Language selection

Search


Top of page

Enhancing Industry-University Collaboration with Canadian Space Agency (CSA) funding for highly qualified personnel (HQP) training - Research Component

On this page

  1. INTRODUCTION
  2. AO OBJECTIVES
  3. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
  4. APPLICATIONS
  5. EVALUATION
  6. FUNDING
  7. FUNDING AGREEMENTS
  8. PRIVACY NOTICE STATEMENT
  9. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)
  10. APPENDIX A – Training Plan
  11. APPENDIX B – Detailed Scoring
  • Expected Budget for this Announcement of Opportunity (AO): $4,000,000
  • Eligible Recipients: Canadian Universities, for a project that has received a grant under the NSERC - Alliance Grants Program
  • Type of transfer payments: Grants
  • Maximum Amount per Project: $100,000 per year
  • Maximum Timeframe of the Project: 5 years
  • Estimated Projects Start Date: Multiple dates based on yearly evaluation deadlines (see below).
  • Publication date:
  • AO Closing Date:

Key Dates:

Enhancing industry-university collaboration with CSA funding for HQP training -:

  • AO Submission Deadline ROUND 1:

Enhancing industry-university collaboration with CSA funding for HQP training -:

  • AO Submission Deadline ROUND 2:
  • AO Submission Deadline ROUND 3:

Enhancing industry-university collaboration with CSA funding for HQP training -:

  • AO Submission Deadline ROUND 4:
  • AO Submission Deadline ROUND 5:

1 INTRODUCTION

The objective of the "Enhancing industry-university collaboration with CSA funding for HQP training (EIUC)" initiative is to award grants to support industry-academia collaborative space research projects through Canadian Universities for projects that have already received an NSERC Alliance Grant under the NSERC - Alliance Grants Program and are either about to begin or are still underway.

The research projects selected for an EIUC grant will contribute to the development of new scientific knowledge in the space sector and/or space technologies or technologies with potential applications in the space sector, while making it possible for students to acquire experience that will favor sustainability and growth of the Canadian space sector. Ultimately, this initiative seeks to increase the number of students receiving support and helping them acquire hands-on experience in an industry setting, thereby increasing the uptake of these talented individuals into Canada's space workforce.

Building Canadian capacity in space science and technology is a priority for the CSA. In addition to the development of space science technologies and knowledge, the CSA seeks to foster the development of a robust and experienced workforce within industry, academia, and government to ensure that Canada continues to play active role in future space missions, and that space contributes to the economic growth of the country.

The EIUC AO contributes to the CSA's Space Capacity Development Program (SCDP), which aims to develop and maintain a space science and technology capacity in Canada to support current and future investments related to the implementation of Canada's national space strategy found in Space Strategy for Canada.

This Announcement of Opportunity (AO) is consistent with the terms and conditions of the CSA Class Grant and Contribution 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.

The CSA reserves the right to amend the AO after each round of application, in an effort to optimize the opportunity and keep it current, as well as to align it with any changes to the NSERC Alliance Grants Program and to the CSA priorities.

2 AO OBJECTIVES

In accordance with the Space Strategy for Canada and the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry Mandate Letter (pm.gc.ca), the main objectives of the EIUC AO are to:

3 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

In this section 3

3.1 Eligible Recipients

  • Canadian universities

3.2 Eligible Projects

To be eligible, all research projects must include the following elements:

  • Research projects that have already received an NSERC Alliance grant under NSERC - Alliance Grants Program for a 1 to 5 year period;
  • Research projects that are currently underway or about to start and that will be ongoing for at least a one year period following the issuance of a CSA EIUC grant;
  • Research activities of interest to Canada related to space science and technology disciplines and their applications. More specifically, activities related to at least one (1) of the research priorities identified for this EIUC AO (see Section 3.3);
  • Collaboration with at least one industry partner related to the space sector. If the industry partner(s) is not related to the space sector, the applicant must explain how this industry partner contributes or plans to contribute to the space sector.
  • The participation of Canadian students who will contribute actively to the project, specifically:
    • Undergraduate university students and/or;
    • Graduate university students (master's and doctorate levels) and/or;
    • Post Doctorate Fellows (PDF).

    For the purpose of this AO, the term "Canadian students" refers to all students (including international students) that are registered in a Canadian university.

    Applicants are encouraged to propose projects that increase the representation and advancement of women and Indigenous Peoples in space sciences and engineering. Applicants should strive for a balanced gender representation in the group of students and amongst their supervisors, role models and mentors.

  • Applications must include a training plan for any new student not originally considered in the NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal. The training plan should also mention any and all opportunities all students will be given for training at the partner organizations (internships, mentorships, etc.). Details on what to include in the training plan are found in APPENDIX A.

Please note:

A project may not be eligible for funding if the applicant was previously awarded funding by the CSA for a similar ongoing project. If the proposed project is directly or indirectly related to a project that was previously funded through a CSA AO or Request for Proposal (RFP), the applicant may still be eligible for funding as long as the proposed project activities are complementary in nature and do not overlap with those of the previously-funded project that is ongoing (see Section 4 of the application form).

Note that an application must be submitted by only one eligible applicant, who would be the only signatory of a grant agreement (a proposal submitted by two or more co-applicants will not be accepted). Collaborating universities may submit separate applications for different elements of the same project. In such cases, each application must include separate research or scientific activities requiring the participation of different Canadian students and/or PDFs, and the applicant must demonstrate that their project can achieve success regardless of the acceptance or refusal of the other university's application.

All development phases necessary for a project are eligible. Any logical breakdown or combination of these phases can constitute a funded project under this AO. However, breaking down a project into numerous phases submitted as distinct proposals to obtain more than the maximum grant or contribution under this AO is not allowed. Furthermore, the completion of a funded phase does not automatically guarantee future funding of the remaining phases.

3.3 Links to CSA Priorities

To be eligible, projects supported under this AO must demonstrate their link to one of the priorities identified in Space Strategy for Canada, Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation, or further the research in the field of quantum technology as related to the space sector. Quantum technology has been identified as a national priority in the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry Mandate Letter (pm.gc.ca).The CSA reserves the right to select projects with research disciplines deemed high priority, including: quantum technology in the Space Sector (satellite quantum key distribution, mapping of near-Earth environment, and quantum sensing of the near-Earth environment), adapting to climate change with space-based data, innovative technology in the space sector including advanced robotics, deep-space food, deep space health and understanding space weather.

Other topics found in the Space Strategy for Canada or Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation that are not listed here may also be eligible.

Applicants proposing projects that respond to more than one research discipline must indicate one primary research discipline in the application form. All other research disciplines will be considered as secondary. Evaluations will be completed based on the applicant's selection of primary research discipline.

3.4 Links to the Class G&C Program Objectives

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

  • To foster the continuing development of a critical mass of researchers and highly qualified people in Canada in areas relevant to the priorities of the Canadian Space Agency.

4 APPLICATIONS

In this section 4

Important note:

As per the eligibility criterion under this AO, eligible applicants must employ a Principle Investigator (PI) with an accepted NSERC's Alliance grant project in order to be considered by the CSA for a grant.

Applicants must read the following section carefully and follow all of the steps that are indicated below in order to ensure their applications are completed and submitted successfully.

4.1 How to submit an application electronically

  1. Download and complete the grant application form;
  2. Combine the following documents into a single PDF-formatted file, in the same order as is presented below. A complete application must contain the following:
    • A completed application form (Word, 547 KB) signed (with handwritten or digital signature) by the duly authorized representative;
    • A copy of the applicant's application submitted to NSERC under the Alliance Grants Program (can be downloaded as a PDF file from the NSERC application website), including letters from funding contributors and partners confirming their contributions as well as any internship, mentorship or similar programs, as well as the award letter and terms and conditions (T&C)s signed by the recipient of the NSERC Alliance Grants Program grant;
    • Declaration on Confidentiality, Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act form signed by the duly authorized representative (refer to the Applicant Declaration on Confidentiality, Access to Information Act and Privacy Act section included in the application form); and
    • For organizations in Quebec, M-30 Supporting Documentation form completed and signed by the duly authorized representative (refer to the M-30 form for organizations in Quebec included in the application form).

    The application must be prepared as a single PDF-formatted file containing all of the above requested documents with all security features disabled. The proposal and supporting documents must be included in the file as searchable PDF-formatted documents (PDF/A-1a or PDF/A-2a formats preferred). If there are any accessibility issues with the submitted PDF file, all consequences reside with the applicant.

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

    The applicant must keep one hard copy of all the original documents above. The CSA may require applicants who successfully passed the evaluation stage described in Section 5 of the AO to send a hard copy of their complete application with the original documents (with the exception of the application submitted to NSERC under their Alliance Grants Program, for which a printed copy will be sufficient).

  3. Submit your completed application electronically:
    • Submit an account creation request using the Electronic Proposal Portal. Please note that Google Chrome is the browser of choice for submissions. Supported browsers are Google Chrome and Edge with some restrictions.
    • In the "Proposal title" field of the Electronic Proposal Portal, please use the following formatting standard: EIUC_Name Of Institution_Last name of PI (e.g. EIUC_ Simon Fraser University_Smith)..
    • In the "Organization" section, under "Type", please select "Canadian university or post-secondary institution".
    • The "Applicant" section should contain the contact information for the PI.
    • Allow up to 72 hours for the CSA to send an email confirming the account creation as well as instructions (user guide) on how to access the platform.
    • Using the temporary password assigned by the CSA, login to the secured portal to upload protected documents.
    • Please refer to the user guide for instructions on how to securely upload documents.

Please note:

  • Applicants are encouraged to create their account no later than for Round 1 of submission in order to be included in the first round of evaluations, as technical difficulties may arise. If technical issues cannot be resolved, applicants must submit their application by mail. Applicants are strongly encouraged to upload their complete application well before the submission deadlines;
  • In order to be considered for the first round of evaluations, applications must be submitted (successfully uploaded) by the applicants no later than at 1:00 p.m. (ET) for Round 1 of submission.
  • For all subsequent rounds of evaluations, applications must be submitted (successfully uploaded) by the applicants no later than the first Monday of May and October of each year.
  • The CSA will continue to accept applications following all submission deadlines until the AO closing date of . All applications received following a submission deadline will be evaluated in the next round of evaluations, until all funds have been awarded.
  • The onus is on the applicant to ensure that their application is complete and that all documents are uploaded on the Electronic Proposal Portal within the prescribed deadline;
  • The CSA is not responsible for any delays under any circumstances, and will defer the evaluation process for applications received after the stipulated deadline until the next round of evaluations;
  • Hand-delivered applications will not be accepted;
  • Applications sent by e-mail will not be accepted;
  • Applicants are asked to not send their application both electronically and by mail or courier service. If multiple applications are submitted, only the latest valid version received will be considered;
  • Incomplete applications will not be considered.

4.2 How to submit an application by mail or using a recognized courier service

The applicant is encouraged to submit their application electronically following the instructions provided in Section 4.1 of the AO. However, if the applicant is unable to submit their application electronically, please communicate with stedia-dstemu@asc-csa.gc.ca no later than , at 1:00 p.m. (ET) for Round 1 of submission to obtain instructions on how to submit a paper application by mail or using a recognized courier service.

Applications by mail or using a recognized courier service must be received at the CSA no later than at 1:00 p.m. (ET) for Round 1 of submission.

The onus is on the applicant to ensure that their application is complete and that all documents are received by the CSA within the prescribed deadline. The CSA is not responsible for any delays under any circumstances.

Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the FAQ Section of this AO (see Section 9). The CSA will answer questions in the following periods:

Round 1 question period:

to

Round 2 question period:

to

Round 3 question period:

to

Round 4 question period:

to

Round 5 question period:

to

4.3 Service Standards – Complete Applications

Applicants will be notified in writing of decisions regarding their application. Selected applications will be proactively divulged on the Open Government 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

Round 1 (/):

  • The CSA's goal is to respond to the proposal within 18 weeks of the AO's first evaluation deadline and to send a grant agreement for signature within 4 weeks after formal approval of the proposal.

Round 2 to 5:

  • In a same fiscal year, if funding remains available after the first round of decisions, the CSA may proceed with a second round of evaluations. The CSA's objective is to proceed with two (2) rounds of decisions every fiscal year, with submission deadlines set for the first week of May and October each year. The goal for each round is to respond to the proposal within 18 weeks of the submission deadlines as presented at the beginning of this AO and to send a grant agreement for signature within 4 weeks after formal approval of the proposal.

Payment: The CSA's goal is to issue payment within 4 weeks of the successful fulfillment of the requirements outlined in the grant agreement.

Compliance with these service standards is a shared responsibility. Applicants must submit all required documentation in a timely fashion.

5 EVALUATION

In this section 5

5.1 Eligibility Criteria

  • Represents an eligible recipient as defined in Section 3.1;
  • The proposed project is an eligible project as defined in Sections 3.2, 3.3, 3.4; and
  • The application complies with the funding provisions of the program stated in Section 6.1.

5.2 Evaluation Criteria

Once the eligibility assessment is completed, applications will be evaluated according to the following criteria:

  1. Benefits to Canada;
  2. Feasibility and risks;
  3. Resources.

Table 2 below shows the criteria, sub-criteria and associated thresholds, while Table 3 shows a brief description of the graded criteria. A detailed breakdown of all of the evaluation criteria is described in APPENDIX B. To be considered eligible for funding, the total score obtained for these graded criteria must be 70/100 or greater.

Table 2: Summary table of evaluation criteria
Criteria Max points for evaluation Min points to pass Poor Average Good Excellent
1. Benefits to Canada 50 35
1.1 Alignment to priorities 30 - 0 10 20 30
1.2 Training plan 15 - 0 5 10 15
1.3 Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) 5 - 0 1 3 5
2. Feasibility and risks 10 7
2.1 Project-related risks and mitigation strategies 10 - 0 5 7 10
3. Resources 40 28
3.1 Project team and budget 20 - 0 10 15 20
3.2 Partnerships 20 - 0 10 15 20
TOTAL 100 70
Table 3: Definition and breakdown of selection criteria
Project Max Score
1. Benefits to Canada Max. Score: 50
Min Score: 35
1.1 Alignment to Priorities Max. Score: 30
This criterion is used to evaluate whether the research is aligned with the research priorities outlined in Section 3.3 of the AO. This criterion is also used to evaluate the probable impact and potential to advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology, directly or indirectly.
1.2 Training plan Max. Score: 15
This criterion is used to evaluate the quality and relevance of the training plan for new students and PDFs. It is also used to evaluate the level of exposure to the industry through beneficial programs such as internships for all the team students and PDFs.
1.3 Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) Max. Score: 5
This criterion evaluates whether the proposal includes a meaningful plan to foster recruitment and engagement of members from underrepresented groups within the research team.
2. Feasibility and risks Max. Score: 10
Min Score: 7
2.1 Project-related risks and mitigation strategies Max. Score: 10
This criterion aims to evaluate how the award of this AO will influence the main risks associated with the project, as well as impact the mitigation strategies identified in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program research proposal.
3. Resources Max. Score: 40
Min Score: 28
3.1 Project team and budget Max. Score: 20
This criterion aims to evaluate how the award of this AO will influence the size / quality of the student team (including PDFs) dedicated to the research project as stated in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal. It will also evaluate the budget and how the EIUC grant will be spent.
3.2 Partnerships/Collaborations Max. Score: 20
This criterion evaluates the level, quality and focus of the partnerships identified in the research project.

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 will 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 to evaluate interdisciplinary applications.

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.

The CSA selection committee may also take into account the representation of PI who belong to the two following underrepresented groups: women and Indigenous peoples. For more information on GBA +. In addition, particular support may be given to early career researchers acting as PI (an early career researcher is defined as an individual who has held an independent university position for a maximum of five years). The results could also take into account regional distribution, and post-secondary educational institutions, etc.

6 FUNDING

In this section 6

6.1 Available Funding and Duration

The total funding available under this AO is currently expected to be approximately $500,000 per year. This opportunity will remain open until and new applications will be considered until the yearly-allotted funds are depleted. All applications received starting the day after a funding round submission deadline will be considered for evaluation in the following round, if funding is still available, until all funds are depleted.

The total maximum funding amount given in grants for each project will be $500,000, over a maximum period of 5 years. Subject to fund availability, the CSA grant received per project under this AO will match the yearly contribution made by NSERC for this project under the Alliance Grants Program up to a maximum of $100,000 per year per project.

Prior to each instalment, the CSA program manager will reassess the recipient's eligibility and review the recipient's progress report. 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.

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, the other confirmed sources of funds provided by other stakeholders and the total yearly grant provided by NSERC for each year of the project. Approved proposals will be eligible for a total amount of government assistance (federal, provincial, territorial and municipal) of up to 100% of total CSA eligible project costs.

The applicant will be responsible to inform the CSA in a timely matter of any changes to NSERC's decision to fund the project and associated Terms and Conditions of award as signed with NSERC. The CSA reserves the right to amend or terminate the EIUC grant award accordingly. The overall number of grants awarded and their value will depend on the availability of funds and the results of the evaluation process. The CSA reserves the right to reject any proposals, reduce the amount or terminate the grants at its entire discretion.

Given the objectives of this AO and the limited available budget, an eligible recipient (institution) may submit several applications; however if two or more applications are submitted with the same designated PI, the CSA reserves the right to select only one of these projects. An eligible recipient may submit only one application for the same project. However, two or more distinct applicants (institutions) may submit separate applications for the same project if their applications concern the development of stand-alone technologies or scientific research. It is then expected that the students and PDFs involved in these different projects will not be the same.

6.2 Eligible Costs

Eligible costs are direct expenses that are 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 grant with the CSA.

Grants

Eligible costs for grants under this AO are the following:

  • Access fees;
  • Accommodation and meal allowances;
  • Acquisition, development and printing of materials;
  • Acquisition or rental of equipment;
  • Aircraft and watercraft charter services;
  • Bursaries;
  • Consultant services (not to exceed 20% of the CSA grant);
  • Costs for carrying out environmental screening and/or impact studies;
  • Costs related to obtaining security clearance;
  • Data acquisition;
  • Data management;
  • Laboratory analysis services;
  • License and permit fees;
  • Launcher services;
  • Marketing and printing services;
  • Materials and supplies;
  • Overhead (administrative) costs (not to exceed 10% of eligible costs);
  • Participation fees at conferences, committees and events;
  • PST, HST and GST net of any rebate to which the recipient is entitled and the reimbursement of any taxes for goods and services acquired in a foreign country net of any rebate or reimbursement received in the foreign country;
  • Publication and communication services;
  • Registration fees;
  • Salaries and benefits paid to eligible students;
  • Salaries and benefits paid to persons other than eligible students (not to exceed 60% of total CSA grant value);
  • Training;
  • Translation services;
  • Travel expenses.

7 FUNDING AGREEMENTS

In this section 7

7.1 Payments

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

Transfer payments will be made through grant agreements. Payments will be made in yearly instalments as described in the signed agreement. Grant funding agreements will include a clause stipulating the recipient's obligation to confirm—once a year in the case of multi-year agreements—their eligibility for the G&C Program – Research Component and inform the CSA in writing of any changes to the conditions used in determining their eligibility for this component.

7.2 Unconfirmed NSERC Alliance Grant

Prior to issuing a grant agreement, the successful applicant must confirm that the NSERC Alliance Grant has been secured for the project. The issuance of a grant agreement is conditional upon the applicant having secured this NSERC Alliance Grant as outlined in their application form. If the confirmation is not received, the CSA reserves the right to reject the application at its entire discretion.

7.3 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.

7.4 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 public office holders and the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector respectively.

7.5 Intellectual Property

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

7.6 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 (L.R.Q., c. 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 from the Secrétariat du Québec aux relations canadiennes (SQRC), 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.

7.7 Performance Measurement

The CSA will require recipients to report on certain elements in their projects, such as the following:

  • Creation of knowledge:
    • Advancement of knowledge (including technological breakthroughs, technologies led to a higher level);
    • Production of knowledge (including publications, research reports) (refer to Section 7.8 for expectations regarding open publications);
    • Presentations (including conferences, seminars, workshops);
    • Intellectual property (including patents) generated by the project.
  • Increased capacity:
    • Project research team (including students and PDFs involved). Note that the grant recipient may be asked to provide the names of the research team members, including the students and PDFs.
  • Collaboration:
    • Partnerships;
    • Contribution of partners;
    • Multidisciplinarity.

The CSA will also require recipients to be informed in advance of important press releases or news releases of interest to the media resulting from work related to this AO.

7.8 Open Access Publications

In tIn the event that publications result from the project, the CSA wishes to promote the dissemination of findings that results from the projects it funds as quickly and to the greatest number of people as possible. Improved access to scientific results not only allows scientists to use a broader range of resources and knowledge, but also improves research collaboration and coordination, strengthens citizen engagement and supports the economy.

Thus, the CSA promotes the use of open access publication and archiving by recipients in order to facilitate the widest dissemination of findings that results from its funded projects. The recipients are therefore invited to publish, in a timely matter, their articles by using one of the following methods:

  1. Accessible online repository (institutional or disciplinary) so that the publication is freely accessible.
  2. Journal offering open access to articles.

Publication costs are eligible expenses, as defined in Section 6.2. Note that these two methods are not mutually exclusive and that recipients are encouraged to use both.

Finally, the CSA wishes to receive, as a courtesy, a copy of the publications (if not freely accessible) or the hyperlink (if freely accessible) and its digital object identifier (DOI). These will be use to improve accessibility by including them in the CSA publications directory.

Recipients are also encouraged to report on additional research outputs (such as databases and software) that create value that were generated as a result of their project.

8 PRIVACY NOTICE STATEMENT

The CSA will manage and protect information provided by applicants under the Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act. By submitting personal information, the applicant consents to its collection, use and disclosure in accordance with the following Confidentiality Statement, which explains how information on applicants is handled.

By submitting an application, the applicant authorizes the CSA to undertake any consultation or verification, in particular but not exclusively with other government departments, agencies and organizations in order to obtain any useful information in assessing the application, and it agrees to have the contacted parties disclose any requested information.

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 (ASC PPU 045) and Awareness and Learning Component (ASC PPU 040). This information will be used for administrative purposes and for the evaluation of applications. Personal information (such as name, contact information and biographical information) will be stored for six years, then destroyed. Under the Privacy Act, any individual, upon request, may

  1. be given access to his/her data, and
  2. have incorrect information corrected or add a note.

Applicants shall also note that information relative to the funding agreement will be publicly disclosed under Government of Canada legislation, policies and directives.

For additional information on privacy matters prior to submitting an application, please contact:

Office of Access to Information and Privacy
Canadian Space Agency
Tel.: 450-926-4866
E-mail: aiprp-atip@asc-csa.gc.ca

9 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

It is the responsibility of applicants to obtain clarification of the requirements contained herein, if necessary, before submitting an application.

For any questions related to this AO, applicants shall use the following generic email address: stedia-dstemu@asc-csa.gc.ca.Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the FAQ Section of this AO.

At any point, applicants are welcome to share with the CSA their comments or suggestions regarding the program. Applicants may either use the generic email address or the generic web-based Comments and Suggestions box.

Question 1: Are recipients of an NSERC Alliance International Catalyst grant eligible to apply for this opportunity?

Answer 1: Yes, but the Alliance International Catalyst grants are awarded for 1 year only and as per the EIUC AO to be eligible a project must be "currently underway or about to start and that will be ongoing for at least a one year period following the issuance of a CSA EIUC grant". Also, the eligible project must include collaboration with industry partners to be eligible. The onus is on the applicant to demonstrate whether the eligibility criteria are met for the CSA EIUC grant. See section 3.2 in the AO for eligibility details. See Appendix B point 3.2 for details on partnerships/collaboration evaluation criteria.

Question 2: Recently CSA had been publicizing their work with AON3D on printing PEEK for space applications. Is this subject area relevant to the call?

Answer 2: At this stage in the process, CSA cannot comment on the eligibility of a specific project/subject area. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that their project is eligible according to the criteria mentioned in section 3.3 of the AO.

Question 3: Is NSERC Alliance Mission Grant considered eligible the same as a regular NSERC Alliance Grant?

Answer 3: Alliance Missions projects are eligible for the EIUC grant provided they meet all eligibility criteria. The applicant should take note of the evaluation criteria in Appendix B.

Question 4: Should the funded NSERC grant be related to space? If the initial NSERC funding was received for air and water monitoring sensors on earth but the PI intends to expand the applications of the sensors to space, is the project eligible?

Answer 4: No, the NSERC Alliance project doesn't have to be exclusively related to space. The part of the project for which the applicant is requesting funding from the CSA through an EIUC grant must be related to space and meet all the eligibility criteria described in section 3.2 of this AO. Details on how the evaluation will be performed is found in Appendix B - Detailed scoring of the AO.

Question 5: If a NSERC Alliance grant has already started in , can we request match funding from CSA for the duration of the NSERC grant that has passed or matching funds can only be requested for the remaining time of the NSERC grant?

Answer 5: Matching funds can only be requested for the remaining time of the NSERC Alliance grant. No funds will be given to match retroactive periods of the project, nor will be awarded to extend the project duration.

Question 6: Since the total funding available is $500k and each project may receive the max $100k, one can expect the number of the funded projects is around 5-8. Is it true?

Answer 6: The overall number of grants awarded will depend on the availability of funds, the projects' budgets and the results of the evaluation process. The CSA grant received per project under this AO will match the yearly contribution made by NSERC for this project under the Alliance Grants Program up to a maximum of $100,000 per year per project.

Question 7: Does the EIUC AO only fund Alliance projects already in line with the space sector? Is an Alliance project admissible if that project was not in line with the space sector but becomes aligned with it with the help of the EIUC funds? If these projects are eligible, are they less suitable/worthy than projects originally in line with the space sector?

Answer 7: No, the NSERC Alliance project doesn't have to be exclusively related to space. The part of the project for which the applicant is requesting funding from the CSA through an EIUC grant must be related to space and meet all the eligibility criteria described in section 3.2 of this AO. Details on how the evaluation will be performed is found in Appendix B - Detailed scoring of the AO. All projects submitted under EIUC will be evaluated against the same criteria (Appendix B). It is the responsibility of the applicant to present sufficient information in order to obtain the maximum score under each criteria.

Question 8: Does NSERC Alliance-Alberta Innovates Advance grants qualify for this grant opportunity if the project aligns with CSA priorities?

Answer 8: The eligible project must include collaboration with industry partners to be eligible (partner organizations that are recognized for cost-sharing with NSERC). The onus is on the applicant to demonstrate whether the eligibility criteria are met for the CSA EIUC grant. See section 3.2 in the AO for eligibility details. See Appendix B point 3.2 for details on partnerships/collaboration evaluation criteria.

Question 9: Should the CSA fund have the same duration as the approved NSERC Alliance grant? Or, can it be longer/shorter?

Answer 9: Matching funds can only be requested for the remaining time of the NSERC Alliance grant. No funds will be given to match retroactive periods of the project, nor can funds be awarded to extend the project duration. The applicant can ask for a shorter remaining funding period than originally requested in the NSERC Alliance proposal.

Question 10: Should the requested annual amount from CSA be less than or equal to the NSERC portion of the Alliance fund? What is the maximum allowable requested fund from CSA on an annual basis?

Answer 10: The EIUC grant received per project under this AO will match the yearly contribution made by NSERC for this project under the Alliance Grants Program up to a maximum of $100,000 per year per project. Please refer to section 6.1 of the AO for more details.

Question 11: Can an applicant submit more than one application if he/she has more than one NSERC Alliance project ongoing?

Answer 11: The applicant may submit more than one application. Section 6.1 of the AO states "Given the objectives of this AO and the limited available budget, an eligible recipient (institution) may submit several applications; however if two or more applications are submitted with the same designated PI, the CSA reserves the right to select only one of these projects. An eligible recipient may submit only one application for the same project."

Question 12: Can the applicant include a co-PI in the application? Conversely, can a co-PI from the original NSERC proposal be named PI for the EIUC grant with the original PI acting in co-PI capacity (reversing roles)?

Answer 12: The applicant (institution) is responsible to designate the PI for any eligible CSA funded project . Therefore, decisions on assignment of PI and co-PI remain with the institution.

Question 13: What is the earliest project start time a PI can request?

Answer 13: Following the service standards as found in section 4.3 of the AO, the CSA will respond to submitted proposals within 18 weeks of the AO application deadline ( for the first round of evaluation), send grant agreements for signature within 4 weeks of formal approval of the proposal and issue payments within 4 weeks of the funding agreement signature. Start time of projects should align with the service standards and will correspond to the date of the funding agreement signature.

Question 14: Can the applicant apply for funding for students who will work under the direction/supervision of another professor who is not the grant applicant?

Answer 14: The eligible applicant for this AO is a Canadian university. The applicant is responsible for determining how the funding will be allocated, how the students will be trained, and how the responsibilities of the project team members will be distributed.

Question 15: Can the co-PIs and students work in another institution than where the applicant's designated PI works?

Answer 15: Yes. Co-PIs and students may work in another institution than that of the designated PI, provided that the applicant adequately justifies their budget, training plan, and team member responsibilities.

Question 16: Is it possible to hire full-time programmers (i.e. non-student staff) with the EIUC grant?

Answer 16: Yes, is it possible to use part of the EIUC grant for salaries and benefits paid to persons other than eligible students (not to exceed 60% of total CSA grant value) as stated in section 6.2 of the AO. However, the applicant should take note of all evaluation criteria found in Appendix B. Particularly applicable to this question is Appendix B point 3.1 Project Team and Budget. It is the responsibility of the applicant to present sufficient information in order to obtain the maximum score under each criteria.

Question 17: Is the award date used to calculate the duration of the project or does the date of signature of the collaboration agreement override it?

Answer 17: The dates of the fully executed agreements are considered the start dates of the projects (Alliance or EIUC) and these dates should be taken into consideration for the calculation of the length/duration of the projects.

Question 18: Can two or more collaborating professors listed on the same NSERC Alliance project apply separately for different extension of the work performed under this same Alliance project?

Answer 18: The PIs and co-PIs may fill out more than one EIUC application form on behalf of an applicant (Canadian university) for different expansion work to be performed to complement the same NSERC Alliance project. However, the CSA will only award a total grant value equivalent to the yearly contribution made by NSERC for this project under the Alliance Grants Program up to a maximum of $100,000 per year per Alliance project. Each application will be evaluated independently and the funds will be awarded based on the evaluation results and available funding. It is therefore recommended to consolidate all potential extensions of the project (including a comprehensive list of all project team members including co-PIs and collaborating professors, etc.) to be covered by the EIUC under one application.

Question 19: What happens if the candidate does not know the name of the team members yet and cannot attach their CVs?

Answer 19: If the team members are not yet known at the time of application, their names and CVs must be provided to the CSA at a later date.

Question 20: Can the project timeline be extended by a few months to round up the project schedule to the closest year?

Answer 20: Matching funds can only be requested for the remaining time of the NSERC Alliance grant. Funds cannot be awarded to extend the project duration.

Question 21: Would research using publicly available datasets (e.g., data collected by satellite in Europe) be eligible and aligned with the program?

Answer 21: Since the project eligibility is part of the evaluation process, CSA cannot answer any question related to the eligibility of a project. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that their project is eligible according to the criteria mentioned in Section 3.3 of the AO.

Question 22: If the topic of my research is not one of the ones listed in the priorities, should I still apply?

Answer 22: To be eligible, projects supported under this AO must demonstrate their link to one of the priorities identified in Space Strategy for Canada, Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation, or further the research in the field of quantum technology as related to the space sector. The CSA reserves the right to select projects with research disciplines deemed high priority but will not restrict the research topics to those priorities, as stated in the AO section 3.3. Since the project eligibility is part of the evaluation process, CSA cannot answer any question related to the eligibility of a project. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that their project is eligible according to the criteria mentioned in Section 3.3 of the AO.

Question 23: Does the AO refer to any NSERC Alliance programs?

Answer 23: NSERC Alliance projects from different NSERC Alliance Programs are eligible for the EIUC grant provided they meet all eligibility criteria. The applicant should take note of the evaluation criteria in Appendix B of the AO. Also, the applicant is invited to look at previous answers on specific Alliance Programs eligibility.

Question 24: Does the proposed project need to be an extension of our current NSERC Alliance grant—i.e. the proposal needs to be directly connected with the Alliance project?

Answer 24: Yes, the proposed EIUC project must connect directly to the initial NSERC project topic. It can be a continuation or an extension but it cannot be on a separate topic.

Question 25: Is there a specific template and characteristics to use/include when preparing the proposal as a separate document—i.e. length of the proposal, salient headings, etc.?

Answer 25: In an effort to shorten the application process and as the applicants have already completed a full application for the successful NSERC Alliance project (which the applicant must provide), the CSA does not require a separate proposal be written for this grant application. The applicant should fill out the application form and send in all documents required as detailed in Section 13 of the application form.

Question 26: Do the industry partners have to be in the space sectors?

Answer 26: In Appendix B point 3.2, details on partnerships/collaboration evaluation criteria are given. For the non-space sector industrial partner, the partner must have a clear, defined and realistic path towards penetration and the development and uptake of goods or technology in the Canadian space sector. The onus is on the applicant to demonstrate whether the eligibility criteria are met for the CSA EIUC grant.

Question 27: Is there any word limit on the sections of the proposal?

Answer 27: There are no word limits on the answers in the application form.

Question 28: If a company contributes cash to the NSERC Alliance grant, should it be listed in the application form Section 2-Project Financial Summary table of the proposal under "Total amount provided by other sources of funding (detailed funding information required in section 9)"?

Answer 28: Yes. All sources of funding must be tallied in the total amount provided by other sources of funding.

Question 29: What should be written in the application form Section 4, point 4 under the 'primary research discipline' field?

Answer 29: A short, generic description of the research field/discipline under which your project falls will be accepted. The research discipline must align with the Space Strategy for Canada and/or Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation, or quantum technology in the space sector in order to be eligible. Examples of research disciplines are: space health and life science, astronomy, planetary exploration, atmospheric science, Earth system science and solar-terrestrial science.

Question 30: If our current Alliance grant end in , are we still eligible for funding under the EIUC grant?

Answer 30: As stated in the Section 3 of the AO, eligible projects are research projects that are currently underway or about to start and that will be ongoing for at least a one year period following the issuance of a CSA EIUC grant. To determine earliest issuance of EIUC grant round 1, applicants can refer to Question 13 in which the earliest project start time estimate is given.

Question 31: Do I need to have an industrial partner with a cash contribution?

Answer 31: No. Your industry partner could be providing in-kind services only.

Question 32: As there are normally no required signatures on the NSERC T&Cs for Alliance grants, can the PI just sign the T&Cs sheet of the awarded Alliance grant and attach it to the EIUC application form?

Answer 32: Yes, if the NSERC Alliance T&Cs are unsigned, the PI assigned to the project can sign. Please note however that the CSA application form must be signed by the duly representative of the applicant university.

Question 33: Do the industry partners need to provide separate confirmation letters in addition to the partner organisation form that is included in the Alliance application?

Answer 33: Partner organization forms included in the accepted Alliance proposal will be sufficient evidence of the industrial partnership, as will individual letters from industrial partners confirming their participation. However, separate letters confirming any opportunity for student training (internships, etc.) should be included as well in order to obtain the maximum number of points in the evaluation criteria 1.2 - Training plan as detailed in Annex B of the AO.

10 APPENDIX A – Training Plan

The training plan should outline how the project is appropriate for students training and is related to competencies required by the space sector. The plan should detail:

For additional context, refer to contributions to the training of highly qualified personnel in NSERC - Guidelines on the assessment of contributions to research, training and mentoring and particularly to the section entitled Contributions to the Training of Highly Qualified Personnel. We suggest that applicants include outcome statements in the training plan showing how the training activities will contribute to those statements.

11 APPENDIX B – Detailed Scoring

In this sectionAPPENDIX B

A numerical score is associated with each criterion. It is strongly recommended that applicants include in their applications information related to each highest score.

1. Benefits to Canada

  • Maximum: 50
  • Minimum: 35

1.1 Alignment to Priorities

This criterion is used to evaluate whether the research is aligned with the research priorities outlined in Section 3.3 of the AO. This criterion is also used to evaluate the probable impact and potential to advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology, directly or indirectly.

  • Does the research clearly respond to one of the research priorities outlined in Section 3.3 of the EIUC AO?
  • Is the proposed research likely to result in long-term innovations in the field of space science and/or technology? Will the research have broad impact and applications to other fields of study?
  • Is the research original and of high intrinsic merit?

Evaluation Source: NSERC Alliance Grants Program Proposal and CSA Application Form

Poor: The research project will not help to achieve one of the research priorities identified in Space Strategy for Canada and/or Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation, or quantum technology in the space sector. It will not contribute to advancement of new knowledge in space science and/or technology. (Score: 0)

Average: The relationship between the research work and one of the research priorities identified in Space Strategy for Canada and/or Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation or quantum technology in the space sector is weak. The probable research project findings could advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology. (Score: 10)

Good: The research work will help to achieve one of the research priorities identified in Space Strategy for Canada and/or Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation or quantum technology in the space sector. The probable research project findings will advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology, and could produce benefits in the short and long terms. (Score: 20)

Excellent: The research work will clearly contribute to achieve the one of the research priorities identified in Space Strategy for Canada and/or Canada's Strategy for Satellite Earth Observation or quantum technology in the space sector. The probable research project findings will advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology, and will produce substantial long-term benefits beyond the immediate field of study. The research work is outstanding because of its highly innovative or original scientific or technical concepts or methods, and/or builds significantly on previous work. (Score: 30)

1.2 Training plan

This criterion is used to evaluate the quality and relevance of the training plan for new students and PDFs. It is also used to evaluate the level of exposure to industry through beneficial programs such as internships for the team students and PDFs.

  • Does the training plan specify the activities or projects in which the new students and PDFs will participate during the research project?
  • Do the training activities suit the academic level of the new students and PDFs involved in the project?
  • Is information provided on the method or methods that will be used to supervise the new students and PDFs?
  • Will all the students involved in the project gain experience that is relevant to the development of their professional careers (e.g. internships in industry, mentorship, etc.)?

Evaluation source: NSERC Alliance Grants Program Proposal and CSA Application form

Poor: The training plan is poorly defined and contains few details on the activities or projects in which the students will participate, and on the distribution of tasks. No information is given regarding opportunities such as internships for the students at the industry partners. (Score: 0)

Average: The training plan is partially defined. Details are missing on the activities or projects in which the new students or PDFs will participate, and on the distribution of tasks. Overall, the activities or projects suit the academic level of the students involved in the project (undergraduate, Master's, PhD, etc.). There is little information provided on the method that will be used to supervise the students. A few of the students will gain knowledge and experience that is relevant to the development of their professional careers but no specific information is given regarding opportunities such as internships at the industry partners. (Score: 5)

Good: The training plan is well-designed and provides detailed information on the activities or projects in which the new students or PDFs will participate, and on the distribution of tasks. The activities or projects suit the academic level of the students involved in the project (undergraduate, Master's, PhD, etc.). The methods for supervising the students are described and suited to the work to be carried out. Detailed information is provided on the knowledge and skills that the students may acquire. Several students will gain knowledge and experience that is relevant to the development of their professional careers, but very generic information is given regarding opportunities such as internships at the industry partners. (Score: 10)

Excellent: The training plan is well-designed and describes in great detail the activities or projects in which the new students or PDFs will participate, and on the distribution of tasks. The activities or projects suit the academic level of the students involved in the project (undergraduate, Master's, PhD, etc.). The methods for supervising the students are clearly described and well-suited to the work to be carried out. A lot of detailed information is provided on the knowledge and skills that the students will acquire and the impact on the students. Several students will gain knowledge and experience that is relevant to the development of their professional careers through work training opportunities such as: internships, mentorship programs, participation to on-site meetings or laboratory work, etc. at the industry partners associated with the project. Such internship opportunities are largely confirmed by the industry partner. (Score: 15)

1.3 Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI)

This criterion evaluates whether the proposal includes a meaningful plan to foster recruitment and engagement of members from underrepresented groups within the research team.

  • Does the research project meaningfully engage members of underrepresented groups within the research team through the engagement of students, PDFs, faculty and partners? Underrepresented groups include, but are not limited to, the four designated groups (women, Indigenous peoples, members of visible minorities, and persons with disabilities). Applicants can consult the Employment equity website for definitions of each group.

Evaluation Source: NSERC Alliance Grants Program Proposal and CSA Application Form

Poor: The original proposal contains a diversity inclusion plan. The description of how this plan will be achieved lacks details. The application form does not contain a recruitment and training plan to foster members from underrepresented groups for new students and team members. (Score: 0)

Average: The original proposal contains a diversity inclusion plan. The description of how this plan will be achieved lacks details, as does the recruitment and training plan for new students and team members found in the application form. (Score: 1)

Good: The original proposal contains a diversity inclusion plan. The description of how this plan will be achieved is mostly complete and the approach appears feasible. The recruitment and training plan for new students and team members found in the application form is mostly complete and aligns with previous efforts described in the original proposal. (Score: 3)

Excellent: The original proposal and application form section 6.1 contain a diversity inclusion plan that is fully described, with detailed information on how it will be achieved. The original proposal demonstrates that efforts were already made to integrate members from underrepresented groups in the research team. The recruitment and training plan for new students and team members found in the application form is clear and meaningful, and aligns with previous efforts described in the original proposal. (Score: 5)

2. Feasibility and risks

  • Maximum: 10
  • Minimum: 7

2.1 Project-related risks and mitigation strategies

This criterion aims to evaluate how the award of this AO will influence the main risks associated with the project, as well as impact the mitigation strategies identified in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program research proposal.

  • Are there new risks associated with activities added to the project since the original proposal?
  • If so, are the proposed mitigation strategies for each new risk well thought out and realistic?
  • What is the probability of the risks materializing?
  • Are the risks associated with the project (as identified in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal) affected by the award of the EIUC grant?
  • Are the proposed mitigation strategies for the main risks identified in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal affected by the EIUC grant?

Note that the evaluation of the risk criterion assumes all risks and associated mitigation plan including the probability of the risk materializing have been considered and evaluated in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal following the criteria detailed in the Risk Assessment Form found in the National Security Guidelines for Research Partnerships - Science.gc.ca. The current evaluation of the risk criterion will solely analyze any changes to the initial evaluation of the project risks due to the award of the EIUC grant.

Evaluation source: NSERC Alliance Grants Program Proposal and CSA Application form

Poor: The application does not mention any of the main risks associated with the project, and does not contain any mitigation strategy, or includes some risks, but the associated mitigation strategies are missing. If the EIUC award does not change the original risks or entail new risks to the project, no justification is given for this statement and it is impossible to determine if the project will be carried out without any new risk or need for new mitigation strategies. (Score: 0)

Average: The application mentions a few of the main risks and contains mitigation strategies for these risks. There is a high likelihood that the data analysis will not take place as planned. If the EIUC award does not change the original risks or entail new risks to the project, little to no details are given in the justification to prove this statement. It is difficult to believe in good faith that the project will be carried out without any new risk or need for new mitigation strategies. (Score: 5)

Good: The original risks affected by the EIUC grant and the new risks (financial, managerial, environmental, scientific and technical risks) and the associated mitigation strategies are described and relevant. Some information is provided to assess the probability of the risks materializing. It is possible to believe in good faith that everything will take place as planned during the period covered by this grant, or that in the case of unforeseen circumstances, the mitigation strategies considered will allow the project to be carried out as planned. If the EIUC award does not change the original risks or entail new risks to the project, the justification given to prove this statement is adequate, but contains few details. (Score: 7)

Excellent: The original risks affected by the EIUC grant and the new risks (financial, managerial, environmental, scientific and technical risks) are well-described, and relevant mitigation strategies are proposed for each risk. The information provided to assess the probability of the risks materializing are deemed to be realistic. It is possible to believe in good faith that the data analysis will take place as planned during the period covered by the grant, or in the case of unforeseen circumstances, the mitigation strategies considered will allow the project to be carried out. If the EIUC award does not change the original risks or entail new risks to the project, the justification given to prove this statement is sound and it is possible to believe in good faith that the project will be carried out without any new risk or need for new mitigation strategies. (Score: 10)

3. Resources

  • Maximum: 40
  • Minimum: 28

3.1 Project team and budget

This criterion aims to evaluate how the award of this AO will influence the size and/or quality of the student team (including PDFs) dedicated to the research project as stated in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal. It will also evaluate the budget and how the EIUC grant will be spent.

  • Will the number of students (including PDFs) participating in the project increase from that stated in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal due to the funds awarded by the EIUC grant?
  • If so, how many more students (including PDFs) will participate and from what education level?
  • Will the EIUC grant be used to improve the caliber of students or other team members hired to work on the project? What special experience or skill will these new team members bring to the project?
  • Will the majority of the budget be spent on hiring new students or giving higher pay to high caliber students or team members?
  • Is the budget realistic and justified in relation to the new proposed activities?
  • Will the physical resources planned for the project and the infrastructure be enhanced by the EIUC grant? If so, what will this enhancement entail specifically?

Evaluation source: NSERC Alliance Grants Program Proposal and CSA Application form

Poor: No students will be added to the team following the award of the EIUC grant and the student team size will remain the same as stated in the original NSERC Alliance Grants Program proposal. No justification is given in the CSA Application Form to justify the unchanged team size. Also, there is a clear mismatch between the planned budget and the work associated with the new aspects of the project and no budget is used for additional students or higher caliber students or team members. (Score: 0)

Average: One student members will be added to the team due to the award of the EIUC grant. Conversely, the student team size remains the same but the applicant stated the EIUC grant will be used to hire a student or other team member with more expertise and experience than would otherwise have been available to work on the project. No details are given to justify this statement. Overall, the budget appears to be adequate and reasonable for all components of the additional proposed work, but there are still questions about some cost items. A small portion of the budget only will be spent on additional students or students or other team members with more expertise and experience (59% or less). (Score: 10)

Good: One student member will be added to the team due to the award of the EIUC grant. Conversely, the student team size remains the same but the applicant stated the EIUC grant will be used to hire a student or other team member with more expertise and experience than would otherwise have been available to work on the project. Only broad details are given to justify this statement. Also, the budget appears to be adequate and reasonable for all components of the additional proposed work. A total of 60% to 70% of the budget will be spent on additional students or other team members with more expertise and experience. (Score: 15)

Excellent: One or more student members will be added to the team due to the award of the EIUC grant. Conversely, the student team size remains the same but the applicant has provided convincing details on how the EIUC grant will be used to hire a student or other team member with more expertise and/or experience than would otherwise have been available to work on the project. The specialized experience and/or expertise is well defined and adds clear value to the project. Also, the budget appears to be adequate and reasonable for all components of the additional proposed work. Most of the budget will be spent on additional students or other team members with more expertise and experience (71% or more). (Score: 20)

3.2 Partnerships/Collaborations

This criterion evaluates the level, quality and focus of the partnerships identified in the research project.

  • Do any of your partners already operate directly in the space sector?
  • How will the project contribute to the continued success of the industrial partner in the Canadian space sector?
  • How are your partners implicated or intend on being implicated in the Canadian space sector?
  • Does your partner have a clear, defined and realistic path towards achieving penetration of the Canadian space sector and development of goods and/or technology in the Canadian space sector?

Evaluation source: NSERC Alliance Grants Program Proposal and CSA Application form

Poor: The project has no industrial partner operating in the Canadian space sector and was unable to effectively define how the non-space sector industrial partners would penetrate and develop goods or technology in the Canadian space sector. (Score 0)

Average: The project has no industrial partner operating in the Canadian space sector. The non-space sector industrial partner has a broad path towards infiltration and development of goods or technology in the Canadian space sector. The applicant's research project role in said penetrate and development in not well defined. (Score 10)

Good: At least one industrial partner already operates or contributes directly to the Canadian space sector. The role and implication of the partner in the space sector is broadly defined only. A broad explanation of how the applicant's research project will contribute to the continued success of the industrial partner in the Canadian space sector is given. Conversely, the non-space sector industrial partner has a clear, defined and realistic path towards penetration and development of goods or technology in the Canadian space sector. The applicant's research project has a clear role in said penetration and development. (Score: 15)

Excellent: At least one industrial partner already operates or contributes directly to the Canadian space sector. The role and implication of the partner in the space sector is well defined. The applicant's research project will contribute to the continued success of the industrial partner in the Canadian space sector. (Score: 20)

Date modified: