Innovation Fund (IF)

Overview

All potential IF 2025 applicants must submit an RTA. The online RTA form collects the following information:

• Faculty letter of support
• Project details
• Lead Institution
• Collaborating or Leading Institution details (for UoA lead or non-UoA led projects, respectively)
• Research or technology development summary
• Relation to and alignment with existing research and infrastructure
• Budget and quotes
• Budget justification
• Personnel requirements
• Information about:
  • The research space and technical requirements of the requested infrastructure.
  • Advanced research computing needs
  • Project data management needs
  • Animal use needs
  • Technology transfer needs
  • EHS needs

RTA applicants are encouraged to complete as much of the RTA form as possible and to ensure that the research project is innovative and feasible and that the infrastructure is well-justified.

The RTA will be reviewed for feasibility by VPRI, Faculties, RAS, UofA Facilities and Operations (F&O), EHS (Environment Health and Safety), RMS (Risk Management Services), CAR (Committee on Animal Resources), TTS (Technology Transfer Services), IST (Information Systems and Technology), Library (Data Management), SMS (Supply Management Services).

If approved, the applicant will be recommended to develop and submit a full IF 2025 proposal.

RTAs will be reviewed by RAS, Central Academic Units, Faculties, Colleges and the Office of the VPRI. Based on the quality of the RTA, potential applicants are either approved or not approved to move forward with a full IF 2025 proposal.

The CFI will use the NOI to: 

• Identify what expertise is needed to assess each proposal
• Recruit committee members
• Ensure that the requested infrastructure is eligible. 

Notices of intent are not assessed as part of the merit review process. 

The NOI will be completed by the Project Leader in the CFI Awards Management System (CAMS). RAS will submit the NOI to the CFI.

The NOI contains six sections: 

1. Project information: Captures basic information about the project such as the title, applicant institution and keywords. 
2. Project summary: A brief summary (max. 1,500 characters, including spaces) of the project and research. Summaries will be posted on the CFI website so that potential collaborators can identify possibilities for collaboration or multi-institutional initiatives. 
3. Team: List up to 10 team members, including the team leader. Up to two (2) team leaders can be selected. Team members’ CVs will be appended to the full application. The team can be comprised of researchers from different institutions, sectors, and countries.
   • For Stream 3 applications, include scientific and technical personnel who are key to the operation and management of the facility.
4. Project description: The project description (max. 3 pages) should reflect the full scope of the planned activities and includes:
   • High-level overview of the research or technology development program(s) that will be enabled by the infrastructure and the anticipated outcomes of these activities, including expected application(s).
   • Table of the requested infrastructure including a brief description and approximate cost of the major pieces.
   • Table of current and planned partners and other potential conflicts of interest. The table should include the name of the partner organization(s) and the name of individuals involved in the research.
5. Collaborating institutions: Collaborating institutions must use CAMS to confirm participation in the project and to confirm their contribution, if any, from their institutional envelope.
6. Suggested reviewers: List up to six (6) potential reviewers who are qualified to provide an informed and impartial review of the proposal. Project teams are encouraged to suggest reviewers who are at different stages of their career, with diverse backgrounds and from underrepresented groups (including those who may face systemic barriers).

An Expert Committee will review the proposal to assess its strengths and weaknesses in relation to the assessment criteria. Each application will be assessed based on the stream specific sub-criterion. Only proposals that meet a minimum threshold for all 5 assessment criteria will move to the next stage. Proposals meet the minimum threshold unless they receive three or more ratings of 3 (Satisfies the criterion with minor weaknesses), or one of either 2 (Partially satisfies the criterion) or 1 (Does not satisfy the criterion standard).

Proposals that meet the competition’s threshold of excellence are then reviewed by a Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee (MAC). The MAC reviews groups of proposals of similar size and/or complexity and assesses them against the three competition objectives. The MAC has two responsibilities:

• Identifying proposals that demonstrate excellence and best meet the three competition objectives relative to other competing requests
• Providing a funding recommendation and funding amount for each proposal for the next stage of review.

In the third and final stage of review, a Special Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee (S-MAC) reviews reports from the MAC meetings for the proposals recommended for funding. 

Like the NOI, the full proposal will be completed in the CFI Awards Management System (CAMS) and submitted by RAS by the deadline.

Information on CAMS from the NOI submission, including Project information, Team, Collaborating Institutions, and Suggested Reviewers, will be populated automatically for the proposal.

Three CAMS modules will be completed for the proposal:

1. Project Module

The Project Module must include:

• Plain language summary: A short summary in plain language of the proposed project.
• Project summary: Up to 3-page general description of the research or technology development activities to be conducted and an overview of the requested infrastructure. The summary must address the extent to which the proposal meets the competition objectives. (Note: The Project Summary is the only section of the proposal that will be shared with the S-MAC to help with its deliberations.)
• Team: Populated automatically from the NOI.
• Assessment criteria: A PDF upload that addresses the following criteria:
  • Research or Technology Development
  • Team
  • Infrastructure
  • Sustainability
  • Benefits
• Note: Each stream has specific sub-criterion that are tailored for each stream and must be addressed.
• The length of the assessment criteria, including tables and figures, will be determined by the total amount of funding requested from the CFI (page limits for proposals written in English):
  • ≤ $10 million: 25 pages (max.)
  • ≥ $10 million: 30 pages (max.)
• Financial resources for operation and maintenance: This section captures the annual costs and funding sources needed to ensure the effective operation and maintenance of the research infrastructre for the first 5 years after it is implemented. Please refer to this section when addressing the Sustainability criterion.

2. Finance Module

• Cost of individual items
• Construction or renovation floor plans (if applicable)
• Contributions from eligible partners
• Infrastructure utilization
• Overview of infrastructure project funding (generated automatically)

Please refer to this section when addressing the Infrastructure criterion.

3. Suggested Reviewers Module

The Suggested Reviewers Module is populated automatically from the NOI.

CAMS will append the CV of each team member to the proposal when it is submitted. Make sure all CVs are up to date before you submit your proposal.