Objectives
The ANRF MAHA Leapfrog Demonstrators for Societal Innovation in India program seeks to catalyse bold, integrated, and scalable solutions to India's most pressing societal challenges through research and innovation.
India's challenges demands solutions that go beyond incremental improvement - ones that address these challenges meaningfully, reach those who need them most, and show a credible path to scale adoption. Aligned with the national mandate to focus on India-centric problems and globally competitive solutions, this Call for Proposals (CFP) supports Leapfrog Demonstrations- integrated, research-driven demonstrators that validate transformative technical, economic, and/or social hypotheses at meaningful scale.
'Leapfrog Demonstrator' in this context, are projects that demonstrate how cutting edge research accelerate the transition of innovative solutions, from development stages to scalable high impact deployment. The focus is on deliberately designed research interventions to demonstrate transformative potential at scale. Such projects must go beyond laboratory-scale validation and demonstrate advancement along multiple dimensions of maturity.
Examples include projects that,
The program complements existing MAHA Mission Mode initiatives by accelerating innovation in societally critical domains through collaborative consortia. This program operates under two tracks:
A. Challenges Track
Directed calls based on clearly defined national problem statements with measurable goals and mission-oriented outcomes. ANRF publishes the defined challenges under this track with each call.
Preliminary list of Challenges can be found here (Annexure - I)
B. Open Proposals Track
Proposals aligned with listed strategic societal areas, where applicants define the specific challenge and leapfrog solution framework.
.
Areas of Support
Illustrative strategic areas include (but are not limited to):
Note 1: Proposals submitted under the Open Track (Track B) must be distinct from the predefined Challenges (Track A). Strategic areas and problem statements explicitly listed under the Challenges Track are not eligible for consideration in the Open Track.
Note 2: ANRF reserves the right to redirect proposals to appropriate Mission Mode Programs if deemed better aligned elsewhere.
Nature and Extent of Support (Track A and Track B) :
(A) LARGE Projects
(B) MEDIUM Projects
The balance amount (Total project cost - ANRF contribution) in cash may come from any non ANRF sources who may/may not be already ANRF partners in the program e.g., philanthropy, industry contribution etc.
General Guidelines:
Eligibility Conditions:
Lead Institution and Lead Principal Investigator Eligibility
Each proposal must be submitted by a Lead Institution, headed by a Lead Principal Investigator (PI). The Lead PI
A Hub-and-Spoke model is preferred, wherein:
Within the hub-and-spoke consortium, proposals must include the following in the capacity of Co-PI or Honorary PI, as applicable.
Start-ups, MSMEs, Industry and NGOs without a valid DSIR SIRO recognition, will not receive grant-in-aid funding under this program. However, they can be compensated:
All proposals must demonstrate a transformative leapfrog ambition, a well-structured demonstration approach, and a credible, evidence-backed pathway to national scale.
Proposals must articulate the Leapfrog Demonstrator with sufficient clarity and rigour. The following questions are indicative prompts to help structure the proposal:
Stage 1: Pre-Proposal
Must include:
Pre-proposals weak in impact potential, integration, validation, cost-sharing clarity, or translational plan will not be considered for further evaluation.
Stage 2: Full Proposal (Only by invitation)
Submission within 30 days of invitation must include:
The process may generally include
For Pre-Proposal
For Full Proposal
Evaluation Criteria include but not limited to:
Ms Soni Koul
Program Director (Technical)
Email: principal-expert1[at]anrf[dot]gov[dot]in
Dr. S.V. Prasanna
Program Officer / Scientist - E
Email: prasanna[dot]sv[at]anrf[dot]gov[dot]in
Section 1: Programme
Q1. What distinguishes a 'Leapfrog Demonstrator' from a standard research project or a technology pilot?
A1: A Leapfrog Demonstrator is not an incremental advance in research or a small-scale pilot. To qualify, a project must demonstrate progress across all of the following dimensions simultaneously:
A project that advances only one of these dimensions, even if significantly, does not meet the programme's definition. The benchmark is a demonstrated transformative shift in the "AS-IS" state of a challenge at national or regional scale, not laboratory-scale validation or a single-site pilot.
Q2: What is the AS-IS vs TO-BE requirement, and how detailed does it need to be at the pre-proposal stage?
A2: Pre-proposals must articulate the current state of the challenge (AS-IS) and the state that would result if the proposed solution is successfully demonstrated and adopted at scale (TO-BE). The contrast must be made at national or regional scale and not at the level of a single lab, field site, or partner institution. Pre-proposals that are weak on impact potential at this scale will not be prioritised for further evaluation.
Q3: Why does the programme require research, engineering validation, field testing, and translation to be co-designed rather than treated as sequential phases?
A3: This programme funds demonstrators, not research pipelines. A project where translation is planned as a later phase will be evaluated as weak on integration. The co-design requirement exists because projects that treat these as sequential handoffs routinely stall at the transitions. The proposal must show that these components are designed together from the outset, not that one will enable the next.
Section 2: Tracks and Areas
Q4: How do I decide whether to apply under Track A (Challenges) or Track B (Open)?
A4: Track A issues directed calls against specific national challenge statements published by ANRF. These statements may be found in the Annexure of the Call for Proposals. If a published challenge is relevant to your proposed work, you can apply under Track A and that challenge area is explicitly excluded from Track B. Track B is for proposals where the applicant independently defines and justifies a national challenge within the listed strategic societal areas. If no published challenge matches your work but it falls within the strategic areas, Track B is the appropriate route.
Q5: Can a Track B proposal address a topic or problem statement that is already listed under Track A?
A5: No. Problem statements explicitly listed under the Challenges Track (Track A) are not eligible for the Open Track (Track B), in either the same or similar framing.
Q6: My proposal seems relevant to both this programme and an existing ANRF MAHA Mission Mode Programme. Where should I apply?
A6: ANRF reserves the right to redirect proposals to appropriate Mission Mode Programmes if it determines they are better suited elsewhere. The LFD programme is designed to complement, not duplicate, existing MAHA Mission Mode initiatives.
Q7: What are the strategic areas supported under this program?
A7: Illustrative strategic areas include (but are not limited to):
The list is indicative, not exhaustive.
Section 3: Who can apply?
Q8: I hold a contractual, ad-hoc, or visiting position at my institution. Can I be the Lead PI?
A8: No. The Lead PI must hold a regular position at an eligible institution. Contractual, ad-hoc, visiting, and temporary appointments do not satisfy this requirement, regardless of seniority or the nature of the work proposed.
Q9: I hold an INSPIRE, Ramanujan, or Ramalingaswami Fellowship. Can I lead a proposal?
A9: No. Fellows under INSPIRE, Ramanujan, and Ramalingaswami schemes may participate as Co-PIs only. They are not eligible to be Lead PIs under this programme.
Q10: I am approaching retirement. Can the proposal still go forward?
A10: Yes, subject to a condition. PIs from academic institutions or National Research Laboratories nearing superannuation may apply, provided the proposal names a Co-PI with at least 5 years of service remaining.
Q11: Can a researcher based at a private company or industry organisation be the Lead PI?
A11: No. The Lead PI must hold a regular position at an academic institution, National Research Laboratory, or a recognised not-for-profit Research Institution or Section 8 company whose object clause is aligned with programme goals. Industry-based researchers are not eligible as Lead PIs but may participate as Co-PIs or Honorary PIs within the consortium.
Q12: My proposed Co-PI from a spoke institution does not hold a PhD. Is this disqualifying?
A12: Not automatically. Co-PIs from spoke institutions affiliated with recognised not-for-profit research institutions or Section 8 companies must hold at least a Master's degree and have a minimum of five years of relevant domain experience. The PhD requirement applies to the Lead PI, not to all Co-PIs.
Q13: Can a foreign institution or personnel from Industry participate as a spoke partner?
A13: The eligible spoke institutions can be academic institutions, national research laboratories, Section 8 companies, and DSIR SIRO recognised organisations including NGOs. Foreign institutions and Industries do not fall within these categories as defined. However, faculty or technical personnel from such institutions, including from Industries, are encouraged to participate as a Honorary PIs.
Section 4: Consortium structure
Q14: Is a multi-institutional consortium mandatory, or can a strong single institution apply on its own?
A14: Multi-institutional consortia are preferred. Proposals must include industry or startup collaborators within the consortium. Purely academic or national laboratory teams without translational, industry, startup, or social entrepreneur partners will not be prioritised.
Q15: What does the hub-and-spoke model require in practice?
A15: The Lead Institution (Hub) anchors the integration, coordination, and demonstrator validation for the entire project. Partner Institutions (Spokes) contribute domain expertise, field validation, translational pathways, or deployment capabilities. Consortium roles must be clearly defined and aligned with the translational and scale objectives of the project.
Partners included to satisfy the structural requirement without meaningful, specified roles will be evaluated unfavourably. The proposal must make the case for why each partner is necessary to the demonstrator's success.
Q16: We want to include an industry partner or startup. What exactly can they receive from the programme, and under what arrangement?
A16: Industry partners, startups, and MSMEs participate as Co-PIs or Honorary PIs. They are not eligible to receive direct grant-in-aid under this programme. However, they may be compensated through contractual arrangements with the Lead Institution for:
All such arrangements must be transparently structured and justified as part of the overall cost-sharing framework within the project budget.
Q17: In a Track B proposal, who identifies and justifies the spoke partners?
A17: Since Track B proposals are self-directed, the applicant is responsible for assembling and making the case for the entire innovation ecosystem. This includes partners across academia, industry, startups, and where relevant, government and civil society. The proposal must make a compelling argument for why this specific team is uniquely positioned to lead the transformation. This is an explicit evaluation criterion for Track B.
Section 5: Funding and cost-sharing
Q18: What funding levels are available?
A18: Large projects: Total project budget of ₹25 Crores to ₹100+ Crores. ANRF contribution up to ₹50 Crores. Minimum 50% cash cost-sharing required. Duration up to 60 months.
Medium projects: Total project budget of ₹10 Crores to ₹25 Crores. ANRF contribution up to ₹12.5 Crores. Minimum 50% cash cost-sharing required. Duration up to 60 months.
Q19: Who can contribute the 50% cash cost-share? Do contributions from other government ministries or state governments qualify?
A19: Yes. The balance amount (total project cost minus ANRF contribution) must come in cash from non-ANRF sources. Eligible sources include other GoI ministries, state or local governments, philanthropy, institutional internal resources, and industry contributions. There is no restriction on the type of non-ANRF source, provided the contribution is in cash and not a reallocation of other ANRF-funded activity.
Q20: Can in-kind contributions such as equipment, facilities, manpower count towards the 50% cost-sharing requirement?
A20: No. The minimum 50% cost-sharing must be in cash from non-ANRF sources. In-kind contributions are welcome and encouraged over and above the cash requirement, but they cannot substitute for it.
Q21: Can this proposal build on work already funded by another programme? What counts as repackaging?
A21: No. Repackaging of existing funding is explicitly prohibited. All funding under this programme must be incremental, i.e., applied to new work beyond what is already funded elsewhere. Proposing the same or substantially similar scope to leverage an existing grant constitutes repackaging and is grounds for rejection.
Existing results can inform and justify the proposed work, and prior infrastructure or datasets can be referenced as enabling conditions. But the funded scope itself must be genuinely new and additional.
Q22: Who bears financial and administrative responsibility for the project as a whole?
A22: The Lead Institution bears full financial and administrative responsibility for the project, including receiving all funds and distributing them to eligible consortium partners.
Section 6: Preparing and submitting the proposal
Q23: What format and length is required for the pre-proposal?
A23: The pre-proposal should be 5 pages in length, 12 point font, single spaced.
Q24: What must the pre-proposal cover?
A24: The pre-proposal must address all of the following:
Pre-proposals weak in impact potential, integration, validation, cost-sharing clarity, or translational plan will not be considered for further evaluation.
Q25: What supporting documents must be uploaded with the pre-proposal?
A25:
Q26: Can a PI submit more than one pre-proposal, either to the same call or to different tracks?
A26: No.
Q27: Can the same team or PI submit under both Track A and Track B in the same call?
A27: No.
Q28: Are submissions by email or any mode other than the online portal accepted?
A28: No. Pre-proposals must be submitted exclusively through the ANRF online portal. Submissions via email or any other mode will not be considered.
Section 7: Evaluation
Q29: What are the evaluation criteria?
A29: Proposals are evaluated against all of the following:
These criteria apply to both the pre-proposal screening and the full proposal evaluation, weighted by the stage of assessment.
Q30: Will I receive feedback if my pre-proposal is rejected?
A30: The Preliminary Screening Committee will provide brief written feedback indicating which area or characteristic was found weak. ANRF is not obligated to provide detailed feedback beyond this, and its decision is final.
Q31: How should KPIs be structured in the proposal?
A31: Proposals must define KPIs across three distinct environments:
KPIs must be independently verifiable. Vague or aspirational metrics without defined measurement approaches will be evaluated unfavourably.
Q32: What is the 'Why now?' question that my proposal should address? What is expected?
A32: Proposals must justify why this leapfrog solution is achievable in 2026 specifically, citing concrete changes in technology, data availability, regulation, or cost structures that make the proposed approach viable today when it was not viable previously. This is not a rhetorical framing exercise; the answer must be substantive and specific. Proposals that skip or give generic answers to this question will be evaluated as weak on scientific rigour.
Section 8: The Full Proposal stage
Q33: How long do I have to submit a full proposal after being invited?
A33: 30 days from the date the decision is communicated to the Lead PI.
Q34: What must the full proposal include?
A34:
Q35: What should a Letter of Intent (LoI) from a non-governmental partner include?
A35: Each LoI must explicitly state the partner's:
LoIs that are generic expressions of support without specific role and resource commitments will not satisfy this requirement.
Section 9: IP, dissemination and durability
Q36: What are the IP requirements?
A36: IP rights are governed by the ANRF IP Policy. Compliance with this policy is the baseline requirement. ANRF open licensing arrangements are encouraged. In select challenges, particularly those involving philanthropy partners, an open IP will be a mandatory condition, specified at the time the challenge is published.
Q37: Is open-source software or open licensing mandatory?
A37: Not for the programme as a whole. Open innovation models, i.e., open-source software, open designs, open data licensing under ANRF guidelines, are encouraged but not required, unless specifically mandated for a given challenge (typically those involving philanthropy partners). Applicants should check the specific challenge description under Track A or confirm with Programme Officers if uncertain.
Q38: What happens to project outputs such as artifacts, datasets, models after the grant period ends?
A38: All outputs developed through public funding must remain replicable and open. Specifically:
The proposal must include a concrete plan for post-project maintenance and accessibility of outputs. This is an evaluation criterion, not a compliance formality.