Language selection

Search

Top of page

Contributions for Exhibits and Youth Activities on Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway) - Space Awareness Element

On this page

  1. INTRODUCTION
  2. AO OBJECTIVE
  3. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
  4. APPLICATIONS
  5. EVALUATION
  6. FUNDING
  7. FUNDING AGREEMENTS
  8. PRIVACY NOTICE STATEMENT
  9. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)
  10. Annex A – Scoring

Announcement of Opportunity

Publication date:

Applications due:

KEY INFORMATION

  • Eligible recipients: Not-for-profit museums and science centres established and operating in Canada
  • Type of transfer payments: Non-Repayable Contributions
  • Maximum amount per grant: two funding categories: Non-Repayable Contributions
  • Maximum Amount per Eligible Recipient: $130,000
  • Estimated Total Amount of the AO: $620,000
  • Maximum Duration of the Project: up to 15 months from the agreement signature
  • Estimated Projects Start Date:
  • Application deadline:

1 INTRODUCTION

In February 2019, the Government of Canada announced an investment of $2.05B related to Canada's involvement in the Lunar Gateway. Shortly thereafter, the Government released a new Space Strategy for Canada entitled "Exploration, Imagination, Innovation: A New Space Strategy for Canada", which laid out the CSA's commitment to inspiring young Canadians through space.

The NASA-led Artemis program is a new chapter of lunar exploration designed to send humans farther into space than ever before. The program builds the expertise for a lasting return to the Moon, and lays an important foundation for deep-space exploration to more distant destinations like Mars.

In return for contributing Canadarm3, a smart robotic system, to the Lunar Gateway, Canada receives a range of opportunities for lunar science, technology demonstration and commercial activities, as well as two astronaut flights to the Moon. A CSA astronaut will be part of Artemis II, the first crewed mission to the Moon since .

The contributions provided through this Announcement of Opportunity (AO) aim to support the development and delivery of a series of exhibits and youth activities related to Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway) to increase awareness and interest about space. These initiatives are also expected to make young Canadians aware of CSA projects and activities related to the Moon.

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

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.

2 AO OBJECTIVE

The objective of this AO is to invest in the design, development, installation and operation of exhibitions and awareness activities for Canadian youth having as a main theme Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway).

3 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

In this section

3.1 Eligible Recipients

Eligible recipients are:

  • Not-for-profit museums and science centres established and operating in Canada, excluding any governmental (federal, provincial or municipal) entities or organizations.

The application should be submitted by one eligible organization, which will be fully liable, and the only signatory of the contribution agreement.

3.2 Eligible Projects

To be eligible, a funding request must be submitted under one or both of the following categories:

  • Category A: exhibits that contribute to increase the awareness, interest and knowledge on Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway). Floor plans and sketches should be presented to give an idea of the project scope.
  • Category B: the design, development and delivery of an activity for youth (from kindergarten to grade 12, K-12) related to Canada's participation in Moon exploration (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway).

The applicant can submit one funding request (one Application Form – see Section 4.1) for one or for both categories. In the former case, the two initiatives (exhibit and activity) should be presented as separate, independent projects. The CSA will reject a funding request that does not respect this condition. The acceptance of one project will not automatically lead to the acceptance of the other one.

The proposed exhibits and activities should be offered at no cost for visitors/ participants during the contribution agreement with the CSA. For exhibits and activities planned to be offered in locations where entry or other standard fees are required, no additional cost will be charged for access to the exhibits or activities supported by the CSA contribution for the period of the contribution agreement.

The recipients of the contributions will have access to the same services that the CSA Communications and Public Affairs group offers to all Canadians, such as information on CSA activities and missions.

If a proponent requests, as part of the proposal, access to and/ or use of the CSA's resources (such as facilities, equipment, technical expertise), an additional collaborative agreement might have to be signed between the CSA and the recipient, provided that the proposal has been selected for funding.

3.3 Links to CSA Priorities

To be eligible, projects supported under this AO must contribute to the CSA's commitment to inspiring young Canadians through space as highlighted in the Government's Space Strategy for Canada entitled "Exploration, Imagination, Innovation: A New Space Strategy for Canada".

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 increase awareness of Canadian space science and technology by increasing the interest of Canadian youth and educators and their participation in related activities;

4 APPLICATIONS

In this section

4.1 Required Documentation

The Application must include the following:

  • A completed typed original Application Form (Word, 102 KB) signed by the Duly Authorized Representative;
  • A proposal (project description) that complies with the guidelines outlined in the application form;
  • A copy of the document(s) confirming the legal name of the Applicant (organization) and its legal registration (incorporation) status;
  • Letters from other funding contributors confirming their contributions, if applicable;
  • A complete Declaration on Confidentiality, Access to Information Act and Privacy 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)
  • One (1) printed copy of the Application Form signed by the Duly Authorized Representative, if submitted by mail;
  • In case the Application is submitted by mail, a copy of the Application (identical to the signed paper copy) on a standard electronic media (e.g. USB flash drive). If there is any discrepancy between the hard copy and the electronic version on the standard electronic media, the hard copy takes precedence.

The financial statements for the last two years and other governance documents may be requested in a later phase of the evaluation process, as a condition to signing the contribution agreement. It is not required to submit any financial statement of the organization with the application.

The Application must be prepared as a single PDF-formatted file containing all of the above requested documents with all security features disabled. Please order the document with the application form and proposal first. If there are any accessibility issues with the submitted PDF file, all consequences reside with the Applicant.

Any missing supporting document or any incoherence between the requested documents and the information provided within the documents may lead to the rejection of the proposal on that sole basis.

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

Applications can be submitted either a) electronically or b) mailed:

  1. To upload the application electronically (recommended), please follow the steps below:
    • Prepare the Application for each Category (if applicable) in a single PDF –formatted file as per instructions above;
    • Submit an account creation request to use the CSA Electronic proposal portal:
      1. For Category A. Proposals (Exhibits) and
      2. for Category B. Proposals (Awareness Activities).
    • Please note that Google Chrome is the browser of choice for submissions; Internet Explorer is also supported with some restrictions. Applicants using the electronic portal are encouraged to create their account several days before the submission deadline, in order to address any technical difficulties that could arise. If the technical issues cannot be resolved, Applicants can submit their application by mail (before the deadline);
    • Upon account creation, the CSA will send an email with instructions on how to connect to the CSA secure filer system to allow you to upload documents securely. Applicants are strongly encouraged to upload their applications well before the submission deadline;
    • In the "Proposal title" field of the Electronic Proposal Portal, please use the following formatting standard: ORGANIZATION NAME_PROJECT TITLE_CSA MOON EXHIBIT / ACTIVITIES .
  2. Mail the Applications to the CSA at the following address:

Partnerships
c/o Sylvie Gagnon
Communications and Public Affairs Directorate
Canadian Space Agency
6767 Route de l'Aéroport
Longueuil, Québec J3Y 8Y9

Applications must be received at the CSA no later than 2:00 p.m. (ET) on .

IMPORTANT NOTES:

  • Incomplete applications will not be considered;
  • Hand-delivered applications will not be accepted;
  • Applications sent by email will not be accepted.

If CSA receives the same application by both ways acceptable for submission, the latest valid version received will be considered.

If the applicant chooses to submit the applications electronically, the applicant must keep one hard copy of the Application with the original (inked) signatures. The CSA may require from the applicants who successfully passed the stages described in Sections 5.1 and 5.2 to send a hard copy of their complete application with the original signatures.

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 maximum two (2) weeks of receiving the completed application package.

Decision: The CSA's goal is to select the proposal(s) within fifteen (15) weeks of the AO's closing date and to send a contribution agreement for signature within five (5) 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 the requirements outlined in the contribution agreement.

Compliance with these service standards is a shared responsibility. Applicants must submit all required documentation in a timely manner. Service standards may vary by Announcement of Opportunity.

5 EVALUATION

In this section

5.1 Eligibility Criteria

Applications will first be submitted to an eligibility assessment by the CSA to verify whether they comply with the eligibility criteria listed in Section 3. Only applications that have passed the eligibility assessment will be given further consideration.

5.2 Evaluation Criteria

Once the eligibility criteria are confirmed, the CSA's evaluators will assess the screened applications submitted in each category according to the criteria presented in Table 2 below.

The Table 2 shows the definition and a breakdown of all the evaluation criteria, which are further described in Annex A for each Category. Applicants should address each criterion in their application. Please note that only projects that obtain an overall minimum score of 60 and achieve the minimum specified thresholds for each criterion will be given further considerations.

Table 2: Evaluation criteria

Evaluation criteria and scoring for Category A:
Criterion Description Poor Avg. Good Excellent Minimum Score
1. Benefits to Canada Depth of Canadian space science and/or technology content 0 10 20 30 10
2. Knowledge transfer mechanism Exhibit (for Cat. A) design and delivery 0 7 12 15 7
3. Feasibility Project definition and management 0 7 15 20 7
4. Resources Project budget, schedule and team 0 7 15 20 7
5. Results, risks and sustainability Reach and sustainability, risk mitigation 0 7 12 15 7
Evaluation criteria and scoring for Category B:
Criterion Description Poor Avg. Good Excellent Minimum Score
1. Benefits to Canada Depth of Canadian space science and/or technology content 0 10 20 30 10
2. Knowledge transfer mechanism Activity (for Cat. B) design and delivery 0 7 15 20 7
3. Feasibility Project definition and management 0 7 15 20 7
4. Resources Project budget, schedule and team 0 7 12 15 7
5. Results, risks and sustainability Reach and sustainability, risk mitigation 0 7 12 15 7

5.3 Evaluation and Selection 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 for each Category. 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.

For the final selection, the CSA will consider the projects having the highest final scores in each category. The CSA could also take into consideration certain factors in the final decision to grant funding, such as, but not limited to, regional distribution, representativeness of the four (4) designated groups (women, Aboriginal persons, disabled persons or members of a visible minority) as well as linguistic minorities.

6 FUNDING

In this section

6.1 Available Funding and Duration

The total maximum funding available for this AO is $620,000.

The total maximum funding amount given per project will be $100,000 for projects submitted under Category A, over a maximum period of 15 months.

The total maximum funding amount given per project will be $30,000 over a maximum period of 15 months for projects submitted under Category B.

An eligible applicant can receive a maximum of $130,000 providing that its applications have included projects for both Categories and both projects have been selected for funding.

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

The approved proposal(s) will be eligible for a total amount of government assistance (federal, provincial, territorial and municipal) of up to 100% of total project costs.

The number of projects under this AO will depend on funding availability.

To determine the amount of funding to be allocated and the number of projects funded, consideration will be given to the availability of CSA funds, the total cost of the projects, 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 the 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 for contributions will be direct expenses associated with the delivery of approved projects that are required to achieve the results to which they relate. Costs will include one or a combination of the following eligible costs:

  • Acquisition, development and printing of materials
  • Acquisition or rental of equipment
  • Consultant services
  • License and permit fees
  • Printing services
  • Materials and supplies
  • Publication and communication services (e.g. digitalization services of exhibitions)
  • Salaries and benefits
  • Translation services
  • Overhead (administrative) costs (not to exceed 10% of the total eligible costs)
  • 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

7 FUNDING AGREEMENTS

In this section

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 (including advance payments if applicable) 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.

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 Public Office Holders and the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector respectively.

7.4 Intellectual Property

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

7.5 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 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.

7.6 Performance Measurement

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

  • Reach and engagement
    • Number of Canadian youth reached through space-STEM activities funded by CSA
    • Percentage of youth engaged who indicated after the activity completion, that they would like to participate in similar space-STEM focused activity again.
      • Exhibition:
        • Number of Canadians reached
        • If online content, number of page views and/or downloads of content
    • Number of partnerships involved in the project

8 PRIVACY NOTICE STATEMENT

The CSA manages and protects the information provided by the applicant under the Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act. By submitting your personal information, you consent to its collection, use and disclosure in accordance with the following Privacy Statement, which explains how the information about the applicant will be processed.

The information is collected under the CSA Class Grant and Contribution Program in Support of Awareness, Research and Learning - Awareness and Learning Component (ASC PPU 040) and Research Component (ASC PPU 045). This information will be used for administration and application evaluation purposes. Personal information (such as name, contact information and biographical information) will be kept for 6 years and destroyed. According to the Privacy Act, any individual may, upon request, (1) have access to his or her personal data and (2) request correction of the incorrect information.

Applicants should also note that information relating to the Funding Agreement could be disclosed publicly in accordance with the laws, policies and directives of the Government of Canada.

For additional information regarding this statement, please contact:

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

9 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.

For any questions related to the AO, applicants shall use the following email address stimjeunesse-youthstem@asc-csa.gc.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 at 12:00 (EDT).

Question 1: Are the planetariums considered eligible recipients under the present AO?

Answer 1: For the purpose of this AO, the Canadian-not-for-profit organizations managing planetariums are considered eligible recipients providing they meet the other requirements.

At this stage in this competitive process, CSA cannot comment on the eligibility of a potential proponent or project.

Question 2: We are an organization that has obtained funding from CSA under a different announcement of opportunity. Are we still eligible to apply under this AO?

Answer 2: Organizations that have previously obtained funding from CSA or currently have a funding agreement with CSA are eligible to apply for this opportunity providing they meet all the other eligibility requirements. Additionally, the project submitted under this AO should clearly demonstrate that there is no overlap with currently funded projects and that the objectives of the two projects can be achieved independently.

Question 3: Is there any possibility to meet with CSA representatives to present our project idea and ensure that this is aligned with the eligibility and/ or evaluation criteria?

Answer 3: No, this AO is a competitive process, and no direct communication or meeting related to this AO is permitted between CSA representatives and potential proponents. All questions submitted as per the instructions presented in Section 9 (FAQ) of the AO will be answered/ published on the AO website only.

Annex A – Scoring

In this section

A.1. Evaluation criteria definitions and scores for projects submitted under Category A - Exhibits

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: 30
Minimum: 10

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • the level of Canadian content in the development of the exhibit, such as but not limited to information and descriptions of Canadian lunar projects, examples, analogies or data related to Moon science and/or technologies;
  • the expected impact on awareness of the audience on Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway);
  • content on science and technology is accurate and current
Poor (Score: 0)

The content related to space is very limited and the links to Canadian lunar projects and Moon sciences and/or technologies are very weak. Visits to the exhibit are expected to have little to no influence on the audience's awareness of Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway).

Average (Score: 10)

The content is space focused, but the level of Canadian lunar projects and Moon sciences and/or technologies content is limited or outdated. Visits to the exhibit are not expected to make a change on the audience's awareness of Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway).The space science and technologies concepts present gaps and weaknesses to be accurate and current.

Good (Score: 20)

Links between the exhibit content and on-going or future Canadian lunar projects and sciences and/or technologies are clearly demonstrated. The exhibit content is related to one of the CSA priority domains (robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), lunar rovers) and it is linked to Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway). Visits to the exhibit are expected to increase the audience's awareness of Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway). The science or technology concepts included need some improvements to become accurate and current.

Excellent (Score: 30)

The exhibit content is strongly based on on-going or future Canadian space missions, sciences or technologies. It is related to one or several CSA priority domains (robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), lunar rovers) and has clear links with Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway). Visits to the exhibit are expected to greatly increase the audience's awareness of Canada and the Moon (Moon exploration, Artemis Missions, Lunar Gateway). The science or technology presented is accurate and current.

2. Knowledge transfer mechanism

Maximum: 15
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • to which extent the proposed content includes original, innovative concepts or methods that increase the exhibit's attractiveness and impact;
  • the effectiveness of the proposed visual design and chosen media, as well as the technical and material requirements to deliver the content of the exhibit
Poor (Score: 0)

The proposed exhibit has no original or innovative concepts, methods or content. No testing or review is planned to enhance the content of the exhibit before delivery. No technical requirements are presented.

Average (Score: 7)

The proposed exhibit is based on existing concepts, methods and content. Technical and material requirements are mentioned but there are not enough details to assess the coherence with the planned project and the target audiences.

Good (Score: 12)

The proposed exhibit contains elements of originality and attractiveness that show high potential to attract the audiences' interest. Minimal testing or review is planned before the delivery. The proposed visual design and/ or chosen media, as well as the technical and material requirements are presented and they are coherent with the project and target audiences.

Excellent (Score: 15)

The proposed exhibit is clearly original and attractive, and has elements that stand out from classical approaches. The proposal includes detailed description of supporting material that will be developed. The proposal shows evidence on how the exhibit will be tested, assessed and tuned before delivery (e.g. focus groups). The proposed visual design and/ or chosen media, as well as the technical requirements to deliver the content are described in detail and they are coherent with the exhibit and the target audiences.

3. Feasibility

Maximum: 20
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • the clarity and completeness of the project objectives
  • the coherence of the exhibit's scope, timeline, resources allocation and deliverables described in the project plan and in the floor plans/sketches
  • the experience of the organization in successfully managing similar projects
Poor (Score: 0)

The project objectives are very poorly defined, and there is no coherence between scope, resource allocations, timelines, resources and final deliverables in the project plan. No floor plans or sketches are provided.

Average (Score: 7)

The project objectives are defined, but they are lacking clarity and details to prove that they are achievable, relevant and time-oriented. The project plan is realistic, but there is a weak coherence between some elements, such as scope, work breakdown, timeline, deliverables. Floor plans and/or sketches are provided, but they are not detailed enough to give a good idea of the project scope. The proponent has very limited experience in delivering similar projects.

Good (Score: 15)

The objectives are well defined, and they are presented with details to prove that they are achievable, relevant and time-oriented. The project plan is realistic, and coherent in most of its elements. Floor plans and sketches are provided and give a good idea of the project scope. The organization has demonstrated some experience in delivering similar projects.

Excellent (Score: 20)

The objectives are very well defined, and they are presented with many details to prove that they are achievable, relevant and time-oriented. Many details are provided in a coherent project plan regarding, in particular, the scope, breakdown of the work, scheduled milestones, and the organization of team members' time to carry out the project, deliverables. Detailed floor plans and sketches are provided and give a very clear idea of the project scope. The organization has clearly demonstrated experience in successfully delivering similar projects.

4. Resources

Maximum: 20
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • the expertise and experience of the team in awareness projects, and how these will effectively contribute to the success of this project
  • duties and responsibilities assigned to each project team member are consistent with each member's experience and expertise
  • the budget and the other resources are realistic and justified in relation to the proposed project
  • access to additional in-kind and cash funding sources or resources
Poor (Score: 0)

The project team members do not have any experience in carrying out awareness projects. The duties and responsibilities are briefly presented. The budget is not realistic and without any additional in-kind and cash funding sources or resources.

Average (Score: 7)

The project team members have limited experience in developing awareness projects. The team lacks expertise in some key areas required in their duties and responsibilities. The budget appears to be adequate for the proposed work and a rationale is provided, but there are still questions about some cost items. Reduced other financial or in-kind contributions may be available, but the probability to access them is low.

Good (Score: 15)

The project team members have demonstrated experience in developing awareness projects. The team is made up of experts from various educational fields of study with a variety of expertise. The budget appears to be adequate and reasonable and a good rationale is provided for most budget items. The physical resources and infrastructure required to achieve the project's goals are identified and supported by rationales. Additional in-kind and cash funding is planned, the probability to access them is high, no confirmed amounts.

Excellent (Score: 20)

The project team members have a considerable demonstrated experience in developing awareness projects, with clear examples provided. The team is made up of experts from various educational fields of study and there is clear complementarity between them. The budget appears to be adequate and reasonable for all components of the proposed work and a credible rationale is provided for all budget items. The physical resources and infrastructure required to achieve the project's goals and objectives are identified in detail, supported by rationales, and planned in order to be used efficiently and effectively. Additional funding is planned, the probability to access them is very high, some funding already confirmed or available.

5. Results, risks and sustainability

Maximum: 15
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • project reach amongst the target group and project results measurement
  • project sustainability beyond CSA funding agreement
  • project-related risks (financial, scientific or technical, managerial) identification and mitigation strategies presented
Poor (Score: 0)

The expected reach and level of engagement with the audience are low relative to the project scope. No process to measure the results is presented. There is no evidence presented to support a continuation of the proposed exhibit after the termination of the CSA contribution. No project-related risk has been identified in the proposal.

Average (Score: 7)

The expected reach and level of engagement with the audience relative to the project scope is acceptable. Processes to measure some results are presented. The project presents a very brief plan, but no credible evidence is presented to support a continuation of the exhibit after the termination of the CSA contribution. The application mentions potential risks but there are no mitigation strategies presented.

Good (Score: 12)

The expected reach and level of engagement with the audience are high relative to the project scope. Processes to measure most of the results are presented. There are some evidence presented to support a possible continuation of the exhibit after the termination of the CSA contribution, such as long term plan and outcomes, resources identification and allocation, partnerships, but the availability of resources is not confirmed. The main risks and some associated mitigation strategies are described.

Excellent (Score: 15)

The expected reach and level of engagement with the audience are very high relative to the project scope. The processes to measure all the results are presented. There is a very strong and credible plan to continue after the termination of the CSA funding, with credible resources availability. The main risks are well described and relevant mitigation strategies are proposed for each risk.

A.2. Evaluation criteria definitions and scores for projects submitted under Category B (awareness activities for youth K-12).

1. Benefits for Canada

Maximum: 30
Minimum: 10

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • The activity's level of Canadian content linked to the future Moon missions, such as but not limited to examples, analogies or data related to Canadian space missions, space science and/or technologies;
  • The relevance of the proposed activity to the CSA priority space topics in Moon exploration and the new space station program Gateway (robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), health, nutrition, lunar rover missions) and their link with STEM.
Poor (Score: 0)

The content related to space is very limited and has no links to any Canadian space mission, science or technologies.

Average (Score: 10)

The content is space related, but limited or no description of Canadian content included in the activity and limited link with science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM). The proposed activity/ content is not related to the future Moon missions.

Good (Score: 20)

Links between the activity content and Canadian Moon missions, science or technologies are mentioned and moderately demonstrated. The activity content is related to one of the CSA priority topics in Moon exploration (robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), health and nutrition, lunar rovers) and the links with science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) are clearly described.

Excellent (Score: 30)

The activity content is strongly based on a Canadian Moon mission, science or technology and it is clearly demonstrated and explained. It is related to one or several CSA priority topics in Moon explorations (robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), health, nutrition, lunar rovers) and has clear links with science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM).

2. Knowledge transfer mechanism

Maximum: 20
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • to which extent the proposed content includes original, innovative, proven concepts or delivery methods that increase the activity's attractiveness and impact;
  • the proposed content adaptability to different youth ability levels, learning types, and pre-activity knowledge, and how the activity will be tested and enhanced
  • the technical and materials requirements to deliver the activity
Poor (Score: 0)

The proposed activity has no original or innovative concepts or methods and there is no proven evidence of attractiveness. No adaptability to different characteristics of the target group is described. No testing or review is planned to enhance the activity before delivery. No technical requirements are presented.

Average (Score: 7)

The proposed activity is based on existing concepts and methods with limited success demonstrated in reaching and increasing youth interest. The adaptability to different characteristics of the target groups (ability levels, learning/teaching types, pre-activity knowledge, and age appropriateness) is limited. Technical and material requirements are mentioned but there are not enough details to assess the coherence with the planned activity and the target group.

Good (Score: 15)

The proposed activity contains elements of originality and attractiveness with high chances to attract youth interest and to be adopted by educators. The proposal presents how the content and methods may be adapted to different characteristics of the target group (ability levels, learning/teaching types, pre-activity knowledge, and age appropriateness). Minimal testing or review is planned before the delivery. Technical and materials requirements are presented and they are coherent with the activity and target groups.

Excellent (Score: 20)

The proposed activity is clearly original and attractive, and has elements that stand out from classical approaches and thus it has high chances to attract youth interest and to be adopted by educators. The proposal clearly presents how the content and methods used are adapted to different characteristics of the target group (ability levels, learning/teaching types, pre-activity knowledge, age appropriateness) and a pilot session, focus group or review is planned before the delivery. Technical and materials requirements are described in detail and they are coherent with the activity and the target group.

3. Feasibility

Maximum: 20
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • the clarity and completeness of the project objectives
  • the coherence of the activity's scope, timeline, resources allocation and deliverables described in the project plan
  • the experience of the organization in successfully managing similar projects
Poor (Score: 0)

The project objectives are very poorly defined, and there is no coherence between scope, resource allocations, timelines, resources and final deliverables in the project plan.

Average (Score: 7)

The project objectives are defined, but they are lacking clarity and details to prove that they are achievable, relevant and time-oriented. The project plan is realistic, but there is a weak coherence between some elements, such as scope, work breakdown, timeline, and deliverables. The proponent has very limited experience in delivering similar projects.

Good (Score: 15)

The objectives are well defined, and they are presented with details to prove that they are achievable, relevant and time-oriented. The project plan is realistic, and coherent in most of its elements. The organization has demonstrated some experience in delivering similar projects.

Excellent (Score: 20)

The objectives are very well defined, and they are presented with many details to prove that they are achievable, relevant and time-oriented. Many details are provided in a coherent project plan regarding, in particular, the scope, breakdown of the work, scheduled milestones, and the organization of team members' time to carry out the project, deliverables. The organization has clearly demonstrated experience in successfully delivering similar projects.

4. Resources

Maximum: 15
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • the expertise and experience of the proposed team in youth (K-12) STEM activities, and how these will effectively contribute to the success of this project
  • duties and responsibilities assigned to each project team member are consistent with each member's experience and expertise
  • the budget and the other resources
  • access to additional in-kind or cash funding sources and resources
Poor (Score: 0)

The project team members do not have any experience and/or expertise in carrying out K-12 STEM activities. The duties and responsibilities are briefly presented. The budget is not realistic or not aligned with the AO limits.

Average (Score: 7)

The project team members have limited experience in developing K-12 STEM activities. The team lacks expertise in some key areas that are required for their duties and responsibilities. The budget appears to be adequate for the proposed work but very brief or no rationale for each item is provided. No other financial or in-kind contribution is presented.

Good (Score: 12)

The project team members have demonstrated experience in developing K-12 STEM activities. The team is made up of experts with a variety of relevant expertise, which includes space expertise related to the activity. The budget appears to be adequate and reasonable and detailed rationale is provided for most budget items. The applicant plans to have a financial or in-kind contribution from at least one other source.

Excellent (Score: 15)

The project team members have considerable demonstrated experience in developing K-12 STEM activities. The team is made up of experts, and there is clear complementarity between them. The project demonstrates access to expertise in the activity's space topic. The budget appears to be adequate and reasonable for all components of the proposed work and a credible rationale is provided for all budget items. The physical resources and infrastructure required to achieve the project's goals and objectives are identified and supported by rationales. The applicant plans to have a financial or in-kind contribution from other sources.

5. Results and sustainability

Maximum: 15
Minimum: 7

This criterion will be used to evaluate

  • activity reach amongst target group
  • activity results measurement
  • promotional plan
  • sustainability beyond CSA funding agreement
Poor (Score: 0)

The expected reach and level of engagement with youth are low relative to the project scope. No process to measure the results is presented. There is no evidence presented to support a continuation of the proposed activities after the termination of the CSA funding.

Average (Score: 7)

The expected reach and level of engagement with youth are reasonably balanced with respect to the project scope. Processes to measure some results are presented. The promotional plan is presented very briefly, with limited description of the target audience or channels. The project presents a very brief plan, but no credible evidence is provided to support a continuation of the activities after the termination of the CSA funding.

Good (Score: 12)

The expected reach is acceptable and level of engagement with youth is high relative to the project scope. Processes to measure most of the results are presented. The promotional plan is well presented and describes a few approaches to reach the target audiences. There are some evidence presented to support a possible continuation of the activity after the termination of the CSA funding, such as long term plan and outcomes, resources identification and allocation, partnerships, but the availability of resources is not confirmed.

Excellent (Score: 15)

The expected reach and level of engagement with youth are very high relative to the project scope. The processes to measure the results are presented. The promotional plan is presented in detail and clearly describes approaches to reach the target audiences, intended channels and expected reach. There is a very strong and credible plan to continue after the termination of the CSA funding, with credible resources availability.

Date modified: