A new first-order decision-making model for the procurement of public sector infrastructure: Procedures and Testing

Given global demand for new infrastructure, governments face substantial challenges in funding new infrastructure and delivering Value for Money (VfM). As part of the background to this challenge, a critique is given of current practice in the selection of the approach to procure major public sector infrastructure in Australia and which is akin to the Multi-Attribute Utility Approach (MAUA). To contribute towards addressing the key weaknesses of MAUA, a new first-order procurement decision-making model is presented. The model addresses the make-or-buy decision (risk allocation); the bundling decision (property rights incentives), as well as the exchange relationship decision (relational to arms-length exchange) in its novel approach to articulating a procurement strategy designed to yield superior VfM across the whole life of the asset. The aim of this paper is report on the development of this decisionmaking model in terms of the procedural tasks to be followed and the method being used to test the model. The planned approach to testing the model uses a sample of 87 Australian major infrastructure projects in the sum of AUD32 billion and deploys a key proxy for VfM comprising expressions of interest, as an indicator of competition.

The life course of Australian researchers : experiences of applying for research funding

The life course of Australian researchers includes regular funding applications, which incur large personal and time costs. We previously estimated that Australian researchers spent 550 years preparing 3,727 proposals for the 2012 NHMRC Project Grant funding round, at an estimated annual salary cost of AU$66 million. Despite the worldwide importance of funding rounds, there is little evidence on what researchers think of the application process. We conducted a web-based survey of Australian researchers (May–July 2013) asking about their experience with NHMRC Project Grants. Almost all researchers (n=224 at 31 May) supported changes to the application (96%) and peer-review (88%) processes; 73% supported the introduction of shorter initial Expressions of Interest; and half (50%) provided extensive comments on the NHMRC processes. Researchers agreed preparing their proposals always took top priority over other work (97%) and personal (87%) commitments. More than half (57%) provided extensive comments on the ongoing personal impact of concurrent grant-writing and holiday seasons on family, children and other relationships. Researchers with experience on Grant Review Panels (34%) or as External Reviewers (78%) reported many sections of the proposals were rarely or never read, which suggests these sections could be cut with no impact on the quality of peer review. Our findings provide evidence on the experience of Australian researchers as applicants. The process of preparing, submitting and reviewing proposals could be streamlined to minimise the burden on applicants and peer reviewers, giving Australian researchers more time to work on actual research and be with their families.

Enabling open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data in Malaysian public universities : a legal and policy analysis

Numerous statements and declarations have been made over recent decades in support of open access to research data. The growing recognition of the importance of open access to research data has been accompanied by calls on public research funding agencies and universities to facilitate better access to publicly funded research data so that it can be re-used and redistributed as public goods. International and inter-governmental bodies such as the ICSU/CODATA, the OECD and the European Union are strong supporters of open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data. This thesis focuses on the research data created by university researchers in Malaysian public universities whose research activities are funded by the Federal Government of Malaysia. Malaysia, like many countries, has not yet formulated a policy on open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data. Therefore, the aim of this thesis is to develop a policy to support the objective of enabling open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data in Malaysian public universities. Policy development is very important if the objective of enabling open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data is to be successfully achieved. In developing the policy, this thesis identifies a myriad of legal impediments arising from intellectual property rights, confidentiality, privacy and national security laws, novelty requirements in patent law and lack of a legal duty to ensure data quality. Legal impediments such as these have the effect of restricting, obstructing, hindering or slowing down the objective of enabling open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data. A key focus in the formulation of the policy was the need to resolve the various legal impediments that have been identified. This thesis analyses the existing policies and guidelines of Malaysian public universities to ascertain to what extent the legal impediments have been resolved. An international perspective is adopted by making a comparative analysis of the policies of public research funding agencies and universities in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia to understand how they have dealt with the identified legal impediments. These countries have led the way in introducing policies which support open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data. As well as proposing a policy supporting open access to and re-use of publicly funded research data in Malaysian public universities, this thesis provides procedures for the implementation of the policy and guidelines for addressing the legal impediments to open access and re-use.

The Implications of Activity Based Funding for Emergency Departments : A Comprehensive Literature Review

Executive Summary Emergency Departments (EDs) locally, nationally and internationally are becoming increasingly busy. Within this context, it can be challenging to deliver a health service that is safe, of high quality and cost-effective. Whilst various models are described within the literature that aim to measure ED ‘work’ or ‘activity’, they are often not linked to a measure of costs to provide such activity. It is important for hospital and ED managers to understand and apply this link so that optimal staffing and financial resourcing can be justifiably sought. This research is timely given that Australia has moved towards a national Activity Based Funding (ABF) model for ED activity. ABF is believed to increase transparency of care and fairness (i.e. equal work receives equal pay). ABF involves a person-, performance- or activity-based payment system, and thus a move away from historical “block payment” models that do not incentivise efficiency and quality. The aim of the Statewide Workforce and Activity-Based Funding Modelling Project in Queensland Emergency Departments (SWAMPED) is to identify and describe best practice Emergency Department (ED) workforce models within the current context of ED funding that operates under an ABF model. The study is comprised of five distinct phases. This monograph (Phase 1) comprises a systematic review of the literature that was completed in June 2013. The remaining phases include a detailed survey of Queensland hospital EDs’ resource levels, activity and operational models of care, development of new resource models, development of a user-friendly modelling interface for ED mangers, and production of a final report that identifies policy implications. The anticipated deliverable outcome of this research is the development of an ABF based Emergency Workforce Modelling Tool that will enable ED managers to profile both their workforce and operational models of care. Additionally, the tool will assist with the ability to more accurately inform adequate staffing numbers required in the future, inform planning of expected expenditures and be used for standardisation and benchmarking across similar EDs. Summary of the Findings Within the remit of this review of the literature, the main findings include: 1. EDs are becoming busier and more congested Rising demand, barriers to ED throughput and transitions of care all contribute to ED congestion. In addition requests by organisational managers and the community require continued broadening of the scope of services required of the ED and further increases in demand. As the population live longer with more lifestyle diseases their propensity to require ED care continues to grow. 2. Various models of care within EDs exist Models often vary to account for site specific characteritics to suit staffing profile, ED geographical location (e.g. metropolitan or rural site), and patient demographic profile (e.g. paediatrics, older persons, ethnicity). Existing and new models implemented within EDs often depend on the target outcome requiring change. Generally this is focussed on addressing issues at the input, throughput or output areas of the ED. Even with models targeting similar demographic or illness, the structure and process elements underpinning the model can vary, which can impact on outcomes and variance to the patient and carer experience between and within EDs. Major models of care to manage throughput inefficiencies include: A. Workforce Models of Care focus on the appropriate level of staffing for a given workload to provide prompt, timely and clinically effective patient care within an emergency care setting. The studies reviewed suggest that the early involvement of senior medical decision maker and/or specialised nursing roles such as Emergency Nurse Practitioners and Clinical Initiatives Nurse, primary contact or extended scope Allied Health Practitioners can facilitate patient flow and improve key indicators such as length of stay and reducing the number of those who did not wait to be seen amongst others. B. Operational Models of Care within EDs focus on mechanisms for streaming (e.g. fast-tracking) or otherwise grouping patient care based on acuity and complexity to assist with minimising any throughput inefficiencies. While studies support the positive impact of these models in general, it appears that they are most effective when they are adequately resourced. 3. Various methods of measuring ED activity exist Measuring ED activity requires careful consideration of models of care and staffing profile. Measuring activity requires the ability to account for factors including: patient census, acuity, LOS, intensity of intervention, department skill-mix plus an adjustment for non-patient care time. 4. Gaps in the literature Continued ED growth calls for new and innovative care delivery models that are safe, clinically effective and cost effective. New roles and stand-alone service delivery models are often evaluated in isolation without considering the global and economic impact on staffing profiles. Whilst various models of accounting for and measuring health care activity exist, costing studies and cost effectiveness studies are lacking for EDs making accurate and reliable assessments of care models difficult. There is a necessity to further understand, refine and account for measures of ED complexity that define a workload upon which resources and appropriate staffing determinations can be made into the future. There is also a need for continued monitoring and comprehensive evaluation of newly implemented workforce modelling tools. This research acknowledges those gaps and aims to: • Undertake a comprehensive and integrated whole of department workforce profiling exercise relative to resources in the context of ABF. • Inform workforce requirements based on traditional quantitative markers (e.g. volume and acuity) combined with qualitative elements of ED models of care; • Develop a comprehensive and validated workforce calculation tool that can be used to better inform or at least guide workforce requirements in a more transparent manner.

The impact of funding deadlines on personal workloads, stress and family relationships : a qualitative study of Australian researchers

Objective To examine the impact of applying for funding on personal workloads, stress and family relationships. Design Qualitative study of researchers preparing grant proposals. Setting Web-based survey on applying for the annual National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Project Grant scheme. Participants Australian researchers (n=215). Results Almost all agreed that preparing their proposals always took top priority over other work (97%) and personal (87%) commitments. Almost all researchers agreed that they became stressed by the workload (93%) and restricted their holidays during the grant writing season (88%). Most researchers agreed that they submitted proposals because chance is involved in being successful (75%), due to performance requirements at their institution (60%) and pressure from their colleagues to submit proposals (53%). Almost all researchers supported changes to the current processes to submit proposals (95%) and peer review (90%). Most researchers (59%) provided extensive comments on the impact of writing proposals on their work life and home life. Six major work life themes were: (1) top priority; (2) career development; (3) stress at work; (4) benefits at work; (5) time spent at work and (6) pressure from colleagues. Six major home life themes were: (1) restricting family holidays; (2) time spent on work at home; (3) impact on children; (4) stress at home; (5) impact on family and friends and (6) impact on partner. Additional impacts on the mental health and well-being of researchers were identified. Conclusions The process of preparing grant proposals for a single annual deadline is stressful, time consuming and conflicts with family responsibilities. The timing of the funding cycle could be shifted to minimise applicant burden, give Australian researchers more time to work on actual research and to be with their families.

Funding emergency care : Australian style

The ongoing challenge for ED leaders is to remain abreast of system-wide changes that impact on the day-to-day management of their departments. Changes to the funding model creates another layer of complexity and this introductory paper serves as the beginning of a discussion about the way in which EDs are funded and how this can and will impact on business decisions, models of care and resource allocation within Australian EDs. Furthermore it is evident that any funding model today will mature and change with time, and moves are afoot to refine and contextualise ED funding over the medium term. This perspective seeks to provide a basis of understanding for our current and future funding arrangements in Australian EDs.

The role of interpersonal influence in budget decision making: The Canadian public library experience

This study determined factors which influenced Canadian provincial (state) politicians when making funding decisions for public libraries. Using the case study methodology, Canadian provincial/state-level funding for public libraries in the 2009-2010 fiscal year was examined. The data were analyzed to determine whether Cialdini’s theory of influence and specifically any of the six tactics of influence (i.e., commitment and consistency, authority, liking, social proof, scarcity, and reciprocity) were instrumental in these budgetary decision-making processes. Findings show the principles of “authority,” “consistency and commitment,” and “liking” were relevant, and that “liking” was especially important to these decisions.

Including or excluding conflicts of interest among expert peer reviewers had little impact on funding success, a case study from Australia

Competition for research funding is intense and the opinions of an expert peer reviewer can mean the difference between success and failure in securing funding. The allocation of expert peer reviewers is therefore vitally important and funding agencies strive to avoid using reviewers who have real or perceived conflicts of interest. This article examines the impact of including or excluding peer reviewers based on their conflicts of interest, and the final ranking of funding proposals. Two 7-person review panels assessed a sample of National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia proposals in Basic Science or Public Health. Using a pre-post comparison, the proposals were first scored after the exclusion of reviewers with a high or medium conflict, and re-scored after the return of reviewers with medium conflicts. The main outcome measures are the agreements in ranks and funding success before and after excluding the medium conflicts. Including medium conflicts of interest had little impact on the ranks or funding success. The Bland–Altman 95% limits of agreement were ± 3.3 ranks and ± 3.4 ranks in the two panels which both assessed 36 proposals. Overall there were three proposals (4%) that had a reversed funding outcome after including medium conflicts. Relaxing the conflict of interest rules would increase the number of expert reviewers included in the panel discussions which could increase the quality of peer review and make it easier to find reviewers.

Streamlined research funding using short proposals and accelerated peer review : an observational study

Background Despite the widely recognised importance of sustainable health care systems, health services research remains generally underfunded in Australia. The Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) is funding health services research in the state of Queensland. AusHSI has developed a streamlined protocol for applying and awarding funding using a short proposal and accelerated peer review. Method An observational study of proposals for four health services research funding rounds from May 2012 to November 2013. A short proposal of less than 1,200 words was submitted using a secure web-based portal. The primary outcome measures are: time spent preparing proposals; a simplified scoring of grant proposals (reject, revise or accept for interview) by a scientific review committee; and progressing from submission to funding outcomes within eight weeks. Proposals outside of health services research were deemed ineligible. Results There were 228 eligible proposals across 4 funding rounds: from 29% to 79% were shortlisted and 9% to 32% were accepted for interview. Success rates increased from 6% (in 2012) to 16% (in 2013) of eligible proposals. Applicants were notified of the outcomes within two weeks from the interview; which was a maximum of eight weeks after the submission deadline. Applicants spent 7 days on average preparing their proposal. Applicants with a ranking of reject or revise received written feedback and suggested improvements for their proposals, and resubmissions composed one third of the 2013 rounds. Conclusions The AusHSI funding scheme is a streamlined application process that has simplified the process of allocating health services research funding for both applicants and peer reviewers. The AusHSI process has minimised the time from submission to notification of funding outcomes.

Applying for funding is the worst part of my job

That’s what one researcher told us when we asked them about applying for NHMRC Project Grant funding. Others said that applying for funding had made them ill, lost them friends, ruined Christmas and caused arguments with friends and family. What makes applying for funding so bad? We’ve tried to summarise the problems with the system in the diagram above. This is based on our group’s four years of research into the funding process. Some of the arrows are based on evidence from our surveys (Survey 1, Survey 2), others are based on anecdote or experience and so maybe wrong. Please let me know if I’ve missed an arrow or an issue.

The Fleet Store : devising a public retail exhibition to promote creative, innovative and sustainable business models for emerging fashion designers

1.Description of the Work The Fleet Store was devised as a creative output to establish an exhibition linked to a fashion business model where emerging designers were encouraged to research new and innovative strategies for creating design-driven and commercial collections for a public consumer. This was a project that was devised to break down the perceptions of emerging fashion designers that designing commercial collections linked to a sustainable business model is a boring and unnecessary process. The focus was to demystify the business of fashion and to link its importance to a design-driven and public outcome that is more familiar to fashion designers. The criterion for participation was that all designers had to be registered as a business with the Australian Taxation Office. Designers were chosen from the Creative Enterprise Australia Fashion Business Incubator, the QUT fashion graduate alumni and current QUT fashion design and double degree (fashion and business) students with existing businesses. The project evolved from a series of collaborative workshops where designers were introduced to new and innovative creative industries’ business models and the processes, costings and timings involved to create a niche, sustainable business for a public exhibition of design-driven commercial collections. All designers initiated their own business infra-structure but were then introduced to the concept of collaboration for successful and profitable exhibition and business outcomes. Collaborative strategies such as crowd funding, crowd sourcing, peer to peer mentoring and manufacturing were all researched, and strategies for the establishment of the retail exhibition were all devised in a collaborative environment. All participants also took on roles outside their ‘designer’ background to create a retail exhibition that was creative but also had critical mass and aesthetic for the consumer. The Fleet Store ‘popped up’ for 2 weeks (10 days), in a heritage-listed building in an inner city location. Passers-by were important, but the main consumer was enlisted by the use of interest and investment from crowd sourcing, crowd funding, ethical marketing, corporate social responsibility projects and collaborative public relations and social media strategies. The research has furthered discussion on innovative strategies for emerging fashion designers to initiate and maintain sustainable businesses and suggests that collaboration combined with a design-driven and business focus can create a sustainable and economically viable retail exhibition. 2. Research Statement Research Background The research field involved developing a new ethical, design-driven, collaborative and sustainable model for fashion design practice and management. The research asked can a public, design-driven, collaborative retail exhibition create a platform for promoting creative, innovative and sustainable business models for emerging fashion designers. The methodology was primarily practice-led as all participants were designers in their own right and the project manager acted as a mentor and curator to guide the process and analyse the potential of the research question. The Fleet Store offers new knowledge in design practice and management; with the creation of a model where design outcomes and business models are inextricably linked to the success of the creative output. Key innovations include extending the commercialisation of emerging fashion businesses by creating a curated retail gallery for collaborative and sustainable strategies to support niche fashion designer labels. This has contributed to a broader conversation on how to nurture and sustain competitive Australian fashion designers/labels. Research Contribution and Significance The Fleet Store has contributed to a growing body of research into innovative and sustainable business models for niche fashion and creative industries’ practitioners. All participants have maintained their business infra-structure and many are currently growing their businesses, using the strategies tested for the Fleet Store. The exhibition space was visited by over 1,000 people and sales of $27,000 were made in 10 days of opening. (Follow up sales of $3,000 has also been reported.) Three of the designers were ‘discovered’ from the exhibition and have received substantial orders from high profile national buyers and retailers for next season delivery. Several participants have since collaborated to create other pop up retail environments and are now mentoring other emerging designers on the significance of a collaborative retail exhibition to consolidate niche business models for emerging fashion designers.

What is the impact of research funding on research productivity?

A research protocol for our prospective study of research funding. How much research funding improves research productivity is a question that has relevance for all funding agencies and governments around the world. Previous studies have used observational data that compares productivity between winners of different amounts of funding, but researchers who win lots of funding are usually very different from those who win little or no funding. This difference creates potentially serious confounding which biases any estimate of the effect of funding based on observational data that simply compares research output for those who did and did not win funding. This means we do not currently know the return on investment for our research dollars, of which billions are invested around the world every year. By using a study design that incorporates randomisation this will be the world’s first unbiased study of the impact of researcher funding.

Save the Reef! Civic crowdfunding and public interest environmental litigation

This article examines the emerging area of civic crowdfunding, a subset of crowdfunding, as a means of financing public interest environmental litigation. The literature surrounding civic crowdfunding and third party litigation funding is currently underdeveloped. The link between those areas and public interest environmental litigation takes a further step into the unknown. As a case study, the Sea Dumping Case presents exciting opportunities for civil society and access to justice, but further research is needed before any firm conclusions can be drawn.

A randomized trial of fellowships for early career researchers finds a high reliability in funding decisions

Objectives Funding for early career researchers in Australia's largest medical research funding scheme is determined by a competitive peer-review process using a panel of four reviewers. The purpose of this experiment was to appraise the reliability of funding by duplicating applications that were considered by separate grant review panels. Study Design and Methods Sixty duplicate applications were considered by two independent grant review panels that were awarding funding for Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council. Panel members were blinded to which applications were included in the experiment and to whether it was the original or duplicate application. Scores were compared across panels using Bland–Altman plots to determine measures of agreement, including whether agreement would have impacted on actual funding. Results Twenty-three percent of the applicants were funded by both panels and 60 percent were not funded by both, giving an overall agreement of 83 percent [95% confidence interval (CI): 73%, 92%]. The chance-adjusted agreement was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.58, 0.92). Conclusion There was a comparatively high level of agreement when compared with other types of funding schemes. Further experimental research could be used to determine if this higher agreement is due to nature of the application, the composition of the assessment panel, or the characteristics of the applicants.

The impact of a streamlined funding application process on application time: Two cross-sectional surveys of Australian researchers

Objective: To examine if streamlining a medical research funding application process saved time for applicants. Design: Cross-sectional surveys before and after the streamlining. Setting: The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia. Participants: Researchers who submitted one or more NHMRC Project Grant applications in 2012 or 2014. Main outcome measures: Average researcher time spent preparing an application and the total time for all applications in working days. Results: The average time per application increased from 34 working days before streamlining (95% CI 33 to 35) to 38 working days after streamlining (95% CI 37 to 39; mean difference 4 days, bootstrap p value <0.001). The estimated total time spent by all researchers on applications after streamlining was 614 working years, a 67-year increase from before streamlining. Conclusions: Streamlined applications were shorter but took longer to prepare on average. Researchers may be allocating a fixed amount of time to preparing funding applications based on their expected return, or may be increasing their time in response to increased competition. Many potentially productive years of researcher time are still being lost to preparing failed applications.