Discovery Grants ProgramandResearch Tools and Instruments Grants Program

“Delivering on NSERC’s commitment to excellence”

PART IDiscovery Grants Program

4

The Discovery Grants Program

Excellence of the Discovery Grants Program validated in two major independent reviews (2008)

Strong support for existing program criteria to measure excellence

Recommendations for enhancement:– New rating principles and measures to allow the

peer review system to respond more dynamically to applicants’ performance (as of 2009)

– New committee structure to give all applicants a higher quality, more comprehensive review (as of 2010)

5

Eligibility to Apply

To be eligible, you must: hold, or have a firm offer of, an academic appointment at a

Canadian institution (minimum three-year term position) as of September 1, 2011;

be in a position that requires independent research and allows supervision of highly qualified personnel (HQP); and

spend a minimum of six months per year at an eligible Canadian institution (if holding a position outside Canada).

Requirements can be found on NSERC’s Web site.

6

Eligibility of Subject Matter Discovery Grants support:

– research programs in the natural sciences and engineering (NSE); and

– interdisciplinary research that is predominantly in the NSESignificance, impact, advancement of knowledge or practical applications in NSE.

The following eligibility guidelines can be found on NSERC’s Web site:– Selecting the Appropriate Federal Granting Agency – Preparation and Review of Applications in Interdisciplinary Rese

arch Consult NSERC or your research grants office (RGO).

Applications deemed more appropriate for another agency will be rejected.

7

Evaluation Process Overview Two-step process separates merit assessment from

funding recommendations. Merit assessment uses six-point scale to evaluate:

– Excellence of the researcher;– Merit of the proposal; and– Contributions to the training of HQP.

Applications grouped in “bins” of comparable merit. Funding recommendations: similar overall ratings within

an Evaluation Group (EG) receive comparable funding, with possible modulation related to the cost of research.

Greater consistency in process between EGs and between competition years.

8

Two-Step Review Process

Exc

eptio

nal

Out

stan

ding

Ver

y S

tron

g

Str

ong

Mod

erat

e

Insu

ffic

ient

Fund

ing

"Bin

s"

A (L, N, H) B (L, N, H)

C (L. N. H) D (L, N, H).

.

.

N O P

Exc

eptio

nal

Out

stan

ding

Ver

y S

tron

g

Str

ong

Mod

erat

e

Insu

ffic

ient

Fund

ing

"Bin

s"

Excellence of researcher

Merit of proposal

Contribution to training of HQP

Cost of research High Normal Low

Exc

eptio

nal

Out

stan

ding

Ver

y S

tron

g

Str

ong

Mod

erat

e

Insu

ffic

ient

Fund

ing

"Bin

s"

A (L, N, H) B (L, N, H)

C (L. N. H) D (L, N, H).

.

.

N O P

Exc

eptio

nal

Out

stan

ding

Ver

y S

tron

g

Str

ong

Mod

erat

e

Insu

ffic

ient

Fund

ing

"Bin

s"

Excellence of researcher

Merit of proposal

Contribution to training of HQP

Cost of research High Normal Low

Merit assessmentFunding

recommendation

9

The Conference Model

The 28 former Grant Selection Committees (GSCs) were replaced by 12 EGs in 2010.

Similar to a scientific conference, several sessions occur in parallel streams.

Members are assigned to various sections on the basis of the match between members’ expertise and the subject matter.– Members may participate in reviews in several EGs.

Flexibility allows applications at the interface between EGs to be reviewed by a combination of members with pertinent expertise from relevant groups.

10

Evaluation Groups Genes, Cells and Molecules (1501) Biological Systems and Functions (1502) Evolution and Ecology (1503) Chemistry (1504) Physics (1505) Geosciences (1506) Computer Science (1507) Mathematics and Statistics (1508) Civil, Industrial and Systems Engineering (1509) Electrical and Computer Engineering (1510) Materials and Chemical Engineering (1511) Mechanical Engineering (1512)

11

How Does the Conference Model Work?

EVALUATION GROUP A Group Chair

~ 40 members4 Section Chairs

EVALUATION GROUP BGroup Chair

~35 members4 Section Chairs

EVALUATION GROUP CGroup Chair

~25 members3 Section Chairs

Sec

tion

A1-

2R

esea

rch

Top

ics

A2

and

A4

Sec

tion

A2

Res

earc

h T

opic

A3

Sec

tion

A1-

1R

esea

rch

Top

ic A

1

Sec

tion

A3-

1R

esea

rch

Top

ic A

5S

ectio

n A

3-2

Res

earc

h T

opic

A6

Sec

tion

A4-

1R

esea

rch

Top

ics

A7

and

A8

Sec

tion

A4-

2R

esea

rch

Top

ics

A9

and

B5

Sec

tion

B1-

2R

esea

rch

Top

ics

B2

and

A10

Sec

tion

B1-

1R

esea

rch

Top

ic B

1

Sec

tion

B2

Res

earc

h T

opic

B3

Sec

tion

B3-

1R

esea

rch

Top

ic B

4S

ectio

n B

3-2

Res

earc

h T

opic

s B

1 an

d B

5

Sec

tion

B4-

2R

esea

rch

Top

ics

B7

and

C6

Sec

tion

B4-

1R

esea

rch

Top

ics

B2

and

B6

Sec

tion

C1-

2R

esea

rch

Top

ic C

2S

ectio

n C

1-1

Res

earc

h T

opic

s C

1 an

d B

5

Sec

tion

C2

Res

earc

h T

opic

C3

Sec

tion

C3-

1R

esea

rch

Top

ic C

4S

ectio

n C

3-2

Res

earc

h T

opic

s C

5 an

d A

5

12

Advantages of the Conference Model

Provides a system with the flexibility to:– ensure that applications have the best possible review;– react to the emergence of new research areas; and– enable "traditional" disciplines or well-defined areas to remain

together.

Reviews benefit from a larger pool of expertise than previously existed in the former system.

Applying to the Discovery Grants Program

14

Life Cycle of a Discovery Grant Application

August 1Submission of Form 180

September to OctoberInitial assignment to EG and contacting of referees

November 1Submission of grant application

Mid-NovemberApplications sent out to referees

Early DecemberEvaluation Group members receive applications

FebruaryGrants competition

March to AprilAnnouncement of results

15

Notification of Intent to Apply for a Discovery Grant (Form 180) – Why?

It is used to identify:

the most appropriate EG to review the application;

the need and potential benefits of a joint review between

EGs; and

the external referees for the application.

16

Notification of Intent to Apply for aDiscovery Grant (Form 180) – When and What? Deadline: August 1

– Electronic submission only– Possible adverse consequences if not submitted: difficulty to

secure external referee reports; difficulty to identify need for participation of experts from other EGs

Includes:– Form 180, listing up to five research topics in priority order– List of contributions in the last six years– List of co-applicants and their contributions (for team grants)

17

Submitting a Discovery Grant ApplicationA full Discovery Grant application includes:

an Application for a Grant (Form 101), with supporting documentation;*

a Personal Data Form (Form 100) for the applicant and all co-applicants;

samples of research contributions (e.g., reprints, pre-prints, thesis chapters, manuscripts, patents, technical reports, etc.); and

all required appendices.* Note that applications, including samples of research contributions, are to be submitted electronically.

Evaluation of Discovery Grant Applications

19

Evaluation Criteria

Scientific or engineering excellence of the researcher(s)

Merit of the proposal

Contribution to the training of HQP

20

Scientific or Engineering Excellence of the Researcher(s)

Knowledge, expertise and experience

Contributions to research in the NSE

Importance of contributions

Complementarity of expertise and synergy (for team applications)

21

Merit of the Proposal

Originality and innovation Significance and expected contributions

to research, and potential for technological impact Clarity and scope of objectives Clarity and appropriateness of methodology Feasibility Extent to which the proposal addresses all relevant

issues Appropriateness and justification of the budget Relationship to other sources of funding

22

Contributions to the Training of Highly Qualified Personnel Quality and impact of contributions to training during the

last six years

Proposed plan for future training of HQP in the NSE– Describe the nature of the training (e.g., length, specific projects) in

which HQP will be involved, the HQP’s contributions and pertinence to the research program proposed.

– Applicants should discuss the soundness of their plans and the expected outcomes.

Enhancement of training arising from a collaborative or interdisciplinary environment (where applicable)

Read the Policy and Guidelines on the Assessment of Contributions to Research and Training.

23

Relative Cost of Research

Determined by the reviewers as Low, Normal or High as compared to the norm for the research areas represented in the applications considered by the EG(s).

Factors considered include: – salaries and benefits;– equipment and/or facilities;– materials and supplies;– travel; and– dissemination.

24

Discovery Grants Indicators

25

Grant Proposal: Tips

Write summary in plain language.

Provide a progress report on related research.

Position the research within the field and state-of-the-art.

Clearly articulate short- and long-term objectives.

Provide a detailed methodology.

Form 101

26

Grant Proposal: Tips

Clearly define your role in any collaborative research and planned joint HQP training.

Describe plans for quality HQP training.

Present a realistic budget.

Discuss relationships to other research support.

Consider comments/recommendations you may have received in the last Messages to Applicant.

Form 101

27

Personal Data Form: Tips

List all sources of support.

Describe up to five most significant research contributions.

List all other research contributions.

Explain your role in collaborative research activities.

Describe contributions to HQP training.

Describe nature of HQP studies (master’s and undergraduate).

Form 100

28

Personal Data Form: Tips

Include as much information as possible.

List your student’s names in bold font in the list of contributions.

Explain your role in co-supervision activities.

Give other evidence of impact of work.

Explain any delays in research activity or particular circumstances that might have affected productivity or contributions to HQP training.

Form 100

PART IIResearch Tools and Instruments (RTI) Grants Program

30

Research Tools and Instruments Grants Program – Category 1 RTI Grants foster and enhance the discovery, innovation

and training capability of university researchers in the NSE by supporting the purchase of research equipment and installations.

One-year awards that assist buying or developing research equipment that costs more than $7,000, up to $150,000.

NSERC will accept applications for equipment whose total net cost is up to $250,000, provided that funding from other sources is secured by the applicant to bring the amount requested from NSERC to $150,000 or less.

Consult the RTI Grants Program description on NSERC’s Web site.

31

Research Tools and Instruments Grants Program – Eligibility and Requirements Eligibility requirements to apply to NSERC must be

satisfied (see slide 5).

Only applications from applicants and co-applicants who currently hold, or are applying for, an NSERC research grant (e.g., Discovery Grant, Strategic Project Grant, research partnership, Canada Research Chair) at the time of application are accepted.

If a cash contribution toward the purchase of the equipment is provided by an organization other than the applicant's institution, a letter is required from the organization confirming this commitment.

32

Research Tools and Instruments Grants Program – Submitting an Application

No Notification of Intent to Apply Application to be submitted by October 25 RTI Grant application includes:

- an Application for a Grant (Form 101) with supporting documentation;*

- a Personal Data Form (Form 100) for the applicant and all co-applicants; and

- all required appendices.

* Note that applications are to be submitted electronically.

33

Research Tools and Instruments Grants Program – Selection Criteria

Excellence of the applicant(s)

Merit of the proposed research program(s)

Need and urgency for the equipment—including availability of, and access to, similar equipment

Suitability of the proposed equipment for the proposed research program(s)

Importance of the equipment for the training of HQP

34

Research Tools and Instruments Grants Program – Evaluation Process Applications are rated and ranked.

Based on the available funds, the most meritorious applications are supported down to a cutoff line.

RTI Grants are usually awarded for the full cost of the requested items (including tax, transportation and eligible installation costs).

EGs may recommend partial funding, but the amount recommended must be sufficient to allow for the purchase of a functional unit.

35

Research Tools and Instruments Grants Program – Eligible Costs

Type of Expenditure RTI – Category 1

Salaries and Benefits Not eligible

Equipment or Facility Purchase or rental

Travel Not eligible

Others (transportation costs for purchased equipment, extended warranty, brokerage and customs charges for the importation of equipment and supplies)

Eligible

36

Research Tools and Instruments Grants Applications – Tips

Describe the research program(s) that will be carried out using the equipment.

Explain the need and urgency of the equipment.

Justify the need and appropriateness for each item.

Illustrate the suitability of the proposed equipment for the research program(s).

Discuss the importance of the equipment for the training of HQP—quality and opportunities for hands-on training.

Final Advice

38

Discovery Grant or Research Tools and Instruments Grant Applications – Reminders

Consult the Peer Review Manual, Section 6 (DG) or Section 7 (RTI).

Read all instructions carefully and follow presentation standards.– Use all the space allotted to you, with clear headings and good

layout.– Respect guidelines for font size, margins and page limits.– Identify students’ contributions in bold font.

39

Discovery Grant or Research Tools and Instruments Grant Applications – Reminders Ensure completeness of application. Keep in mind that two audiences read your application

—expert and non-expert. Ask colleagues and/or your RGO for comments on your

application. Read other successful proposals.

40

NSERC Contacts

EGs Program Officer firstname.lastname@nserc-crsng.gc.ca

Deadlines, acknowledgement of applications and results

Your university RGO

Your account, Grants in Aid of Research Statement of Account (Form 300)

Your university Business Officer (BO)

NSERC Web site www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca

Discovery Grants Program

(including eligibility)

E-mail: resgrant@nserc-crsng.gc.ca

Tel.: 613-995-5829

Use of Grant Funds E-mail: casdfinance@nserc-crsng.gc.ca

On-line Services Helpdesk E-mail: webapp@nserc-crsng.gc.ca