Q. Can we make a power point presentation at the interview with the Advisory Board? Is the interview going to be one hour or is this flexible?
A. The HEEF Advisory Board's interviews with institutions are strictly limited to one hour. The interviews are intended to allow the Board to ask questions about the proposal and clarify any information received as part of the institution's EoI or application. If considered necessary, institutions may make a short presentation of no longer than ten minutes. Note that power point facilities will not be available.
Q. Our institution will be committing funds received from the Commonwealth Capital Development Pool and the Commonwealth Better Universities Renewal Fund. Do these need to be shown in Part 2 under "Details of other organisations that will contribute resources to the project? If so, are they shown under Organisation Type "Other"? Are these funds shown part 2 under "Funding Summary" as part of the "Institution cash contribution" or under "Co-investor cash contribution"?
A. The Advisory Board requires information on the source and intended use of all funds for HEEF projects. As long as this information is provided clearly and is easily identifiable, we do not intend to prescribe how institutions should complete the application form.
Q. Is it a requirement that state/territory government feedback on proposals be provided by institutions as an attachment to their applications?
A. No, this advice is for states/territories to provide to the Advisory Board directly. But see answer to following question.
Q. Are you expecting any state/territory co-funding commitments to be attached to institutions' final HEEF applications, or will this confirmation be sought following final selection?
A. Institutions have been asked to provide letters of commitment from co-investors as part of their applications. Therefore if a state/territory government is a confirmed co-investor, an institution will require a letter of 'commitment' explaining the nature and status of the co-investment from the government for inclusion in its application.
If state/territory governments wish to make any additional comments about the nature or status of a possible co-investment, they may do as part of the advice they will provide to the Advisory Board directly.
Q. If there is no state/territory government funding available and the shortfall cannot be met by the institution, can you confirm you will be expecting a revised final application which reflects either a down-scaled proposal or an increased amount from HEEF?
A. As stated in Section 4.3 of the HEEF Application and Assessment Procedures for the 2009 Funding Round, where cost estimates provided at the EoI and Application stage vary significantly an explanation must be provided.
Q. Part Five of the Implementation Plan requires the inclusion of significant assets (greater than $50,000) to be built or acquired during the funding period. Does this relate to items to be purchased as part of the project fund or does it include additional assets that will acquired for the operation of the project from other sources?
A. All significant assets which will contribute to achievement of the capabilities of and outcomes for a proposed initiative should be included. This may include enabling technology and other items in addition to buildings and fixtures. The acquisition/building of all significant assets, and whether it is proposed that they will be funded by the Australian Government or from other sources, should be addressed in both the implementation plan and the financial plan.
Q. Can you please advise how cash flows will be paid to the university? For example, will it be in payments throughout the year and tied to milestones? Or will be provided at the start of each financial year for expenditure to be incurred that year?
A. Payment arrangements will be negotiated with successful institutions as part of funding agreement negotiations. A draft funding agreement is on the website for your information.
Q. In Part Three, Strategic Assessment, of the Stage 2 Application Form, applicants are invited to provide up to two referee reports. Are referee reports mandatory at the point of submission? Given the reduced preparation time can these reports be provided prior to interviews with the HEEF Advisory Board?
A. To ensure that applicant universities have sufficient time to obtain referee reports, these may be provided up until the time of the interview with the HEEF Advisory Board. However, this applies only to referee reports. All other components of the application must be lodged by the deadline of 5pm AEDT Wednesday 5 November 2008. Regards
Q. Pg 9 of the procedures states "The financial plan must set out the projected revenue, operating costs and capital costs for the project as a whole, and for each major component of the project, on a year by year basis". Can you please clarify what is meant by "projected revenue"? I am assuming this refers to financial contributions from HEEF, the institution and other co-contributors to the project, for the establishment of the facility. I am assuming it does not refer to income the facility may (or may not) generate once operational.
A. To paraphrase section 4.3(d) of the procedures, the application needs to demonstrate that the project is fully costed and funded during the construction phase and fully costed and financially viable post construction. Tables 1, 2 and 3, combined with additional information you provide in the financial plan, need to demonstrate this.
In this context, during the construction phase, projected revenue would include the institution's contribution, HEEF funding and co-investment(s). Projected revenue may also include income that the facility may generate. For most projects this would seem most likely post construction.
Q. 14 bids have been shortlisted totaling over $700m. Is the total funding pool available for the successful bids (who are selected from stage 2) still $304m?
A. There is $304 million available for new research facilities or capital expenditure in Australia's universities through the 2009 HEEF funding round.
Q. The Addendum to Table 3 of the Stage 2 application form states that we are not required to attach drawings, project plans etc. Whilst not required to do so, are we able to attach such documentation if we choose to do so?
A. As stated in the Addendum to Table 3, attachment of planning and building information, including plans, is not required.
Under section 4.2 of the HEEF Application and Assessment Procedures for the 2009 Funding Round, "the Advisory Board may seek supplementary information from applicants. Supplementary information is information which, in the opinion of the Advisory Board, elaborates or clarifies the formal application but which, in the opinion of the Advisory Board, does not alter it in any material aspect."
At its discretion, the Advisory Board may, therefore, request drawings and project plans etc. from institutions at a later stage to elaborate or clarify the formal application.
Q. In relation to the Stage 2 HEEF applications, can you please advise if there is any page limit relating to:
· Part 5 - Implementation Plan
· Part 6 - Risk Management Plan
· Part 7 - Financial Plan (including Attachments C and D)?
A. There is no page limit or prescribed format relating to Parts 5, 6 and 7 and to Attachments C and D.
Q. Under Part Three of the Stage 2 application form, we are invited to submit two references as Attachment B. Under the EoI we were asked (Section 5) to give names of two referees. Do we assume that these have been contacted already by the HEEF panel as part of the EoI consideration and get references from two others, or do we assume those nominated at the EoI stage have not been contacted and that the Stage 2 references can be from those two already nominated (or indeed that we have the flexibility to get any two we would like)?
A. It was not necessary to contact referees nominated in EoIs. You may obtain references from any two people regardless of whether you nominated them at the EoI stage or not.
Q. In Part Two of the Stage 2 application form, you want details of 'other organisations that will contribute resources to this proposal' and letters of commitment. Are these organisations the 'co-investors' as detailed in our EoI? If we have two major 'co-investors' that will provide cash for the new facility, is it them? Will this have to 'reconcile' with the funding summary Table 2? We will also have multiple organisations over time providing cash and staff to work in the new facility--do you want letters from them?
A. You should provide letters of commitment from both co-investors making a cash contribution to the capital facility and organisations which have been included as significant contributors to the establishment and/or operation of the facility.
Those letters should confirm the nature and status (whether firm and unconditional or otherwise) of the commitment.
Q. Who should letters of commitment and letters from referees be addressed to?
A. Letters of commitment and letters from referees should be addressed to:
Mr Philip Marcus Clark AM
Chair HEEF Advisory Board
Infrastructure and Endowment Branch
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
PO Box 9880
CANBERRA ACT 2601.
Q. Can we attach drawings/building/floor plans as part of the application?
A. As stated in the Addendum to Table 3 on page 10 of the Stage 2 application form, attachment of planning and building information, including plans, is not required.
Q. Do the Risk Management and Implementation Plan have to be in Word format only (ie. could a Gantt chart be included)? Is there a limit on the length?
A. A Gantt chart may be included but should be provided in a format which does not require Microsoft Project or any other specialised application to be opened and read. There is no limit on the length of responses to Parts Five, Six and Seven of the application.
Q. What is the expectation for the number of staff that should attend Stage 2 interviews?
A. In his letter of 22 October 2008 to successful proponents, the Chair of the HEEF Advisory Board wrote that "the Board is interested to speak to people within your institution who will be responsible for managing the project and who will use the new facilities, such as academics, researchers and students, should the HEEF bid be successful". Institutions should exercise discretion on the numbers appropriate to satisfying the Board's expectation.
Q. Are there templates for Attachments A to D of the Stage 2 application form?
A. In view of the accelerated timeframe for Stage 2 of the HEEF funding round, the application form has been revised to remove template requirements for attachments A to D to the form. This will allow applicants flexibility in the way in which they provide information.
Q. Page 2 point 5 of the Stage 2 Application form states "Indicate clearly in the application where cost estimates are indicative or actual." All cost estimates are indicative to a certain extent. What is the distinction between the two terms?
A. Actual costs may be those obtained from a source such as a quantity surveyor or project manager. Indicative costs may be those where no professional advice has yet been sought. This is in recognition of the fact that some proposals are at a more advanced stage of planning than others. If your cost includes a contingency reserve, that should be specified as a line item.
Q: Should applications be submitted in Word or PDF format?
A: Expressions of interest will be accepted in Word or PDF format. DEEWR would prefer not to receive scanned copies of expressions of interest, but no expression of interest will be rejected if this format is used.
Q: Is there a time cap on the period of time successful applicants can run the project/activities?
As stated in Section 2.6 of the Application and Assessment Procedures for the 2009 Funding Round ("the Procedures"), it is generally expected that each project approved in 2009 will be completed within five years of contract approval, unless otherwise specified.
Further as part of the application stage, as noted in Section 4.3 of the Procedures, “the financial plan must demonstrate that the proposal will be absorbed into the ongoing fabric and financial management of the eligible higher education institution at completion. It should not include an expectation of further HEEF or EIF funding."
Q: How should institutions address Investment Principle 2? Should the strategic relevance of the project be linked to relevance with industry or organisational needs/wants, or at a higher level should it be aligned with the organisation’s strategic direction and strategic priorities?
The Investment Principles underpinning Higher Education Endowment Fund investments are detailed in Section 1.5 of the Higher Education Endowment Fund Application and Assessment Procedures for the 2009 Funding Round. Investment Principle 2, Strategic Relevance, is described as follows:
Investments should show a strong alignment with the proposing higher education institution's (or institutions') strategic goals and missions.
Accordingly, responses to Principle 2 should focus on how the proposal is aligned with the institution’s/institution’s strategic goals and missions.
However, institutions should not regard this advice as discouragement from also addressing industry needs/wants in the EoI where they are reflected in the university's strategic directions.
Q: To whom should I address the cover letter for my HEEF proposal?
Expressions of interest must be submitted by email to heef_applications@deewr.gov.au by 5pm Thursday 14 August 2008. All information that is material to the expression of interest should be included in the application. Covering letters for expressions of interest are not required.
Q: How will the Field of Research codes on page 2 of the expression of interest be used? Should they be selective or should they be comprehensive?
The 4-digit Field of Research codes will assist the Advisory Board in identifying relevant experts, should the Advisory Board decide that expert advice is required for any expression of interest. As such, only those codes directly relevant to the primary research fields of the proposal should be listed.
Q: In Section 5 (Other information) of the expression of interest form, the box labeled ‘Requirement for HEEF Funding’ asks us to “Please state why other Australian Government funding sources are not appropriate for this proposal.” Can you please give some indication of how we should respond to this requirement?
Reasons why other Australian Government funding sources are not appropriate will depend on the nature and scale of each proposal and possibly other factors. As such, there is no single appropriate response. It is a matter of judgement for your institution whether the factor you identify is the only consideration in your case and the extent to which you wish to elaborate upon this in your expression of interest.
Q: Can we have an extension to submit an expression of interest?
We are unable to grant an extension. Any expression of interest received after 5pm AEST on 14 August 2009 will be a late application. As stated in Section 3.3 of the Application and Assessment Procedures for the 2009 Funding Round (which are a legal instrument), late expressions of interest will not be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances are considered to be beyond the control of the eligible higher education institution, which includes where an expression of interest is late solely due to mishandling by DEEWR. The responsible Ministers will make the final decision regarding claims of exceptional circumstances for any late expressions of interest.
Q: Section 2.6 of the Procedures states that each project approved in 2009 should be completed within 5 years of contract approval. Can we submit a proposal which would be completed within 5 years from commencement, but which would run over more than 5 calendar years?
A: Proposals should be completed within 5 years (60 months) from contact approval. A proposal which takes place across more than 5 calendar years but which is completed within the 5 year timeframe is in accordance with Section 2.6.
Q: Section 4.3 of the Procedures refers to Attachment C. Where is Attachment C?
The reference to Attachment C is one which we failed to update in the preparation of the Procedures. It should be a reference to the form for the Application Stage. A proposed copy of the application form has been provided under the Funding Round page of the HEEF website to assist institutions with preparing their EoIs, and to give an example of the required detail in the application stage.
The proposed template letter for formalising the commitment of a co-investment is Attachment 2A on the application form.
Q: Can you please advise if operational funds - the ongoing costs associated with teaching and research - can be considered as institutional contributions in the expression of interest financial details?
A: When providing information on institutional contributions, you should distinguish between investment in the capital facility itself and funding committed for the on-going costs of operation of the facility. The Advisory Board will be interested to receive information on both the institution's capital contribution and its on-going funding commitment for activities utilising the facility, including identification of new and additional recurrent funding to support the proposal.
Q: Is it correct that HEEF funds are for capital expenditure or construction of research facilities, and thus cannot be used to fund in any way staff for the new building/facility?
A: The Chair of the HEEF Advisory Board writes in his foreword to the Procedures that:
"I have made it clear during our consultations that the Advisory Board intends to widely interpret 'co-investment', 'collaboration', and 'capital expenditure and research facilities'."
Institutions should make their own judgements about those costs which are reasonably included in proposals.
It would be up to an institution to argue for the inclusion of some staff costs for the funding period; eg. technicians necessary to maintain a piece of research equipment.
Q: Is the role of the experts nominated by institutions under Section 5 of the Expression of Interest form different to the role of experts nominated by the Expert Panel?
A: The role of the experts nominated by the institution would be no different to that of the experts nominated by the Expert Panel.
Q: Can you please clarify what 'research facilities' includes? i.e. would supporting infrastructure such as telecommunications systems, computers, and maintenance costs be eligible? Also, would co-investment have to also be capital investment in a facility, or could investment in research projects, fellowships, alliances/networks and/or operational costs to support a facility seeking HEEF funding be considered eligible as 'co-investment'?
A: As stated in the Chair’s foreword to the Procedures, the Advisory Board intends to widely interpret ‘co-investment’, ‘collaboration’, and ‘capital expenditure and research facilities’. The onus is on institutions to demonstrate to the Advisory Board how their proposals align with the principles outlined in the Procedures, and the extent to which the proposed investments will advance the development of a world class Australian higher education sector.
Q: Principle 7 states that institutions will demonstrate financial viability. Does this mean that the funded infrastructure/facility must have a revenue stream (i.e. income from commercialisation of research) or simply that the applicant must demonstrate how the ongoing costs of the funded infrastructure/facility would be met (and that this could be from general university operating revenue)?
A: Section 4.3(d) of the Procedures establish the Advisory Board's expectation that successful proposals will be absorbed into the ongoing fabric and financial management of the eligible higher education institution at completion. There is no requirement that ongoing funding come from a particular source. It is a matter of discretion for proponents as to how they best describe how their project will satisfy principle 7.
Q: Section 2 of the Expression of Interest form has a table for cash flow estimates where the estimates need to be filled out for the following categories: total, Australian Government, Institution and Co-Investment. What is meant by “institution” and “co-investment”?
A: "Institution" seeks year-by-year information on the contribution by the institution submitting the EoI. "Co-investment" seeks information on the contributions by other parties.
Q: Are detailed financial summaries, such as a summary of income and expenditure for years 1-5 required for the EoI, or simply the statement of costs on page 1?
A: The EoI form requires an estimate of costs (page 1), a five year cash-flow summary for the project which identifies funding sources (page 2) and a written response to Principle 7 (page 14).
Q: Does Principle 7 require a financial summary to 'demonstrate financial viability'?
A: It is a matter of discretion for proponents as to how they best describe, within a one page limit, how their project will satisfy Principle 7.
Q: Can institutions discuss their projects with the Advisory Board, DEEWR or DIISR ahead of EoIs being submitted?
A: No. HEEF Advisory Board members and staff of the DEEWR Infrastructure and Endowment Branch, which is providing administrative support to the Advisory Board, will not be discussing proposals with proponents in the lead up to submission of EoIs.
Q: Are there any protocols in place to facilitate communication about the funding round?
A: As noted on the HEEF website, institutions are invited to submit any questions via email. The website also states that "the department and the Advisory Board will not be answering questions verbally nor those sent to any other email address."
Communications protocols for the assessment process itself are outlined in the Procedures.
Q: Will the history of applications which may have been considered under different funding programs in the past be taken into account?
A: In making recommendations to the Ministers on proposals to be funded, the Advisory Board will assess proposals against the investment principles set out in the Procedures.
Relevant background and contextual information will be provided to the Advisory Board by this department and the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (see section 3.2 of the Procedures) and may be sourced from other Australian Government agencies.
However, to reiterate, in making a recommendation to the Ministers, the Advisory Board must consider the merits of the proposal as assessed against the investment principles.
Q: What supplementary materials, such as concept drawings or multi-media, can institutions submit with applications?
A: None.
The statement in paragraph 3 of the Advice for institutions submitting an Expression of Interest (EoI) that "all information which you wish to convey must be stated in the responses" precludes inclusion of supplementary material.
Q: Is there a restriction on the number of EoIs that an institution can be involved with in a collaborative capacity?
A: No, there is no restriction on the number of EoIs that an institution can be involved with in a collaborative (i.e. not in a leading) capacity. Each eligible institution can be the lead, and therefore, submitting institution, on no more than two EoIs.
Q: In the instructions, there is a statement that the Advisory Board may recommend grants outside the $10m - $100m limits. Should applications be to a maximum of $100m or can applications be more than $100m?
A: Applications for more than $100 million will be considered by the Advisory Board for recommendation to the Ministers.
However, section 2.4 of the Procedures make clear that, as a general rule, grants will be for no more than $100 million. Based on the information in section 2.4, institutions will need to make their own judgement on whether or not to submit an application for funding in excess of that amount.
Q: Is it appropriate for institutions to submit EoIs based on capital investment in IT infrastructure?
A: Section 1.5 of the Procedures state that the HEEF Advisory Board will identify strategically-focused investments that can be recommended to the Ministers. 'Investment' refers to projects which comprise capital expenditure and/or research facilities. As such, the Procedures do not preclude capital investment in IT infrastructure and proposals of this nature will be considered.
Q: In Section 5 of the Expression of Interest Form there is an opportunity to provide the contact details of two experts. What will be the role of these experts?
The Procedures (section 3.2) provide that, where relevant, the Advisory Board may seek advice to inform its recommendations from, among others, the HEEF Expert Panel.
The role of the Expert Panel is set out in section 2.3(c) of the Procedures. The Expert Panel will itself provide advice from a discipline perspective or will identify other suitable discipline experts to provide advice.
Where it is necessary for the Expert Panel to identify experts to provide advice from a discipline perspective, it will consider those experts nominated by a proponent institution.
Where experts are used, they will perform this role under contract to DEEWR who will actively manage conflict of interest and confidentiality matters.
Q: What supplementary materials can we submit with our EoIs? For example, concept drawings, multimedia?
A. None.
The statement in paragraph 3 of the 'Advice for institutions submitting an Expression of Interest (EoI)' that 'all information which you wish to convey must be stated in the responses' precludes inclusion of supplementary material.
Q: In the EoI do you require any detailed financial summaries? That is possibly a Year 1-5 Income and Expenditure summary? Or do we just complete the 'costs' section on page 1. Does Principle 7 require a financial summary to 'demonstrate financial viability'?
A. The EoI form requires an estimate of costs (page 1), a five year cash-flow summary for the project which identifies where funding will be sourced from (page 2) and a written response to principle 7 (page 14). It is a matter of discretion for proponents as to how they best describe, within a one page limit, how their project will satisfy principle 7.
Q: How will our draft Assessment of Strategic Focus which we provide as part of the IAF Information Collection be used in the EoI assessment process?
A: The Procedures oblige DEEWR to provide relevant background and contextual information to the Advisory Board. The draft Assessment will provide an up-to-date overview of an institution's broad strategic direction in the institution's own words, rather than those of DEEWR. As such, it is intended that DEEWR will provide to the Advisory Board those parts of the draft Assessment which will inform the Board's consideration of a proposal in relation to the investment principles (particularly Investment Principle 2 - strategic relevance).
Q: On page 1 of the EoI template "Estimated start year" is repeated twice. Is this an error?
A: The first 'Estimated start year' seeks the year in which the proposed project would commence (eg. commencement of the construction of a new building). The second 'Estimated start year' seeks the year in which the facility becomes operational (eg. teaching commences in a new building).
Q: If a multi-year project is successful for HEEF funding, are the HEEF funds paid upfront as a lump sum?
A: As noted in section 5.2 of the Procedures, "The grant will be paid by progressive instalments which will be linked to project stages and outlines in the funding agreement."
Q: For a multi-year project which is funded through a number of bodies (ie. HEEF, the institution, other project partners etc) is it possible to ask for HEEF to fund works undertaken in Year 1, with the other project partners funding the works in subsequent years?
A: The Procedures do not preclude proposals seeking the first stages of capital works to be funded by the Australian Government, with latter stages to be funded by other project partners.
Any determination on how funds might flow from the Commonwealth to eligible institutions would be resolved at the contract negotiation stage.
Q: Are we required to rank or prioritise our EoIs?
A: The Procedures do not require you to rank or prioritise expressions of interest.
Q: What costs should be included in ‘co-investment’?
A: Investment Principle 4 makes reference to 'internal' and 'external' co-investment. The former term refers to the investment made by the proposing institution. The latter term refers to co-investment by other parties.
Consistent with section 4.3(d) of the Procedures, co-investment may be either cash or in-kind. This section goes on to state that ‘The financial plan must be fully costed, that is, it must take into account direct and indirect costs which must be met to ensure the project will operate effectively.’ It is for institutions to determine what costs they need to include and as such what would constitute their co-investment.
Q: Can an institution receive HEEF funding for a facility which will be built on land owned by third party and will have ownerships transferred to the third party once completed although the institution retains rights to use the building for an extended period of time?
A: The Procedures do not preclude funding for a project under this scenario.
The draft funding agreement referred to in section 5.2 of the Procedures contains a standard “Assets” clause, which may not be compatible with the proposed arrangements. However, this does not preclude the proposal from being submitted, ie. the Assets clause is to be regarded as negotiable; nevertheless, the proposal should clearly describe the relevant assets, their ownership and relevant rights to use them.