Post #4029426

I had a minute to read through the proposed changes to the National Competitive Grants Program (https://www.arc.gov.au/system/files/2026-07/ncgp-policy-review_finalreport-20262207_0.pdf). I think there are some positive things here. I like the emphasis on ECR support, and the splitting of the main ECR grant into early-ECR and late-ECR. This should make up for DECRA shortcomings, where most grants were awarded in the last year of eligibility. I also like the increased focus on Indigenous scholars, with a dedicated funding pathway for both ECR and MCRs. These are hugely positive. I do think there are a few mis-steps though, particularly around salary funding for anyone non-ECR (no more Future Fellowship equivalent). This is going to disadvantage anyone who hasn't got a secure position, no more salary funding to entice a uni to give you a job! It also seems like quite a risk-averse strategy. The 'Explore' program is the blue-sky program, and is expected to make up just 5% of funding, while 'Breakthrough' projects, which are 'excellent research that addresses a significant gap' (what research doesn't hope to do this?) will comprise 40% of projects. The elephant in the room of the (relatively) tiny ARC budget was not addressed, and the report goes to lengths to hide this. Nowhere is the annual grant budget plotted over time in real terms. I guess because this would demonstrate too clearly that funding has declined... Anyway, these are just my quick thoughts. Interested to hear what other people think. #AusPol #AcademicChatter