| 1 The title can be long but not more than 75 characters with spaces; and the acronym should meaningfully convey the title of the project |
| 2 Duration can be a maximum of 24 months i.e., FY 2024-25 & FY 2025-26. Projects with clear objectives of less than 24 months duration would be given priority |
| 3 Clearly spell out whether the proposal is basic research oriented (which might result in background data for a full-blown proposal for funding by either CSIR or other grant providing agencies) OR Applied research (which either would result in a technology, process or a product that can be commercialized) |
| 4 More than One PI could be allowed with a proper justification. There has to be a clear accounting of time that will be spent by PIs, Co-PIs and team members for the proposed project. Further, projects involving colleagues from different divisions/sections with justifications for such involvements will be given preference. |
| 5 Please provide patent search, current status of literature and clearly indicate how the proposed project is different from what is already available in the published domain. |
| 6 Work package can be clearly state objectives and work elements will be the way objectives will be achieved. In other words, each work package should result either in a proposal that would be funded by other funding agencies, technology, process or a product. Proposals can have a maximum of 4 work packages and clearly charted work elements (not more than 3 work elements under each work packages) to achieve the work package. |
| 7 Equipments that will be placed in the central facility for use by all would be considered for funding. |
| 7a Clearly state with time line when the indents will be raised and by when it will reach S&P. |
| 8 Clearly indicate what are the outputs (papers, patents, process or technology) and subsequent outcomes (official method, licensed process/technology/product). |
| 9a Any proposals that have clearly identified an industrial partner would be given preference and the TRL levels that would be achieved needs to be clearly mentioned. |
| 9b If the industry contributes 10% of the project cost, they would be preferentially offered the technology developed at 50% cost fixed by the institute. |
| 9c Must indicate as to how the background information obtained through this proposal would result/compel the other funding agency to fund the extended proposal. |
| 9d This is self-explanatory |
| 10 This is notional loss the team has to project to strengthen their chances of approval. However, the clear justifications have to be provided for the loss they are projecting with rationale. |
| 11 All the proposals would be reviewed by the laboratory strategy group and also will be evaluated through a double-blind process using external reviewers as well. Hence, indicate who the potential reviewers for this proposal are and mention why you consider them best suited to review your proposal. |
| 12 Any scientist / expert you think should not see or review your proposal should be mentioned here. |