AgriScience Program – Projects: 3. Before you apply

3. Before you apply

Intake period: Open

Apply now. Applications will be accepted until funding has been fully committed or until otherwise announced here.

The program ends March 31, 2028. Projects must be completed by this date.

Review and consider the following information before you apply.

Sources of funding

In your application, you must provide letters of financial support from all financial contributors (confirmed or conditional) including:

other federal government departments
provincial/territorial governments
municipal governments
industry and/or partners such as:
- industry associations and networks
- businesses
- academia

How we assess your application

The program is highly competitive. As such, priority for funding and support is directed toward proposals that meet or exceed the expectations and assessment criteria outlined below. AAFC prioritizes projects that closely align with program objectives and which demonstrate broad and clear benefits to the sector.

Assessment criteria tables

The following three assessment criteria tables will help you prepare your application and include the main criteria used by technical reviewers to assess project proposals. Each proposal is evaluated independently and solely based on the information provided within the application package and undergoes a comprehensive multi-disciplinary review from a sector, program, scientific, policy, and performance perspective.

Science methodology, work plan and organizational capacity

Assessment criteria	High	Medium	Low	Not met
Science methodology	Methodology is rigorous and fully aligned with best practices and emerging advances in the field Objectives are exceptionally clear, well-justified, and strategically designed to maximize impact	Methodology is sound and consistent with current state of the science Objectives are clear and reasonable	Methodology is sometimes not sound or consistent with current state of the science Objectives are not completely clear or reasonable	Methodology is not sound or is not consistent with current state of the science Objectives are not clear or reasonable
Timelines and milestones	Objectives and milestones are clearly attainable and supported by a strong work plan All major risks are anticipated, clearly articulated, and addressed with highly effective mitigation strategies	Good probability of objectives and milestones being achieved Most risks identified with appropriate mitigation strategies	Some objectives and milestones are achievable Some risks and mitigation strategies identified	Most objectives and milestones cannot be achieved Risk identification and mitigation strategies are lacking or inappropriate
Budget	All cost items are carefully considered, clearly aligned with objectives, and essential to successful completion of the project	All cost items are reasonable and necessary to complete the work	Some cost items are unreasonable and/or not necessary to complete the work	Most cost items are unreasonable and/or not necessary to complete the work
Expertise and capacity	Research team and partners possess all necessary expertise to fully support the project as well as relevant complimentary knowledge and experience Strong demonstrated science and project management capacity through previous successful projects	No gaps in knowledge or expertise gaps on the research team or through contracted partners Some demonstrated science and project management capacity through previous successful projects	Some gaps in knowledge or expertise on the research team and/or through contracted partners that may impact the project Limited demonstrated science and project management capacity or previous projects	Gaps in knowledge or expertise on the research team and/or through contracted partners that will impact the project No demonstrated science and project management capacity or previous projects
Financial capacity	Demonstrated financial resources to cover project costs with additional flexibility	Demonstrated financial resources to cover cost-shared portion of project costs	Limited demonstrated financial resources that cover only a portion of the project costs	No or very limited demonstrated financial resources to cover the project costs

Innovation

Assessment criteria	High	Medium	Low	Not met
Novelty	Proposal demonstrates clear and significant novelty with clear differentiation from other relevant work Project would generate new knowledge or technology not currently available in the sector that fills or works toward filling a need/gap	Proposal demonstrates moderate or incremental novelty with only minor potential overlap with other relevant work Project would adapt or improve existing technology in a meaningful way and with clear added value	Proposal demonstrates limited novelty with unclear or marginal differentiation from other relevant work Project would largely replicate existing research or technology with minimal advancement	Proposal does not demonstrate novelty or fails to identify or differentiate from other relevant work Project would duplicate existing research without meaningful adaptation or would not generate new knowledge or technology
Sector impact	Substantial and clearly articulated sector-wide benefits with demonstration that successful execution would deliver major economic, resilience, or sustainability gains Benefits extend to national or multi-provincial levels, with large numbers of industry stakeholders positioned to benefit directly	Moderate and well-defined benefits that would improve outcomes for intended beneficiaries Benefits may be regional or multi-regional, with a narrower group of beneficiaries	Limited or localized benefits, with impacts that are small in scale, apply to a niche group of beneficiaries, or are uncertain in magnitude Benefits are primarily regional, with minimal broader sectoral influence	Does not demonstrate a credible or meaningful benefit to the Canadian agricultural sector The intended beneficiaries are unclear, unsupported, and the geographical scope of benefits is not defined

Program funding principles

Assessment criteria	High	Medium	Low	Not met
Alignment with industry/sector need and program priorities	Responds to a significant and urgent industry/sector need, gap, emerging issue or opportunity related to at least one of the program priorities	Responds to an important industry/sector need, gap, emerging issue or opportunity related to at least one of the program priorities	Responds to a minor industry/sector need, gap, emerging issue or opportunity related to at least one of the program priorities	Does not adequately respond to a relevant industry/sector need, gap, emerging issue or opportunity related to at least one of the program priorities
Performance measures	Comprehensive, well-justified, and clearly aligned with project objectives Measurement strategies are robust, feasible, and appropriate	Generally appropriate performance measures, though some indicators may be broad, partially defined, or less directly linked to outcomes	Limited or weak performance measures, with indicators that are vague, poorly aligned, or insufficient to meaningfully assess progress or impact	Does not include appropriate performance measures or fails to provide meaningful indicators Most proposed measurement strategies are not feasible or are inappropriate
Knowledge and technology transfer	Will reach all relevant stakeholders Plan is robust and thoughtfully designed using a diverse variety of appropriate methods with a high potential for stakeholder engagement	Will reach a large stakeholder audience Diverse variety of appropriate methods	Will reach a small stakeholder audience Methods are mostly appropriate but limited in variety	Plan is insufficient or will only reach a very small stakeholder audience Methods are inappropriate or limited in variety
Collaboration and partnerships across the value chain	Partners bring complementary expertise and have demonstrated a high level of commitment that significantly strengthens the project	Appropriate partners have committed adequate support or involvement in the project	Some committed support or involvement from partners, but important stakeholders may be missing	Insufficient level of committed support or involvement from partners or there are critical partners missing *Not applicable: Applicant is a for-profit company developing proprietary R&D
Diversity, equity and inclusion	Efforts are made to promote greater inclusion and increase the diversity of participants and beneficiaries of the proposed research		No efforts are made to promote greater inclusion and increase the diversity of participants and beneficiaries of the proposed research

Considerations

M-30 Act (Quebec organizations only)

The Province of Quebec's M-30 legislation may apply to Quebec-based applicants only. It is the Act Respecting the Ministère du Conseil exécutif (R.S.Q., c. M-30).

More information on the act is available online or by contacting the Ministère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation at dpci@mapaq.gouv.qc.ca.

All Quebec-based organizations will have to address this matter and demonstrate their compliance with the act during the application assessment process, and prior to entering into a contribution agreement.

Intellectual property

Should your funding proposal be approved, specific IP requirements relevant to the project will be included in the contribution agreement and/or Collaborative Research and Development Agreement.

Intellectual property means all patents, trademarks, industrial designs, trade-names, copyright, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights, whether registered or not, and all confidential information and technical information, including know-how, show-how, inventions, processes, products, formulas, designs, records, and all bacterial, viral, plant, human or animal material that has new genetic or other characteristics.