sshrc grantsmanship presentation standard research grant program
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
SSHRC Grantsmanship Presentation Standard Research Grant Program

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 44

SSHRC Grantsmanship Presentation Standard Research Grant Program - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

SSHRC Grantsmanship Presentation Standard Research Grant Program. The Presentation Overview. What’s new at SSHRC? Standard Research Grants Program Overview The evaluation process Tips SPJI programs (Strategic Programs & Joint Initiatives). What’s New at SSHRC?. 3. What’s New at SSHRC.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'SSHRC Grantsmanship Presentation Standard Research Grant Program' - ronda

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The Presentation Overview
  • What’s new at SSHRC?
  • Standard Research Grants Program
    • Overview
    • The evaluation process
    • Tips
  • SPJI programs (Strategic Programs & Joint Initiatives)
what s new at sshrc1
What’s New at SSHRC
  • Blue Ribbon Panel
  • Targeted research funding
    • Aboriginal Research Grants
    • Environment and the North
    • Innovation, Leadership & Prosperity
  • Strategic Review
    • RTS
    • Funding related to health research
  • SRG Online in 2009


blue ribbon panel
Blue Ribbon Panel
  • SSHRC’s Peer-Review process - evaluation by an independent, arm’s length group composed of internationally recognised experts on peer-review
  • Extensive consultations were conducted with experts, in addition to a survey completed by more than 6000 researchers in the SSH community
  • Conclusion: Peer-Review at SSHRC is up to the best practices and highest international standards
  • Nonetheless, changes were recommended, and we are working towards their implementation
  • Available online at


cfi s leaders opportunity fund lof for sshrc programs
CFI’s Leaders Opportunity Fund (LOF) for SSHRC programs
  • CFI is there for SSH researchers too
  • LOF and SRG: Joint review process
    • For BOTH research and infrastructure funding
  • Less paperwork: one CV, short CFI application
  • More to come on SSHRC and CFI
  • Additional opportunities for SSH researchers at CFI
  • Talk to CFI program officers and your research office

targeted research funding
Targeted Research Funding
  • Northern Communities: Towards Social & Economic Prosperity
  • Canadian Environmental Issues
  • Innovation, Leadership & Prosperity


targeted research funding1
Targeted Research Funding
  • Aboriginal Research Grants
    • Development Grants – up to$25,000over a maximum of two years.
    • Research Grants – up to $100,000 annually, for a maximum of $250,000 over three years.
    • applicants from universities, colleges; Aboriginal & community organizations

Anna TorgersonMathieu RavignatProgram Officer Senior Program Officer613-947-9652 [email protected]

Deadline – September 30, 2009

strategic review
Strategic Review
  • A process which requires all government departments and agencies to review all program spending and:
    • to assess how and whether these programs are aligned with core mandates; and
    • how they are effective, efficient and meet the priorities of Canadians.
  • SSHRC, CIHR and NSERC all underwent the process this past year.


results of strategic review rts
Results of Strategic Review - RTS
  • Research Time Stipends (RTS) are no longer available in any of our programs
  • Note that:
    • RTS granted prior to April 1, 2009 will be respected
    • this decision does not affect salary replacements for non-academic participants in SSHRC-funded research projects (for example, staff in community organisations participating in CURA projects).


results of strategic review funding to health related research
Results of Strategic ReviewFunding to Health Related Research

SSHRC funding is reduced for health-related research that is

eligible under the mandate of CIHR:

  • Spending reductions will apply to all SSHRC programs: research grants, knowledge mobilization and communication grants and fellowships.
  • Modification of SRG committee structure
    • Cmts 27 and 20 no longer exist
    • One psychology committee (Cmt 10 – Psychology)
    • Cmt 30 – Social Work, library/information science, career guidance
  • Please consult our website throughout the summer and fall for information about how our programs will be affected


srg online
SRG Online
  • SRG Competition is now fully online for Fall 2009 submission
  • Supports SSHRC strategic priority to improve client service delivery through communication and technology
  • This will:
    • Eliminate paper attachments (including CVs)
    • Allow E-Signatures as required
    • Centralise approval process within institutions
    • Adapted from NSERC e-submission process used for Discovery grants



Overall Success Rate for SRG 2009

  • more detailed statistics on winning research are available on the SSHRC website:
Objectives of the Standard Research Grants Program

To support:

  • Programs of research
  • Training of future researchers
  • New theoretical or methodological approaches
  • Disciplinary and multidisciplinary research
  • Communication of research results both within & beyond academia
  • Team and individual applications
  • Three-year cycle
  • Maximum $100,000 per year / $250,000 over 3 years
    • Minimum of $7,000 in at least one of the three years
  • Peer-reviewed
steps in the peer review process
Research Office

Notice of Intent


External Review

Committee Members

Communication of Results

Committee Adjudication

Steps in the Peer Review Process


program officers
Program Officers
  • Provide advice & guidance to applicants
  • Select committee members
  • Determine eligibility of files
  • Select external assessors
  • Coordinate committee work
  • Prepare results


External Assessors
  • Goal - 2 Assessors per file
  • How they are chosen:
    • Assessors’ expertise
    • Suggested assessors & list of references
    • Exclusion of external assessors
    • Must adhere to conflict of interest guidelines
Committee Members
  • Overall competence and credibility; scholarly stature
  • Appropriate representation on the basis of:
    • areas of expertise
    • university size (small, medium, large)
    • geographical region (Canada & abroad)
    • language
    • gender
    • must adhere to conflict of interest guidelines
    • normally serve 3 years, voluntary service
conflicts of interest
Conflicts of Interest
  • Conflicts of interest
    • a close friend or relative
    • a research collaborator
    • an institutional colleague
    • a student previously under the applicant’s supervision
    • a person with whom the applicant is involved in a dispute
    • a person with whom the applicant is involved in a partnership


pre adjudication
  • Assignment of Readers A & B
  • Teleconference
  • Preliminary Scores for:
    • Record of Research Achievement
    • Program of Research
  • Flagging of files
flagging criteria
Flagging Criteria
  • Significant discrepancy between scores of both readers;
  • Significant discrepancy between scores and assessors’ comments;
  • Research tools;
  • No external assessment; and,
  • Any other issue raised by a committee member or program officer.


2009 adjudication in ottawa
2009 - Adjudication in Ottawa
  • No discussion of files in top 15% after initial ranking unless flagged – except for budget
  • No discussion of files in bottom 35% after initial ranking - unless flagged
  • Final ranking and scores


2009 standard research grants competition results
2009 Standard Research Grants Competition Results
  • 2,880 eligible applications, 941 awards (including 26 awards to New Scholars in Environment and North)
  • Overall success rate of 32.7% (variation across committees)
  • Average three-year award of $83,712
  • Limits placed on the number of applicants in the alternate (4A) list
what to consider when applying
What to consider when applying
  • Eligibility
  • Committee selection


Eligibility Requirements
  • Research subject must meet SSHRC’s mandate
  • Affiliation with a Canadian post-secondary institution (no citizenship requirement)
  • PostDocs must be affiliated by April 15
  • PhD candidates in final year (file will be flagged)
  • Submission of Final Research Report
Choosing a Committee
  • Choose from the adjudication committee list
  • Membership available on line
  • Committee 15 (inter- and multi-disciplinary committee)
    • Not a “catch-all” committee
    • Fully explain the inter- or multi-disciplinary nature of proposal
    • SSHRC reserves the right to determine committee placement
changes in srg committees 2009 2010
Changes in SRG Committees 2009-2010
  • Because of an increasingly large number of applications, &

due to funding changes to health-related research 4 Committees have been restructured

    • Cmt 2 (History) – two panels
    • Cmt 24 (Political Science) – now Cmts 24 & 31
    • Cmt 20 (Health Studies & Social Work) – now Cmt 30
    • Cmts 10 and 27 (Psychology) – now Cmt 10, two panels
  • Please consult our website for the latest information on committees, their subject matter content & membership


New Scholars vs. Regular Scholars
  • Score weighting – 60/40% or 40/60%

New Scholars:

  • Must not have been awarded as a principal investigator (an SRG, MCRI or Strategic Grant) AND
  • Must have completed highest degree less than five years OR
  • Held tenure-track position less than 5 years OR
  • Never had a tenure-track position OR
  • Had career interrupted or delayed for family reasons
career interruptions special circumstances
Career Interruptions & Special Circumstances
  • Productivity stopped/productivity slowed
  • Personal reasons - serious health problems, death in family, maternity or parental leave
  • Professional reasons - heavy teaching load, along with administrative duties
  • Committee discretion
Evaluation of the Record of Research Achievement
  • Contributions from last 6 years, unless career was interrupted
  • Quality and significance of published work
  • Originality and impact of previous research
  • Quantity of research activity
  • Importance of other scholarly activities
  • Recentness and consistency of output
  • Dissemination to non-academic audiences (where relevant)
  • Productivity from previous grant (s)
  • Training of future researchers
Presenting your Curriculum Vitae
  • Follow the instructions re: format and page limitations
  • Categorize your publications: refereed, non-refereed, etc.
  • Avoid “inflating” the CV
  • Indicate productivity from previous grants
  • Be honest and specific about forthcoming items
team applications
Team Applications
  • Applicant should demonstrate need for team & outline each person’s role & responsibilities
  • Each team member assessed; however, collaborators do not factor into track record score
  • Applicant must be qualified; cannot rely on experience of co-applicant (s)
Evaluation of the Program of Research
  • Originality & contribution to advancement of knowledge
  • Quality of the literature review
  • Appropriateness of the theoretical approaches/framework
  • Appropriateness of the research strategies/methodologies
  • Suitability of plans to communicate research results
  • Nature, extent and benefit of research training
Presenting your Program of Research
  • Clear and precise objectives
  • Clear theoretical framework or conceptual approach
  • Explain and justify methodology (where appropriate), establish relationship between objectives, methodology and budget
  • Define all key terms or concepts
  • Include a complete literature review
  • Append a bibliography / list of references
summary page
Summary Page
  • Clearly indicate the purpose, the objectives, the context for and potential impact of the proposed research
  • Used by committee members and for publicity purposes; think generalists!
  • Avoid jargon or technical terms
  • Reasonable and fully justified budget
  • Check Tri-Council list of eligible & ineligible expenses
  • Explain and justify costs
  • Link between research objectives and budget
characteristics of a successful application
Characteristics of a Successful Application
  • Clarity: application is well written, well organized and error free
  • Originality: application is challenging, interesting, ambitious yet feasible
  • Importance of research is clear
  • Potential Impact is stated convincingly
  • Presented confidently not boastfully
common problems
Common Problems
  • Application is “premature”
  • Proposal is “exploratory”
  • Project is too ambitious
  • Methodology is inappropriate, vaguely described
  • Theoretical rationale is lacking
  • Project is not adequately contextualized
  • Not clear how proposed work differs from previous work
  • Prepare your proposal with Assessors (experts) & Committee members (possibly non-specialists) in mind
  • Have your grant proposal read by colleagues who have been successful in previous SRG competitions
  • Take previous Committee Comments into account
  • Give evidence of consistent scholarly activity
  • Established scholars – avoid submitting a “Trust Me” application, a strong record will not compensate for a weak program
  • Present a modest, reasonable budget (think “minimum essential funding”)
  • Avoid, whenever possible, budgeting for professional services
  • Link dissemination plans to research agenda
  • Link student training to research needs
  • Use a reasonable font size; and maintain reasonable margins
  • NOI – Notice of Intent to Apply – August 15
    • Optional & Not Binding
    • Very brief, easy to fill-out
  • Internal Deadline at your university
  • Application Deadline – October 15
    • Application available online

Program Officers

Research Grants & Dissemination Division

Committee and/or Discipline