When designed and delivered well, government grants can help achieve important outcomes – from supporting communities and small businesses to encouraging innovation and investment. But grants can also carry significant risks if they lack clear objectives, are overly complex, or do not have adequate oversight.

QAO’s work across our grant audits, including our most recent Supporting industry development (Report 4: 2025–26) report, has highlighted common themes in how entities design and deliver government grant programs. These insights apply across government, regardless of sector or funding type.

In this blog, we explore 5 key areas that can help ensure grants are fair, effective, and deliver lasting value for Queenslanders.

1. Design grants with clear objectives and measurable outcomes

Every program should start with a clear statement of what success looks like and how it will be measured. Grants are more likely to achieve their purpose when they have defined objectives, measurable outcomes, and a plan for collecting and verifying data from the outset.

When setting up a program, clearly link activities and funding to the results you want to achieve. Develop success indicators early and make them realistic and measurable – for example, jobs created, services improved, or participation increased. This clarity helps everyone involved understand what the program aims to deliver and how progress will be tracked over time. 

For example, a grant to help manufacturers upgrade their equipment might set targets for productivity gains, or jobs created. Clear measures like these make it easier to assess progress and demonstrate value for money.

2. Align grant processes with program intent

Eligibility, assessment, and funding conditions should reflect the purpose of the program. Programs designed to support innovation or emerging sectors, for example, may need different risk settings from those suited to well-established organisations.

Think carefully about who you want to reach and what types of projects you want to encourage. For example, a program designed to help new technology businesses test and scale their ideas might allow staged funding with larger upfront payments. This recognises that these businesses may find it harder to secure early finance elsewhere. In contrast, a program aimed at established industries or major infrastructure projects may require higher levels of co-contributions and use reimbursement-based payments.

Tailoring processes in this way helps ensure that funding arrangements support policy goals, make programs more accessible to the right applicants, and increase the likelihood of achieving intended outcomes.

3. Establish strong governance and clarity in decision-making

The provision of public funds to individuals, organisations, and businesses needs to be fair and justifiable. Strong governance with clear roles, responsibilities, and guidance helps entities make sound and defensible funding decisions. 

Make sure your framework sets out who is responsible for each stage of the process – from assessment to approval. Provide consistent guidance to assessors so similar applications are treated in similar ways. Where exceptions are necessary, record the reasons and approvals clearly. This clarity helps promote fairness and trust in how funding decisions are made.

4. Manage risk and administration proportionately

Grants vary widely in size, complexity, and risk. A proportionate administrative approach helps ensure public funds are managed well without placing unnecessary burden on applicants or staff.

Scale your administration, monitoring, and reporting requirements to suit the nature of the project. Larger or higher-risk projects may need more frequent checks, while smaller, low-risk grants may allow for simpler reporting. For instance, a community event grant of $5,000 may only need a short acquittal form and receipts, while a $5 million infrastructure grant might warrant milestone reviews, independent audits, and detailed financial reporting. 

Matching the level of assurance to the level of risk keeps processes efficient and ensures resources are focused where they have the most impact.

5. Aim to publicly share program information

Openness about how government funding is used and what it achieves is important for public confidence. Publishing results also supports learning across the public sector and highlights the impact of government investment.

Entities should share appropriate information about program and project outcomes while respecting any commercial and privacy considerations. Where there are limitations on what details can be shared, consider what information can be released — such as summaries of funded projects, overall results, or program-level achievements, and how sensitivities may reduce over time. 

Bringing it together

These learnings highlight how strong program design, clear governance, proportionate assurance, and transparent reporting can improve outcomes across all types of grant programs.

By focusing on these principles, entities can make their grants more effective, fair, and responsive – and build greater confidence in how public funds are used to deliver benefits for Queensland communities.

You can read more in QAO’s report Supporting industry development (Report 4: 2025–26) on our website.

Resources

Reports

Supporting industry development (Report 4: 2025–26)

Improving grants management (Report 2: 2022–23)

Awarding of sports grants (Report 6: 2020–21)

Better practice guides

Grant management maturity model

Blogs

Responsibilities of ministers and public servants regarding grants