Access To Knowledge For Technology Development And Dissemination (A2K+) - Studies

What is A2K+ Studies?

Access to Knowledge for Technology Development and Dissemination (A2K+) is a programme run by TIFAC. The Technology Information, Forecasting and Assessment Council, an autonomous organisation under the Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology. The "Studies" component of A2K+ funds analytical studies that generate and spread technology knowledge, so that industry, government, researchers and entrepreneurs can make better-informed decisions.

TIFAC's core mandate is technology foresight and assessment. The A2K+ Studies programme puts that mandate into practice by supporting techno-market surveys, technology assessment reports, foresight studies and technology status reports. These studies map where a technology stands, what its market potential is, what barriers exist, and what the path to development or commercialisation might look like. The results are meant to be disseminated, feeding into policy, industry strategy and further research.

This is not a citizen benefit or a student scholarship. It is a proposal-driven research programme: a qualified expert, institution or industry body proposes a study, and TIFAC decides whether to fund it based on the study's relevance and quality. Funding is tied to the study's scope and deliverables, and it is released to carry out and complete that specific piece of work.

Who is eligible for A2K+ Studies?

You can propose a study if:

• You are an expert, researcher, institution, consultant or industry association with demonstrable competence in the relevant technology area.
• You can present a clear study proposal: scope, methodology, deliverables, timeline and budget.
• You are able to carry out and deliver the study, and account for the funds used.

You cannot use this programme if:

• You are a student or individual seeking a personal scholarship or stipend. A2K+ Studies funds studies, not personal maintenance; individuals should look at the Ministry of Science and Technology's fellowship and scholarship schemes instead, and this scheme cannot be claimed as a personal entitlement.
• You cannot show relevant expertise, a credible methodology or a fundable deliverable.

Meeting these conditions lets you submit a proposal for consideration; it does not guarantee funding. TIFAC selects studies competitively on merit.

What documents are required?

How to apply for A2K+ Studies

1. Review TIFAC's current focus areas and the A2K+ programme terms on the TIFAC portal (tifac.org.in), and confirm that your study idea fits the programme's scope.
2. Prepare a detailed study proposal setting out the objective, scope, methodology, expected deliverables, timeline and an item-wise budget.
3. Attach your credentials — the CV and relevant experience of the investigator, and institutional details where applicable, to establish capability to deliver.
4. Submit the proposal to TIFAC through its prescribed process, addressed to the A2K+ programme.
5. Respond to TIFAC's review, and if the study is approved, carry it out to the agreed deliverables and submit the study report and utilisation accounts.

Because the programme is competitive and discretionary, a sharply defined study with a clear methodology and a realistic budget stands a much better chance than a broad or open-ended proposal.

How A2K+ Studies fits within TIFAC's work

A2K+ Studies is one strand of TIFAC's broader technology foresight and dissemination work. Where TIFAC also produces its own foresight exercises and technology roadmaps, the A2K+ Studies route lets external experts and institutions contribute focused studies that add to that knowledge base. If your aim is to run a specific technology or market study whose findings will be shared and used, this is the relevant programme; if you are seeking product development funding or a personal fellowship, a different Department of Science and Technology scheme will suit better.

Help and where to get information

• TIFAC portal: tifac.org.in describes the A2K+ programme and TIFAC's current priorities and contact points.
• TIFAC does not publish a single dedicated public helpline for this programme; the relevant programme contact is listed on the portal.

Applicants should rely on TIFAC's own published terms for the current scope and any funding limits. This is a genuinely niche, institution-facing programme, and its findings-oriented, proposal-driven nature; not a personal grant; is the point most first-time applicants misunderstand.

How to check your application status

A2K+ Studies is a proposal-driven grant, not a portal-based application with a tracking number, so there is no online dashboard where a proposer can log in and see a status bar. Follow-up works through direct contact instead:

1. Keep a copy of your submission with its date and reference details. Note who at TIFAC the proposal was addressed to, and how it was sent (email, post or hand delivery), so you can refer to it precisely in any follow-up.
2. Allow a reasonable review period before following up. Proposal evaluation involves internal review of relevance, methodology and budget, so an immediate reply should not be expected; contacting TIFAC too soon rarely produces new information.
3. Contact the TIFAC programme office directly, since a general "check status" call cannot succeed. Reach the relevant division through the contact details published on tifac.org.in, quoting your proposal title, submission date and the investigator's or institution's name.
4. Ask specifically whether the proposal is under review, has gone to an expert committee, or has been decided, since TIFAC's evaluation may pass through more than one internal stage before a funding decision is made.
5. If approved, track progress through the funding agreement rather than a status page: TIFAC will communicate sanction terms, milestones and reporting requirements directly to the investigator or institution, and subsequent "status" is really the study's own progress against those milestones.
6. If there is no response after a reasonable interval, send a written follow-up (email is usual) referencing the original submission rather than resubmitting a fresh proposal, which can create confusion about which version is under review.

Because TIFAC does not publish a dedicated helpline or SMS-based tracking for A2K+, the portal contact and email trail are the only reliable channels for status information.

Common reasons for rejection

A2K+ Studies proposals are turned down for identifiable, fixable reasons rather than random chance:

• The proposal reads as a personal scholarship or stipend request rather than a study. A2K+ Studies funds a defined piece of research work with deliverables, not an individual's living or education expenses. Fix: frame the submission around the study's output (a report, survey or assessment) and its use, not around personal support.
• The study topic falls outside TIFAC's technology foresight and assessment mandate. Proposals for basic scientific research, product development or business funding do not fit this programme. Fix: check TIFAC's current focus areas on tifac.org.in before writing the proposal, and target a techno-market survey, technology assessment or foresight study specifically.
• The methodology is vague or the deliverables are not clearly defined. A proposal that says it will "study" a technology without specifying data sources, analysis method, and a concrete output (report structure, indicators, timeline) is hard for reviewers to evaluate. Fix: set out a step-by-step methodology and describe exactly what document or report will be delivered and when.
• The investigator's or institution's credentials do not establish credibility in the technology area. TIFAC weighs whether the proposer can actually deliver the study. Fix: attach a CV or institutional profile that clearly shows relevant prior work, publications or projects in the same or a closely related technology area.
• The budget is unrealistic, unexplained, or not broken down by item. A lump-sum figure without justification is difficult to approve. Fix: submit an item-wise cost breakdown (manpower, data collection, travel, report production) that matches the scope described in the methodology.
• The proposal is too broad or open-ended. A study that promises to cover an entire sector or technology area in general terms is less fundable than one with a sharply defined scope. Fix: narrow the proposal to a specific question, technology, or market segment that can realistically be completed within the proposed timeline and budget.
• Required supporting documents are missing. Proposals submitted without institutional details, credentials or a budget sheet where these are called for are incomplete on their face. Fix: cross-check the submission against TIFAC's stated requirements before sending it, rather than assuming a narrative proposal alone is sufficient.

None of these are procedural technicalities; they reflect what a discretionary, merit-based research grant actually screens for, so addressing them substantively (not just resubmitting the same proposal) is what improves the chance of approval.