Language selection

Search


Top of page

Announcement of Opportunity (AO) for Health & Life Sciences Data and Sample Mining (DM) or Research Models (RM)

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. CYCLE 1 RECIPIENTS
  11. CYCLE 2 RECIPIENTS
  12. CYCLE 3 RECIPIENTS
  13. CYCLE 4 RECIPIENTS
  14. ANNEX 1
  15. ANNEX 2
  16. ANNEX 3

Publication date:

Applications due .

Summary of Key Information

Eligible recipients::

  • Canadian post-secondary institutions, defined as a Canadian university or college (including CEGEPs in Quebec) that has provincial accreditation to grant degrees, diplomas, certificates or other recognized qualifications;
  • Not-for-profit organizations established and operating in Canada that have research included in their institutional mandate, and that have a standing Research Ethics Board / Animal Care Committee (when required), or that delegate this responsibility to another institution's recognized board/committee.

Funding Type: Grants

Maximum amount per grant: two (2) funding categories:

  • Category 1 - Data and Sample mining (DM): up to $75,000 for a maximum duration of one (1) year.
  • Category 2 - Research Model (RM): up to $180,000 for a maximum duration of two (2) years.

The number of grants and the amount awarded will depend on the budget requested by each proposal and the availability of funds.

1 INTRODUCTION

Future human exploration of space is expected to extend beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to the orbit and surface of the Moon, and ultimately to distant targets such as Mars. The resulting expeditions will require extended periods of exposure to weightlessness and space radiation, with confinement and isolation in the extreme environment of space, all of which are linked to substantial health and performance risks.

The CSA supports human spaceflight and maintains a highly qualified Canadian astronaut corps capable of participating in space exploration missions. Also, as stated in the vision and priorities of the recent Space Strategy for Canada, the CSA aims to enable scientific opportunities and global partnerships, and to harness space to solve everyday challenges for Canadians.

To achieve this, the CSA's Health and Life Sciences (HLS) group conducts activities to generate knowledge in fields that sustain human space flights, mitigate health risks, and develop countermeasures for those missions. Since time and resources on the International Space Station (ISS) are limited, CSA aims to broaden science opportunities to enhance and supplement flight investigations ISS and to optimize utilization of the Canadian resource allocation ISS.

The intent of this Announcement of Opportunity (AO) is to provide financial support to researchers at Canadian Universities and post-secondary institutions to conduct science investigations that will lead to a better understanding of human spaceflight risks while contributing to improve remote medicine and health benefits here on Earth.

More specifically, this AO is divided in two (2) different categories, as defined below:

Category 1 - Data and Sample mining:

This category solicits proposals for scientific analyses, using databases or samples derived from existing collections to improve the understanding of the risks of spaceflight or for initial validation of new countermeasures. The studies selected for this Category are expected to be precursors of Canadian investigations on the ISS or Lunar Gateway.

Dedicated databases and sample repositories collecting the results from space-related studies on human subjects and non-human model organisms are available (see Table 1 for examples of databases and repositories). These studies include investigations in space and on Earth using analogue populations or other relevant models of spaceflight. In addition to the use of publicly available datasets and repositories, researchers can also use datasets from previous flight or analogue experiments, either archived by the original investigator at their institution. Applicants must provide in their proposal a clear justification of the intended use of datasets or samples to test or generate new hypotheses regarding the effects of spaceflight on human health.

Table 1: Examples of databases and sample repositories that could be used to respond to this AO Category. This category is not confined to these databases or sample repositories, nor will proposals using these specific databases or sample repositories be favored. Inclusion of database or sample repository here does not constitute an endorsement or guarantee access. All data and sample use implies attribution requirements (i.e., acknowledgement of the root source(s) of the data or samples).

Table 1 
Database or sample repository Details Access Limits
NASA GeneLab

A comprehensive "-omics" database for space-related research utilizing both ground and space biological and radiation data.

  • Public data accessible for immediate download and use.
Genbank

The GenBank sequence database is an open access, annotated collection of all publicly available nucleotide sequences and their protein translations.

  • Public data accessible for immediate download and use.
Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging Data and Biospecimen (CLSA)

A longitudinal study that tracks various health-related parameters in Canadians between 45-85 years old.

  • CLSA data and biospecimens can only be used by investigators affiliated with a public sector research organization
  • Research projects must have received Research Ethics Board (REB) approval prior to the release of CLSA data and/or biospecimens.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) Tissue Bank

The Canadian Nuclear Laboratories offer a tissue bank from the Life Span Study that aims to investigate the relative biological effectiveness of ingested tritium vs exposure to Co-60 gamma rays on the tumorigenesis and latency in mice.

  • Samples requests must be submitted to this email address.
Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS)

Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS), the biobank is designed to produce a nationally representative cohort to facilitate the progress of new and innovative health research projects. The biobank currently holds biospecimens (blood, urine, and DNA) collected from over 22,000 consenting Canadians between the ages of 3 to 79 years.

  • Researchers submit a completed application form to use CHMS biospecimens.
  • An application evaluation including a feasibility assessment and Biobank Advisory Committee review is required.

After obtaining all necessary approvals, a letter of agreement is signed between the researcher and Statistics Canada.

Dryad

Dryad is an international disciplinary repository of data underlying scientific and medical publications. Dryad is a curated general-purpose repository that makes data discoverable, freely reusable, and citable.

  • Public data accessible for immediate download and use.

It is the researchers' responsibility to provide a proof of access to required data or samples before submitting their proposals.

Category 2 – Research Models:

The focus of research to be funded under this Category 2 - RMRM will be to use non-human subject research models such as animals, organoids, cell culture, and microorganisms to investigate space-related health risks (identified in Table 2 in Section 3.3) and identify sex differences, if applicable. The CSA encourages innovative approaches, such as synthetic biology (i.e., modification of living systems) that support health risk reduction, diagnosis or health care during space missions (prevention, detection, or treatment of acute or chronic health issues, infectious disease, radiation exposure, stress, etc.). However, the core of the proposed studies must focus on living systems.

Well-designed non-human subject research model studies are valuable for improving our understanding of the risks of spaceflight or for initial validation of new countermeasures. The studies targeted in this Category are expected to lead to countermeasures related to human spaceflight health risks, and to be precursors of Canadian investigations on the ISS or Lunar Gateway. In other words, the applicant must provide a solid conceptual link between the proposed work and future studies that require access to space. Proponents must also substantiate the validity of the link between the chosen experimental system(s) and human biology.

The study must include research model/methodology relevant to weightlessness (for example: centrifuges, clinostats, rotating bioreactors, Falcon 20 conducting parabolic flights) or space radiation. The costs of access and travel to facilities (e.g.: purchase of clinostats or access to beam facilities for radiation studies) must be included in the applicant's budget.

This 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 proposals. 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 OBJECTIVES

Projects selected from this CSA competition must increase scientific knowledge that will contribute to the efforts toward the understanding, mitigation or elimination of health risks associated with human space exploration, and to generate scientific insights that will contribute to applications on Earth.

More specifically, through this AO, the CSA seeks to:

3 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

In this section

3.1 Eligible Recipients

Eligible recipients (beneficiaries) for grants are:

  • Canadian post-secondary institutions, defined as Canadian universities or colleges (including CEGEPs in Quebec) that have a provincial accreditation to grant degrees, diplomas, certificates or other recognized qualifications;
  • Not for profit organizations established and operating in Canada that have research included in their institutional mandate, and that have a standing Research Ethics Board / Animal Care Committee (when required), or that delegate this responsibility to another institution's recognized board/committee.

3.2 Eligible Projects

Projects eligible for funding under this AO are those wherein eligible recipients submit projects for which a Canadian researcher is the Principal Investigator (PI) for a new research project. Projects must be original initiatives presented to the CSA. Projects submitted to other space agency-led selection processes are not eligible under this AO. The principal investigator must hold a traditionally recognized academic position such as professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or professor emeritus (post-doctoral fellows cannot be considered as PI). Individuals who are paid salary through someone else's research grant are not eligible as a PI.

Category 1 - DM:

As described in Section 1, eligible projects will focus on scientific analysis, using datasets or samples derived from existing collections to improve our understanding of the risks of spaceflight on health of men, women, and gender diverse people (identified in Table 2 in Section 3.3) and the identification of new potential countermeasures to these risks.

Category 2 - RM:

As described in Section 1, eligible projects will use non-human subject research models such as animals, organoids, cell culture, or microorganisms to investigate space-related health risks (identified in Table 2 in Section 3.3) or new countermeasures to these risks. However, the core of the proposed studies must focus on living systems. The study must include a research model/methodology relevant to weightlessness.

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

3.3 Links to CSA Priorities

To be eligible, projects supported under this AO must be aligned with CSA priority outcomes, as stated in the - Departmental Plan: Leveraging deep-space health and food innovations. In accordance to its mandate, the activities selected must 1) generate new knowledge and insight into the risks of human space flight to keep astronauts healthy in space (Space Strategy for Canada, ), 2) they must clearly be recognizable as direct precursors of future Canadian investigations on the ISS or Lunar Gateway, and 3) they must generate strategies for novel countermeasures against the risks of human space flight. The most important health risks associated with human space flights (i.e., future long-duration human spaceflight missions) have been listed in Table 2.

In addition to the risks listed in the table below, the CSA will also evaluate if the activities would contribute to advancing our understanding of similar health issues, could contribute to improving health and health care for all Canadians, or translate to applications on Earth.

The following table presents the human space flight risks targeted by the CSA for this AO.

Table 2 – Eligible Human Space Flight Risks
Musculoskeletal Mission risk resulting from reduced muscle strength and aerobic capacity, and increased bone fragility.
Sensorimotor Mission risks resulting from sensory changes/dysfunctions.
Metabolism Mission risks associated with metabolism and the effects of nutrient composition of diet on health during space missions.
Behavioural Health and Performance Mission behavioural health and performance risks, for example, associated with psychological adaptation, stress and fatigue, cognitive deterioration, or issues with team dynamics.
Radiation Mission risk due to health and performance impairment associated with radiation damage.
Variable Gravity and Planetary-Lunar Missions Mission risks associated with physiological adaptation (including Space Associated Neuro-optical Syndrome) during transit (i.e. long duration exposure to microgravity) and sojourn on planetary surfaces. Note that physiological adaptation includes adaptation of human-associated microbial communities. Other risks can be associated with planetary exploration and can include, for instance, exposure to dust.

3.4 Links to the Class Grants and Contributions (G&C) Program Objectives

To be eligible, projects supported under this AO must contribute to the achievement of at least one (1) of the following objectives:

  • To support the development of science and technology relevant to the priorities of the Canadian Space Agency;
  • 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

4.1 Required Documentation

The required documentation can be uploaded electronically.

The application must include the following:

  • The full proposal, with a completed original application form (Word, 119 KB) signed by the duly authorized representative. For electronic submission, a digital signature is required;
  • A copy of the document(s) confirming the legal name of the applicant (must be confirmed by the organization's Office of Research);
  • For Not-for-profit organizations, an original or certified copy of their certificate of constitution, letters patent, or other constitutive documents. Non-original or uncertified copies are accepted for the purposes of the application, but subsequently the original documents will be required at the time of the signing of the agreement.
  • Letters from other funding contributors confirming their contributions, if applicable;
  • Letter of support from Co-Investigators, confirming their intent to participate to the study, including information on the potential source of funds, if applicable;
  • Letters from providers of any other data that are not openly accessible confirming the availability of the data;
  • The CSA requires that ethical principles stated in the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans be followed during the execution of projects selected for funding. Applicants need to ensure that institutional ethical certification requirements have been met and provide a letter signed by the chairperson of the local Research Ethics Board (REB) or Animal Care Committee (ACC) regarding approval of the experimental protocol;
  • A Data Management Plan shall be provided with the proposal that addresses:
    • Types of data products;
    • Short term data preservation approach;
    • Long term data preservation/archiving approach;
    • Formats for data and metadata;
    • Sharing and Reuse of the data, when applicable;
    • Roles and Responsibilities for data management within the team.
  • 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);
  • 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).

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

The application, uploaded electronically, must be prepared as a single PDF-formatted file containing all the above requested documents with all security features disabled. Please order the document with the application form and proposal first. The proposal and supporting documents must be submitted as a searchable PDF-formatted document (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.

The applicant must keep one (1) 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.

Process for electronic submission:

  • The applicant must complete an account creation request at the Electronic Proposal Portal. Upon receipt, 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. Please note that Chrome is the browser of choice for submissions. Supported browsers are Google Chrome, Firefox and, Internet Explorer with some restrictions.
  • Allow up to seventy-two (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. It is strongly recommended that the account creation request be submitted no later than . 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 deadline.
  • 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.
  • Applications must be submitted (successfully uploaded) by applicants no later than 2:00 PM (EDT), ;
  • Incomplete or late applications shall not be considered. A late application has an electronic timestamp on the CSA system after the deadline above.

Process for application sent by mail:

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 santespatiale-spacehealth@asc-csa.gc.ca no later than at 2:00 PM (EDT), to obtain instructions on how to submit a paper application by mail.

  • For applications sent by mail, one (1) original paper copy of the full proposal, with a completed original application form signed by the duly authorized representative is required. A copy of the application (identical to the signed paper copy) in a PDF file (on a USB flash drive) is also required. If there is any discrepancy between the hard and the soft version, the hard copy will take precedence.

Applications submitted by mail must be received at the CSA headquarters no later than at 2:00 PM (EDT). Applications sent by email will not be accepted. Incomplete applications may not be considered. The CSA is not responsible for any delays under any circumstances and will refuse applications that are received after the stipulated deadline.

Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the Frequently Asked Questions (Section 9).

4.2 Service Standards – Complete Applications

CSA has set service standards for the timely delivery of the acknowledgement of receipt, funding decision and payment processes.

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

Decision: The CSA's goal is to let applicants know the fate of their proposal within forty-six (46) weeks of the AO's closing date and to send a grant agreement for signature within eight (8) weeks after formal approval of the proposal.

Payment:

The CSA's goal is to issue payment within four (4) weeks of 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

5.1 Eligibility Criteria

  • Represents an eligible recipient as defined in Section 3.1;
  • Represents an eligible project as defined in Sections 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4;
  • Meets program funding provisions in Section 6.1.

An evaluation committee will first screen all applications according to the eligibility criteria described in Table 9 in ANNEX 1.

5.2 Evaluation Criteria

5.2.1 Graded Evaluation Criteria

Once the eligibility is confirmed, proposals will be evaluated in two (2) steps; the programmatic evaluation followed by the scientific merit review, using the following graded criteria. These criteria and ratings are listed in Table 3 and a detailed description can be found in ANNEX 2. Proposals passing the programmatic evaluation will then be considered for the scientific merit review based on criteria described in Section 5.2.2.

Table 3. Programmatic Evaluation Criteria
Criteria Maximum score Passing score
1. Benefits to Canada and Outcomes
1.1 Alignment with CSA priorities and HLS program 8 4
1.2 Link to future space studies 8 4
1.3 Benefits on Earth 4 2
1.4 Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) 4 2
2. Project Feasibility, Resources, and Risk Assessment
2.1 Budget and Resource allocation, and Schedule 8 4
2.2 Risk Management and mitigation strategies 8 4
Total 40 20

5.2.2 Evaluation Criteria for Scientific Merit Review

The scientific merit review will be conducted by a panel of scientific experts according to the language ladder listed in Table 4. A detailed description of each criterion can be found in ANNEX 3. For any given criterion, a score within the associated range will be given by each reviewer of the three (3) reviewers assigned to the proposal. A consensus rating is then decided amongst the reviewers. Finally, all the committee members not in conflict with the proposal under evaluation are asked to vote (+/- 10% of the consensus rating) for the final rating of the proposal. The scientific merit review panel will assign a score from 0 to 60 or a designation "not recommended for further consideration" based on the intrinsic scientific merit to all proposals not meeting the minimal score for the scientific merit criteria. Passing proposals must receive at least a minimal score for each criterion and obtain a total score of at least 42 (70%), which is higher than the sum of all the minimal scores.

Sex and gender differences, as well as differences due to other intersecting identity factors (e.g.: race; indigeneity) exist in space-related health risks, making these issues an important component of this AO. Therefore, the CSA strongly encourage applicants to consider biological sex as a biological variable and gender as a socio-cultural factor into their research designs, methods, analysis and/or dissemination of findings, when appropriate.

Table 4 – Science Merit Scores
Criteria Maximum score Passing score Poor Average Good Excellent
1. Rationale 20 11 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20
2. Methodology 20 11 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20
3. Expertise 20 11 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20
Total 60 42Footnote 1

5.3 Evaluation Process

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

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

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

Grant agreements will be offered to the applicants in the rank order, based on total score, of proposals in each category (in other words, there will be separate ranked lists for Data Mining and Research Models), while allowing considerations to maximize the use of available funding. However, the results obtained in this selection process could take into account certain factors in the final decision to grant funding, such as representation of PI to one of the four (4) designated groups: women, Aboriginal people, disabled persons, or members of a visible minority, regional distribution, diversity among universities/organizations and post-secondary institutions, etc.

6 FUNDING

In this section

6.1 Available Funding and Duration

Transfer payments will be made through grant agreements. In all cases, the maximum funding includes overhead costs. The two (2) funding categories are:

Category 1 - DM: up to $75,000 for a maximum duration of one (1) year.

Category 2 - RM: up to $180,000 for a maximum duration of two (2) years.

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

There is no limit on the number of proposals submitted per investigator. However, considering the limited funding in this AO, the CSA will only fund one (1) project for a researcher as a PI in this AO in DM, and only one (1) in RM. However, it is possible for an investigator to be selected for funding in Category 1 - DM and Category 2 - RM.

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

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

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

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

6.2 Eligible Costs

Eligible costs are direct expenses 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.

Applicants to this CSA AO cannot include as eligible costs any costs related to non-Canadian Co-Investigators or their work within the proposal. These costs should be submitted to the appropriate national agency for funding.

Eligible costs for grant under this AO are the following:

  • Accommodation and meal allowances;
  • Acquisition, development and printing of materials;
  • Acquisition or rental of equipment;
  • Bursaries (such as stipends for students involved in the project);
  • Consultant services;
  • Costs related to obtaining security clearance;
  • Data acquisition (sample acquisition);
  • Data management;
  • Laboratory analysis services;
  • License and permit fees;
  • Marketing and printing services;
  • Materials and supplies;
  • Overhead (administrative) costs (not to exceed 20% of eligible costs for universities & post-secondary institutions and 15% for other eligible recipients);
  • 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;
  • Training;
  • Translation services;
  • Travel;

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.

For grant agreement, payments will be made in a lump sum or 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 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:

  • Knowledge Creation
    • Knowledge production (including publications)
    • Presentations
    • Intellectual property (including patents)
  • Capacity Building
    • Project's research team (including highly qualified personnel supported)
  • Collaboration
    • Partners' contributions
    • Partnerships
    • Multidisciplinarity

7.7 Open Science

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.

To this end, the CSA strongly encourages the use of open access publication and archiving by recipients to facilitate the widest dissemination of findings that results from its funded projects. Thus, recipients are 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.

It should be noted that these two (2) methods are not mutually exclusive and that recipients are encouraged to use both.

Following result publications in journals, the recipients are encouraged to submit their final datasets to the CSA.

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

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 Grants and Contributions Program in Support of Awareness, Research and Learning - Research Component (ASC PPU 045) and Awareness and Learning Component (ASC PPU 040). 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 six (6) years and destroyed. According to the Privacy Act, any individual may, upon request, have access to his or her personal data and 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: asc.aiprp-atip.csa@canada.ca

9 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

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

For any questions related to the AO, applicants shall use the following generic email address (asc.santespatiale-spacehealth.csa@canada.ca). Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the Frequently Asked Questions section of this AO. The CSA will respond to questions received before 2:00 PM (EDT), .

At any point, applicants are welcome to share with the CSA their comments or suggestions regarding the program or the process. Applicants may either use the generic email address (asc.lecedessetc-thegandccoe.csa@canada.ca) or the generic web-based Comments and Suggestions Box available at http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/resources/gc/comments-form.asp

  • Question 1: Will it be possible to obtain an extension to the current deadline of in order to complete the proposal and/or obtain the necessary approvals?

    Answer 1: The evaluation process will begin right after the AO closes, and extending the AO posting puts the evaluation schedule at risk and delays funding of successful proposals. Therefore, a change of deadline is unfortunately not possible.

  • Question 2: In the Application form regarding your recent Announcement of Opportunity (AO), it is indicated that the full proposal description should be around 2500 words in MS Word format(.DOC, .DOCX), 12-pt typeface, letter-sized paper and 1" margins. Could you please clarify the followings:
    • Are there specific requirements for line spacing?
    • Is it possible to include figures and tables presenting preliminary data in the proposal?
    • Are references included in the maximum limit of 2500 words?

    Answer 2: Here are some details about the description of the research proposal:

    • Proposals are usually written in single space format; however, there is no preference/requirement for line spacing.
    • Figures and tables presenting preliminary data can be included, but all legends and text will count towards the maximum limit of 2500 words.
    • References are not included in the maximum limit of 2500 words.
  • Question 3: In the AO, under 4.1 Required documentation lists the following as required: A copy of the document(s) confirming the legal name of the applicant (must be confirmed by the organization's Office of Research). Could you confirm what type of document CSA will accept and what type of confirmation is required from the Research Office Services?

    Answer 3: The documentation required by CSA aims to confirm the legal name of the organization (this is necessary for a formal agreement to be drafted). It is typically enclosed in the letters patent, other constitutive documents, or the university Act and it can be provided by the Office of Research of your University or organization.

  • Question 4: We are in the process of completing an application for your AO and we have questions regarding the "Duly Authorized Representative "Signature:
    • Is the" Duly Authorized Representative" the same person as the "Representative from the Office of Research"?
    • Is the Chair of my research department sufficient to be this representative?

    Answer 4:

    • "The Duly Authorized Representative" can be the same person as the "Representative from the Office of Research", but it can also be another authorized representative of the University.
    • The Chair of the research department cannot be this representative, the application has to be sign by the "Representative from the Office of Research" or a "duly authorized representative" of the University.
  • Question 5: In section 4 of the application form, is it possible to add more than 6 members of the research team? If yes, how?

    Answer 5: Section 4 of the application form includes members of the research team, such as principal investigators and co-investigators. If you have more than 5 co researchers, it is possible to include them by adding them to the table of the application form (editable Word document).

  • Question 6: As per the OA for this funding opportunity, we understand that overhead/administrative costs are not to exceed 20% of eligible costs for universities. Is this 20% applies to all eligible costs or if there are any specific costs that should be excluded from overhead calculations (e.g., graduate student stipends or other research personnel costs)?

    Answer 6: The 20% is applicable for all of eligible costs.

  • Question 7: My understanding is that submissions are done by the post-secondary institution as an "Eligible Recipient". Can professors (i.e. researchers or "applicants") create their own online portal or is this something the University should do? Should we create an online portal specifically for the University?

    Answer 7: The applicant/researcher or the Representative from the Office of Research can make a new account creation request using the link 'Electronic Proposal Portal', and indicate 1) the name of the researcher, 2) the name of the Representative from the Office of Research, and 3) the name of the university or organisation and address.

  • Question 8: If a researcher has already collected data as funded by CSA on a given project, could the researcher apply to this AO proposing to use the data already collected to answer a different question not addressed in the original funded project? If yes, would the researcher need to amend the ethics of the original project to include the question addressed in the current AO proposal?

    Answer 8: Eligible projects for this AO include the use of data already collected to answer a different question not addressed in the original funded project. However, this will be decision of the local Research Ethic Board (REB). CSA will need local REB approval before the signature of the grant agreement, if your proposal is successful in this CSA competition.

  • Question 9: Does the applicant have to complete Section 3: Scientific Merit Review?

    Answer 9: The Scientific Merit Review in Section 3 is performed by a panel of scientific experts, therefore the applicant does not need to complete this section.

  • Question 10: What samples and data are available for use in this AO?

    Answer 10: Examples of databases and sample repositories that could be used to respond to this AO are listed in Table 1. However, other databases and sample repositories could also be accepted for this AO. The Methodology criteria of the Scientific Merit evaluation will evaluate if the selected set of data or samples (for Category 1) or research models (for Category 2) are appropriate for the proposed research objectives.

  • Question 11: Is it possible to propose studies using mice that would be housed on the space station? How many mice can we propose to use if the objective would be to conduct the studies in the space station, and what is the experience of the resident researchers in terms of ability to collect tissues and store samples?

    Answer 11: The purpose of this AO is to perform experiments using non-space research models (for example, hind-limb suspension, rotating bioreactors, clinostats), in order to better prepare for, enhance and supplement future flight investigations on the ISS (such future investigations are not funded or selected through this AO). The studies targeted in this AO are expected to lead to countermeasures related to human spaceflight health risks, and to be precursors of Canadian investigations on the ISS or other space research platforms.

  • Question 12: In the team members section, we included the information of the researchers (principal investigator and co-principal investigator). Should we also include the information of other collaborators (eg: doctoral / master's students involved, other researchers who would collaborate without being co-principal investigator).

    Answer 12: In Section 3 - Team members, we only need to include the principal investigator and co-principal investigators information, if applicable.

  • Question 13: Is it possible to cover the salary of the principal investigator with the grants offered under this AO?

    Answer 13: Grant funds can be used to cover salaries, or the proportion of salaries, that are specific to the project and that are not funded by other sources of funds.

  • Question 14: Regarding the application form, item 7 of Section 11 (Submission Checklist), it is written: "Applicant need to ensure that institutional ethical certification requirements have been met and a letter signed by the chairperson of the local Research Ethics Board (REB) or Animal Care Committee (ACC) regarding approval of the experimental protocol will be required for funding" Does the applicant need to have ethics approved and attach the ethical certificate to the application at the time of submission of the proposal or can the researcher submit the ethical certificate only prior to funding being released?

    Answer 14: We require the researcher to submit ethical certificate to the Canadian Space Agency only prior to funding being released once the proposals have been selected. No documents regarding ethics approval are required when submitting the proposal.

  • Question 15: Although the applicant will only apply for eligible costs to CSA, i.e. costs related to Canadian Co-Investigators, a separate application will also be submitted to another space agency in relation to costs related to non-Canadian Co-Investigators. Should this application to the other space agency be mentioned in the Budget Breakdown table of Section 4-2.1 and in Section 8 of the Application Form? Please indicate where the information should appear in these or any other sections.

    Answer 15: If other funding is required in addition to CSA funding, the amount should be included in the Budget table in Section 4-2.1 and in Section 8 of the Application Form. Please also explain what the ramifications are if the funding request to the other space agency is unsuccessful.

  • Question 16: Is it possible to include non-Canadian Co-Investigators in the list of Team Members?

    Answer 16: Yes it is possible to include non-Canadian Co-Investigators in the list of Team Members.

  • Question 17: Could you explain what is meant by: "Projects presented to other space agency-led selection processes are not eligible under this AO?" For instance, if the applicants are simultaneously applying to another space agency's grant competition, would they be considered ineligible?

    Answer 17: CSA cannot fund a project that is already funded at 100%. It would be acceptable if a proposal is submitted to another agency by a Co-Investigator in order to obtain funds for their part in the project. Ultimately, if CSA and the proposing institution sign a funding agreement, the institution implicitly acknowledges that sufficient funds have been secured from other sources.

  • Question 18: Would a PhD student be able to apply to the AO along with their supervisor (a professor) who would be the PI on the project?

    Answer 18: As indicated in the Announcement of Opportunity (AO), the principal investigator (PI) or Co-Investigator (Co-I) listed must be a Canadian Researcher and must hold a traditionally recognized academic position such as professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or professor emeritus (post-doctoral fellows cannot be considered as PI or Co-I). However, the participation of students in projects submitted to this AO is encouraged and stipends for students involved in the project are eligible costs as per the AO (section 6.2).

  • Question 19: One of the eligibility criteria for this announcement of opportunity (AO) is to provide proof of have access to datasets. Could you please clarify the description of the proof required for the AO?

    Answer 19:

    • If the datasets are already available to the public and open sourced, please provide the name and the hyperlink.
    • If the datasets are closed source, please provide a proof of access such as a letter of confirmation from the dataset owner.
  • Question 20: As mentioned in section 7.5 of the Announcement of Opportunity (AO), if an organization based in the province of Quebec is defined as a public body under the Act Respecting the Ministère du Conseil exécutif (M-30), does the applicant need to provide the pre-authorization documentation to conclude a funding agreement with the CSA at the time of submitting an application?

    Answer 20: At the time of submitting an application, the applicant only needs to review and complete section 13-A of the application form. Documentation/authorization related to the M-30 Act will only be required before the signing of the funding agreement with the CSA if the proposal is selected. In this case, it is suggested to promptly initiate the process by following the instructions in section 13-A of the application form.

  • Question 21: Are the overhead costs included in the maximum funding?

    Answer 21: The maximum amount for the second category (research model) is $180,000 for a maximum duration of two (2) years. The maximum funding includes overhead costs as mentioned in section 6.1 of this Announcement of opportunity.

  • Question 22: Regarding industry support letters, should applicants include letters of support from industry partners, even if they are not providing any financial contributions?

    Answer 22: Yes, support letters from industry partners should be included in the proposal even if they are not financially contributing to the research project.

  • Question 23: Is there a specific page limit for the "SCHEDULE" and "BUDGET" sections referenced in Section 2.1?

    Answer 23: No, there are no page limit for the "SCHEDULE" and "BUDGET" sections.

  • Question 24: Are applicants permitted to include images in the application form to illustrate ideas? If references are allowed, would they count toward the overall word limit?

    Answer 24: Pictures and references are allowed; Figures and tables presenting preliminary data can be included, but all legends and text will count towards the maximum limit of 2500 words. References are not included in the maximum limit of 2500 words.

  • Question 25: Does the project's duration affect the grading process? For example, if an applicant were to propose a one-year project for Category 2 (rather than the maximum two years), could that influence the grade given to this proposal?

    Answer 25: No, project duration will not affect grading as long as the proposed project respects maximum duration and funding for that specific topic.

  • Question 26: Can applicant include their Curriculum Vitae to their application?

    Answer 26: Yes, as indicated in Section 3 of the Application form, it is requested to attach the curriculum vitae (CV) or generic version of the Common CV (CCV) for each member of the team.

  • Question 27: When applying, which version of the Canadian Common CV (CCV) should applicant include in their application?

    Answer 27: When submitting a research proposal, please attach a curriculum vitae (CV) or a version of the Canadian Common CV (CCV) of your choice.

  • Question 28: In the application form, Eligibility Criteria 1 states 'For Category 1 - Data and sample mining (Section 1 of the AO) Proof of access to the required data or samples (if applicable) – maximum of 300 words', if the applicant submits a proposal for Category 2, could they still fill this section and change the title to Category 2 themself?

    Answer 28: This criterion is only mandatory for Category 1. Although it is not necessary for Category 2, applicants are allowed to fill this section if they would like to provide important information regarding the model organism that will be used in their experiment.

  • Question 29: Could you clarify if Statement #9 in the 'Applicant Attestation' section of the application form (9. Undertakes to provide the CSA, without costs and, delay and in the form requested, with all the information necessary to complete the evaluation of the request for financial assistance and, if applicable, to execute and enforce a possible financing agreement.) refers to a research funding agreement?

    Answer 29: Yes, this section of the application form refers to a funding agreement.

  • Question 30: Please provide clarifications regarding the Auditing Requirement stated under the Section 7. 'Funding Agreements'. What documentation could be subject to audit by CSA during the retention period (6 years after the completion date)?

    Answer 30: The applicant needs to preserve all information and documents necessary to establish its eligibility for the grant throughout the duration of the agreement and the retention period - a non-exhaustive list of documents can be found in Section 4.1 'Required Documentation' of the Announcement of Opportunity.

CYCLE 1 RECIPIENTS

*Note – Cycle 1 includes both human analogue and DM and RM projects, subsequent cycles split these projects into two separate announcements of opportunity.

Table 5 - Cycle 1 Recipients
Type Organization Project title Description Total amount

Data Mining

University of Waterloo – Richard Hughson

Extracting novel information from Canadian space life science astronaut data

The current project will provide an opportunity for young, highly talented Canadian scientists to engage in data mining exercise that will leverage data collected from the CSA-supported projects BP Reg and Vascular. Novel hypotheses developed since these original studies can utilize spaceflight data to provide insights into blood pressure regulation and the effects of stiffer arteries on blood flow to the brain. Our results set the stage for applications of the CSA Bio-Monitor and advanced ultrasound technology to benefit astronauts in future long-duration exploration missions; and, they open opportunities to benefit health in the aging population on Earth.

$70,000

Data Mining

University of Montreal – Frédéric Pitre

Impacts of long-term space travel upon astronaut health: analysis of MARS500 crew microbiomes using improved Metagenomics

The microbiome is intricately involved in human health. One concern in spaceflight is the potential negative impact of long-term habitat confinement upon microbiome health. The MARS500 project investigated this by sampling the microbiome of six astronauts over the longest ground-based confined habitat experiment conducted to-date. The project objective is to determine common microbiome changes in the crew of the MARS500 experiment. Improved metagenomic assessment technologies mean that significant differences in microbiome species can be identified over the 520-day experiment. Findings should reveal insight into the long-term impacts of spaceflight upon astronaut health and provide a unique view of confined environments.

$69,999

Research Models

Unity Health Toronto – Yeni Yucel

Disturb Fluid drainage Around Eye: An important Missing Piece in the Puzzle of Vision Loss in Astronauts?

Vision loss due to Space Associated Neuro-Ocular Syndrome (SANS) is observed in many astronauts, is poorly understood and remains one of the most feared hazards of space flight. The loss of gravity causes fluid shifts and these disturbances around the eye may be an important piece of the puzzle. Novel non-invasive techniques will be used to examine eye and lymphatic fluid changes for the first time in a model of SANS. Discovering impaired entry and exit of fluid in and from around the eye will be an important step toward understanding and preventing vision loss from SANS in astronauts.

$149,944

Research Models

McGill University – Svetlana Komarova

Understanding relative contributions of fluid flow and mechanical strain to bone adaptation in altered gravity.

Bone loss in astronauts is a major challenge for long-duration space exploration. In weightlessness, muscles are used less often, thus providing less stimulation of bone. Microgravity also induces fluid shift from the lower body towards the head, the role of which in bone loss is unclear. We aim to develop imaging, computational and pharmacological tools to examine contributions of fluid flow and mechanical strain to bone adaptation to mechanical environment using mouse models of mechanical loading and immobilization-induced unloading. Understanding the links between microgravity and bone adaptation will help to prevent bone loss in long-duration human space flights.

$150,000

Research Models

Mount Saint Vincent University – Tamara Franz-Odendaal

Understanding microgravity-induced bone loss through in vivo simulated microgravity experiments

Following a space mission, astronauts experience severe bone thinning and increased risks of fracture when back on Earth. This anomaly is due to microgravity exposure. The aim of this study is to reproduce and expose fish larvae to a simulated microgravity on Earth, and to analyse the effects on the cells of the skeleton. Fish bones strongly resemble human bones in structure. They utilize similar cell types to secrete, mineralize and degrade bone matrix, and similar signaling pathways for cell-cell communication. Thus, fish are a good model to understand the causes underlying the microgravity-induced bone fragility observed in astronauts

$150,000

Research Models

University of Ottawa – Odette Laneuville

An animal model to prevent shoulder injuries in microgravity

Shoulder's muscles and tendons combine their activities to provide mobility and stability when we move our arms. On Earth, shoulder muscles must counteract gravity to maintain in position the shoulder. In space, only muscle forces act and astronauts develop shoulder overuse injuries. Our ability to detect early signs of shoulder overuse is limited. As such, soft tissue tears develop unnoticed until they cause pain and serious functional deficits. We propose to study the shoulders of mudskippers, an amphibious fish, as a natural model that mirrors the dramatic changes in motions, gravitational forces experienced by astronauts' shoulders

$150,000

Human Analogues

Simon Fraser University – Andrew Blaber

Effect of individualized Artificial Gravity Training on Cardiovascular and Cerebral Responses in Males and Females during Supine to Stand tests

Wobbly legs, dizzy spells and even fainting experienced by astronauts on return to Earth are serious health and safety concerns. One solution may be to provide artificial gravity from a centrifuge in space. Our group has shown that artificial gravity training on Earth increases standing tolerance, but the reasons behind this increase are not well understood, particularly for women who have not been included as often in previous studies. We will look the posture, cardiovascular and brain blood flow responses to an individualized artificial gravity program in men and women to better understand and use this technique to protect astronauts.

$99,340

Human Analogues

York University – Laurence Harris

CSA Smug: Self-motion under gravity

When humans move from the normal constant one gravity environment found on earth a range of different perceptual systems must operate under unusual conditions resulting the systematic errors in fundamental measures including the perception of self-motion. Understanding how humans integrate cues to their self-motion under such circumstances is critical for humans to operate safely and effectively off earth. In collaboration with German partners and the DLR, the CSASMUG project is building a model of how humans integrate gravity and other cues to estimate their self-motion and is developing countermeasures and display technology based on this model.

$147,840

CYCLE 2 RECIPIENTS

Table 6 - Cycle 2 Recipients
Type Organization Project title Description Total amount

Data Mining

University of Waterloo – Richard Hughson

Cerebrovascular pulsatility and compliance following spaceflight: integrated insights from arterial and venous function

This project provides an opportunity for young, talented Canadians to engage in research by using previously collected information. We will answer new questions investigating the link between blood vessel function and brain health. The project is designed to determine how well brain blood vessels soften the pulses coming from the heart. We will also test whether an astronaut s exercise routine protects their brain. The results will increase understanding of the link between blood vessel health and cognition in older adults on Earth, and help to protect astronauts during future missions, which will extend for longer durations and deeper into space.

$70,000

Data Mining

University of Calgary – Steven Boyd

TBONE – Advanced analysis of bone structural trajectories in long-duration spaceflight

Astronauts lose bone mass rapidly while in space. Some bone may recover after returning to Earth, but bone structure may be permanently changed. The ends of long bones are made of porous bone connected by thin rods and plates called trabeculae. When bone is lost, trabeculae thin and separate from one another, reducing the strength of the bone. With advances in high-resolution bone imaging, we can now measure bone on a scale finer than a human hair and assess changes in individual trabeculae. This study will discover how individual trabeculae change in response to microgravity and whether these structures recover after returning to Earth.

$70,000

Data Mining

Université Laval – Simon Duchesne

The Astronaut Brain Health Data Mining project

Spaceflight is harsh: astronauts are exposed to radiation and microgravity, isolated and confined for weeks and months. Eventually their cognition, sensation, movement, and coordination changes, affecting their performance. We will study brain images from previous astronauts to determine how their brain health was affected by the spaceflight using methods that we developed to track the effect of aging. An increased understanding of the impact of space travel will allow us to better evaluate the effect of countermeasures, which could be applied here on Earth to different clinical population, including patients affected by brain degeneration such as Alzheimer's disease.

$149,944

Research Models

McGill University – Svetlana Komarova

Understanding relative contributions of fluid flow and mechanical strain to bone adaptation in altered gravity.

Bone loss in astronauts is a major challenge for long-duration space exploration. In weightlessness, muscles are used less often, thus providing less stimulation of bone. Microgravity also induces fluid shift from the lower body towards the head, the role of which in bone loss is unclear. We aim to develop imaging, computational and pharmacological tools to examine contributions of fluid flow and mechanical strain to bone adaptation to mechanical environment using mouse models of mechanical loading and immobilization-induced unloading. Understanding the links between microgravity and bone adaptation will help to prevent bone loss in long-duration human space flights.

$70,000

Research Models

Northern Ontario School Of Medicine – David Alexander MacLean

Investigating the role of a mutli-targeted dietary supplement on attenuating radiation and microgravity induced tissue damage

Reducing the risks to human health is critical for long-duration space flight. Space radiation and micro-gravity can negatively impact health, yet the combined effects of these factors remain unclear. Our project seeks to understand how the combined effects radiation and microgravity interact and damage healthy tissue such as muscles, bones, eyes, and brains using a model that simulates space flight. We will then determine if a dietary supplement can counteract these effects and protect tissues. This study will provide us with a clear understanding of how the body is affected by space travel and begin exploring meaningful countermeasures.

$150,000

Research Models

Laurentian University of Sudbury – Douglas Boreham

Investigating the radiation response during anhydrobiosis in yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and applications for future space biosciences research

Yeast is an ideal model system for space biosciences research because they can be maintained in a dry desiccated state for prolonged periods of time without the need for water or nutrients. However, we still lack a complete understanding of how this desiccated state impacts their natural response to ionizing radiation. This research project will examine the effects of different types of radiation on the cellular and molecular response in desiccated yeast. Overall, this research will provide the foundational knowledge that will enable the use of desiccated yeast as a model system for future long duration space missions.

$149,500

Research Models

Queen's University – Rachel Holden

Dietary Phosphate as a Sex-Specific Mediator of Bone Loss in Spaceflight

Astronauts lose substantial amounts of bone during space missions. Abnormalities in the way the body handles phosphate has been linked to bone loss on Earth. Astronauts on the ISS consume high levels of phosphate, but it is unknown whether this contributes to bone loss during space travel. In this study, we will determine whether phosphate metabolism is altered and whether dietary phosphate contributes to bone loss in microgravity. The results of this study could inform optimal nutrient contents of astronaut diets and may have implications for people on Earth who are at risk for bone loss.

$149,975

Research Models

University of Ottawa – Bernard Jasmin

The RNA-binding protein Staufen1 as a novel therapeutic target for skeletal muscle atrophy

Skeletal muscle atrophy is a health concern for human on Earth and for astronauts involved in space flight due to decrease in muscle size and strength which increwses fatigability and frailty. The success of long-term space flight is partly limited by the health concerns and risks to the astronauts involved in these missions. The focus of this project is to: i) better understand how muscle atrophy occurs; and ii) eventually design novel therapeuthic interventions to counteract the devastating impact of atrophy on Earth and in space.

$150,000

Research Models

Brock University – Val Fajardo

Inhibiting GSK3 to preserve musculoskeletal and cognitive health during spaceflight

Canada has committed efforts to push humanity further into the solar system beyond the ISS to more distant destinations like the Moon and Mars. However, travelling with the astronauts on these longer-duration missions are risks for muscle loss and weakness, bone fragility and cognitive decline, all of which will compromise astronaut well-being and the mission at hand. Our research seeks to determine whether stopping an enzyme called glycogen synthase kinase 3 can slow the functional decline of our muscles, bone, and brain not only in space but also here on Earth, providing novel therapeutic strategies for human health.

$150,000

Research Models

University of Montreal – Matthew D. Regan

Harnessing hibernation: evaluating the translational potential of hibernation-related mechanisms of muscle atrophy resistance

This project aims to translate a hibernation-related mechanism of muscle atrophy resistance to astronauts. The microgravity conditions of space invariably lead to profound loss of skeletal and cardiac muscle mass and performance, a phenomenon called spaceflight-induced disuse atrophy. However, hibernating mammals are remarkably resistant to muscle atrophy, and we have recently identified a gut microbiome-based process that facilitates this resistance by building muscle protein. Here, we use proteomics techniques to determine which muscle proteins this process helps build and whether they will counter spaceflight-induced atrophy. The ultimate goal is to create a hibernation-like probiotic to facilitate atrophy resistance in astronauts.

$149,040

Research Models

McGill University – Bettina M. Willie

Role of circadian rhythms in mechanical unloading-related bone loss

Bone loss in astronauts is a major challenge for long-duration space exploration. In weightlessness, muscles are used less often, thus providing less stimulation of bone. In addition, astronauts often have disrupted ccircadian rhythms. It is known that night and rotating shift workers display an increased incidence of bone fractures. Molecular mechanisms underlying microgravity-induced bone loss are still unclear. We aim to determine how circadian rhythms contribute to mechanical unloading-related bone loss using mouse models. Understanding the links between circadian rhythms, microgravity and bone adaptation will help to prevent bone loss in long-duration human space flights.

$150,000

CYCLE 3 RECIPIENTS

Table 7 - Cycle 3 Recipients
Type Institution Project title Description Total amount

Data Mining

Schlegel-UW Research Institute for Aging – Andrew Robertson

Cerebrovascular factors involved in postural control in older adults and astronauts – insights from the recent CIHR-CSA bed rest study

Light-headedness and fainting occurs when the cardiovascular system is unable to maintain arterial pressures during rapid changes in posture, such as standing up from a horizontal position. Some astronauts experience such symptoms after returning to Earth from space and the underlying factors are still poorly understood. The research team will analyze data from the recent CIHR-based Bed Rest Study of 55-65-year-old men and women wich they propose can provide information on how the blood supply to the brain is related to fainting. The results will be an important step towards the prevention of fainting in astronauts and people on Earth.

$70,000

Data Mining

Unity Health Toronto – Yeni Yucel

Mining data from a previous CSA-funded study to test new hypotheses about astronauts' eye and brain health

Vision loss due to Space Associated Neuro-Ocular Syndrome (SANS) is observed in many astronauts, is poorly understood, and remains one of the most feared hazards of space flight. The loss of gravity causes shift of fluids, including blood to the upper body, and these disturbances around the eye, especially in the choroid, the most vascularized tissue in the body, may be an important piece of the puzzle. Novel non-invasive eye imaging techniques will be used to examine blood vessel changes in the choroid for the first time in a model of SANS. Discovering biomarkers of excess and persistent blood and fluid entry into the eye will be an important step toward understanding and predicting SANS and preventing vision loss from SANS in astronauts.

$70,000

Data Mining

Elisabeth Bruyère Research Institute – Mark Campbell

Evaluating the use of artificial gravity to counter the risk of Achilles tendon rupture following prolonged bedrest and spaceflight

The Achilles tendon is critical to walking, yet can be impaired after long period of immobility or lack of gravity, in space or on earth. Our study aims to investigate whether artificial gravity can reduce the effect from lack of gravity on the Achilles tendon, and explore whether male or female respond differently to artificial gravity.

$70,000

Research Models

University of Manitoba – Lorrie Kirshenbaum

Circadian Regulation of Cardiometabolic Function in Space Flight

It is well-recognized that astronauts experience profound physiological changes that adversely affect the heart owing in part to the effects of changes in the normal circadian light/dark cycle. Furthermore, new compelling data from our laboratory suggests that accumulation of damaged organelles resulting from impaired cellular quality control processes is an underlying defect contributing to cardiac cell-death and dysfunction following circadian disruption. The relationship between circadian disruption and heart health during spaceflight is not well-studied. Hence, we propose to delineate how circadian disruption influences autophagy, cell-viability and cardiac dysfunction in females versus males in response to altered light/dark cycle during spaceflight.

$150,000

Research Models

University of Montreal – Frédéric Pitre

MARSCROP Martian Regolith Salix Co-cropping for Perchlorate

Findings from Viking and Phoenix Mars landers have revealed the widespread presence of perchlorates in Mars regolith at concentrations that are toxic to humans and plants. The MARSCROP project will explore the use of perchlorate reducing bacteria associated with willow roots to mitigate regolith toxicity as well as determine the potential for co-cropping of willow with tomato and soybean to produce safe fresh food for astronauts on the surface of Mars. The project findings will hope to exploit multisystem biology which has evolved on earth to help solve complex challenges and safeguard astronaut health on the Martian surface.

$150,000

Research Models

The Sir Mortimer B. Davis-Jewish general Hospital – Colin Crist

Global Changes in mRNA Translation Underlying the Unique Mechanisms of Skeletal Muscle Atrophy on Earth and in Space

Muscle wasting occurs in consequence to pathological conditions, including aging (sarcopenia). In space, healthy astronauts experience severe wasting of the anti-gravity muscles, the muscles that are normally engaged on Earth to maintain posture. Adjunct therapies are required to mitigate the risk of muscle wasting to enable human exploration of space. In this proposal, we use genetic tools in the mouse to reveal how protein synthesis, a major determinant of muscle mass, is remodeled in aging mice. Understanding how protein synthesis is remodeled under conditions of muscle wasting on Earth and in space is the first step towards identifying drug targets.

$150,000

Research Models

University of Alberta – Adetola Adesida

Mechanogenomic suppression of microgravity induced chondrocyte hypertrophy in bioengineered human cartilage

Space's low gravity leads to bone and muscle loss which can compromise astronauts' missions. Previous work showed that the knee cartilage of mice breakdown after a period in space's low gravity. But little is known about the effect of low gravity on human cartilage. We will use human stem cells from adult females and males to make cartilage to study the effect of low gravity on cartilage. We will use an instrument designed by NASA to replicate low gravity. We hope our work will shed new light into osteoarthritis, a common disease in Canadians with cartilage breakdown at its core.

$149,442.40

Research Models

Mount Saint Vincent University – Tamara Franz-Odendaal

Deciphering simulated microgravity and vibration effects on bone tissue in vivo

Following a space mission, astronauts experience severe bone thinning and increased risks of fracture when back on Earth. This bone anomaly is due to the exposure to an environment with reduced gravitational forces, namely microgravity. The aim of this study is to reproduce the microgravity environment on Earth using a ground-based instrument. Researchers will expose fish larvae to a simulated microgravity environment and analyse the effects on bone cells in the skeleton. The counter measure of vibration will also be examined separately and in combination with microgravity. The objectives of the study are to understand the cellular responses to these treatments in order to understand the microgravity induced bone loss observed in astronauts and to understand how to reduce these effects with vibration exposures. Fish bones strongly resemble human bones, in that the same cells are present, therefore these results will be relevant to humans. This project builds on from the foundational groundwork we established in our soon-to-end existing CSA project in which we optimised conditions for analysing zebrafish larval and adult bones after SMG and vibration exposure.

$150,000

CYCLE 4 RECIPIENTS

Table 8 - Cycle 4 Recipients
Type Organization Project title Description Total Amount

Data Mining

Schlegel-UW Research Institute for Aging – Richard Hughson

Development of next generation assessment algorithms for Bio-Monitor datasets – interrogating fitness sleep and cardiovascular health aboard the ISS

This project will analyze pre-existing data collected by the Bio-Monitor biometric shirt in 9 astronauts (2 women) before, during and after missions to the ISS. Specific goals of this project include the un-intrusive assessment of astronaut sleep, fitness and blood pressure continually over long-duration (48-hour) recordings. Sleep is paramount to astronaut health, with numerous pre-existing reports of impaired sleep during flight. By assessing how sleep changes over the course of a mission with previously validated analyses, strategies to improve sleep quality could be developed. Astronaut fitness can be measured from Bio-Monitor signals Finally, these analyses will allow for improved understandings of changes to astronaut health over the course of 6-month missions; they will also support the use of the Canadian-produced Bio-Monitor shirt for future missions to the moon.

$75,000

Data Mining

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute  – Guy Trudel

Polaris neocytolysis assessed by mining blood and air samples

The Polestar payload aims to address outstanding questions on the mechanism of space anemia. Polestar will test three key hypotheses: 1. Older red blood cells (RBC) are preferentially destroyed in space; 2. Space can induce a shift from adult to fetal hemoglobin; and 3. Space induces RBC morphological changes, causing RBC dysfunction. Using blood and air samples collected from the SpaceX Polaris Dawn 5-day mission, Polestar will measure the effect of high-altitude space and space radiation on space hemolysis in 4 astronauts compared to 4 age-related and sex-matched ground controls. Polestar will investigate the subpopulation of hemolyzed RBCs, hemoglobin gene-switching, and RBC anomalies, using state-of-the-art methods often applied for the first time to space samples. Polestar leverages private space missions to speed up critical space life science advances.

$74,700

Data Mining

Simon Fraser University – Andrew Blaber

Exploring space health solutions through multiomic analysis of existing human spaceflight and analogue data

Spaceflight produces deleterious effects on multiple physiological systems (e.g., cardiovascular, cardiorespiratory, and postural controls) with astronauts in isolation and confinement (IC) in a microgravity environment. IC studies conducted on the ISS and the ground generally demonstrated altered neuro-immunomodulated responses, whose mechanisms may be related to chronic stress dysregulating the central nervous system (CNS). However, the effects of IC on CNS insult and multiomic responses are yet to be investigated. We propose to analyze datasets of previous flight experiments from NASA's OSDR and Vivaldi 1 & 2 transcriptomic data from dry immersion analogue study . We aim to generate new knowledge and understanding of human spaceflight risks associated with CNS dysfunctions and contribute to evidencebased, prophylactic countermeasure development to mitigate the adverse risks associated with current spaceflight. Moreover, this research aims to translate this understanding to improve the health of Canadians on Earth who may be affected by related adverse effects.

$75,000

Data Mining

Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières – Jean-Philippe Leduc-Gaudet

Integrated RNA Sequencing to Understand Skeletal Muscle Atrophy During Bed Rest

The loss of skeletal muscle mass and function is a major public health concern, reducing quality of life and independence for many individuals. Both on Earth and during spaceflight, muscle unloading leads to atrophy, loss of strength, and glucose intolerance. Our project aims to uncover the cellular mechanisms driving muscle atrophy during unloading and inactivity, such as prolonged bed rest, using advanced RNA-sequencing technologies. Furthermore, we will also investigate the underlying protective effects of an exercise countermeasure. By performing long-read RNA-seq analyses on a wellcharacterized cohort of participants, we will generate valuable scientific knowledge that could pave the way for new treatments to prevent or combat muscle atrophy and weakness. These findings will not only help astronauts stay healthy during space missions but also benefit people on Earth who experience muscle loss due to immobilization, critical illnesses, or chronic diseases like diabetes and cancer.

$74,475

Data Mining

University of Ottawa – Odette Laneuville

Machine-learning algorithms for integrating HDT bed rest data and measuring the deconditioning of physiological systems.

During spaceflight, astronauts experience deconditioning; the simultaneous reduction of the functional capacity of multiple body systems leading to weakness and inability to perform activities. Impairments span multiple systems from cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, to immunity all contributing to deconditioning. The scarcity of astronauts' biological samples combined with technical challenges in space hampers our ability to monitor how the human body copes with space hazards. However, HDT bed rest studies represent an Earth-based analogue to microgravity and an opportunity to decipher the molecular mechanisms leading to deconditioning. Our Team secured access to European Space Agency (ESA) data collected for the monitoring of participants. We will apply machine-learning algorithms to integrated ESA data and gene expression data collected from the same participants by our Team. Results will reveal predictor and physiological responses for early detection of deconditioning and for the design of interventions to prevent the negative effects of microgravity.

$75,000

Data Mining

Bruyère Research Institute – Mark Campbell

Determining the effectiveness of Artificial gravity with Cycling or vibration Exercise on Achilles tendon changes following 60 days of bedrest – An MRI-based analysis of the BRACE and BRAVE RandomIzed Control trials – The Achilles ACE MAVERIC study

Injury or complete tear to the Achilles tendon happens often after being in bed for a long time (e.g. if one needs to stay in bed for a long time because one is very sick). Astronauts in space have the same problem because being in low gravity is like being in bed. This project will find out whether providing a treatment with artificial gravity (using a human centrifuge!) combined with either cycling while in bed or exercising while the whole body is being vibrated can help stop an Achilles injury after bedrest. We will also find out if there is a difference in the effect of resting in bed in men versus women.

$75,000

Data Mining

University of Montreal – Guido Simonelli

Sleep problems in Isolated Confined and Extreme Environment – a story of latitude or lived experience or physiology

Leveraging data from over 20 Antarctic campaigns and a control study in an Arctic community, we propose to conduct a comprehensive study aimed at unravelling the complex interplay of factors that impact sleep in isolate confined extreme environments and to examine fatigue and fatigue prediction in this context, which would support the developing potential countermeasures for health risks in human spaceflight as well as potential performance-enhancing measures. By applying Earth-based analogs, our study will provide insights directly relevant to the risks of future Canadian investigations on the ISS or Lunar Gateway.

$75,000

Research Models

University of Toronto – Michael Garton

Engineering genetic countermeasures against ionizing radiation a human iPSC-based model for targeting oxidative stress DNA damage and cellular senescence

This project will develop a robust human cell culture-based pipeline for engineering innate radiation protection mechanisms. As opposed to traditional models which lack biological relevance, this proposal leverages the use of hPSCs and derived cells thereof, constituting both a sensitive and relevant approach. We will identify potential gene therapy targets that can confer radioprotective phenotypes by effectively reducing oxidative stress, DNA damage, and cell death responses whilst deepening our understanding of their underlying mechanisms. This approach could significantly advance efforts to protect human health in the challenging environment of space. The data generated herein is a potentially invaluable resource for CSA and others for prediction of radiation resistance factors in living systems. Finally, this project will engineer gene therapy delivery vectors to demonstrate effective radiation protection in target cell culture models relevant for spaceflight environments.

$174,500

Research Models

University of Alberta – Adetola Adesida

Understanding the molecular and functional heterogeneity of human meniscus fibrochondrocytes and microtissue models under simulated microgravity and hypergravity

The pair of menisci in each knee joint protects the cartilage of the joint from excessive stress and enables humans to walk or run with stable knees. However, the meniscus is prone to traumatic tears, especially during sports-related activities, with very little ability to repair itself and presenting a major risk for developing knee osteoarthritis. Recent work in our lab shows that the cells making up the meniscus are diverse. Some cells exhibit features that can repair the meniscus, some display osteoarthritis-like response to space's low gravity and others show superior ability to make the proteins that support meniscus' mechanical function in the knee. We will study the diverse population of human meniscus cells after exposure to low and high gravity conditions of spaceflight missions using a specialized machine to replicate the gravity conditions of spaceflight missions. We hope our work will shed light on meniscus repair and osteoarthritis.

$179,010.70

Research Models

University of Alberta – Svetlana Komarova

Quails in space: a new model to study physiological effects of space radiation for safe exploration and food security for Lunar Gateway

Space exploration radiation risks remain a major challenge for long-duration missions. In collaboration with Canadian Nuclear Laboratories we will develop a space radiation protocol simulating heavily shielded environment of Lunar habitats predicted to exhibit high levels of neutron radiation. We propose to use quail (Coturnix coturnix) as a novel non-human research model and to assess the effects of gamma and neutron radiation on skeletal, calcium homeostasis and cardiovascular systems. Similar to humans and rodents, spaceflight experiments with quail eggs showed altered calcium homeostasis and bone loss, demonstrating that quail egg is a valid research model to study fundamental biological questions relevant to spaceflight risks to humans. Moreover, quail meat and eggs have nutritional value and are potentially useful as sustainable food supply for Lunar bases. These studies will pave the way for assessing countermeasures necessary to eliminate the identified risks of the chronic exposure to radiation relevant to Lunar exploration.

$180,000

Research Models

University of Ottawa – Avmeric Ravel-Chapuis

Targeting the RNA-binding protein Staufen1 with FDA-approved drugs to prevent skeletal muscle atrophy

Muscle atrophy is a condition characterized by the shrinking and weakening of muscles impacting everyday activities. It can occur during extended periods in space due to reduced gravity, as well as in various conditions on Earth, including inactivity, aging, injuries, and diseases. In our previous research, we identified a protein called Staufen1 that plays a key role in the early stages of muscle atrophy across various conditions, including ground-based human and mouse models of microgravity. Our current research aims to determine if muscle atrophy can be reduced or prevented by modulating Staufen1 levels. In addition, we aim to identify FDA-approved drugs targeting Staufen1. The results of this study have the potential to accelerate the development of new treatments and countermeasures to effectively combat muscle atrophy in diverse conditions.

$180,000

Research Models

McGill University – Richard Leask

Vascular simulator for variable gravity mechanobiology

The objective of this proposal is to design and test a vascular simulator for variable gravity mechanobiology to be used in future space missions. It will build upon a portable vascular simulator used to study the impact of variable gravity in a parabolic flight campaign of the carotid bifurcation. The simulator is being designed to study fundamental knowledge gaps in the biomechanics and mechanobiology of vascular adaptation and deconditioning. The vascular cell culture simulator will be used to expose human endothelial cells, blood cells and blood components to fluid and tissue stresses created during space flight to identify cellular response, adaptation and blood/drug interactions. The simulator will advance the development and testing of new countermeasures to limit cardiovascular risk in space flight. The vascular simulator developed will provide a platform to help answer specific research questions associated with endothelial cell response, inflammation and thrombosis formation.

$180,000

ANNEX 1

Table 9 - Summary of eligibility criteria
Criteria Description Scoring
Category 1 : (Data and sample mining) This criterion assesses, for applications relating to Category 1 (Data and sample mining), that access to the data or samples is confirmed, as indicated in Section 1.0.

Pass
The application demonstrates proof of access to the required data or samples.

Failure
The application does not demonstrate access to required data or samples.

Eligible recipients This criterion evaluates whether the application has been submitted from an eligible recipient as defined in Section 3.1.

Pass
The organization is an eligible recipient for a grant as described in Section 3.1 of this AO.

Fail
The organization is not an eligible recipient for a grant as described in Section 3.1 of this AO.

Eligible projects This criterion evaluates whether the application is an eligible project for this AO as defined in Section 3.2.

Pass
The project is eligible for a grant as described in Section 3.2 of this AO.

Fail
The project is not eligible for a grant as described in Section 3.2 of this AO.

Links to CSA priorities This criterion evaluates how the project will contribute to the CSA priorities as defined in Section 3.3.

Pass
The proposal clearly demonstrates that the research objectives directly address one (1) or more risks of human space flight as described in Table 2.

Fail
The research does not address a risk of human space flight as described in Table 2 or only indirectly addresses a risk.

Links to Class G&C Program Objectives This criterion evaluates how the project will contribute to the G&C Program objectives, as defined in Section 3.4.

Pass
The proposal clearly demonstrates how the project will contribute to support the development of science and technology relevant to the priorities of the CSA, and that it will foster the continuing development of a critical mass of researchers and HQP in Canada in areas relevant to the priorities of the CSA.

Fail
The proposal does not demonstrate how the project will contribute to support the development of science and technology relevant to the priorities of the CSA or that it will foster the continuing development of a critical mass of researchers and HQP in Canada in areas relevant to the priorities of the CSA.

Meets program funding provisions in Section 6.1 This criterion evaluates whether the proposal meets program funding provisions described in Section 6.1

Pass
The proposal meets program funding provisions described in Section 6.1.

Fail
The proposal does not meet program funding provisions described in Section 6.1.

ANNEX 2

In this section

Description of Programmatic Evaluation Criteria

1. Benefits to Canada and Outcomes:

1.1 Alignment with the priorities of the CSA and its HLS Program

Description:This criterion evaluates whether the proposed research objectives are aligned with the priorities of the CSA and its HLS program. Do the research objectives directly address health risks associated with human space flights (per Table 2)?

Minimum score required = 15

Poor:

The research objectives in the proposal do not address a risk of human space flight as listed in Table 2. (Score: 0)

Below average:

One (1) research objective in the proposal addresses a risk of human space flight as described in Table 2, but overall, the proposal only indirectly addresses this risk, or does not clearly demonstrate how the risk is addressed. (Score: 10)

Average:

One (1) research objective in the proposal addresses one (1) direct risk of human space flight as described in Table 2 and describes how the risk is addressed, but the description is superficial or incomplete. (Score 15)

Good:

Some of the research objectives in the proposal directly address one (1) or more risks of human space flight as described in Table 2 and the proposal clearly describes how the risk is addressed. (Score: 20)

Excellent:

All research objectives in the proposal directly and clearly address one (1) or more risks of human space flight as described in Table 2. (Score: 25)

1.2 Benefits on Earth:

Description: This criterion evaluates whether the proposal demonstrates that the proposed research may contribute to the advancement of our understanding of similar health issues or applications on Earth, or that could contribute to improving health care for Canadians. Provide a clear explanation of how specifically this research can bring benefits on Earth (e.g.: which specific population, how it will benefit that population, etc.).

Minimum score required = 10

Poor:

The proposal does not address benefits on Earth, or the case for benefits is not clear or logical. (Score: 0)

Below average:

The proposal indicates some benefits on Earth, but the justification for benefits is not well described and not fully clear. (Score 5)

Average:

The proposal indicates benefits on Earth, and the justification is included but it is general, or lacks precision. (Score: 10)

Good:

One (1) or more of the research objectives has direct Earth benefits. A specific justification is provided and adequate. (Score: 15)

Excellent:

Justification on how the proposed research will directly contribute to the advancement of our understanding of similar health issues or to improve health care for Canadians is clear, thorough, and persuasive. (Score: 20)

1.3 HQP development

Description:This criterion evaluates how the project will foster the development of HQPs, through recruitment of qualified students/postdoctoral fellows/trainees and provide them with an integrated and meaningful role in the project research team.

  • Explain clearly how the proposed research can lead to a future investigation on the ISS or the lunar Gateway.
  • The research proposal should describe how the project will lead to novel operational countermeasure strategies against the risk of human spaceflight. List potential countermeasures, which could include preventative measures, interventions, treatments, etc.

Minimum score required = 1

Poor:

The proposal does not include a plan to foster the development of students/postdoctoral fellows/trainees. (Score: 0)

Average:

The proposal contains a development plan. Role of students/postdoctoral fellows/trainee candidates is stated but lacks details. (Score 1)

Good:

The proposal contains a detailed plan to develop students/postdoctoral fellows/trainees, and provides realistic assurance on its feasibility. Their role in the team is well defined. (Score: 3)

Excellent:

The proposal contains a well-thought out plan to develop students/postdoctoral fellows/trainees. Description on how this plan will be achieved is complete. The proposal demonstrates that HQP will be assigned leadership roles appropriate for their educational status. (Score: 5)

1.4 Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI)

Description: This criterion evaluates whether the research team has in the past fostered the recruitment and engagement of members of underrepresented groups within the research team, and if EDI measures are part of the current proposal plan. Underrepresented groups include, but are not limited to, the following four (4) 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.

It also evaluates the different outreach activities proposed by investigators or the research team aiming the engagement and inclusion of underrepresented groups, inside or outside of the research laboratories or universities/institutions (e.g.: participation to committees and boards, conferences/colloquiums, workshops, and public dialogues).

  • Note that journal club or lab meetings are not considered outreach activities with members of the underrepresented groups.
  • Referencing the university policy is not considered a sufficient demonstration.

Minimum score required = 0

Poor:

The proposal does not describe any measure to promote the diversity within the team and does not mention any outreach activities. (Score: 0)

Average:

The proposal describes means that were taken in the past or future actions that will be taken to engage members of the underrepresented groups, or mentions one (1) outreach activity. (Score: 1)

Good:

The proposal contains a diversity inclusion plan that describes specific means to foster recruitment and engagement of members from underrepresented groups. The explanation of how this plan will be achieved is mainly complete and the approach appears feasible. (Score: 3)

Excellent:

The proposal contains both means that were taken in the past as well as future actions that will be taken to recruit and engage members of underrepresented groups. The proposal also mentions at least one (1) outreach activity. (Score: 5)

2. Project Feasibility, Resources and Risk Assessment

2.1 Budget, Resources Allocation, and Schedule

Description: This criterion evaluates the adequacy of the budget, resource allocation to tasks (roles and responsibilities of students/HQPs should be detailed) and material resources as well as project schedule. Applicants must present in their application an itemized budget that clearly describes project expenditures and sources of funding. Justification for the requested funds needs to be complete. The application must also show resource (human & funds) allocation to tasks for each individual involved in the project, as well as project schedule. Applicants are encouraged to seek co-funding and should clearly indicate co-funding in their budget.

Minimum score required = 10

Poor:

The proposal presents an incomplete or inadequate description of budget, resource allocation (roles and responsibilities), and schedule, and/or inadequate justification of project expenditures. (Score: 0)

Below average:

The budget, resource allocation (roles and responsibilities) and schedule are presented, however, information is missing, or the justification of expenditure is incomplete, or some expenditures are misevaluated or unrealistic/exaggerated. (Score: 5)

Average:

The budget, resource allocation (roles and responsibilities) and schedule are presented, however, some information may be missing, or the justification of expenditure may sometimes be incomplete, or some expenditures are not defined well enough. (Score: 10)

Good:

Appropriate budget and allocation of resources (roles and responsibilities) are presented. Schedule planning is feasible and realistic. Justification of project expenditures is appropriate, with no major omissions. (Score: 15)

Excellent:

The budget, resource allocation (roles and responsibilities) and schedule are presented in a detailed and clear manner. Justification of resources is clear and comprehensive. The allocation of resources with clear and comprehensive justification are provided. (Score: 20)

2.2 Risk Management and Mitigation strategies

Description: This criterion evaluates the identification of potential pitfalls and obstacles that may occur during the project, as well as the adequacy of proposed preventive/remedial measures. The proposal shall address key risks associated with the project and the mitigation strategies for each. Information should be provided on resource availability, risks associated with their non-availability and, the risk and mitigation strategies associated with those risks. The following points are particularly important:

  • Has the applicant identified and described in detail the risks associated with the project, including, but not limited to, financial, technical (e.g.: execution of research protocols, Research Ethics Boards approval), and managerial risks (e.g.: human resource back-up plans in case of departure of a team member(s))?
  • Are the resources available to the research team, or was an agreement made to ensure implementation of the project?
  • Are the mitigation strategies for each risk correctly addressed and realistic?

Minimum score required = 10

Poor:

The proposal does not identify any key risks or mitigation strategies, or some risks may be identified but related mitigation strategies are missing. (Score: 0)

Below average:

The proposal identified risks, but the related mitigation strategies proposed appear inadequate (Score 5).

Average:

The proposal identified some, but not all, key risks and their mitigation strategies are defined. However, the information provided is not sufficient and some details are missing. (Score: 10)

Good:

The proposal demonstrates general understanding of key risks and potential pitfalls for this type of project and proposes elements of preventive/remedial measures to ensure feasibility of the study and their justification is well developed. (Score: 15)

Excellent:

The proposal demonstrates clear understanding of key risks and obstacles/pitfalls accompanied by a thorough and adequate discussion of preventive/remedial measures to ensure completion of the study with quality results. Key risks and their mitigation strategies are well described, and the risk assessment is realistic. (Score: 20)

3. Results

3.1 Results of Scientific Merit Review

For results of scientific merit review, refer to section 5.2. and for a detailed description of each criterion in ANNEX 2.

3.2 Science dissemination plan

Description: This criterion evaluates whether the proposal includes a science dissemination plan describing how results from the investigations will be disseminated (e.g.: conferences, publications, etc). Per Section 7.7, the CSA promotes the use of open access publication and archiving by recipients, and applicants are encouraged to use open access publications in order to facilitate dissemination of results from the investigation.

Minimum score required = 1

Poor:

The proposal does not include a science dissemination plan. (Score: 0)

Average:

The proposal indicates some provisions for science dissemination, but few details are provided about this plan and the proposal does not clearly establish if open access publications will be used. (Score: 1)

Good:

The proposal includes a realistic plan to disseminate scientific results to the scientific community, the use of open access publications is also indicated. (Score: 3)

Excellent:

The proposal includes an explicit and a well-thought-out and structured scientific publications plan to disseminate scientific results using open access publications, and the plan is likely to raise Canada's profile in Space Life Science considerably. (Score: 5)

ANNEX 3

In this section

Description of Evaluation Criteria for Scientific Merit

1. Science quality

Description: This criterion evaluates whether the proposal addresses a significant gap in health research related to spaceflight. The significance of the proposed research in terms of the hypotheses/research questions addressed as well as novelty will be assessed. Potential increase of our understanding of the risks associated with human spaceflight or proposed mitigation strategies will be evaluated.

  • Does this study address an important gap in identifying, characterizing and mitigating health risk for spaceflight?
  • If the objectives are achieved, how will scientific knowledge related to spaceflight health risks be advanced?
  • What are the expected outcomes of the proposed research in the context of understanding health risk problems related to spaceflight and/or mitigation strategies?

Minimum score required = 15

Poor:

The hypotheses and research questions do not address an important health risk related to spaceflight or do not provide any mitigation strategy. The research question will most likely not result in novel knowledge generation as hypotheses and research questions have been explored before. (Score: 0-7)

Average:

The hypothesis and research questions address health risk related to spaceflight or propose a mitigation strategy. However, the study will only marginally increase our understanding of the risks of human spaceflight or provide minor insights into mitigation strategies. The research question will most likely result in limited novel knowledge generation. (Score: 8-14)

Good:

The hypothesis and research questions address an important health risk related to spaceflight or propose a credible mitigation strategy. The study is also likely to increase our understanding of the risks of human spaceflight or can lead to concrete insights to provide mitigation strategies. The project is likely to result in novel knowledge generation. (Score: 15-24).

Excellent:

The hypotheses and research questions address one or several important health risks related to spaceflight or propose a substantial mitigation strategy. The study is likely to result in significant scientific understanding of the risks of human spaceflight or can lead to the development of new countermeasures. Results of this project will most likely considerably contribute to significant scientific knowledge advances in the field. (Score: 25-30)

2. Research approach

Description: This criterion evaluates whether the proposal addresses a significant gap in health research related to spaceflight and if the research approach is built upon a successful foundation of relevant published research. The significance of the proposed research in terms of the hypotheses/research questions addressed as well as novelty will be assessed. Potential increase of our understanding of the risks associated with human spaceflight or proposed mitigation strategies will be evaluated.

  • Does this study address an important gap in identifying, characterizing and mitigating health risk for spaceflight?
  • If the objectives are achieved, how will scientific knowledge related to spaceflight health risks be advanced?
  • What are the expected outcomes of the proposed research in the context of understanding health risk problems related to spaceflight and/or mitigation strategies?

Minimum score required = 11

Poor:

The hypotheses and research questions do not address an important health risk related to spaceflight or do not provide any mitigation strategy. The research approach is not based upon a successful foundation of relevant previous studies. (Score: 0-4)

Average:

The hypotheses and research questions address health risk related to spaceflight or propose a mitigation strategy. However, the study will only marginally increase our understanding of the risks of human spaceflight or provide minor insights into mitigation strategies. Also, the research approach is based in part upon a successful foundation of relevant previous studies. The research question will most likely result in limited novel knowledge generation. (Score: 5-10)

Good:

The hypotheses and research questions address an important health risk related to spaceflight or propose a credible mitigation strategy. The study is also likely to increase our understanding of the risks of human spaceflight or can lead to concrete insights to provide mitigation strategies. The project is likely to result in novel knowledge generation and is based upon a successful foundation of relevant previous studies. (Score: 11-15).

Excellent:

The hypotheses and research questions address one (1) or several important health risks related to spaceflight or propose a substantial mitigation strategy. The study is likely to result in significant scientific understanding of the risks of human spaceflight or can lead to the development of new countermeasures. The research approach is largely based upon a successful foundation of relevant previous studies. Results of this project will most likely considerably contribute to significant scientific knowledge advances in the field. (Score: 16-20)

3. Methodology

Description: This criterion evaluates the appropriateness of the proposed research design, research methods and data analysis methods to achieve the objectives. In addition, assessment of the integration of biological sex and/or gender will be taken into consideration.

  • Is the selected set of data or samples (for Category 1) or research models (for Category 2) appropriate for the proposed research objectives?
  • Are the research design, methods and analysis proposed appropriate to achieve the objectives?
  • Do the objectives integrate biological sex and/or gender into research, if applicable?

Minimum score required: 13

Poor:

The proposed methodology is unlikely to support the objectives of the study or is poorly described. The research design lacks important details, the selected approach is not appropriate, the choice of data/samples (for Category 1) or research models (for Category 2) is not well justified, and there is no integration of biological sex and/or gender into the proposed research (when applicable). (Score: 0-5)

Average:

The proposed methodology may support the study's objectives. However, there is a lack of details in research design and/or the selected approach is poorly described. The choice of data/samples (for Category 1) or research models (for Category 2), and integration of biological sex and/or gender (when applicable) is justified, but there is a clear risk that the proposed approach cannot fully address the research questions. There may be better approaches to achieve the objectives. (Score: 6-12)

Good:

The proposed methodology is likely to achieve the objectives and well described. The research design, the selected approach, the choice of data/samples (for Category 1) or research models (for Category 2), and integration of biological sex and/or gender (when applicable), are justified and are aligned with the research question. However, additional approaches could have been included to fully address the research questions. (Score: 13-20)

Excellent:

The proposed methodology is excellent and clearly described, giving a high level of confidence that the objectives will be achieved. The research design, the selected approach, the choice of data/samples (for Category 1) or research models (for Category 2), and integration of biological sex and/or gender (when applicable), are well justified and described. The proposed methodology fully addresses the research questions. (Score: 21-25)

4. Expertise

Description: This criterion evaluates the availability of all the required expertise and experience in the proposed field of HLS research to successfully accomplish the proposed work. This criterion will also evaluate the scientific productivity and past achievements in the proposed field of research and methodology.

  • Does the researcher or team members have sufficient experience in Health and Life Science (HLS)?
  • Does the researcher of team members (when applicable) have the required expertise? Is there sufficient personnel dedicated to the project?
  • Has the researcher demonstrated a high level of productivity/high impact work, commensurate with the career stage of the team members, and considering extenuating factors?

Minimum score required: 8

Poor:

The PI or team members (when applicable) have some expertise or experience in similar research studies, but it is rather poor or limited. The scientific productivity in this field of research (commensurate with the career stage of the team members, and considering extenuating factors) is poor and below an acceptable level of quality, impact and/or importance. (Score: 0-5)

Average:

The PI or team members (when applicable) have expertise and experience in the field of research, but the overall level of expertise in the team is average. The scientific productivity in this field of research (commensurate with the career stage of the team members, and considering extenuating factors) is average with acceptable level of quality, impact and/or importance. (Score: 6-12)

Good:

The PI or the team (when applicable) include members that have the required expertise in the field and demonstrated experience in similar studies. The PI or team have a good publication record of high quality, impact and/or importance (commensurate with the career stage of the team members, and considering extenuating factors). Personnel dedicated to the project is sufficient. (Score: 13-20)

Excellent:

The PI or team are experts in the proposed field of research. The PI or team have a clear expertise in the field and has successfully conducted studies of similar scope. The researcher or team members (when applicable) have a solid publication record of high quality, impact and/or importance (commensurate with the career stage of the team members and considering extenuating factors). Personnel dedicated to the project is sufficient. (Score: 21-25)

Date modified: