Community Information Sessions Questions and Answers
National Landcare Program Phase Two and Regional Land Partnerships
Updated 12 December 2017
Program administration
Q. Why is the government considering changing the funding model?
A. The government is exploring ways to improve the effectiveness of the Australian Government’s investment and to respond to previous feedback, including that received during the Review of the current National Landcare Program published earlier this year (www.nrm.gov.au). Proposed changes include:
o more targeted outcomes that can be clearly monitored;
o encouraging new partnerships; and
o an open and competitive tender.
Q. Is there a limit to administrative costs under the proposed procurement model? Will this be assessed or is it a decision for organisations?
A. 20 per cent has been proposed as an indicative national funding allocation for core services, however, this will be tested through the anticipated competitive assessment process and the Departments would expect administrative costs to be kept relatively low.
Q. 20 per cent has been proposed as an indicative split for core services, how do you avoid cost shifting by states for natural resource management regional bodies that receive statutory support?
A. It is reasonable for the Australian Government to share an appropriate proportion of the cost of core services, as regional service providers will be delivering the National Landcare Program for the Australian Government.
Q. How do the proposed indicative splits compare with the current funding weightings?
A. The proposed indicative splits for the National Landcare Program Phase Two will be much more targeted than the current National Landcare Program which has four broad objectives. Indicative splits for National Landcare Program Phase Two do not compare directly against the current National Landcare Program objectives.
Q. How will the payment structure differ from a grants model?
A. Under the proposed procurement model, payment will be on delivery of services.
Q. Will there be a change to the way funding is administered to States?
A. It is anticipated that successful Tenderers will nominate their preferred payment arrangements (i.e. bank account details), which may include payment through States.
Q. Will the Regional Land Partnerships approach apply in all States and Territories?
A. Yes, it is proposed that Regional Land Partnerships will operate Australia wide.
Q. Is the Government looking for projects of a particular size and length; will there be preferences for projects that deliver against multiple outcomes, target higher threat areas, or leverage other investment?
A. Criteria for the assessment of projects will be outlined in any tender documentation. Value for money and clear connection to the outcomes being sought are expected to be considerations. We expect to select a range of different sized projects to fit into the available budget ($450 million over five years) and the indicative split. The indicative split for each category of services at a national level is as follows:
Category of services / Indicative split (%)Core services / 20
Regional Agriculture Landcare Facilitator Services / 8
Threatened Species Services / 30
Ramsar Services / 10
Threatened Ecological Communities Services / 10
World Heritage Services / 5
Soil, Biodiversity and Vegetation Services / 12
Supporting Agriculture Systems to Adapt to Change Services / 5
Q. Will there be a template for tenderers to use?
A. Yes, we propose to have a tender response form.
Management Units
Q. What is a Management Unit?
A. A Management Unit is the geographical scale at which tenders will be sought in any open approach to market. It is proposed that Management Unit boundaries will match the current Natural Resource Management regional boundaries.
Q. How much funding will each Management Unit receive?
A. It is proposed that there will not be a notional allocation of funding by Management Unit. The level of funding provided will be determined through a competitive process based upon the priorities in each Management Unit and value for money presented.
The Government will be looking to maintain national coverage that is viable for the next five years.
Program Outcomes
Q. Four environment outcomes were tested during consultation. Will they change in light of feedback during consultation?
A. The Government will consider feedback from the consultation process in determining final outcomes, and this will be reflected in any open tender documentation in any approach to market.
There was feedback that activities in relation to threatened ecological communities should not be restricted to private land. In relation to threatened species, there were suggestions to broaden the scope of eligible species beyond those in the Threatened Species Strategy. Questions were also raised regarding:
o Non-Ramsar wetlands
o activities in relation to invasive species outside world heritage sites and;
o cultural heritage.
Q. Are there links between the Smart Farms program and Regional Land Partnerships considering the similar outcomes? Is there going to be links with tenders?
A. The outcomes are similar as they both contribute to the five overarching National Landcare Program Phase Two outcomes. The programs are otherwise separate, each with their own eligibility criteria and assessment processes.
Tenderers are welcome to consider applying for funding under both programs. There is further information on eligibility criteria for Smart Farms available in the guidelines at www.nrm.gov.au.
Agriculture Outcomes
Important note on the agricultural priorities interactive maps
The soil priorities information in the interactive map, available through the Regional Land Partnerships App, was updated on 1 November 2017. We suggest that stakeholders who have previously accessed these maps revisit the maps.
Q. Would improving soil biodiversity be considered an eligible outcome under the proposed soil investment priorities?
A. No, soil biodiversity is not a priority on its own but could be considered if related to other identified soil priorities such as soil acidification, building soil carbon and reducing soil lost by wind and water erosion.
Q. In Outcome 6 for Regional Land Partnerships, what does the reference to market changes mean?
A. Market changes broadly refer to changes in what consumers are interested in and what international markets are looking for. For example, consumers are increasingly interested in where their food and fibre comes from and how it is produced. They want to know that farmers are using land management practices that protect and improve the condition of soils, vegetation and biodiversity on their farms. International markets are also looking for agricultural products with sustainability credentials; the ability to demonstrate good farm management practices and alignment with international obligations will influence how Australian products are received in some markets.
Q. Are the colour scales shown on the soil maps intended to demonstrate the level of risk?
A. Yes. The maps identify the level of risk (high or medium) to soil condition associated with soil priorities of wind erosion, hillslope (water) erosion, soil acidification and soil carbon decline. The soil priorities are also listed for each management unit on the interactive map, available through the Regional Land Partnerships App.
Q. Is the data used to develop the soil investment priorities maps available to potential applicants?
A. The soil maps were developed by CSIRO (acidification, soil carbon, hillslope erosion) and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage/ABARES (wind erosion). The reports associated with the soil maps can be downloaded via the interactive map application on the Regional Land Partnerships App. The high resolution data used to produce the maps will also be available for download soon. We note that there may be other publicly available information not represented on these maps. Reference to this information will be required in your proposal if you are planning to invest in one or more of the soil issues in areas not identified as high or medium priority. This is a requirement in the Request for Tender.
Q. Are ecosystem services included in Outcome 5 for Regional Land Partnerships?
A. Yes. More than half of Australia is used for agriculture. Improving the condition of soils, vegetation and biodiversity on farm will deliver ecosystem services benefits to the broader community. These include more sustainable food and fibre production, regulation of climate, water flows and water quality, improved air quality, pollination and pest management services; and cultural services such as recreation, ecotourism, aesthetic and heritage values.
Q. How do the environment outcomes link to Outcome 6 for Regional Land Partnerships?
A. If there is an environmental aspect to adapting to change, projects should link to outcomes 1-4. Outcomes 6 is specifically about supporting farmers to adapt to climate change and markets. This includes changes in rainfall which is expected to have a major impact on agricultural productivity. Building soil carbon, managing soil acidification and reducing soil and nutrient lost via erosion can help mitigate some of these impacts by increasing the amount of rainfall stored in the soil as well as increasing productivity. Improving pollination and pest management through better vegetation and biodiversity management can also improve productivity from more resilient agricultural systems. Factors such as the traceability, provenance and sustainability credentials (being able to demonstrate good farm management practices) are expected to increasingly influence how agricultural products are received by consumers and many international markets.
Community Engagement
Q. Community engagement has been a focus for the Regional Delivery; is this expected to continue under the next phase of the National Landcare Program?
A. Yes. We have included a number of measures that will encourage community engagement at different levels through the National Landcare Program Phase Two. In the Regional Land Partnership Consultation Paper, it is proposed that tenderers will be expected to have the involvement and support of their communities, and work with Indigenous, community and landcare groups to achieve the outcomes under Regional Land Partnerships.
The departments are also considering that at least 20 per cent of the budget in each Management Unit be used for projects supporting small, onground projects and related activities that are delivered by, or directly engage with the local landcare community.
Under Regional Land Partnerships, Regional Landcare Facilitators will now be referred to as Regional Agriculture Landcare Facilitators. It is also expected that projects with community engagement and participation elements will include required personnel to support these activities. A fact sheet on community engagement is available at www.nrm.gov.au.
Q. How will community engagement be assessed?
A. Criteria for the assessment process is still under development and will be outlined in any tender documentation. It is currently proposed that tenderers will be expected to demonstrate that they have the involvement and support of their communities, and are committed to work with Indigenous, community, industry and landcare groups to achieve the outcomes under Regional Land Partnerships. Evidence could include letters of support and partnership agreements.
Q. What other opportunities are there for communities?
A. There will be a number of ways for community and landcare groups to access funding under the National Landcare Program Phase Two. For example, Smart Farms program funding is available for a range of entities, including communities, to support the adoption of best practice natural resource management. An Environment Small Grants program will also be available for activities that improve the local environment.
Community groups are also able to partner with other entities under Regional Land Partnerships.
A fact sheet on community engagement is available at www.nrm.gov.au.
Q. Will focussing on biophysical outcomes with this funding jeopardise community engagement and social licence?
A. We recognise biophysical outcomes and community engagement are intrinsically linked. It is proposed that tenderers in any open approach to market will have to demonstrate how they will engage communities to deliver the biophysical outcomes. The focus on partnerships is also part of that process.
Indigenous issues
Q. How will service providers demonstrate that they have genuinely engaged Indigenous stakeholders?
A. Criteria for the assessment process will be outlined in any tender documentation. Indigenous engagement will be assessed in any tender process. Evidence could include letters of support and partnership arrangements.
Q. How is the Indigenous Procurement Policy being implemented? Will the policy apply across both core services and project budgets?
A. The Commonwealth Indigenous Procurement Policy will apply to the procurement process.
Further detail will be reflected in any tender documentation in any open approach to market.
Q. You have a Regional Agriculture Landcare Facilitator, why not have an Indigenous Landcare Facilitator?
A. Maintaining Regional Agriculture Landcare Facilitators builds on past investment in Regional Landcare Facilitators under the current National Landcare Program. Their role focuses on supporting landcare and production groups to adopt sustainable farm and land management practices and to protect and improve natural resources on-farm. We expect that projects with community engagement with Indigenous communities will include funding for personnel to support these activities.
Regional Agricultural Landcare Facilitators
Q. Has the role of the Regional Landcare Facilitators (RLFs) changed? If so, how?
A. No. The job title is changing to include the word ‘Agriculture’ to reflect its focus on supporting agriculture. Regional Agriculture Landcare Facilitators (RALFs) are expected to be involved in the delivery of funded projects and core services.
Q. Does the name change of Regional Landcare Facilitators (RLF) to Regional Agriculture Landcare Facilitator (RALF) have any implications for Bushcare and Coastcare?
A. No. The change to include ‘Agriculture’ in the title is about clarifying that the focus of the RALF is about protecting and improving the condition of natural resources on agricultural lands, including coastal and marine environments.
Q. Will RALFs have less autonomy to focus on local community priorities under National Landcare Program phase two than RLFs do under the current program?
A. No. The RALFs are expected to help to deliver national and regional priorities at the local scale.
Q. Will the RALFs be part of the Management Unit core services?
A. RALF services are grouped under the Management Unit core services but will have a separate indicative investment estimate of 8% of the total national Regional Land Partnerships funds. This is separate from the overall core services for the Management Unit (20% of funds).
Q. Will there be a RALF in each region?
A. There is expected to be a designated RALF position/ positions for each Management Unit. This may be more or less than one Full Time Equivalent position depending on the number of sustainable agriculture priorities and projects within the Management Unit. This may be delivered by a few designated people.