Language selection

Search


Top of page

Secure Transatlantic Quantum Communications demonstration

On this page

  1. Introduction
  2. AO objectives
  3. Eligibility criteria
  4. Applications Process
  5. Evaluation
  6. Funding
  7. Funding agreements
  8. Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
  9. Appendix A point-rated evaluation criteria

Publication date:

Registration deadline: (ET)

Applications deadline: (ET)

Summary of Key Information

Eligible recipients: Eligible recipients are limited to for-profit organizations established and operating in Canada. Eligible recipients must have more than 100 employees in Canada. Eligible recipients must demonstrate over than $5M/year in annual revenue during the past 3 years.

  • Non repayable contributions
  • Maximum funding: $5,000,000
  • Timeframe of the project: typically between 24 and 36 months
  • Estimated project start date:

1 Introduction

Advances in quantum science and technology have the potential to transform how people work and live in Canada and around the world. Canada's investments in quantum technologies and research over many decades have made the country a global leader in the field, with a growing ecosystem of world-class centres of quantum expertise in universities and businesses across the country. As the rest of the world expands its own quantum programs, Canada must continue to invest and innovate if it is to stay ahead.

On , the Prime Minister of Canada and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom announced a “joint commitment to develop secure, transatlantic communications based on quantum technologies, allowing us to connect our national systems and lay the groundwork to create a truly global, next-generation network, with applications across our financial and telecoms sectors.”

At the centre of this is Quantum Key Distribution (QKD), which creates virtually unbreakable encryption codes and will provide Canadians with secure communications, even against the potential of quantum computers which threaten to break our conventional encryption methods. The capacity of ground-based QKD devices is very limited. They rely on fibre-optic cables to transmit quantum particles on land, but the signal currently becomes unreliable at distances over a few hundreds of kilometres. In order to create an integrated quantum communication network across the world, a combination of satellites and ground links is required.

The Canadian Space Agency (CSA) is issuing this Announcement of Opportunity (AO) to support the R&D in the area of quantum communications with the aim of demonstrating terrestrial and spaceborne quantum communications capability. This AO also contributes to the joint Canada-UK commitment to develop secure transatlantic communications based on quantum technologies.

The selected project in this AO will be the Canadian counterpart to a project supported by the United Kingdom through a separate process. The Canadian and UK projects together form a collaboration to demonstrate and advance R&D with regards to end-to-end secure quantum communication. The selected project will be expected to coordinate with UK organizations to advance R&D with regards to end-to-end secure quantum communication.

In light of the above, this AO concerning quantum communications will award a non-repayable contribution of up to $5M that will advance basic R&D towards a quantum key distribution (QKD) system by demonstrating a wide-scale, end-to-end secure quantum communication network and increasing technology readiness levels (TRL).

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

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

The CSA reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to:

AO objectives

The objective of this AO is to advance toward a QKD system by demonstrating a wide-scale, end-to-end secure quantum communication network and increasing TRL in the following key areas:

  1. Secure QKD key share via satellite between a minimum of two quantum ground stations
  2. Secure QKD key share (incl. satellite in the loop) between a diverse set of end users.
  3. Demonstration of QKD-enabled encrypted communication between end users spread geographically across Canada and the UK.

This objective is ambitious and requires pooling resources and knowledge from many stakeholders. As such, the CSA will be favouring applicants that can assemble a consortium of Canadian technology providers, end users and talent pool to work under its leadership.

These activities will enable the selected Canadian organization and its collaborators to further their basic R&D capabilities, which could increase their future industrial competitiveness.

3 Eligibility criteria

In this section 3

3.1 Eligible Recipients

Eligible recipients are limited to for-profit organizations established and operating in Canada.

Eligible recipients must have more than 100 employees in Canada at the time of applying. This minimum number of employees is applicable to the legal entity applying.

Eligible recipients must demonstrate over than $5M/year in annual revenue during the past 3 years.

3.2 Eligible Projects

The project must aim to advance towards QKD system by demonstrating a wide-scale, end-to-end secure quantum communication network as a means to strengthen industrial capabilities (new concepts, products and/or know-how) related to basic R&D of quantum technologies.

Eligible projects must include at least 3 other Canadian technologies that enable quantum communication applications, from 3 different organizations in the demonstration. These organizations exclude academic institutions.

Projects aiming at TRLs higher than TRL-6 are not eligible. There is no restriction on starting TRL.

Applications must be unique to this AO. An applicant cannot summit the same project to another open CSA AO. If multiple applications of the same project are detected, CSA will declare the application ineligible, and it will not be evaluated.

An applicant can only submit one application form.

3.3 Links to CSA Priorities

This AO focuses on the CSA's priority of building capabilities and positioning Canada's private space sector to help grow the economy and create the jobs of the future. It will support a project that aims to develop new concepts, products and/or know-how. Industrial capability building therefore encompasses all projects aimed at strengthening the industry core capabilities with particular focus on developing its people and technologies.

3.4 Links to program objectives

This AO supports Space Capacity Development Program objective to increase space and market readiness for both science and technologies to be flight-ready for space missions. This AO also contributes to the following objectives of the CSA Class G&C Program: To support the development of technologies relevant to Canada; and to foster the continuing development of a critical mass of highly qualified personnel (HQP) in Canada.

3.5 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion

Applicants should strive for a balanced representation in the group HQPs participating in the project. For instance, applicants are encouraged to propose projects that increase the representativeness of the four designated groups (women, Indigenous Peoples, members of visible minorities, and persons with disabilities).

3.6 Basic R&D definition

Eligible projects supported under this AO must comply with the following definition for basic R&D:

"Any pre-commercial technology activities that are carried out to resolve unknowns regarding the feasibility of space concepts in the space sector."

The following due diligence process will be applied to determine whether projects are compliant with this definition:

  • Are the technical objectives clearly quantified?
  • Is there a description of how the expected results will be measured?
  • Are the technological unknowns to be answered clearly stated?
  • Are the working hypotheses used to solve the technological unknowns clearly stated?
  • Is the anticipated plausibility of solving the technological unknowns clearly stated?
  • Is it clearly demonstrated that the proposed solution consists of more than ordinary engineering or current operations?
  • Are the current TRL and the proposed TRL expected to be reached (up to TRL-6) clearly substantiated?

The following TRL definitions must be used:

TRL-1

Basic principles observed and reported

TRL-2

Technology concept and/or application formulated

TRL-3

Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept

TRL-4

Component and/or breadboard validation in a laboratory environment

TRL-5

Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment

TRL-6

System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment (ground or space)

Basic R&D activities supported under this AO must be undertaken in Canada unless it is essential to the success of the project.

4 Application Process

In this section 4

Applicants are asked to read the following AO thoroughly before submitting their applications. The application process consists of two steps:

  1. Registering the intent to submit with CSA, and
  2. Preparing the required documents and submitting all documentation before the deadline.

By submitting an application, the applicant authorizes the CSA to undertake any consultation or verification, in particular with suppliers, financial institutions, accounting firms, funding agencies, credit agencies and/or any government agencies, that it deems necessary in order to obtain any useful information in assessing the application for financial assistance, security or for the administration and monitoring of any resulting contribution agreement, and it agrees to have the contacted parties disclose any requested information.

4.1 Registering the intent to submit with CSA (deadline is [ET].)

  • Interested for-profit organizations must register their intent to submit an application by using the Registration Portal. Supported browsers are Google Chrome and MS Edge.
  • The registration request must be submitted no later than (ET).
  • Registration requests submitted after (ET) will be rejected and organizations will not be permitted to submit an application.
  • In the "Proposal title" field of the Registration Portal, use the following formatting standard: AOTransatlanticQuantumDemo_Name Of Organization (e.g. AOTransatlanticQuantumDemo_SpaceCompanyA).
  • The "Applicant" section must contain the information of the contact person that will be referred in the application form.
  • After the request has been submitted, the applicant will receive an email confirming registration to the AO as well as credentials to be used for the document submission. This email will also include instructions (user guide [PDF, 1,027 KB ]) on how to access the platform. Applicants should expect to receive a confirmation within three business days.

4.2 Preparing the required documentation

Interested organizations must complete all sections of the application form.

The application must include the following:

  • A completed original Application form (Word, 113 KB) signed by the duly authorized representative
  • The résumés of each team member responsible for managing the project and key technical personnel. Each résumé must be limited to two pages with only the information that is relevant to the application
  • Proof of incorporation or registration and a copy of the document(s) confirming the legal name of the applicant
  • The applicant's financial statements (unconsolidated financial statements) for the previous three fiscal years prior to the submission of this application and the most recent interim results.
  • Letters of support from other organizations with a major participation in project execution
  • Letters of interest, demonstrating interest in the outcomes of the project, if applicable
  • The 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)
  • For organizations in Alberta, Bill-18 Supporting Documentation form completed and signed by the duly authorized representative (refer to the Bill-18 form for organizations in Alberta included in the application form).

The documents must be combined in a single PDF formatted file, in the same order as presented above with all security features disabled. The application form and supporting documents must be included in the file as a searchable PDF formatted document (PDF/A-1a format preferred). If there are any accessibility issues with the submitted PDF file, the CSA may, at its sole discretion, reject the application.

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

Additional documents might be requested in a later phase of the evaluation process.

4.3 Submitting the application (deadline (ET))

Using the credentials and link communicated upon registration, the applicant must log in to the secured document portal to upload the application documents. Please refer to the user guide (PDF, 1,027 KB) for instructions on how to securely upload documents. The document must be uploaded to the folder (aka community) matching the “Proposal title” created upon registration.

Please note:

  • Applications must be submitted (successfully uploaded) by the applicants no later than (ET).
  • The onus is on the applicant to ensure that their application is complete and that all documents are uploaded on the Electronic Proposal Portal before the prescribed deadline
  • The CSA is not responsible for any delays under any circumstances, and will reject any applications that are uploaded after the stipulated deadline
  • Applications sent by mail or courier will be rejected
  • Applications hand-delivered to CSA will be rejected
  • Applications sent by e-mail will be rejected
  • Incomplete applications will be rejected
  • Ensure the text in the reserved spaces is aerated and not pasted in one large paragraph
  • Do not modify the length of the document space reserved for answering the questions. Each section has a predetermined length to be respected. Failure to respect this directive can lead to the automatic rejection of the application.

4.4 How to report issues with electronic submissions

The applicant must submit their application electronically following the instructions provided in Section 4.3 of the AO. However, if the applicant is unable to submit their application electronically, please communicate with pdts-stdp@asc-csa.gc.ca as soon as possible.

The onus is on the applicant to ensure that their application is complete and that all required documents are received by the CSA before the prescribed deadline. The CSA is not responsible for any delays under any circumstances and will reject any applications that are received after the stipulated deadline.

Questions and answers related to this AO are generally posted on the CSA website in the Frequently asked questions (Section 9).

4.5 Service standards

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

Acknowledgement: The CSA's goal is to acknowledge receipt within five (5) business days of receiving the completed application package.

Decision: The CSA's goal is to respond to the proposal within ten (10) weeks of the AO's closing date and to send a contribution agreement for signature within four (4) weeks after formal approval of the proposal.

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

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

5 Evaluation

In this section 5

5.1 Eligibility Criteria

An evaluation committee will screen applications according to the eligibility criteria described in Table 4 in ANNEX 1.

5.2 Point-rated evaluation criteria

Applications will be evaluated according to the following point-rated criteria:

  1. Project Strategy
    1. Breadth of the demonstration
    2. Project Implementation
    3. Advancement of Canadian Capabilities
  2. Post-project Strategy
    1. Roadmap to seamless quantum secure network operations in Canada
    2. Commitment towards Canadian supply chain

The page count limit for supporting each of the above criteria is implemented in the Application form. The definitions of the criteria and the scoring grid are specified in Appendix A.

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, an individual evaluation of the screened applications will be performed according to the criteria listed in Section 5.2. Evaluators will be experts in the field relevant to the applications and may include representatives of other Canadian government departments as well as external consultants. A review committee will then make an overall selection based on the priorities of the Government of Canada and the CSA.

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.

An application must receive an overall minimum score of 70% as well as the minimum specified thresholds for each criterion to be considered further for funding.

6 Funding

In this section 6

6.1 Available Funding and Duration

The maximum CSA contribution for the project is $5,000,000. The target duration for the project is 24 to 36 months. Please see section 7 for details.

Approved proposals will be eligible for a total government (federal, provincial/territorial and municipal) assistance of up to a maximum of 75% of total eligible project costs. The following examples are acceptable cases:

Institution Applicant Total
CSA Applicant TOTAL
$5,000,000 (75%) $1,666,666 (25%) $6,666,666 (100%)
Institution Mitacs Applicant Total
CSA Mitacs Applicant TOTAL
$4,960,000 (74.4%) $40,000 (0.6%) $1,666,666 (25%) $6,666,666 (100%)
Max total government assistance of 75%
Institution Mitacs Applicant Total
CSA Mitacs Applicant TOTAL
$5,000,000 (74.4%) $40,000 (0.6%) $1,680,000 (25%) $6,720,000 (100%)
CSA contribution AND Government assistance maximized

The following example is not an acceptable case:

Institution Demandeur Mitacs Total
CSA Mitacs Demandeur TOTAL
$5,000,000 (74.55%) $40,000 (0.6%) $1,666,666 (24.85%) $6,706,666 (100%)
Max total government assistance exceed 75%

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 eligible costs, and the other confirmed sources of funds provided by other stakeholders and the applicant.

Applicants must identify all sources of funding in their application and confirm this information in a funding agreement if the project is selected for funding. The applicant must confirm it has direct access to its 25% financial contribution. It is the applicant's responsibility to plan for and make the necessary arrangements regarding loans and other financing sources. Upon completion of a project, the recipient must also disclose all sources of funding.

The CSA reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to:

  • terminate this AO or cancel the entire initiative at any time and for any reason
  • reject any or all proposals
  • reduce the total amount of the contribution

6.2 Eligible Costs

Eligible costs are costs that are essential to carry out the Project, reasonable and directly related to the project to achieve the expected results of the project. The costs are to be incurred directly by the applicant. “Incurred Costs” means any expense made to carry out the project related to an eligible cost which is due and payable. CSA will not contribute to costs Incurred prior to the coming into force of a Funding Agreement and after the Project Completion Date.

Eligible costs are limited to one or a combination of the following categories (see definitions):

  • Acquisition or rental of equipment including software (not to exceed 20% of the total project eligible costs);
  • Consulting services;
  • Data acquisition;
  • Laboratory analysis services;
  • Materials and supplies;
  • Overhead (administrative) costs (not to exceed 15% of the total project eligible costs);
  • Salaries and benefits Footnote * (only the real salary rates are authorized as admissible costs which can include benefits of up to 20% of the admissible salary);
  • Travel expenses including accommodation and related meal allowances;
  • Access fees;
  • License and permit fees;
  • Taxes for goods and services acquired in a foreign country, net of any rebate or reimbursement received in the foreign country.

7 Funding agreements

In this section 7

7.1 Agreement

Upon favorable review of the applications, the CSA will send a Contribution agreement to the successful applicant. The Contribution agreement will outline the rights, roles, and obligations of each respective party. In the event of any discrepancies between this AO and a Contribution agreement between the CSA and the recipient, the latter document will take precedence.

For greater clarity, no liability and no commitment or obligation exist on the part of the CSA to issue a Contribution payment to the applicant until a Contribution agreement is signed by both parties. Furthermore, any costs or expenses incurred or paid by the recipient prior to the execution of a written Contribution agreement by both parties are the sole responsibility of the applicant, and no liability exists on the part of the CSA.

7.2 Payments

Payments for contribution agreements will be made in accordance with the process and the reporting requirements described in the signed funding agreement. Upon notice of a successful application, the CSA will have no liability until a funding agreement is signed by both parties. Only eligible costs incurred after the funding agreement is signed and indicated in the agreement will be reimbursed.

7.3 Audit

The recipient of a funding agreement shall keep proper records of all documentation related to the funded project, for the duration of the project and for three (3) years after the completion date of the project, in the event of an audit. This documentation shall be available upon request.

7.4 Intellectual Property

All intellectual property developed by the recipient in the course of the project shall vest in the recipient. The recipient will undertake to protect all intellectual property he will possess, acquire or develop during the project.

7.5 Organizations in Quebec

7.5.1 Act Respecting the Ministère du Conseil exécutif, CQLR c M-30

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, CQLR c M-30.

Under Sections 3.11 and 3.12 of this Act, certain entities/organizations, as defined in the meaning of the Act, such as municipal bodies, school bodies, or public agencies, must obtain authorization from the Secrétariat du Québec aux relations canadiennes (French only), 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.

7.5.2 Loi sur la langue officielle et commune du Québec

La Loi sur la langue officielle et commune du Québec, le français (LLOQ [french only]) changes section 55 of the Charter of the French Language and came into force on . Since that date, the conclusion of a G&C Agreement in English in Quebec is subject to the following conditions for the recipient to be bound by the Agreement:

  • A French version of the Agreement must be produced including the Schedules and must be given to the recipient before the signing of the English version.
  • The recipient must consent to signs the Agreement in English and continue communications in English thereafter.
  • Only one Agreement must be signed, either the French or English version.

7.6 Organizations in Alberta

An organization located in Alberta may be subject to the Provincial Priorities Act (Chapter P-35.5) (the Act) and its Provincial Priorities Regulation (Alberta Regulation /) (the Regulation).

As per section 2 of the Act, provincial entities listed in the Act and Regulations must obtain prior approval from the Government of Alberta in accordance with the process set out in the Act and in the Regulation before entering into an agreement with the Government of Canada.

Therefore, any entity that falls under the application of the Act or the Regulation must obtain such authorization prior to entering into an agreement with the CSA.

Applicants having activities in Alberta must complete the Bill-18 supporting documentation.

7.7 Performance Measurement

The recipient will have obligations to report on various performance measurement indicators throughout the execution of the project. Examples include but are not limited to the number of HQP involved in the project, return on investment and growth of the organization.

8 Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

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

For any questions related to the AO, applicants must use the following email address pdts-stdp@asc-csa.gc.ca. Questions and answers related to this AO are generally posted on the CSA website in this section. The CSA will respond to questions received before .

By default, email is not secure and should not be used for sensitive information. Caution is advised when formulating questions.

Appendix A: Point-Rated Evaluation Criteria

Applications must receive an overall minimum score of 70% as well as minimum specified thresholds to be considered for funding. Obtaining the highest score possible maximizes your chance of being selected to obtain financial support (see Section 6). The following point-rated criteria will be evaluated using 5 benchmark statements. Each benchmark statement will receive the following percentage of maximum points according to the following scale:

  1. Inadequate: 0%
  2. Poor: 25%
  3. Average: 50%
  4. Good: 75%
  5. Excellent: 100%
In this section 13

1 Project Strategy (50% of the overall score)

  • Maximum: 50 points
  • Minimum: 30 points (60.0%)

1.1 Breadth of the demonstration

Maximum: 20 points

This criterion evaluates the pertinence and breadth of the proposed demonstration.

This criterion seeks answers to the following:

  • Does the proposed demonstration include a partner based in the UK?
  • Does the proposed demonstration bring secure QKD key share closer to the end user?
  • Does the proposed demonstration results in secure QKD key share via satellite?
  • Does the proposed demonstration result in a QKD-enabled encrypted communication between end users?
  • Does the proposed demonstration involve relevant Canadian stakeholders that will contribute to advancing Canada's quantum communications capabilities?
Inadequate:

One of the following is true. The proposed demonstration does not include a partner based in the UK. The demonstration does not advance QKD key share between stakeholders beyond what is currently achieved. The demonstration does not allow for secure QKD key share via satellite. The demonstration does not result in encrypted communication between end users. The demonstration does not include relevant quantum communication stakeholders.

Poor:

The proposed demonstration includes a partner based in the UK. The demonstration presents limited advancements beyond currently achieved QKD Key share over established ground-based optical links or a satellite system. Encrypted communications will be demonstrated between some network segments. The Canadian stakeholders participating in the demonstration have limited knowledge and experience in quantum communications.

Average:

The proposed demonstration includes a partner based in the UK. The demonstration is fragmented and will enable representative QKD Key share between end users over established ground-based optical links and a satellite system with manual intervention. Encrypted communications will be demonstrated between some network segments. The Canadian stakeholders participating in the demonstration are knowledgeable in quantum communications.

Good:

The proposed demonstration includes a partner based in the UK involved in the quantum ecosystem. The demonstration is large and will enable QKD Key share, although lengthy or inefficient, between end users over established ground-based optical links and a satellite system and will result in encrypted communication between these same end users. The Canadian stakeholders participating in the demonstration are knowledgeable and have existing capabilities in quantum communications.

Excellent:

The proposed demonstration includes a relevant partner based in the UK that enriches the demonstration scenario. The demonstration is very broad and will enable rapid and seamless QKD Key share between end users over established ground-based optical links and a satellite system and will result in encrypted communication between these same end users. The Canadian stakeholders participating in the demonstration are knowledgeable and influential in raising Canadian capabilities and have a stake in the outcomes. The demonstration will lead the way to interconnect national systems and lay the foundation for a truly global, next-generation network.

1.2 Project implementation

Maximum: 20 points

This criterion evaluates the completeness and effectiveness of the proposed implementation plan in directing the project to successful completion as well as the combined technical qualifications and experience of the team assembled to carry out the proposed work. This criterion seeks answers to the following:

  • Does the team have the necessary technical and managerial qualifications to execute the project?
  • Does the proposal include a clear and complete implementation plan consisting of a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), detailed Work Package Descriptions (WPD), schedule, milestones, resource (personnel, facilities, laboratories, field sites, specialized equipment, etc.) availability and allocation as well as risk identification and mitigation?
  • Does the proposed implementation plan seem credible and well suited to the project objectives, and does it embody sound methodology and management?
  • How will the applicant increase the project TRL during this project? An explanation for each TRL level must be provided.
    • What tests will be performed for each project TRL level?
    • What characterization will be performed for each project TRL level?
  • In CSA's opinion, does the applicant have a track record of completing projects on time, on budget, and achieving the planned outcomes according to the original proposal?
Inadequate:

One of the following is true. The implementation plan is incoherent or is missing more than 1 element. In CSA's view, the applicant's proposed team does not have technical and managerial qualifications to execute the project.

Poor:

The implementation plan is poorly defined, incomplete, or difficult to understand. The WBS, WPD, and/or schedule are not provided in sufficient detail. There is a high likelihood that the objectives will not be met due to inappropriate methodology, technical team, budget, schedule, key risks, or availability of resources. The applicant has a poor track record of completing projects on time, on budget, and achieving the planned outcomes. Most key technical and managerial risks have not been explicitly identified and mitigation plans established for each of them lacks details and clarity. The applicant does not have a good understanding of the TRLs or does not establish technical conditions and criteria to be met for each TRL targeted during the project.

Average:

The implementation plan is somewhat defined but lacks details or clarity. The WBS, WPD, and schedule are provided but stays at a high level only. Doubts remain regarding the technical methodology of the proposed work, qualifications of the technical team or the likelihood that the objectives will be met. The applicant has an inconsistent or unknown track record of completing projects on time and achieving the planned outcomes. Some key technical and managerial risks have not been explicitly identified and mitigation plans established for each of them lacks details and clarity. The applicant established technical conditions and criteria to be met for each TRL targeted during the project.

Good:

The implementation plan is complete and well defined. A detailed WBS, WPD, and schedule is provided. The proposed methodology seems adequately suited for the proposed work to be carried out and the technical team has worked with closely related technologies. The expectation that the proposed work will meet the set objectives and be completed on schedule and within budget is credible. The applicant has a good track record of completing projects on time, on budget, and achieving the planned outcomes. Key technical and managerial risks have been identified and mitigation plans established for each of them. The applicant established technical conditions and criteria to be met for each TRL targeted during the project.

Excellent:

The implementation plan is complete, very well defined, and coherent. A detailed WBS, WPD, and schedule is provided. The methodology described is logical and well suited for the proposed work to be carried out. The proposed team possesses all the qualifications and experience required to perform the proposed work. The applicant has a consistent track record of completing projects on time, on budget, and achieving the planned outcomes. The likelihood that the proposed work will meet the set objectives and be completed on schedule and within budget is high. Major external participants to the project, acting as consultants or subsystem manufacturers, have confirmed their participation via a letter of support. Key technical and managerial risks have been identified and mitigation plans established for each of them. The applicant clearly established technical conditions and criteria to be met for each TRL targeted during the project.

1.3 Advancement of Canadian Capabilities

Maximum: 10 points

This criterion evaluates how national capabilities will advance as a direct result of the demonstration.

This criterion seeks answers to the following:

  • Will national systems be interconnected allowing stakeholders to continue activities such as QKD Key share and end to end encrypted communications?
  • Will more infrastructure be accessible in Canada?
  • Will access to this infrastructure have increased for Canadians?
  • Will the talent pool in quantum communications have increased?
  • Will the project stakeholders have advanced towards the definition of products and services?
  • How close will Canadians be to readily available quantum communication services?
Inadequate:

One of the following is true. The demonstration will not raise national capabilities. National infrastructure, products and services, talent pool or access will not increase.

Poor:

The demonstration will have limited effect in advancing national capabilities. It is foreseen that either infrastructure or access or talent pool or the definition of products and services will have limited improvements.

Average:

The demonstration will derisk technological unknowns pertaining to infrastructure, access and definition of products and services. It will enable greater access to the talent pool. Although national systems will not yet be interconnected, there is a clear path to accomplish this in the next 10 years.

Good:

The demonstration will advance national capabilities through increased infrastructure, access and definition of products and services. The talent pool should increase in the next 5 to 10 years. Although national systems will not yet be interconnected, there is a clear path to accomplish this in the next 5 years.

Excellent:

The demonstration will significantly advance national capabilities through infrastructure, access and definition of products and services. The talent pool will increase twofold in the next 5 years as a direct result. National systems will be partially interconnected as a result and projections to full interconnection in the next 3 years.

Post-Project Strategy (50% of the overall score)

  • Maximum: 50 points
  • Minimum: 30 points (60.0%)

2.1 Roadmap to seamless quantum secure network operations in Canada

Maximum: 25 points

This criterion evaluates the roadmap to achieving seamless quantum secure network operations in Canada after the completion of the demonstration. The plan should identify all technology development efforts, infrastructure acquisitions, trials and business development activities. The plan must go beyond the applicant's own plan and include the assessment of major collaborators to the project or of the key stakeholders envisioned to be offering secure network operations in the future.

This criterion seeks to answer the following:

  • Does the applicant and its collaborators have a post-project strategy, with cost estimates, schedules, and required funding sources?
  • Are technology development investments required by the applicant or collaborators?
    • An explanation for each TRL level must be provided.
    • What tests will be performed for each post-project TRL level?
    • What characterization will be performed for each post-project TRL level?
  • Is major infrastructure required and which stakeholder would logically need to acquire it?
  • Are demonstrations or pilots required before achieving seamless quantum secure network operations in Canada?
  • Are there business development activities required by the applicant and its collaborators?
  • What is the level of commitment expressed by the stakeholders most likely to operate quantum secure networks?
    • Low level: identification of stakeholders
    • Medium level: letters of interest
    • High level: support letters with confirmed commitment
Inadequate:

One of the following is true. The roadmap does not contain relevant content with respect to technology development, infrastructure, demonstrations or business development activities. The roadmap does not contain relevant content regarding cost estimates, timelines and funding sources.

Poor:

The post-project strategy is incomplete. The strategy leaves out many of the key characteristics expressed in the criterion definition. The plan will not direct the Canadian ecosystem to seamless quantum secure network operations.

Average:

The proposal provides an average post-project strategy with limited information cost estimates, schedules, and required funding sources. The plan identifies some technology development or required infrastructure investments or demonstrations and pilots or business development activities. The plan might steer some stakeholders in the Canadian ecosystem to seamless quantum secure network operations. The level of commitment expressed by the stakeholders is low.

Good:

The proposal provides a good post-project strategy with information on cost estimates, schedules, and required funding sources. Although the plan identifies all technology development, required infrastructure investments, demonstrations and pilots and business development activities, doubt or ambiguities remains as to its capacity to direct the Canadian ecosystem to seamless quantum secure network operations. Letters of support are included and the level of commitment expressed by the stakeholders is medium.

Excellent:

The proposal provides an excellent post-project strategy with clear information on cost estimates, schedules, and required funding sources. The plan is holistic and identifies technology development, required infrastructure investments, demonstrations and pilots, as well as business development activities. The level of commitment expressed by the stakeholders is high.

2.2 Commitment towards Canadian supply chain

Maximum: 25 points

This criterion evaluates the applicant's commitment towards integrating a strong Canadian supply chain. This criterion seeks answers to the following:

  • Is the applicant aware of the supply chain?
  • Are there any gaps in the Canadian supply chain to achieve seamless quantum secure network operations in Canada?
  • What are the applicant's plans and commitments to include Canadian quantum technology suppliers in its eventual commercial offering?
Inadequate:

One of the following is true. The applicant is unaware of the supply chain. The applicant has no plans or commitments to include Canadian quantum technology suppliers in its eventual commercial offering.

Poor:

The application demonstrates a poor understanding of the Canadian supply chain. It identifies Canadian suppliers that could play a role in the solution. Gaps in the Canadian supply chain are not identified. The applicant has expressed vague plans to include Canadian quantum technology suppliers in the eventual commercial offering, but there is no commitment made.

Average:

The application demonstrates an acceptable understanding of the Canadian supply chain. It identifies suppliers and why they are relevant to the solution. General gaps in the Canadian supply chain are identified. The applicant has expressed plans to include Canadian quantum technology suppliers in the eventual commercial offering and commitments are projected in the future.

Good:

The application demonstrates a good understanding of the Canadian supply chain. It identifies key suppliers and the specific advantages their products offer. Specific gaps in the Canadian supply chain are identified. The applicant has expressed solid plans to include Canadian quantum technology suppliers in the eventual commercial offering and limited commitments are made.

Excellent:

The application demonstrates a strong understanding of the Canadian supply chain. It identifies key suppliers, the degree of reliance, the performance of their products and the associated risks. Specific gaps in the Canadian supply chain are identified, and the underlying cause is expressed. The applicant has expressed solid plans to include Canadian quantum technology suppliers in the eventual commercial offering. Strong commitments are made that have an impact now and for the foreseeable future.

Date modified: