1) |
$16,464,825 |
Health and Community Services |
161 |
$40,477,081 |
91 (39, 42, 10) |
$23,561,843 |
Manufacturing |
100 |
$35,194,329 |
54 (0, 2, 52) |
$23,392,353 |
Mining |
42 |
$12,664,899 |
27 (0, 1, 26) |
$9,121,020 |
Personal and Other Services |
42 |
$5,589,046 |
26 (6, 12, 8) |
$2,312,282 |
Property and Business Services |
68 |
$17,792,458 |
29 (2, 3, 24) |
$8,930,124 |
Transport and Storage |
13 |
$3,651,396 |
10 (8, 0, 2) |
$2,987,540 |
Wholesale Trade |
5 |
$566,042 |
2 (0, 0, 2) |
$182,400 |
Total |
881 |
$215,017,398 |
458 (164, 96, 198) |
$128,877,735 |
* These figures include multiple counting of Partner Organisations which are listed on more than one proposal.
Partner Organisations were identified by the applicants as government, non-profit or private companies, and also identified as Australia-based or international. The Partner Organisation contributions in these categories for Round 1 2009 proposals approved for funding are shown below in Table 6.
Table 6: Partner Organisation contributions by sector for approved Linkage Projects Proposals in Round 1 2009
Type |
Cash | In-kind | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
$M |
% |
$M |
% |
$M |
% |
||
Government |
|||||||
Commonwealth |
2.5 |
6.4 |
3.9 |
4.3 |
6.4 |
5.0 |
|
State, Territory & Local |
9.7 |
24.4 |
27.7 |
31.0 |
37.3 |
29.0 |
|
International |
0.3 |
0.8 |
1.4 |
1.6 |
1.7 |
1.3 |
|
Sub-total |
12.5 |
31.6 |
33.0 |
36.9 |
45.5 |
35.3 |
|
Non-profit |
|||||||
Australian |
3.2 |
8.0 |
10.4 |
11.7 |
13.6 |
10.5 |
|
International |
1.1 |
2.8 |
3.6 |
4.1 |
4.8 |
3.7 |
|
Sub-total |
4.3 |
10.8 |
14.1 |
15.8 |
18.4 |
14.2 |
|
Private companies |
|||||||
Australian |
16.0 |
40.5 |
26.4 |
29.6 |
42.4 |
32.9 |
|
International |
6.8 |
17.1 |
15.8 |
17.7 |
22.6 |
17.5 |
|
Sub-total |
22.8 |
57.6 |
42.2 |
47.3 |
65.0 |
50.5 |
|
Total |
39.6 |
100 |
89.3 |
100 |
128.9 |
100 |
|
Note: All totals and percentages are calculated using unrounded figures.
In approved proposals, private companies have pledged 57.6% of the total cash and 47.3% of the total in-kind contributions pledged by Partner Organisations. Government agencies have pledged 31.6% of the total cash and 36.9% of the in-kind contributions pledged by Partner Organisations. State, Territory and Local governments account for the bulk of government agency-pledged contributions (29.0% of overall pledged contributions, compared with 5.0% pledged by Commonwealth agencies).
Leverage of ARC Funding
The ARC considered 441 proposals seeking a total of $178.8M in ARC funding over five years. These proposals were linked to 881 instances of Partner Organisation involvement, with total (cash and in-kind) pledged Partner Organisation contributions of $215.0M over five years.
For the 218 approved proposals, the ARC will contribute $71.7M and Partner Organisations have pledged $128.9M over the life of these projects. This represents $1.8 from Partner Organisations for every dollar funded by the ARC.
The total ARC allocation has increased from $55.2M in Round 1 2003 to $71.7M in Round 1 2009. There has been a greater proportional increase in the Partner Organisation total (cash and in-kind) contribution from $85.3M in Round 1 2003 to $128.9M in Round 1 2009. This greater proportional increase in Partner Organisation contributions has resulted in an increase in leverage of Partner Organisation contributions to ARC allocations from 1.5 in Round 1 2003 to 1.8 in Round 1 2009.
Table 7: Comparison of leverage of ARC funds for approved Linkage Projects proposals from Round 1 2003 to Round 1 2009
Funding round and year |
Total ARC allocation |
Total Partner Organisation contribution (cash & in-kind) |
Leverage |
|---|---|---|---|
Rd 1 2009 |
$71,704,687 |
$128,877,735 |
1.8 |
Rd 2 2008 |
$63,717,139 |
$115,136,011 |
1.8 |
Rd 1 2008 |
$62,267,846 |
$95,032,189 |
1.5 |
Rd 2 2007 |
$60,313,034 |
$114,246,463 |
1.9 |
Rd 1 2007 |
$59,434,943 |
$105,481,215 |
1.8 |
Rd 2 2006 |
$53,980,315 |
$91,005,817 |
1.7 |
Rd 1 2006 |
$56,564,715 |
$84,240,904 |
1.5 |
Rd 2 2005 |
$58,101,851 |
$101,980,929 |
1.8 |
Rd 1 2005 |
$53,276,211 |
$80,364,264 |
1.5 |
Rd 2 2004 |
$66,467,567 |
$95,661,309 |
1.4 |
Rd 1 2004 |
$48,683,379 |
$68,361,263 |
1.4 |
Rd 2 2003 |
$45,912,227 |
$73,303,393 |
1.6 |
Rd 1 2003 |
$55,182,916 |
$85,344,360 |
1.5 |
International Collaboration
Linkage Projects Round 1 2009 applicants foreshadowed 291 instances of international collaboration with researchers in 44 countries on 173 proposals. Of the 218 proposals approved for funding, applicants foreshadowed 174 instances of international collaboration in 36 countries on 93 proposals.
Instances of international collaboration on approved proposals has increased from 112 in Round 2 2007 to 174 in Round 1 2009. The highest incidence of international collaboration over the last four rounds has been with researchers in the USA. The second highest incidence of international collaboration over the last four rounds has been with researchers in the UK. Data relating to international collaboration over the last four rounds are shown in Table 8.
Table 8: Comparison of Linkage Projects proposals that involve international collaboration from Round 2 2007 to Round 1 2009.
Collaborating Country |
2007 Round 2 | 2008 Round 1 | 2008 Round 2 | 2009 Round 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
|
United States |
61 |
41 |
42 |
23 |
53 |
31 |
78 |
45 |
United Kingdom |
30 |
20 |
34 |
17 |
27 |
9 |
38 |
19 |
Canada |
13 |
5 |
15 |
10 |
17 |
8 |
18 |
10 |
New Zealand |
5 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
8 |
5 |
17 |
10 |
France |
2 |
2 |
11 |
5 |
9 |
6 |
12 |
9 |
China, People's Republic |
14 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
15 |
5 |
13 |
8 |
Germany |
11 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
14 |
8 |
10 |
7 |
India |
5 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
5 |
Japan |
4 |
2 |
6 |
3 |
7 |
2 |
11 |
5 |
Korea, Republic of |
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
6 |
5 |
Italy |
2 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
Netherlands, The |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
Singapore |
2 |
1 |
7 |
3 |
7 |
4 |
||
Spain |
4 |
2 |
6 |
4 |
||||
Indonesia |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
7 |
3 |
Sweden |
3 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
11 |
5 |
6 |
3 |
Switzerland |
6 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
7 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
Argentina |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
||||
Brazil |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
Hong Kong |
1 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
||
Russian Federation, The |
1 |
3 |
2 |
|||||
South Africa |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
Thailand |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
||
Vietnam |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
||
Belgium |
2 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
Bulgaria |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
Chile |
3 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
Denmark |
2 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
|||
Fiji |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
||||
Finland |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
||||
Malawi |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Malaysia |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
||
Mexico |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Mozambique |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Norway |
2 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
|
Philippines, The |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
||||
Austria |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|||||
Bangladesh |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
Colombia |
1 |
1 |
||||||
East Timor |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
Estonia |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Greece |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Hungary |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Ireland, Republic of |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
||||
Israel |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|||||
Lithuania |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Pakistan |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Papua New Guinea |
2 |
2 |
1 |
|||||
Poland |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Portugal |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
Sri Lanka |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
Taiwan |
2 |
1 |
||||||
Tonga |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Turkey |
1 |
1 |
||||||
Vanuatu |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
Other* |
3 |
1 |
9 |
1 |
||||
Total |
192 |
112 |
180 |
95 |
264 |
127 |
291 |
174 |
*Other = Cambodia, Egypt, Iran, Jersey, Kuwait, Laos, Mongolia, Peru, Qatar, Seychelles, Slovakia, Tanzania
Age and Gender
The total number of participants (Chief Investigators, APDI’s and Partner Investigators) named on all proposals considered in this round is 1795. Of these, 504 are female and 1291 are male. The overall success rate for female and male participants is 49.8% and 52.5% respectively. Despite the number of female participants involved in Linkage Projects proposals being considerably lower than male participants, the success rates for female and male participants has remained very similar over the last nine rounds. Gender success rates over the last nine Linkage Projects rounds are represented in Figure 1. Success rates by age and gender in the current Linkage Projects round are represented in Figure 2.
Figure 1. Comparison of Linkage Projects success rates between female and male participants from Round 1 2005 to Round 1 2009
Figure 2. Comparative success rates by participants age and gender for Linkage Projects proposals Round 1 2009
National Research Priorities
The Australian Government has identified four National Research Priorities and, within these, 21 national research priority goals.
Of the 441 proposals considered in this round, 425 (96.4%) were identified by the applicants as addressing a National Research Priority. Of those 425, 206 (48.5%) are approved for funding, representing 94.5% of the total 218 proposals approved for funding and accounting for 96.3% of the total funding over the life of these projects.
Table 9: Approved funding for Linkage Projects Round 1 2009 by National Research Priority
Priority area |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
Approved funds over project life |
|---|---|---|---|---|
None selected |
16 |
12 |
75.0% |
$2,679,572 |
An Environmentally Sustainable Australia |
147 |
76 |
51.7% |
$26,166,689 |
Promoting and Maintaining Good Health |
121 |
52 |
43.0% |
$15,323,100 |
Frontier Technologies for Building and Transforming Australian
Industries |
118 |
59 |
50.0% |
$21,744,293 |
Safeguarding Australia |
39 |
19 |
48.7% |
$5,791,033 |
Total proposals |
441 |
218 |
49.4% |
$71,704,687 |
Total priority proposals |
425 |
206 |
48.5% |
$69,025,115 |
% within priority areas |
96.4% |
94.5% |
96.3% |
Rural and Regional
The Linkage Projects scheme identifies proposals that are of benefit to rural and regional areas.
Of the 441 proposals considered in the current round, 184 were identified by the applicants as 'rural and regional' proposals. The requested funding for these proposals is $78.8M which represents 44.1% of the total funds requested by all considered proposals.
Of the 218 proposals approved for funding in the current round, 85 were identified by the applicants as 'rural and regional' proposals. The total funding over the life of these projects is $27.7M which represents 38.7% of all approved proposals.
Table 10: Requested funding and approved allocations for Rural and Regional proposals by Discipline Panel for Round 1 2009 Linkage Projects proposals.
Panel |
Funds requested | Approved funds allocated | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
All proposals considered |
R & R proposals |
Percentage requested by R & R proposals |
Proposals approved |
R & R proposals approved |
Percentage allocated to R & R proposals |
|
BSB |
$42,209,729 |
$21,750,270 |
51.5% |
$14,422,502 |
$8,139,502 |
56.4% |
EE |
$42,221,107 |
$20,902,016 |
49.5% |
$17,049,460 |
$8,150,940 |
47.8% |
HCA |
$11,985,968 |
$3,047,614 |
25.4% |
$5,310,210 |
$1,073,420 |
20.2% |
MIC |
$18,161,993 |
$3,920,326 |
21.6% |
$8,265,420 |
$1,174,000 |
14.2% |
PCG |
$14,150,304 |
$3,773,718 |
26.7% |
$6,917,420 |
$2,128,420 |
30.8% |
SBE |
$50,086,557 |
$25,422,876 |
50.8% |
$19,739,675 |
$7,083,107 |
35.9% |
Total |
$178,815,658 |
$78,816,820 |
44.1% |
$71,704,687 |
$27,749,389 |
38.7% |
Summary of Outcomes
Table 11: Comparison of proposal numbers, success rates, requested and allocated funds for successful proposals from Round 1 2003 to Round 1 2009
Funding round and year |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
Requested funds over project life (all proposals) |
Requested funds over project life (approved proposals) |
Funds allocated over project life |
Allocation as % of request |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rd 1 2009 |
441 |
218 |
49.4% |
$178,815,658 |
$106,032,303 |
$71,704,687 |
67.6% |
Rd 2 2008 |
487 |
208 |
42.7% |
$182,915,040 |
$93,414,877 |
$63,717,139 |
68.2% |
Rd 1 2008 |
424 |
202 |
47.6% |
$140,343,990 |
$78,546,893 |
$62,267,846 |
79.3% |
Rd 2 2007 |
472 |
217 |
46.0% |
$159,099,346 |
$90,541,315 |
$60,313,034 |
66.6% |
Rd 1 2007 |
485 |
208 |
42.9% |
$174,086,843 |
$84,147,797 |
$59,434,943 |
70.6% |
Rd 2 2006 |
577 |
206 |
35.7% |
$158,958,973 |
$70,707,892 |
$53,980,315 |
76.3% |
Rd 1 2006 |
529 |
194 |
36.7% |
$149,127,122 |
$70,255,021 |
$56,564,715 |
80.5% |
Rd 2 2005 |
585 |
251 |
42.9% |
$146,659,128 |
$74,669,866 |
$58,101,851 |
77.8% |
Rd 1 2005 |
463 |
237 |
51.2% |
$109,106,675 |
$66,169,679 |
$53,276,211 |
80.5% |
Rd 2 2004 |
426 |
240 |
56.3% |
$128,057,836 |
$76,806,838 |
$66,467,567 |
86.5% |
Rd 1 2004 |
322 |
164 |
50.9% |
$97,271,443 |
$56,647,236 |
$48,683,379 |
85.9% |
Rd 2 2003 |
408 |
176 |
43.1% |
$117,063,072 |
$59,199,898 |
$45,912,227 |
77.6% |
Rd 1 2003 |
373 |
197 |
52.8% |
$113,969,301 |
$68,662,807 |
$55,182,916 |
80.4% |
28/05/09
