Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Protected area / relocation · Australia · 2018–2025

Great Barrier Reef Foundation A$443m grant (Australia)

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
  • The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
What the record lacks: 1 insufficient · 1 not measured · 1 unclear See the gaps

In 2018 the Australian government awarded a A$443 million grant to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation without a tender. The national audit office reviewed the award in January 2019.

A$443mGrant awarded without a tender
Great Barrier Reef Foundation, 2018. The audit office reported administrative costs of up to A$86m.

Status As of the latest sources reviewed (2025): the award was audited in January 2019; no later outcome of the grant is on record.

What?
The Australian government gave a A$443 million grant to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation without a tender. Australian National Audit Office
Where?
Australia; the Great Barrier Reef. Australian National Audit Office
When?
2018 (award); January 2019 (audit report). Australian National Audit Office
Who?
Gained
Lost
None on record
Harmed
None on record
Why?
The sources reviewed do not state the government's rationale for awarding the grant without a tender.
How?
Direct grant from the federal budget, not put to competitive tender. Australian National Audit Office
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

In 2018 the Australian government awarded a grant of A$443 million (A$443.3 million in the audit office's report) to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation. The award was not put to tender. The Australian national audit office (ANAO) published a performance audit of the award in January 2019 (audit report No. 22, 2018-19).

The audit office's findings, as recorded, included that the grant was made without competition and that its administrative costs could reach A$86 million.

Press reports said the foundation's paid annual advisory panel included mining and fossil-fuel companies. The sources reviewed do not carry the foundation's or the government's own account of the award.

The Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) reported in 2025 the sharpest decline in the reef's coral cover on its record, as summarised in the sources reviewed.

  1. 2018A$443m awarded to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation without a tender
  2. 2019January: audit office publishes performance audit of the award (No. 22, 2018-19)
  3. 2025AIMS reports the sharpest decline on the reef

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

    Recorded

    • The audit office examined the award of A$443.3m to the foundation; the grant was not competitively tendered and administrative costs of up to A$86m were recorded.
    • Press reports said the foundation's paid annual panel included mining and fossil-fuel companies.

    In court and with insurers

    Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

    Lawsuits and rulings

    No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.

    Insurers

    No insurer decision on record.

    What nature saw

    Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

    Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

    Grant
    A$443m
    Awarded without a tender, 2018 (ANAO, 2019)
    Administrative costs
    Up to A$86m
    As recorded by the audit office
    Reef condition
    Sharpest decline in 2025
    AIMS, 2025, as summarised in the sources reviewed

    What we don't know

    Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

    Nature

    • Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.

    Record

    • Insufficient Details attributed to the audit office in a secondary summary that was not independently verified: the foundation had 6 employees, the award took 11 working days, and the grant was paid up front.
    • Unclear The reef-spending breakdown of the grant is not given in the sources reviewed.

    Did the harm stop?

    Not on record in the sources reviewed.

    Who paid?

    The grant was funded from the Australian federal budget.

    Sources

    Voices on record: — Company or project✓ Government and regulators— Courts— Press and investigations— Communities and civil society— Researchers

    Government and regulators

    Connected cases

    Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.