CCCESD University of Ottawa November 5, 2010 Dave Bowen Team Leader Environmental Sciences Discovery Grants NSERC

Outline  2010 Federal Budget & NSERC news  2010 Discovery Grants Competition & Results  Questions and Discussion

Federal Budget 2010 New prestigious PDF program – Banting Postdoctoral Fellowships $45M over 5 years NSERC Discovery Research$8M permanent increase NSERC Strategy for Partnerships and Innovation $5M permanent increase College and Community Innovation Program $15M permanent increase Indirect Costs Program$8M/yr

NSERC Frontiers  Initiative includes two elements: –Discovery Frontiers, focused on discovery researchDiscovery Frontiers –Innovation Frontiers, focused on research partnerships with industryInnovation Frontiers  All funded projects will include an international partnership component that taps into global expertise

Discovery Frontiers  First call for proposals $4 million over a four- year period to support research in Northern Earth Systems  Researchers will work collaboratively to tackle broad problems defined with the input of the northern community  Deadline for Letter of Intent December 10

 NSERC Strategy for Partnerships and Innovation -Launched in November Builds on the base of Discovery research -Connects academia and industry -Aims to double the number of companies partnering with NSERC-funded researchers by Regional offices are now focused on facilitating partnerships

Discovery Grants 2010 Competition Full implementation of Conference Model  12 Evaluation Groups instead of 28 GSCs  Flexible composition of sections to provide optimal review for applications  A more dynamic system  Raising the bar of excellence  Applicants, new and established, with superior contributions more easily identified and awarded funding at appropriate level

Discovery Grants 2010 Competition  While the overall DGP budget was unchanged this year, the 2010 competition budget was lower than in 2009 –differences in cohort make-up –fewer grant-holders choosing not to re-apply this year –a greater number of applicants who were not previously funded (Returning Unfunded: 2009 = 14.8%; 2010 = 20.7%; 2011 = 28.7%) *  This led to reduced success rate and a slightly smaller average grant for successful applicants * statistics for Geosciences EG

Evaluation principles  Two-step process separating merit review and funding recommendations  Merit assessment based on the same criteria as in the past (EoR, MoP, and HQP)  Funding recommendations ─ comparable funding for those with similar overall ratings within a committee  Greater consistency in process from committee to committee and competition to competition

Enhanced two-step review process

Conference Model - Definition  Similar to a scientific conference, where several sessions are occurring in parallel streams in different rooms.  The conference model had been implemented by several Grant Selection Committees (GSCs) – four years for one GSC – with two streams running in parallel.  This concept expanded the model to 3, or 4, or 5 streams.  Evaluation Group members meet in various combinations to assess applications in specific research topics.  Each stream involves six to ten EG members, as required.

Geosciences (1506) Research Topics (F180s received in 2011) GS01 Petrology & Mineralogy (8) GS02 Sedimentology & Stratigraphy (16) GS03 Paleontology & Paleobiology (7) GS04 Geophysics (19) GS05 Economic Geology (10) GS06 Tectonics & Structural Geology (6) GS07 Geochemistry & Geochronology (20) GS08 Volcanology (2) GS09 Planetary sciences (4) GS10 Surface Processes (12) GS11 Paleo-environmental Sciences (15) GS12 Biogeosciences (20) GS13 Global Geological Processes (2) GS14 Atmospheric Sciences (35) GS15 Hydrology (21) GS16 Oceanography (19) GS17 Soil Sciences (13) GS18 Geomatics & Earth Systems Observations (18) GS19 Cryology (4)

How does the Conference Model work? GROUP A Group Chair ~ 30 members 4 Section Chairs GROUP B Group Chair ~35 members 4 Section Chairs GROUP C Group Chair ~25 members 3 Section Chairs Section A1-2 Research Topics A2 and A4 Section A2 Research Topic A3 Section A1-1 Research Topic A1 Section A3-1 Research Topic A5 Section A3-2 Research Topic A6 Section A4-1 Research Topics A7 and A8 Section A4-2 Research Topics A9 and B5 Section B1-2 Research Topics B2 and A10 Section B1-1 Research Topic B1 Section B2 Research Topic B3 Section B3-1 Research Topic B4 Section B3-2 Research Topics B1 and B5 Section B4-2 Research Topics B7 and C6 Section B4-1 Research Topics B2 and B6 Section C1-2 Research Topic C2 Section C1-1 Research Topics C1 and B5 Section C2 Research Topic C3 Section C3-1 Research Topic C4 Section C3-2 Research Topics C5 and A5

Advantages of Conference Model  Provides a system with increased flexibility to ensure that applications have the best possible review;  Eliminates the need for consultation process between two GSCs – such applications are reviewed by a joint section and benefit from a larger pool of expertise than in the current system;  Proposals would be discussed by smaller numbers of members  reduction of the number of readers and, therefore, a reduction in workload; and  Enables "traditional" disciplines or well-defined areas to remain together.

Overall Statistics – 2010 Discovery Grants Competition Number of Applications Number of Awards Amount Awarded Success rate (%) Average Grant Early-Career researchers (ECR) $7,418,44958$23,930 Established researcher (ER) applicants who held a grant 1,9021,360$49,412,77772$36,333 Applicant not previously holding a grant $7,439,05029$27,552 Overall 2 3,3551,940$64,270,27658$33,129 Overall 3 3,3741,959$68,724,27658$35, Includes returning unfunded applicants and experienced researchers submitting a first application. 2. Includes Discovery and Subatomic Physics (Individual and Team) Grants. 3. Also includes Subatomic Physics Projects.

2010 Discovery Grants Competition Evaluation Group Success Rate Average Grant Genes, Cells & Molecules (1501)52.2%$33,610 Biological Systems and Functions (1502)51.4%$38,985 Evolution & Ecology (1503)60.2%$32,798 Chemistry (1504)53.8%$55,092 Physics including SAP (1505)62.3%$40,828 Geosciences (1506)54.3%$30,245 Computer Science (1507)64.2%$27,044 Mathematics & Statistics (1508)62.1%$19,656 Civil, Industrial & Systems Engineering (1509)52.5%$30,131 Electrical and Computer Engineering (1510)63.3%$30,401 Materials and Chemical Engineering (1511)66.5%$32,271 Mechanical Engineering (1512)63.7%$27,199

Change in Grant Level for 1st Renewal – 2010 Competition

Change in Grant Level for All Established Researchers – 2010 Competition

Change in Grant Level for All Established Researchers – 2008 Competition

Success Rate by University Size – Competitions 2000 to 2010

Average Grant Awarded by University Size – Competitions 2000 to 2010

2009 DG Competition Results 2009 Solid & Environmental Earth Sciences (GSCs 08-09) Early Career Researchers ER Overall RenewalsOthers # of Applications # of Awards $ Awarded$321K$4,668K$239K$5,228K Success Rate50.0%76.9%20.8%61.0% Average Grant$20,063$42,433$23,902$38,439

2010 DG Competition Results 2010 Geosciences (EG 1506) Early Career Researchers ER Overall RenewalsOthers # of Applications # of Awards $ Awarded$300K$2,746K$388K$3,434K Success Rate48.4%73.5%23.4%54.3% Average Grant$20,000$33,093$25,867$30,396

Geosciences DG Results 2010

RTI Results by Evaluation Group Evaluation GroupTotal ReceivedSuccess Rate Genes, Cells & Molecules (1501) % Biological Systems and Functions (1502) % Evolution & Ecology (1503) % Chemistry (1504) % Physics (1505) % Geosciences (1506) % Computer Science (1507) % Mathematics & Statistics (1508) % Civil, Industrial & Systems Engineering (1509) % Electrical and Computer Engineering (1510) % Materials and Chemical Engineering (1511) % Mechanical Engineering (1512) % * Funding rate for all EGs was ~27%

Discovery Accelerator Supplements (DAS) results  100 DAS were awarded among all EGs  Geosciences EG reviewed all applications and recommended 13 applicants for a DAS supplement  list provided to Executive Committee of EG, who conducted final analysis of DAS nominees to reduce to the given quota of 7 awards  nominees who best met the objectives of the program recommended to NSERC President for a DAS award  The Geosciences Evaluation Group recommended its full quota of seven applicants

2010 Ship Time Allocation Committee (STAC) Results 2010 # of Applications # of Awards $ Requested $ AwardedDFO Awarded Non-DFO Awarded 139 (69.2% S/R) $1,295k$833k (64.3% F/R) 3 (60%) 6 (75%) 2010 Northern Research Supplements (NRS) Results 2010 # of Applications # of Awards$ Requested $ Awarded ($10k each) Success Rate 2310$240k$100k43.5% EGs requesting NRS support: , , , and EGs requesting STAC support: , , and

Questions? Program Officers –Geosciences – Tiffany Lancaster –Geosciences – Kenn Rankine