COOPERATIVE RESEARCH CENTRES PROGRAM
15thSELECTION ROUND (2012)
RESPONSE TO SELECTION CRITERIA FORM
(new or extension application)
Title of the proposedCRC
The title must include the words ‘Cooperative Research Centre’ or ‘CRC’ (10 words maximum)Application number
Insert the eight digit application number automatically generated by CRC onlineExecutive summary
Describein plain language the major national challenge the CRC will address from an enduser perspective, why it is important, how the CRC will address it, what the benefits will be and the difference made.
The executive summary should be clear and concise, allow the reader to understand what the applicantis proposing to do, how it will be done and why. Convince the reader that what is proposed is not only a good idea but is well thought out, achievable and includes the right team. Leave the reader wanting to explore the rest of your application. Justify why a CRC is needed to address the challenge and why the Commonwealth should invest in the collaboration.
The executive summary must be text only. Do NOT include any diagrams, graphics, images, tables, graphs, footnotes, etc.
Maximum of 500 words.
CRC priority areas
If the applicant has nominated one or more priority areas in their CRC online application the applicant must describe here the fit and contribution of the proposal to the priority area(s) selected.
If the applicant has not nominated a priority area this section should be left blank.
Applicants should describe how the major challenge relates to the priority area(s) and explain how the proposed CRC activities address and produce tangible impacts in the priority area(s). This is required for all nominated priority areas.
This section must be text only. Do NOT include any diagrams, graphics, images, tables, graphs, footnotes, etc.
Maximum of 250 words regardless of the number of priority areas addressed.
1
Response to selection criteria(Maximum 10 A4 pages in total)
Applicants must address the requirements set out in section 6.4 of the CRC program guidelines when addressing the selection criteria. In addition, applicants may wish to consider the questions listed under each criterion below in developing their response to the selection criteria. Applicants should not address these questions individually. They are provided to guide the applicant’s thinking.
Applicants should ensure the response to the selection criteria is coherent, well structured and written in plain English. Please ensure your claims are justified and supported with evidence.
Please delete these notes and the questions below in italics before lodging your application.
Response to selection criterion 1 – Research (approximately five A4 pages)
What research is required? Is the proposed research excellent, innovative and transformational?
Will the research address any of the CRC priority areas? How will this be achieved?
Is the proposed research achievable, particularly within the proposed timeframes?
What is the competitive position of the proposed work, both in Australia and internationally?
To what extent is the research activity already being undertaken by the participants?
What part of the challenge will the research address?
What mechanisms will be put in place to enable collaboration between researchers and endusers?
What is the track record of key researchers? Do they have an international reputation? Is this the best team to undertake the work?
Have you provided sufficient information on the research (without being too simplistic or overly technical)?
Is the proposed research structured as a number of high level research programs?
How do the research programs relate to each other and what are the dependencies?
Are the research programs cohesive and relevant to the major challenge?
Have you adequately described the complementary education and training and SME engagement activities?
What are the key risks and how will risk be managed?
Extension applications
If applying for an extension of funding, have you identified what research is new and justified the continuation of any previous activities?
Response to selection criterion 2 – Results (approximately three A4 pages)
What will success look like?
Will the CRC deliver substantial economic, environmental and/or social benefits to Australia that are highly relevant to endusers?
What endusers will utilise the research outputs? What strategies will be put in place to assist utilisation of research outputs by endusers, including SMEs?
What is the proposed utilisation strategy and path to market? Is it clearly defined?
What strategies will the CRC put in place to manage IP? What degree of control will the CRC have over the protection and exploitation of IP?Why are these strategies appropriate? How will the proposed IP arrangements maximise the benefits to Australia, the CRC and participants?
Can you describe your value chain? Where in the value chain are you trying to intervene? What impact will this have?
What is the CRC’s SME engagement strategy?
What is the time frame for delivery of the expected benefits? Is this reasonable?
What do you intend to do at the end of the Commonwealth’s funding of the CRC? Is there a transition plan following the end of the proposed funding period?
What is the scale (quantity and value) of the expected benefits? Is the estimate robust and justified?
What education and training activities will be developed to support utilisation of research outcomes?
What are the key risks and how will risk be managed?
Extension applications
If applying for an extension of funding, have you provided information on the CRC’s achievements to date and justified why additional funding is required?
Response to selection criterion 3 – Resources (approximately two A4 pages)
Why is a collaborative effortrequired to address the major challenge? Why are other structures not appropriate?
What will be the governance arrangements of the CRC? Why are they appropriate? Have participants agreed to the governance arrangements?
How will the CRC be structured? Why is this structure the most appropriate?
Who is the interim chair of the board? How will membership of the board be determined?
Who is the interim CEO? Does the CEO have the required skill set to manage the CRC? If successful, how will the CEO be appointed?
Is the leadership team of high quality? Why is this the right team to address the challenge? What do they bring and what is their capability and experience?
Why should the Commonwealth invest in this CRC? Why can’t the consortium raise the capital to address the major challenge?
Have you justified the level of CRC program funding requested? Is the level of funding justified in relation to the expected benefits, the return on investment, and participant contributions?
Are the participants relevant to the collaboration? Are all key organisations involved in the CRC? If not, why not?
How has the CRC decided which participants are essential? Has the CRC considered how important each participant is to achieving either the research outputs or utilisation?
Are there other groups addressing the major challenge? If so, why are they not a part of the CRC?
Are the resources, including the cash and in-kind mix, adequate to undertake the proposed activities and to deliver the proposed benefits?
Are sources of in-kind and other firm cash clearly explained and justified?
What conditions are attached to tied cash contributions?
Is all the untied cash at the disposal of the CRC for use in any project?
If there are any low staff in-kind (FTE) contributions, what do they add to the CRC?
What are the key risks and how will risk be managed?
What will happen if the CRC is not funded?
References(Delete if not used)
If required, a maximum of onepage is permitted for references.
You should provide a list of anyreferences cited in theexecutive summary and the response to selection criteria in standard journal format.
1