1

Presented by: Presented by: Dr. René TinawiDr. René Tinawi

Dr. Greg NatererDr. Greg Naterer

August 6, 2008August 6, 2008

2

Plan of the presentationPlan of the presentation

About NSERCChanges to GSCEligibilityPreparing a Grant ApplicationPeer review process2007 Funding StatisticsFinal Advice

3

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

NSERC www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca

Suzanne Fortier President

4

Total: $920

NSERC Budget 2007-08(millions of dollars)

Excludes $37M increase from the 2007 Federal Budget.

5

Total: $399

Discovery Programs Budget 2007-08

1. Includes Canadian Light Source funding from NRC ($3M) and Budget 2004 ($6M). Excludes $37M increase from the 2007 Federal Budget..

(millions of dollars)

6

7

GSC Restructuring Restructuring of the Communications, Computer

and Components Engineering (GSC 334) and Electromagnetics / Electrical Systems Engineering (GSC 335) Grant Selection Committees

8

Grant Selection Committee (GSC) Structure Review Current discipline-based GSC structure may

have difficulties handling inter-disciplinary and new areas of research

To handle increasing workload, GSCs are sub-dividing and thus becoming more specialized, exacerbating the problem

Is there a better way? NSERC is reviewing the current system

9

11

12

Discovery GrantsObjectives:promoting and maintaining a diversified base of

high-quality research capability in natural sciences and engineering in Canadian universities

fostering research excellenceproviding a stimulating environment for research

training (HQP)

An essential grant to have!

13

Discovery Grants

• Supports ongoing programs of research, rather than projects

• Inherent flexibility in the research program

• Success rate: approximately 70%

• Average grant: $31K per year

14

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

For Discovery Grants (DG), and University Faculty Award (UFA) applications

Facilitates selection of external referees

List contributions (2002-08) to avoid conflictsDeadline: August 1

Can have adverse consequences if not submitted

15

A Complete Discovery Grant Application Includes:

1. An Application for a Grant (Form 101) with supporting documentation

2. A Personal Data Form (Form 100) for applicant with appropriate appendices

3. Samples of research contributions (reprints, pre-prints, thesis chapters, manuscripts, etc.)

4. Environmental Assessment, if required

16

Merit of the proposal

FORM 101YOUR GRANT PROPOSAL

F100 (CV)YOUR RESEARCH PROFILE

Excellence of the Researcher

Training of HQP

Need for funds

Potential HQP Past HQP record

Budget justificationRelationship to other sources of funds

List of other sources of funds

17

Personal Data Form – an essential component

• List all sources of support (held or applied for) during the past four years

• Describe 5 most significant research contributions

• List other research contributions (2002-2008) in reverse chronological order (journal papers, conferences, books, etc.)

• Emphasize quality not just quantity

• Describe contributions to training of HQP (2002-2008)

• Give other evidence of impact of work (awards, honours, membership on scientific committees)

• Explain any delays in research activity (maternity)

FORM 100

18

Discovery Grant: Application tips

Please read the instructions: “Plug & Play” concept on-line does not work!

Write the summary in plain language

Provide a progress report (even for first time applicant, a must for renewals)

Position the research within the field (1page bibliography)

Articulate short and long-term objectives of your research program

Provide a detailed and focused methodology (2-3 pages)

Outline problems that you may encounter and their possible solutions

Describe plans for training of HQP (co-supervision in some cases)

Prepare a realistic budget (look at statistics)

First time applicants must seek guidance from ORS and colleagues

Discuss any relationship to other research support

Address previous GSC comments or external referee reports (if applicable)

FORM 101

19

Other tips - Discovery Grants Use the 2008 Web version of forms/guide Read all instructions VERY carefully Select the most appropriate GSC for your proposal Find out who was on your GSC last year (yearly committee renewal 1/3) Follow presentation standards for print size and page limitations (this will irritate committee

members and could have negative impact) Send the required number of papers or contributions Ensure completeness of application Read other (successful) proposals, if you can Ask colleagues for (negative) comments on your application First time applicant: Research program is essential Applicants renewing: Productivity and training of HQP is a must! + Research Program Allow several weeks to write your proposal and the possibility of iterating several times Proposals written 24h before the deadline are not appreciated by GSC In summary: your innovative research ideas and your CV no matter how outstanding they are,

must be “packaged” in a neat and clear way by respecting page limits, margins, font size, etc. Poorly prepared proposal will definitely be rejected.

Remember: money is scarce and any excuse to reject or reduce funding will be used by GSC.

Good news: You do this once every five years!

FORM 101

20

You don’t get rich working for NSERC!! Committee members are all volunteers. You will not believe your ears!!

I can’t understand how University X hired professor Y, applicant can’t even read the instructions!

Applicant is cheating: the font size is too small, it aggravates my eyes! Research proposal is too widespread, no focus! All the six papers in the CV are variations on the same theme: productivity is not

impressive! Publications: journals, conferences and book chapters are all mixed up and are not listed in

the required order! No mention or desire of HQP training: Applicant wants to attend conferences only! Applicant has other funds for the same research: double dipping! No time: it is evident this application was written 12 hours before the deadline! Applicant

will have no time to conduct the proposed research! No funding! The experimental program makes no sense at all: matchsticks inside a bucket of sand in a

laboratory are not representative of real pile foundations! Etc.

21

22

Research tools and instruments (RTI)Budget: $375M

Objectives: To foster and enhance the discovery, innovation and training capability of university researchers by supporting the purchase of research equipment and installations.

Categories:RTI – Category 1: $7,001 to $150,000; RTI – Category 2: $150,001 to $325,000; (Moratorium) RTI – Category 3: more than $325,000 (Moratorium).For categories 2 and 3, NSERC funding must be complemented from other sources such that NSERC requirement ≤ $150,000.

Advice:Apply for RTI at the same time as your DGInvolve other Faculty members, if possibleTry to obtain partial institutional or other supportOverall success rate is about 50% with an average grant of $49,000It is not advisable to apply for $149,900 RTI Grant

23

Research Tools and InstrumentsDeadline date – October 25

Ongoing moratorium on Categories 2 and 3

$150,000 or less available from NSERC

Must hold or have submitted an NSERC research grant (not necessarily a Discovery Grant)

A Grant Selection Committee’s RTI competition budget is based on the total amount applied for

24

Research Tools and Instruments Category 1What research will be performed with equipment?

Justify each item

Explain need and urgency of overall request

Suitability of proposed equipment for research program

Indicate impact on trainingGive alternate configurations and prices

FORM 100 RTI FORM 101 &

25

How your application is evaluated by the Grant Selection Committee

26

August 1 to mid-SeptemberForm 180 - Assignment of GSC and Referees

November 1Submission of Grant Application by ORS

November 25Chairs’ Meeting – Confirmation of GSC

November Mail-out DG to External Referees

Mid-DecemberMail-out to GSC Members

FebruaryGrants Competition

March – AprilAnnouncement of Results

27

Outline of evaluation

The Grant Selection Committee

How is your application evaluated

Discovery Grants (DG)

Research Tools and Instruments Grants (RTI)

28

Levels of ReviewGenerally, at least eight people will read your

proposal:

One primary reviewer on GSC One secondary reviewer on GSC Three readers One external reviewer (at least)

Total number depends on your

GSC

29

FORM 100 (CV)

& FORM 101

FORM 101

Selection Criteria for DG

Merit of the proposalExcellence of the researcherTraining of highly qualified personnel

(HQP)Need for funds

30

During February Competition

Chair

P.O.

1st Reviewer

ReaderReader

Rea

der

Reader Reader

2nd Reviewer

32,000$30,000$25,000$23,000$20,000$

00

Conflict?

31

Criterion1 - Excellence of ResearcherKnowledge, expertise and experienceContribution to researchImportance of contributions

Complementarity of expertise and synergy for group applications

32

Criterion 2 - Merit of the ProposalOriginality and innovationSignificance and expected contribution to researchClarity and scope of objectivesClarity and appropriateness of methodologyFeasibility of program

33

Criterion 3 - Training of HQP Quality and extent of past and potential

contributionsAppropriateness of proposed work for training

Training in collaborative or interdisciplinary environment

34

Name Type of HQP Training

Years Supervised or Co-supervised

Title of Project or

Thesis

Present Position

Consent obtained

Imadoc, Marie

Masters (completed)

Supervised

2003-2005

Isotope geochemistry in petroleum engineering

V-P (research), Earth Analytics Inc.,

Calgary, AB

Consent not obtained

(name withheld)

Masters (completed)

Supervised

2003-2005

Isotope geochemistry

Research executive in petroleum

industry – Western Canada

35

36

2007 Discovery Grants Results: All Disciplines

Disciplines

First-time Applicants Returning Applicants

No App.

Success(%)

Avg. Grant

($)

NoApp.

Success (%)

Avg. Grant

($)

Life Sciences 315 50.8 27,270 814 66.6 34,625

Physical Sciences 189 58.7 26,664 579 79.8 39,505

Math, Stats 84 69.4 14,356 218 76.1 18,570

Computer Science 57 72.3 18,764 297 81.8 25,311

Engineering 222 60.4 21,077 740 73.9 26,095

Subatomic Physics 12 91.7 42,591 21 85.7 48,361

Interdisciplinary 21 71.4 20,267 29 65.5 27,618

Total for all GSCs 900 58.9 23,615 2692 74.0 30,993

41

2007 Research Tools and Instruments (RTI-1)

All RTI RTI for FTAs

DisciplinesNo. App.

Success Rate (%)

Funding ($k)

No App.

Success Rate (%)

Life Sciences 456 56.4 11,709 87 47.1

Physical Sciences 487 48.3 17,359 81 56.8

Math, Stats 10 92.9 389 1 100.0

Computer Science 54 50.4 1,552 9 50.0

Engineering 512 44.7 17,827 71 40.8

Interdisciplinary 13 53.8 373 3 33.3

Total for all GSCs 1532 49.9 49,210 252 48.4

46

Why these statistics?

No grant application is guaranteed fundingDemand ($ of applicants) is > supply (available $)Committees can not exceed their allocated

budgetsAttitude of a GSC is to fund excellent applications

only: a magnifying glass is used to spot the most minute reason, as an excuse, not to fund some applicants

47

48

Final AdviceUse the 2008 Web version of the forms and Guide.

Read all instructions carefully and follow presentation standards.

Ensure completeness of application.

Remember that more than one audience reads your application.

Ask colleagues for comments on your application.

Read other successful proposals, if possible.

Read the Peer Review Manual (on the web)

Allow enough time for iterations

49

Thank you for Thank you for

your patience!your patience!

Questions?Questions?