1. Welcome to the future Lori Burrows, PhD CIHR University Delegate burrowl@mcmaster.ca

2. FOUNDATION SCHEME PROJECT SCHEME Emphasis on the Program Leader (or team) plus program of research, and on training/mentorship One competition per year with three-stage review process, two virtual and one face-to-face One competition per year with three-stage review process, two virtual and one face-to-face Up to 7 years funding (5 for young investigators) & up to $1.5M/year Emphasis on feasible ideas with great potential, specific purpose, defined endpoints Two competitions per year with two- stage review process, virtual and face-to-face From 1 to 5 years funding & up to $750K/year

3. A comment on numbers and timing two Project competitions per year, March and September right now you can submit >1 grant to each of those competitions, but this could change if CIHR gets more than they think they can manage re: # of reviewers and # of grants per reviewer, they will ask for deferral of some apps or delay release of decisions past July

4. Reforms impact style of grant writing no longer in control of visual format different and explicit review criteria more reviewers, more perspectives, and no consensus between them needed VERY limited space (including refs) very focused CV

5. To get started: you need a CIHR PIN you need a ResearchNet account you need a Common CV - Biosketch you need to be eligible (have an appropriate appointment that allows you to hold research funds) you need to know the rules – applicants can’t change post-registration

6. A Project grant proposal Summary Proposal – Concept (50%) Proposal – Feasibility (50%) Biosketch CV Budget & justification optional *partnered/iKT*

7. The summary is critical required at registration and used to find the right reviewers for your grant: first impression! what it says about you and your science: – what you’ve done – what you will do and how – why you want to do it – how likely you are to succeed – if a) reviewers feel that they have sufficient expertise, and b) reading your application might be painful (poorly written, confusing, boring)

8. A Project grant proposal Summary – should not change markedly from registration Proposal - Concept Quality of the Idea (25%) Importance of the Idea (25%) Proposal – Feasibility Methodology (25%) Expertise, Experience and Resources (25%) Biosketch CV (5 awards, 10 pubs, 5 patents, 5 presentations, 10 trainees, 5 KT) Budget

9. What’s your idea? does your idea address a health- related issue? – what is the scope of the problem? is it a good idea? – why are you taking this approach to tackling the problem and what will you achieve? is it an important idea? – how is your idea going to make a difference?

10. The quality of an idea (0.5 page; 1750 characters) Is the idea creative? Best in its field? Is the rationale of the project idea sound, logical, evidence-informed and valid? Are the goals and objectives clearly defined? Do the anticipated outputs align with the goals?

11. The importance of an idea (1 page, 3500 characters) what is the value of the work? context and needs (issues and/or gaps) of the project are clearly described Is the potential impact of the research project significant - advances in health- related knowledge, health research, health care, health systems, and/or health outcomes?

12. A Project grant proposal Summary – should not change markedly from registration Proposal - Concept Quality of the Idea (25%) Importance of the Idea (25%) Proposal – Feasibility Methodology (25%) Expertise, Experience and Resources (25%) Biosketch CV (5 awards, 10 pubs, 5 patents, 5 presentations, 10 trainees, 5 KT) Budget

13. Feasibility- the methodology (4.5 pages, 15,750 characters) Are the methods appropriate to deliver the proposed output(s) and achieve the proposed contribution(s)? Are the timelines and related deliverables of the project realistic? Pitfalls- does the proposal identify potential challenges and appropriate mitigation strategies?

14. Expertise, experience and resources (1 page, 3500 characters, plus Biosketch CV) Do the applicants (and their team) bring the appropriate expertise and experience to deliver on the proposed outputs, and to achieve the proposed contributions? Is there an appropriate level of engagement and/or commitment from the applicants? Is the environment (institution & infrastructure) appropriate to enable the conduct and success of the project?

15. Biosketch CV focus on information that is directly relevant to the application (5 awards, 10 pubs, 5 patents, 5 presentations, 10 trainees, 5 KT) there is no separate ‘registration CV’ but you can update your CV between registration and application fill out the CV on the Canadian Common CV website; validate it; paste the number you get into the appropriate spot in ResearchNet. Made changes? Repeat & get new number to paste. If you don’t have a Google Scholar profile, you should create one. Reviewers will likely search you online even though they are supposed to focus on the BCV.

16. Supporting documentation allowed two pages only of references for the whole grant (7000 characters) two pages only (PDF) of figures with succinct legends. No tables. No monster legends. No letters of support. No papers ‘accepted for publication’. No example surveys. Nothing but figures.

17. Budget: how much will it cost? not scored, ask must be consistent with proposed work amounts incl. taxes rounded to nearest $1K, total rounded to nearest $5K JUSTIFY the request: – personnel costs are often the biggest part, staff vs trainees, NAMES – provide rationale for animal numbers, cage costs – power calculations for trial enrollment – equipment is allowed!! >1 year lifespan and >$2000. Also maintenance and service contracts – KT costs (page charges, open access)

18. FAQs Do I need preliminary data? It is considered optional for Project grants, but it never hurts to demonstrate feasibility. Consider your competition and whether they will have pilot data. Updates on papers no longer allowed. How much money should I ask for? Up to $750K per year, but be realistic and JUSTIFY the ask. How many trainees/staff should I list? As many as it takes to do the proposed work, JUSTIFY. Historically, a technician or RA, 1-2 PDFs, 1-3 graduate students, summer students. There are no restrictions on stipends but they must be justified. McMaster will subsidize benefits for salaried staff that exceed a ~30% cap.

19. FAQs continued… Will CIHR accept updates after the application deadline, e.g. acceptance of publications? No. Are CV-related attachments permitted? No. What about grant attachments? Yes, Figs ONLY. Max two pages. Can I apply to Foundation and Project? Yes. You can apply to both Foundation stage 2 and Project. You can also apply for more than one Project grant (for now). How many grants will be awarded in the first Project? ~300-400?; some money is directed to translational and commercialization proposals with partnered or integrated KT.

20. A comment on iKT (partnered/integrated Knowledge Translation) As part of the reforms,“Knowledge Synthesis”, “Proof-of- Principal” “Partnerships for Health Services Improvement” etc. were all rolled into the general Operating grant pool. To ensure that those types of grants will still have a shot in the new world, CIHR has a ‘special consideration’ stream in this Project Pilot for Partnered/Integrated Knowledge Translation (iKT) Projects. At registration, you will be asked “Is your application for a knowledge translation or commercialization project that includes a partner and/or a knowledge user?” If you say yes, you will have more paperwork. A KU must be a principal applicant (but not necessarily the NPI). Your grant will be reviewed by at least 1 KU.

21. How will my grant be reviewed? 5 reviewers per grant (sometimes fewer, depending on topic/conflicts); ~15 grants per reviewer, online (virtual) review overseen by Virtual Chairs who watch ~50-60 grants reviewers are suggested by applicants, selected by CIHR based on keywords, and/or proposed by the VCs who are former panel chairs reviewers must declare that they have sufficient expertise to review your grant – they can say no if they don’t find the summary relevant/compelling. VCs may convince them to take a grant if they are short of reviewers. KU don’t review basic science grants.

22. How will my grant be reviewed? cont. each reviewer rates the criteria – this is for your information, and for their within-pile comparisons – no consensus on rating required but VC to prompt discussion where there are big differences in opinion using the ratings, each reviewer ranks your grant relative to the others in their pile – this is for CIHR, and will eventually determine where you land relative to all others with a ‘consolidated ranking’.

25. source of much frustration! how are these selected??

26. Final stage: face-to-face review applications that go forward will first be binned into A (high rank, low SD), B (high rank, high SD), or C (lower rank, high SD); movement allowed those in group A will be funded (green zone); those in group B will be discussed (grey zone), and voted on by panel; those in C are not funded each panel member has a set number of ‘yes’ and ‘no’ votes to apply to the grey zone apps the apps will be shuffled based on number of yes votes to get the final list; exact number will depend on how much money is available

27. McMaster U.