Page 1639 - Week 05 - Thursday, 2 June 2022

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

d. was the program accounted for as an expense on behalf of the Territory (“administered” within the meaning of Australian accounting standard AASB 1050)?

No, the payment was paid from Controlled Recurrent Payment funding.

e. how many applications were received for grants under the program in
(i) 2016-17, (ii) 2017-18, (iii) 2018-19, (iv) 2019-20, (v) 2020-21, and
(vi) 2021-22?

2018-19	Ten applications received	Three successful applicants
2019-20	Fourteen applications received	Six successful applicants
All other years	N/A	N/A

f. who decided, approved or rejected applications for grants?

A cross-government evaluation panel made recommendations to the Delegate, the Director General, Environment Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate (EPSDD).

g. what percentage of applicants were approved in (i) 2016-17, (ii) 2017-18, (iii) 2018-19, (iv) 2019-20, (v) 2020-21, and (vi) 2021-22?

2018-2019	30 per cent
2019-2020	43 per cent
All other years	N/A

h. what percentage of applicants were rejected in (i) 2016-17, (ii) 2017-18,
(iii) 2018-19, (iv) 2019-20, (v) 2020-21, and (vi) 2021-22?

2018-2019	70 per cent
2019-2020	57 per cent
All other years	N/A

i. what criteria, policies, guidelines applied to the program?

A copy of the program guidelines for the fund is publicly available on the EPSDD website: https://www.planning.act.gov.au/urban-renewal/affordable-housing/innovation-fund/affordable-housing-innovation-fund-guidelines.

(3) For each grant program referred to in part (1), but excluding non-competitive grant programs that provide generalised financial assistance to individuals or businesses,

a. who received a grant in (i) 2016-17, (ii) 2017-18, (iii) 2018-19, (iv) 2019-20, (v) 2020-21, and (vi) 2021-22?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video