WCHRI Innovation Grants The Art & Science of Grant Writing Presented by Dr. Geoff Ball & Dr. Alan Underhill February 2, 2017

WCHRI Innovation Grant Program Provides up to $50,000 in operating funds (over 24 months) to projects that will lead to improved health outcomes for women and/or children; Proposed projects must adhere to WCHRI vision, mission and strategic roadmap; Applications are reviewed by either the Applied Health Committee, chaired by Dr. Geoff Ball or by the Biomedical Committee, chaired by Dr. Alan Underhill; Funding may not be used as bridge or top-up; scientific overlap (conceptual or budgetary) must be declared at the time of application

Since 2013, WCHRI has funded around 35% of Innovation applications. WCHRI Innovation Grant Program Application Outcomes Since 2013, WCHRI has funded around 35% of Innovation applications.

Application type Biomedical -corresponds to CIHR Pillar 1. Art placed here Art placed here Biomedical -corresponds to CIHR Pillar 1. -committee is chaired by Dr. Alan Underhill.

Application type Applied Health Art placed here Applied Health -aligns with health systems services, clinical, or social, cultural, environmental & pop health themes. -corresponds to CIHR Pillars 2,3, and 4. Committee is chaired by Dr. Geoff Ball.

Recent results 2013: 20/48 (42%); 11/27 (41%) Biomed; 9/21 (43%) App Health 2014: 18/48 (37%); 12/31 (39%) Biomed; 6/17 (35%) App Health; 5/13 (39%) BCSC 2015: 21/59 (37%); 15/44 (34%) Biomed; 6/15 (40%) App Health 2016: 20/70 (29%); 11/46 (24%) Biomed; 9/24 (38%) App Health

Applicant Eligibility must be WCHRI academic member must hold a faculty appointment at the U of A may submit one application per cycle successful applicants may not apply the following year

Application Alignment Applications must be: directly related to women and/or children’s health and health outcomes aligned to WCHRI vision, mission and strategic roadmap meets WCHRI relevance criteria (able to hold funds) Project relevance & vision, mission and strategic roadmap High relevance to WCHRI Moderate relevance to WCHRI Low relevance to WCHRI

Moderate scientific merit Application Alignment Eligibility to hold WCHRI funds is based on: Relevance to WCHRI Scientific merit Moderate relevance High scientific merit Eligible High relevance Low relevance and/or Low scientific merit Not Eligible Moderate scientific merit

Letters of Collaboration should clearly detail each collaborator’s role or contribution must be signed by collaborator NO additional letters of support should be included.

Consider Committee Composition Committees are broadly composed Do not expect an expert reviewer to be exactly in your field of research Avoid jargon/ specific scientific language

Committee Review Criteria & Ratings Application Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Criteria for Reviewers Percentage contribution to total reviewer score Quality of Proposal 75% Quality of Applicant 15% Impact/KT 10%

Committee Review Criteria & Ratings Committee Consensus Rating Scale Committee Impression of Application Scientific Merit given Application Cohort Rating Scale Outstanding 4.5-4.9 Excellent 4.0-4.4 Very Good 3.5-3.9 Good 3.0-3.4 Needs Revision 2.5-2.9

The peer review process Art placed here Grantsmanship can make the difference the quality of science of applications in the 10% below the cut-off for funding is not significantly different from the 10% just above the cut-off.

Knowledge Translation Plan Worth 10% of the total score Detail: anticipated outcomes and impact knowledge users involvement next steps (future grants, (pre-)clinical development, impacts on health policy)

Writing the Budget Make sure the budget is justified Do not request items that are not allowed Publication is an anticipated outcome - costs should be included!!!

Closing Comments Ask for clarification if necessary You have some very good resources at this university – start with your colleagues or research mentor

WCHRI Can Help! Contact us at wcgrants.ualberta.ca Further information on this program may be located on our website at: www.wchri.org