Fresh details have emerged about the government’s so-called “sports rorts” affair after new documents revealed at least six grants were approved by the minister despite no application form for the money being received for them.

In answers to questions on notice to two inquiries, Sport Australia also said that five new applications for a community sport infrastructure grant – all of which were approved for funding after the government entered the caretaker period – didn’t meet the score to be recommended for funding by Sport Australia.

A copy of the Sport Australia brief to Bridget McKenzie dated 4 April 2019 released among the new documents showed the former sport minister agreed to provide reasons if funding amounts or recipients were changed or added and noted the recommendations had not been approved by the Sport Australia board.

The Greens sport spokeswoman, Janet Rice, accused McKenzie of “signing off on the brief noting that she was approving projects in breach of the CSIG program guidelines” because reasons were not provided.

Guardian Australia has previously reported that on 11 April 2019 some 11 changes to the final list of sport grant recipients were made by McKenzie’s office in consultation with the prime minister’s office after the government had entered the caretaker period.

In May the Australian National Audit Office revealed the health department also had concerns and concluded if the brief was signed during the caretaker period then the minister should have consulted with the opposition before making a decision.

Sport Australia said that the changes included “six grants about which Sport Australia has no knowledge and no application form”.

Although grant guidelines allowed changes after the assessment process if there were “emerging issues”, Sport Australia said McKenzie did not provide details of any issues related to the projects and it could not request details during the caretaker period.

Sport Australia queried what the “status” of McKenzie’s decision was given it was received “during caretaker” and how to manage the six new applications.

In answers to the Senate inquiry on sports grants, Sport Australia revealed the scores of the five new applications that didn’t meet the score of 74 out of 100 to be recommended for funding by Sport Australia:

• Westbury bowls club, in the Tasmanian seat of Lyons, received $235,000 for a synthetic green despite a score of just 40 out of 100.

• Yarra Ranges council, in the outer-Melbourne seat of Casey, received $500,000 for the Belgrave reserve netball court development despite a score of 59.

• Yeppoon Australian football club, in the Queensland seat of Capricornia, received $146,200 for Swan Park lights despite a score of 66.

• Strathbogie shire council, in the independent-held seat of Indi, received $350,000 for the Nagambie tourism infrastructure project and foreshore walk despite a score of 60.

• Pennant Hills Demons junior AFL club received $500,000 for its clubhouse building project despite a score of 69.

The ANAO has found that if McKenzie had followed Sport Australia’s recommendations only projects scoring 74 and above would have received funding. In January a scathing auditor general’s report found the former sport minister had skewed the program towards target and marginal seats by running a parallel assessment process.

Rice said the scores showed “the extent of the then ministers’ pork barrelling and the brazen way that she overrode Sport Australia”.

The chair of the committee, Labor’s Anthony Chisholm, called on McKenzie to explain why five projects “which scored significantly below the recommended cutoff” were added at the last minute. He argued they show that “McKenzie and the prime minister’s office choose political gain over project merit”.

Questions on notice to the grants inquiry contain multiple versions of colour-coded spreadsheets detailing CSIG applicants by electorate and the party holding that seat.

It is unclear whether the spreadsheets and calculation were created by Sport Australia or the minister’s office.

McKenzie has consistently denied wrongdoing in the handling of the program – arguing she retained a discretion to override Sport Australia’s decisions, although the ANAO said it was “not evident” what her legal authority to do so was.

McKenzie has denied being aware of the colour-coding of projects by electorate, said she was not influenced by a seat’s marginal status and also argued that more Labor seats benefited as a result of her interventions.

Although the final brief was signed by McKenzie and dated 4 April 2019, emails between Sport Australia and the health department produced to Senate estimates confirm it was not received until 8.47am on 11 April – after parliament had been prorogued and the House of Representatives dissolved ahead of the federal election.

Sport Australia emailed the health department’s caretaker team, noting further changes had occurred in a version received at 12.45pm because the minister’s office claimed the previous version “contained errors”.

Sport Australia has produced the ministerial submission it sent on 3 April 2019 purportedly signed by McKenzie on 4 April.

The cover sheet is edited by hand to specify that grants were not “recommended by Sport Australia” but rather “approved by [the] minister”.

McKenzie “agreed” that under Sport Australia’s grant guidelines “reasons should be recorded where the delegate rejects or changes the funding amount from what is being recommended”.

“As such, provide reasons for rejecting or changing the recommended grant applicants,” Sport Australia instructed the minister.

The submission notes the minister’s office had “provided details to Sport Australia of nine additional projects received outside of the program closing date” and advised these could only be considered if changes responded to “emerging issues”.

Rice said the documents make clear “Sport Australia wanted a paper trail to distance themselves from the government’s blatantly corrupt pork barrelling”.

The release of the documents comes ahead of the inquiry recommencing on Wednesday, with evidence from the secretary of the department of prime minister and cabinet, Phil Gaetjens, and the departments of infrastructure and finance.

Rice said she planned to question Gaetjens “on why there wasn’t a genuinely independent, transparent investigation into the minister’s actions”.

Guardian Australia contacted McKenzie for comment.