Language selection

Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada

Search

Top of page

Fieldwork for the Advancement of Science and Technology - Lunar Exploration Analogue Deployment 2018 (FAST LEAD 2018)

Announcement of Opportunity

Publication date:

Application deadline:

Summary of key information

  • Eligible recipients: Canadian universities and post-secondary institutions;
  • Type of transfer payment: Grants;
  • Expected budget for four (4) grants: $900,000 (including an additional $250,000 for an optional field deployment);
  • Categories of projects:
    • Category A: Science investigation for Canadian Space Agency (CSA) LEAD – Core (HERACLES);
    • Category B: Capability demonstration projects for lunar science and technologies;
  • Maximum budget per project category: $450,000 ($325,000 + $125,000 for an optional field deployment);
  • Maximum amount per grant: $225,000 ($162,500 + $62,500 for an optional field deployment);
  • Project maximum duration per grant: two (2) years, with a possibility of about three (3) month extension for an optional field deployment;
  • Approximate number of awards:
    • Two (2) awards in category A and two (2) awards in category B;
  • Application deadline: .

Table of contents

1. Introduction

The objective of the Fieldwork for the Advancement of Science and Technology - Lunar Exploration Analogue Deployment (FAST-LEAD) Announcement of Opportunity (AO) is to support Canadian universities and post-secondary institutions research projects that would contribute to a CSA-coordinated LEAD and offer Capability Demonstration opportunities while providing hands-on experience to students and young researchers in order for them to acquire competencies required for their potential participation in future Lunar exploration missions.

Building Canadian capacity in space science and technology is a priority for the CSA. Canada must develop and maintain a robust and experienced workforce within industry, academia, and government in order to continue playing an active role in future space missions and contributing to Canada's economic growth. Opportunities to participate in a space mission are infrequent, but when a space mission activity is approved, a team with expertise and experience must be quickly formed to meet challenging schedule constraints driven by launch or market opportunities.

The CSA is preparing to conduct Lunar Exploration Analogue Deployments (LEAD-Project) to position Canada for potential future contributions to lunar rover missions by demonstrating capabilities for human and robotic exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit. They are based on the Human-Enhanced Robotic Architecture and Capabilities for Lunar Exploration and Science (HERACLES) mission concept which is being developed as a collaboration between European Space Agency (ESA), CSA, JAXA and NASA. The design reference mission for HERACLES involves a 70-day lunar sample return mission nominally at Schrodinger Crater in the south polar region of the Moon, and a year-long traverse to explore the region and validate future human mission landing sites. More details of the mission concept are provided in the following CSA document:

"Space Exploration Science Maturation Study: Precursor to Human and Scientific Rover Lunar Demonstrator Mission" SOW - Appendix A (sections A.3 and A.4.5).

The LEAD Project includes two (2) separate fields of research that will be carried on at two (2) different analogue sites in and potentially (as an option field deployment) be combined in and conducted at an analogue site located in Lanzarote, Spain. Those two (2) fields of research are represented in the following categories and will run concurrently but independently:

Each of these categories includes an option to provide additional funds to enable a second major deployment in (potentially at Lanzarote), subject to further CSA approval.

This AO is consistent with the terms and conditions of the CSA Class Grant and Contribution (G&C) Program to Support Research, Awareness and Learning in Space Science and Technology – Research Component.

Applicants are asked to read the following AO thoroughly before submitting their applications. This AO was prepared to help applicants complete the application process, and outlines key elements, including mandatory criteria for eligibility, details on eligible projects and the selection process. In the event of any discrepancies between this AO and the individual funding agreements governing a project, the latter document(s) will take precedence.

2. AO objectives

The FAST LEAD AO main objectives are to:

Those objectives contribute to the achievement of the CSA G&C Program objectives which are to:

3. Eligibility criteria

3.1 Eligible recipients

3.2 Eligible projects

To be eligible, it is mandatory that a project corresponds to one (1) of the two (2) following categories:

In addition, it is mandatory that a project includes the following items:

Applicants are not allowed to break down a project into numerous phases of a project in order to obtain more than the maximum grant under this AO. Furthermore, even if the maximum funding for one (1) project is not reached, the completion of a funded phase does not guarantee funding of the subsequent phases under future AO.

3.3 Eligible HQP

For this AO, Canadian HQP includes:

Applicants are encouraged to propose projects that increase the representation and advancement of women in the space sciences and engineering, as one means to foster excellence in research and training. Applicants should strive for a balanced gender representation in the group of trainees and in their supervisors, role models and mentors. If the discipline of the proposed projects tends to have a gender imbalance in the trainee population, applicants are strongly encouraged to demonstrate that this imbalance has been considered and addressed in their plan for trainee recruitment.

3.4 Project categories

The project categories are:

3.4.1 Category A - Science investigation for LEAD-Core (HERACLES)

The science investigations for the LEAD-Core HERACLES deployment will take place at a lunar analogue site located in Lanzarote, Spain, in the - timeframe, nominally .

Projects submitted under category A must describe a science investigation relevant to a strawman HERACLES lunar science payload (Table 1) as a future potential lunar sample return mission. Projects must include using or testing the instrument(s) in the analogue environment, the acquisition of science data, and data analysis to address scientific and/or operational objectives.

More specifically, projects must meet the following requirements;

3.4.1.1 Investigation scope

Proposal must:

Note that the applicant is responsible for shipping the prototype(s) and/or COTS instrument(s) and operating it in the field (see Appendix A).

3.4.1.2 Eligible instruments

Table 1 provides the strawman payload capability needed for CSA's LEAD-Core HERACLES Project scenario.

It should be noted that:

Table 1: Eligible instruments and their role in the science investigation for the CSA LEAD-Core (HERACLES) Project are:
Nominal instrument type Value for sample return scenario
Panoramic colour camera To select traverse destinations and provide context
Remote sensing elemental abundance (eg. LIBS/Raman) To identify the chemical composition of rocks and soils, including their atomic and molecular makeup
Remote sensing mineralogy & materials properties (eg. UV-VIS-NIR) For mineralogy and physical properties; to detect differentiated materials
Micro-Imager Provide imagery of grain sizes and small-scale textural information
Contact geochemistry (eg. APXS / XRF) Analyze chemical elements in rocks and soils
3.4.1.3 Science operations scenario and student training

The CSA LEAD-Core (HERACLES) Project scenario will focus on the sample return objective of the HERACLES mission concept.

For the purpose of the category A projects, it can be assumed that the scenario will begin with panoramic imagery of the site and this imagery will be used by the remote Science Operations Team to select a traverse destination taking into account notional targets identified in a pre-mission strategic plan.

At the traverse destination, one (1) or more samples will be selected by the remote Science Operations Team including documentation of context data. Further traverse destinations may be selected, with further sample acquisition according to a Science Operations Plan that will be discussed at a pre-mission Kick-Off Meeting (see Table 2) with all Science Team members and approved by CSA. The Science Team will be composed of the Project Teams selected under this AO and the UWO Science Maturation Study Team. There may additionally be participation in the Science Team from international HERACLES partners.

A single CSA LEAD-Core (HERACLES) Project remote Science Operations Team will operate from a Science Operations Centre at UWO for the duration of the CSA LEAD-Core (HERACLES) Project deployment. This will be largely composed of HQP from the awarded FAST-LEAD-Core HERACLES projects, with mission management provided by UWO according to the approved Science Operations Plan.

Proposals must include a minimum of ten (10) HQP of which at least eight (8) must be available to participate in the Science Operations Team at UWO for training and the duration of the deployment, with others deployed in the field as needed to operate the proposed instruments. Shift work may be required during the deployment, anticipating the impact of the time difference between the Science Operations Centre at UWO and the analogue site in Lanzarote, Spain.

Science operations approaches proposed as part of each of the two (2) selected projects will be included in the Science Operations Plan subject to feasibility and resources. Where elements of the selected projects are not included in the core Science Operations Plan, their implementation will be encouraged as parallel activities.

The HQP training provided by co-ordinated HERACLES science operations provides relevant experience, knowledge and skills for planetary exploration missions.

The evaluation of the training plan for this AO will centre on the training and mentoring provided within the Project's team.

3.4.1.4 LEAD analogue sites

The CSA LEAD-Core (HERACLES) Project deployment is planned to take place at analogue sites on the island of Lanzarote in Spain. Lanzarote provides analogue sites used by ESA. Science activities are targeted at this recognised lunar analogue in anticipation of a possible co-ordinated end-to-end international HERACLES campaign in . Ortiz Cardona, Tinguatan South and Valle de la Tranquilidad South are candidates for the deployments in and . CSA is expected to select the final site(s) for the and deployments from amongst these three (3) candidate sites. Images and site specific details are provided in Appendix A.

3.4.1.5 LEAD project logistic requirements and schedule

Proposals must plan for one (1) analogue deployment in consisting in two (2) weeks of fieldwork in Lanzarote, Spain, in the timeframe -, nominally in , with dates to be finalised by CSA. The Lanzarote campaign will not include a CSA rover prototype, and is anticipated to be implemented using a person simulating the rover traverse. CSA envisions that all instruments will be hand carried. Teams are required to have personnel at the field site sufficient to operate their instruments, and students at the LEAD science operations centre at UWO who will take key roles in science operations decision making, as noted in section 3.4.1.3 above.

Proposals may include a site visit to Lanzarote to help prepare their investigation for the CSA LEAD-Core (HERACLES) Project Lanzarote campaign.

Proposals must include support for participation in CSA mission planning and coordination activities as described in Table 2, participation in the remote science team (including travel & living) at the UWO, support for the field deployment of their instrument (including travel & living, all needed equipment and supplies, power supplies, data storage, etc.), and analysis of data.

Data transfer between investigation teams and the CSA in the field (for transmission to the remote science team) will be via standard media (e.g. USB) and provided via a communication system that will be established in concert with the CSA during the project, and will either use standard data formats (jpeg, etc.), or software to be provided by investigation teams to allow data to be used in science operations.

The applicant must be willing to share its data with members of other teams and should be prepared to publish its results. Confirmation that the proposer agrees to this will be required in the application form. Samples acquired in the field will be documented by the Science Operations Team and distributed by the CSA to participating teams if needed for used in validation of investigations.

Table 2: Key schedule dates and logistics co-ordination needs for planning purposes
Nominal date Purpose Investigation team to support
Analogue mission kick-off meeting – within one (1) month of grant award To present investigations selected through this process. To share detailed information on the site and mission planning process.

Principal investigator (PI) or delegate participation in the meeting (by webex). Presentation of project investigation to other Science Team members (Powerpoint or PDF format).

CSA to provide: Templates to capture investigation and permit requirements; Updated analogue site and scenario documentation.

Planning telecon To confirm the analogue scenario, taking into account inputs received from each investigation team. PI or delegate participation in telecom by webex
Science operations training 1-2 days training for team members who will participate in remote science operations. Participation in science operations training for all HQP assumed for planning purposes to be at UWO, or by webex)
Analogue science mission readiness review To ensure all teams are ready for the field deployment

PI or delegate participation in the meeting (assumed at UWO or by webex).

CSA to provide: Final analogue mission scenario. Field safety handbook.
Analogue science mission at Lanzarote site Implementation of investigations Two (2) weeks in the field plus 1 week for setup, and two (2) weeks of co-ordinated remote science operations at UWO.
Debrief/ Science Workshop To provide debrief from field team to remote science operations team, and capture lessons learned from all participants. Status for possible activities. Participation in debrief nominally by all participants at UWO (in person or by webex)
Science workshop & operations training (TBC)

Possible grant option – see section 1.

Repeat of schedule milestones associated with deployment.
Analogue mission readiness review (TBC)
Analogue mission (TBC)
Debrief (TBC)

Applicants are not allowed to break down a project into numerous phases of a project in order to obtain more than the maximum grant under this AO. Furthermore, even if the maximum funding for one (1) project is not reached, the completion of a funded phase does not guarantee funding of the subsequent phases under future AO.

3.4.2 Category B - Capability demonstration for Lunar science and technologies

Projects under category B must include lunar science and/or technology demonstration activities commencing with preparatory activities in and culminating in a field deployment in the - timeframe at the CSA Headquarters (HQ) AT (see Appendix B), with an option to perform a second remote analogue site deployment at Lanzarote, Spain in , subject to CSA approval and coordination.

The Capability demonstration opportunity is to enable the recipients to prepare for, execute and close-out a demonstration of the capability of their project (e.g. instrument, payload, rover or operational concept/methodology) during a field deployment while offering hands-on experience to students and young researchers in order for them to acquire competencies required for their potential participation in future Lunar exploration missions. It does not include the design & development of such an instrument, payload or mobility platform.

Eligible demonstrations would involve projects that address the specific objectives of this AO (section 2) by advancing lunar science and/or technology that can benefit from test and demonstration at the CSA-AT (see Appendix B), in and potentially at an optional Lanzarote analogue site, in Spain (see Appendix A) in .

It is recognized that the CSA-AT site does not provide a rich opportunity for the conduct of science. Rather, it is an opportunity to demonstrate proof of concept, interfaces and operational procedures that may ultimately be used to conduct science at the optional Lanzarote deployment site in .

This opportunity allows post-secondary institutions to propose projects which include, but are not limited to, the following science and technologies:

The only Capability demonstration "phases" that are eligible are; Preparation (may include instrument/payload adaptation/packaging); Deployment (execution); Close-out (including return of any borrowed CSA equipment) and Final report.

Any logical breakdown or combination of these phases can constitute a funded project. However, breaking down a project into numerous phases to obtain more than the maximum grant or contribution is not allowed.

Note that design & development of the project's instrument, payload, or mobility platform is not within the scope of this AO.

The CSA would provide access to, and technical support for the use of CSA facilities (e.g. AT) and mobility platforms (e.g. rovers – 2 Junos and 1 LRPDP - see Appendix B). This could include use by the Recipient of associated CSA infrastructure (e.g. local WiFi & Satellite data network communications) for preparatory activities and deployments, as required. Use of mobility platforms could be at the CSA, the Recipient' home pending sufficient justification and, potentially, in at the Lanzarote field site (described in Appendix A) for an optional field deployment.

The CSA would provide coordination and oversight to ensure that all activities carried out through different selected projects and by different participating parties, occurring at the same location (CSA-AT in and/or the optional Lanzarote analogue deployment site in ), do not conflict with one another.

3.5 Training plan

Proposals related to category A projects or category B projects must include a detailed training plan that outlines how hands-on experience will enable Canadian HQP to develop some or all of the following skills:

The level and content of training should be appropriate to the research discipline, whether it is related to science or engineering, and should include opportunities for interaction and collaboration with other researchers inside and outside the organization, where appropriate.

The CSA strongly encourages collaborative research activities involving academia, industry, and foreign researchers. In collaborative research activities involving industry, HQP training may be enhanced by exposure to an industrial working environment. Similarly, industry personnel may benefit from being involved in academic research.

4. Applications

4.1 Required documentation

The application must include the following:

It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that his/her application complies with all relevant federal, provincial and territorial legislation and municipal by laws. Applications must be mailed to the CSA at the following address:

FAST AO-LEAD
c/o Cathy Baillargeon
Senior Program Officer, Academic Development
Space Science & Technology
Canadian Space Agency
6767 Route de l'Aéroport
Saint-Hubert, Quebec J3Y 8Y9

Applicants must also take note of the following:

Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the FAQ section of this AO (see section 9). The CSA will answer questions received before .

4.2 Service standards for this AO – Complete applications

Applicants will be notified in writing of decisions regarding their application. Selected applications will be announced on the CSA website. The CSA has set the following service standards for delays in processing requests, acknowledgements of receipt, funding decisions and payment procedures.

Acknowledgement: The CSA's goal is to acknowledge receipt of proposals within two (2) weeks following the AO's closing date.

Decision: The CSA's goal is to respond to the proposal within eleven (11) weeks of the AO's closing date and to send a grant agreement for signature within four (4) weeks after formal approval of the proposal.

Payment: The CSA's goal is to issue payment within four (4) weeks of the successful fulfillment of the requirements outlined in the grant agreement.

Compliance with these service standards is a shared responsibility. Applicants must submit all required documentation in a timely fashion.

5. Evaluation

5.1 Eligibility criteria

Applications will first be assessed for an eligibility assessment to determine if each of them:

5.2 Evaluation criteria

Once the eligibility assessment is completed, applications will be evaluated according to the following criteria:

Table 3 below shows the definition and a breakdown of all evaluation criteria, which are further described in Appendix C. Applicants should carefully address each of them when writing their proposals. Please note that an application must receive an overall minimum score of 70% as well as minimum specified thresholds to be considered for funding.

Table 3. Definition and breakdown of evaluation criteria
1. Benefits to Canada
Max. score: 30
Min. score: 20 		1.1 Increase knowledge in space science and technology
Max. score: 15
This criterion evaluates the originality of the research and its probable impact and potential to advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology, directly or indirectly and more specifically for future lunar missions (for category A projects, refer to section 3.4.1.1).
1.2 Relevance to FAST-LEAD AO Project category A or B
Max. score: 15
This criterion evaluates relevance of the proposed project to one (1) of the FAST LEAD AO Project categories described in section 3.4.1 and 3.4.2.
2. Results in terms of contribution to the training of Canadian HQP
Max. score: 30
Min. score: 17		 2.1 The relevance of experience, knowledge and skills acquired by Canadian HQP to the Canadian space sector
Max. score: 20
This criterion is used to assess the degree to which the experience, knowledge and skills targeted in HQP training are relevant to the Canadian space sector (industry, academia or government). For category A projects, refer to section 3.4.1.3 for more details.
2.2 Interaction between Canadian HQP and researchers from different disciplines and occupations
Max. score: 10
This criterion evaluates how well the project promotes collaborative team research and interaction between Canadian HQP of different levels of academic programs, between Canadian HQP and researchers from different disciplines, and other occupations from other organizations.
3. Resources
Max. score: 20
Min. score: 11 		3.1 Quality and experience of the team
Max. score: 10
This criterion evaluates the quality of the project team, its combination of expertise, and its ability to carry out the research project and provide the proposed training activities.
3.2 Adequacy of allocated resources
Max. score: 10
This criterion evaluates the quality, quantity and relevance of the human and non-human resources planned to be utilized to meet the project goals and objectives.
4. Project Feasibility and risks
Max. score: 20
Min. score: 11		 4.1 Clarity and completeness of the research and training plans
Max. score: 10
This criterion evaluates the clarity, completeness and feasibility of the research, training and mentoring plans, with the roles and responsibilities, contribution and level of involvement of each team member.
4.2 Project risks (financial, managerial, environmental and technical) and mitigation strategies
Max. score: 10
This criterion evaluates key risks associated with the project and the mitigation strategies for each risk.

5.3 Evaluation process

Only applications that have passed the eligibility assessment listed in section 5.1 will be given further consideration.

Once the eligibility criteria are confirmed, evaluators will assess the screened applications according to the criteria listed in section 5.2. Evaluators shall be experts in the fields relevant to the applications and may include representatives of Canada and other countries, and representatives of other government and non-government agencies and organizations. If applicable, a multidisciplinary evaluation committee will be formed to evaluate interdisciplinary applications.

An application must receive an overall minimum score of 70% as well as minimum thresholds specified in Table 3 to be considered for funding.

Before a final decision is made, the Manager responsible for the FAST AO-LEAD may seek input and advice from other organizations, including (but not limited to) federal, provincial, territorial and municipal government agencies and organizations.

A review committee will make an overall selection that reflects the priorities of the CSA (including completeness with respect to the LEAD-Core (HERACLES) scenario for category A projects).

6. Funding

6.1 Available funding and duration

Funding available for both research project categories (A or B) per project is:

If an optional field deployment in Lanzarote is confirmed, the Recipient may be offered up to $62,500 to participate in it.

Before each installment, the Manager responsible for the FAST-LEAD AO will reassess the Recipient's eligibility and review the Recipient's progress report.

Given the objectives of this AO and the limited available budget, a PI can only submit one (1) proposal in response to this AO, although, an eligible Recipient (section 3.1) may submit more than one (1) proposal.

However, only one (1) proposal per project category (see section 3.4) from an eligible recipient will be considered for funding.

An approved proposal will be eligible for a total amount of government assistance (federal, provincial, territorial and municipal) of up to 100% of total project costs (as described in the proposal and subject to the eligible expenses).

To determine the amount of funding to be allocated, consideration will be given to the availability of CSA funds, the total cost of the project, and the other confirmed sources of funds provided by other stakeholders and the applicant. The CSA reserves the right to reject any proposals or reduce the amount of the grants at its entire discretion.

Applicants must identify all sources of funding in their applications and confirm this information in a funding agreement if the project is selected for funding. Upon completion of a project, the recipient must also disclose all sources of funding.

6.2 Eligible costs

Eligible costs are direct expenses that are associated with the delivery of the approved project and that are required to achieve the expected results of the project. Expenses will be covered subject to the applicant signing a grant agreement with the CSA.

Eligible costs for a grant under this AO are the following:

7. Funding agreements

7.1 Payments

The CSA and each successful applicant (the recipient) will sign a grant funding agreement. This is a condition for any payment made by the CSA with respect to the approved project.

Payments will be made in a lump sum or instalments as described in the signed agreement. Grant funding agreements will include a clause stipulating the recipient's obligation to confirm, once a year in the case of multi-year agreements, their eligibility for the G&C Program – Research Component, and inform the CSA in writing of any changes to the conditions used in determining their eligibility for this component.

7.2 Audits

The recipient of a grant shall keep proper records of all documentation related to the funded project, for the duration of the project and for six (6) years after the completion date of the project, in the event of an audit. This documentation shall be available upon request.

7.3 Conflict of interest

In the funding agreement, the recipient will certify that any current or former public office holder or public servant it employs complies with the provisions of the relevant Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for Public Office Holders and the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector respectively.

7.4 Intellectual property

All intellectual property developed by the recipient in the course of the project shall vest in the recipient.

7.5 Organizations in Quebec

An organization in Quebec whose operations are partially or fully funded by the province of Quebec may be subject to the Act Respecting the Ministère du Conseil exécutif, R.S.Q., Chapter M-30.

Under sections 3.11 and 3.12 of this Act, certain entities/organizations, as defined in the meaning of the Act, such as municipal bodies, school bodies, or public agencies, must obtain authorization from the Secrétariat aux relations canadiennes du Québec, as indicated by the Act, before signing any funding agreement with the Government of Canada, its departments or agencies, or a federal public agency.

Consequently, any entity that is subject to the Act is responsible for obtaining such authorization before signing any funding agreement with the Government of Canada.

Quebec applicants must complete, sign and include the M-30 Supporting Documentation form with their application.

7.6 Performance measurement

This AO is expected to contribute to the following outcomes:

By contributing to maintaining excellence in key capabilities and to inspiring Canadians, this AO will address key principles of Canada's Space Policy Framework. It will enable Canadian HQP to be well prepared to participate in future space missions while developing their skills and acquiring new scientific and technical knowledge, thus helping ensure the strategic and sustained utilization of space in Canada.

The CSA will ask the recipients to report on certain aspects of their projects such as:

As a courtesy, the CSA would like to receive a copy of publications arising from the work, and to be informed in advance of significant press releases or media interest resulting from the work.

8. Privacy notice statement

The CSA will comply with the federal Access to Information Act and Privacy Act with respect to applications received. By submitting personal information, an applicant is consenting to its collection, use and disclosure in accordance with the following Privacy Notice Statement, which explains how the applicant's information will be managed.

Necessary measures have been taken to protect the confidentiality of the information provided by the applicant. This information is collected under the authority of the CSA Class G&C Program to Support Research, Awareness and Learning in Space Science and Technology – Research Component, and will be used for the evaluation and selection of proposals. Personal information (such as contact information and biographical information) included in the rejected proposals will be stored in a CSA Personal Information Bank for five (5) years and then destroyed (Personal Information File no. ASC PPU045). Personal information included in the successful proposals will be kept along with the proposal results for historical purposes. These data are protected under the Privacy Act. According to the Privacy Act, the data linked to an individual and included in the proposal being evaluated can be accessed by the specific concerned individual who has rights with respect to this information. This individual may, upon request, (1) be given access to his/her data and (2) have incorrect information corrected or have a notation attached.

Applicants shall note that for all agreements, information related to the funding agreement (amount, grant or contribution, name of the recipient and project location) will be made available to the public on the CSA website.

For additional information on privacy matters prior to submitting a proposal, please contact:

Access to Information and Privacy
Canadian Space Agency
Telephone: 450-926-4866
Email: aiprp-atip@asc-csa.gc.ca

9. Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

It is the responsibility of the applicants to obtain clarification of the requirements contained herein, if necessary, before submitting an application.

For any questions related to the AO, applicants shall use the following generic email address lecedessetc-thegandccoe@asc-csa.gc.ca. Questions and answers related to this AO will be posted on the CSA website in the FAQ section of this AO. The CSA will respond to questions received before 5 p.m. (ET), .

At any point, applicants are welcome to share with the CSA their comments or suggestions regarding the AO, the program or the process. Applicants may either use the generic email address or the generic web-based comments and suggestions box.

Question 1: Is a non-profit organization considered an eligible recipient if it offers, to children aged 6 to 18, trainings and workshops related to science and technology?

Answer 1: To be an eligible recipient, the application must be a Canadian university or post-secondary institution.

Appendix A: Lanzarote analogue site

Lanzarote, Spain is the LEAD-Core (HERACLES) Project Analogue Site. This site is planned for the Science Investigation and also for an optional deployment in for Science Investigation and for Capability Demonstration. Projects selected under this AO will be offered the opportunity to participate in this optional deployment.

Lanzarote provides analogue sites used by the ESA. Science activities are targeted at this recognized lunar analogue in anticipation of a possible coordinated end-to-end international HERACLES campaign in . Ortiz Cardrona, Tinguatan South and Valle de la Tranquilidad South are candidates for the deployment. Images and site specific details are provided in Figures 1-4 below and in the following scientific article "Assessing qualitative long-Term volcanic hazards at Lanzarote Island (Canary Islands), Becerril et al, 2017, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences".

Applicants planning to use the Lanzarote Analogue site must consider the following:

Shipping to the site of instruments and supporting equipment as needed to operate the instruments and for any planned field validation activities; travel to the site for field members who will operate the instrument(s), including daily transport of instruments, support equipment and team members from accommodation in nearby villages to the site; accommodation and meals for the field team, and any export permits needed for equipment.

It is expected that a coordinated permit for site access will be procured by CSA as needed for the LEAD-Core HERACLES Project deployments: selected teams will be required to provide information for their investigation in a template. Communications and some power at the analogue site can be anticipated to be provided by CSA.

Access to the sites can be anticipated to require some portion of travel along rough tracks.

Figure 1: Analogue sites in the region of recent volcanism on Lanzarote. Ortiz Cardona, Valle de la Tranquilidad South and Tinguatan South are candidates for the deployment.

Figure 2 image A

Figure 2 image B

Figure 2 image C

Figure 2 image D

Figure 2: Ortiz Cardona: Man-made mounds and pits are found at the entrance of the field site. Terrain is hummocky with some relatively flat areas (Image A). High rock abundance. The boundaries of the field site is marked by rough lava flows. More outcrops and rock fragments are found approaching the lava flows. Some of the outcrops have a lot of lichen cover. Vegetation covers some of the regolith giving it a whitish-green appearance (Image A+B).

Figure 3: Tintaguan South. The site is situated close to the town of Tinajo (approximately 2 km) and the Timanfaya visitor centre (1.7 km south) (29°1'13.30"N / 13°42'51.91"W). Access to the site is a gravel/dirt road with scattered blocks of lava flows ranging from 5 cm to 30 cm. This site is used by the ESA's PANGAEA course (Image A). The site is characterized by lapilli regolith (2-64 mm sized volcanic fragments, Image B), and, low vegetation cover, with some lichen cover on regolith and outcrops, and relatively high rock abundance with lava flow fragments scattered across the regolith (Image C). Olivine-rich xenoliths are encased in the lava flow outcrops and fragments.

Figure 4: Valle de Tranquilidad South. The site is situated off the SW border of the Timanfaya National Park, off of the LZ-67 road (28°58'44.36"N / 13°44'56.52"W). A camel road cuts through the site. This site is characterized by flat and hummocky terrain with low vegetation cover. (Credit: Western University)

Description:

  • Moderately high rock abundance, greatest close to the margins of the rough lava flows (Image A).
  • Red-oxidized regolith found close to the camel dirt road (Image B).
  • Some outcrops have been weathered but not extensively.
  • Outcrops with a low lichen coverage (Image C).

Appendix B: Access to CSA rovers, infrastructure & facilities in Saint-Hubert (Quebec) for field investigations for category B projects

In order to facilitate the ground testing and demonstration of planetary exploration technologies, and to support field investigations to prepare Canada for future planetary exploration missions, the CSA has developed an infrastructure and facilities for testing, integration and operations of planetary exploration systems and equipment such as rovers and scientific instruments, in a "mission-like" planetary environment. The facilities include integration labs, test facilities, a planetary analogue site (CSA AT located at the CSA), a control center and the communications infrastructure necessary to connect various on-site facilities.

The CSA is offering to category B Grant recipients, subject to availability, some rovers (i.e. 2 Junos and 1 LRPDP) from its fleet of prototype Planetary Mobility Systems (rovers) and associated indoor & outdoor Facilities and Infrastructure to support the Testing, Integration and Operations of Planetary Exploration systems and equipment (e.g. rovers, instruments, payloads).

Applicants interested in utilizing CSA assets must clearly state so in their application and provide information on their rover, instrument or payload as well as their schedule. However, the CSA cannot guarantee a specific asset will be available at the location, period of the year or time of day stated in a recipient's proposal. The Proposal should also address the risk & mitigation plan if any requested CSA assets & resources cannot be made available for use.

B.1 Use of CSA rovers, infrastructure or facilities on-site in Saint-Hubert (Quebec)

The CSA will provide, subject to availability, expert engineering and technical staff resources to operate the CSA-provided elements and infrastructure, and support the recipients while on-site at the CSA.

The CSA will also provide the appropriate information to the recipient to ensure that interfaces (e.g. such as those of the rovers) are well understood in order to accommodate recipient instruments or payloads. Instrument or payload interface adaptation/modifications may be necessary.

B.2 Process

Once a proposal has been selected, the Recipient will have to fill out a questionnaire providing additional information on its rover, instrument or payload and the field investigation requirements. The Recipient will subsequently be responsible for ensuring its equipment will be ready on time and meets CSA safety and interface requirements, which will be provided by the CSA upon request.

The preliminary schedule provided in the proposal should include a target deployment date and a "Deployment Readiness Review" four (4) weeks prior to the scheduled deployment date. The deployment date will be confirmed shortly after the Readiness Review. The CSA will do its utmost to accommodate all selected applicant requests that meet the CSA Health & Safety (H&S), Security, interface requirements, and that are compatible with the ongoing CSA plans and schedule for use of its rovers, facilities and infrastructure and technical support resources.

Users of CSA facilities (e.g. AT) will be sent Facility-specific H&S Plans prior to their arrival. Each participant will be asked to respond with an email stating that they have read, understood and will comply with the H&S requirements.

CSA badging will be arranged prior to arrival. Depending on the length of visit and frequency of trips to the CSA, either a Visitor's Badge (Escort required) or a CSA Access Badge (no Escort required) will be issued on-arrival. For CSA Visitor Badges - Canadians need to show ID (e.g. Driver's License) and non-Canadians need to show ID + student/work Visa + Passport). For CSA Access Badges - a Government Security Check will be done including Fingerprinting & Form to be filled and submitted approximately two (2) weeks prior to visit.

B.3 Agreements

An agreement will have to be signed between CSA and recipients in order to have access to CSA rovers, infrastructure and facilities. This agreement will include, among other things, clauses relating to the following elements:

B.4 Expenses

All expenses associated with the recipients rover, instrument or payload interface adaptation, testing, integration and shipping, as well as travel and accommodation before, during and after the field investigation activity, are the Grant recipient's responsibility.

B.5 Use of CSA rovers at a remote location (e.g. optional Lanzarote analogue site)

CSA rovers could be used by the Recipient at their home location, if sufficient justification is provided and, at an optional field deployment site in Lanzarote, Spain. The applicant requesting access to a CSA rover at those locations must plan a visit to CSA HQ located in Saint-Hubert (Quebec), as CSA will provide at the CSA HQ and subject to availability, expert engineering and technical staff resources to train the Recipient team members on how to operate the CSA rovers.

During that visit, the CSA will work with the Recipient to ensure that interfaces are well understood in order to accommodate Recipient's instruments or payloads. Instrument or payload interface adaptation/modifications may be necessary.

B.6 Loan agreement

Should the project involve the use of CSA rovers at the Recipient's home location and/or an optional field deployment site in Lanzarote, Spain a loan agreement must be signed between CSA and the Recipient. The agreement will include, among other things, clauses relating to the following elements:

B.7 Expenses related to the use of CSA rovers

All expenses associated with the Recipient instrument or payload interface adaptation, testing, shipping and integration with a rover, as well as travel and accommodation before, during and after the field investigation activity, are the grant Recipient's responsibility. This also includes shipment of the CSA-rover to/from the Recipient's home location. Only for the optional Lanzarote deployment in , the Recipient will be responsible for shipping all required equipment (including CSA rover, if applicable) to/from the CSA. The CSA will integrate the Recipient equipment into CSA shipping containers and transport them to/from Lanzarote.

B.8 CSA rovers & facilities overview descriptions

For a high level description of CSA rovers & facilities, please see below.

In order to provide as much information as possible before the AO application deadline, the following CSA Documents are also being made available on a per-request basis and in an "as-is" state. In some cases, the information contained does not reflect with 100% accuracy the current configuration of the facilities, as some upgrades may have occurred since the documents were prepared. However, the information supplied should be sufficient to provide the applicant with an understanding of the available functionality, capability and general interfaces. Available documentation is listed below:

To obtain a copy of those documents, please send a request to stedia-dstemu@asc-csa.gc.ca. For any questions on those documents, please refer to section 9 (FAQ's) of the AO.

B.9 CSA fleet of rovers

The Canadian Space Agency's fleet of rovers

Credit: CSA

For a description of CSAs fleet of rovers. (Note: Only 2 Junos and 1 LRPDP are available for this AO)

B.10 CSA facilities descriptions

ExDOC

The ExDOC provides centralized command and control for various technology and science resources deployed at local or remote analogue sites.

It also provides re-distribution of voice, video, and data & control functions to other participating centers e.g. universities, contractors, international partners.

Credit: CSA

AT (Planetary AT)

The CSA-located AT is a 60 x 120 metre outdoor facility offering various surface features and topographies to simulate the planetary surface, such as rock bed, crater, summit, and flag stone patch. This facility is also equipped with situation awareness cameras and WIFI network for the needs of rover and instrument or payload testing and deployment.

Credit: CSA

PCCS

This infrastructure provides a controlled & secure environment for conducting remote analogue site deployments i.e. a portable "ExDOC" and can be rapidly deployed and setup. Note: For projects under category B, the PCCS will be available for use at the CSA deployment site, but will not be available at the potential deployment at Lanzarote site should the optional field deployment in be approved.

It measures approximately 10 m (including Hitch) by 3 m by 3 m tall.

Equipped with multiple workstations and satellite & wireless communications equipment.

Credit: CSA

RIF

The RIF is both a development and integration & test facility for rovers, payloads and instruments, providing.

Credit: CSA

ESF

Co-located with the AT, the ESF provides a sheltered and secure environment in which to store a variety of rovers and science & technology instruments.

ESF dimensions are 10.4 m by 7 m with 3.2 m ceiling height, providing over 70 square-metres of storage area. It is able to provide storage for up to 20 rovers.

Credit: CSA

RIW

The RIW is an indoor testing facility located in the CSA High Bay.

It is a somewhat smaller (13.4 m by 11.0 m) version of the AT that is generally used when weather conditions prohibit use of the AT, but provides similar functionality.

Credit: CSA

Appendix C: Scoring and weighting

A numerical weight is associated with each criterion. It is strongly recommended that applicants draft their proposals by providing information related to each highest score.

Since the main objective of this AO is to train Canadian HQP, some selection criteria relate particularly to the quality of HQP training. High-quality training should attract and equip students for future careers in space science or technology, hence research should benefit Canada (original, relevant to future missions and space opportunities), and results should provide the student with experience, knowledge and skills that are recognized and sought after in the Canadian space sector (industry, academia and/or government).

1. Benefits to Canada

1.1 Increased knowledge in space science and technology

This criterion evaluates the originality of the research and its probable impact and potential to advance our knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology, directly or indirectly and more specifically for lunar missions (for category A projects, refer to 3.4.1.1).

Poor: The research is not expected to have a significant short- or long-term impact. The project lacks novel concepts and will not contribute to advancement of new knowledge in space science and/or technology. (Score: 0)

Average: The research could advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology. The work is largely derivative of previous work. (Score: 5)

Good: The probable results will advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology. The proposed research involves new or original concepts or methods, and/or builds on previous work (Score: 10)

Excellent: The probable results will advance knowledge in the field of space science and/or technology and have a broad, long-term impact beyond the immediate field of study. The proposed research stands out because of its highly innovative or original scientific or technical concepts or methods, and/or builds significantly on previous work. (Score: 15)

1.2 Relevance to the FAST LEAD AO project category A or B

This criterion evaluates the relevance of the proposed project to one (1) of the FAST LEAD AO project category (A or B) described in sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2.

Poor: The research is not relevant to any of the FAST LEAD AO Project category described in sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2. (Score: 0)

Average: The research is relevant to a FAST LEAD AO Project category listed in sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2. (Score: 5)

Good: The research is relevant to a FAST LEAD AO Project category described in sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 and may be integrated into, or contribute to, a future space mission. (Score: 10)

Excellent: The research is central to a FAST LEAD AO Project category described in sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2. It contributes to mission objectives currently under consideration and/or presents solutions to known and future space mission needs, and hence is highly likely to result in or contribute to a future space mission, or to be used/commercialized by industry. (Score: 15)

2. Results in terms of contribution to the training of Canadian HQP

2.1 The relevance of experience, knowledge and skills acquired by Canadian HQP to the Canadian space sector needs

This criterion is used to assess the degree to which experience, knowledge and skills targeted in HQP training are relevant to the Canadian space sector (industry, academia and/or government) needs (see section 3.5). For category A project refer to section 3.4.1.3 and 3.4.1.5 for more details.

Poor: The knowledge and skills to be acquired by Canadian HQP over the course of the project are not defined, or are unrelated or are irrelevant to the Canadian space sector. It is also not clear how the knowledge and skills planned to be acquired by Canadian HQP will increase their employability. (Score: 0)

Average: The knowledge and skills to be acquired by Canadian HQP involved in the project are defined to some degree and are relevant to the Canadian space sector. However, it is not clear who would acquire the knowledge and skills, what knowledge or skills would consist of, or what purpose they would serve. There is insufficient rationale to demonstrate how the knowledge and skills to be acquired are relevant to future space missions. The knowledge and skills planned to be acquired by Canadian HQP may increase their employability. (Score: 7)

Good: The knowledge and skills to be acquired by Canadian HQP involved in the project are defined and relevant to the Canadian space sector. The knowledge and skills planned to be acquired by Canadian HQP will increase their employability. (Score: 14)

Excellent: The knowledge and skills to be acquired by Canadian HQP involved in the project are clearly defined and relevant to the Canadian space sector. There is a description of the need for the knowledge and skills to be acquired, and how it will be used, in the context of a potential future space mission. Knowledge and skills planned to be acquired by Canadian HQP will greatly increase their employability. (Score: 20)

2.2 Interaction between Canadian HQP and researchers from different disciplines and occupations

This criterion evaluates how well the project promotes collaborative team research and interaction between Canadian HQP of different levels of academic programs as well as between Canadian HQP and researchers from different disciplines and other occupations from other organizations.

Poor: All Canadian HQP involved in the project are at the same academic level and/or have unclear or limited interaction with researchers other than their supervisor(s). (Score: 0)

Average: Some Canadian HQP involved in the project collaborate and interact with researchers from different disciplines and with others from other organizations. Canadian HQP are, however, at the same academic level (program and/or discipline). (Score: 4)

Good: Most of the Canadian HQP involved in the project collaborate and interact with researchers from different disciplines and others organizations. Canadian HQP are at different levels of academic programs and disciplines. (Score: 7)

Excellent: All Canadian HQP involved in the project collaborate and interact with researchers from different disciplines and with others in academia, industry and governments in Canada and abroad. Canadian HQP are from different levels of academic programs and disciplines. (Score: 10)

3. Resources

3.1 Quality and experience of the project team

This criterion evaluates the quality of the project team (PI, Co-PI or PDFs as applicable), its combination of expertise, and its ability to carry out the research project and provide the proposed training activities. It evaluates the qualifications of the team members and their past performance, particularly their track record in training HQP.

Poor: The project team has no experience or expertise in the field of study and/or the supervisors have little to no track record with training HQP. (Score: 0)

Average: The project team has some experience and expertise in the field of study. However, although the supervisors have a track record in managing and completing similar projects, they have little experience in training HQP. All team members may not have the appropriate expertise for the roles and responsibilities they would have during the project. (Score: 4)

Good: Members of the project team have demonstrated experience and expertise in the field of study and the supervisors have a good track record in training HQP. There is a good combination of expertise to undertake the proposed project and training activities. The supervisors have demonstrated the ability to manage and complete similar projects. Roles and responsibilities of each member correspond to their expertise and experience. (Score: 7)

Excellent: Members of the project team have extensive experience in the field of study and the supervisors have a solid track record in training HQP. The combination of expertise needed to undertake the proposed project and training activities is excellent. The team members have demonstrated the ability to manage and complete more than two (2) similar projects. Roles and responsibilities of each team member correspond to their expertise and experience. (Score: 10)

3.2 Adequacy of allocated resources

This criterion evaluates the quality, quantity and relevance of the human and non-human resources planned to be utilized to meet the project goals and objectives. It evaluates the timely availability of these resources and the adequate allocation of these resources to each specific project task. It also evaluates the existence of collaborators willing to provide financial and/or in-kind contribution, thereby leveraging funds from the CSA.

Poor: There is a clear mismatch between the resources proposed to be used and the project goals and objectives. Key resources are missing and there is no indication of a plan to obtain them. There are no contributions from the applicant or from other organizations. (0 Point)

Average: Some resources (material, research infrastructure, human (expertise and skills), and/or financial resources) are missing to accomplish the project goals and objectives. The applicant provides an in-kind contribution. Other organizations to be involved in the project plan to provide financial and/or in-kind contribution (4 Points).

Good: Material, research infrastructure, human (expertise and skills), and financial resources required to accomplish the project goals and objectives are identified and their utilization is planned adequately. While being well identified, there are some uncertainties about availability of resources in a timely manner. The allocation of resources per project task is appropriate. The applicant will provide an in-kind contribution. Other organizations to be involved in the project may plan to provide a financial or in-kind contribution. Only some resources are secured and/or confirmed so far. (7 Points)

Excellent: Material, research infrastructure, human (expertise and skills), and financial resources required to accomplish the project goals and objectives are clearly identified, well detailed and planned to be efficiently and effectively used. Resources will be available in a timely manner. The allocation of resources per project task is clearly appropriate. The applicant will provide a significant in-kind contribution considering the total project budget. Other organizations to be involved in the project will provide significant financial and in-kind contributions. All resources have been secured and/or confirmed. (10 Points)

4. Feasibility of the project

4.1 Clarity and completeness of the research and training plans

This criterion evaluates the clarity, completeness and feasibility of the research, training and mentoring plans, with the roles and responsibilities, contribution and level of involvement of each team member clearly identified. The criterion also evaluates the likelihood that the work will be completed on schedule and within budget.

Poor: The management, training and mentoring plans are poorly defined and/or there is a high likelihood that the objectives will not be met because of any or a combination of the following: inappropriate methods; inadequate or unavailable resources; the proposed budget or schedule is incomplete and/or highly under- or over-estimated. (Score: 0)

Average: The management, training and mentoring plans are defined to some degree, but details are lacking. The work and HQP training could be completed on schedule and within budget, but some doubts remain concerning the suitability of methods, the access of proposed ground-based infrastructure, analogue site, suborbital/orbital platform, scientific instruments and/or data to be used, and the availability of resources. A budget that appears to be reasonable is provided along with a basic rationale for projected expenses. (Score: 4)

Good: The management, training and mentoring plans are well defined. The methodology and resources required are clearly described and well suited to the work to be carried out. A budget is provided along with a sound rationale for projected expenses. The likelihood that the defined work including the ground-based infrastructure, analogue site, suborbital/orbital platform, scientific instruments and/or data utilization and training activities will be completed on schedule and within budget is good. (Score: 7)

Excellent: Well-thought-out management, training and mentoring plans are provided. The methodology and resources required are clearly described and well suited to the work to be carried out. There is great detail on the breakdown and related expenses, scheduled milestones, time allocations for team members to carry out the project. The proposal identifies adequate resources to be allocated to the project that are validated in a detailed rationale in support of the budget. The likelihood that the work, the ground-based infrastructure, analogue site, suborbital/orbital platform, scientific instruments and/or data utilization and training activities will be completed within schedule and budget is excellent. (Score: 10)

4.2 Project risks (financial, managerial, environmental and technical) and mitigation strategies

This criterion evaluates key risks associated with the project and the mitigation strategies for each risk. In addition, a thorough analysis of the project's financial, technical, managerial and environmental risks should be carried out. Detailed information should be provided on resources availability, risks associated with their non-availability and, the risk and mitigation strategies associated with those risks (level of uncertainties related to the launch date, access to infrastructure, field site, instruments and/or data, agreement with the launch provider, collaboration with industry and foreign research partners).

Poor: The proposal does not identify any key risks or outline any mitigation strategies or some risks are identified, but associated mitigation strategies are missing. (Score: 0)

Average: The proposal identifies some, but not all, of the main risks and provides mitigation strategies for those identified risks. There are great risks that the planned fieldwork, the use infrastructure or scientific instrument, or the data analysis will not occur as planned. (Score: 4)

Good: Key financial, technical, managerial and environmental risks and associated mitigation strategies are described and are relevant, and some information is provided assessing the probability of the risks materializing. There is good confidence that the planned fieldwork, use of infrastructure or scientific instrument, or data analysis will occur as planned during the period covered by the grant. Most other sources of funding have been confirmed. (Score: 7)

Excellent: Key financial, technical, managerial and environmental risks and associated mitigation strategies are described and are relevant. The information provided for the purpose of assessing the probability of the risks materializing is deemed realistic. The planned fieldwork, use of infrastructure or scientific instrument, or data analysis will occur as planned during the period covered by the grant. All other sources of funding have been confirmed. (Score: 10)

Evaluation score

Follow us

Date modified: