Inclusive industrial protective headwear

From: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada

Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) is seeking the design and production of an inclusive industrial protective headwear option that can be safely used by workers who wear head coverings for religious, cultural, medical and/or gender identity reasons. An innovation in this field would be a breakthrough, and address systemic barriers faced by Canadians in industries that require wearing protective headwear.

Challenge sponsor:
Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC)

Funding mechanism:
Contract

Opening date:
July 10, 2024

Closing date:
August 21, 2024, 14:00 Eastern Time

Log in to view your submissions

Here are a few things you need to know before you get started on your application to this challenge:

  1. This challenge is only open to receive proposals for Phase 1 (Proof of Feasibility) of our Challenge Stream. Proposed solutions that fall within technology readiness levels (TRL) 1-4 can be submitted to this challenge
  2. We recently made changes to the Challenge Stream, we have outlined the new  parameters here
  3. Read through the official solicitation documents
  4. To read the tender notice for this specific challenge, refer to CanadaBuys

Challenge
 

Problem statement

People wearing head coverings for religious, cultural, medical and/or gender identity reasons face significant challenges when using industrial protective headwear given current legislative/standards requirements in Canada, and lack of commercially available options. The vast majority of industrial protective headwear on the market are designed to be worn smoothly on the top of the head, with no equivalent alternative for those who wear head coverings. Certain communities, for instance the Sikh community who wear turbans, face significant barriers when accessing work sites due to a lack of protective headwear that accommodates their practices and beliefs. This is especially the case in industries where personal protective equipment is required to protect workers from workplace hazards and perform work safely, such as construction, manufacturing, and mining. This creates a situation where workers are forced to choose between their practices and beliefs and their safety, leading to economic disadvantage and exclusion.

PSPC is seeking industrial protective headwear solutions that would accommodate the needs of those who wear head coverings (e.g., turbans, hijabs, kippah, etc.). The protective headwear solution will have to accommodate the extra volume of the head coverings while still providing adequate protection and meeting the requirements in accordance with the standard of the Canadian Standards Association (CSA Z94.1), titled "Industrial protective headwear". Selected recipients will work in a collaborative process with PSPC, with the opportunity to engage with the CSA Group, to develop and test the validity of their solution. This collaborative effort will ensure technical specifications and safety requirements are met with the goal of informing the update of the CSA Z94.1 standard.

Desired outcomes and considerations

Essential (mandatory) outcomes

The proposed solution must:

  1. 1) Meet the Canadian Standards Association (CSA Z94.1), "Industrial Protective Headwear – Performance, Selection, Care and Use" standard, as it pertains to protective headwear for industrial, construction, mining, utility, and forestry workers.

    1. 1.1) Articles or clauses of the CSA Z94.1 standard could be considered for exclusion or modification as long as the proposed solution addresses safety concerns of the article or clause. For example, clause 5.7.3 can be excluded as long as the proposed solution addresses potential injuries or harm caused by pressure points that are created from the bunch up of materials under the protective headwear.

      A free view access to the CSA Z94.1 standard is available online. It is only available for viewers in Canada and creation of a free user account is required to view this document.

  2. 2) Be adjustable to best fit and accommodate the various volumes and shapes of as many religious, cultural, medical and/or gender identity head coverings as possible (e.g., turbans, hijabs, yamakas, and more). Gender identity head coverings include wigs and more.

  3. 3) Pass the tests required by the CSA Z94.1 standard and/or the new CSA Technical Specification on Industrial protective headwear to accommodate head coverings.

    Development and publication of a new CSA Technical Specification (TS) for Industrial protective headwear to accommodate head-coverings will be informed by outputs from Phase 1 and by input from selected subject matter experts in a process facilitated by the CSA Group.

Additional outcomes

The proposed solution should:

  1. 1) Be adaptable for use in a range of industries and applications, providing workers with flexibility in the workforce environment.
  2. 2) Be designed with sustainability in mind, using eco-friendly materials and production processes to minimize environmental impact.

Background and context

PSPC plays an important role in the daily operations of the Government of Canada. It supports federal departments and agencies in the achievement of their mandated objectives as their central purchasing agent, real property manager, linguistic authority, treasurer, accountant, pay and pension administrator.

As a common service provider, PSPC provides federal workers and parliamentarians with workspaces. PSPC builds, maintains and manages federal properties and other public works such as bridges and dams. As part of their duties, PSPC workers and their clients tend to visit construction sites and are required to comply with occupational health and safety regulations and guidelines such as wearing Personal Protective Equipment, including industrial protective headwear. PSPC workers who wear religious, cultural, medical and/or gender identity head coverings do not have access to construction sites because they cannot find a suitable protective headwear (size, type, class) that can be properly adjusted and secured to fit their head coverings.

PSPC prides itself on the diversity of its workforce, as well as its inclusive and respectful work environment. We've worked hard to create a welcoming, respectful, and inclusive workplace through a variety of programs and initiatives. International and Canadian jurisdictions are taking various approaches to accommodate religious head coverings. Some of them have implemented laws to ensure that Sikh turban wearers have equal rights and opportunities. For example, the province of British Columbia has narrowed their rules around wearing industrial protective headwear to allow Sikh workers who wear turbans to access additional jobs, however for industries where there is a higher risk of head injuries, it is still mandatory to wear protective headwear. This innovation challenge presents a unique global leadership opportunity for Canada to address design limitations of protective headwear and allow for a barrier-free workplace.

There are significant risks for the affected workers if protective headwear designed to accommodate religious, cultural, medical and/or gender identity head coverings is not made available. These include, but not limited to:

  • Head injuries: Without proper head protection, workers are at risk of serious head injuries from falling objects, debris, or other hazards on the job site.
  • Non-compliance with safety regulations: Employers are required by law to provide workers with adequate head protection. If they are unable to provide headwear that accommodate religious, cultural, medical and/or gender identity head coverings, the affected workers may not comply with safety regulations.
  • Discrimination and exclusion: Workers who are unable to wear standard protective headwear may be excluded from certain jobs or industries, leading to discrimination and limiting their career opportunities.
  • Psychological distress: Workers who feel they must choose between their safety and their practices and/or beliefs may experience psychological distress, including anxiety, stress, and a sense of alienation from their workplace.

To prevent these risks, it is important for industrial and regulatory bodies to prioritize the development and distribution of protective headwear that accommodate religious, cultural, medical and/or gender identity head coverings, and to work with the impacted communities to ensure that their safety needs are met in a respectful and inclusive way.

Maximum contract value and travel

Multiple contracts could result from this Challenge.

Phase 1:

  • The maximum funding available for any Phase 1 contract resulting from this Challenge is : $300,000.00 CAD excluding applicable taxes, shipping, travel and living expenses, as required.
  • The maximum duration for any Phase 1 contract resulting from this Challenge is up to 6 months (excluding submission of the final report).
  • Estimated number of Phase 1 contracts: 3

Phase 2:

Note: Only eligible businesses that have successfully completed Phase 1 will be considered for Phase 2.

  • The maximum funding available for any Phase 2 contract resulting from this Challenge is : $1,000,000.00 CAD excluding applicable taxes, shipping, travel and living expenses, as required.
  • The maximum duration for any Phase 2 contract resulting from this Challenge is up to 24 months (excluding submission of the final report).
  • Estimated number of Phase 2 contracts: 1

This disclosure is made in good faith and does not commit Canada to award any contract for the total approximate funding. Final decisions on the number of Phase 1 and Phase 2 awards will be made by Canada on the basis of factors such as evaluation results, departmental priorities and availability of funds. Canada reserves the right to make partial awards and to negotiate project scope changes.

Note: Selected companies are eligible to receive one contract per phase per challenge.

Travel

No travel is anticipated in Phase 1. Project meetings will be conducted by telephone or video conference.

Kick-off meeting

All communication will take place by telephone or video conference.

Progress review meeting(s)

Any progress review meetings will be conducted by telephone or video conference.

Final review meeting

All communication will take place by telephone or video conference.

Eligibility
 

Solution proposals can only be submitted by a small business that meets all of the following criteria:

  • for profit
  • incorporated in Canada (federally or provincially)
  • 499 or fewer full-time equivalent (FTE) employeesFootnote **
  • research and development activities that take place in Canada
  • 50% or more of its annual wages, salaries and fees are currently paid to employees and contractors who spend the majority of their time working in CanadaFootnote **
  • 50% or more of its FTE employees have Canada as their ordinary place of workFootnote **
  • 50% or more of its senior executives (Vice President and above) have Canada as their principal residenceFootnote **

Evaluation criteria

The official source of the Evaluation Criteria for this challenge is the Government Electronic Tendering System (CanadaBuys).

In the event of a discrepancy between the information below and the information published on CanadaBuys, CanadaBuys will take precedence.

Phase 1

The Applicant (offeror) must complete the Challenge Stream Submission Form with a degree of information sufficient to enable Canada's assessment of the proposal against the criteria and the Evaluation Schema. The information must demonstrate how the proposal meets the criterion. The Applicant (offeror) may not add information to their submission at a later time.

Part 1: Phase 1 - Mandatory Criteria

Proposals must meet all Mandatory Criteria identified by achieving a "Pass" in order to proceed to Part 2. Proposals that do not meet all Mandatory Criteria will be deemed non-responsive and given no further consideration.

Mandatory Criteria

(Applicant's proposal must address)

Question 1 a: Scope

Describe the proposed innovation and demonstrate how it responds to the challenge. Include in your description the scientific and technological basis upon which the solution is proposed and clearly demonstrate how the solution meets all of the Essential Outcomes in the Desired Outcomes section in the Challenge Notice.

Question 1 a: Evaluation Schema (Mandatory – Pass/Fail)
Pass

The proposed innovation is within the scope for the challenge, and clearly addresses all Essential Outcomes identified in the Challenge.

Fail

The proposed solution is articulated as out of scope for the challenge.

or

The proposal does not clearly demonstrate how the proposed solution addresses all Essential Outcomes identified in the challenge.

or

The proposed solution is poorly described and does not permit concrete analysis.

or

There is little to no scientific and/or technological evidence that the proposed solution is likely to meet all Essential Outcomes.

Question 2: Current Technology Readiness Level (TRL)
  1. Indicate the current TRL of the proposed solution. (Drop Down Menu of the Challenge Stream Submission Form)
  2. Describe the research and development activities that have taken place to bring the proposed solution to the stated TRL.

This section should include:

  • A description of the method of research
  • The solution objectives and an analysis of the results proving the feasibility of the solution
  • Data proving the solution's feasibility
  • Evidence to demonstrate the highest level of validation conducted (e.g. activities such as paper studies, analytic studies, components that are not yet integrated or representative, integration of "ad hoc" hardware in the laboratory, laboratory testing, simulated environment, field testing, debugging, etc.)
  • The type of environment(s) in which this was done and by whom, including title
Question 2: Evaluation Schema (Mandatory – Pass/Fail)
Pass:

The Applicant (offeror) has demonstrated that the proposed solution is currently between TRL 1 to 4 (inclusive), and provided justification by explaining the research and development (R&D) that has taken place to bring the solution to the stated TRL.

Fail:

The Applicant (offeror) has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the current TRL is between 1 to 4 (inclusive) including:

  1. There is insufficient/no evidence provided for TRL judgment.
  2. The solution involves the development of basic or fundamental research.
  3. The solution is demonstrated at TRL 5 or higher.
  4. Insufficient/unclear/no justification explaining the R&D that took place to bring the solution to the stated TRL.
  5. The explanation simply paraphrases the description of a given TRL level.
Question 3a: Innovation

Demonstrate how the proposed solution meets one or more of the ISC definitions of innovation below:

  1. An inventionFootnote *, new technology or new process that is not currently available in the marketplace.
  2. Significant modifications to the application of existing technologies/components/processes that are applied in a setting or condition for which current applications are not possible or feasible.
  3. An improvement in functionality, cost or performance over an existing technology/process that is considered state-of-the-art or the current industry best practice.
Question 3a: Evaluation Schema (Mandatory – Pass/Fail)
Pass:

The proposed solution meets one or more of the ISC definitions of innovation.

Fail:
  • The proposed solution does not meet any of the ISC definitions of innovation
    or
  • The proposed solution is an incremental improvement, "good engineering", or a technology that would go ahead in the normal course of product development (i.e. the next version or release).
Question 3b: Advance on State of the Art

Describe in detail the competitive advantages and level of advancement over existing technologies. Where appropriate, name existing technologies as well as potential substitutes or competitors.

To demonstrate this, the proposal must include the following information:

  • Improvements (minor or major) over existing technologies or substitutes. Use direct comparison.
  • How the proposed innovation will create competitive advantages in existing market niches or market spaces.
Question 3b: Evaluation Schema (Mandatory Criteria – Pass/Fail + Points)
0 points/Fail:
  • The Applicant (offeror) has not demonstrated that the proposed solution advances the state-of-the-art over existing technologies, including available competing solutions; or
  • The proposed solution improves minimally upon the current state of the art, though not sufficiently enough to create competitive advantages in existing market niches; or
  • The stated advancements are described in general terms but are not substantiated with specific, measurable evidence.
5 points/Pass:
  • The Applicant (offeror) has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers one or two minor improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions that have potential to create competitive advantages in existing market niches.
12 points/Pass:
  • The Applicant (offeror) has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers three or more minor improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions, that together are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches; or
  • The Applicant (offeror) has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers one significant improvement to existing technologies that is likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches.
20 points/Pass:
  • The Applicant (offeror) has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers two or more significant improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions that are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches and could define new market spaces; or
  • The Applicant (offeror) has demonstrated that the proposed solution can be considered a new benchmark of state of the art that is clearly ahead of competitors and that is likely to define new market spaces.

Part 2: Phase 1 - Point-Rated Criteria

Proposals must meet the overall minimum pass mark of 65 of 130 possible total points (50%) to be deemed responsive. Proposals that do not achieve the minimum pass mark will be declared non-responsive and given no further consideration.

Point-Rated Criteria

(Applicant's proposal to address)

Question 1b: Scope

Demonstrate the scientific and technological basis of how the proposed solution addresses the Additional Outcomes (if identified) in the Desired Outcomes section in the Challenge Notice. If no Additional Outcomes are identified in the Challenge Notice, text entered in this section will not be considered.

If no Additional Outcomes are identified in the Challenge Notice, Applicants (offerors) will receive 10 points.

Question 1b: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the solution will address any of the Additional Outcomes. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates that the solution will address some (<50%) of the Additional Outcomes. 3 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates that the solution will address most (50% or more) of the Additional Outcomes. 6 points
  4. Information provided demonstrates that the solution will address all (100%) of the Additional Outcomes. 10 points
Question 4: Phase 1 Science and Technology (S&T) Risks

Identify potential scientific and/or technological risks to the development of the proof of feasibility and describe how they will be mitigated in Phase 1.

Question 4: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Information is insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant (offeror) has identified potential risks and described associated mitigation strategies or information provided contains significant gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant (offeror) has identified potential risks and described associated mitigation strategies but there are minor gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 5 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant (offeror) has identified the potential risks and described associated mitigation strategies. 10 points
Question 5: Phase 1 Project Risks

Identify potential project risks to the development of the proof of feasibility and describe how they will be mitigated in Phase 1.

Applicants (offerors) should address the following risks:

  • Human Resources
  • Financial
  • Project Management
  • Intellectual Property
  • Supply chain issues

Note: S&T risks should not be included in this section. Question 4 addresses S&T risks.

Question 5: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Information is insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant (offeror) has identified potential risks and described associated mitigation strategies or information provided contains significant gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant (offeror) has identified potential risks and described associated mitigation strategies but there are minor gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 5 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant (offeror) has identified the potential risks and described associated mitigation strategies. 10 points
Question 6: Phase 1 Project Plan

Demonstrate a Proof of feasibility Phase 1 project plan by completing the table in the Proposal Submission Form.

  • Indicate if any milestones and activities will be completed concurrently
  • Indicate the estimated exit TRL at the completion of Phase 1. (Drop Down Menu of the Challenge Stream Submission Form)
Question 6: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate a feasible project plan for Phase 1 and/or the project plan exceeds the maximum duration indicated in the Challenge Notice. 0 points
  2. Information is feasible for the Phase 1 project plan but not clearly demonstrated and/or includes gaps. 10 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates a feasible project plan for Phase 1. 20 points
Question 7: Phase 1 Implementation Team

Demonstrate how the project implementation team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the project plan for Phase 1 by completing the table. A member of the implementation team can have more than one role.

Question 7: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the project team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates that there are minor gaps in required management and/or technological skill sets and/or experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan.10 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates that the project team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 20 points
Question 8: Inclusivity

A key objective of the Innovative Solutions Canada program is to increase the participation of under-represented groups in the research and development of the proposed solution.

Applicants (offerors) should describe the policies, strategies, and/or procedures (e.g. recruitment strategy, internships, co-op placements, or other initiatives) that they currently have in place or would put in place to support the R&D effort in Phase 1 including an overview of the group(s); and which specific under-represented groups (women, youth, persons with disabilities, Indigenous people, visible minorities, 2SLGBTQI+ community, etc.).

Note: Do not provide any personal information of individuals employed by your company or that of your subcontractors in the response.

Question 8: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. No description and/or concrete examples of actions provided that are in place or would be taken to encourage greater participation of under-represented groups. 0 points
  2. A description and concrete examples of actions to encourage greater participation of under-represented groups provided. 10 points
  3. If the Applicant (offeror) is registered on the Indigenous Business Directory, Modern Treaty or Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement (CLCA) business list/directory, please provide this information as part of this criterion. A registered Indigenous Businesses will receive the maximum score for Question 8: Inclusivity. 20 points
Question 9: Phase 1 Financial Controls, Tracking and Oversight

Describe the financial controls, tracking and oversight that will be used to manage the funds throughout Phase 1. Applicants (offerors) should indicate if an individual or firm will be managing the funds and provide their credentials and/or relevant experience.

A good financial control in R&D refers to effective management and oversight of financial resources allocated to R&D activities, with the goal of maximising the return on investment and ensuring funds are used efficiently and effectively.

For example, this section could include (but not limited to):

  • Establishing clear budgets and financial plan
  • Regular monitoring
  • Developing systems for tracking and recording costs (salaries, equipment and supplies, overhead expenses, etc.)
  • Providing accurate and timely financial reports (including actual and projected costs) to stakeholders such as management, funders or researchers
  • Ensuring compliance with relevant financial regulations, policies and procedures
Question 9: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate the Applicant's ability to manage funds in Phase 1. 0 points
  2. Information provided is vague and/or contains gaps. The Applicant (offeror) has some financial controls, tracking and/or oversight in place to manage the funds in Phase 1. 5 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant (offeror) has financial controls, tracking and oversight to manage funds in Phase 1. 10 points
Question 10: Phase 2 Overview

Demonstrate an overview for the prototype development plan if selected to participate in Phase 2.

Responses should include:

  • key tasks
  • estimated cost for materials
  • human resources
  • project risks and mitigation strategies

Note: A more detailed project plan may be requested if selected for consideration to participate in Phase 2.

Question 10: Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant (offeror) has contemplated an overview for the Phase 2 prototype development. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates an overview for Phase 2 prototype development, however it is vague and/or contains gaps. 5 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant (offeror) has a defined overview for the Phase 2 prototype development. 10 points

Questions and answers

All incoming questions regarding this specific challenge should be addressed to TPSGC.SIC-ISC.PWGSC@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca

A glossary is also available.

 Report a problem
Date modified: