Trust and verification in digital government

From: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada

cfp_banner-trust_verification_en

 

We are seeking pre-commercial innovative prototypes that can strengthen trust in digital interactions by ensuring that identities, credentials, and system-to-system exchanges are verifiable and interoperable across Government of Canada (GC) services.

Funding opportunity sponsor:
Innovative Solutions Canada (ISC)

Funding mechanism:
Contract

Opening date: 
May 27, 2026

Closing date: 
June 17, 2026, 14:00 Eastern Time

Apply/Login

Before submitting a proposal, please read the following solicitation documents.

Overview

The Testing Stream aims to procure, test and evaluate innovative late stage pre-commercial prototypes.
The purpose of these solicitation of offers (SoOs) is to create pools of conditionally qualified innovations that Canada may select from to address a broad range of the Government of Canada organizations' requirements.
If you meet the eligibility criteria and have a prototype that can respond to one of the problems below, apply now!

Problem statements

Supplier verification and decentralized credentialing 

The Government of Canada (GC) relies on a wide network of suppliers to deliver goods and services. For small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), demonstrating verified "Government of Canada supplier" status is important to demonstrate credibility and access opportunities. Current processes for validating and displaying supplier status depend on centralized systems and manual intervention by Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC), which can introduce delays, administrative burden, and limit scalability.

Technologies that leverage digital credentials, identity and trust frameworks, as well as automated verification infrastructure present an opportunity to modernize how supplier credentials are issued, verified, and shared. These technologies can enable tamper-resistant, real-time validation of supplier status while reducing reliance on manual processes and intermediaries.

The GC is interested in testing solutions to enable suppliers to independently display and verify a "Government of Canada supplier" status. These solutions should support secure credential issuance, real-time validation, interoperability across platforms, and alignment with federal standards for data protection, identity management, and digital trust. The solutions will interface with publicly available data to determine supplier status and generate a tamper-proof and real-time verifiable, portable credential. 

Definition

  • Blockchain (distributed ledger technology): A decentralized and distributed digital ledger that records transactions across multiple systems in a way that ensures data integrity, transparency, and immutability without requiring a central authority.
  • Digital credential: A verifiable digital representation of a qualification, status, or attribute (such as supplier certification) that can be securely issued, stored, and shared electronically.
  • Decentralized identity (DID): A model for managing digital identities that allows individuals or organizations to control their own identity information without relying on a central authority.
  • Smart contract: Self-executing code stored on a blockchain that automatically enforces rules or agreements when predefined conditions are met.
  • Verification: The process of confirming the authenticity and validity of a supplier's status or credentials through cryptographic or authoritative means.

Outcomes

Innovations must meet at least one or more of the following outcomes to fulfill the requirements of the 4 Screening Criteria evaluation grids:

  1. Solutions that enable the GC to issue secure, tamper-resistant digital credentials that can confirm a company's supplier to the GC status. Solutions must provide suppliers with embeddable, dynamic trust indicators that are capable of interactive verification by users in a single click or scan. Solutions must allow suppliers to easily display and share their verified GC supplier status (e.g., via websites, procurement platforms, or digital profiles) without requiring manual PSPC intervention (supplier self-service verification tools). 

Out of scope

Innovative Solutions Canada (ISC) will not accept any of the following:

  • Solutions that rely solely on manual validation processes or require ongoing PSPC intervention for credential display or verification. 
  • Solutions that do not incorporate secure methods for preventing credential tampering, fraud, or unauthorized access. 
  • Solutions that fail to comply with applicable federal policies on privacy, security, and digital trust. 

Eligibility and evaluation

Certifications

Canadian offeror

The offeror must be a Canadian offeror. A Canadian offeror is defined as a Canadian person or entity submitting an offer on its own behalf and having a place of business in Canada where the person or entity conducts activities on a permanent basis that is clearly identified by name and accessible during normal working hours.

Canadian content 

At least 80% of the financial proposal costs, the total proposal price to Canada stated in "Section G – Financial Proposal," must be  Canadian goods or Canadian services. For the complete definition of 'Canadian goods' and 'Canadian services,' please refer to Annex Solicitation of Offers Definitions of the solicitation number EN578-26ISC1 on the Canada Buys Website.

Note: Canadian content compliance will also be verified and confirmed during contract negotiations.

Ownership 

The offeror must be the owner of the Intellectual Property (IP) for the proposed innovation or hold a valid exclusive licence for the IP rights from a Canadian licensor for the proposed innovation. The offeror must also ensure that the proposed innovation does not infringe on any existing IP rights.

Pre-commercial status 

The proposed innovation must not be openly available in the marketplace and must not have been previously sold on a commercial basis as of the date of the submission of the offer. Refer to the definitions of pre-commercial innovation and commercial sales at Annex Contract Definitions of the solicitation number EN578-26ISC1 on the Canada Buys website.

Note: Pre-commercial status can include the significant modification of an existing technology or processes applied in a government setting for which current applications are not possible or feasible.

Offeror presence in Canada

The offeror must meet the following minimum requirements:

  • 50% or more of the offeror's Full Time Equivalent employees must have Canada as their ordinary place of work; 
  • 50% or more of the offeror's annual wages, salaries and fees must be paid to employees and contractors who spend the majority of their time working in Canada; 
  • and 50% or more of the offeror's senior executives (Vice President and above) must have their principal residence in Canada. 

These calculations must take into account affiliated businesses, such as parent companies and subsidiaries that are either in or outside of Canada.

Stage 1 - Mandatory technical criteria (MC)

MC1: Previously conditionally qualified innovation 

The proposed innovation or any other versions of the proposed innovation must not have been previously awarded a contract under the Build in Canada Innovation Program(BCIP) or its predecessor, the Canadian Innovation Commercialization Program (CICP), nor under the Innovative Solutions Canada (ISC) Testing Stream.

The proposed innovation or any other versions of the proposed innovation must not currently be active in a pool of conditionally qualified innovations. A proposed innovation that is currently active in a pool will be considered only if the offer validity period for that offer has expired or the offeror has withdrawn their innovation from the relevant pool, prior to the solicitation closing date and time.  

Offerors are limited to submit only one (1) offer per Problem Statement. If the proposed innovation is similar or identical to an innovation previously submitted by the offeror that is currently active in a pool and has not been withdrawn prior to solicitation closing, the following assessment will be used to determine sufficient difference to proceed.  

Pass

Sufficiently different 

  • A distinct product and/or service that has undergone a completely separate path of research and development (R&D) or that diverged early in technology development; or 
  • Significant modifications to the application of the previous technology or components of the technology, applied in a setting or condition which was not possible or feasible for the conditionally qualified or contracted innovation; or
  • A significant improvement in functionality, cost or performance over the conditionally qualified or contracted innovation. 

Fail

Not sufficiently different 

  • Incremental improvements; or
  • Technologies that follow a normal course of product development (i.e. the next version or release); or
  • Stated differences are not quantified or are inadequately described.  

Stage 2 – Screening criteria (SC)

SC1: Innovation

The offeror must demonstrate that the proposed innovation aligns with Innovative Solutions Canada (ISC) definition of innovation.
The proposed innovation must meet one or more of the ISC definitions of innovation below:

  • An inventionFootnote 1 , new technology or new process that is not currently available in the marketplace.
  • 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, including government applications.
  • 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.

Pass

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

Fail

  • The proposed innovation does not meet any of the ISC definitions of innovation; or
  • The proposed innovation is an incremental improvement, "good engineering," or a technology that would go aheadin the normal course of product development (e.g., next version or release).

SC2: Operational readiness validation

The offeror must demonstrate that, at the time of offer submission, the proposed innovation is feasibly ready for testing in an operational environment. In other words, the proposed innovation should be at TRL 7 or above according to the ISC TRL scale
Technology Readiness Level Scale (TRL 7 definition: Prototype system ready (form, fit, and function) for testing in an appropriate operational environment).

Pass
  • The offeror has provided evidence demonstrating that, at a minimum, the proposed innovation is a functional prototype (form, fit, and function) as per the ISC Technology Readiness Level scale; and
  • The offeror has provided evidence supporting that an operational test of the proposed innovation is feasible at the time of the offer submission.

Fail

  • The proposed innovation from the offeror has not provided evidence demonstrating that, at a minimum, the proposed innovation is a functional prototype (form, fit and function) as per the ISC Technology Readiness Level  scale; or
  • The offeror has not provided evidence supporting that an operational test of the proposed innovation is feasible at the time of the offer submission.

SC3: Risks considerations

The offeror must demonstrate that they have obtained or possess, at the time of offer submission, the certifications, the licences, and approvals required to safely deploy the proposed innovation, and that it poses no risks to individuals or the potential test partner involved in an operational test.
This is to ensure that the potential test partner is not exposed to safety or privacy risks during the conduct of the operational test.

Pass

At the time of offer submission:

  • The offeror has demonstrated that they have assessed for risks associated with the safe deployment of the proposed innovation in an operational test;
  • If applicable, the offeror has demonstrated that they have obtained or possess the certifications, the licences, and approvals required to safely deploy the proposed innovation in an operational test; and
  • No concerns remain regarding the physical safety and privacy of individuals that could be involved in an operational test; and
  • The proposed innovation does not pose organizational safety or security concerns for the potential test partner when used in an operational setting; and
  • Where applicable, the offeror has mitigated risks during the operational test related to:
    • The potential test partner's assets: strategies to ensure the safety of equipment, data, personnel, and operational integrity;
    • Broader impacts during an operational test: strategies to ensure the protection of the population, infrastructure, and information;
    • Ethical & legal compliance, technical and cybersecurity risks, and civilian and infrastructure protection considerations; and
  • The mitigation strategies to address the identified risks are feasible and well described. However, minimal risks remain to the potential test partner involved in an operational test.

Fail

At the time of offer submission:

  • The offeror has failed to demonstrate that they have assessed for risks associated with the safe deployment of the proposed innovation in an operational test; or
  • If applicable, the offeror has failed to demonstrate that they have obtained or possess the certifications, the licences, and approvals required to safely deploy the proposed innovation in an operational test; or
  • Concerns remain regarding the physical safety or privacy of individuals that could be involved in an operational test; or
  • The proposed innovation may pose organizational safety or security concerns for the potential test partner when used in an operational setting; or
  • Where applicable, the offeror has failed to demonstrate that they have mitigated risks during the operational test related to:
    • The potential test partner's assets: strategies to ensure the safety of equipment, data, personnel, and operational integrity;
    • Broader impacts during an operational test: strategies to ensure the protection of the population, infrastructure, and information;
    • Ethical & legal compliance, technical and cybersecurity risks, and civilian and infrastructure protection considerations; or

The mitigation strategies are inadequate, and significant risks remain to the test partner during the operational test.

SC4: Scope – outcomes

The offeror must demonstrate that the proposed innovation provides a solution to the problem statement and meets one or more of the outcomes selected by the offeror.

Pass

  • The proposed innovation is within the scope of the selected problem statement and clearly addresses one or more of the outcomes selected by the offeror.

Fail

  • The proposed innovation is out-of-scope for the problem statement and the relevant outcome(s) selected by the offeror; or
  • The offer does not clearly demonstrate how the proposed innovation addresses any one of the outcomes selected by the offeror; or
  • The proposed innovation is poorly described and does not permit concrete analysis; or
  • There is little to no scientific and/or technological evidence that the proposed innovation is likely to meet any of the outcomes.

Stage 3 – Point-rated screening criteria (PS)

PS1: Advance on state of the art 

The offeror must demonstrate that the proposed innovation improves upon current approaches and state of the art, or current practices relevant to its purpose or application, in a manner that yields competitive advantages. 

2 points 

  • The proposed innovation 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 not substantiated with specific, measurable evidence. 

12 points 

  • The proposed innovation offers one or two minor improvements, and no significant improvements, to the state of the art that are not likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches; or 
  • The stated advancements are well-described in general, but are not substantiated with specific, measurable evidence. 

24 points minimum 
  • The proposed innovation offers three or more minor improvements to the state of the art, that together are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches; or 
  • The proposed innovation offers one significant improvement to the state of the art, that is likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches. 

40 points 

  • The proposed innovation offers two or more significant improvements to the state of the art, that are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches and could define new market spaces; or 
  • The proposed innovation 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. 

PS2: Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy

The offeror must demonstrate a suitable Intellectual Property (IP) strategy, relevant to protect IP generated by the proposed innovation and to protect the offeror. This criterion also assesses the degree to which the strategy is appropriate to support successful commercialization.

0 points

  • The IP strategy is insufficiently rationalized or substantiated and is poorly suited for background IP or generated IP as they pertain to the proposed innovation.

8 points minimum
 
  • The ongoing activities described and rationalized form a suitable IP strategy in terms of relevant background IP or generated IP and enables the application of suitable protection where and when relevant, as they pertain to the proposed innovation; and
  • The offeror describes an IP strategy factoring current available resources of the company for the effective and competitive leveraging of IP in terms of profitable exploitation and market access.

12 points

  • The activities described are well substantiated and form an IP strategy that addresses all relevant background IP and generated IP as they pertain to the proposed innovation and will ensure the offeror is protected; and
  • The offeror described an IP strategy factoring considerations such as the current available resources of the company and the future state of the company after the operational test of the proposed innovation, for the effective and competitive leveraging of IP in terms of profitable exploitation and market access.

Stage 4 – Point-rated criteria (PR)

PR1: Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Benefits

This criterion is intended to assess the degree to which the offeror has sufficient measures to effectively achieve and maintain diversity, inclusivity and gender equity within; their business, supply chain, or business ecosystem.
Score levels reflect the number of the following elements the offeror addressed in their answer:

  • anti-discrimination policies
  • recruitment strategy and hiring process
  • training available to educate the offeror's workforce on diversity and inclusion
  • how diversity and inclusion are factored into offeror's supplier selection methods
0 points
  • Information regarding diversity, inclusivity and gender equity are not identified, or are insufficient.

4 points

  • Information provided clearly demonstrates that the offeror is currently implementing or will implement two (2) EDI elements to achieve and maintain diversity, inclusivity, and gender equity.

8 points

  • Information provided clearly demonstrates that the offeror is implementing or will implement three (3) EDI elements to achieve and maintain diversity, inclusivity, and gender equity.

12 points

  • Information provided clearly demonstrates that the offeror is implementing or will implement all four (4) EDI elements to achieve and maintain diversity, inclusivity, and gender equity.

PR 2: Commercialization strategy

This criterion is intended for the offeror to demonstrate that they have a credible strategy to commercialize the proposed innovation.

0 points
  • The presented commercialization strategy is inadequate, incomplete or has not been presented.

8 points

  • The presented commercialization strategy could support limited target market entry; or
  • Shortcomings in the expertise, human resources, partners/sales channels or physical assets to successfully commercialize the proposed innovation.

24 points

  • The presented commercialization strategy, is clear and well-developed and, given full implementation, should support entry into the target market; or
  • A majority of the expertise, human resources, partners/sales channels and physical assets are present, to successfully commercialize the proposed innovation.

32 points

  • The presented commercialization strategy, is complete, strong, and is highly likely to support long-term and sustained entry into the target markets; or
  • The offeror has the expertise, human resources, partners/sales channels and physical assets required to move forward with successful commercialization of the proposed innovation.

In order to conditionally-qualify an offer must score a minimum of 60 points out of 96 points as a sum of all points from Stage 3 and Stage 4 criteria.

Pathway to commercialization (PTC)

Enabling the Government of Canada to buy what it tries – a Pathway to Commercialization (PTC) for eligible Canadian small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)

Our new pilot project gives SMEs the opportunity to sell your innovation directly to the Government of Canada.
Through the PTC under ISC's Testing Stream, eligible SMEs can receive commercial contracts based on the successful testing and market-readiness of your pre-commercial prototype. It is important to note that this pathway will only be available to eligible Canadian SMEs, which represent over 97% of all businesses in Canada, a percentage that mirrors past participation in the program.

How will it work?

Once your initial ISC testing contract is completed, you may be eligible for PTC if your innovation is market-ready above technology readiness level (TRL 9).
You will have up to 12 months following the end of your initial ISC Testing Stream contract to apply to the PTC, at which time you will be assessed against the PTC entry criteria to determine if your innovation will be placed on a PTC source list where government departments can browse and purchase your successfully-tested innovations for up to three years

Important considerations

You must be selling the same innovation from your initial Testing Stream contract
If you participate in the PTC, you will no longer be eligible for additional testing through the Testing Stream. Unlike PTC contracts, additional testing contracts are still considered R&D contracts, similar to the initial Testing Stream contract. Additional testing opportunities are open to all program participants, SMEs and non-SMEs.
The requirements for commercial contracts will reflect the operational needs of client departments, the nature of the innovation, as well as input from Public Services and Procurement Canada, the program's Contracting Authority.

How will SMEs be assessed?

A number of criteria will be used as part of the assessment process, including:

  • Financial capacity
  • Technology readiness
  • Certifications
  • IP strategy
  • Company size
  • Scalability
  • Innovation test performance

Please read the call for proposals (CFP) for more information on the Pathway to Commercialization (PTC).

Questions

All incoming questions regarding this specific call for proposals should be addressed to TPSGC.PASICVoletessai-APISCTestingStream.PWGSC@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca.

A glossary is also available.

 Report a problem
Date modified: