1 Presented by: Dr. René Tinawi Dr. Greg Naterer August 6, 2008

2 Plan of the presentation About NSERC Changes to GSC Eligibility Preparing a Grant Application Peer review process 2007 Funding Statistics Final Advice

3 Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada NSERC Suzanne Fortier President

4 Total: $920 NSERC Budget (millions of dollars) Excludes $37M increase from the 2007 Federal Budget.

5 Total: $399 Discovery Programs Budget 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

10 Are You Eligible? Hold, or have a firm offer of, an academic appointment at a Canadian institution (minimum three-year term position) Position requires independent research and allows supervision of Highly Qualified Personnel (HQP)

11

12 Discovery Grants Objectives: promoting and maintaining a diversified base of high-quality research capability in natural sciences and engineering in Canadian universities fostering research excellence providing 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 ( ) to avoid conflicts Deadline: 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 101 YOUR GRANT PROPOSAL F100 (CV) YOUR RESEARCH PROFILE Excellence of the Researcher Training of HQP Need for funds Potential HQPPast HQP record Budget justification Relationship 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 ( ) in reverse chronological order ( journal papers, conferences, books, etc.) Emphasize quality not just quantity Describe contributions to training of HQP ( ) 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 DG Involve other Faculty members, if possible Try to obtain partial institutional or other support Overall success rate is about 50% with an average grant of $49,000 It is not advisable to apply for $149,900 RTI Grant

23 Research Tools and Instruments Deadline 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 1 What 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 training Give alternate configurations and prices FORM 100RTI FORM 101 &

25 How your application is evaluated by the Grant Selection Committee

26 Life Cycle of a DG Application August 1 to mid-September Form Assignment of GSC and Referees November 1 Submission of Grant Application by ORS November 25 Chairs’ Meeting – Confirmation of GSC November Mail-out DG to External Referees Mid-December Mail-out to GSC Members February Grants Competition March – April Announcement 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 Review Generally, 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 proposal Excellence of the researcher Training of highly qualified personnel (HQP) Need for funds

30 During February Competition Chair P.O. 1 st Reviewer Reader 2 nd Reviewer 32,000$ 30,000$ 25,000$ 23,000$ 20,000$ 0 Conflict ?

31 Criterion1 - Excellence of Researcher Knowledge, expertise and experience Contribution to research Importance of contributions Complementarity of expertise and synergy for group applications

32 Criterion 2 - Merit of the Proposal Originality and innovation Significance and expected contribution to research Clarity and scope of objectives Clarity and appropriateness of methodology Feasibility of program

33 Criterion 3 - Training of HQP Quality and extent of past and potential contributions Appropriateness of proposed work for training Training in collaborative or interdisciplinary environment

34 NameType of HQP Training Years Supervised or Co-supervised Title of Project or Thesis Present Position Consent obtained Imadoc, Marie Masters (completed) Supervised Isotope geochemistry in petroleum engineering V-P (research), Earth Analytics Inc., Calgary, AB Consent not obtained (name withheld) Masters (completed) Supervised Isotope geochemistry Research executive in petroleum industry – Western Canada Reporting HQP

35

Discovery Grants Results: All Disciplines Disciplines First-time ApplicantsReturning Applicants No App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) No App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) Life Sciences , ,625 Physical Sciences , ,505 Math, Stats , ,570 Computer Science , ,311 Engineering , ,095 Subatomic Physics , ,361 Interdisciplinary , ,618 Total for all GSCs , ,993

Discovery Grants Results: Life Sciences Grant Selection Committee (GSC) First-time ApplicantsReturning Applicants No. App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) No. App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) (1011) Integrative Animal Biology , ,222 (32) Cell Biology , ,724 (33) Molecular & Dev. Genetics , ,214 (03) Plant Biology & Food Sci , ,005 (18) Evolution & Ecology , ,851 (12) Psychology: Brain, Behaviour and Cognitive Science , ,303 Total for Life Sciences , ,625

Discovery Grants Results: Physical Sciences Grant Selection Committee (GSC) First-time ApplicantsReturning Applicants No. App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) No. App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) (08) Solid Earth Sciences , ,980 (09) Environmental Earth Sci , ,998 (24) Inorganic & Organic Chem , ,512 (26) Analytical & Physical Chem , ,372 (17) Space & Astronomy , ,009 (28) Condensed Matter Physics , ,069 (29) General Physics , ,971 Total for Physical Sciences , ,505

Discovery Grants Results: Math, Stats and CIS Grant Selection Committee (GSC) First-time ApplicantsReturning Applicants No. App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) No. App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) (336) Pure & Applied Math. – A , ,915 (337) Pure & Applied Math. – B , ,723 (14) Statistical Sciences , ,073 (330) Computing & Info. Sci. – A , ,855 (331) Computing & Info. Sci. – B , ,767 Total for Math, Stats & CIS , ,616

Discovery Grants Results: Engineering Grant Selection Committee (GSC) First-time ApplicantsReturning Applicants No. App. Success (%) Avg. Grant ($) No. App. Succes s (%) Avg. Grant ($) (334) Comm., Comp. & Components Eng , ,133 (335) Electro. & Elect. Sys. Eng , ,872 (20) Industrial Engineering , ,842 (04) Chem. & Metallurgical Eng , ,202 (06) Civil Engineering , ,998 (1053) Mechanical Eng. - A , ,140 (1054) Mechanical Eng. - B , ,942 Total for Engineering , ,095

Research Tools and Instruments (RTI-1) All RTIRTI for FTAs DisciplinesNo. App. Success Rate (%) Funding ($k) No App. Success Rate (%) Life Sciences , Physical Sciences , Math, Stats Computer Science , Engineering , Interdisciplinary Total for all GSCs ,

RTI-1 Results: Life Sciences Grant Selection Committee (GSC) ALL RTIRTI for FTAs No. App. Success Rate (%) Funding ($) No. App. Success Rate (%) (1011) Integrative Animal Biology ,132, (32) Cell Biology ,644, (33) Molecular & Dev. Genetics ,763, (03) Plant Biology & Food Sci ,210, (18) Evolution & Ecology ,786, (12) Psychology: Brain, Behaviour and Cognitive Sci ,171, Total for Life Sciences ,708,

RTI-1 Results: Physical Sciences Grant Selection Committee (GSC) All RTIRTI for FTAs No. App. Success Rate (%) Funding ($) No. App. Success Rate (%) (08) Solid Earth Sciences ,328, (09) Environmental Earth Sciences ,444, (24) Inorganic & Organic Chem ,731, (26) Analytical & Physical Chem ,531, (17) Space & Astronomy , (28) Condensed Matter Physics ,554, (29) General Physics ,696, Total for Physical Sciences ,358,

RTI-1 Results: Math, Stats and CIS Grant Selection Committee (GSC) All RTIRTI for FTAs No. App. Success Rate (%) Funding ($) No. App. Success Rate (%) (336) Pure & Applied Math – A0NA00 (337) Pure & Applied Math – B , (14) Statistical Sciences , (330) Computing & Info Sci. – A , (331) Computing & Info Sci. – B , Total for Math, Stats & CIS ,941,

RTI-1 Results: Engineering Grant Selection Committee (GSC) All RTIRTI for FTAs No. App. Success Rate (%) Funding ($) No. App. Success Rate (%) (334) Comm., Comp. & Components Eng ,006, (335) Electro. & Elect. Sys. Eng ,048, (20) Industrial Engineering , (04) Chem. & Metallurgical Eng ,188, (06) Civil Engineering ,720, (1053) Mechanical Engineering - A ,824, (1054) Mechanical Engineering - B ,685, Total for Engineering ,827,

46 Why these statistics? No grant application is guaranteed funding Demand ($ of applicants) is > supply (available $) Committees can not exceed their allocated budgets Attitude 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 Advice Use 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 your patience! Questions?