Merit Review Evaluation Grid for the Full Application

Principle / Rating Element High
5
High-Medium
4
Medium
3
Medium-Low
2
Low
1
Strategic value aligned with core federal responsibilities and priorities Successful execution of the proposed strategic plan would significantly advance federal responsibilities and/or priorities Successful execution of this proposal would significantly advance federal responsibilities and / or priorities Between High and Medium Successful execution of this proposal would make a measurable contribution to advancing federal priorities and / or priorities Between Medium and Low Successful execution of this proposal would not advance federal priorities or responsibilities
The proposed objectives are effectively linked to federal priorities and responsibilities All proposed objectives are effectively linked to federal priorities and responsibilities Between High and Medium Objectives are somewhat linked to federal priorities and responsibilities Between Medium and Low Proposed objectives are not linked to federal priorities and responsibilities
Added value to federal science, technology and innovation (ST&I) investment There is a strong value proposition The application clearly outlines a strong and unique value proposition to the ST&I ecosystem (e.g., identifying specific benefits to Canada that would not otherwise occur) Between High and Medium The application outlines a value proposition which adds some value to the ST&I ecosystem. Between Medium and Low There is no compelling value proposition to the application
Other federally-supported organizations and programs in the ecosystem are effectively leveraged The proposal effectively leverages other federally-supported organizations and programs in the ecosystem (e.g., with details on how existing investments are systematically considered) Between High and Medium The proposal leverages some of the federally-supported organizations and programs in the ecosystem. Between Medium and Low The proposal does not effectively leverage other federally-supported organizations and programs in the ecosystem.
Presence at the national level The organization will have reach across the country (including in both official languages) and will incorporate viewpoints from across Canada into its operations.

The proposed activities will be accessible to all relevant populations across Canada and the organization will incorporate viewpoints from across Canada into its operations (e.g. with regionally diverse staff or other means).

If not already established nationally: there is strong evidence of support to expand nationally (e.g., concrete national commitments in Letters of Support)

Between High and Medium

The proposed activities will be accessible to many relevant populations across Canada and will somewhat incorporate viewpoints from across Canada into its operations.

If not already established nationally: there is some evidence of support to expand nationally (e.g. some commitments in Letters of Support)

Between Medium and Low

The proposed activities will only be accessible to a limited segment of relevant populations across Canada.

If not already established nationally: there is no clear evidence of support to expand nationally (e.g. only regional support within Letters of Support)

The organization has engaged key stakeholders in the setting of objectives and delivery of activities. It is clearly outlined how key stakeholders (including clients/end-users, for example Indigenous communities) have been meaningfully engaged in setting objectives and clear how they will be meaningfully engaged in the delivery of activities (e.g., as evidenced within Letters of Support) Between High and Medium It is stated in general terms that stakeholders have been engaged in setting objectives and that they will be engaged in the delivery of activities Between Medium and Low It is unclear that stakeholders have been engaged in setting objectives, and whether there are plans to engage them in the delivery of activities
The organization has established key national partnerships (e.g. co-funders), including demonstrated engagement with relevant provinces and territories. There is strong evidence (e.g., within letters of support) that key partnerships necessary to deliver at a national level have been established, including strong engagement with relevant provinces and territories. Between High and Medium There is some evidence that key partnerships necessary to deliver at a national level have been established Between Medium and Low There is no clear evidence that key national partnerships have been established.
Regional diversity in the governance and advisory structures of the organization has been appropriately considered. The Board of Directors has significant and appropriate regional diversity, or clear plans to reach significant and appropriate regional diversity within a reasonable time frame Between High and Medium The Board of Directors has some regional diversity, or plans to become somewhat regionally diverse within a reasonable time frame Between Medium and Low The Board of Directors is centred around one region, with no clear plans to increase regional diversity
ST&I capacity, sound governance, operational efficiency The proposed activities are likely to achieve the expected outcomes There is a robust link between all proposed activities and the expected outcomes (e.g. as demonstrated through the logic model) Between High and Medium There is a coherent link between some of the proposed activities and the expected outcomes Between Medium and Low The proposed activities are unlikely to achieve the expected outcomes.
The organizations will have the right mix of specialized mechanisms and expertise (e.g. scientific, financial, IP, diversity, interdisciplinarity) to deliver on the proposed activities. The expertise necessary to deliver on the proposed objectives is clearly outlined, as is the extent to which it is already present (or the extent to which there is a clear plan to secure this expertise if not already present) Between High and Medium The type of expertise necessary to deliver on the proposed objectives is outlined, and there is some mention of the extent to which it is already present (or some mention of a plan to secure the expertise if not already present) Between Medium and Low The type of expertise necessary to deliver on the proposed objectives is not mentioned.
Effective governance is in place (or planned), including the breadth of expertise necessary to effectively oversee the proposed functions.

The Board of Directors has or plans to have the breadth of expertise necessary to oversee the proposed functions. There is strong evidence of effective governance (e.g. demonstrated in the Board minutes, audits and evaluations), showing appropriate input in strategy development, monitoring progress, and ensuring the right advisory structures are in place.

If the organization is newly established, there is a strong plan in place for effective governance, including a plan to recruit the breadth of expertise necessary to oversee the proposed functions.

Between High and Medium

The Board of Directors has or plans to have some of the breadth of expertise necessary to oversee the proposed functions. There is some limited evidence of effective governance.

If the organization is newly established, there is a high-level plan in place for effective governance.

Between Medium and Low There is no clear evidence that effective governance is or will be in place.
The right policies, recourse mechanisms, guidelines and training have been identified to ensure the organization meets the highest standards of governance and operations in all areas of activities The organization has put in place or planned with a specific timeline (e.g. by July xx, 20xx) the necessary organizational policies, recourse mechanisms, guidelines and training for the proposed activities. There is strong evidence that they align with best practices in all proposed areas of activities. Between High and Medium The organization has identified and planned some of the necessary organizational policies, recourse mechanisms, guidelines and training for the proposed activities. There is some evidence that they align with best practices in proposed areas of activities. Between Medium and Low The organization has not identified or planned the necessary organizational policies, recourse mechanisms, guidelines and training for the proposed activities.
Research security and integrity, cybersecurity and physical security have been adequately considered and addressed, including within the selection of proposed partners The organization has put in place or planned with a specific timeline (e.g. by July xx, 20xx) the appropriate processes to identify and mitigate risks related to any applicable areas of research security and integrity, cybersecurity and physical security. Between High and Medium The organization has identified and planned some of the appropriate processes to identify and mitigate risks related to any applicable areas of research security and integrity, cybersecurity and physical security. Between Medium and Low The organization has not identified or planned the appropriate processes to identify and mitigate risks related to any applicable areas of research security and integrity, cybersecurity and physical security.
The plan to protect and manage intellectual property to the greatest benefit to Canada is appropriate

There is a strong plan which considers the process for disclosure of new IP, the ability to share IP for research and educational purposes, and that maximizes potential benefits to Canada.

In cases where no IP is expected to be generated: There is an adequate justification for why no IP is expected.

Between High and Medium There is a high-level plan for IP management with some details on how benefits to Canada will be maximized. Between Medium and Low There is no plan to protect and manage IP and no justification as to why no IP is expected to be generated.
The operational plan has appropriately integrated Equity, Diversity and Inclusion considerations The operational plan has appropriately  considered EDI in all areas of activities. The organization has secured or has strong plans to secure the necessary EDI expertise (e.g. individuals with the skill-sets to reach target populations in a culturally appropriate way). Between High and Medium The organization has considered EDI in some areas of activities. There are general statements about securing EDI expertise in the future. Between Medium and Low The organization has not appropriately integrated EDI considerations.
A credible plan is in place for the organizational make-up to reflect Equity, Diversity and Inclusion goals, including gender parity (50% women) and significant representation of other under-represented groups (30%) within the Board and Senior Management

The organization has established a strong plan (e.g. as evidenced within hiring policies, succession plans for senior management, recruitment plans) with a specific timeline which:

  • Achieves 50% women and 30% significant representation of other under-represented groups within its Senior Management and Board of Directors (including from under-represented groups specifically intended to benefit from the proposed activities), and discusses how it will build from this plan to set more ambitious goals.
  • Ensures that the overall organizational make-up reflects Equity, Diversity and Inclusion goals.
Between High and Medium The organization has established a reasonable plan to reach 50% women and 30% significant representation of other under-represented groups within its Senior Management and Board of Directors, and for the overall organizational make-up Between Medium and Low The organization has not planned any actions to reach representation goals within a reasonable time frame.
Critical role of federal funding The application fully justifies the requested level of funds The necessary level of funds are fully justified to realize the proposed activities and could not reasonably be scaled down Between High and Medium The applications gives some reasonable justification for the size of the funding request. Between Medium and Low The application does not adequately justify the size of the funding request.
The financial plan is viable, with assumptions and risks adequately explained

The financial plan appears viable, with assumptions and risks that are clearly explained and appear reasonable.

Between High and Medium Assumptions are explained and appear generally reasonable. Between Medium and Low High-level assumptions for the budget are not explained.
The role and importance of federal funding has been effectively explained There is a clearly articulated role and importance (e.g. anchor function) for federal funding of the proposed activities; partner funding alone would not be able to sustain proposed activities (e.g. due to scale or jurisdiction) Between High and Medium There is an articulated need (e.g. anchor function) for federal funding of the proposed activities; partner funding would not likely be able to sustain proposed activities Between Medium and Low The application does not outline a clear need for federal funding in relation to other commitments from partners.
The role of non-federal funding has been effectively explained and the expected matched funding ratio is appropriate

The expected level of matched funding meets or exceeds ratios in the context of previous federal funding (and/or is appropriate relative to the activities proposed)

If fundraising is a material part of expected matched funds, there is a robust fundraising strategy in place.

Between High and Medium The level of matched funding is somewhat below ratios in the context of previous federal funding for similar activities (and/or is somewhat below what is appropriate relative to the activities proposed) Between Medium and Low The level of matched funding is at an unacceptable level for the activities proposed.
There is a reasonably decreased reliance on federal funds over time (where appropriate)

There is a strong plan for decreased reliance on federal funds over time and an appropriate diversification of funding sources.

Or

There is a clear and compelling justification for not planning a decreased reliance on federal funds over time.

Between High and Medium There is a plan for some decreased reliance on federal funds over time.
Or
There is generally reasonable justification for not planning a decreased reliance on federal funds over time.
Between Medium and Low There is no clear plan for decreased reliance on federal funds over time.
Or
There is no clear justification for not planning a decreased reliance on federal funds over time.
Demonstrable impact The selected objectives and linked performance indicators are realistic and achievable within the timeframe. Indicators and targets are convincingly linked to the proposed objectives, are appropriate to measure the overall success, and are realistic and achievable. Between High and Medium Indicators and targets are somewhat linked to the proposed objectives and will give some measure of the overall success. Between Medium and Low No convincing rationale was given for selecting the Key Performance Indicators and related targets.
The plan for ongoing risk and performance monitoring is appropriate, including specific mechanisms to terminate and re-allocate funding (where appropriate) There is a robust plan for monitoring performance and risks, including specific mechanisms to terminate and re-allocate funding (where appropriate) Between High and Medium There is a general plan for monitoring performance and risks, including the general intent to have the ability to terminate and re-allocate funding (where appropriate) Between Medium and Low There is no appropriate plan for ongoing risk and performance monitoring.
For organizations with a track record of federal funding: The organization has established a track record of significant achievement There is strong evidence that the organization has a track record of significant achievement with past federal funding. Between High and Medium There is evidence that the organization has had some success in reaching its past objectives with federal funding. Between Medium and Low There is no indication of success at reaching past objectives with federal funding.