1 / 10

AGENDA

AGENDA. PREPARATION OF A GRANT- DR. S.M. COLLINS AN INTRODUCTION TO HEALTH RESEARCH SERVICES (HRS) PROCESSING OF CIHR GRANTS BY HRS - LISA HODGE DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIP – GAY YUYITANG “Getting Grants” -TIPS ON PLANNING - JEFF WEITZ

gurit
Download Presentation

AGENDA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AGENDA • PREPARATION OF A GRANT- DR. S.M. COLLINS • AN INTRODUCTION TO HEALTH RESEARCH SERVICES (HRS) • PROCESSING OF CIHR GRANTS BY HRS - LISA HODGE • DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIP – GAY YUYITANG • “Getting Grants” -TIPS ON PLANNING - JEFF WEITZ • WHAT’S GOING ON AT CIHR GRANT REVIEW PANELS Q & A WITH PANELISTS

  2. WHY CIHR/TRI-COUNCIL GRANTS ? • DETERMINES CRC ALLOCATION • DETERMINES CFI-LOF FUNDING • GENERATES INDIRECT COSTS FOR RESEARCH • IT’S A GOOD PLACE TO START…

  3. FHS TRI-COUNCIL FUNDING

  4. WHAT’S OUR RESEARCH OUTPUT?

  5. GLOBAL RANKING OF FACULTIES OF MEDICINE, DENTISTY AND PHARMACOLOGY (1000 INSTITUTIONS) • Pilot study on RESEARCH IMPACT by The University of Western Australia (http://www.highimpactuniversities.com). • Generated a Research Performance Index (RPI) and a g-index for each of 1000 universities and 5000 faculties over 9 years (2000-9). • g-index is a variant opf the h index (see L. Egghe, “Theory and Practise of the,” Scientometrics, Vol. 69, No. 1, pp. 131-152, Jan. 2006 ). • Comparing research impact among faculties of medicine, dentistry and pharmacology across the world, McMaster ranked 25th (behind U of T but ahead of all other Canadian institutions), Yale, Wash U and USC • Combining all faculties at individual universities McMaster University ranked 62nd out of 5000 institutions. • .

  6. INTERNAL PEER REVIEW OF CIHR GRANTS • THE IMPORTANCE OF CIHR FUNDING • AIM IS TO OPTIMIZE CHANCES OF FUNDING OUR RESEARCHERS, PARTICULARLY NEW INVESTIGATORS • DISCOURAGE THE (REPEATED) EXPOSURE OF BAD GRANTS TO CIHR GRANT PANELS • TO GENERATE A HEALTHY REPUTATION FOR McMASTER GRANT APPLICATIONS AT CIHR GRANT REVIEW PANELS; EVERYBODY BENEFITS.

  7. RESPONSIBILITY FOR PEER INTERNAL PEER REVIEW • THE APPLICANT • THE DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH INSTITUTE, CENTER, PROGRAM OR GROUP or • DEPARTMENTAL “RESEARCH DIRECTOR” BEST DONE BY A PANEL RATHER THAN AN INDIVIDUAL

  8. THE INVENTORY OF SCIENCEhttp://ios.mcmaster.ca/. Available to all faculty members for the following purposes: To assist new and established investigators seeking collaboration or advice on research expertise and methodologies. To assist in obtaining arms length peer-review of scientific content of grants applications To assist the institution in developing responses to requests from government agencies, the pharmaceutical industry and others regarding expertise within the faculty of health science. 500 word description of research in general terms + several keywords. The IOS can be word searched and therefore there should be:(1) a focus on the field of study, (2) whether it involves humans or animals or both, (3) it should name approaches and techniques, and (4) the clinical field to which the research is relevant. Currently restricted to FHS

  9. THE PROCESS IDEA FOR A GRANT PROPOSAL 3-12 MONTHS INCUBATION THE INVENTORY OF SCIENCE WRITING, EXPERIMENTATION,COLLABORATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING INTERNAL PEER-REVIEW SUBMISSION

  10. HEALTH RESEARCH SERVICES WHO DOES WHAT?

More Related