1. CFI John R Evans Leaders Fund Assessment Criteria – Research or Technology Development

2. CFI Requirements – Research or Technology Development
“The proposed research or technology development is of high quality and originality, and meets international standards. It will create knowledge or develop technology leading to innovation.”
Describe the proposed research or technology development program and its innovative aspect.
Explain why it is important to pursue the proposed research or technology program at this time.
Explain how the proposed research or technology development program complements or differs from comparable programs being conducted nationally and/or internationally.
* Ref: John R. Evans Leaders Fund Guidelines – March 2017 version

3. Suggested Structure for this Section
1. Introductory Statement
What is the major goal of the applicant’s research program?
How is this goal significant and innovative?
How will the infrastructure allow these goals to be met?
2. Proposed Research
What are the key objectives for the research?
What methods will be used in the research program?
What will be the milestones and deliverables from the research program?
How will the infrastructure be used to achieve these objectives

4. Suggested Structure for the Research or Technology Section
3. Innovation and Transformative Potential
What sets research program apart from others? Nationally? Internationally?
If similar projects exist, how is the proposed research unique?
4. Timeliness and Impact
What is the state of knowledge in the field?
Why does this research need to be completed now?
How will acquiring this equipment enable new opportunities to be seized?

5. Feedback from Reviewer Comments
(for UofA JELF Applications submitted Oct 2013 to June 2016)
Analysis of reviewers feedback from submitted JELF applications indicated that:
A consistent concern raised by reviewers is that the Research or Technology Development section is insufficiently detailed
48% of all U of A submitted JELF proposals had at least one reviewer commenting on the lack of details for this section
92% of the submitted U of A submitted JELF proposals that were rejected or partially funded had reviewers indicating that the lack of detail in this section of the proposal was a concern to them
Reviewers also raised concerns about the feasibility of the research plan and whether the proposed research is sufficiently innovative

6. (JELF submissions Oct. 2013 to June 2016)
CFI Reviewer Comments
(JELF submissions Oct to June 2016)
All Submitted
Proposals
(n=60)
Research or Technology Development
Researchers
Need for Infrastructure
Training of HQP
Benefits to Canadians
Sustainability %
*For Unaffiliated JELF Stream, CFI request $400,000 or less

7. CFI Reviewer Concerns Rejected/Partially Funded Applications (n=12) %
(JELF submissions Oct to June 2016)
Rejected/Partially Funded Applications
(n=12)
Research or Technology Development
Researchers
Need for Infrastructure
Training of HQP
Benefits to Canadians
Sustainability %

8. Tips for Success
Research (science) must be presented as the priority in the proposal
The infrastructure requested should logically enable the innovative research plan
Innovative nature of the project is crucial
“Novel” ≠ “innovative”
The innovation should stem from the research plan
Requested equipment should enable innovative research plan to be executed
The equipment requested does not need to have exceptional features
Research plan should represent “new way of doing things”
Interdisciplinary and integrative research is viewed by reviewers as particularly innovative

9. Tips for Success
Ability to deliver on the project (feasibility) is a necessity
Reviewers must be convinced that research plan can be ‘pulled off’
Quality of the science and the team must be of the highest level
Methods in the research plan must be scientifically sound
Proposal will be reviewed by expert reviewers
Background information should substantiate feasibility of research approach
References ≠ bibliography
You may choose to include a list of citations, but these are not required
Use supporting/preliminary data to substantiate claims
Proposal should stand on its own
Grantsmanship!!

10. Tips for Success
Clearly outlined objectives, goals and methods will demonstrate to expert reviewers that research plan is sound
But … final funding decisions are made by non-expert reviewers
All concepts should be fully explained in near-lay terms
Explain all acronyms to avoid jargon