Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2024L00854:body:0:p23
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2024L00854
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 65752–69019

and selection processes; grant agreements and payment arrangements; systems and support; and monitoring and performance assessment procedures. Officials should consider that duplication will generally add to an entity's administrative costs and may increase compliance cost for potential grantees and grantees.
          * Officials should consider other sources of funding that may be available. Consideration should be given to the possibility of 'double-dipping' by a grantee. Double-dipping occurs where a grantee is able to obtain funding for the same grant activity from more than one source.
          * Officials should be alert to the possibility of 'cost shifting' to the Commonwealth by another level of government, or 'substitution of effort' by another level of government. Cost shifting occurs where, for example, the Commonwealth funds a grant activity that should be paid for by a state, territory or local government. Officials should put in place a range of procedures to minimise opportunities for cost shifting and substitution of effort. These include seeking assurances that the funding will not be used for grant activities that would normally be paid for by a state, territory or local government. A further measure is to specify the types of grant activities excluded from Commonwealth grants in any relevant grant documentation such as grant opportunity guidelines.
          * Officials should consider the use of longer term grant agreements, where appropriate. When considering the length of term of grant agreements, officials should consider the administrative costs involved for the entity and grantees. Longer term grant agreements may better achieve value with relevant money and government policy outcomes, than conducting multiple grant opportunities with grant agreements of shorter term duration.

    13.        Consistency with Grant Guidelines and Established Processes
    13.1.   Consistency with grant guidelines and established processes is key to better practice grants administration. Achieving government policy outcomes should be at the core when designing grant opportunity selection processes, guidelines, associated grant agreements as well as an entity's practices and procedures.
    13.2.   It is important that officials develop clear, consistent and well-documented grant opportunity guidelines and other related documentation. Grant opportunity guidelines are the authoritative documents and should be fit-for-purpose and align with the nine key principles of the CGRPs. Officials should consider that a single reference source for policy guidance and other documentation (for example, administrative procedures, eligibility and assessment criteria appraisal processes, monitoring requirements, evaluation strategies and standard forms) helps to ensure consistent and efficient grants administration.[78]
    13.3.   The content and complexity of grant opportunity guidelines and related processes should be proportional to the grant program, grant activities, potential grantees and the available funding. It is important that potential grantees and beneficiaries of grant activities are not disadvantaged by deviations from the published selection criteria and processes. Grant opportunity guidelines should