The individual actions by which aspects of the project are disseminated to others, for awareness, knowledge, and action.

Source document for glossary entry: Hinton, T., Gannaway, D., Berry, B., & Moore, K. (2011). The D-Cubed Guide: Planning for Effective Dissemination. Sydney: Australian Teaching and Learning Council, p. 6.

The intentionally-developed approach to dissemination of a particular project which includes identification of targeted potential adopters, an assessment of the climate of readiness for change, planning how engagement will be built throughout the project, and enabling transfer of project outcomes.

Source document for glossary entry: Hinton, T., Gannaway, D., Berry, B., & Moore, K. (2011). The D-Cubed Guide: Planning for Effective Dissemination. Sydney: Australian Teaching and Learning Council, p. 6.

“The engagement of an innovation in the local process and perhaps the modification of policies, procedures and structures to accommodate the new practice” (Southwell et al., 2005, p. 81).

Source document for glossary entry: Hinton, T., Gannaway, D., Berry, B., & Moore, K. (2011). The D-Cubed Guide: Planning for Effective Dissemination. Sydney: Australian Teaching and Learning Council, p. 6.

Reference used in glossary entry: Southwell, D., Gannaway, D., Orrell, J., Chalmers, D., & Abraham, C. (2005). Strategies for effective dissemination of project outcome: Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education.

People for whom the innovation is designed, such as students.

Source document for glossary entry:  Hinton, T., Gannaway, D., Berry, B., & Moore, K. (2011). The D-Cubed Guide: Planning for Effective Dissemination. Sydney: Australian Teaching and Learning Council, p. 6.

'The authentic involvement of targeted potential adopters by including them in the evolution of the project findings throughout the project.'

Source document for glossary entry:  Hinton, T., Gannaway, D., Berry, B., & Moore, K. (2011). The D-Cubed Guide: Planning for Effective Dissemination. Sydney: Australian Teaching and Learning Council, p. 6.

Impact is the difference the project makes to the area of focus in terms of changes and benefits, during and after the project has finished. The Office for Learning and Teaching (OLT) have developed an Impact Management Planning and Evaluation Ladder (IMPEL) to guide grants applicants to consider the project's impact at multiple levels.

This is a person (or a team) who is appointed by the grant recipients for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness and impact of the project. This person or team is not involved in the conception, development or delivery of the project. They may also be referred to as an external evaluator. Note that independent evaluators are mandatory for some categories of grant (e.g. Commissioned, Innovation and Development) but not others (e.g. Seed Projects and Extension Grants).  

These are institutional contributions to a project, most often in the form of a percentage of a project team member’s time which might be, for example, 20% of their salary (equivalent of 1 day a week) for the duration of the project. Other common in-kind contributions are office and meeting room/lecture theatre use, provision of computing and web-based facilities, catering, and hosting teleconferences.

'An idea, product, process or service that adds value, is useful or transforms current practice in the context to which it is applied. ‘First generation innovators’ are those who do or create something new or different. ‘Second-generation innovators’ are those who take an innovation from one context and replicate, adapt or transform it for use within a new context.' (Southwell et al., 2005, p. 2).

Source document for glossary entry: Hinton, T., Gannaway, D., Berry, B., & Moore, K. (2011). The D-Cubed Guide: Planning for Effective Dissemination. Sydney: Australian Teaching and Learning Council.

Reference used in glossary entry: Southwell, D., Gannaway, D., Orrell, J., Chalmers, D., & Abraham, C. (2005). Strategies for effective dissemination of project outcome: Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education.

An amount from the total project budget that the lead institution claims to cover the administrative and overhead costs associated with hosting the project. Historically, OLT have stipulated that the administration levy does not exceed 10% of the total budget. Note that it is up to the institution to apply the levy. Some institutions choose not to apply the levy.