4.21 The purpose of the selection phase was to use the outputs of the profiling and appraisal stages to create a priority list of initiatives to enable informed decision‐making for the allocation of funding.113 To achieve this, a merit matrix was structured using the profiling assessment categories and the results of the economic appraisal.
4 .22 Using a rule‐based combination of the proponent's BCR (as moderated by the Office of the Infrastructure Coordinator appraisal) and the outcome of the profiling assessment, the Office of the Infrastructure Coordinator developed a merit matrix of 37 of the 94 projects shortlisted. The remaining 57 projects either had a BCR that was below the threshold of 1.5114 or a profiling assessment had not been able to be completed. The results are summarised in Table 4.4 which outlines that, of the 37 projects, nine had been assessed as not having a good fit with the strategic priorities or as not delivering significant economic benefits and therefore (under the documented Evaluation Plan) should not be further considered as either priority or potential candidates for the Interim Priority List. Accordingly, based on the merit matrix results, the Prioritisation Evaluation Committee focused its consideration on the 28 projects that had been assessed as either a High Priority or a Moderate Priority.
Table 4.4 Application of merit matrix to shortlisted projects: December 2008
Overall ranking | Prioritisation Category | Merit Matrix | Number of Projects in Category |
Priority candidates for further consideration | Very High Priority | Exceptional BCR and Very Good Profiling | No projects |
| Exceptional BCR and Good Profiling | 4 projects (only 1 of which had sufficient information to support the BCR) | |
Strong BCR and Very Good Profiling | 3 projects (2 of which had sufficient information provided to support the BCR) | ||
Strong BCR and Good Profiling | 4 projects (2 for private funding and the other 2 did not provide sufficient information to support the BCR) | ||
| Exceptional BCR and Basic Profiling | 3 projects (only 1 of which had sufficient information to support the BCR) | |
Potential candidates | Strong BCR and Basic Profiling | 8 projects (only 2 of which had sufficient information to support the BCR) | |
Satisfactory BCR and Very Good Profiling | 2 projects (neither of which had sufficient information to support the BCR) | ||
Satisfactory BCR and Good Profiling | 4 projects (none of which had sufficient information to support the BCR) | ||
Not further considered | No Priority | All other combinations | 9 projects (5 of which had insufficient information to support the BCR, another of which was for private funding) |
Source: ANAO analysis of Office of the Infrastructure Coordinator data.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
113 Infrastructure Australia, Outline of Infrastructure Australia's Prioritisation Methodology, 24 September 2008, p. 5.
114 In a small number of instances, initiatives with a BCR below 1.5 had been assessed prior to the decision having been taken to focus only on those initiatives with a BCR above 1.5. The initiatives with a BCR below 1.5 that had been assessed were included in the merit matrix.