Good Practice: Receive/Process Applications
Good Practice: Receive and Process Applications
- Use the NSW model application form to develop a standard application form for each funding program.
- Restrict information collected to only what is necessary to assess applications against published program criteria.
- Use available technologies for applications lodgement and assessment processes.
- Establish a transparent process with the minimum number of administrative layers for assessment and approval of applications.
- Fully document funding recommendations and decisions.
- Advise successful and unsuccessful grants applicants at the same time and as quickly as possible following Ministerial approval.
Guidelines and Resources
Applications
Applications should follow a standard format to allow for a fair comparison of applicants and an objective assessment of their capabilities and the project feasibility against the grants program criteria.
A model application form is provided which can be used to develop a standard form for different grants programs while maintaining a consistent cross government approach to language and information collected.
Note: The application form, first released in 2004, has been updated consistent with the model templates provided on this site for project planning and monitoring and acquittal processes.
The model application form has three parts:
- Registration designed to obtain details of the applicant organisation, its structure and legal status and contact details. Only the minimum amount of information should be sought to meet accountability requirements.
- Project funding with core questions to collect information against the criteria for community project funding programs.
- Service provider funding with core questions to collect information against criteria for service delivery funding programs.
| Grants Managers: | Grants Applicants: |
|---|---|
|
|
Model process templates can be customised and used according to this basic guide to Using Model Forms.
Assessment Grants programs must have criteria against which applications are assessed. The full criteria should be published when promoting the program and decisions must be made on the basis of the published criteria.
The grants assessment process should be as transparent as possible and have a minimum number of administrative layers. Assessment should include a recommendation stage and a decision making stage. A personal 'statement of conflict of interest' on behalf of any person involved in the assessment of applications should be formally made and recorded.
Wherever possible, processing should utilise the current technologies that are available, such as the Internet.
Adhere to the timetable provided in the published guidelines as circumstances may change with the passage of time for either the applicant or the grant giving agency. Deal with the assessment process promptly to avoid unnecessary uncertainty and provide a written response to both successful and unsuccessful applicants.
Follow this link to a Model Grant Application Assessment Form. Model process templates can be customised and used according to this basic guide to Using Model Forms.
Model assessment process
| Steps | Actions | |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Cull | Initial eligibility cull by grants administration officer completed against the grants program criteria. | |
| 2. Summary | If ineligible to be considered: | Submission to Minister. Letter to applicant with reason signed by CEO or delegate. |
| If eligible: | Grants administration officer develops summary of all applications. | |
| 3. Committee | Establish Grants Advisory Committee. Include representative(s) from another agency, stakeholder groups, and an independent person. Agencies with a regional presence include regional staff. In larger agencies include program staff. | |
| 4. Assessment |
Undertake assessment against criteria.
| |
| 5. Recommendation | Grants Advisory Committee makes recommendation to CEO or delegated officer. Detail the procedures followed and the selection criteria used. | |
| 6. Decision-making |
Minister's or delegated officer's approval based on whether:
| |
| 7. Announcement | Public announcement if required. Written advice to unsuccessful applicants with reasons for lack of success. | |

