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

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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7.  NSERC Strategy for Partnerships and Innovation -Launched in November 2009 -Builds on the base of Discovery research -Connects academia and industry -Aims to double the number of companies partnering with NSERC-funded researchers by 2014 -Regional offices are now focused on facilitating partnerships

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. Enhanced two-step review process

12. 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.

13. 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)

14. 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

15. 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.

16. Overall Statistics – 2010 Discovery Grants Competition Number of Applications Number of Awards Amount Awarded Success rate (%) Average Grant Early-Career researchers (ECR) 532310$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 1 921270$7,439,05029$27,552 Overall 2 3,3551,940$64,270,27658$33,129 Overall 3 3,3741,959$68,724,27658$35,143 1. 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.

17. 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

18. Change in Grant Level for 1st Renewal – 2010 Competition

19. Change in Grant Level for All Established Researchers – 2010 Competition

20. Change in Grant Level for All Established Researchers – 2008 Competition

21. Success Rate by University Size – Competitions 2000 to 2010

22. Average Grant Awarded by University Size – Competitions 2000 to 2010

23. 2009 DG Competition Results 2009 Solid & Environmental Earth Sciences (GSCs 08-09) Early Career Researchers ER Overall RenewalsOthers # of Applications3214348223 # of Awards1611010136 $ 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

24. 2010 DG Competition Results 2010 Geosciences (EG 1506) Early Career Researchers ER Overall RenewalsOthers # of Applications 3111364208 # of Awards158315113 $ 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

25. Geosciences DG Results 2010

26. RTI Results by Evaluation Group Evaluation GroupTotal ReceivedSuccess Rate Genes, Cells & Molecules (1501)16530.91% Biological Systems and Functions (1502)24632.11% Evolution & Ecology (1503)11434.21% Chemistry (1504)23028.70% Physics (1505)13327.07% Geosciences (1506)10926.61% Computer Science (1507)5928.81% Mathematics & Statistics (1508)1154.55% Civil, Industrial & Systems Engineering (1509)11926.05% Electrical and Computer Engineering (1510)13623.53% Materials and Chemical Engineering (1511)17724.86% Mechanical Engineering (1512)17027.06% * Funding rate for all EGs was ~27%

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

28. 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: 1503-11, 1504-1, 1506-10, and 1509-1 EGs requesting STAC support: 1502-1, 1503-4, and 1506-8

29. Questions? Program Officers –Geosciences – Tiffany Lancaster tiffany.lancaster@nserc-crsng.gc.ca –Geosciences – Kenn Rankine kenn.rankine@nserc-crsng.gc.ca