3.1 Annual Performance Statement

Introductory statement

I, as the Accountable Authority of the Australian Research Council (ARC), present the 2017–18 Annual Performance Statement of the ARC, as required under paragraph 39(1)(a) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) and the Australian Research Council Act 2001 (ARC Act). In my opinion, these Annual Performance Statements are based on properly maintained records, accurately reflect the performance of the entity, and comply with subsection 39(2) of the PGPA Act.

Professor Sue Thomas
Chief Executive Officer

Purpose

The ARC’s purpose is to grow knowledge and innovation by funding the highest quality research, assessing the quality, engagement and impact of research and providing advice on research matters (Outcome 1 from the ARC Portfolio Budget Statements [PBS]).

A statement is provided for each of the three key activities that support the ARC’s purpose as follows:

• Key Activity 1: Funding the highest quality research
• Key Activity 2: Assessing the quality, engagement and impact of research
• Key Activity 3: Providing advice on research matters.

Approach

The performance statement for each key activity comprises:

• a description of the key activity
• a description of the key deliverables
• a description of performance against each indicator including a description of why it is important, the result(s), an analysis of the result(s) and additional context if appropriate
• a performance summary or overall analysis of performance against the activity.

The indicators addressed in detail in the performance statement are the key indicators as identified in the ARC’s PBS 2017–18. They are supported by the full set of indicators identified in the ARC Corporate Plan 2017–18 against the ARC’s broad level logic model (Figure 4). A report on the ARC’s performance against the full set of indicators is provided on pages 24–39 for Key Activity 1, pages 40–46 for Key Activity 2 and pages 47–52 for Key Activity 3.

Key Activity 1: Funding the highest quality research

Description

The ARC administers the National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP). It comprises two programs, Discovery and Linkage, which include a range of research funding schemes.

In 2017–18 the ARC administered the following schemes (see Appendix 1 for description):

• Discovery Program: Australian Laureate Fellowships; Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA); Discovery Indigenous; Discovery Projects; and Future Fellowships
• Linkage Program: ARC Centres of Excellence (CoE); Industrial Transformation Research Hubs (ITRH); Industrial Transformation Training Centres (ITTC); Linkage Infrastructure, Equipment and Facilities (LIEF); Linkage Learned Academies Special Projects (LASP); Linkage Projects; Special Research Initiatives (SRI); and Supporting Responses to Commonwealth Science Council Priorities.

A selection round for the Supporting Responses to Commonwealth Science Council Priorities scheme was conducted for the first time in 2017–18. This ongoing scheme aims to support the development of Australian research in priority areas as set by the Commonwealth Science Council.

The ARC also sought applications for the SRI: PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) Remediation Research Program. The program funds research to: minimise PFAS in the environment; develop effective technologies that can be applied to remediate PFAS contaminated soil, waterways, waste, debris and/or large volumes of groundwater; and develop options and mechanisms through which these effective technologies can be applied in the field.

By supporting excellent internationally competitive research through the NCGP funding schemes, the ARC aims to deliver outcomes of benefit to Australia and to build Australia’s research capacity.

Deliverables

The key deliverables for the NCGP, as identified in the PBS 2017–18 (pages 151–154), were that the ARC:

• awards research grants through a competitive peer review process
• manages the administration of ARC-funded research grants
• provides strategic policy advice on research, research training and research partnerships.

In 2017–18 the ARC:

• conducted selection processes that considered 5381 proposals for NCGP funding and awarded 1111 grants for research projects (Figure 5), involving 2521 researchers (Chief Investigators), worth $561.52 million
• administered 4586 new and ongoing grants under the NCGP, providing over $686.45 million in payments to administering organisations (based on planned allocations recorded at the time of grant award)
• undertook a range of NCGP-related policy development activities (page 49).

Performance

Key indicators of the NCGP’s success in meeting its ARC Corporate Plan 2017–18 objectives relate to:

• the sustainability of Australia’s research workforce
• improved engagement between universities, industry and other research sectors
• improved international engagement
• the extent to which research projects address areas of Australian Government research priority
• benefits to Australia.

Extent to which ARC-funded research supports the sustainability of Australia’s research workforce

Why is this important?

Research performance is critically dependent on access to highly qualified and skilled personnel. The ARC’s aim is to foster research training and career development opportunities through its funding schemes, including opportunities under its Linkage Program for researchers to spend time in industry organisations.

Performance

KPI	Proportion of Discovery Program funding allocated to support early career researchers under the DECRA scheme
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35, PBS 2017–18 page 152
Target	Maintain
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Discovery	16.3% Target met	16.0%	15.1%	14.7%
KPI	Proportion of Linkage Program funding allocated to support industrial research training under the ITTC scheme
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	Maintain
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	8.1% Target met	5.8%	4.7%	3.5%

In 2017–18, 16.3 per cent of Discovery Program funding (new and ongoing) was allocated to the DECRA scheme and 8.1 per cent of Linkage Program funding (new and ongoing) was allocated to the ITTC scheme.

For both Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), the proportions have increased slightly over the past four years. The steadier results for the DECRA scheme may reflect the nature of the support provided, as the number of fellowships awarded is set. Under the ITTC scheme, alternatively, projects funded are dependent on the total funding available, the number of applications received and the quality of those applications.

Additional context

In 2017–18 the ARC:

• provided direct salary support for 309 new awards and fellowships encompassing every stage of a research career, from early career researchers to senior researchers
• funded 1111 new research projects, involving 2521 researchers. This funding support enabled the employment of additional research personnel and contributed significantly to the development of Australia’s research capacity.

Extent to which ARC-funded research results in improved engagement between universities, industry and other research sectors

Why is this important?

Research is a collaborative activity with successful researchers and research organisations working together, partnering and networking to generate multiplier effects. The ARC’s aim in supporting engagement between universities and other sectors is to maximise opportunities to build the scale and focus of research involving end-users, potentially resulting in direct benefits to Australia.

Performance

KPI	Level of co-funding from partner organisations involved in ARC-funded research projects (Linkage Projects scheme)
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	$1 of co-funding per $1 of ARC funding
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	$1.76 Target met	$1.98	$1.76	$1.93
KPI	Proportion of partner organisations satisfied with the research partnership supported through the Linkage Program (Linkage Projects scheme)
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	Maintain; with baseline based on four year rolling average
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	97.0% Target met	98.0%	98.0%	98.0%
KPI	Efficient delivery of Linkage Projects scheme
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	100 per cent of Linkage Projects scheme announcements are made within six months of submission of application
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	76.1% Target not met	n/a	n/a	n/a

Under the Linkage Projects scheme, the combined cash and in-kind contributions pledged by partner organisations are required to match, at least, the funding sought from the ARC. In 2017–18 this requirement was exceeded with every ARC dollar attracting $1.76 from partner organisations.

A partner organisation’s commitment of funding and other resources to a research project indicates an expectation of gain from that investment. Analysis of partner organisation feedback conducted for this Annual Report showed that a majority of partners that provided feedback on final reports (97 per cent) found that the collaborative research project had been either ‘very beneficial’ or ‘beneficial’ to their organisation. The feedback also showed that:

• 46 per cent of partner organisations were entering into a new relationship and 53 per cent were building on a previously established collaborative relationship (one per cent selected ‘other’)
• 95 per cent indicated that they would be willing to conduct a collaborative research project again, depending on the circumstances.

In 2016, the ARC introduced a continuous application process for the Linkage Projects scheme. This process, which was announced as part of the Australian Government’s National Innovation and Science Agenda (NISA), aimed to shorten the duration of the assessment process. Approximately 76 per cent of applications received under the 2017 selection round for the Linkage Projects scheme were announced within six months of submission.

Additional context

The Linkage Program comprises a range of schemes aimed at building collaborative research partnerships between researchers in universities and other organisations. These include: Linkage Projects; ITRH; ITTC; LIEF; and the ARC CoE.

Each scheme is targeted at a different element of end-user engagement:

• the Linkage Projects scheme aims to support innovation at all levels, involving end-users from government, not-for-profit and both domestic and international industry
• the Industrial Transformation Research Program (ITRP) aims to support the development of solutions for industry, and train future researchers, through partnerships between universities and industry in identified industrial transformation priority areas
• the ARC CoE scheme aims to build linkages across all sectors including a strong international focus
• the LIEF scheme aims to support collaborative use of infrastructure, primarily between universities, but also involving partner organisations from outside the sector where appropriate.

Extent to which ARC-funded research results in improved international engagement

Why is this important?

Research is a global activity with researchers seeking access to the best partners and facilities worldwide. The ARC’s aim in supporting international research collaboration is to maximise Australia’s contribution to, and benefits from, international research collaborations, partnerships, developments and policy.

Performance

KPI	Proportion of ARC-funded research projects that involve international collaboration
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35, PBS 2017–18 page 152
Target	Maintain/increase the proportion
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	76.1% Target met	71.6%	68.9%	64.8%
Discovery	80.0% Target met	77.4%	73.5%	69.5%
Linkage	58.3% Target met	54.0%	55.8%	49.8%

The proportion of ARC-funded research projects involving international collaboration has slowly increased over the past four years (Figure 6).

The ARC’s mechanisms of support for international collaboration have not changed significantly in the past four years, indicating that the general upward trend of results for the Discovery and Linkage Programs represents a real change in levels of collaboration.

Additional context

NCGP funding schemes use a variety of mechanisms to support international research collaboration, including:

• all NCGP schemes are open to overseas researchers as long as they apply through an Australian eligible organisation. If successful, Chief Investigators, fellows and awardees must reside predominantly in Australia for the duration of the project
• as appropriate, researchers located overseas may participate in ARC-funded projects as Partner Investigators without any residency requirements
• project funding can be requested to support international travel by Chief Investigators, fellows, and Partner Investigators associated with a project, to foster and strengthen collaborations between researchers in Australia and overseas
• organisations based overseas (including higher education, companies, not-for-profit and government) are eligible to participate in projects funded under the NCGP, as a partner, other, or host organisation
• funding may be sought for Discovery International Awards (DIAs) under the Discovery Projects scheme. DIAs may be requested for up to two researchers per proposal, for a Chief Investigator to work overseas with an overseas based Partner Investigator, or an overseas based Partner Investigator to travel to Australia for research on the project
• international subscriptions are an eligible budget item under the LIEF scheme.

In relation to research projects awarded funding commencing in 2017–18:

• 1823 instances of potential international collaboration were identified with more than 85 countries. The five countries most commonly identified were the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Germany, China and Canada
• 662 international participating organisations (or 446 unique international organisations) were identified (including ‘other’ and host organisations under the Discovery Program, and partner and ‘other’ organisations under the Linkage Program)
• 48 international partner organisations (or 47 unique international partner organisations) on projects were awarded funding under the Linkage Projects scheme
• the top five fields of international collaboration research were pure mathematics, astronomical and space sciences, materials engineering, biochemistry and cell biology, and atomic, molecular, nuclear, particle and plasma physics
• one international subscription was funded under the LIEF scheme―Contribution to the AugerPrime upgrade of the Pierre Auger Observatory
• 23 per cent of the fellowships and awards under the DECRA, Future Fellowships and Australian Laureate Fellowships schemes were awarded to researchers from overseas.

Extent to which ARC-funded research addresses Australian Government priority areas

Why is this important?

Through the identification of priority areas, the Australian Government aims to focus research on areas that address challenges facing Australia. The ARC contributes to this aim by funding research in priority areas under the NCGP.

Performance

KPI	Proportion of ARC-funded research projects that involve research in one of the Australian Government’s Science and Research Priority areas
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 pages 152 and 154
Target	Maintain; with baseline based on four year rolling average
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	60.4% Target not measureable	66.0%	n/a	n/a
Discovery	56.1% Target not measureable	59.7%	n/a	n/a
Linkage	79.9% Target not measureable	85.4%	n/a	n/a

Approximately 60.4 per cent of research projects awarded funding commencing in 2017–18 involved research relevant to the Australian Government’s Science and Research Priority areas.

The result recorded for the Discovery Program is lower than the result recorded for the Linkage Program, reflecting the different objectives of the two programs. The Discovery Program is aimed at supporting fundamental research, while the Linkage Program has a greater focus on supporting research partnerships between universities and organisations that will result in the applied use of research.

Performance against the target cannot be measured in 2017–18 as the Science and Research Priority areas have not been in place for four years and were not implemented until 2016–17.

Additional context

The Australian Government announced the Science and Research Priority areas in May 2015. The nine cross-disciplinary priorities are food, soil and water, transport, cybersecurity, energy, resources, advanced manufacturing, environmental change and health.

In applying for NCGP funding, researchers are asked to indicate if their proposed research project falls within a priority area. While funding is not specifically directed to these areas, most schemes ask assessors to consider whether the research will address or has the potential to address these areas.

In addition to the Science and Research Priority areas, in 2017–18 the ARC:

• conducted an SRI to support the development of innovative technologies to investigate and remediate PFAS contaminated areas, including soil and other solid contaminated debris, groundwater, waterways and marine systems. The program will build on the Australian Government’s investment in responding to PFAS contamination, including investigations, community support, remediation and research
• continued to support Industrial Transformation Priorities under the ITRP. The priorities for funding commencing in 2018 are advanced manufacturing, cyber security, food and agribusiness, medical technologies and pharmaceuticals, mining equipment, technology and services, and oil, gas and energy resources. These priorities are consistent with the six high-growth sectors established under the Australian Government’s Industry Growth Centres initiative.

Extent to which ARC-funded research results in outcomes of benefit to Australia

Why is this important?

In a tight fiscal government environment it is important that the outcomes of the Australian Government’s investment in research can be clearly demonstrated. ARC-funded research provides economic, environmental, social, health and/or cultural benefits to Australia.

Performance

KPI	Evidence of outcomes arising from ARC-funded research projects, improving our fundamental understanding of the world and/or providing economic, environmental, social, health and/or cultural benefits to Australia
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 pages 152 and 154
Target	Evidence of outcomes arising from ARC-funded research
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Discovery	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Linkage	Target met	Met	Met	Met

Additional context

In 2016–17 the ARC published the Making a difference booklet, an annual publication that demonstrates the economic, environmental, social, health and/or cultural benefits stemming from research supported under the NCGP. Making a difference can be accessed via the ARC website.

Performance summary

There were no changes in the ARC’s activities, organisational capability or environment that impacted significantly on its performance in delivering Key Activity 1: Funding the highest quality research.

As indicated on page 24, during the year:

• a selection round for the Supporting Responses to Commonwealth Science Council Priorities scheme was conducted for the first time
• a call for applications was made for the SRI: PFAS Remediation Research Program.

Selection rounds for these schemes were conducted in line with established processes for the LASP and SRI schemes respectively.

The ARC commenced implementation planning for the SRI: Excellence in Antarctic Science announced in the 2018 Australian Government budget.

The ARC continued to implement a continuous application and assessment process under the Linkage Projects scheme. The continuous process was announced as part of the Australian Government’s NISA and was implemented by the ARC for all Linkage Projects applications submitted after 1 July 2016. During 2017–18 the ARC continued to consolidate the processes established in the first year, including the use of video conferencing arrangements for meetings. An evaluation of the ARC’s implementation of the continuous application and assessment processes is expected to be undertaken in 2019.

The ARC also continued to build upon its program of stakeholder engagement, particularly with the larger scale funding schemes, including the ARC CoE and ITRP. The focus was on improved grants management by grantees and the promotion of high quality applications for major awards, which typically commence many months before the scheme opens.

Key Activity 1: Indicators

Performance criteria: The NCGP contributes to the growth of knowledge and innovation in Australia by funding excellent research and researchers, research training and career development, international collaboration and research in areas of priority. It produces outcomes that improve our fundamental understanding of the world and/or provide economic, environmental, social, health and/or cultural benefits to Australia.

Volume/efficiency and outputs

KPI	Number of applications submitted to the ARC for funding
Metric	Activity
Source	CP 2017–18 page 34
Target	Not applicable; metric of activity
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	5381	6219	6186	6926
Discovery	4792	5216	5265	6035
Linkage	589	1003	921	891
Additional explanation	The decrease in the number of applications submitted in 2017–18 reflects the lower number of applications received under the Discovery Projects and Linkage Projects schemes and that an ARC CoE selection round was not conducted.
KPI	Number of research projects funded by the ARC
Metric	Activity
Source	CP 2017–18 page 3
Target	Not applicable; metric of activity
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	1111	1272	1227	1368
Discovery	912	957	910	1041
Linkage	199	315	317	327
Additional explanation	Research projects are awarded funding following a competitive peer review process involving national and international assessors. Under the Discovery Program fellowship schemes, the maximum number of awards is set (up to 200 for the DECRA scheme, up to 100 for the Future Fellowships scheme and up to 17 under the Australian Laureate Fellowships scheme). The number of projects funded under other schemes will depend on the total funding available, the funding sought and the quality of those applications.
KPI	Length of Linkage Projects scheme application and assessment processes
Metric	Output
Source	CP 2017–18 page 34, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	Announcement within six months of submission
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	76.1%	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	See pages 27–28.

ARC funding supports excellent researchers

KPI	External recognition of the achievements of ARC-funded researchers
Metric	Immediate/Intermediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 34
Target	Prizes and awards are won by ARC-funded researchers
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	Target met	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	External acknowledgement is considered to be a proxy indicator of the excellence of the researchers supported by the ARC. ARC-funded researchers have a strong record of winning prizes and awards and this continued in 2017–18 (see Appendix 3).

ARC funding supports research training and career development

KPI	Proportion of Discovery Program funding allocated to support early career researchers under the DECRA scheme
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35, PBS 2017–18 page 152
Target	Maintain
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Discovery	16.3% Target met	16.0%	15.1%	14.7%
Additional explanation	See page 26.
KPI	Proportion of Linkage Program funding allocated to support industrial research training under the ITTC scheme
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	Maintain
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Discovery	8.1%	5.8%	4.7%	3.5%
Additional explanation	See page 26.
KPI	Number of researchers (unique individuals) on ARC-funded grants (Chief Investigators only)
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35
Target	Not applicable; metric of participation
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	2521	2938	2666	2920
Discovery	1611	1649	1571	1730
Linkage	1064	1523	1275	1438
Additional explanation	The total number of researchers on ARC-funded grants is restricted by the NCGP grant limits. Numbers will fluctuate depending on the size of teams participating in ARC-funded research projects.
KPI	Number of researchers (unique individuals) on ARC-funded grants who identified as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	29 (1.2%)	28 (1.0%)	23 (0.9%)	27 (0.9%)
Discovery	27	17	17	18
Linkage	2	12	8	11
Additional explanation	The proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers on ARC grants has remained constant at approximately 1.0 per cent. This figure is consistent with the total proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander academics recorded in 2017.
KPI	Number of researchers (unique individuals) on ARC-funded grants who are women
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	736 (29.2%)	784 (26.7%)	690 (25.9%)	780 (26.7%)
Discovery	530	477	440	502
Linkage	224	343	284	328
Additional explanation	The proportion of female investigators increased slightly in 2017–18 to 29.2 per cent (up from 26.7 per cent in 2014–15).
KPI	Number of researchers (unique individuals) on ARC-funded grants who are early career researchers
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	339 (13.4%)	362 (12.3%)	393 (14.7%)	425 (14.6%)
Discovery	273	278	285	300
Linkage	74	95	118	141
Additional explanation	Early career researchers are defined as researchers within five years of completion of their PhD. The proportion of early career researchers increased slightly in 2017–18.
KPI	Number of researchers on ARC-funded grants who are fellows or awardees
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Discovery	309	320	268	370
Additional explanation	Under the Discovery Program, the ARC administers fellowship schemes aimed at early career researchers, mid-career researchers, established researchers and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers. The drop in 2015–16 is due to the smaller number of awards made under the Future Fellowships scheme in that year.

ARC funding supports international collaboration

KPI	Proportion of ARC-funded research projects that involve international collaboration
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35, PBS 2017–18 page 152
Target	Maintain/increase the proportion
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	76.1%	71.6%	68.9%	64.8%
Discovery	80.0%	77.4%	73.5%	69.5%
Linkage	58.3%	54.0%	56.0%	49.8%
Additional explanation	See pages 28–30
KPI	Proportion of financial (cash) contributions to ARC-funded research made by international partner organisations
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35
Target	Not applicable; metric of participation
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	20.2%	22.7%	24.4%	22.9%
Additional explanation	The decrease in the proportion of cash contributions made by international organisations in 2016–17 and 2017–18 may be the result of changes to the Linkage Projects application and assessment processes in 2016. An evaluation of the implementation of these changes will be conducted in 2019.
KPI	Proportion of participating organisations that are international organisations
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 35
Target	Not applicable; metric of participation
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	39.2%	36.6%	35.0%	37.7%
Discovery	62.9%	62.4%	61.3%	60.6%
Linkage	16.1%	20.3%	16.4%	18.4%
Additional explanation	Under the NCGP, international organisations are eligible to participate as a partner, host or other organisation in research projects administered by an eligible organisation. The proportion of international organisations has remained relatively constant under the NCGP in recent years.

ARC funding supports expanded engagement between researchers and end-users

KPI	Level of co-funding from partner organisations involved in ARC-funded research projects (Linkage Projects)
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	Maintain/increase the level of co-funding from partner organisations under the Linkage Projects scheme (greater than $1 of co-funding per $1 of ARC funding)
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	$1.76	$1.98	$1.76	$1.93
Additional explanation	See page 27.
KPI	Proportion of partner organisations satisfied with research partnerships supported through the Linkage Program (Linkage Projects)
Metric	Intermediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 page 154
Target	Maintain; with baseline based on four-year rolling average
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Linkage	97.0% Target met	98.0%	98.0%	98.0%
Additional explanation	See page 27.

ARC funding grows Australia’s research capacity in priority research areas

KPI	Proportion of ARC-funded research projects that involve research in one of the Australian Government's Science and Research Priority areas
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 pages 152 and 154
Target	Maintain; with baseline based on four-year rolling average
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	60.4%	66.0%	n/a	n/a
Discovery	56.1%	59.7%	n/a	n/a
Linkage	79.9%	85.4%	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	See pages 30–31.
KPI	Proportion of funding allocated to ARC-funded research projects that involve research in one of the Australian Government’s Science and Research Priority areas
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36
Target	Maintain; with baseline based on four year rolling average
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	65.3%	79.6%	n/a	n/a
Discovery	58.0%	62.5%	n/a	n/a
Linkage	88.9%	96.1%	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	The falling proportion of funding reflects the decrease in the number of projects involving research in one of the Science and Research Priority areas.

ARC funding grows knowledge and innovation

KPI	Number of research outputs arising from ARC-funded research projects
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36
Target	Not applicable; output metric
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	16,187	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	ARC-funded research projects commencing in 2012 produced 16,187 research outputs, including 10,372 articles in scholarly refereed journals.
KPI	Number of commercialisation outputs arising from ARC-funded research projects including start-up companies, licensed technologies, invention disclosures and patents
Metric	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36
Target	Not applicable; output metric
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	128	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	ARC-funded research projects commencing in 2012 produced 128 commercialisation outputs, including 46 invention disclosures, 54 patents filed, and six plant breeder rights. In addition, the establishment of nine start-up companies was identified as being the result of projects commencing in 2012.
KPI	Proportion of established ARC research centres demonstrating growth of knowledge and innovation
Metric	Intermediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36
Target	100 per cent
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	100.0% Target met	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	Each year research centres provide information on knowledge and innovation activities through a final report provided to the ARC. Copies of these final reports may be found on the website of individual centres.

ARC-funded research produces outcomes of benefit

KPI	Proportion of ARC-funded research projects that meet their objectives
Metric	Intermediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36
Target	Maintain
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
NGGP	97.0% Target not measureable	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	Of the final reports received for ARC-funded research projects commencing in 2012, 97% indicated that they had either met all the objectives of their research or met over half of their objectives.
KPI	Evidence of outcomes arising from ARC-funded research projects, fellowships and awards improving our fundamental understanding of the world and/or providing economic, environmental, social, health and/or cultural benefits to Australia
Metric	Intermediate/long-term outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 36, PBS 2017–18 pages 152 and 154
Target	Evidence of outcomes arising from ARC-funded research
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
Discovery	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Linkage	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Additional explanation	See pages 31–32.

Key Activity 2: Assessing the quality, engagement and impact of research

Description

Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) evaluates research quality by discipline at Australian universities. Evaluating research against international benchmarks, ERA identifies excellence across the full spectrum of research activities. ERA aims to improve Australia’s research capabilities and inform government policy.

In 2017–18 the ARC completed development and commenced implementation of an Engagement and Impact (EI) assessment. Drawing on the lessons of a successful pilot, the first full EI assessment is being run in 2018 in conjunction with ERA. It will examine the social, economic, environmental and cultural benefits of Australian university research and provide incentives for universities to improve their collaborations with industry and other research end-users.

Together these frameworks:

• provide a unique, evidence-based resource to inform Australian Government research policy
  and the strategic direction of Australian universities
• encourage researchers to produce high-quality research with real-world benefits.

Deliverables

The key deliverables for ERA and EI as identified in the PBS 2017–18 (page 155) were:

• administering an evaluation framework to measure and report on the quality of research
  conducted at Australian universities
• developing a framework to assess engagement and show how universities are translating their research into economic, social, environmental and other impacts
• informing strategic policy advice on research quality, engagement and impact.

In 2017–18, the ARC:

• commenced implementation of the fourth round of ERA
• completed the EI pilot and reported on the EI pilot outcomes
• finalised the development of the EI 2018 methodology and commenced implementation of EI 2018
• provided strategic policy advice on a wide range of research matters relating to research quality, engagement and impact.

ERA provides assurance of the quality of research in Australia

Why is this important?

ERA informs existing and prospective stakeholders about the performance of each university by discipline and helps promote Australia’s research strengths on the world stage. Providing assurance of the quality of research enables strategic planning by universities and the Australian Government. This strategic planning further strengthens Australia’s research capabilities.

Performance

KPI	Evidence that ERA provides assurance of the quality of research in Australia
Source	CP 2017–18 pages 16 and 37–38, PBS 2017–18 pages 155–156
Target	ERA reports and activities inform Australian Government policy
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Indicator	Number of organisations participating
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	42	n/a	41	41
Target	ERA evaluations are delivered in line with planned timelines
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	Met	n/a

Analysis of results—ERA informs Australian Government policy

The three rounds of ERA conducted to date have established a dataset documenting the research activity and performance of Australian universities that spans over a decade. The dataset is a unique and valuable resource for a range of stakeholders. The ARC responds to requests from government agencies for information about university research and performance to inform Australian Government policy on research quality.

Analysis of results—Number of organisations participating

As ERA is an evaluation of the quality of Australian university research, widespread participation by the university sector is needed for the program to meet its objectives. In 2017–18 the submission stage of ERA 2018 was completed. All 42 eligible institutions identified in the ERA 2018 Submission Guidelines made submissions for ERA 2018.

Note: the years 2014–15 and 2015–16 cover the ERA 2015 round. In those years only 41 institutions were eligible to participate in ERA.

Analysis of results—ERA delivered on time

Due to the triennial timeframe of ERA, an assessment was not completed in 2017–18. However, as scheduled, in 2017–18 the ARC assisted universities with preparations for ERA 2018 and the ERA 2018 submission process was completed in May 2018.

ERA encourages excellent, internationally competitive research

Why is this important?

Improvements in research quality lead to a better return on investment in research, and improve the social rate of return of research¹. The ARC’s aim is to ensure these outcomes can be realised for Australia through the conduct of a best practice assessment of the quality of research at Australian universities.

Performance

KPI	ERA encourages excellent, internationally competitive research
Source	CP 2017–18 pages 16, 37–38, PBS 2017–18 pages 155–156
Target	ERA reports and activities inform strategic planning at eligible Australian higher education institutions
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Target	Research performance of higher education institutions improves
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	Met	n/a

Analysis of results—Informs strategic planning activities

A survey of the websites of ERA participating universities revealed that about 22 per cent of institutions referenced ERA in their strategic planning documents and about 54 per cent referenced ERA in their annual report of performance. In addition, more than 90 per cent referred to ERA and/or their ERA performance on their website.

Over 63 per cent of universities listed their ERA results as a measure of success (across their strategic plans, annual reports and webpages). Almost half of universities framed material in their annual reports and strategic plans in a manner consistent with ERA’s objectives, for example, by referring to building on existing research strengths, identifying new interdisciplinary research opportunities and including research excellence as an aim.

Analysis of results—Research performance improves

Performance against this target cannot be measured in 2017–18 because an ERA evaluation was not completed.

ERA is conducted every three years with the most recent round being in 2015 and the current round underway in the 2018 calendar year. The outcomes of ERA 2015 showed that the quality of research conducted by eligible Australian higher education institutions had improved since the previous evaluation.

The Engagement and Impact assessment encourages impactful engagement within and beyond the research sector

Why is this important?

Existing systems of research evaluation show that transparent reporting of university performance drives institutions to modify and improve their behaviour. The assessment and reporting of a university’s performance in both research engagement and impact can lead to greater collaboration between universities and research end-users. It is also expected to encourage improved performance in the translation and commercialisation of research. This will deliver economic and social benefits and maximise the value of Australia’s public investment in research.

Performance

KPI	The Engagement and Impact assessment encourages impactful engagement within and beyond the research sector
Source	CP 2017–18 pages 16, 37–38, PBS 2017–18 pages 155–156
Target	n/a—see PBS 2018–19 page 126. Relevant targets rely on information to be collected for the first time in 2018–19
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a

Analysis of results

Performance against this KPI cannot be measured in 2017–18 because an EI assessment was not fully completed. The relevant targets require indicators that will be available in 2018–19, following the completion of the EI assessment. These targets, as set out in the ARC Corporate Plan 2017–18, are:

• number of organisations participating—data to be collected in 2018–19
• EI assessment delivered in line with planned timelines—EI to be completed in 2018–19
• engagement within and beyond the research sector is benchmarked—data to be
  collected in 2018–19
• engagement within and beyond the research sector improves—data to be collected in 2021–22
• impact studies submitted for the EI assessment publicly demonstrate how universities are translating their research into economic, social, environmental and other impacts—data to be collected in 2018–19.

In 2017–18 the ARC finalised the development of the EI assessment methodology, which was based on the outcomes of a successful pilot exercise. The findings were published in a report released by Senator the Hon. Simon Birmingham, the then Minister for Education and Training, on 1 November 2017. The release of the report marked the end of the pilot and the start of preparations for launching the 2018 assessment.

By the end of the 2017–18 reporting period, the ARC had completed preparations for and begun implementation of EI 2018. The submission phase of the assessment commenced on 17 May 2018 and the chairs of the panels undertaking the assessments were announced on 6 April 2018.

Performance summary

There were no changes in the ARC’s activities, organisational capability or environment that impacted on its performance in delivering Key Activity 2: Assessing the quality, engagement and impact of research.

In 2017–18, the ARC worked on preparations for and commenced implementation of EI and ERA 2018. This included:

• recruiting and training committee members for ERA, receiving submissions from universities,
  and commencing ERA evaluation processes
• finalising the development of the EI 2018 methodology, recruiting EI panel members, and opening the EI submission phase.

Stakeholder engagement continued to be an important input to the ARC’s processes, including for developing the EI methodology and preparing for the EI and ERA 2018 submissions.

Key Activity 2: Indicators

Performance criteria: The ERA program, including the research quality assessment framework and the EI assessment framework, contributes to the growth of knowledge and innovation in Australia by providing assurance of the quality of research in Australia, encouraging excellent, internationally competitive research, and encouraging impactful engagement within and beyond the research sector.

Volume/efficiency of activity and outputs

KPI	Number of organisations participating
Metric/Outcome	Activity
Source	CP 2017–18 page 37
Target	Not applicable
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	42	n/a	41	41
Additional explanation	To date this metric applies to the ERA evaluation framework only. In the years 2014–15 and 2015–16 only 41 institutions were eligible to participate in ERA. In 2017–18, 42 institutions were eligible to participate.
KPI	Delivery of ERA evaluation and EI assessment
Metric/Outcome	Output
Source	CP 2017–18 page 37
Target	ERA evaluations and EI assessments are delivered in line with planned timelines
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	Met	n/a
Additional explanation	Submission of data for ERA 2018 was completed in May 2018 in line with anticipated timeframes. The completion of ERA evaluations and EI assessments is scheduled for the 2018 calendar year.

Outcomes

KPI	Australian Government policy
Metric/Outcome	Immediate; intermediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 37, PBS 2017–18 page 155
Target	The ERA program delivers reports and activities that inform Australian Government policy
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Additional explanation	See page 41.
KPI	Strategic planning at eligible Australian universities
Metric/Outcome	Immediate/intermediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 37, PBS 2017–18 pages 155–56
Target	The ERA program delivers reports and activities that inform strategic planning at eligible Australian universities
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Additional explanation	See page 42.
KPI	Engagement within and beyond the research sector (2018–19)
Metric/Outcome	Immediate outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 37, PBS 2017–18 page 156 (amended in Corporate Plan)
Target	Engagement within and beyond the research sector is benchmarked
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	Data scheduled for collection in 2018–19.
KPI	Engagement within and beyond the research sector (2021–22)
Metric/Outcome	Immediate/intermediate/long-term outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 38, PBS 2017–18 page 156 (amended in Corporate Plan)
Target	Engagement within and beyond the research sector improves
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	Data scheduled for collection in 2021–22.
KPI	Translation of university research into economic, social, environmental and other impacts
Metric/Outcome	Immediate/intermediate/long-term outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 38, PBS 2017–18 page 156 (amended in Corporate Plan)
Target	Impact studies submitted for the EI assessment publicly demonstrate how universities are translating their research into economic, social, environmental and other impacts
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	Data scheduled for collection in 2018–19.
KPI	Research performance of higher education institutions
Metric/Outcome	Immediate/intermediate/long-term outcome
Source	CP 2017–18 page 38, PBS 2017–18 page 156
Target	Research performance of higher education institutions improves
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	n/a	n/a	Met	n/a
Additional explanation	Data scheduled for collection in 2018–19.

Key Activity 3: Providing advice on research matters

Description

The ARC’s commitment and contribution to policy development plays an essential role in facilitating excellent research outcomes for Australia. The ARC takes an active and collegiate approach to identifying and responding to emerging issues and challenges within Australia’s research sector.

Through policy development and advice, the ARC aims to:

• reflect current Australian Government priorities and initiatives in its operations
• contribute to the development of national research and innovation policy
• provide advice on research matters to the Australian Government
• support the effective delivery of ARC programs.

Deliverables

As identified in the PBS 2017–18, policy advice underpins the ARC’s delivery of the NCGP, ERA and EI assessment (PBS pages 151–156).

In 2017–18, the ARC:

• reviewed research-related policies and consulted with stakeholders regarding potential changes
• finalised a revision of the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research, in conjunction with the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Universities Australia (UA)
• participated in policy development across portfolios, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ethical guidelines for undertaking research
• continued to look for ways to increase the efficiency, comprehensiveness and timeliness of data gathering and reporting
• continued to monitor emerging issues relevant to the research sector
• monitored, incorporated and contributed to international developments in research and
  research funding.

ARC policy advice contributes and responds to Australian Government policy development

Why is this important?

The ARC’s aim is to develop policy advice and implement policies regarding research that support achieving tangible benefits for Australia.

Performance

KPI	ARC policy advice reflects Australian Government priorities and policies
Source	CP 2017–18, pages 17–18, 39
Target	ARC policy reflects Government priorities and initiatives
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met

Analysis of results

During 2017–18, the ARC:

• implemented initiatives from NISA and other reviews
• continued to implement the Australian Government’s Science and Research Priority areas through all NCGP funding schemes, and Industrial Transformation Priority areas through the ITRP
• worked cooperatively with other agencies, including the NHMRC and the Department of Education and Training on a range of research policy activities.

National Innovation and Science Agenda

The ARC is leading implementation of two initiatives under NISA: (i) the introduction of continuous application and expedited decision-making processes under the Linkage Projects scheme, and (ii) a systematic national assessment of research engagement and impact at a university level by discipline, as a companion to the ERA exercise. In 2017–18, the ARC completed a year of the continuous submission and assessment process for Linkage Projects 2017, and initiated Linkage Projects 2018.

Special Research Initiative—PFAS Remediation Research Program

In 2018 the ARC commenced funding through the SRI for the PFAS Remediation Research Program. The SRI funding will facilitate the development of innovative technologies to investigate and remediate PFAS contaminated waterways, waste, debris and/or large volumes of groundwater. It will also develop options and mechanisms through which these technologies can be applied in the field.

Review of Research Policy and Funding Arrangements (Watt Review)

The final report of the Watt Review, released in December 2015, included 28 recommendations. The Australian Government formally responded to the review in May 2016, accepting all 28 recommendations. In addition to the NISA initiatives, the report included recommendations that relate to the ARC in a number of key areas including the use of experts with experience in industry in assessing proposals for funding, and intellectual property requirements relating to ARC-funded research.

Experts with experience in industry, collaboration and commercialising research have been identified for assessing grant proposals for funding under schemes in the Linkage Program. The Selection Advisory Committee for the ITRP 2018, for example, has its membership sourced equally from industry and academia.

During 2017–18, the ARC finalised a new intellectual property policy which was developed in consultation with relevant government agencies and universities.

Implementation of Science and Research Priority areas

Information about the ARC’s implementation of Science and Research Priority areas under the NCGP is provided on page 5.

National policy initiatives and discussions

The ARC continued to ensure that the benefits of publicly funded research are realised and disseminated as widely as possible. It does this by working with the research sector to facilitate compliance with the ARC’s open access policy and open data requirements. The ARC continued to be an active observer on the Universities Australia Deputy Vice Chancellors (Research) Committee working group tasked with progressing an agenda around FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) access to research outputs.

The ARC has reviewed its Research Workforce Statement, its Gender Equality in Research Statement, and its annual gender equality action plan.

Working with the National Health and Medical Research Council

The ARC finalised and released a revised version of the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research, 2018 with the NHMRC and UA. The ARC also participated in the review of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research ethics guidelines. The ARC’s active contribution to these reviews has ensured that the scope of these documents is relevant to research across all disciplines.

ARC policy advice supports best practice research

Why is this important?

Best practice research is critical for the development of the robust evidence base required to drive discoveries that will benefit Australia. It provides the basis for high quality research training and career development and delivers assurance to those who use outcomes of research for innovation. Best research practice also helps build assurance and public confidence in the research process and its outcomes.

Performance

KPI	ARC policy advice supports best practice research
Source	CP 2017–18, pages 17–18, 39
Target	ARC policies support the NCGP, particularly industry engagement and research workforce
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met

Analysis of results

The ARC’s administration of the NCGP is supported by a range of policy documents. During 2017–18 the ARC:

• reviewed and re-released its Research Workforce Statement, Gender Equality in Research Statement of Support and Action Plan, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Researchers and Research: ARC Statement of Support and Action Plan 2018–2019
• released the ARC Reconciliation Action Plan 2018–2019
• finalised the ARC Intellectual Property Policy
• released a revised ARC Medical Research Policy
• released a revised ARC Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Policy.

Research workforce

The ARC Research Workforce Statement outlines how the ARC contributes to establishing a sustainable research workforce in Australia. The ARC does this by funding the highest quality research in all disciplines and supporting researchers at all career stages as well as from under-represented groups. The ARC provides funding that supports researchers’ flexibility in shaping their careers, and helps attract and retain the highest quality researchers.

To assist in the implementation of the Research Workforce Statement, the ARC developed the Gender Equality in Research and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Researchers and Research statements of support and action plans. The action plans are reviewed annually.

ARC policy advice engages researchers, including international organisations
and researchers

Why is this important?

Involving stakeholders in policy development and evaluation processes helps to ensure policies and activities align with their expectations and needs. It increases the diversity of experience and knowledge available to the ARC in identifying relevant issues, analysing policy options and deciding on the appropriate policy instruments. Stakeholder feedback surrounding the implementation of policies gives the ARC exposure to valuable information about policy effects, resulting in more successful policy outcomes.

Performance

KPI	ARC policy advice engages stakeholders in ARC policy development, including international organisations and researchers
Source	CP 2017–18, pages 16 and 39
Target	Stakeholder engagement in ARC policy development activities
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
KPI	Stakeholders are satisfied with ARC policy advice
Source	CP 2017–18, pages 16 and 39
Target	Stakeholders are satisfied with the quality of ARC policy advice
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met

Analysis of results

During 2017–18 the ARC:

• continued to engage with a broad range of national and international stakeholders on research matters, including research integrity, open research and program evaluation
• continued to provide evidence-based policy advice, including investigating different ways of interrogating data to help reveal trends or issues of concern
• communicated policy changes to stakeholders in Australia and internationally
• maintained an evaluation plan for key program initiatives
• through its consultation and development activities for ERA and EI, engaged with a wide range
  of researchers, research leaders and managers, and experts in research evaluation, nationally
  and internationally.

National engagement

In 2017–18, the ARC engaged with a range of stakeholders on ERA and EI in a variety of forums. In 2017–18 the ARC sought feedback and input from universities, peak bodies and representatives from industry to finalise the development of the methodology for EI 2018. In addition, the ARC engaged directly with eligible universities to assist in the preparation of submissions for the ERA and EI 2018 processes. This included direct requests for feedback, face-to-face meetings with participating universities, as well as meetings with researchers and other interested stakeholders.

International engagement

The ARC hosted several international delegations in 2017–18, sharing information on the ERA and EI methodologies. International researchers participated in the steering committee and working groups that developed the assessment methodology for EI 2018. ARC representatives took part in a major international conference in Rome, attended by international government representatives, to share lessons on the methodologies suitable for nationwide assessments of the engagement and impact of university research.

The ARC continued to be an active participant in the Global Research Council, attending the Asia-Pacific regional meeting in Sri Lanka in November 2017 and contributing to the items discussed at the annual meeting in Russia in May 2018.

Seventeen international delegations visited the ARC throughout 2017–18 to explore and better understand the opportunities available to international researchers and research organisations through the NCGP. In addition, there were 20 instances where the ARC attended or contributed to meetings, interviews or engagements with international stakeholders.

Performance summary

There were no changes in the ARC’s activities, organisational capability or environment that impacted its performance in delivering Key Activity 3: Providing advice on research matters.

A key development during the year was the Australian Government’s review of a range of research and higher education activities. This provided opportunities for the ARC to engage in discussions and respond to requests for information about a broad range of research and higher education issues.

Key Activity 3: Indicators

Performance criteria: ARC policy advice contributes to the growth of knowledge and innovation in Australia by providing a robust framework for the administration of the NCGP, ERA and the EI assessment. It provides a robust framework that supports the conduct of the highest quality research leading to outcomes of benefit for Australia.

Volume/efficiency of activity and outputs

KPI	Number of policies developed
Metric	Activity
Source	CP 2017–18 page 39
Target	Not applicable
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	5	n/a	n/a	n/a
Additional explanation	Policies developed reflect NCGP needs.
KPI	ARC policy advice reflecting Australian Government priorities and policies
Metric	Immediate
Source	CP 2017–18 page 39
Target	ARC policy advice reflects Australian Government priorities and policies
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Additional explanation	See pages 47–49.
KPI	ARC policy advice supporting best practice research
Metric	Immediate; intermediate
Source	CP 2017–18 page 39
Target	ARC policy advice supports best practice research
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Additional explanation	Policies developed by the ARC are responsive to NCGP and industry activities. The biannual review of ARC policies has facilitated improvement in the diversity of the research workforce.
KPI	Stakeholder engagement in ARC policy development activities (including international organisations and researchers)
Metric	Immediate; intermediate
Source	CP 2017–18 page 39
Target	Stakeholder engagement in ARC policy development activities
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Additional explanation	Key stakeholders contributed to the development of new ARC policies.
KPI	Stakeholder satisfaction with the quality of ARC policy advice
Metric	Immediate; intermediate
Source	CP 2017–18 page 39
Target	ARC policies reflect national and international research policy developments
Results	2017–18	2016–17	2015–16	2014–15
	Target met	Met	Met	Met
Additional explanation	Stakeholders are supportive of ARC policies, and have actively participated in policy development.

¹ Benefits Realisation Review of Excellence in Research for Australia, September 2013, ACIL Allen Consulting