The Primary Sector Growth Fund (PSGF) is the Ministry for Primary Industries' (MPI's) co-investment fund for food and fibre projects that lift profits or cut costs across New Zealand's value chain. MPI funds up to 40 per cent of project costs, or 50 per cent by exception, with a minimum Crown contribution of $250,000 and no set cap. Every project starts with an Expression of Interest (EOI), which you can submit at any time.
By Paul Burke, Path Forward. Last updated [publish date]. Checked against MPI's PSGF pages on 28 October 2026.
PSGF at a glance
Run by: Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI)
Funding: $266 million over four years, allocated in Budget 2026 [CONFIRM: Beehive release]
Crown share: Up to 40% of total project cost; up to 50% by exception
Minimum: $250,000 from MPI, matched by at least $375,000 from the applicant ($625,000 total). Smaller projects by exception.
Maximum: No set cap. Multi-year, multi-million-dollar programmes are considered.
How to apply: Online EOI, then a full application if MPI invites you
Rounds: None. EOIs are accepted at any time.
EOI to signed contract: About 5 to 6 months, in my experience
Contact: psgfund@mpi.govt.nz
What the PSGF funds, and what it doesn't
The PSGF funds projects anywhere in the food and fibre value chain, from on-farm to processing, marketing and distribution. MPI lists four broad types of project:
developing and launching high-value products, ingredients or materials
turning by-products into high-value products
testing solutions that cut costs or improve efficiency
improving productivity and value across the value chain.
A project's main purpose can be economic, environmental, social or cultural. Whatever the purpose, the application has to show direct economic benefit for New Zealand's food and fibre sectors. Since April 2026, the fund has also accepted feasibility proposals for large or community-scale water storage and reticulation, under separate guidance.
What it won't fund. MPI excludes:
work an organisation would normally do as part of its core business
proposals that are entirely export-focused
funding that subsidises commercial activity
capital expenditure that subsidises commercial operations.
Pilot-scale capital, such as a prototype or equipment for new product development, is the exception.
The export rule catches people out. Export growth is a perfectly good outcome, but the funding can't act as an export subsidy. My reading is that applications should frame the benefit as value captured inside the New Zealand value chain (higher returns to growers, processors or exporters, or lower costs), with export sales as the route to it.
Is your project eligible? Five tests
1. Does it lift profits or cut production costs in New Zealand's food and fibre value chain? MPI treats this as a prerequisite. If the benefit can't be stated in those terms, the project isn't a PSGF project.
2. Is it big enough? The floor is $625,000 in total project cost. MPI considers smaller projects by exception, and a few have been funded, but plan on the floor.
3. Can you fund your share? Your 60 per cent must be real money or genuine in-kind, committed by the time the project starts. The EOI asks this directly. Other Crown funding can't count towards it, and neither can money you've already spent developing the idea.
4. Is it beyond business as usual? MPI won't fund what you would be expected to do anyway. The question underneath every application is what the Crown's money makes possible that wouldn't happen otherwise.
5. Does the benefit reach beyond your own business? The EOI asks what the impact will be for the wider sector, compared with no government investment. Projects with a credible path to benefits for other growers, processors or the sector score better than those that only improve one company's margins.
Not sure your project passes? Book a 30-minute PSGF fit call. I'll tell you plainly whether it looks like a PSGF project, and if it doesn't, where else to look.
How much MPI will co-invest
MPI contributes up to 40 per cent of total project cost, and the applicant funds the rest. Where the case for government investment is strong enough, MPI may go to 50 per cent.
Cash preferred. In-kind contributions are considered case by case.
In-kind must be additional. It must be a cost that arises only because the project goes ahead, sits outside usual business activity and is central to delivery. Staff time, materials you already own and existing plant or facilities can qualify.
No other Crown money. Other government funding can't count towards your share.
No past spend. Time or money already spent developing the idea doesn't count.
Private funding first. You must show your funding before MPI considers its share.
A worked example (illustrative). A $1.5 million project could seek up to $600,000 from MPI. The applicant and its partners fund $900,000, for example $700,000 in cash and $200,000 in staff time and existing equipment that the project genuinely needs.
What earns 50 per cent? MPI doesn't define "sufficiently compelling". In the published project list, the one project in my sample funded at 50 per cent is a multi-organisation, sector-wide programme. My reading is that the higher share goes to work with broad public benefit that no single company would fund alone. It isn't a lever for a single-firm project.
How MPI assesses applications
MPI scores every application against four criteria. It doesn't publish weightings. Te Tiriti o Waitangi partnership is built into each criterion rather than assessed separately.
Net benefits to New Zealand
What MPI looks for: Higher profits or lower costs in the value chain, realistic enough to survive MPI's analysis, and a return on the Crown's investment. Wider environmental, social and iwi benefits count too.
Where I see applications fall short: Features described instead of benefits. Benefits that stop at the applicant's own gate.
Rationale for additional Crown funding
What MPI looks for: A quantified picture of what happens without Crown funding, and what the funding enables beyond private investment.
Where I see applications fall short: A counterfactual of "the project won't happen", which is rarely credible. A similar project already funded elsewhere.
A strong project plan
What MPI looks for: Budgeted activities linked to benefits, key assumptions stated and tested, named oversight, and risks with mitigations.
Where I see applications fall short: An opportunity that hasn't been validated. Assumptions presented as facts.
Ability to deliver benefits
What MPI looks for: Reputation, financial stability, ability to fund your share, delivery capacity, understanding of end users, a plan to sustain benefits, awareness of regulation and prior work, freedom to operate.
Where I see applications fall short: Thin management bandwidth. A balance sheet that can't carry the co-funding. Technology without an adoption plan.
The EOI: what MPI asks and what it's testing
The EOI is a short online form. You can't save it part-way, so draft your answers offline first. MPI sets no word limits but asks you to be concise. These are the questions it asks:
Total cost, MPI request, your cash and in-kind, other co-investors. Tests whether the 40/60 split works and the money is real.
Will 60% be secured by project start? Tests your ability to fund your share.
Previous government funding for this or similar work. Tests additionality and duplication.
Project name, sector, duration (1 to 2, 3 to 4 or 5 to 7 years). Tests scope and fit.
What you plan to achieve: problem, end point, what is novel. Tests clarity of purpose and innovation.
Workstreams and main activities. Tests whether a credible plan exists behind the idea.
Other organisations involved, during and after the project. Tests delivery capacity and the path to adoption.
Economic benefits, quantified where possible. Tests the prerequisite: profits up or costs down.
Environmental, social and cultural benefits. Tests wider net benefit.
Why PSGF should invest, and the value beyond private investment. Tests the rationale for Crown funding.
Three things to know before you submit:
MPI shares EOIs. An EOI is confidential, but MPI may share it within MPI and with other agencies, for expert feedback, to check that similar work isn't already funded, or to find a better-fit fund. It's also subject to the Official Information Act.
The answer comes back quickly. In my engagements, MPI has responded within about two weeks.
A "no" usually comes with a pointer. If the project isn't a PSGF fit, MPI points applicants to MBIE's science funding, New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, Invest New Zealand or the Kānoa Regional Economic Development and Investment Unit.
In my experience, MPI's PSGF team is open to discussing a draft EOI before it's formally submitted. [CONFIRM: whether this is offered to any applicant, and how to phrase it]
The full application: the June 2026 form
If MPI invites you to apply, you complete MPI's application form (the current version is dated June 2026), plus supporting attachments, and lodge it by email. For larger projects, MPI expects detail similar to the business case a corporate would put to its Board for a funding decision. You fund the cost of preparing the application yourself.
Applicant details and organisation (200 words). Entity, contacts, a description of your organisation.
Executive summary (200 words). Opportunity, solution, drivers, the benefit PSGF funding enables, the difference to the sector.
Funding breakdown (table). Cash and in-kind by contributor, evidence of commitments, prior government interactions.
Outcomes and funding rationale (no limit). What the project delivers, why it's necessary, what's innovative, why government funding is needed, what happens without it.
Project plan (500 words for the overview and 500 per workstream). Overview, a Gantt chart of workstreams over up to seven years, a detailed plan per workstream with milestones and stop/go points.
Key performance indicators (tables). At least four or five, split between project critical KPIs (progress towards outcomes) and workstream KPIs (delivery milestones).
Project delivery (no limit). Capability, capacity, project management and governance.
Benefits (narrative and tables). Economic, environmental and social or cultural benefits, each with measures, baselines and targets with and without government funding.
Plan to achieve benefits (no limit). What you'll do during the project and for five years after it: capital, partners, staff, capacity, barriers to adoption, monitoring.
Risks and mitigations (table). Risks rated 1 to 5 for likelihood, impact and residual risk, plus health and safety.
Attachments. Outcome Logic Model, budget schedules, evidence of co-funder commitments, supporting plans.
MPI's public technical guidance for applicants is dated June 2025 and describes the sections in a different order. Where the two differ, work to the form.
Three parts of the form decide most outcomes, in my view:
The with-and-without tables. MPI asks you to quantify each benefit with and without government funding. The difference between the two is the value MPI is buying, not the whole project benefit. A credible "without" case is usually slower, smaller or narrower, not "nothing happens".
The Outcome Logic Model. Every activity should trace to an output, an outcome, a benefit and a measure you can report against. If the chain breaks, assessors notice.
The declaration. If funding is approved, the application form is appended to your contract, and your project description becomes MPI's public project statement. Write it as something you'll be held to.
From EOI to contract: the process and how long it takes
MPI doesn't publish timelines. These are typical durations across my own engagements.
EOI (about 2 weeks for a response). You submit the online form; MPI reviews fit and gives high-level feedback.
Full application (8 to 12 weeks, largely in your hands). You complete the June 2026 form, schedules and Outcome Logic Model.
Assessment (about 1 month to a decision). MPI assesses against the four criteria, with expert input.
Contracting (6 to 8 weeks to signing). MPI prepares the funding agreement.
Delivery and reporting (the project term). Progress reports against milestones and KPIs, then a final report.
Allow about five to six months from submitting the EOI to a signed contract, plus the time it takes to prepare the EOI. Build that into Board and budget timing. A project that needs to start next quarter is already late.
Planning a project for the next 12 months? Book a 30-minute PSGF fit call to check timing and fit before you commit to an EOI.
Larger projects: $2 million and $5 million-plus
For requests of $2 million or more, MPI will guide you on the level of detail it needs and help progress the application. For requests of $5 million or more, MPI must get advice from the PSGF Investment Advisory Panel before making its final recommendation. The panel may also be consulted on complex or sensitive projects. Contracts at this scale use a separate funding agreement template.
After approval: contract, reporting and disclosure
Signing the funding agreement commits you to delivering the project and its benefits. Expect:
reporting against your KPIs, which become part of your annual plan and progress reports, including health and safety
a final report for every project, summarising delivery and forecasting ongoing benefits
independent audit and evaluation for projects managed as partnerships: a financial audit after the second year, a mid-term evaluation and an MPI-commissioned evaluation at the end, which MPI publishes
public disclosure. MPI publishes each project's description, partners, Crown and co-investment funding and spend to date, and quarterly updates for larger projects.
Delivery is where funded projects most often drift, usually because reporting and milestone management land on people who already have full-time jobs. Path Forward also provides post-approval programme management and grant administration.
What MPI has funded so far
MPI's project list showed 33 PSGF projects on 28 October 2026. Across a sample of 20 of them: [CONFIRM: update to all 33 before publishing]
The Crown share ranged from 32 to 50 per cent. Half were at exactly 40 per cent, and one was at 50.
MPI contributions ranged from about $229,000 to $10.4 million. The median was about $600,000.
Four were $2 million or more, and one was over $5 million.
Sectors included horticulture, seafood, meat, dairy, forestry, arable, agritech and food and beverage.
The pattern matters for anyone weighing whether to apply. Most PSGF projects are well under $1 million of Crown funding. The fund isn't reserved for big industry programmes.
Where PSGF projects stall
These are the patterns I see most often, in EOIs and in full applications.
No benefit to the wider sector. The project improves one company's position, with no credible path for others to benefit.
Technology first, adoption second. The application describes what the technology does, but not who will adopt it, what stops them and how the project overcomes that.
No management bandwidth. Nobody has the time to drive a multi-year project alongside their day job, and assessors can tell.
Features, not benefits. The application explains how something works instead of what it's worth, to whom, and by when.
An unvalidated opportunity. No customer conversations, trials or market evidence behind the numbers.
A thin balance sheet. The applicant can't credibly fund its 60 per cent, or depends on funding that isn't yet committed.
Someone got there first. Another organisation already has PSGF funding for similar work. MPI checks for duplication, so search the project list before you start.
PSGF or another fund?
The PSGF suits commercially focused projects with a clear economic benefit to New Zealand's food and fibre value chain. If yours is earlier-stage research, outside the primary sector, or mainly about one firm's export expansion, another instrument may fit better. MPI itself points applicants to MBIE's science funding, New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, Invest New Zealand and Kānoa. Comparing funds early saves months.
Key dates
May 2025: PSGF opens. Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures (SFF Futures) closes to new applications on 22 May 2025.
June 2025: MPI publishes its technical guidance for applicants.
April 2026: PSGF begins accepting feasibility proposals for large or community-scale water storage.
30 April 2026: MPI reviews its assessment criteria and application pages.
29 May 2026: Budget 2026 allocates $266 million over four years to the PSGF [CONFIRM].
June 2026: Current application form issued.
7 July 2026: MPI reviews its project requirements page (40%, with 50% and smaller projects by exception).
Frequently asked questions
What is the Primary Sector Growth Fund? The PSGF is MPI's co-investment fund for projects that increase profits or reduce production costs in New Zealand's food and fibre value chain. MPI funds up to 40 per cent of a project, and the applicant funds the rest.
Did the PSGF replace SFF Futures? Yes. The PSGF replaced Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures, which closed to new applications on 22 May 2025. MPI continues to support existing SFF Futures and Primary Growth Partnership projects until they finish.
What percentage of project costs will MPI fund? Up to 40 per cent of total project cost. By exception, where the case for government investment is strong enough, MPI may fund up to 50 per cent.
What is the minimum project size? MPI's minimum contribution is $250,000, matched by at least $375,000 from the applicant, so a total project of at least $625,000. MPI considers smaller projects by exception.
Can in-kind contributions count towards co-investment? Yes, case by case. MPI prefers cash. In-kind costs must arise only because of the project, be additional to usual business activity and be central to delivery. Staff time, materials you already own and existing equipment or facilities can qualify.
Can PSGF funding pay for equipment or other capital items? Generally not where the capital subsidises commercial operations. MPI makes an exception for pilot capital, such as a prototype or equipment for new product development.
Can I use another government grant as co-funding? No. Your contribution can't include other Crown funding, and money already spent developing the idea doesn't count.
Are there funding rounds or closing dates? No. MPI accepts EOIs at any time and invites the strongest projects to submit a full application.
How long does it take from EOI to a funding decision? MPI doesn't publish timelines. In my engagements, an EOI response has taken about two weeks, a full application 8 to 12 weeks to prepare, and a decision about a month after lodgement. Contracting takes another 6 to 8 weeks.
Do I need an Outcome Logic Model? Yes, for the full application. MPI requires an Outcome Logic Model that shows how the project's activities lead to outcomes and benefits. Your KPIs and benefit tables should trace back to it.
Ready to test your project? Book a 30-minute PSGF fit call. No preparation needed, just a clear idea of what you want to achieve.
About the author
Paul Burke is the founder of Path Forward, a Lincoln-based strategy and funding advisory for New Zealand's primary sector. Before founding Path Forward he spent a decade at New Zealand Trade and Enterprise working with high-growth exporters [CONFIRM: wording]. In 2026 he has helped clients secure $8.85 million in PSGF funding [CONFIRM: Crown share or total project value; calendar year to date]. He works with the June 2026 application form and supports funded projects through delivery. Connect on LinkedIn.
Sources
All MPI pages checked on 28 October 2026. Last-reviewed dates are MPI's.
MPI: About the Primary Sector Growth Fund (last reviewed 12 October 2026)
MPI: PSGF project requirements and guidance (last reviewed 7 July 2026)
MPI: How we assess PSGF applications (last reviewed 30 April 2026)
MPI: How to submit an expression of interest (last reviewed 22 June 2026)
MPI: What to expect if we invite you to apply (last reviewed 30 April 2026)
MPI: How we manage PSGF investments (last reviewed 3 August 2026)
MPI, Primary Sector Growth Fund application form, June 2026 (issued to invited applicants)
Hon Todd McClay, Budget 2026 release, 29 May 2026 [CONFIRM: Beehive link]
