Criteria for Proposals for Science-led Contestable Funding
1. Notice to the Science Board—(1) In this notice, I:
2. General policy objective—(1) The general policy objective of science-led contestable funding is to fund research, science, or technology, or related activities that have the potential to:
3. Vision Mātauranga policy—(1) The Vision Mātauranga policy aims to unlock the science and innovation potential of Māori knowledge, resources and people for the benefit of New Zealand. It focuses on four themes:
4. Science Board to make decisions on proposals for science-led contestable funding—(1) The Science Board will make funding decisions on proposals for science-led contestable funding.
(2) In making funding decisions on proposals for science-led contestable funding, the Science Board may allocate funds from the following research funds:
(3) The Science Board must make funding decisions on proposals for science-led contestable funding in accordance with:
5. General eligibility criteria for science-led contestable funding proposals—(1) For a proposal to be assessed against the criteria in clause 6, the proposal must:
(2) For the purposes of clause 5.1(a), “research organisation” means an organisation that has internal capability for carrying out research, science or technology, or related activities.
6. Assessment criteria for science-led contestable funding proposals—(1) A proposal that has been assessed as eligible for science-led contestable funding under clause 5 must be assessed having regard to the following criteria:
i. | is likely to best achieve the objectives referred to in clause 6(b)–(d); and |
ii. | will ensure that funding is not concurrently provided in respect of any two or more programmes of research, science, or technology, or related activities that are the same or substantially similar (whether those programmes are part of a new proposal or are already being funded); and |
iii. | will minimise the risk that an applicant will not be able to undertake the relevant programme of research, science, or technology, or related activities because the applicant, or any person involved in delivering the programme, would concurrently be committed to one or more other programmes (whether those programmes are part of a new proposal or are already being funded). |
7. Revocation of previous notices—I hereby revoke the notice entitled “Criteria for Proposals for Science-led Contestable Funding and Funding for Smart Ideas in the 2014 Science Investment Round” published in the Supplement to the New Zealand Gazette, 8 November 2013, No. 148, page 4063.
Dated at Wellington this 28th day of October 2014.
Hon STEVEN JOYCE, Minister of Science and Innovation.
1. Specific policy objectives—(1) Smart Ideas is designed to drive innovation and an entrepreneurial culture in the research community. Smart Ideas supports novel ideas and emerging capability in research, science, or technology, or related activities, which refresh the national science portfolio.
(2) Smart Ideas is intended to:
(3) Subject to clause 2.2, Smart Ideas funding is available in two phases: a research phase (“Phase 1”) and an application phase (“Phase 2”). The objectives of each phase are as follows:
2. Specific eligibility criteria—(1) To be eligible for funding under the Smart Ideas investment mechanism in either Phase 1 or Phase 2, the applicant must have committed to:
(2) A proposal is eligible for Smart Ideas funding in Phase 2 only if the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities directly build on the research programme that received Smart Ideas funding in Phase 1.
3. Specific assessment criteria—(1) A proposal for Smart Ideas funding that has been assessed as meeting the eligibility criteria for science-led contestable funding must be assessed against the following specific assessment criteria, and each assessment criterion must be weighted as set out below:
Specific Assessment Criteria for Smart Ideas Phase 1 Funding
Benefits to New Zealand |
Risk Management or Success Factors |
Outcome benefits to New Zealand Key Question: To what extent could the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities create benefits for New Zealand? |
Implementation pathway** Key Question: To what extent does the proposal outline a plan to develop the idea to take it to market*? |
Weighting 10% |
Weighting 10% |
Benefits to New Zealand of research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Questions: How novel* is the idea*? What is the quality of the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities? |
Ability to deliver results (outputs) from research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Question: What is the likelihood that the proposed outputs of the research, science, or technology, or related activities will be achieved? |
Weighting 55% |
Weighting 25% |
*See clauses 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 of this schedule for information about what constitutes novelty, market and idea for the purpose of this Schedule.
**Securing co-funding, commercial partners or other commercial arrangements is not a requirement for this phase.
Benefits to New Zealand |
Risk Management or Success Factors |
Outcome benefits to New Zealand Key Question: To what extent could the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities create benefits for New Zealand? |
Implementation pathway Key Question: To what extent does the proposal outline a plan to take the idea to market*? |
Weighting 25% |
Weighting 25% |
Benefits to New Zealand of research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Questions: How novel* is the idea*? What is the quality of the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities? |
Ability to deliver results (outputs) from research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Question: What is the likelihood that the proposed outputs of the research, science, or technology, or related activities will be achieved? |
Weighting 30% |
Weighting 20% |
*See clauses 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 of this schedule for information about what constitutes novelty, a market and an idea for the purpose of this Schedule.
4. Other assessment criteria—(1) For the purposes of this notice, an “idea” is a scientific or technological hypothesis, or an approach, or a process, or a product or service in which the idea is embodied. An idea being proposed must be based on sound scientific or technological principles, and this must be substantiated in the proposal put forward.
(2) When considering the novelty of ideas under this schedule, the Science Board must consider:
(3) When considering the Implementation pathway assessment criterion for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 Smart Ideas, the Science Board should apply the term “market” in the appropriate context for each research fund. For example, for research benefitting the public sector, there may only be a single or few, rather than many users making up the “market”.
(4) For each proposal the Science Board may allocate no more than $500,000.00 (excluding GST) per year for up to two years.
Enabling Technologies Investment Mechanism
1. Specific policy objectives—(1) Enabling Technologies is designed to:
i. | purpose-driven and aligned with national priorities that generate economic, environmental or social benefits for New Zealand; and |
ii. | likely to involve knowledge-transfer and co-ordination between participants linked to the proposed activities; |
(2) For the purposes of this schedule, a “technology platform” is a critical mass of capabilities and equipment that is responsive to industry needs and that provides the means to enhance the performance and capabilities of the users.
2. Specific assessment criteria—A proposal for Enabling Technologies funding that has been assessed as meeting the eligibility criteria for science-led contestable funding must be assessed against the following specific assessment criteria, which are all weighted equally:
Benefits to New Zealand |
Risk Management or Success Factors |
Outcome benefits to New Zealand Key Questions: To what extent would the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities create benefits for New Zealand? To what extent are there multiple opportunities arising from the technology platform? |
Implementation pathway Key Question: To what extent does the proposal provide for engagement across multiple users and potential or proposed implementation through multiple channels, having regard for the stage of the development of the enabling technology? |
Benefits to New Zealand of research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Questions: What is the quality of the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities? To what extent could the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities develop a platform of underpinning, enabling technologies that have multiple applications and many connections across science and business? To what extent would the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities generate new knowledge? |
Ability to deliver results (outputs) from research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Question: What is the likelihood that the proposed outputs of the research, science, or technology, or related activities will be achieved? |
3. Other assessment criteria—The Science Board may allocate funding under the Enabling Technologies investment mechanism only:
Targeted Research Investment Mechanism
1. Specific policy objectives—(1) Targeted Research is designed to support purpose-driven research, science, or technology, and related activities aligned with national priorities that generate economic, environmental or social benefits for New Zealand. To increase the impact of the national science portfolio, knowledge transfer is an important part of such programmes of research, science, or technology, or related activities.
(2) Targeted Research addresses New Zealand’s strategic needs, challenges and opportunities.
2. Specific assessment criteria—A proposal for Targeted Research funding that has been assessed as meeting the eligibility criteria for Science-led contestable funding must be assessed against the following specific assessment criteria, which are all weighted equally:
Benefits to New Zealand |
Risk Management or Success Factors |
Outcome benefits to New Zealand Key Question: To what extent would the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities create benefits for New Zealand? |
Implementation Pathway Key Question: To what extent does the proposal have a credible pathway to implementation? |
Benefits to New Zealand of research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Questions: What is the quality of the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities? To what extent would the proposed research, science, or technology, or related activities generate new knowledge? |
Ability to deliver results (outputs) of research, science, or technology, or related activities Key Question: What is the likelihood that the proposed outputs of the research, science, or technology, or related activities will be achieved? |