Language selection

Search


Top of page

CSA Announcement of Opportunity (AO) for the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Cycle 2 General Observers (GO) projects

On this page

  1. Introduction
  2. AO objectives
  3. Eligibility criteria
  4. Applications
  5. Evaluation
  6. Funding
  7. Funding agreements
  8. Privacy notive statement
  9. Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
  10. Annex A – Evaluation Criteria Definition, Scale Rating, and Scores

Publication date:

Deadline:

Key information

  • Eligible Recipients: Canadian universities and post-secondary institutions
  • Funding Type: Grants
  • Maximum Amount per Project:
    • Category A – PI/Co-PI projects: up to $100,000
    • Category B – Co-I only projects: up to $50,000
  • Estimated Total Amount of the AO: up to $1,000,000
  • Maximum Timeframe of the Project: 2 years
  • Estimated Projects Start Date: Fall 2023

1. Introduction

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) successfully launched on . After 4 weeks of travel to its orbital point and following 24 weeks of commissioning, JWST revealed its first full colour, calibrated images accompanied by spectroscopic data to the public on and . As one of the international partners attached to the JWST mission, the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) has negotiated that at least five percent of JWST general observing time shall be granted to Canadian astronomers over the mission lifetime. This announcement of opportunity is to request proposals from Canadian astronomers granted observing time through NASA's Cycle 2 General Observers (GO) call for proposals. The Cycle 2 GO call for proposals has been issued on with a deadline of . Canadian astronomers must have first submitted a winning proposal to NASA's call for proposals (as a Principal Investigator (PI), Co-PI or Co-I) to be considered in the context of this CSA Announcement of Opportunity (AO).

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

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

2. AO objectives

The objective of this AO is to provide support to Canadian astronomers for the analysis of JWST data and dissemination of results through publications. It is intended to help Canadian astronomers perform fundamental research in the several areas of infrared astronomy enabled by JWST and to provide a unique training opportunity in Canada for students and post-doctoral researchers.

The key results for CSA expected from selected proposals are:

3. Eligibility criteria

In this section

3.1 Eligible Recipients

Eligible recipients under this AO are Canadian universities and post-secondary institutions.

3.2 Eligible Projects

Eligible projects for this AO are those that were selected based on JWST open observing time and that were selected as a result of the GO Cycle 2  call for proposals issued by NASA/STScI. Only one application per project will be accepted.

One of the following roles, must be filled by a Canada based astronomer (see section 3.1):

  • Category A:
    • Principal Investigator, and/or
    • Co-Principal Investigator(s).
  • Category B:
    • Co-Investigator(s) only.

The projects have to be based on the analysis of the GO Cycle 2 data for the purpose of advancing knowledge of the astronomy fields of research enabled by JWST.

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

3.3 Links to CSA Priorities

To be eligible, projects supported under this AO must contribute to at least one of the following CSA priorities, such as expressed in the Space Strategy (www.asc-csa.gc.ca/pdf/eng/publications/space-strategy-for-canada.pdf [PDF, 1.66 MB]) and the report Canadian Space Exploration - Science and Space Health priorities for Next Decade and Beyond ():

  • Maximize the utilization of the Canadian time on JWST by astronomers and help them perform outstanding research in space astronomy.
  • Ensure Canada's leadership in acquiring and using space-based data to support science excellence, innovation, and economic growth.
  • Supporting space science to study Earth and beyond.
  • To increase the number of astronomers using space telescopes for their research projects.

Applicants are encouraged to propose projects that increase the representation and advancement of women and underrepresented groups in space sciences and engineering as one means to foster excellence in research and training.

3.4 Links to the Class G&C Program Objectives

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

  • To support information gathering, studies and research related to space.
  • 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

Applicants must submit a completed Application as described below.

The Application must include the following:

  • A completed typed original application form digitally signed by the Duly Authorized Representative of the proposed project as stipulated in section 3.2.
  • The proposal:
    • The application form requests a separately attached proposed research and data analysis plan, which must address the evaluation criteria described in section 5.2 and in Annex A.
    • For Category A projects, proposals of maximum 5 pages (excluding figures and bibliography) addressing all of the evaluation criteria will be accepted.
    • For Category B projects, abbreviated proposals of maximum 3 pages (excluding figures and bibliography) addressing all of the evaluation criteria may be accepted when appropriate.
  • Proof of incorporation or registration (i.e. Corporation Registry) of the Applicant. Note that the Applicant refers to the Canadian university/post secondary institution (see section 3.1).
  • A CV should at least be included for the collaborators submitting the proposals and any key team members such as the PI, Co-PI(s) and Co-Is associated with Canadian institutes and directly relevant to the CSA proposal (it is optional for all team members listed on the proposal submitted to STScI to include CVs).
  • For Category B proposals, a letter of support from the Principal Investigator of the approved NASA/STScI Cycle 2 GO proposal confirming the roles and responsibilities of the Canadian Co-I(s).
  • Letters from other funding contributors confirming their contributions (if applicable).
  • Declaration on Confidentiality, Access to Information Act and Privacy Act form signed by the duly authorized representative (refer to the Applicant Declaration on Confidentiality, Access to Information Act and Privacy Act section included in the application form), and
  • For organizations in Quebec, M-30 Supporting Documentation form completed and signed by the duly authorized representative (refer to the M-30 form for organizations in Quebec included in the application form).

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

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

4.2 Submission of Applications

  • The complete application (the required documentation, including a complete original application form signed by the duly authorized representative) must be submitted (successfully uploaded) by the applicants no later than 2 p.m. EDT on (Closing date).
  • Applications must be uploaded electronically following the instructions provided below. However, if the applicant is unable to submit their application electronically, please communicate with (csa_jwst_cycle2@asc-csa.gc.ca) no later than at 5 p.m. EDT, to obtain instructions on how to submit a paper application by mail. Applications sent by e-mail will not be accepted.
  • Incomplete or late applications will not be considered. A late application has an electronic timestamp on the CSA system later than the deadline above.
  • The applicant must complete an account creation request on 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 Google Chrome is the browser of choice for submissions. Supported browsers are Google Chrome and Internet Explorer with some restrictions. Applicants are encouraged to create their account many days before the submission deadline as technical difficulties may arise.
  • Allow up to seventy-two hours (72) 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 arise and cannot be resolved before , applicants must submit their application by mail at the following address:

    JWST Cycle 2 AO
    c/o  Dr. Jean Dupuis
    Space Exploration Development
    Canadian Space Agency
    6767 Route de l'Aéroport
    Borough of Saint-Hubert
    Longueuil
    , Québec
    J3Y 8Y9

  • Applicants are strongly encouraged to upload their applications 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 (PDF, 221 KB) for instructions on how to securely upload documents.
  • The application must be prepared as a single PDF-formatted file containing all of the above requested documents with all security features disabled. Please order the document with the application form and proposal first. The proposal and supporting documents must be included in the file as searchable PDF-formatted documents (PDF/A-1a or PDF/A-2a formats preferred). If the CSA encounters any accessibility issues with the submitted PDF files, the applicant will be solely responsible, and the application might not be considered.
  • The applicant must keep one hard copy of all the original documents above. The CSA may require applicants who successfully passed the evaluation stage described in Section 5 to send a hard copy of their completed application with the original documents.
  • Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the Frequently Asked Questions (Section 9).

4.3 Service Standards – Complete Applications

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

  • Acknowledgement: The CSA's goal is to acknowledge receipt of proposals within 2 weeks of receiving the completed application package.
  • Decision: The CSA's goal is to respond to the proposal within 20 weeks of the AO's closing date and to send a grant agreement for signature within 8 weeks after formal approval of the proposal.
  • Payment: The CSA's goal is to issue payment within 4 weeks of the successful fulfillment of the requirements outlined in the grant agreement.

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

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, and
  • Meets program funding provisions in Section 6.1.

5.2 Evaluation Criteria

Applications will be evaluated according to the following criteria:

List of criterias, descriptions and scores for applications evaluation
Criteria Description A B C D E Minimum
Score
Benefits to Canada The significance and potential for advancement of scientific knowledge in astronomy relevant to JWST science objectives 20 15 10 5 0 10
Project Feasibility Research methodology 10 8 6 4 0 21
Research plan and schedule 20 18 15 12 0
Resources Qualification and experience of the applicant and investigation team 10 8 6 4 0 16
Budget justification 15 12 10 8 0
Results Publication and science dissemination plan 20 15 10 5 0 10
Risk and mitigation strategies Project risks (financial, managerial, scientific and/or technical) and mitigation strategies. 5 4 3 2 0 3

Specific evaluation of the criteria is detailed under Annex A "Evaluation Criteria". The annex defines each criterion, and the scale rating of each criterion. A minimum score of 60 is required for a proposal to be selected for funding. If a proposal receives a score below the minimum score for any individual criteria, the application fails the evaluation and is not eligible for funding.

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.

The results obtained in this AO could take into account certain factors in the final decision to grant funding, such as, but not limited to, the representativeness of the four designated groups (woman, Aboriginal person, disabled person or member of a visible minority), regional distribution, academic level, distribution between universities and post-secondary educational institutions, etc. For more information on GBA +.

A review panel will then make an overall selection based on the evaluation scores and other priorities of the Government of Canada and CSA such as, but not limited to, regional distribution, distribution between universities and post-secondary institutions, implication of HQP and science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) students. Because of a limited availability of funds, we plan on prioritizing projects during the JWST Cycle 2 call for proposals (NASA/STScI) with Canadian based PIs and Co-PIs selected (category A) but an effort will be made to fund Canadian based Co-Is (Category B).

6. Funding

In this section

6.1 Available Funding and Duration

Over a maximum period of 2 years, the total maximum funding amount given in grant for each project will be as follows:

Category A Maximum Funding: up to $100,000

Projects with Canada based PI/Co-PI.

Category B Maximum Funding: up to $50,000

Projects with only Canada based Co-I.

The number of projects under this AO will depend on funding availability. A reminder that only one proposal per project will be accepted. Priority of funding will be given to Category A projects, but Category B projects will still be considered and can receive funding.

While the maximum amounts are explicitly stated, the costs of the project are expected to be modulated according to project complexity, team composition, number of Canadian based team members and observation time (project size as defined for Cycle 2 call for proposals). The need for full available funding must be substantiated.

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

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

  • Salaries and benefits.
  • Publication and communication services.
  • Registration fees.
  • Travel.
  • Accommodation and meal allowances.
  • Acquisition, development, and printing of materials.
  • Acquisition or rental of equipment.
  • Bursaries.
  • Consultant services.
  • Data acquisition.
  • Data management.
  • License and permit fees.
  • Marketing and printing services.
  • Materials and supplies.
  • Overhead (administrative) costs (not to exceed 10% of eligible costs for universities).
  • 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.
  • Training.
  • Translation services.

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 agreements, 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 (L.R.Q., c. M-30).

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

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

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

7.6 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 Access Publications

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

Thus, the CSA promotes the use of open access publication and archiving by recipients in order to facilitate the widest dissemination of findings that results from its funded projects. 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 methods are not mutually exclusive and that recipients are encouraged to use both.

Finally, the CSA wishes to receive, as a courtesy, a copy of the publications (if not freely accessible) or the hyperlink (if freely accessible) and its digital object identifier (DOI). These will be used to improve accessibility by including them in the CSA publications directory. Also, as a courtesy, the CSA would like to be informed in advance of significant press releases or media interest resulting from the work.

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 6 years and destroyed. According to the Privacy Act, any individual may, upon request,

  1. have access to his or her personal data and
  2. request correction of the incorrect information.

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

For additional information regarding this statement, please contact:

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

9. Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

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

For any questions related to the AO, applicants shall use the following email address (csa_jwst_cycle2@asc-csa.gc.ca). Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the Frequently Asked Questions section of this AO. The CSA will respond to questions received before .

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

  • Question 1: If a Canadian PI, Co-PI, or Co-I is awarded JWST time through a joint program, like the ones for the Chandra and Hubble observatories, are they eligible to apply to the CSA for funding to support the JWST-related part of the program? Will the proposal categories and funding amounts be the same as for other JWST GO programs and/or are there any additional requirements connected to these types of requests?

    Answer 1: No, only observing programs submitted in response to the STScI Cycle 2 JWST Call for proposals will be considered. This includes joint programs selected by the Cycle 2 JWST TAC for which JWST is the prime science. For these joint projects, the same proposal categories and funding amounts would apply.

  • Question 2: Could a grant have a later start date than Fall and run from for two years from then?

    Answer 2: Yes, CSA will accept later start date but as long as the project starts before and ends no later than .

  • Question 3: Can a postdoctoral fellow under a temporary position at a Canadian university be eligible for applying to a CSA JWST grant? What about for a graduate student?

    The answer will depend on the institution as not all universities will allow a postdoctoral fellow or a graduate student to be a principal investigator of a grant. It will be acceptable to appoint an administrative principal investigator for the grant, typically a professor from the same department, but at the condition that the postdoctoral fellow or the graduate student is employed or registered at the same Canadian institution as the appointed PI. If a postdoctoral fellow or graduate student leaves their institution before the completion of the project, a plan must be discussed in the AO application as a guarantee that the project will continue. For example, this can be addressed in the Risk and Mitigation Strategy section of the application.

  • Question 4: What type of CV will be accepted? Are there any limits on the length of the CV or when relevant experience was obtained?

    Answer 4: We will accept a freeform CV, the CSA CV Form [PDF, 0.67 MB] or the Canadian Common CV. There is no limit on the length of the CV. All relevant experience will be considered regardless of the publication or contribution dates.

  • Question 5: Should the dates listed in Section 7 – Detailed Budget and Sources of Funding of the AO form start and end in the Fall months rather than in April and March?

    Answer 5: No. The dates included in Section 7 – Detailed Budget and Sources of Funding that are listed below the Amount Requested from the CSA correspond to the CSA fiscal years. When determining how much to request for the budget, please split it according to these dates. A first installment will be made at project start during FY- for the first year and a second payment a year later in FY- pending the approval a progress report for the second year of the project.

  • Question 6: What type of projects qualify for Category B funding?

    Answer 6: Projects that do not have a Canadian-based PI or Co-PI(s) but do have Canadian-based Co-I(s). The participation of international collaborators as PI, Co-PI(s) or Co-I(s) will not affect qualification for this category.

  • Question 7: What is the maximum amount of overhead for a grant?

    Answer 7: The maximum overhead for a Category A grant would be $9,090.91, corresponding to 10% of $90,909.09 worth of eligible expenses, for a total grant value of $100K. The maximum overhead for a Category B grant would be $4,545.46, corresponding to 10% of $45,454.54 worth of eligible expenses, for a total grant value of $50K.

  • Question 8: Is it mandatory to include suggested reviewers in my application? What are the restrictions on the who can be a reviewer?

    Answer 8: No, it is not mandatory to suggest reviewers.

    Reviewers cannot be involved with JWST Cycle 2 GO. This means they cannot be a Canadian-based observer who has been approved through NASA's call for proposals nor can they be an appointed administrative PI for any Cycle 2 projects. All reviewers must be impartial and must not have a personal interest to see a grant approved.

  • Question 9: If an Administrative PI has been appointed, does the Scientific Investigator (PI, Co-PI or Co-I) or Administrative PI submit the AO application?

    Answer 9: Referring to question 3, the answer will depend on internal policy of the institution.

  • Question 10: In Section 5 of the AO application, does the PI refer to the PI of the JWST Cycle 2 GO proposal or the PI for the CSA AO?

    Answer 10: In Section 5 of the application form, the PI refers to the PI of the JWST Proposal. If the PI is not Canadian based, a CV from the PI is optional. The same applies for the Co-PI(s) and Co-I(s).

  • Question 11: In section 5 of the application form, does "project" refer specifically to the CSA-funded portion of the project, or the overall JWST Cycle 2 GO project?

    Answer 11: The term "project" refers to the overall JWST Cycle 2 GO proposal that was approved through the NASA/STScI competition not strictly the CSA-funded portion of the project.

  • Question 12: How should applicants include the Detailed Implementation Schedule within the AO application?

    Answer 12: The Detailed Implementation Schedule outlined in Section 6 of the AO application should be included as its own attachment inside the combined application document. There is no page/character limit on the Detailed Implementation Schedule and is separate from the proposed research and data analysis plan outlined in Section 4.1 of the AO. As a result, the Detailed Implementation Schedule will not be counted towards the maximum page limits.

  • Question 13: Both the AO and the AO application ask for details about the overall budget for the project. Can applicants include explanations about the budget strictly in the Budget Breakdown Table in Section 7 of the AO application?

    Answer 13: No. A short description can be included in the Description and Details column of the Budget Breakdown Table in Section 7 of the AO application. Additional explanations behind the funding outlined in the Budget Breakdown Table addressing the criteria described in Section 5.2 and Annex A of the AO should be included within the separately attached proposed research and data analysis plan described in Section 4.1 of the AO.

10. Annex A – Evaluation Criteria Definition, Scale Rating, and Scores

In this section

Scoring and weights

A numerical weight is associated with each criterion. Each criterion will be rated on a letter scale from A to E, with A being the highest score. It is strongly recommended that applicants write their proposals by providing information related to each highest score.

There is an overall minimum score of 60 to pass, as well individual minimum requirements on all criteria individually. If a proposal receives a score below the minimum score for any individual criteria, the application is not eligible for funding. The Applicant is advised to read Evaluation Criteria carefully when preparing the proposal.

1. Benefits to Canada

Scoring:

  • Maximum: 20
  • Minimum: 10

The significance and potential for advancement of scientific knowledge in astronomy relevant to JWST science objectives and how the work is anticipated to enhance Canada's reputation in space astronomy will be assessed on the following:

  • How significant an advance would be made?
  • If the work were disseminated, would it significantly enhance the reputation of Canada in space astronomy?
  • Is the project providing leadership opportunities for Canadian HQP in the context of JWST?
Scoring - Criterion 1. Benefits to Canada
Criterion not addressed The investigation does not address science objectives of the JWST mission and/or will not contribute to the advancement of new knowledge. (Score: E=0)
Poor The investigation poorly addresses science objectives of the JWST mission and/or will most likely contribute very little to the advancement of new knowledge. (Score: D=5)
Average The investigation addresses science objectives of the JWST mission in a general way and could advance knowledge but is largely derivative of previous work. (Score: C=10)
Good The investigation addresses science objectives of the JWST mission, and the probable results are likely to advance knowledge central to those objectives. The investigation involves novel or original concepts or methods, and/or builds on recent Space Astronomy research advances and offers opportunities for Canadian HQPs leadership. (Score: B=15)
Excellent The investigation fully addresses science objectives of the JWST mission, and the probable results have a wide-ranging, long-term impact beyond the immediate field of study. The proposal is distinguished by highly novel or original concepts or methods, builds on recent Space Astronomy research advances, and is likely to significantly enhance the reputation of Canada in Space Astronomy. It offers many opportunities for Canadian HQPs to take on leadership roles. (Score: A=20)

2. Project Feasibility

Scoring:

  • Maximum: 30
  • Minimum: 21

2.1 Research methodology

This criterion evaluates the feasibility of the proposed research methodology to meet the proposed research objectives.

  • Does the proposal include a description of the data reduction and analysis plans in sufficient details to justify the level of effort?
  • Is there a description of the software packages to be used and if the project can be done using existing resources and/or if new development will be required?
Scoring - Criterion 2.1 Research methodology
Criterion not addressed This criterion is not addressed in the proposal (Score: E=0)
Poor The research methodology is poorly defined and/or there is a high likelihood that the research objectives will not be met due to inappropriate methods. (Score: D=4)
Average The research methodology is somewhat defined, but details are lacking, and/or, better approaches can be found in the literature to achieve the same objectives. (Score: C=6)
Good The research methodology is defined. Proposed scientific methods and technical approaches are well-understood and have been applied to similar projects as demonstrated by a literature review. There is some likelihood that the research objectives will be achieved. (Score: B=8)
Excellent The research methodology is well defined. Innovative scientific methods and/or technical approaches are needed and described. A thorough literature review justifies the approaches and their feasibility. There is a high likelihood that the research objectives will be achieved. (Score: A=10)

2.2 Research plan and schedule

This criterion evaluates the appropriateness and feasibility of the research and data analysis plan and of the schedule.

  • Is the schedule well correlated with the project objectives?
  • Is the work plan credible and the likelihood to achieve the anticipated results during the period of performance high?
Scoring - Criterion 2.2 Research plan and schedule
Criterion not addressed This criterion is not addressed in the proposal (Score: E=0)
Poor The research plan does not include clear tasks and schedule milestones. (Score: D=12)
Average The research plan appears reasonable, but some relevant information is missing. (Score: C=15)
Good The research plan is defined and includes schedule milestones. (Score: B=18)
Excellent The research plan is well defined with clear tasks for which time allocations for team members are provided, schedule milestones, and traceability to the investigation objectives. (Score: A=20)

3. Resources: Qualification and experience of the PI, Co-PI or Co-I (applicant) applying for the grant as well as the investigation team, and budget justification.

Scoring:

  • Maximum: 25
  • Minimum: 16

3.1 Qualification and experience of the applicant and investigation team

This criterion evaluates the qualifications and past performance of the applicant and team and roles and responsibilities of each team member in the collaboration.

  • Does the applicant possess the scientific expertise required to undertake the proposed project?
  • Has the applicant demonstrated the ability to manage and complete similar projects?
  • Does the applicant or team have experience in space astronomy missions (guest investigators or science team membership), increasing confidence that science investigations defined through this work will be successful and impactful?
  • Does the proposal include an implementation plan with appropriate roles and responsibilities?
Scoring - Criterion 3.1 Qualification and experience of the applicant and investigation team
Criterion not addressed This criterion is not addressed in the proposal (Score: E=0)
Poor The applicant has limited or no experience and expertise in the field of study. (Score: D=4)
Average The applicant has some experience in the field of study. The applicant has some experience in the management and completion of similar projects. (Score: C=6)
Good The applicant has demonstrated experience in the field of study and in managing similar projects. Any co-investigators (Co-Is) and collaborators included in the proposal have well-defined roles and are critical to the success of the investigation. The applicant or team has some experience with space astronomy missions. (Score: B=8)
Excellent The applicant, research team or collaborators have extensive experience in the field of study, and one or more members is recognized internationally. All Co-Is and collaborators included in the proposal have well-defined roles and are critical to the success of the investigation. The applicant has demonstrated the ability to manage and complete similar projects. The applicant or team has experience in handling data from space observatories. (Score: A=10)

3.2 Budget justification

This criterion evaluates the appropriateness of the budget.

  • Is the budget well justified by the investigation tasks, aligns with the project complexity and data volume (total exposure time, etc.) and by budget category?
  • Is a detailed budget breakdown provided and is the budget appropriate?
  • When available, are other sources of funding well described and used efficiently in complementarity to the CSA funding?
Scoring - Criterion 3.2 Budget justification
Criterion not addressed This criterion is not addressed in the proposal (Score: E=0)
Poor The budget is missing important information or is inappropriate. (Score: D=8)
Average Information is provided to justify the budget, but some details are missing, or some budget items appear under- or over-estimated. (Score: C=10)
Good A justified budget is provided which appears appropriate. (Score: B=12)
Excellent The budget is detailed, well justified and appropriate, and gives high confidence in the budget feasibility of the investigation. (Score: A=15)

4. Results: Publication and science dissemination plan

Scoring:

  • Maximum: 20
  • Minimum: 10

This criterion evaluates the applicant's commitment to sharing data and disseminating results from the proposed investigation based on their JWST data.

  • Does the proposal include a plan to share reduced JWST data with a broader science community and/or with the public?
  • Does the proposal include a plan to disseminate results (articles, conference presentations, seminars, public talks, websites, etc.)?
Scoring - Criterion 4. Results: Publication and science dissemination plan
Criterion not addressed This criterion is not addressed in the proposal (Score: E=0)
Poor The proposal only includes minimal reference to data sharing or science dissemination. (Score: D=5)
Average The proposal indicates some science analysis results dissemination, but few details are provided. (Score: C=10)
Good The proposal includes a plan to disseminate results from the science analysis results and for science dissemination targeting the scientific community. (Score: B=15)
Excellent The proposal includes an explicit plan to disseminate results from the science analysis results and a well-thought-out and structured scientific publications and science dissemination plan that is likely to raise Canada's profile in Space Astronomy considerably. (Score: A=20)

5. Risk and mitigation strategies – Project risks (financial, managerial, scientific and/or technical) and mitigation strategies.

Scoring:

  • Maximum: 5
  • Minimum: 3

This criterion evaluates key risks associated with the project and the mitigation strategies for each risk. It includes a thorough analysis of the project's financial, scientific and/or technical, and managerial risks.

  • Has the applicant identified and described in detail the risks associated with the project, including, but not limited to, financial, scientific and/or technical, and managerial?
  • Are the mitigation strategies for each risk correctly addressed and realistic? What is the probability that such risks would occur?
Scoring - Criterion 5. Risk and mitigation strategies – Project risks (financial, managerial, scientific and/or technical) and mitigation strategies.
Criterion not addressed This criterion is not addressed in the proposal. (Score: E=0)
Poor The proposal does not identify any key risks or mitigation strategies, or some risks are identified but related mitigation strategies are missing. (Score: D=2)
Average Some, but not all, key risks and their mitigation strategies are defined. (Score: C=3)
Good Key financial, scientific and/or technical, managerial risks and their mitigation strategies are defined, but there are few details on the risk evaluation occurrence probability presented. (Score: B=4)
Excellent Key financial, scientific and/or technical, managerial, and their mitigation strategies are well described. The risk evaluation occurrence probability and severity are deemed realistic. (Score: A=5)
Date modified: