Our Investment Approach

Grand Challenges Canada is an innovation platform: we invest in Bold Ideas with Big Impact®.

We define innovation as new or adapted solutions that can deliver better outcomes than existing approaches. Innovation may take the form of a product, process, service, or delivery model. It should have the potential to address a defined grand challenge more effectively than what is currently available.

An innovation does not always have to be something completely new to the world. It can also involve new ways of using and applying proven ideas, tools, or methods in new contexts or in fundamentally different ways, where the design or implementation materially improves the lives of underserved or unserved populations. Innovations should be designed to meet community needs and demonstrate the potential for transformational impact and sustainable scale, whether through public systems, market mechanisms, or strategic partnerships.

We define Integrated Innovation™ as the coordinated application of scientific/ technological, social, and business innovation to develop whole solutions to complex challenges.

• Scientific/Technological Innovation: A new or improved product, tool, process or technical approach that is grounded in scientific research or engineering and addresses a clearly defined problem.  Examples include (but are not limited to) new or improved drug delivery systems, point-of-care diagnostic devices, or digital tools that expand access to care.
• Social Innovation: A new or improved approach to delivering services, shaping behaviour, or strengthening systems to improve outcomes. Examples include interventions to reduce gender barriers, engagement of community or religious leaders to build trust, or approaches that remove financial obstacles.
• Business Innovation: A new or improved business (or financing) model that enables a solution to be sustained. Examples include affordable business models to secure government or investor buy-in, strategies for developing, manufacturing, and distributing products or services, or a novel incentive scheme.

Integrated Innovation™ recognizes that each innovation type has standalone value, but none can sufficiently address complex challenges on its own. The real transformative power comes from integrating multiple innovation types to address both the underlying problem and the barriers to adoption, accessibility, reach, and sustainability.

What this means for you:

• Integrated Innovation™ does not require each type to be novel but requires the role of innovation to be considered for each.  
• We will explore all three of these dimensions with funded innovators over time, on the path to scale and sustainability.

Learn more about our perspective on integrated innovation in our white paper.

Balancing risk and reward is at the heart of innovation. As an innovation platform, we take smart, calculated risks to achieve impact.

We think about this in two main ways:

• Innovation risk: the risk that an untested innovation will fail to achieve the intended impact (i.e. that it won’t work). We accept this risk as the price of backing new ideas before evidence exists.
• Innovation-market fit risk: The risk that a tested and proven innovation struggles to gain traction in real-world contexts (i.e.that users may not adopt it, that no one will pay for it, or that it can’t scale). We accept this risk as well, recognizing that technical proof and market traction are two separate mountains to climb.

We also recognize that some innovations are groundbreaking (fundamentally reshaping how a problem is solved), while others are incremental (bringing existing or modified solutions to new markets or user groups).

What you need to know about our approach to risk:

• We have a high risk appetite for new ideas and their market fit. We’re willing to take bold bets on unproven ideas before markets or systems fully accept them. We expect these risks to decrease with time, as the evidence and market fit grow.
• We have a lower tolerance for project and organizational risks within an innovator’s control (e.g. planning, execution, fiduciary risks , etc.) and for external risks (e.g. political instability).

We currently fund innovative solutions at two stages: Proof of Concept and Transition to Scale.

Our Proof of Concept or “seed” funding helps test early-stage ideas, methods, or products. This is the stage where an innovation is field-tested in a real-world pilot to assess its potential for impact, as well as technical, operational, and financial viability.[1] GCC typically deploys grants of CAD $150,000 – $250,000 for 12-24 months at the Proof of Concept stage.  

What to know about our Proof of Concept funding:

• We encourage innovation in all forms: technologies, products, services, processes, business models, and/or delivery mechanisms.
• To be eligible for Proof of Concept funding, it is not required that the applicant have already piloted or tested their innovative idea.
• Proposed solutions must be innovative, with the potential to drive meaningful or transformative impact.

Proof of Concept funding is also available to support the ongoing design and refinement of an innovation, or to assess its operational feasibility, acceptability, user engagement, satisfaction, adherence, or efficiency. This list is non-exhaustive; innovators are encouraged to consider what is relevant for their solution and context.

Proof of Concept awards are an opportunity to pilot innovations with the potential to drive transformative impact. We believe that the Proof of Concept stage presents an opportunity to generate important learnings and insights about what works and what doesn’t.  Even when an innovative idea fails, there is value in understanding why. That’s why we require that all Proof of Concept investments include monitoring, evaluation and learning activities during the project period.

What this means for Proof of Concept proposals:

• It is critical that applicants propose clear definitions of what ‘proof of concept’ and meaningful impact means for their solution and context, as well as a robust plan to evaluate whether this was achieved by the project end.
• Specifically, applicants should begin thinking through their theory of change and identifying relevant priority outcomes for the duration of their project. Where in-house monitoring, learning and evaluation capacity is limited, early exploration of academic or research partnerships may be appropriate. We are open to a variety of evaluative methods at the Proof of Concept stage, such as observational study designs, to surface early signals of impact.

At Proof of Concept, monitoring, learning, and evaluation activities must include:

• SMART objectives (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound) to define and determine how achievement of proof of concept will be assessed;
• Plans to monitor and evaluate the effects of the innovation on the priority outcome(s) listed in the Request for Proposal, with defined indicators (both process and proxy);
• Appropriate tools and approaches to monitor and evaluate impact, with careful consideration of the context and community;
• A plan (if relevant) to incorporate human-centred or participatory design approaches and feedback loops; and
• A strategy to identify shortcomings, challenges, and unexpected results.

For innovations that cannot demonstrate proof of concept, it is expected that innovators will be able to document learnings about why their innovation did not work.

We assess whether proof of concept was established by reviewing achievement of the specific objectives agreed on with the innovator at the start of the award.

We also consider:

• Strength of evidence – using an appropriate methodology (ideally from a controlled or limited setting) the innovator has demonstrated that the innovation improves one or more relevant priority outcomes;
• User/community demand – the innovator has demonstrated that the innovation is feasible, and that there is demand at the end-user/community level, and with key stakeholders for ongoing implementation and scale; and
• Feasible next steps or early plans for how the innovation can be sustained in the target region and/or scaled across a larger region.

We define Scale as expanding an innovation so that it reaches a significant share of the need, demand, or problem it aims to address.

We recognize that innovations rarely move quickly from proof of concept to scale. There is a significant ‘transition to scale’ journey in which an innovation moves from a controlled, smaller-scale setting to reaching many more people. This journey usually takes time, and requires learning, adaptation, and growth over several years.

That’s why we deploy patient and catalytic capital (grants, debt, equity) at Transition to Scale to support the most promising innovations that serve those in greatest need, and that are positioned to take a bold idea to big impact.

Readiness for Transition to Scale investment means having a viable innovation that has demonstrated positive results in a controlled setting (i.e. achieved proof of concept) and the potential to drive impact if deployed at scale.

You are ready for a Transition to Scale investment if:

• Your innovation has demonstrated feasibility and effectiveness, and shown early evidence of impact on the priority outcomes relevant to the grand challenge. This evidence should come from proof of concept (or equivalent) testing (whether funded by us or others).
• Your organization has a scaling plan under development or in testing.
• Your organization has visionary leadership that can articulate a future scaling state.
• You have key stakeholders engaged or committed for ongoing implementation at scale (both financial and non-financial).

What phase of Transition to Scale funding are you eligible for?

We use a 3-phased approach to our Transition to Scale investments:

• Each phase depends on factors such as evidence of impact, progress on scaling plans, strength of partnerships, demand for the innovation, and availability of match funding.
• Funding amounts and timelines adjust accordingly and are tailored to the innovation’s stage of development and needs.
• We may start investing in an innovation at the earliest or at later stages of scale-up. We may also reinvest in the most promising innovations as they progress along their scaling journey.
• Sometimes phases are repeated.

Please note: Phasing, related funding amount, and investment duration will always be at our discretion and determined during the due diligence phase (should an innovation move forward to due diligence). 

The next section is intended to help you estimate which Transition to Scale phase is applicable to you.

The graphic below is intended to help you estimate which Transition to Scale phase is applicable to you.

I need a viable plan for scale.

This phase is for innovators that have already achieved Proof of Concept and now need to develop a viable plan for scale.

Your innovation would fall under this phase if:

• You have already achieved Proof of Concept in a controlled or limited setting; and
• Your innovation has demonstrated early impact, operational feasibility, user satisfaction and engagement, and efficiency; and
• You now need to generate additional evidence of impact beyond the initial setting and/or develop a clear, viable plan to scale.

Objectives of funding at this phase:

• Strengthen evidence beyond the controlled setting
• Develop a feasible plan for scale
• Identify partners and other funding sources

Typical funding amount: $150K to $300K CAD

Matched funding expectation: N/A, and an asset if secured already

Typical funding timeline: 6-18 months

I need to test my business/scaling plan and address gaps

This phase is for innovators that have already developed a scaling plan and now need to test and validate its viability and scalability.

Your innovation would fall under this phase if:

• You have already demonstrated feasibility and evidence of impact
• You have developed a clear scaling plan
• Strategic partners and/or funders have been identified and show early commitment
• You now need to test, validate, and strengthen your scaling approach in real-world settings

Objectives of funding at this phase:

• To validate the viability and scalability of your scaling plan
• Address evidence gaps required by commercial or public sector partners
• Grow and strengthen strategic partnerships
• Fill key personnel or operational gaps necessary for successful scale

Typical funding amount: $300K – $1.5M CAD

Matched funding expectation: $0.75 for every $ GCC invests

Typical funding timeline: 1-2 years

I need to refine and implement my business/ scaling plan, based on lessons learned

This phase is for innovators that have already validated their scaling plan and are ready to expand and strengthen implementation at scale.

Your innovation would fall under this phase if:

• Your scale plan has been well tested and validated
• You have demonstrated feasibility and robust evidence of impact required by commercial or public sector scaling partners
• Strategic partners and funders are identified, with strong demonstrated commitments to support scale
• You are now focused on expansion, iteration, and strengthening organizational capacity for multi-site or system-level scale

Objectives of funding at this phase:

• To improve and iterate the scaling plan based on implementation lessons
• Strengthen organizational capacity to scale to multiple locations
• Secure long-term agreements and funding
• Formalize strategic partnerships and/or government buy-in to enable sustained scale

Typical funding amount: Up to $3M CAD

Matched funding expectation: 1.50 for every $ GCC invests

Typical funding timeline: 2-4 years

We have learned that in order to scale beyond our funding, innovators require support from strategic partners that provide money and critical ‘more-than-money’ access to resources, markets, networks and expertise. Our match funding approach is designed to encourage innovators to identify, build and maintain strong strategic and funding partnerships.

For every Transition to Scale investment that we make, we assess the availability of matched funds from another source.

• Matched funds are defined as dollar for dollar contributions in alignment or addition to funded activities.
• Minimum match funding expectations differ by Transition to Scale phase. Innovators and applicants are encouraged to secure match funding aligned with their stage of scale, ideally before submitting an application. We understand this may not always be possible, so during due diligence, we work with innovators to establish clear and achievable fundraising milestones.
• In-kind contributions and funds from the same originating source as the award, i.e., Global Affairs Canada, are not considered as match funding. 

For Transition to Scale funding, we require that all investments include a monitoring, evaluation and learning plan. As part of these plans and activities, we expect innovators to:

• Measure the effectiveness of their innovation, and demonstrate evidence of improved health, wellbeing, and survival amongst underserved and unserved populations.
• Demonstrate that their innovation makes real impact, compared to what would have happened without it – for example, by using control or comparison groups to help prove that positive outcomes are due to the innovation and nothing else.
• In addition to showing improvements in health, wellbeing, and access on end-users, innovators are expected to develop strong plans to monitor immediate and intermediate outcomes, such as (but not limited to):
  • jobs created
  • intermediaries using (or trained to use) the innovation
  • improvements in knowledge or skills among intermediaries
  • the number of facilities or sites implementing the innovation
  • publications produced and new patents acquired.
• Monitor and evaluate outcomes over the project life cycle to ensure the positive benefits are maintained as the innovation scales and is more widely adopted.
• Monitor and report on progress towards achieving the intended outcomes; and identify best practices to maximizing impact, mitigation strategies for overcoming barriers to scale, and limitations of their Innovation.
• Develop plans to monitor and report their efforts and achievements related to stakeholder engagement,  and systems influence/change, as relevant to their innovation and long-term scaling and sustainability plans.

Transition to Scale innovators are also encouraged to strategically consider the type of evidence needed by prospective payers at scale. For example, if the long-term plan is to scale through a specific government system, an Innovator should consider working with government partners to understand what type of evidence would be critical to unlocking buy-in and support.

As part of their Transition to Scale activities, innovators can work with Grand Challenges Canada to build monitoring, evaluation, and learning plans to strengthen their evidence base.

For us, sustainability refers to an innovation’s ability to continue delivering and growing its impact after GCC funding ends.

Over more than a decade of supporting health innovations we’ve learnt that there is no single pathway to achieve sustainable scale.  Innovations may scale through public sector pathways, private sector pathways, or a combination of the two, depending on context and circumstances.

• We consider public sector scaling to include the engagement and cooperation of government bodies, such as uptake by national health systems and/or support by relevant multilateral organizations to secure public sector uptake.
• Private sector scaling includes commercial business models with self-generated revenue models.
• Overall, we value an organization’s vision and ability to articulate its end game and achieve financial sustainability, as this is a critical driver of long-term, scalable impact.

Innovators supported by GCC must be able to articulate how they will progress toward scale and sustainability, and through which pathway(s), while considering the following factors:

• the state of local infrastructure;
• social, political, and economic conditions;
• the capacity of their institution and its leadership;
• potential strategic and implementation partners;
• available long-term funding and revenue streams; and
• other potential barriers to scale.

GCC recognizes that scaling sustainably beyond our funding typically requires support from strategic partners who provide both financial capital and non-financial support, including access to networks, markets, resources, and expertise. 

All innovators are encouraged to identify, build, and maintain strong strategic and funding partnerships that ultimately enable them to embed innovations into practice, markets, or health systems to enable impact without donor dependency.

To achieve impact, bold ideas need to be implemented by effective, results-driven leaders. We encourage multidisciplinary teams and those applying to one of our funding opportunities should ensure they possess relevant technical, social, and business expertise.

What we look for in innovator teams:

Teams who demonstrate that, collectively, their core staff and collaborators have strong capacity in key areas such as –

• technical/sector-specific expertise;
• relevant geographic/context experience and presence;
• project management/delivery (e.g. conceptualization, design, creating innovative approaches, piloting, iteration);
• business development and/or public sector engagement;
• partnership development and management;
• monitoring, evaluation and learning;
• data analysis and statistics; and
• communications/marketing.

As innovations progress from the proof of concept stage through their scaling journey, there is almost always a need to review and evolve the leadership approach and team’s capacity to ensure continued success from one stage to the next.

We believe that the people closest to the challenge are best placed to develop relevant and impactful solutions to solve it. Local actors have the agency, knowledge and social capital needed to define, design, and implement meaningfully impactful innovations.

In this spirit, we value local leadership and invest in innovations that are culturally sensitive and community driven.

We’ve learned that innovations that achieve sustainable impact tend to be rooted in and/or demonstrate a strong understanding of the social, cultural, political, regulatory, and economic environment in which they operate. They also meaningfully engage their intended users to understand local needs and preferences, and to identify risks.

We encourage innovators to consider:   

• How your solution relates to local priorities (for example: national or regional policy plans, and data driven or community-stated issues not reflected in policy); 
• Why your innovation would be preferred over alternatives; and
• How your solution might stimulate market formation and consumer demand. 

When making our investment decisions, we will review the extent to which innovations are informed by, co-designed with, and implemented by/in partnership with affected communities. We assess whether innovations are:

1. Community owned
2. Community led
3. Community partnered
4. Community linked
5. Not meaningfully connected to community

In our review process, we will consider the following:

• Do key members of the innovation team identify as being part of the affected local community?
• Are key members of the innovation team based in or around the affected local community/region?
• What role(s) in the organization is/are held by any local staff?
• Does the implementing organization have an active local presence in the affected community?
• Does the organization partner with the affected community and/or with local community organization(s)?
  • If so, is this an active and established engagement or a new partnership?
  • Is this partnership equitable, collaborative, and/or consultative?

Grand Challenges Canada is committed to furthering the principles of gender equality, environmental sustainability and a human rights-based approach. For more information, see Grand Challenges Canada’s Policy on Gender Equality, Environmental Sustainability, and Human Rights and Inclusion.

Additional information about Grand Challenges Canada’s approach to gender lens investing can be found on our website – resources available include a gender white paper, gender equality learning modules and case studies. 

Grand Challenges Canada is not able to fund innovations for which the core intellectual property rights are owned by a third-party institution, unless that third party; (i) grants the applicant sufficient license rights to the innovation to permit eventual scaling in low- and middle-income countries; or (ii) signs an undertaking to comply with Grand Challenges Canada’s Sharing and Access for Impact Strategy and the Grant Agreement.

Grand Challenges Canada’s Sharing and Access for Impact Strategy guides our organization’s approach to intellectual property and all applicants are urged to consider their willingness to submit an application in compliance with this strategy, which includes a respect for the inherent right to self-determination and sovereignty of Indigenous and other communities around the world.

All funding recipients are required to commit to compliance with the Grand Challenges Canada Sharing and Access for Impact Strategy; to develop an Access Plan for making their innovations meaningfully accessible to target beneficiaries in low- and middle-income countries, meaning broadly and quickly available at costs that are reasonable in the context; to develop a Sharing Plan for sharing of Project Knowledge; and to sign a Sharing and Access for Impact Agreement with Grand Challenges Canada, in line with the guiding principles, applicable to the innovative solutions and project outputs supported by GCC .  It is important to note that innovators will continue to own all of their intellectual property.

Finally, communicating and sharing learnings and results is an important part of an innovator’s accountability to Grand Challenges Canada and other key stakeholders. Innovators should always consider how these will be disseminated to drive the innovation’s impact, scale, and sustainability, as well as learning and innovation in the space. While doing this through scientific publication is important, this should not be the primary objective of any funded project without a well-articulated justification that this is a critical path to impact and sustainability.

It is the policy of Grand Challenges Canada that research involving human subjects, research with animals, and research subject to additional regulatory requirements must be conducted in accordance with the highest internationally recognized ethical standards.

While not necessary at the application stage and as applicable to the individual project, Grand Challenges Canada requires that, for each jurisdiction in which any part of a project is conducted either by the funded organization or a sub-grantee or sub-contractor, all legal and regulatory approvals for the activities being conducted are obtained in advance of commencing the regulated activity. We further require funding recipients to agree that no funds will be expended to enroll human subjects until the necessary regulatory and ethical bodies’ approvals are obtained.

Research involving human subjects is subject to additional regulations and will require appropriate research ethics approval by an agreed-upon, independent research ethics board and/or research ethics process. Innovators are responsible for identifying the relevant ethical requirements and developing a plan to align with them. To support this, Grand Challenges Canada always recommends that innovators include the anticipated costs and timelines associated with implementing high-quality and ethical research activities in their funding proposals and ultimate budgets, if selected for funding.

For further details, please see the Grand Challenges Canada Ethics policy.