What Happened to SDTC: The 2024 Wind-Down and the Move to IRAP CTAS

For two decades, Sustainable Development Technology Canada — SDTC — was the federal government's flagship cleantech funding agency. It is no longer accepting applications. Following an Auditor General review that found significant governance and conflict-of-interest issues, the federal government announced in June 2024 that SDTC's mandate would be absorbed by the National Research Council's Industrial Research Assistance Program (NRC IRAP), under a new Clean Technology Assistance Stream (CTAS). This article explains what happened, what it means for existing portfolio companies, and exactly where new cleantech applicants should go now.

The rest of this article is for context. If you already know SDTC is gone and just need the practical path forward, jump to Where new applicants go now. Otherwise, the timeline below is useful background — especially if you’re a founder whose company has a legacy SDTC agreement, an investor doing diligence on a cleantech portfolio, or a board member trying to understand what changed in the federal funding stack.

SDTC at a glance: what it was and what it funded

Sustainable Development Technology Canada was created by federal statute in 2001 as an arm’s-length foundation. Its mandate was to support Canadian cleantech development — specifically, pre-commercial technologies that promised measurable environmental benefits (greenhouse gas reduction, clean water, soil remediation, waste reduction, and so on) but were too risky for conventional financing. SDTC operated outside the federal departmental structure under contribution agreements with Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED).

Two flagship funds did most of the heavy lifting:

• The SD Tech Fund — contributions to small and mid-stage cleantech companies developing and demonstrating novel technologies. Typical project size ran from roughly $1 million to over $10 million.
• The SD Seed Fund — smaller, earlier-stage contributions intended to help startups validate proof of concept and prepare for follow-on capital.

Over its lifetime, SDTC funded several hundred projects across solar, wind, energy storage, hydrogen, biofuels, agritech, water treatment, industrial process emissions, and many other verticals. For many Canadian cleantech founders, SDTC was the single most important non-dilutive capital partner in the early demonstration phase — the gap between prototype and a commercially viable first deployment.

How SDTC differed from IRAP (historically)

Even before the transition, SDTC and IRAP served related but distinct populations. IRAP, run inside the National Research Council, focused on technology development across all sectors, delivered through a national field force of Industrial Technology Advisors (ITAs) and typically capped at smaller project sizes. SDTC focused exclusively on cleantech, often funded larger pre-commercial demonstration projects, and operated through a separate application and review process at arm’s length from government.

That structural distinction — SDTC as an independent foundation — is part of what made the 2024 changes necessary.

The 2023–24 Auditor General review findings

The catalyst for the wind-down was a review conducted by the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, which examined SDTC’s governance practices and the administration of its funding programs. The Auditor General’s report, tabled in 2024, identified what was described publicly as “significant lapses” in the foundation’s governance and handling of public money. The findings fell into several categories.

Conflict-of-interest concerns

The review found that SDTC’s conflict-of-interest policies were not consistently applied. Reporting on the Auditor General’s work identified dozens of instances where conflict-of-interest expectations were not met, including cases where directors with declared conflicts participated in funding decisions affecting connected companies. The number of policy breaches publicly cited was substantial — in the range of dozens of separate cases — and the pattern, not just any individual decision, became the centre of concern.

Eligibility and project review

The Auditor General also examined whether funded projects met SDTC’s own eligibility criteria. The report identified a subset of audited projects that, in the Auditor General’s view, did not meet the program’s eligibility requirements — either because the activity did not constitute the development or demonstration of a new technology, or because projected environmental benefits were not reasonably supported. The dollar value of contributions associated with these findings ran into the tens of millions.

Departmental oversight

A third strand of findings dealt with ISED, the department responsible for overseeing SDTC’s contribution agreements. The Auditor General concluded that ISED’s monitoring of SDTC was insufficient — that the department had not adequately tracked whether SDTC was following its own policies or living up to the terms of its contribution agreements with the government.

The June 2024 wind-down decision

On June 4, 2024, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry announced that SDTC’s programming would be transitioned to the National Research Council of Canada. The decision had several practical components:

• SDTC would stop signing new funding agreements. The pipeline of new applications under SDTC’s historical programs closed.
• Existing funding agreements would continue. Companies with active contribution agreements would not lose their funding; their projects would be administered through a transition arrangement and eventually transferred to NRC.
• SDTC’s cleantech mandate would move into NRC IRAP. A new stream — the Clean Technology Assistance Stream (CTAS) — would be created inside IRAP to deliver cleantech contributions going forward.
• Staff and program knowledge would transition where possible. Public reporting indicates a meaningful number of SDTC employees were onboarded to NRC IRAP to preserve sector expertise during the transition.

The transition activities ran through fiscal year 2024–25, with existing project transfers to NRC concluding in spring 2025 and the new CTAS application intake opening early in fiscal 2025–26.

A note on the longer-term picture

The federal government has separately signalled that NRC IRAP — including its CTAS stream — is expected to be folded into a future Canada Innovation Corporation (CIC) in a subsequent reorganization. As of writing, that next step has not been implemented and IRAP/CTAS is the operative vehicle for cleantech contributions. If and when CIC stands up, we will publish a separate update; founders should not delay applications today on the basis of a future reorganization.

What happened to existing portfolio companies

This is the question we get most often from founders whose companies signed SDTC contribution agreements before the wind-down. The short answer: active agreements continue to be honoured. A few details are worth knowing.

Existing agreements were not cancelled

The wind-down decision did not retroactively rescind funding. Companies with signed contribution agreements continued to receive milestone-based disbursements through the transition. The administrative interface for those agreements moved — first to an interim team responsible for closing out SDTC operations, then to NRC as projects were formally transferred — but the contractual obligations on both sides remained in place.

Reporting and milestones still matter

If anything, the level of administrative scrutiny on legacy SDTC files has gone up, not down, given the political and audit attention on the file. Companies still drawing down on legacy agreements should treat milestone reporting, financial reporting, and any conflict-of-interest declarations with extra rigour. Late reports, sloppy expense substantiation, and ambiguous environmental-benefit metrics — the kinds of issues that might have been forgiven in a friendlier audit climate — are more likely to be questioned now.

Amendments and extensions

Founders who need amendments to legacy agreements — project scope changes, milestone date shifts, budget reallocations — should expect a more formal process than they may have experienced under the original SDTC team. Build in extra time. Document the rationale for any change in writing, with reference to the original contribution agreement language. If you’re unsure who the right administrative contact is for your file, the NRC IRAP cleantech team is the safe starting point.

Where new applicants go now: NRC IRAP CTAS

The Clean Technology Assistance Stream is the inheritor of SDTC’s mandate. It is delivered by NRC IRAP and supports Canadian small and medium-sized businesses developing, testing, and bringing to market clean technologies with quantifiable environmental benefits.

At a high level, the published eligibility criteria look like this:

• For-profit business incorporated in Canada.
• 500 or fewer full-time employees in Canada.
• Both technical and business capability in the company — not just founders.
• An innovative, technology-driven product with a validated proof of concept.
• Quantifiable environmental benefits — reduced greenhouse gas emissions, reduced water or energy consumption, waste reduction, and so on.
• A credible commercialization pathway to revenue.

The application process is mediated by an Industrial Technology Advisor (ITA) — an NRC IRAP staff member who acts as the company’s primary point of contact, helps shape the project scope, and ultimately brings the file forward for funding decisions. This ITA-mediated model is a significant operational change from how SDTC ran, and we discuss the differences below.

How CTAS differs from SDTC

For founders who lived through SDTC’s Statement of Interest and full application process, CTAS will feel different. Some of the most important changes:

The ITA relationship is the central change

The single biggest behavioural change for founders is that you no longer submit a standalone application and wait. You are matched with an ITA, who acts as a quasi-program-officer for your file. The ITA assesses fit, helps shape the project scope, and is the person who brings your project to the funding decision. If your ITA isn’t convinced, your project doesn’t move forward. This shifts a lot of the work of a successful application into the relationship-building phase.

Project sizing and structure

SDTC was known for funding larger pre-commercial demonstration projects — sometimes in the multi-million-dollar range — that were too big for IRAP’s historical envelopes. CTAS is intended to preserve that capacity for cleantech specifically, but the published documentation is less explicit about hard maximums than the old SDTC program documents were. Expect project scoping conversations with your ITA to determine the right funding scale for your stage, not a published “up to $X million” ceiling.

Environmental-benefit substantiation

One of the threads in the Auditor General’s findings concerned overstated environmental benefits in SDTC-funded projects. It is a safe operating assumption that CTAS reviewers will scrutinize environmental-benefit claims more carefully than the old regime did. Quantitative methodology, defensible baselines, and clear unit conversions (tonnes CO2e avoided per unit, litres of water saved per cycle, kilowatt-hours displaced per year) matter. If your environmental story is hand-waved, expect questions.

What changed, and what stayed the same

What changed

• The delivery agency. SDTC the foundation no longer signs new agreements; NRC IRAP’s CTAS does.
• The application interface. ITA-mediated engagement replaces SDTC’s direct open-call process.
• The governance frame. Funding decisions sit inside NRC’s federal departmental oversight structure rather than at an arm’s-length board.
• The scrutiny level. Post-audit, expect tighter conflict-of-interest declarations, more rigorous eligibility review, and harder questions on environmental benefits.

What stayed the same

• The federal commitment to cleantech. Cleantech support did not disappear; the vehicle changed.
• Existing agreements. Active SDTC contribution agreements continue to be honoured.
• Sector focus. CTAS is a cleantech stream — it is not a general-purpose IRAP envelope. The cleantech-specific lens carries over.
• Stacking rules with other federal programs. SR&ED, regional development agencies, provincial programs, and the federal Clean Technology Investment Tax Credit continue to interact with cleantech grants in the same ways they did under SDTC, subject to each program’s own rules.

Other cleantech funding paths to know

CTAS is not the only federal lever for cleantech companies. Depending on your stage and structure, the following may matter at least as much:

Federal Clean Technology Investment Tax Credit (Clean Tech ITC)

The federal Clean Technology Investment Tax Credit is a refundable credit on qualifying capital investments in eligible clean technology property — renewable energy, grid storage, low-emission heating, zero-emission vehicles, certain industrial decarbonization equipment, and related categories. Mechanically it is very different from a contribution grant: it offsets capital expenditures via the tax system rather than providing project-stage R&D money. For cleantech companies in the deployment phase — rather than the demonstration phase — the Clean Tech ITC is often the single largest federal support available.

SR&ED

The Scientific Research and Experimental Development tax credit program is sector-agnostic. Cleantech companies doing genuine technical experimentation — testing hypotheses, resolving technological uncertainty, iterating across results — should be claiming SR&ED on the underlying R&D work, regardless of what contribution programs they engage. See our SR&ED explainer and technical narrative guide for the practitioner-level view.

Regional development agencies

FedDev Ontario, FedNor, ACOA, PrairiesCan, PacifiCan, CED-Q, and CanNor all run cleantech-friendly contribution programs at the regional level. These programs can stack with CTAS in some configurations, but stacking limits and cost-share rules vary by agency. The right cleantech project sometimes carries both an IRAP component (R&D labour, subcontractors) and a regional component (commercialization, capital, market entry).

Provincial cleantech programs

Provincial layers vary. Ontario, Quebec, BC, and Alberta all have provincial cleantech-relevant programs — ranging from research and demonstration funds to commercialization grants to specific decarbonization envelopes for heavy industry. The interaction with federal contributions is rule-specific; check before you stack.

Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF) Net Zero Accelerator

For larger industrial cleantech projects — particularly those tied to facility-scale decarbonization or major deployment — the Strategic Innovation Fund’s Net Zero Accelerator stream is a separate, much larger federal vehicle. SIF is not a small-business program; project minimums are high and timelines are long. But for the right kind of project, it is the most significant cleantech contribution program in the federal stack.

A practitioner’s playbook for re-engaging the cleantech stack

Setting aside the policy story, here is the operational version of how we walk cleantech founders through this transition when they come to us today. Treat this as a checklist, not gospel — every file has its own specifics.

1. Inventory what you actually have

Before doing anything, write down the funding state of your company: any active SDTC contribution agreement (and its remaining balance, milestones, and end date), any SR&ED filing history, any regional development agency engagement, and any prior IRAP relationship. If you don’t have an ITA already, note that. The first conversation with a CTAS advisor goes much faster when you arrive with this map prepared.

2. Articulate the technical project clearly

CTAS, like SDTC before it, funds projects, not companies. Your application story has to centre on a discrete piece of technical work with defined start and end conditions: what you’re building, what technological uncertainties you’re resolving, what experimentation will close them, and what demonstration or commercialization milestone the project ends on. This is where the S/THERI framework — scientific or technological uncertainty, hypotheses, experimentation, results, iteration — carries over from SR&ED narrative practice. The same discipline that makes a strong SR&ED technical narrative makes a strong CTAS project scope.

3. Build the environmental-benefit case quantitatively

Given the audit context, expect environmental-benefit claims to be probed. Have your unit basis nailed down: tonnes CO2e per year avoided at full deployment, kilowatt-hours displaced per unit, litres of water saved per cycle — whatever the right metric is for your technology. Document the baseline assumption (what does the world look like without your technology?) and the methodology. If your numbers come from a third-party LCA or engineering study, cite it. If they come from internal modelling, document the model.

4. Get an ITA conversation on the calendar

CTAS is ITA-mediated. You don’t submit a form — you initiate a conversation with NRC IRAP through the cleantech intake. Treat that initial conversation as a stakeholder pitch, not a paperwork exercise. The ITA will assess whether your project fits, whether the company has the technical and business capacity to deliver, and whether the proposed scope is realistic. Bring a one-pager. Be ready to talk specifics.

5. Plan the financial stack in parallel

A CTAS contribution will cost-share a defined slice of your project, not the whole thing. Plan how the remainder is funded: equity, debt, other grant components, founder cash, or revenue. Disclose your stack honestly — reviewers can spot a project where the math doesn’t work, and a thin financial plan is one of the easier reasons to delay a file. If you are planning to claim SR&ED on the R&D portion of the same work, plan now for how the cost categories will be separated. SR&ED and CTAS can coexist on the same underlying R&D, but the same eligible expenditure cannot be claimed twice in the same way.

Common questions from cleantech founders

I had an SDTC Statement of Interest in flight when the wind-down hit. What now?

Any in-flight Statement of Interest that had not converted to a signed contribution agreement before the wind-down does not carry over automatically. The right move is to engage NRC IRAP through the cleantech intake and re-scope the project for CTAS. The technical and environmental work you did in the SOI is not wasted — reuse it — but treat the new engagement as a fresh file.

Is CTAS funding repayable, like some IRAP work, or non-repayable like SDTC was?

CTAS is structured as a contribution program. The default expectation in the published material is non-repayable contributions for cleantech R&D and demonstration work, consistent with SDTC’s historical posture, but contribution terms can vary by project. Confirm the specific terms in your agreement — do not assume.

Can I still cite my old SDTC funding on my deck and to investors?

Yes. A past SDTC contribution is a legitimate part of your company’s funding history and saying so on your deck is accurate. What you should not do is imply that SDTC is still an active funding source for your business, or that you can introduce other founders to SDTC. The agency is no longer signing new agreements.

Does the federal Clean Tech ITC replace CTAS?

No. They do different things. The Clean Tech ITC is a refundable investment tax credit on qualifying clean technology capital property. CTAS is a contribution program for R&D and demonstration projects. A growing cleantech company can use both: CTAS for the R&D phase, the Clean Tech ITC on capital once you’re deploying the technology. They are complements, not substitutes.

How long does CTAS approval take?

The published timeline is project-dependent. ITA-mediated programs are typically faster than open-call competitive programs once an ITA is assigned and engaged, but pre-engagement (getting the right ITA, scoping the project, sharpening the technical case) is where most of the elapsed time accumulates. Plan months, not weeks, end to end for any meaningful project size.

Will CTAS itself change again under the Canada Innovation Corporation?

Possibly. The federal government has signalled that NRC IRAP will eventually be folded into a future Canada Innovation Corporation. As of writing, that has not happened and CTAS is the live vehicle. Apply through the live vehicle.

Final thoughts for cleantech founders

If you are coming to the cleantech funding landscape fresh in 2026, the SDTC story is mostly historical context. The operational reality is: cleantech contribution funding is now an NRC IRAP file, delivered through CTAS, mediated by an ITA. That’s the path. Engage an ITA, do the work to scope a defensible project, and treat the application process as a relationship, not a form.

If you are inside the legacy SDTC portfolio, your priorities are different: keep your existing agreement clean, treat reporting with extra care given the post-audit environment, and route any new cleantech project work through CTAS rather than expecting SDTC to come back.

If you are a founder evaluating the broader stack, remember that contribution programs (CTAS, regional agencies, SIF) are only one layer. SR&ED and the Clean Tech ITC are tax-system layers that work alongside contributions and frequently deliver more dollars over the life of a company than any single grant. Building a cleantech funding strategy means looking at all of them together — which is exactly what we help clients do.

For a side-by-side view of 80+ Canadian funding programs we work on, including cleantech-relevant federal and provincial programs, see the Grant Finder and the full program list.