Nominations must present a recent outstanding Canadian advance in a field of the natural sciences or engineering. While the interpretation of a “recent” advance can be different among disciplines, NSERC considers a period of less than 10 years to be appropriate for most disciplines.

Nominations will be evaluated according to the following selection criteria:

1. Novelty and quality of the advance
   • extent to which the recent advance presents novel, original, creative or innovative concepts, lines of inquiry, or methodology, and/or applies existing knowledge or techniques in original ways
   • the work leading to the advance followed a rigorous and responsible approach to research, which can include but is not limited to reproducibility of results, accessibility of findings, appropriate data stewardship, and the integration of equity, diversity and inclusion considerations in the research process , where relevant
2. Impact and significance of the advance within its field
   • extent to which the advance has had a tangible impact on the field
   • extent to which the advance is of high significance or a major contribution to the field

A diverse selection committee made up of research representatives from academia, government and industry across a range of disciplines will review the nominations and recommend the successful candidate or team to NSERC. Committee members are selected according to NSERC’s guidelines governing membership of selection committees. The committee may recommend that the prize not be awarded in a given year if there is no outstanding nomination.

NSERC recognizes that the entire research ecosystem is strengthened by equitable, diverse and inclusive access and participation. In support of its ongoing commitment to cultural and systemic change in Canadian research, NSERC has updated and improved its guidelines concerning contributions to research and training. The intended outcomes of the Tri-agency EDI Action Plan and recommendations from the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) inform these changes. NSERC’s revised guidelines on the assessment of contributions to research, training and mentoring diversify the principles and considerations regarding contributions and assessing their quality and impact. The selection committee will consider a broad range of indicators of quality and impact when assessing the merit of a nomination as described in these guidelines.

The nominator(s) should clearly describe the quality and impact of the advance, placing it within this larger context for the multidisciplinary selection committee members.

It is also important to note that the stature of a candidate is not an evaluation criterion for this prize, and research contributions unrelated to the advance will not be considered. Additionally, the impact of the advance is only assessed within its field. While the benefits to Canadian society (societal impact) may be presented, it is not among the selection criteria.

Regarding the impact of the advance within its field, impact does not refer to quantitative indicators such as bibliometrics, but to the influence that the results have had on other researchers and on the specific field. Impact can include, but is not limited to: advancing knowledge, developing technology that improved the accuracy, speed or general approach to research; providing access to a new data set that offered significant improvements to quality and speed of models; generating new knowledge that opened up new lines of inquiry; training students in a way that led to a critical mass of expertise in a much-needed area of research; or contributing to increased diversity and equity in research. The relevance of such considerations may differ depending on the discipline and the nature of the research being conducted.

Eligible candidates may be nominated by any individual or group. Because nominations are reviewed by a multidisciplinary selection committee, the nomination material should be written for non-specialists.

The nomination package must include:

1. A letter of nomination signed by one or more nominators. The letter must be no more than four pages if written in English and five pages if written in French. It must also include a title describing the advance. The letter must clearly describe the recent advance using the following points as headings:
   • the nature of the advance
   • the novelty and quality of the advance (refer to selection criteria above)
   • the impact and significance of the advance within its field (refer to selection criteria above)
   • a summary of the advance for public release
2. Up to four documents related to the recent, outstanding advance that provide evidence of how it meets the selection criteria
   • at least one of these must be a peer-reviewed article
   • the other documents may include testimonials and publications such as journal articles, workshop papers or posters, communications, preprints, monographs, memoirs or special papers, review articles, conference or symposia proceedings and abstracts, government publications, and reports documenting contributions to engineering practice, among others
3. The names, organizational affiliations and email addresses of six researchers who could be contacted by NSERC to conduct an impartial review of the nomination
   • reviewers must not be in conflict of interest (see the Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Policy of the federal research funding organizations)
   • NSERC strongly recommends that nominators suggest a cross-section of reviewers with expertise in the nominee’s area of research, such as:
     • Canadian or international researchers from established to early-career stages
     • individuals from underrepresented groups, including women
     • researchers in academic and non-academic settings
   • Nominees must not contact suggested external reviewers in advance
   • NSERC reserves the right to select all or none of the suggested reviewers
4. A brief letter from the team identifying one of the members as the spokesperson (for team nominations only). This individual must be eligible to hold NSERC grant funds and will serve as the contact person for NSERC for matters related to the outcome of the competition (see NSERC's eligibility requirements for faculty to apply for or hold grant funds). The letter must also include the name, title, affiliation and email address of each team member
5. A terms and conditions form for nominees signed by each nominee (do not use the encrypted digital signature function). It is the nominee’s responsibility to retain a copy of the agreed terms and conditions for their records
6. A terms and conditions form for nominators signed by each nominator (do not use the encrypted digital signature function). It is the nominator’s responsibility to retain a copy of the agreed terms and conditions for their records