Competition year : 
2023-2024

Deadline (application) : 
October 6th, 2022 at 16:00 (EST)

Announcement of results : 
End of April 2023

Amount : 
$60,000 to $95,000 - Optional funding and supplements: see Section 7.1.3

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.

AN APPLICATION THAT IS SUBMITTED AFTER THE COMPETITION DEADLINE OF 4 P.M. ON OCTOBER 6, 2022 WILL BE DEEMED INADMISSIBLE. 
This version was updated on July 7, 2022, subject to the approval of the Ministre de l’Économie et de l’Innovation.

1. OBJECTIVES

This program aims to make Québec’s research community more dynamic and secure a prominent place for its researchers on the international level by:

  • Fostering the emergence of new research themes, approaches and topics;
  • Consolidating research infrastructures.
    More specifically, it aims to:
    • Provide research teams and their partners in practice settings, where applicable, with access to joint infrastructures;
    • Maximize theoretical and methodological benefits (teaching and research) and encourage knowledge mobilization activities;
      Foster the integration of new academics in research teams;
    • Optimize training and mentoring conditions for graduate and postgraduate students and postdoctoral fellows.

Teams must meet these objectives by deploying a series of structuring activities based on a concerted scientific program.

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 funded through other sources. The scientific program must be designed to evolve over time and foster the significant and collective contribution of members 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. CONFIGURATIONS

Teams applying to the competition must choose one of the following two configurations, based on the nature of their research and collaboration activities:

2.1 University team 
The primary goal of a University team is to deploy a scientific program based on a broad scientific theme in an effort to make innovative contributions to knowledge structure and advancement.

2.2 Partnership team 
Partnership teams foster collaboration between a practice setting and university or college settings, by offering a scientific program designed based on partners’ needs and implementing an activity plan to meet those needs.

Practice settings may include public, community or private sector organizations and institutions engaged in various fields of activity or in the production of goods or services. The involvement of the practice setting must include, but is not limited to, participation in the execution of the scientific program, and does not necessarily require a financial contribution on its part.

A Partnership team must demonstrate that it has developed close collaborations between the university and college setting, where applicable, and the practice settings. This collaboration must be put in place from the conception of the scientific program and be maintained at all phases of its deployment.

The processes associated with the deployment of the Partnership scientific program must lead to enduring ties between stakeholders, beginning with the imperative inclusion of a co-investigator from the partner setting in the team’s composition.

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.

Teams collaborating with practice settings on knowledge transfer activities, but that have not developed mechanisms to ensure the participation and integration of the practice setting at all phases of the scientific program, should consider applying as a University team.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Teams that present a research project rather than a scientific program will be deemed ineligible.

3. DEVELOPMENT STAGES

Teams must choose the development stage corresponding to their situation (see also the Table of Team Development Stages in the program Toolbox):

3.1 New team 
This stage of development is intended for teams that have never been funded by the Fonds under this program or that received their final funding instalment no later than March 2020.

IMPORTANT NOTE: In the case of a New team derived in part from a team that received funding under this program after April 1, 2021, at least 50% of its co-investigators must be new to the team. 

3.2 Renewal team
This stage of development is intended for teams already funded by the Fonds under this program and who received their final instalment in March 2021 or March 2022, as well as those whose funding is underway and ends in March 2023.

4. COMPOSITION

4.1 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.

Team composition and eligible status  

Role in the team

Principal investigator

Eligible researcher status(es)

University researcher (Status 1 a) i) only)

Role in the team

Co-investigator

Eligible researcher status(es)

University researcher (Status 1)
Clinical university researcher (Status 2)
College researcher (Status 3) *

Role in the team

Other co-investigator 

Eligible researcher status(es)

Other researcher statuses (a, b, c and d only)

Minimum number of team members: 4 **

* 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.

** 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.

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.

4.2 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.

5. APPLICATION

Before completing the Grant application form, the principal investigator must create a user account on the Fonds website (see informational video) if this has not already been done. Individuals who already have a personal identification number (PIN) have direct access to a FRQnet account and must update their profile in their E-portfolio.The forms are available in the FRQnet portal no later than one month before the competition deadline.

5.1. Presentation standards
It is preferable that the funding application be written in French, but it can also be written in English. However, the title and summary must be in French. These may be used by the Fonds for promotional and dissemination purposes (CGR, Section 3.6).

Please consult the Presentation standards for files (PDF) attached to FRQnet forms document 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.

5.2 Grant application 

5.2.1 The application form and its 4 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 “Description du projet ou de la programmation” section, the team must attach a file in which it explicitly addresses all evaluation criteria that apply to its stage of development and configuration. To facilitate the work of the committee, the information must be presented in separate sections, following the title and order of the evaluation criteria. Any other procedure will complicate the work of the evaluation committee and may be viewed as an annoyance. 

IMPORTANT NOTE: To assess the “Appropriateness of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities” sub-criterion of the “Feasibility” criterion (see also Criteria and sub-criteria, Section 6.3), members of the evaluation committee will consult the attachment entitled “Budget justification”. However, the completion of this attachment does not exempt applicants of the need to address the “Realism of the proposed timeline” sub-criterion in the Satisfaction of Evaluation Criteria file.

The number of pages allowed is based on the type of team, as shown in the table below:

TEAM CONFIGURATION

University

STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT

New team

NUMBER OF PAGES

8 pages

TEAM CONFIGURATION

Partnership

STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT

New team

NUMBER OF PAGES

10 pages

TEAM CONFIGURATION

University

STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT

Renewal team

NUMBER OF PAGES

10 pages

TEAM CONFIGURATION

Partnership

STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT

Renewal team

NUMBER OF PAGES

12 pages

B. BIBLIOGRAPHY FILE (maximum 10 pages)

In the “Bibliography” section, the team must include a bibliography listing the texts cited as references, including those pertaining to the state of the knowledge in the field.

C. TABLEAUX DE SYNTHÈSE DE LA PROGRAMMATION SCIENTIFIQUE, DES COLLABORATIONS ET DES ACTIVITÉS SCIENTIFIQUES  FILE (maximum 10 pages)

This file is available in the program Toolbox. It must be completed, saved in PDF format and attached to the application form in the “Tableaux synthèses” section. This file contains several summary tables and is intended to provide evaluators with an overview of the collaborations and activities of co-investigators as they pertain to the proposed scientific program. “Partnership” teams must also present the expected collaboration of the co-investigator from the partner setting.

D. BUDGET JUSTIFICATION FILE (maximum 6 pages)

In the Budget section, the team must attach a file presenting:

  • Base grant (see 7.1.2) – Explain all planned expenditures for each category of base funding only, indicating the amounts and types of expenditures (maximum 3 pages).
  • Optional funding relating to interregional teams (7.1.3. A), partnerships (7.1.3 B) and the supplement for renewal teams with 12 members or more (7.1.4 B), where applicable. Justification should be provided for expenditures related to each optional amount or supplement requested, clearly identifying each category in the text (maximum 1 page per category). In the case of expenditures related to interregional teams, it must be made clear how the principal investigator intends to ensure the full participation of all co-investigators, whatever their geographic distance from the managing institution linked to the application.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Amounts related to the Support for College Researchers program for college co-investigators, as presented in Section 7.1.4.A, must be justified in the section of the form entitled “Teaching release – college”, which is separate from the “Budget” section and provided specifically for that purpose.

5.2.2 Canadian Common CV (CCV) and Detailed Contributions attachment of the principal investigator and co-investigators 

The Fonds requires the Common Canadian CV  and the PDF Detailed Contributions file for 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.
 
Exception 
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.

5.2.3 Additional documents
Additional documents are required for Partnership teams and teams that include retired researchers, college researchers or contracted researchers. These documents should be sent to the principal investigator who will attach them to the application form. All required documents must be grouped and scanned in PDF format.

A. PROOF(S) OF PARTNERSHIP (for Partnership teams)
Attach in the “Other documents” section (see 7.1.3 B).
The proof(s) 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. These documents should be concise (no more than a few pages), but they 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
Attach in the “Other documents” section.
Retired co-investigators must provide a letter from their university indicating that prior to retirement the researcher was a regular professor, and that for the term of the grant, he/she will have access to the facilities and logistical support required to carry out research activities and will continue to train/supervise students, where applicable. An insufficiently documented letter could render the retired researcher ineligible.

C. LETTER FOR CONTRACTED RESEARCHER
Attach in the “Other documents” section.
Co-investigators with statuses 1 and 2 of the CGR (Section Status and Roles) 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. An insufficiently documented letter could render the contracted researcher ineligible.

D. JUSTIFICATION FOR COLLEGE RESEARCHER (maximum 1 page)
Attach as indicated in the “Teaching release – college” section of the form, and in accordance with the rules of the Support for College Researchers program (see also 7.1.4 A).
College researchers who are identified as co-investigators do not need to complete a 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 his/her FRQnet E-portfolio.
It is preferable that the funding application be written in French, but it can also be written in English. However, the title and summary must be in French. These may be used by the Fonds for promotional and dissemination purposes (CGR, Section 3.6).

5.3 Submitting the application
THE APPLICANT 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 “Transmis à l’établissement” once the applicant has transmitted the application to the managing institution;
  • The form will be flagged “Transmis au 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 his/her 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.

The form and all required documents must be submitted to the institution before the competition deadline of 4 p.m. on October 6, 2022.

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.

6. EVALUATION

6.1 Peer review process

The role of evaluation committees and the conditions governing funding decisions are defined in the CGR (Sections 4.4 and 4.5).

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.

6.2 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.

6.3 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 four criteria that constitute the basis of the evaluation process:

  • Scientific program (eliminatory criterion)
  • Team composition
  • Students
  • FeasibilityIn addition, criteria and indicators with specific weighting have been set up to ensure that the evaluation process is adapted to the teams’ configurations and development stages. Applicants are advised to attach equal importance to both the evaluation criteria and their associated sub-criteria.

IMPORTANT NOTE: In order to receive a recommendation for funding, a team must be awarded an overall score of 70% or more and obtain at least 70% for each eliminatory criterion.

1. NEW UNIVERSITY TEAM

CRITERIA

Scientific program (eliminatory
criterion)

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

50

CRITERIA

Composition and coordination

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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.  
WEIGHTING

30

CRITERIA

Students

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

10

CRITERIA

Feasibility

SUB-CRITERIA
  • Appropriateness of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
  • Realism of the proposed timeline
WEIGHTING

10

2. NEW PARTNERSHIP TEAM

CRITERIA

Scientific program (eliminatory criterion)

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

30

CRITERIA

Partnership (eliminatory criterion)

SUB-CRITERIA
  • Relevance of the choice of partner setting(s) and collaboration methods, including the level of effective engagement of the partner setting(s)
  • Relevance of the scientific program as it pertains to the partner’s needs and objectives and quality of expected mutual benefits
WEIGHTING

20

CRITERIA

Composition and coordination

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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. 
WEIGHTING

30

CRITERIA

Students

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

10

CRITERIA

Feasibility

SUB-CRITERIA
  • Appropriateness of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
  • Realism of the proposed timeline
WEIGHTING

10

3. UNIVERSITY TEAM – RENEWAL

CRITERIA

Team achievements in relation to previous funding (eliminatory criterion) 

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

20

CRITERIA

Scientific program (eliminatory criterion)

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

40

CRITERIA

Composition and coordination

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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. 
WEIGHTING

20

CRITERIA

Students

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

10

CRITERIA

Feasibility

SUB-CRITERIA
  • Appropriateness of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
  • Realism of the proposed timeline
WEIGHTING

10

**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.

4. PARTNERSHIP TEAM – RENEWAL

CRITERIA

Team achievements in relation to previous funding (eliminatory criterion)

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

20

CRITERIA

Scientific program (eliminatory criterion)

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

20

CRITERIA

Partnership (eliminatory criterion)

SUB-CRITERIA
  • Relevance of the choice of partner setting(s) and collaboration methods, including the level of effective engagement of the partner setting(s)
  • Relevance of the scientific program as it pertains to the partner’s needs and objectives and quality of expected mutual benefits
WEIGHTING

20

CRITERIA

Composition and coordination

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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. 
WEIGHTING

20

CRITERIA

Students

SUB-CRITERIA
  • 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
WEIGHTING

10

CRITERIA

Feasibility

SUB-CRITERIA
  • Appropriateness of the budgetary justifications (base grant and requested supplements) to the program deployment plan and anticipated activities
  • Realism of the proposed timeline
WEIGHTING

10

**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. 

7. DESCRIPTION OF FUNDING

7.1 Nature du financement: montants de base, financements optionnels et suppléments 
 
7.1.1 Nature of funding
The grants awarded under this program are infrastructure-type allocations to cover operating costs.

Teams must receive external funding in order to carry out the research projects undertaken as part of their scientific program.

The 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);
  • 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. 

7.1.2 Base grant 

The amount of the base grant is determined by the development stage of the team, as follows:

  • New team: $60,000 per year for 4 years
  • Renewal team: $95,000 per year for 4 years  

7.1.3 Optional funding available to all teams 
Optional funding for interregional teams and partnerships may be granted in addition to the base amount according to a team’s configuration and development stage. The planned use of this optional funding must be explicitly justified in a document included in the “Budget” section. Without appropriate justification, the requested funding could be refused. 
 
A) Interregional teams: $2,500 to $10,000 per year 
This amount covers costs incurred due to the geographic distance between co-investigators (travel expenses, videoconferencing, etc.).

To qualify as interregional, a team must include co-investigators based at institutions other than that of the principal investigator and in different administrative regions*, as defined by the Government of Québec**. 

Up to $2,500 may be claimed for each administrative region represented on the team – excluding that of the principal investigator – up to a maximum of $10,000.

In justifying these costs, the team must specify how it intends to ensure the full participation of all co-investigators in the consolidation or deployment of the scientific program, whatever their distance from the principal investigator’s host institution.

* This rule does not apply to co-investigators attached to the same university but located on campuses in different administrative regions. 
** The Fonds reserves the right to analyze the geographic distribution of the co-investigators before awarding this optional funding. 
 
B) Partnership: $20,000 (New team) or $40,000 (Renewal team) per year 
This funding is exclusively for Partnership teams and 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, where applicable, and the partner practice setting, and be explicitly justified in the section of the application provided for that purpose. 
 
7.1.4 Supplements 
A) Supplement for college researcher  
This supplement is offered to all teams. It is subject to budget availability under the Support for College Researchers (CHZ) program. Researchers interested in obtaining this additional funding are invited to read the complete rules of this program.

Specifically, 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 the college-level institutions recognized by the FRQ to manage funding and/or in the Québec college centres 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 function fully. 

IMPORTANT NOTE: To receive this supplement, it must be requested in the “Budget” section of the form.

7.2 Eligible expenses  
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. 

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. 

8. FOLLOW-UP AND FINANCIAL REPORTING

The conditions regarding the announcement and management of funding are set out in the CGR (Sections 5 to 8).

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.

Number of co-investigators

≤ 20

Number of publications

2 publications

Number of co-investigators

between 21 et 30

Number of publications

3 publications

Number of co-investigators

between 31 et 40

Number of publications

4 publications

Number of co-investigators

≥ 41

Number of publications

5 publications

9. EFFECTIVE DATE

These rules apply to the 2023-2024 fiscal year.