6.1 Evaluation criteria
Applications are evaluated based on the following criteria, according to the weighting indicated. It is the applicant's responsibility to clearly address these criteria in their written proposal.
The criteria listed below form a repertory of values and objectives of the Program for College Research, and were developed to suit a diversity of research projects and applicant profiles.
Thus, evaluators do not necessarily expect all applicants to meet all of the sub-indicators presented below, but to meet most of them in a consistent manner.
Criterion 1: Quality of the research project (65 pts)
C1.1 Excellence in research (15 pts)
Creativity, innovation, potential for disruption and advancement in the field, theoretical approach if applicable (relevance of the theme and issues addressed, new approach, risk-taking, etc.);
1.1.2 Scientific scope
Scope of the objectives for the scientific and user communities and contributions within the field of research;
1.1.3 Collaborations and partnerships
Cooperation in Québec and/or internationally (relevance, added value for the project, the institution or Québec);
C1.2 Project presentation (30 pts)
Relevance in relation to the objectives; scientific and technical feasibility. Availability of infrastructure and equipment. Where appropriate, the reuse of scientific material and the purchase of second-hand material are encouraged. Ethical and environmental considerations;
1.2.2 Realism of the time frame and budget
Appropriateness of budget and time frame: budget justification (details, quantification, financial structuring, etc.), relevance of the project duration to the research question and budget, risk management plan;
1.2.3 Quality of presentation
Project structure and understanding: description of objectives and keywords, clarity, popularization, quality of writing and language, etc.;
C1.3 Project benefits (20 pts)
1.3.1 Strengthening research capacity
Training and mentoring plan: feasibility of the project for the training of highly qualified personnel (HQP), recruitment, tasks, pedagogical scope.
1.3.2 Knowledge transfer
Valorization, promotion and dissemination of results internally and in technical and general training programs as well as to user communities and the general public. Consideration for access to data (open access, etc.);
Criterion 2: Applicant's competency in science (30 pts)
C2.1 Scientific capacity (15 pts)
2.1.1 Scientific expertise
Relevance of CV to the project: the applicant must possess the expertise and knowledge necessary to successfully carry out the proposed project;
2.1.2 Experience and potential
Applicant's research experience: quantity and quality of scientific contributions and achievements, mentoring and potential demonstrated by the applicant throughout his/her career and activities related to research and science: originality of academic background, risk-taking, engagement, collaborative network, leadership, etc.;
C2.2 Knowledge dissemination (15 pts)
2.2.1 Scientific community
Knowledge transfer activities; organization and presentation at seminars, symposia, workshops; report, guide, etc.;
2.2.2 General public and user communities
Discussions and dissemination activities for a wide audience: general public, schools, colleges, municipal services, media, volunteering, production of non-technical content, etc.
Criterion 3: Integration of the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion in research (5 pts)
Efforts put in place to promote equity, diversity and inclusion. It is up to each applicant to choose how to address this criterion through concrete actions, taking into account his or her unique situation. Efforts may involve composition, organization and management, knowledge sharing and dissemination to user communities, etc.
For more information on this criterion, please consult the document entitled Guidelines on considering equity, diversity and inclusion in the evaluation of FRQNT grant applications. This document is also available in the Toolbox Section.
6.2 Evaluation process
The program administrator and scientific advisors classify the funding applications according to their research fields. Keywords are essential to this classification.
Applications are evaluated by multidisciplinary evaluation committees and external experts. All evaluators are selected among peers from the college, industrial, socio-economic and university sectors.
Role of the multidisciplinary evaluation committees and external experts
The multidisciplinary evaluation committees and, where applicable, external experts evaluate applications according to the rules and evaluation criteria in effect for the program, taking into account the quality standards and existing research traditions in the different disciplines concerned.
The committees rank the applications and advise the board of directors of the proposals that merit funding. Budget projections are considered in the evaluation process.
Role of the program administrator
The program administrator is responsible for ensuring that committee members and external referees comply with the current rules of the program, as well as the rules relating to ethics, confidentiality, the responsible conduct of research, and equity, diversity and inclusion.