R&D for Multi EO Satellite Data Integration - EOADP

Announcement of Opportunity

Publication date:

Application deadline:

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. AO Objectives
  3. Eligibility Criteria
  4. Applications
  5. Evaluation
  6. Funding
  7. Funding Agreements
  8. Data
  9. Reporting
  10. Intellectual Property
  11. Privacy Notice Statement
  12. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. Introduction

This Announcement of Opportunity (AO) is consistent with the terms and conditions of the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) Class Grant and Contribution (G&C) Program to Support Research, Awareness and Learning in Space Science and Technology – Research Component.

Applicants are asked to read the following AO thoroughly before submitting their applications. This AO was prepared to help applicants complete the application process, and outlines key elements, including mandatory criteria for eligibility, details on eligible projects and the selection process. In the event of any discrepancies between this AO and the individual funding agreements governing a project, the latter document(s) will take precedence.

To ensure that Canadian industry remains at the forefront of emerging space technologies and is enabled to develop applications that capitalize on new Earth Observation (EO) sensors and their capabilities, the Earth Observation Applications Development Program (EOADP) issues AOs for funding through the CSA's Class G&C Program to Support Research, Awareness and Learning in Space Science and Technology.

2. AO Objectives

The objective of this AO is to support R&D on multi EO satellite data integration. This is defined as the combination of RADARSAT imagery with other types of EO satellite imagery, plus any other complementary forms of data such as in-situ measurements, models or surface truth information. This comprehensive data acquisition pools capacity and maximizes interoperable and synergistic use of available satellite systems.

This AO is initiated in recognition of new advances and trends in modern technology. There are two main trends in technology relevant for this AO:

  1. the proliferation of available EO data; and
  2. the explosion of massive data sources in the marketplace as a result of Big Data, cloud computing and Machine to Machine (M2M) technologies.

These advances in technology present major opportunities and challenges to the development, management and user communities.

  1. EO Missions: As of , there were 374 operational EO or Earth Science satellites in orbit (Source: Union of Concerned Scientists database as reported at www.pixalytics.com) servicing a variety of users and applications.  In order to stand out among the growing population of missions, it is necessary for the satellites to have exceptional operating characteristics and a dedicated user base, as in the case of Canada's RADARSAT program. There is an increasingly demonstrated trend for incorporating multiple satellite sources into more complex applications. For example, several applications in recent years have been shown to benefit significantly from the use of both optical and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery as complementary to one another. It is expected that this trend for favoring multiple types of satellite coverage will grow in the future, presenting unique and difficult challenges in the processing and use of the data.
  2. In parallel to the progress in EO missions has been the explosion of other data types in the form of M2M technologies, along with the storage and processing capabilities in cloud computing and Big Data. Much of the technology is interconnected. In the case of traditional EO applications, there is growing use of interconnected in situ devices with EO imagery with a variety of multivariate data sources. This trend is only going to grow further in the future.

In recognition of these trends and their potential impact on the use of EO data in the future, it is necessary to develop innovative methods, products and services to address the evolving changes in the applications context of a modern technology-based society.

3. Eligibility Criteria

3.1 Eligible Recipients

Eligible recipients for contributions under this AO are:

3.2 Eligible Projects

All development phases necessary for a project are eligible. Any logical breakdown or combination of these phases can constitute a funded project. However, breaking down a project into numerous phases to obtain more than the maximum grant or contribution is not allowed. Furthermore, even if the maximum funding for one project is not reached, the completion of a funded phase does not automatically guarantee funding of the remaining phases.

3.3 Link to CSA Priorities

The Expected Results are:

The ability of industry to turn EO data into useable products and services is enhanced.

This AO will support the EOADP objective:

This result encompasses both capacity building of industry and an increased use of EO data by the end-user community.

The overarching priority of the CSA is the utilisation of RADARSAT data.

3.4 Link to G&C Program Objectives

To be eligible, projects supported under this AO must contribute to the achievement of the following objective:

3.5 R&D Definition

Any pre-commercial science and technology activities that are carried out to resolve unknowns regarding the feasibility of applications in the space sector. Basic R&D activities supported under this AO shall be undertaken in Canada unless it is essential to the success of the project.

4. Applications

4.1 Required Documentation

It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that the application complies with all relevant federal, provincial/territorial and municipal laws.

Applications must be post-mailed to the CSA at the following address:

c/o Management (3A-333)
Earth Observation Applications Development Program
Canadian Space Agency
6767 Route de l'Aéroport
Saint-Hubert, Quebec J3Y 8Y9

Proposals must be received at the CSA no later than .

Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA Web site in the Frequently Asked Questions of this AO (see Section 12).

4.2 Service Standards – Complete Applications

Applicants will be notified in writing of decisions regarding their application. Selected applications will be announced on the CSA website. The CSA has set the following service standards for processing times, acknowledgement of receipt, funding decisions and payment procedures.

Acknowledgement: The CSA's goal is to acknowledge receipt of proposals within two (2) weeks of receiving the completed application package.

Decision: The CSA's goal is to respond to the proposal within twelve (12) weeks of the AO's closing date and to send a contribution agreement for signature within eight (8) weeks after formal approval of the proposal.

Payment: The CSA's goal is to issue payment within six (6) weeks of the successful fulfillment of requirements outlined in the contribution agreement.

Compliance with these service standards is a shared responsibility. The applicant must submit all required documentation in a timely fashion. Service standards may vary by AO.

5. Evaluation

Only applications that include all of the documents itemized in Section 4.1 and meet the Eligibility Criteria as defined in Section 5.1 will be evaluated.

Proposals will be evaluated against point-rated criteria and those with the highest scores will receive funding. It is estimated that ten to fifteen (10 - 15) projects will be funded under this AO.

5.1 Eligibility Criteria

5.2 Evaluation Criteria

Applications will be evaluated according to the following criteria:

Project feasibility
Resources
Risks and risk mitigation measures
Results
Benefits to Canada

Proposals will be scored in accordance with the following:

Criteria Overall maximum
points for corresponding criterion
(a*b)
Maximum points for evaluation
(a)
Weighting factors
(b)
Benchmark definition corresponding to point rating
(1 to 8 points)
A B C D
1. Project Feasibility 25 8 3.125 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8
2. Resources 20 8 2.5 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8
3. Risks and Risk Mitigation Measures 15 8 1.875 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8
4. Results 25 8 3.125 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8
5. Benefits to Canada 15 8 1.875 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8
Minimum Overall Score 60            
Total Points 100            

The proposal scoring for each evaluation criterion will be determined using a range from 1 to 8 points, 8 being the highest rating:

As an example, the maximum point rating, excluding the weighting factor, for the "Resources" criterion is 8 points. If a proposal receives "6" for this criterion in the evaluation process, the final score attributed to the criterion will be:

6 * 2.5 (Weighting factor) = 15.0 points (score)

Evaluation criteria that are not addressed in the proposal will be given a score of zero, and the proposal will be rejected.  The minimum overall score is 60/100.

Project Feasibility

Description: This criterion assesses whether research objectives are clearly described and the effectiveness of the proposed methodology in attaining them. The technical methodology demonstrates that the work packages, their sequence and the data plan are clearly substantiated, coherent and feasible.

Data should be chosen to best demonstrate the feasibility, performance, and success of the project. The data plan should describe all of the EO data that will be used in the project, including areas of interest, dates and volume of data, any other complementary imagery or other data types, whether they have been previously acquired or if they need to be acquired during the project.

Rating scale
D

The proposal clearly states and describes specific research objectives that are realistic. The proposed methodology for the research activities shows a sound and methodical approach to conducting the work and achieving the objectives. An excellent data plan is included.

C

The proposal states and describes specific research objectives of the study that appear to be realistic. The proposed methodology for the research activities shows a good approach to conducting the work. However its effectiveness in achieving the technical objectives of the work is not fully substantiated. A good data plan is included.

B

The proposal states and describes specific research objectives of the study that may not be realistic. The proposed methodology for the research activities shows an adequate approach to conducting the work. However there are gaps in the methodology and its effectiveness in achieving the technical objectives of the work is poorly substantiated. A marginal data plan is included.

A

The proposal is not clear about the research objectives of the study. The proposed methodology for the research activities is not appropriate or is not adequately elaborated.  The data plan is poor and lacks detail.

Resources

Description: This criterion assesses the combined technical and management capability (qualifications, experience) of team members to effectively achieve project objectives, and should include a description for each of the proposed team members stating their roles and responsibilities within the project. Resumes should be provided in an appendix.

This criterion also evaluates the Management Plan for its completeness and its effectiveness in directing the project to a successful completion.

Rating scale
D

The proposed project team is highly experienced in the relevant technologies or applications. The proposal includes well described roles and responsibilities of each team member. The proposal provides a coherent and comprehensive Management Plan that will be effective in delivering the project.

C

The proposed project team has worked actively in the relevant technologies or applications. The proposal includes roles and responsibilities of each team member. The proposal provides a credible Management Plan but its ability to effectively deliver the project may be somewhat limited.

B

The proposed project team has some experience in the relevant technologies or applications. The proposal lists team members but is vague about their roles and responsibilities. The proposal provides a marginal Management Plan, and its ability to effectively deliver the project is doubtful.

A

The proposed project team has limited or no experience in the relevant technologies or applications. The proposal includes team members but does not describe their roles and responsibilities. The proposal provides a poor Management Plan, which will not be effective in delivering the project.

Risks and Risk Mitigation Measures

Description: This criterion assesses any critical issues that could potentially jeopardize the successful completion of the project (technical, managerial, financial). An assessment of the risks involved should be accompanied by a mitigation strategy.

Rating scale
D

The proposal clearly states the risks to the successful completion of the work within the stated timeframe and budget. The risks are assessed in terms of their impact and likelihood and solid mitigation measures are proposed.

C

The proposal states some of the risks to the successful completion of the work within the stated timeframe and budget. The risks are assessed in terms of their impact and likelihood. Mitigation measures are proposed but are general in nature.

B

The proposal states some of the risks to the successful completion of the work within the stated timeframe and budget but does not properly assess them. Mitigation measures are weak.

A

The proposal does not clearly state the risks to the successful completion of the work within the stated timeframe and budget. Mitigation measures are inadequate or non-existent.

Results

Description: This criterion evaluates the proposed EO solution that integrates data from RADARSAT with that of other EO satellite sensors and may also include other types of complementary data. This criterion also assesses if and how multi-satellite data integration will enhance the new EO products, services or processes and lead to improvements over current state-of-the-art practices.

Rating scale
D

The proposal gives an excellent description of the EO solution that integrates data from RADARSAT with that of other EO satellite sensors and may also include other types of complementary data. The proposal shows clearly how the research will lead to enhanced EO products, services or processes, and improvements over current state-of-the-art practices through the integration of multi-sensor data.

C

The proposal gives a good description of the EO solution that integrates data from RADARSAT with that of other EO satellite sensors and may also include other types of complementary data. The proposal shows, in a general way, how the research will lead to enhanced EO products, services or processes, and improvements over current state-of-the-art practices through the integration of multi-sensor data.

B

The proposal gives a marginal description of the EO solution that integrates data from RADARSAT with that of other EO satellite sensors and may also include other types of complementary data. The proposal states that the research will lead to enhanced EO products, services or processes, and improvements over current state-of-the-art practices through the integration of multi-sensor data, but does not explain how.

A

The proposal gives a poor description of the EO solution that integrates data from RADARSAT with that of other EO satellite sensors and may also include other types of complementary data. It is not clear that the research will lead to enhanced EO products, services or processes, and improvements over current state-of-the-art practices through the integration of multi-sensor data.

Benefits to Canada

Description: This criterion evaluates the potential of increasing industrial capabilities and know-how as pertains to the use and application of satellite EO data and how the project will broaden the use of space-based EO data. It also assesses how the proposed project will contribute to enhancing Canadian industry's ability to meet national space needs and its ability to be competitive in the global market.

Rating scale
D

The proposal clearly shows how the research will contribute to the organization's expertise in the use and application of satellite EO data, and should lead to broadened use of space-based EO data. The proposal shows how the proposed EO solution will address national needs and enhance the organization's international competitiveness.

C

The proposal shows how the research will contribute to the organization's expertise in the use and application of satellite EO data, and may lead to broadened use of space-based EO data. The proposal demonstrates a partial explanation as to how the proposed EO solution will address national needs and enhance the organization's international competitiveness.

B

The proposal only provides a general idea of how the research will contribute to the organization's expertise in the use and application of satellite EO data. It is not clear that it will lead to broadened use of space-based EO data. The proposal is unclear as to how the proposed EO solution will address national needs and enhance the organization's international competitiveness.

A

The proposal does not provide a clear idea of how the research will contribute to the organization's expertise in the use and application of satellite EO data. It is unlikely that it will lead to broadened use of space-based EO data.  The proposal does not address how the proposed EO solution might address national needs or enhance the organization's international competitiveness.

5.3 Evaluation Process

Only applications that have passed the eligibility assessment listed in Section 5.1 will be given further consideration.

Once the eligibility criteria are confirmed, evaluators will assess the screened applications according to the criteria listed in Section 5.2. Evaluators shall be experts in the fields relevant to the applications and may include representatives of Canada and other countries, and representatives of other government and non-government agencies and organizations. If applicable, a multidisciplinary evaluation committee will be formed when applications from several different disciplines are competing in order to provide a uniform final score and ranking of proposals.

Before a final decision is made, the CSA's Program Manager responsible for this AO may seek input and advice from other organizations, including (but not limited to) federal, provincial, territorial and municipal government agencies and organizations.

6. Funding

6.1 Available Funding and Duration

The total maximum funding amount given in contribution for each project will be $150 000, over a maximum period of 18 months.

The number of projects under this AO will depend on funding availability. Each eligible recipient can be funded for one (1) project under this AO.

The CSA reserves the right to reject any proposals or reduce the amount of the contributions at its entire discretion.

Approved proposals will be eligible for a total amount of government assistance (federal, provincial, territorial and municipal) of up to 75% of total project costs.

To determine the amount of funding to be allocated, consideration will be given to the availability of CSA funds, the total cost of the project, and the other confirmed sources of funds provided by other stakeholders and the applicant.

Applicants must identify all sources of funding in their applications and confirm this information in a funding agreement if the project is selected for funding. Upon completion of a project, the recipient must also disclose all sources of funding.

6.2 Eligible Costs

Eligible costs are direct expenses associated with the delivery of the approved project and that are required to achieve the expected results of the project. Expenses will be covered subject to the applicant signing a funding agreement, in the form of a contribution, with the CSA.

Eligible costs for contributions under this AO are the following:

Eligible Cost definitions are provided in Appendix A.

7. Funding Agreements

7.1 Payments

The CSA and each successful Applicant (the recipient) will sign a funding agreement. This is a condition for any payment made by the CSA with respect to the approved project.

Payments for contribution agreements will be made in accordance with the process and the reporting requirements described in the signed funding agreement. Upon notice of a successful application, the CSA will have no liability until a funding agreement is signed by both parties. Only eligible costs incurred after the funding agreement is signed and indicated in the agreement will be reimbursed. Payments will be made not more than once per three months period.

7.2 Audit

The recipient of a funding agreement shall keep proper records of all documentation related to the funded project, for the duration of the project and for six (6) years after the completion date of the project, in the event of an audit. This documentation shall be available upon request.

7.3 Conflict of Interest

In the funding agreement, the recipient will certify that any current or former public office holder or public servant it employs complies with the provisions of the relevant Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for Former Public Office Holders and the Value and Ethics Code for the Public Sector respectively.

7.4 Organizations in Quebec

An organization in Quebec whose operations are partially or fully funded by the province of Quebec may be subject to the Act Respecting the Ministère du Conseil exécutif, R.S.Q., chapter M-30.

Under sections 3.11 and 3.12 of this Act certain entities / organizations, as defined in the meaning of the Act, such as municipal bodies, school bodies, or public agencies, must obtain authorization by the Secrétariat aux affaires intergouvernementales canadiennes du Québec (SAIC), as indicated by the Act, before signing any funding agreement with the Government of Canada, its departments or agencies, or a federal public agency.

Consequently, any entity that is subject to the Act is responsible for obtaining such authorization before signing any funding agreement with the Government of Canada.

Quebec applicants must complete, sign and include the M-30 Supporting Documentation Form with their application.

8. Data

The focus of the current AO is R&D related to the use of RADARSAT imagery in combination with other sources of EO satellite imagery, in addition to other complementary data. This may include airborne, in-situ data, models or surface truth information.

Each proposal should provide a data plan for the imagery that is intended to be used for the proposed project. Data should be chosen to best demonstrate the feasibility, performance, and success of the project objectives. The data plan should describe all of the RADARSAT data that will be used in the project, including areas of interest, dates and volume of data, any other complementary imagery or other data types, whether they have been previously acquired or if they need to be acquired during the project. The data plan should explain why these data are needed.

Since the focus of the current AO is related to the use of EO imagery for R&D purposes, the CSA will provide access to a small amount of RADARSAT-2 imagery (or RADARSAT-1, if required) free of charge to the successful applicants. A large volume of archived RADARSAT imagery is maintained that Applicants are encouraged to try to incorporate into their proposed activities.

Applicants will need to abide by the following end user license agreements:

If imagery from other EO space missions, airborne data and in-situ data are proposed, the Applicant will be responsible for obtaining the necessary complementary data to conduct its research activities, and include this cost in the project budget.

The data plan should take into consideration the potential constraints related to RADARSAT data acquisition (e.g., priority levels, scheduling conflicts and end user license agreement). It should be noted that data orders under these R&D projects have lower acquisition priority than for Government of Canada operational needs.

Some areas in Canada are particularly susceptible to RADARSAT data acquisition conflicts. As a result, the risk associated with these areas, with respect to data availability, might increase. Projects that focus on these areas and/or planning to use time series should propose a solid mitigation strategy (alternative study sites, or data, reducing the number of sites, etc.). The following areas are particularly susceptible to RADARSAT data acquisition conflicts: 

RADARSAT imagery identified in Table D-1 does not need to be purchased by the Applicant and the cost should not be included in the project budget. However, the project budget should include the cost of any other complementary data (identified in the Data Plan) that will need to be purchased by the Applicant during the project.

Table D-1 below is an example of the format that should be used for the RADARSAT data plan. For other satellite data, airborne or in situ data proposed in the project, a separate table should be provided.

Table D-1
RADARSAT Data Plan
Acqui-sition Date Study Area Beam Mode Polarization (Single Co, Single Cross, Dual, Quad) Processing Level
(SLC, SGX, SGF, SSG)
Table note 1
RADARSAT Data provided by CSA RADARSAT Data available from
(insert organization's name)
Number of Scenes Concurrent field data collection
Table note 2
(Yes/No)
Archive Data New Acqui-sition Archive Data
(a)
New Acquisition
(b)
Number of scenes
(a) + (b)
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
Total     Total      

9. Reporting

9.1 Progress and Final Reports

9.2 Performance Measurement

The CSA will ask the recipients to report on certain aspects of their projects such as:

Capacity Building

Products & Services

9.3 Publications

As a courtesy, the CSA would like to receive a copy of publications arising from the work, and to be informed in advance of significant press releases or media interest resulting from the work.

10. Intellectual Property

All intellectual property developed by the recipient in the course of the project shall vest in the recipient.

11. Privacy Notice Statement

The CSA will comply with federal Access to Information Act and Privacy Act with respect to applications received. By submitting personal information, an applicant is consenting to its collection, use and disclosure in accordance with the following Privacy Notice Statement which explains how Applicant's information will be managed.

Necessary measures have been taken to protect the confidentiality of the information provided by the Applicant. This information is collected under the authority of the CSA Class G&C Program to support Research, Awareness and Learning in Space Science and Technology   Research Component, and will be used for the evaluation and selection of proposals. Personal information (such as contact information and biographical information) included in the rejected proposals will be stored in a Personal Information CSA Bank for five (5) years and then destroyed (Personal Information File no. ASC PPU045). Personal information included in the successful proposals will be kept along with the proposal results for historical purposes. These data are protected under the Privacy Act. According to the Privacy Act, the data linked to an individual and included in the proposal being evaluated can be accessed by the specific concerned individual who has rights with respect to this information. This individual may, upon request,

  1. be given access to his/her data and
  2. have incorrect information corrected or have a notation attached.

Applicants shall note that for all agreements over $25 000, information related to the funding agreement (amount, grant or contribution, name of the recipient and project location) will be made available to the public on the CSA website.

For additional information on privacy matter prior to submitting a proposal, please contact:

Access to Information and Privacy
Canadian Space Agency
Telephone: 450-926-4866
Email: asc.aiprp-atip.csa@canada.ca

12. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

It is the responsibility of the Applicants to obtain clarification of the requirements contained herein, if necessary, before submitting an application. At any point, Applicants are welcome to share with the CSA their comments or suggestions regarding the AO, the program or the process. Applicants may either use the generic email address or the generic web-based Comments and Suggestions Box.

For any questions related to the AO, applicants shall use the following generic email address: asc.lecedessetc-thegandccoe.csa@canada.ca. Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the "Frequently Asked Questions" section of this AO.  The CSA will respond to questions received before: .

Question 1: For the purpose of this AO, can the subject of experimentation be located outside of Canada, and if so, what is the possibility of obtaining RADARSAT-2 data over a site outside of Canada?

Answer 1: Basic R&D activities supported under this AO shall be undertaken in Canada unless it is essential to the success of the project. A study site could be located outside of Canada and RADARSAT-2 data acquired over this site. However, the data acquisition request over such a site will be reviewed against data policy guidelines contained in the Master Agreement between the CSA and MDA and will be subject to the Canadian Access Control Policy administered by Global Affairs Canada. For acquisitions outside of Canada, a request form has to be submitted to MDA and these acquisitions may or may not be authorized. Several elements are considered: for ex. What entity is making the request, over what country and on what area is the proposed acquisition, what RADARSAT-2 product is requested (acquisition mode, level of processing, etc.). In addition, the proposal will have to be clear on what the benefits to Canada are, which is one of the evaluation criteria for the proposals.

Question 2: Can the closing date of this Announcement of Opportunity be extended?

Answer 2: No, the closing date of this AO cannot be extended.

Question 3: In the AO, there is reference made to both "funding agreements" and "contribution agreements" that would result between the CSA and successful applicants; however, there is no reference made to what terms and conditions would be included in those resulting agreements. Could you please provide me with a copy of the agreements for review?

Answer 3: Funding agreements and contribution agreements refer to the same thing. Funding agreements will only be provided to successful applicants and are not made available during the AO process.

Question 4: Can a private sector primary applicant have a collaborating partner at a university listed as a co-applicant?

Answer 4: A collaborating partner from a university would not be considered a co-applicant, although some project work could be subcontracted to a university. However, contributions under this AO are for the benefit of for-profit and not-for-profit organizations established and operating in Canada (excluding academic institutions) and are aimed at advancing the (lead) Applicant's capabilities. The Applicant organization must demonstrate that it has the ability (knowledge, expertise and capability) to execute the project and may use outside services for specific tasks only, not for the project as a whole. The CSA will exercise due diligence when evaluating proposals to ensure that the Applicant organization is doing the majority of the project work.

Appendix A

Eligible Costs Definitions

No costs incurred prior to signing a Contribution Agreement can be considered as eligible project costs, either as a CSA or an Applicant contribution.

Acquisition or rental of equipment:

Consists of equipment, including software rented, acquired or constructed exclusively for the project. In order to be eligible, such equipment must be identified in the project cost estimates, be commensurate with project scope and needs and approved by the CSA. All such equipment shall be charged to the project at the net price, including all costs incurred to get the equipment operational after deducting all trade discounts, rebates and similar charges. It includes also disposal costs. The PST, HST and GST must be excluded.

Consultant services:

The nature of services to be acquired shall be set out in the proposal estimates. The amount eligible for a consultant shall be the actual contract amount. The CSA reserves the right to approve only a portion of the consultant fees submitted.

The Applicant must demonstrate it has the proven ability (knowledge, expertise and capability) to execute the project and may use consultant services for specific tasks only, not for the project as a whole. In the case where consultant services are used, a detailed work plan must indicate the distribution of the work and the Intellectual Property Agreement must be provided. It must be clear that benefits will accrue to the Applicant.

Data Acquisition:

Other than RADARSAT data (which will be deducted from the Government of Canada credit).

Overhead:

Not to exceed 15% of eligible costs. This represents expenses of doing business that are not readily identified with a particular project or activity, but are necessary for the general operation of the organization and the conduct of activities it performs.

Salaries and benefits:
  1. Salaries include wages for all personnel with direct involvement in the project such as, but not limited to, engineers, scientists, technologists, researchers, project managers, students and administrative assistants. All eligible personnel must be employees on the recipient's payroll. Payment in terms of shares, stock, stock options and the like are not eligible. The amount invoiced shall be actual gross pay for the work performed and shall include no markup for profit, selling, administration or financing (PWGSC rates typically do not apply as they contain a profit element).

    The eligible payroll cost is the gross pay of the employee (normal periodic remuneration before deductions). Normal periodic remuneration rates are the regular pay rates for the period excluding premiums paid for overtime or shift work. The payroll rate does not include any reimbursement or benefit conferred in lieu of salaries or wages. When hourly rates are being charged for salaried personnel, the hourly rates shall be the periodic remuneration (annual, monthly, weekly, etc.) divided by the total paid hours in the period including holidays, vacation and paid sickness time.

    Labour claims must be supported by suitable records such as time sheets and records, and be held for verification at time of audit. Management personnel are required to maintain appropriate records of time devoted to the project.

  2. Benefits are defined as a reasonable prorated share of expenses associated with the direct labour cost such as the employer's portion of Canada Pension Plan, Quebec Pension Plan and Employment Insurance, employee benefits such as health plan and insurance, Worker's Compensation, sick leave and vacation plus any other employer paid payroll related expenses. Those items which have no relationship to the project or which have been charged on an indirect basis are not eligible. The determination of the fringe benefits amount shall be in accordance with generally accepted cost accounting principles. In general, fringe benefits rate provided in the project estimate shall be computed once during the life of the project and agreed on prior to the signing of the agreement. If retroactive adjustments are made, these must be indicated on claims for progress payments for the CSA's approval.

Travel:

expenses shall be in direct relation to the project (ex. field work, project meetings). Proponent must indicate the number of trips and the number of days for each trip, the cost, destination and purpose of each journey, together with the basis of these costs which must not exceed the limits of the National Joint Council Office (NJC) Travel Directive. With respect to the Treasury Board Directive, only the meal, private vehicle and incidental allowances specified in Appendices B, C and D of the Directive, and the other provisions of the Directive referring to "travellers", rather than those referring to "employees", are applicable.

Date modified: