Competition year :
2024-2025
Deadline (application) :
October 12th, 2023 at 16:00 (EST)
Announcement of results :
End of April 2024
Amount :
$60,000 to $95,000 / Optional funding and supplements: see Sections 6.1.2 and 6.1.3
Duration :
4 years
The link to the FRQnet E-portfolio and the forms associated with this competition are available under “Portals access” on the website. Further details are available in the “Documents” menu of the FRQnet E-portfolio.
This program refers to the Common General Rules (CGR), which apply to all FRQ programs. It is the responsibility of applicants and/or funding holders to read the CGR, which set out all rules governing competitions and managing awards. Only the special conditions applicable to the FRQSC Research Team Support Program are indicated in this document, and these prevail over the CGR. Personal contact information can be updated in the FRQnet E-portfolio.
AT THE COMPETITION DEADLINE OF 4 P.M. ON OCTOBER 12, 2023, THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION IN THE FRQnet SYSTEM MUST BE “SUBMITTED TO INSTITUTION” OR “SUBMITTED TO THE FONDS”. AN APPLICATION WITH ANY OTHER STATUS WILL BE CONSIDERED INADMISSIBLE. TO BE CONSIDERED ADMISSIBLE, AN APPLICATION WITH THE STATUS OF “SUBMITTED TO INSTITUTION” MUST NONETHELESS HAVE THE STATUS “SUBMITTED TO THE FONDS” WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT SET OUT IN THE CGR (SECTION 3.2).
This version was updated on July 6, 2023, subject to the approval of the Ministre de l’Économie, de l’Innovation et de l’Énergie.
1. OBJECTIVES
This program aims to foster the emergence of new research themes, approaches and topics and consolidate existing research infrastructures by enabling the deployment of scientific programs related to the various fields covered by the Fonds – Société et culture.
SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM:
A scientific program is different from a research project and must be based on a research theme developed through specific thrusts driven by research projects that are funded or will be funded through other sources. The scientific program must be designed to evolve over time and foster the significant and collective contribution of its co-investigators to the team’s work and activities.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Teams that present a research project rather than a scientific program will be deemed ineligible.
2. STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT and CONFIGURATION
Teams applying to the competition must choose one of the combinations offered by the program based on the nature of their research activities and their collaborations:
- New team – University
- New team – Partnership
- Renewal team – University
- Renewal team – Partnership
The choice of stage of development depends on previous funding under this program, if any:
*Teams that have never been funded or received their last instalment in March 2021 or earlier must apply as a “New team”.
*Teams that received their last instalment in March 2022 or March 2023 must apply as a “Renewal team”.
*Teams that are currently funded and whose funding ends in March 2024 must apply as a “Renewal team”.
IMPORTANT NOTE: In the case of a New team derived in part from a team that received funding under this program after April 1, 2022, at least 50% of its co-investigators must be new to the team.
2.2 Configurations
Choosing Partnership configuration allows members of the university and college community to integrate practice settings into their scientific program if they wish. The program must then be designed based on partners’ needs and implement an activity plan to meet those needs. This collaboration must be put in place from the conception of the scientific program and be maintained at all phases, both administrative and scientific, of its deployment.
This configuration involves an additional eliminatory evaluation criterion (see Section 5 – Evaluation), provides access to additional funding, but does not necessarily require a financial commitment from the identified partner(s).
*A team opting for “Partnership” configuration is required to include at least one co-investigator from the partner setting(s), in addition to the minimum 4 co-investigators (see Section 3 – Composition).
Note that organizations dedicated exclusively to scientific research do not constitute eligible practice settings. However, when partners whose work includes research (such as affiliated university centres and institutes) are chosen as practice settings, the Partnership team’s program, as presented in the application, must clearly describe the partner’s specific contribution as a research partner and practice setting.
3. COMPOSITION
3.1 Team composition: eligible roles and statuses
Researcher statuses and roles are presented in the CGR on pages 5 and following.
The principal investigator and all co-investigators must meet the general eligibility requirements set out in Section 2 of the CGR, as well as any other requirements described in this program, both at the time of application and for the entire duration of the grant, if it is awarded.
Retired researchers are not eligible for the role of principal investigator of a team (see CGR, Section “Roles in the application”). However, should the principal investigator retire during the course of the grant, a transition period may be arranged in consultation with the Fonds, which must be kept informed of the situation.
*Notwithstanding the definition of college researcher in the CGR, a doctoral degree is required to qualify for the role of co-investigator under this program. College researchers may be employed on a part-time basis at the time of application to this competition, with the understanding that full-time employment status is required to receive the Support for College Researchers grant and to manage a portion of the Research Team Support grant as a co-investigator.
In addition to these co-investigators, a team may include collaborators with any of the statuses applicable to grants as defined in the CGR. Researchers outside Québec may not take on any role in the team other than that of collaborator. Individuals with the training statuses defined in the CGR are not eligible for the role of collaborator.
3.2 Team composition: Membership in two teams funded by the FRQSC
A researcher may not be principal investigator of more than one applicant or funded team under the FRQSC Research Team Support Program. However, a principal investigator may be a co-investigator in another applicant or funded team under the program.
Co-investigators may belong to up to two applicant or funded teams under this program.
Any additional participation in a team beyond those authorized above must be in the role of collaborator.
4. APPLICATION
Before completing the Grant application form, the principal investigator must create a user account on the Fonds website (see informational video) if they have not already done so.
The forms are available in FRQnet no later than one month before the competition deadline.
4.1. Presentation standards
Please see Section 3.6 of the Common General Rules for information regarding the language of submitted forms and documents.
Refer to the “Presentation standards for PDF attachments to FRQnet forms” to properly format any documents to be attached to the application. For further details on completing and submitting applications, please refer to Section 3.2 of the CGR.
4.2 Grant application
4.2.1 The application form and its attachments
The application form, available in FRQnet, must be completed and submitted via the principal investigator’s E-portfolio. The following documents must be attached in the appropriate sections of this form:
A. SATISFACTION OF EVALUATION CRITERIA FILE
In the “Program description” section, the team must attach a file in which it explicitly addresses, in order, all the evaluation criteria (see IMPORTANT NOTE) that apply to its stage of development and configuration. To facilitate the work of the committee members, the information must be presented in separate sections, using the titles of the evaluation criteria. Any other procedure could affect the quality of the application evaluation.
The number of pages allowed in the Satisfaction of Evaluation Criteria file varies between 10 and 14, depending on the team’s stage and configuration. See the table Program Rules & Requirements – SE in Section 2.2.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Only the Quality of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) and appropriateness to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities sub-criterion does not have to be addressed in the file attached in the Program description section. Instead, this sub-criterion should be addressed in the Budget justifications file to be attached in the Budget section of the form.
B. BIBLIOGRAPHY FILE (max. 10 pages)
In the Bibliography section, the team must include a bibliography listing the texts cited as references in its program description, including those pertaining to the state of knowledge in the field.
4.2.2 Additional documents in the Other documents section
Additional documents are required for Partnership teams and teams that include retired researchers or contracted researchers. These documents should be sent to the principal investigator who will attach them in the Other documents section of the application form according to the instructions on the form.
A. PROOF(S) OF PARTNERSHIP (for Partnership teams)
Proofs of partnership are used in the evaluation of the Partnership component of the application. They may take different forms, from a letter of support from a partner to a formal partnership agreement between the team and its partners, but must explicitly detail the nature of the partnership and the role each party will play if the grant is awarded.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Partnership teams must submit at least one proof of partnership document. Partnership team applications with no proofs of partnership will be deemed ineligible.
B. LETTER FOR RETIRED UNIVERSITY RESEARCHER
Retired university co-investigators must provide a letter from their university stating that, prior to retirement, they held a regular faculty position, that they will have access to the facilities and logistical support required to carry out their research activities for the duration of the grant, and that they will continue to train/supervise students, where applicable.
C. LETTER FOR CONTRACTED RESEARCHER
Co-investigators with statuses 1 and 2 of the CGR who hold a non-tenure track university position must provide a letter from the university indicating that they will maintain this status throughout the duration of the grant.
4.2.3 Document to be attached in the Budget section (max. 3 to 6 pages depending on the amounts requested)
In addition to a costed budget, the Budget section of the application form requires the submission of a document addressing the Quality of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) and appropriateness to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities evaluation sub-criterion.
This document (max. 3 pages) must show that each expense allocated to the team’s base budget (as per its stage of development) is consistent with the planned scientific program.
This document must also include one page justifying expenses related to partnership funding, where applicable (see Section 6.1.2 A) and one page explicitly detailing how the interregional supplement, if requested, ensures the full participation of all co-investigators, whatever their geographic distance from the managing institution linked to the application (see Section 6.1.2 B). Applications with 12 members or more must also provide a one-page justification if they are requesting the $10,000 supplement for large teams (see Section 6.1.3 B).
4.2.4 Document to be attached in the Teaching release – College section (1 page per member of the team with Status 3)
College researchers who are identified as co-investigators do not need to complete an individual form at the full application stage. If the application is successful, and following the acceptance of funding by the principal investigator, a form to be completed by each college researcher will be deposited in their FRQnet E-portfolio.
The application must include a document with one page for each member with Status 3, identifying:
- The name of the recipient of the teaching release and/or statutory supplement and the college to which they belong;
- An estimate of the amount claimed for the teaching release, where applicable. This amount may not exceed 50% of the recipient’s gross annual salary, nor exceed $40,000.
- The role played by the recipient in the consolidation or deployment of the team’s scientific program,
- The request for the $7,000 statutory supplement, where applicable,
- Justification for the use of the supplement and teaching release funding allocated specifically for the recipient’s involvement.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The request for salary support for researchers from college centres for technology transfer (CCTT) must be included in the Budget section of the form, where applicable.
For further details, please refer to the Support for College Researchers program rules.
4.2.5 Canadian Common CV (CCV) and Detailed Contributions attachment of the principal investigator and co-investigators
The Fonds requires the Canadian Common CV and the PDF Detailed Contributions attachment of each co-investigator to be included in the appropriate section of the FRQnet E-portfolio.
Co-investigators must complete the FRQSC version of the Common Canadian CV, update this document within 12 months prior to the competition deadline, and complete the Detailed Contributions file in due form. The documents Preparing a CV for the Fonds and the Detailed Contributions attachment, available in the program Toolbox, can be consulted as needed.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Co-investigators with Status 4 of the CGR do not need to submit a CCV. However, they must provide an abridged CV (maximum 2 pages), prepared according to the standards set out in the FRQ Abridged CV – Presentation Rules document available in the program Toolbox.
4.3 Submitting the application
THE PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR MUST NOT FORGET TO SUBMIT THE APPLICATION AFTER COMPLETING AND VALIDATING IT.
ATTENTION: At this stage of the application process, the Fonds requires the approval of the managing institution. It is the applicant’s responsibility to submit the application to the institution before the competition deadline and to ensure that the application is forwarded to the Fonds within the time prescribed in the CGR (Section 3.2). At any time, applicants may verify the transmission status of their application in the “My forms” section of their FRQnet E-portfolio:
- The form will be flagged “Submitted to institution” once the applicant has transmitted the application to the managing institution;
- The form will be flagged “Submitted to the Fonds” once the managing institution has transmitted the application to the Fonds.
Applications received by the Fonds are assessed for eligibility. A notice will be sent via email no later than December following the competition deadline, informing the applicant of the status of their application and, where applicable, its transmission to the evaluation committee. Applicants whose application is not forwarded to the evaluation committee will also be notified of this via email.
At the competition deadline of 4 p.m. on October 12, 2023, the status of the application in the FRQnet system must be “Submitted to institution” or “Submitted to the Fonds” and all required documents must be attached to the form.
An incomplete application that does not contain the information necessary to establish eligibility or which cannot be evaluated will be deemed ineligible by the Fonds. Elements missing from the application will not be requested. Documents received after the application deadline will not be considered. Unrequested documents will not be submitted to the evaluation committee.
An application that does not include the appropriate justification documents for optional or supplementary funding will not be entitled to these amounts.
5. EVALUATION
5.1 Peer review process
Given the diverse profiles of evaluation committee members involved in this type of program, applicants are encouraged, in the documents submitted for evaluation, to present their program in such a way as to be easily understandable in a multidisciplinary context.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The evaluation committee may, while in session, deem an application to be ineligible with regard to the program rules and objectives, despite a prior positive assessment of eligibility by the FRQSC.
5.2 Special case: evaluation of Partnership teams
Partnership team applications are evaluated by a committee of experts in collaborative research in the Québec context. This committee only looks at the eliminatory “Partnership” criterion and its various indicators, for which a minimum score of 70% is required. The other criteria are evaluated by the multidisciplinary evaluation committees.
5.3 Evaluation criteria, sub-criteria and weighting
Applicants are invited to consult the FRQSC Scoring System Grid used by the evaluation committees.
All eligible applications are assessed according to five criteria that constitute the basis of the evaluation process:
- Scientific program
- Composition and coordination
- Students
- Budget
- Timeline
Applications for Renewal teams must also meet the Team Achievements criterion.
IMPORTANT NOTE: To be recommended for funding, a team must receive an overall score of 70% or more and obtain at least 70% for the eliminatory Partnership criterion, if applicable.
Scientific program – 50 points
- Scope of the research theme based on the current state of knowledge
- Potential for the advancement of knowledge and innovation (social, economic, technological, cultural, aesthetic, etc.)
- Relevance of the division of the scientific program into research thrusts and consistency, within thrusts, of the objectives with current and planned projects
- Relevance and precision of the theoretical and conceptual tools and methodological approaches
- Relevance and quality of the anticipated scientific and knowledge mobilization activities
Composition and coordination – 30 points
- Skills, leadership and experience of the principal investigator, both administrative and scientific
- Relevant experience and achievements of each co-investigator, and complementarity of their expertise in relation to the scientific program and knowledge mobilization
- Role of each co-investigator in the deployment of the scientific program, and quality of the planned collaborative processes
- Efforts and methods for integrating new academics, where applicable*, and postdoctoral fellows
*If specific characteristics or restrictions of any kind apply to the team in relation to this sub-criterion, this should be stated in the application, for the benefit of the evaluation committee
Students – 10 points
- Quality of research training provided to undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate students, beyond what is usually offered in their programs of study
- Efforts to integrate students into the program through the awarding of scholarships or contracts
Budget – 5 points
- Quality of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) and appropriateness to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
Timeline – 5 points
- Quality and realism of the proposed timeline
Scientific program – 30 points
- Scope of the research theme based on the current state of knowledge
- Potential for the advancement of knowledge and innovation (social, economic, technological, cultural, aesthetic, etc.)
- Relevance of the division of the scientific program into research thrusts and consistency, within thrusts, of the objectives with current and planned projects
- Relevance and precision of the theoretical and conceptual tools and methodological approaches
- Relevance and quality of the anticipated scientific and knowledge mobilization activities
Partnership (eliminatory criterion) – 20 points
- Relevance of the choice of partner setting(s) and collaboration methods, including the level of effective engagement of the partner setting(s)
- Suitability of the scientific program as it pertains to the partner’s needs and objectives and quality of expected mutual benefits
Composition and coordination – 30 points
- Skills, leadership and experience of the principal investigator, both administrative and scientific
- Relevant experience and achievements of each co-investigator, and complementarity of their expertise in relation to the scientific program and knowledge mobilization
- Role of each co-investigator in the deployment of the scientific program, and quality of the planned collaborative processes
- Efforts and methods for integrating new academics, where applicable*, and postdoctoral fellows
*If specific characteristics or restrictions of any kind apply to the team in relation to this sub-criterion, this should be stated in the application, for the benefit of the evaluation committee.
Students – 10 points
- Quality of research training provided to undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate students, beyond what is usually offered in their programs of study
- Efforts to integrate students into the program through the awarding of scholarships or contracts
Budget – 5 points
- Quality of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) and appropriateness to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
Timeline – 5 points
- Quality and realism of the proposed timeline
Team achievements in relation to previous funding – 10 points
- In relation to the different thrusts of the previous scientific program, contribution of the team’s activities and achievements to the advancement of knowledge in the field and to the structuring of the theme
- Quality of collective activities and achievements attributable to the previous funding, in terms of training, graduation, outreach and mobilization
Scientific program – 50 points
- Added value of the proposed scientific program in relation to the previously funded program (evolution of the theme, theoretical and conceptual tools, methodological approaches, division of the scientific program into thrusts, etc.)
- Potential for the advancement of knowledge and innovation (social, economic, technological, cultural, aesthetic, etc.)
- Consistency, within thrusts, of the objectives with current and planned projects
- Relevance and quality of the anticipated scientific and knowledge mobilization activities
Composition and coordination – 20 points
- Skills, leadership and experience of the principal investigator, both administrative and scientific*
*In the case where the principal investigator has been leading the team for more than two funding cycles, this criterion must include a justification of the relevance or necessity of his or her continued leadership. Insufficient justification could be sanctioned by the evaluation committee. - Relevant experience and achievements of each co-investigator, and complementarity of their expertise in relation to the scientific program and knowledge mobilization
- Role of each co-investigator in the deployment of the scientific program, and quality of the planned collaborative processes
- Efforts and methods for integrating new academics, where applicable*, and postdoctoral fellows
*If specific characteristics or restrictions of any kind apply to the team in relation to this sub-criterion, this should be stated in the application, for the benefit of the evaluation committee.
Students – 10 points
- Quality of research training provided to undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate students, beyond what is usually offered in their programs of study
- Efforts to integrate students into the program through the awarding of scholarships or contracts
Budget – 5 points
- Quality of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) and appropriateness to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
Timeline – 5 points
- Quality and realism of the proposed timeline
Team achievements in relation to previous funding – 10 points
- In relation to the different thrusts of the previous scientific program, contribution of the team’s activities and achievements to the advancement of knowledge in the field and to the structuring of the theme
- Quality of collective activities and achievements attributable to the previous funding, in terms of training, graduation, outreach and mobilization
Scientific program – 30 points
- Added value of the proposed scientific program in relation to the previously funded program (evolution of the theme, theoretical and conceptual tools, methodological approaches, division of the scientific program into thrusts, etc.)
- Potential for the advancement of knowledge and innovation (social, economic, technological, cultural, aesthetic, etc.)
- Consistency, within thrusts, of the objectives with current and planned projects
- Relevance and quality of the anticipated scientific and knowledge mobilization activities
Partnership (eliminatory criterion) – 20 points
- Relevance of the choice of partner setting(s) and collaboration methods, including the level of effective engagement of the partner setting(s)
- Suitability of the scientific program as it pertains to the partner’s needs and objectives and quality of expected mutual benefits
Composition and coordination – 20 points
- Skills, leadership and experience of the principal investigator, both administrative and scientific*
*In the case where the principal investigator has been leading the team for more than two funding cycles, this criterion must include a justification of the relevance or necessity of his or her continued leadership. Insufficient justification could be sanctioned by the evaluation committee. - Relevant experience and achievements of each co-investigator, and complementarity of their expertise in relation to the scientific program and knowledge mobilization
- Role of each co-investigator in the deployment of the scientific program, and quality of the planned collaborative processes
- Efforts and methods for integrating new academics, where applicable*, and postdoctoral fellows
*If specific characteristics or restrictions of any kind apply to the team in relation to this sub-criterion, this should be stated in the application, for the benefit of the evaluation committee.
Students – 10 points
- Quality of research training provided to undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate students, beyond what is usually offered in their programs of study
- Efforts to integrate students into the program through the awarding of scholarships or contracts
Budget – 5 points
- Quality of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) and appropriateness to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
Timeline – 5 points
- Quality and realism of the proposed timeline
6. DESCRIPTION OF FUNDING
6.1 Nature of funding: base grant, optional funding and supplements
6.1.1 Nature of funding
The grants awarded under this program are infrastructure-type allocations to cover the team’s operating costs. The maximum base grant is $60,000 per year for 4 years for a New team, and $95,000 per year for 4 years for a Renewal team.
Expenses incurred to complete the various phases of a research project, including salaries and travel for data collection/analysis, are not eligible. However, to enhance the leverage effect of the grant, up to 20% of the base grant may be used to reimburse expenditures related to:
- Launching a project (e.g., carrying out a preliminary study or pilot project); or
- Finalizing a project (e.g., completing the final stages of a project whose funding is at an end).
Where applicable, such projects must be part of the team’s program and be carried out on a collaborative basis between at least two co-investigators.
6.1.2 Optional funding
Optional funding for partnership and interregional teams may be granted in addition to the base amount:
A) Partnership team: $20,000 (New team) or $40,000 (Renewal team) per year
This funding is intended to make possible the coordination and realization of joint activities involving the practice setting. The amounts requested for partnership activities must facilitate full and enhanced collaborations between the university and college researchers and the partner practice setting, and be explicitly justified in the section of the application provided for that purpose (see Section 4.2.3).
B) Interregional teams: $2,500 to $10,000 per year
A supplement of up to $10,000 per year is provided for teams with an interregional component. Funding made available under this measure must be used to cover costs incurred due to the distance between the team’s co-investigators (travel, accommodation, videoconferencing, etc.). More specifically, this supplement must promote the full participation of remote co-investigators in the scientific life of the team, as well as that of all students. It must also support the organization of activities in different regions of Québec and outside the major centres.
If the grant is awarded, the amount of this supplement, if requested, is calculated by the Fonds based on an analysis of:
1) The geographic distribution of the co-investigators across the province. The situation of teams whose principal investigator and managing institution are located in the regions will also be taken into account in calculating this supplement, which allows for a maximum of $2,500 for each administrative region (as defined by the Government of Québec*) represented on the team. Only one supplement of $2,500 may be awarded per region represented.
2) The plan submitted by the team (see Section 4.2.3 – Document to be attached in the Budget section).
*This rule does not apply to co-investigators from the same university but working on campuses in different administrative regions.
6.1.3 Supplements
A) Supplement for college researcher
This supplement is offered to all teams, on request. It is subject to budget availability under the Support for College Researchers program. Researchers interested in obtaining this additional funding are invited to read the complete rules of that program and Section 4.2.4 of these rules.
The Release from teaching duties (2.1) and Statutory supplement (2.2) components provided under the Support for College Researchers program are available to college researchers who wish to join a research team if they meet the following definition:
Person who has a PhD and who is employed in the equivalent of a full-time position in a college-level institution recognized by the FRQ to manage funding and/or in a Québec college centre for technology transfer (CCTT).
This person must also possess the professional autonomy required to supervise research projects and hold: i) a position as a college-level institution professor, OR ii) a position as a CCTT researcher, OR iii) a position in a college-level institution in which at least 75% of their time is dedicated to research activities.
B) Supplement for Renewal team with 12 members or more
This funding is awarded to teams with 12 members or more, to allow them to operate to their full capacity. To receive this supplement, it must be requested in the Budget section of the application form. See Section 4.2.3 of these rules.
6.2 Teaching release
A release from teaching duties is authorized for the principal investigator. Note that it must be requested in the submitted budget. If this is not done, it cannot be requested during the funding period.
In the case of Partnership teams, a release from duties is also authorized for a team member representing the partner setting(s), subject to the same conditions.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Eligible expenses under this program must be directly related to the submitted scientific program and not to the projects that result from it and be in keeping with those listed in Section 8 of the CGR. Teams that incur expenses that are not eligible under this program will be refused reimbursement.
7. FOLLOW-UP AND REPORTING
The conditions regarding the announcement and management of funding are set out in Sections 5 to 8 of the CGR.
During the funded period, a portfolio of peer-reviewed publications, released as immediate open access (without embargo) under an open license, must be produced, in accordance with the FRQ Open Access Policy (revised in 2022). The number of publications to be included will depend on the number of co-investigators, including the principal investigator:
8. EFFECTIVE DATE
These rules apply to the 2024-2025 fiscal year.