PROBITY GUIDELINES

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE PROGRAMME

Last updated 20 October20141

Table of contents

Table of contents

1. Introduction

1.1 How to apply the probity guidelines.

1.2 Assessment objective and probity risks

1.2.1 Portfolio entities partnering applications

1.2.2 Encouraging collaboration with other parties

1.3 Background

2. Probity principles

2.1 Introduction

2.2 General responsibilities of Departmental and Ministerial staff

2.2.1 Departmental discussions with applicants

2.2.2 General rules for Department staff communicating with applicants on the NESP

2.3 Probity and the APS Code of Conduct

2.4 Independent probity advice

2.5 Confidentiality

2.6 Conflicts of Interest

2.6.1 Conflict of Interest Register

3. Roles and Responsibilities

3.1 The Minister for the Environment and the Minister’s Office

3.2 Science Partnerships Section (Science Division, Department of the Environment)

3.3 NESP Assessment Panel

3.3.1 NESP Assessment Panel business procedures

3.3.2 Meetings with applicants to support the assessment process

3.3.3 Minutes of NESP Assessment Panel meetings

3.6 Inter-Departmental advice

1. Introduction

1.1 How to apply the probity guidelines.

All Departmental (and portfolio) staff involved in the implementation of the National Environmental Science Programme (NESP) should apply the principles outlined in Sections 1 and 2 of these guidelines. Staff with specific assessment roles should also refer to the following sections:

  • Section 3.1: The Minister for the Environment and the Minister’s Office
  • Section 3.2: Science Partnerships Section (Science Division, Department of the Environment)
  • Section 3.3: NESP Assessment Panel.

1.2 Assessment objective and probity risks

The NESP is a competitive, merit-based grants programme. It is delivered through multi-disciplinary research hubs or consortia, hosted by Australian Research Institutions. Potential consortia will apply for the programme via applications for hubs, comprising a host research institution and other research organisation partners. An Assessment Panel consisting of Departmental officers and Independent experts will assess the applications against established criteria consistent with the Programme Guidelines for the NESP. Recommendations from the process will be made to the Minister for the Environment (the Minister) as proposals for research hubs.

This document sets out the probity guidelines for the application and assessment phases of the programme.

Research conducted under the NESP will support the Minister’s portfolio responsibilities within the Department of the Environment and portfolio agencies, including the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) and the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM). Research outputs will also deliver to co-investing partners and the broader Australian community.

Hereafter, reference to the Department includes the Department of the Environment and all of its portfolio agencies unless stated otherwise.

During the application period and assessment process, interactions between applicants, the Department and assessors will be undertaken in line with the probity guidelines.

The programme is seeking hubs with research capacity and capability to inform the Department’sfuture environmental policy development and decision-making. It is expected that most information that would assist hubsin developingapplications is publically available. Following the competitive phase, the research planning phase in early 2015 will be the opportunity for the Department to collaborate with successful hubs to develop and agree detailed research plans.

During the competitive process, the Department needs to both help applicants understand its research needs and conduct a fair and equitable competitive grants process. Therefore care needs to be taken to ensure effective implementation of these probity guidelines. Probity risk areas are identified as: the assessment process; the collaborative requirements of the programme; and procedural grievances by unsuccessful applicants. These risk areas are the primary focus of these probity guidelines.

1.2.1 Portfolio entities partnering applications

Portfolio research entities (including BoM, AAD and ERIS) are eligible to partner potential applications during the application process. Any Departmental entities which partner an application will be ineligible to participate in the selection process.

The Department will take steps sufficient to ensure that:

  • information concerning the receipt and assessment of applications is not accessible by portfolio research entities; and
  • portfolio research entities are encouraged, to the extent possible, to engage with any interested applicant to explore potential partnering opportunities for the NESP.

1.2.2 Encouraging collaboration with other parties

Applicants can be encouraged, in a general way, to form partnerships in the development of their proposals. It is permissible to make suggestions as to the kind of other groups or organisations that may be worth talking to in developing their proposal. Whilst a priority of the NESP is to encourage collaboration, care should be taken not to favour one organisation over other similar organisations.

An online register will be available to potential applicants who would like the option of receiving information and contact details from other potential applicants, possibly to form hub partnerships.

1.3 Background

The NESP is a public good research grants programme with an objective to improve our understanding of Australia’s environment through collaborative research that delivers accessible results and informs decisions. The NESP will fund applied biodiversity and climate systems research. It is an ongoing programme with around $25.5 million available per annum for environmental research to inform Australian decision makers. Further programme details are outlined in the Guidelines and NESP Research Scope, both available from Science Partnerships or the NESP website at environment.gov.au/nesp.

There will also be a small emerging research priorities funding stream for high priority environmental research needs that emerge during the life of the programme. The Minister will work with the Department to identify priority issues to be addressed under emerging priorities funding.Applications for emerging priority research activities will be sourced directly from those hubs established under the NESP, or through a competitive grant or procurement process.

2. Probity principles

2.1 Introduction

All Departmental staff involved in the assessment of NESP applications will observe the highest standards of probity, with all applications assessed in a manner that is fair, transparent, confidential, and of the highest professional standard.

There are a number of key requirements to promote probity:

  • Fairness and impartiality

-Applicants[1] are to be treated equally and must have the same opportunity to access information and advice.

  • Consistency and transparency of process

-Applicants are to be evaluated in a systematic manner against explicit predetermined assessment criteria.

  • Security and confidentiality

-The processes adopted for receiving and managing applicant information are to ensure the security and confidentiality of intellectual property and proprietary information.

  • Identification and resolution of potential Conflicts of Interest

-Any person involved in the assessment process is to declare and address any real or apparent conflict of interest prior to providing any advice or assessment.

The above key requirements are intended to achieve an equitable, justifiable and sound process affording equal opportunity for all applicants. This process will be applied with common sense and flexibility, so that the task of assessing proposals is fair and equitable while still achieving programme outcomes.

2.2 General responsibilities of Departmentaland Ministerialstaff

Information must be provided to applicants in a fair, equitable and consistent manner. Applicants will be able to access the same level of informationfrom Science Partnerships Section (See Section 3.2) staff. No applicant should receive or be perceived to have received an undue advantage in respect to the assessment process.

If there is an error or omission in the Department’s application process, the Department will seek advice and not enter into any immediate communications with applicants until options have been considered to address the concern. All applicants will be informed of any changes to the application process which may affect their submissions via an update on the programme’s website at environment.gov.au/nesp.

Prior to the opening of the competitive round, staff should be wary of disclosing any information that is not publically available as this may result in potential applicants gaining an unfair advantage during a selection process. This includes any policy or programme activity, such as sensitive decisions under consideration in line areas that may benefit from future research projects under NESP. If critical details of either NESP or other portfolio activity are divulged to potential applicants, the Department may need to make these details public on the NESP website.

Unless otherwise advised, staff within the portfolio and the Minister’s office should ensure that details of any discussions with NESP stakeholders about potential NESP applications are recorded and emailed to for programme files.

2.2.1 Departmental discussions with applicants

Science Partnerships will address all applicant enquiries with regard to the grant process in a manner consistent with these probity guidelines. Staff should refer all applicant enquiries to Science Partnerships and, in circumstances where staff nonetheless engage in discussions directly with applicants on the NESP, they must advise Science Partnerships of the reason for and nature of the discussion.

2.2.2 General rules for Department staff communicating with applicants on the NESP

Before funding decisions are made by the Minister, staff should not provide an opinion on an application that gives the prospective applicant the impression that they have a competitive advantage or an expectation of success or failure.

Routine business meetings and social activities continue as usual, but staff must exercise caution, and must not discuss the assessment or contents of any submission. If pressed to do so, staff should indicate that it is not appropriate to discuss such matters. Such incidents, if considered significant, should be reported to Science Partnerships and a file note should be prepared detailing the conversation.

Department staff also should not provide applicants with copies of documents that may be useful to applicants, but which are not publicly available.

It is recognised that in seeking information on specific Departmental needs, an applicant may ask questions that may reflect the applicant’s proposed bid, and it may not be appropriate, in a competitive grants process, to communicate the answer to all applicants. All logged discussions will be examined by Science Partnerships to determine whether knowledge imparted in discussions should be made publicly available. If making such material available, consideration will be given to whether the applicant needs to be contacted to confirm that no proprietary information will be at risk.

Should a staff member believe that the information provided by the Department to an applicant is relevant to all applicants and could be perceived as providing an unfair advantage they should advise Science Partnerships immediately. Science Partnerships may need to disclose the information to all applicants via a questions and answers page on the NESP website.

2.3 Probity and the APS Code of Conduct

As per the Australian Public Service (APS) Code of Conduct, APSstaff are required to:

  • behave honestly and with integrity in the course of their employment in the APS
  • disclose, and take reasonable steps to avoid any conflict of interest (real or apparent) in connection with their employment in the APS
  • not make improper use of inside information or the employee’s duties, status, power or authority in order to gain, or seek to gain, a benefit or advantage for the employee or for any other person
  • at all times behave in a way that upholds the APS Values and the integrity and good reputation of the APS.

The APS Code of Conduct obligations also apply to independent expert Assessment Panel members during this process. Independent expert members will be required to attend a probity briefing session and to familiarise themselves with the APS Code of Conduct, the Commonwealth Grant Rules and Guidelines and other key documentation relevant to the performance of their role.

2.4 Independent probity advice

To ensure integrity of the process the Department has retained the services of an independent probity advisor for the duration of the application and assessment process.Science Partnerships and the Department generally may seek probity advice at any time on issue arising.

2.5 Confidentiality

Confidential information will be received and generated during the assessment process. The following procedures will be followed to ensure that the unauthorised release of confidential information does not occur. The following items will be maintained as confidential:

  • Contents of submissions from applicants unless the applicant agrees to make it more widely available.
  • Clarification questions and responses that are considered commercial-in-confidence.
  • Confidential information produced as part of the assessment process (e.g. meeting minutes and assessment reports) noting that some parts of this information may need to be summarised for any appeals process.

In particular, those involved in the assessment process will be asked to treat applications and assessment documents as confidential and ensure they are securely stored.

2.6 Conflicts of Interest

Staff participating on the Assessment Panel (including sub-panels), Divisional Research Contacts, and Science Partnerships staff are required to divulge any actual or perceived conflicts of interest and sign a conflict of interest declaration in relation to:

  • any financial interest in the grant applicants or applications
  • any relatives or friends with a financial interest in the grant applicants or applications
  • any personal bias or inclination which would affect, or be perceived to affect, a decision in relation to grant applicants or applications
  • any personal obligation, allegiance or loyalty which would in any way affect, or be perceived to affect, a decision in relation to the grant programme.

If a potential conflict or apparent conflict arises during the grant application assessment period or during the period when applications are being called for, the individual shall make a further declaration to the Director - Science Partnerships and the NESP Assessment Panel. If any conflict of interest applies, the individual concerned will cease any discussions with applicants and will not assess relevant applications. All decisions in relation to potential conflicts of interest will be minuted at Panel meetings.

2.6.1 Conflict of Interest Register

Science Partnerships will maintain a register of all potential conflicts of interest reported during the application and assessment processes. Science Partnerships will be responsible for ensuring that people involved in providing input to the assessment process sign a conflict of interest declaration before assessing and offering comments or views.

3. Roles and Responsibilities

3.1 The Minister for the Environment and the Minister’s Office

The Minister has the sole discretion to approve funding under the NESP, consistent with the programme guidelines. In making a decision, the Minister can draw on advice including that of the NESP Assessment Panel and the Department.

Announcements regarding the programme need to be in a public forum available to all eligible applicants. If the Minister chooses to discuss programme details that are not publically available with individual stakeholders or a limited audience, these details must be immediately made public and also recorded for programme files.

All stakeholders, including NERP and ACCSP partners (including those employed in government research agencies), should not be privy to any design details of the programme prior to announcements by the Minister.

In correspondence about NESP, Ministerial staff cannot give any specifics of the programme that are not already public.

3.2Science Partnerships Section (Science Division, Department of the Environment)

The Science PartnershipsSection will:

  • administer the NESP
  • provide logistical support to NESP Assessment Panels
  • maintain conflict of interest registers and notify the Chair of the Assessment Panel of any actual or perceived conflicts of interest
  • work with the Minister to identify emerging issues and develop projects to be funded from emerging priorities funding

Therole of Science Partnerships Section in the application process will be to:

  • Be the first point of contact for applicants and direct applicant enquiries on to DRCs when necessary.
  • Provide general information to applicants on the NESP and application process.
  • Monitor and keep a register of contact between applicants and Departmental staff and ensure fairness of process during the competitive phase.
  • Receive applications and conduct eligibility checks (if non-compliant or ineligible, the Department may at its discretion seek additional information or request errors be remedied, where consistent with probity principles).
  • Participate in assessment sub-panels and provide logistical support.
  • Collate recommendations on applications from the NESP Assessment Panel and advice from the Department.

The Science Partnerships Section will maintain a record of all contact with applicants making enquiries about the NESP throughout the competitive process. Enquiries, responses and discussions with applicants will be recorded either as a log (for phone calls), minutes (for meetings) or by filing emails and correspondence. At regular times, these records will be examined to evaluate if information needs to be disclosed to other applicants, and if so, the information will be made available on the NESP website.

The Science Partnerships Section in consultation with the independent probity advisor will prepare guidance documents for the Assessment Panel and sub-panels, including application scoring templates, to ensure standardised assessment of applications.

3.3NESP Assessment Panel

Note: This section applies to members of the Assessment Panel andof each of the sub-panels.

The NESP Assessment Panel will be chaired by the First Assistant Secretary of the Science Division, and will be supported by six sub-panels(one for each of the hub research themes) that assist it in carrying out its duties. The Assessment Panel will also comprise the chairs of each sub-panel and six independent expert members (external to the portfolio) who have an up-to-date understanding of research relevant to the programme and who are not involved in hub applications.

Each sub-panel will be chaired by a Portfolio Senior Executive officer. Other members of each sub-panel will be:

  • representatives from Departmental lineareas relevant to the hub research theme
  • one of the independent expert members from the Assessment Panel
  • a staff member from Science Partnerships (who will also provide logistical support)
  • possibly APS employees external to the Department.

It is expected that some Senior Executive officer panel members will also represent the portfolio on individual hub steering committees at the completion of the competitive phase.