Assessment and scoring guidance - Smart Ideas 2025 investment round – Endeavour Fund
Smart Ideas Proposals will be assessed using the guidance, criteria, and scoring tables below.
On this page
Assessment guidance
The Smart Ideas investment mechanism is intended to catalyse and rapidly test promising, innovative research ideas with high potential for benefit to New Zealand, to enable refresh and diversity in the science portfolio. The expectation and assessment of impact of the proposal needs to be consistent with the Smart Ideas mechanisms, in particular Benefits and Pathway(s) are indicative and do not need to be supported by evidence.
Assessors for Endeavour Fund Smart Ideas read and assess proposals assigned to them for Excellence and Impact, based on a 7-point scoring system (see scoring tables below). Each Assessor provides scores and commentary underpinning their rationale for the Science Board, and feedback for MBIE to provide to the applicant on the main strength and weakness of the proposal.
Guidance on terms
Dissemination
Novelty
Innovation
Risk
Risk management
Well-positioned
A credible research plan
Benefit (as it relates to impact)
Scale
Extent
Implementation pathway(s)
Excellence: Science Criterion (50% weighting)
Research should be well-designed, involve risk and/or novelty, and leverage additional value from wider research. Assessment must have particular regard to whether the proposed research, science or technology or related activities:
- progress and disseminate new knowledge
- have a well-designed research plan and a credible approach to risk management
- are ambitious in terms of scientific risk, technical risk, novelty and/or innovative approaches
- are well-positioned in the domestic and international research context
- if applicable to the proposal, recognises the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori.
The scores in the table below range from 1 (low quality) to 7 (high quality).
| Score | Keywords | Example |
| 1 | (Low quality) None Not fit for purpose Negligible Missing Not credible |
There is no risk and or novelty. Risk is not managed. The research plan and methodology are not credible. No additional value is leveraged from wider research. No new knowledge will be progressed or disseminated. When you would otherwise expect it, there is no recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori. |
| 2 | Minimal Poor Inadequate Insufficient Doubtful Lacking Unlikely |
There is minimal risk and or novelty. Risk management is doubtful. The research plan and methodology are poor. Little additional value is leveraged from wider research. Minimal new knowledge will be progressed or disseminated. When you would otherwise expect it, there is insufficient recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori. |
| 3 | Limited Uncertain Some Partial Incomplete Lacks detail Possible |
There is some risk and/or novelty. Risk management lacks detail. The research plan and methodology lack detail. Some additional value is leveraged from wider research. Limited new knowledge will be progressed and disseminated. When you would otherwise expect it, there is only partial recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori. |
| 4 | Acceptable Sufficient Suitable Adequate Reasonable Quite likely |
There is acceptable risk and/or novelty. Risk management is adequate. The research plan and methodology are sufficient. Sufficient additional value is leveraged from wider research. Adequate new knowledge will be progressed and disseminated. If applicable, there is suitable recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori. |
| 5 | Significant Good Substantial Well Clear Large Probable |
There is significant risk and/or novelty. Risk management is good. The research plan and methodology are clear. Substantial additional value is leveraged from wider research. Significant new knowledge will be progressed and disseminated. If applicable, there is good recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori. |
| 6 | Strong High Comprehensive Very good Very well Extensive Certain |
There is high risk and/or novelty. Risk management is very good. The research plan and methodology are comprehensive. Comprehensive additional value is leveraged from wider research. Extensive new knowledge will be progressed and disseminated. If applicable, there is very good recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori. |
| 7 | (High quality) Excellent Exemplary Impressive Outstanding Total Definite |
The proposal has outstanding novelty and includes risk. There is exceptional risk management. The research plan and methodology are impressive. Exemplary additional value is leveraged from wider research. Outstanding new knowledge will be progressed and disseminated. If applicable, the project has outstanding recognition of the distinctive research, science and innovation contributions of Māori people, knowledge, and resources, including mātauranga Māori. |
Excellence: Team Criterion (15% weighting)
The proposed team should have the mix of complementary skills, knowledge, and resources to deliver the proposed research, science or technology or related activities, and to manage risk. Assessment must have particular regard as to whether:
- the mix of skills is appropriate for the research
- the team has the skills, knowledge and resources which give confidence in their ability to deliver the research
- if applicable, the team has the appropriate Māori expertise for the project.
The scores in the table below range from 1 (low quality) to 7 (high quality).
| Score | Keywords | Example |
| 1 | (Low quality) None Not fit for purpose Negligible Missing Not credible |
The team has none of the skills, knowledge, or resources needed. The team gives no confidence in their ability to deliver the research or manage risks. When you would otherwise expect it, appropriate Māori expertise in the team is missing. |
| 2 | Minimal Poor Inadequate Insufficient Doubtful Lacking Unlikely |
The team has an inadequate mix of the skills, knowledge and resources needed. The team gives little confidence in their ability to deliver the research or manage risks. When you would otherwise expect it, the team is lacking appropriate Māori expertise. |
| 3 | Limited Uncertain Some Partial Incomplete Lacks detail Possible |
The team has a partial mix of the skills, knowledge and resources needed. The team gives some confidence in their ability to deliver the research and manage risks. When you would otherwise expect it, there is limited appropriate Māori expertise in the team. |
| 4 | Acceptable Sufficient Suitable Adequate Reasonable Quite likely |
The team has a suitable mix of the skills, knowledge and resources needed. The team gives adequate confidence in their ability to deliver the research and manage risks. If applicable, there is reasonable or appropriate Māori expertise in the team. |
| 5 | Significant Good Substantial Well Clear Large Probable |
The team has a good mix of the skills, knowledge and resources needed. The team gives good confidence in their ability to deliver the research and manage risks. If applicable, there is significant appropriate Māori expertise in the team. |
| 6 | Strong High Comprehensive Very good Very well Extensive Certain |
The team has a comprehensive mix of the skills, knowledge and resources needed. The team gives high confidence in their ability to deliver the research and manage risks. If applicable, there is comprehensive appropriate Māori expertise in the team. |
| 7 | (High quality) Excellent Exemplary Impressive Outstanding Total Definite |
The team has an impressive mix of the necessary skills, knowledge and resources needed. The team gives outstanding confidence in their ability to deliver the research and manage risks. If applicable, there is exemplary appropriate Māori expertise in the team. |
Impact: Benefit to New Zealand (25% weighting)
Research should have direct and indirect benefits or effect on individuals, communities, or society as a whole, including broad benefits to New Zealand’s economy, environment or society. Assessment must have particular regard to:
- the scale and extent of potential benefits from the proposed research, science or technology, or related activities
- the extent of alignment with 1 or more areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need for New Zealand
- where relevant, the extent to which the project has identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori.
The scores in the table below range from 1 (low quality) to 7 (high quality).
| Score | Keywords | Example |
| 1 | (Low quality) None Not fit for purpose Negligible Missing Not credible |
The scale and extent of the potential (direct or indirect) benefits of the proposed work is negligible. The outcomes have no alignment with any areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need. Where relevant, the project has not identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori. |
| 2 | Minimal Poor Inadequate Insufficient Doubtful Lacking Unlikely |
The scale and extent of the potential (direct or indirect) benefits of the proposed work is minimal. The outcomes have doubtful alignment with 1 or more areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need. Where relevant, the project has poorly identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori. |
| 3 | Limited Uncertain Some Partial Incomplete Lacks detail Possible |
The scale and extent of the potential (direct or indirect) benefits of the proposed work is limited. The outcomes have some alignment with 1 or more areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need. Where relevant, the project has partially identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori. |
| 4 | Acceptable Sufficient Suitable Adequate Reasonable Quite likely |
The scale and extent of the potential (direct or indirect) benefits of the proposed work is adequate. The outcomes have reasonable alignment with 1 or more areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need. Where relevant, the project has adequately identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori. |
| 5 | Significant Good Substantial Well Clear Large Probable |
The scale and extent of the potential (direct or indirect) benefits of the proposed work is significant. The outcomes have good alignment with 1 or more areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need. Where relevant, the project has clearly identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori. |
| 6 | Strong High Comprehensive Very good Very well Extensive Certain |
The scale and extent of the potential (direct or indirect) benefits of the proposed work is extensive. The outcomes have very good alignment with 1 or more areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need. Where relevant, the project has comprehensively identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori. |
| 7 | (High quality) Excellent Exemplary Impressive Outstanding Total Definite |
The scale and extent of the potential (direct or indirect) benefits of the proposed work is impressive. The outcomes have outstanding alignment with 1 or more areas of future additional value, growth, or critical need. Where relevant, the project has outstandingly identified and evaluated the potential impacts for Māori. |
Impact: Implementation Pathways (10% weighting)
Research should have an indicative implementation pathway(s) to deliver public benefit to New Zealand that is not limited to a single firm or end-user, and an understanding of the barriers to impact. Assessment must have particular regard to:
- the degree to which the proposal demonstrates an understanding of the enablers and barriers in potential implementation pathway(s) to deliver public benefits to New Zealand
- identification of the indicative end or next-users, beneficiaries, and stakeholders
- for those projects with mātauranga Māori, assess whether there is sufficient input from Māori at the appropriate stage(s) of the project, that they are adequately resourced, to ensure effective implementation.
The scores in the table below range from 1 (low quality) to 7 (high quality).
| Score | Keywords | Example |
| 1 | (Low quality) None Not fit for purpose Negligible Missing Not credible |
The indicative implementation pathway(s) is not credible because:
|
| 2 | Minimal Poor Inadequate Insufficient Doubtful Lacking Unlikely |
The indicative implementation pathway(s) has minimal credibility because:
|
| 3 | Limited Uncertain Some Partial Incomplete Lacks detail Possible |
The indicative implementation pathway(s) has limited credibility because:
|
| 4 | Acceptable Sufficient Suitable Adequate Reasonable Quite likely |
The indicative implementation pathway(s) has acceptable credibility because:
|
| 5 | Significant Good Substantial Well Clear Large Probable |
The indicative implementation pathway(s) has good credibility because:
|
| 6 | Strong High Comprehensive Very good Very well Extensive Certain Likely |
The indicative implementation pathway(s) has very good credibility because:
|
| 7 | (High quality) Excellent Exemplary Impressive Outstanding Total Highly likely |
The indicative implementation pathway(s) has outstanding credibility because:
|
Vision Mātauranga assessment
Through the Vision Mātauranga Policy, we encourage appropriate and distinctive research arising from the interface between Māori knowledge and science to deliver effective and innovative products, services, and outcomes for New Zealand. Vision Mātauranga is designed to inspire researchers to find innovative responses to opportunities and solutions to issues and needs facing our country. This includes encouraging and building the capability, capacity and networks of Māori and the research community to collaborate in carrying out this work.
Giving effect to the Vision Mātauranga policy
Where applicable, proposals must consider the relevancy of the Vision Mātauranga Policy. We expect that the Vision Mātauranga Policy will not be relevant to all proposals. Proposals that give effect to the Policy should demonstrate the relevance and use of a fit-for-purpose approach.
Related to Vision Mātauranga, we are asking assessors the following:
- In your opinion, is the Vision Mātauranga policy relevant to this proposal? (Yes / No)
If the assessor ticks ‘Yes’ then we ask the assessor to answer the follow up question.
- In your opinion, how well will the project give effect to the Vision Mātauranga Policy (i.e., realise the potential of Māori people, knowledge and resources), and reflect genuine, fit-for-purpose approaches?
Consider the specific activities, output and outcomes described, and whether they will create impact for Māori. Assessors will select from the following to best describe their opinion: Exceptional / Very Well / Well / Not Well / Absent.
If the Vision Mātauranga policy is relevant to this proposal, then the proposal can give effect to the Vision Mātauranga policy by considering the various ways in which Māori communities, knowledge and resources may be enabled, mobilised, and empowered in research, science and innovation. The manner and extent to which proposals give effect to Vision Mātauranga may differ depending on the research.
- Very strong applications, giving effect to Vision Mātauranga, may be Māori-led or co-led.
- Strong applications may have Māori researchers or traditional knowledge holders as part of the team; or may work meaningfully with Māori communities, interest groups, businesses, or key individuals.
- Strong applications enabling Māori knowledge may use kaupapa Māori approaches or draw deeply on mātauranga Māori.
- Others may incorporate Māori principles or perspectives into the research.
Enabling Māori people will be an important part of giving effect to Vision Mātauranga, as the appropriate understanding, development, and protection of Māori knowledge and resources will have Māori input. Research positioned to give effect to the Vision Mātauranga policy will create distinctive and meaningful impact for Māori and for New Zealand in any or all of the following ways:
- Enhancing productivity and performance of Māori and non-Māori enterprise through new products, processes, and services.
- Achieving environmental sustainability by utilising distinctive Māori relationships with the environment.
- Improving health and social well-being for Māori (the Endeavour Fund does not fund research with primarily health outcomes but will support this as a secondary outcome, as long as the sum of these outcomes is 49% or less of the proposal’s outcomes).
- Generating new knowledge at the interface between indigenous knowledge (including mātauranga Māori) and research, science and innovation.
- Generating new indigenous knowledge (including mātauranga Māori) and research, science, and innovation.