1 / 6

nserc-crsng.gc/NSERC-CRSNG/Visits-Visites/grants-subventions_eng.asp

Maximizing Funding Success from the Tri-council Granting Agencies: The NSERC Perspective Glen Van Der Kraak , Department of Integrative Biology . NSERC has an overview of the discovery grant program on their website: .

sona
Download Presentation

nserc-crsng.gc/NSERC-CRSNG/Visits-Visites/grants-subventions_eng.asp

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. Maximizing Funding Success from the Tri-council Granting Agencies: The NSERC Perspective Glen Van DerKraak, Department of Integrative Biology NSERC has an overview of the discovery grant program on their website: http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/NSERC-CRSNG/Visits-Visites/grants-subventions_eng.asp TIPS: Ask to see the grants of successful applicants Solicit peer review Sell your science, sell your science, sell your science

  2. Two-Step Review Process Funding recommendation Merit assessment

  3. Scientific or Engineering Excellence of the Researcher(s) • Knowledge, expertise and experience • Contributions to research in the NSE • Importance of contributions • Complementarity of expertise and synergy (for team applications) TIPS EXPLAIN YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS: It is not just what you found but the context in which it is important. Measures of success; use by others, open doors, invitations Training of HQP is critical Describe your engagement in the scientific community

  4. Merit of the Proposal • Originality and innovation • Significance and expected contributions to research, and potential for technological impact • Clarity and scope of objectives • Clarity and appropriateness of methodology • Feasibility • Extent to which the proposal addresses all relevant issues • Appropriateness and justification of the budget • Relationship to other sources of funding TIPS: Place your work in context: not just what but why it is important NSERC funds programs and not projects: short term and long term goals NSERC is not stamp collecting Be feasible and realistic : explain strengths but also limitations.

  5. Contributions to the Training of Highly Qualified Personnel • Quality and impact of contributions to training during the last six years • Proposed plan for future training of HQP in the NSE • Describe the nature of the training (e.g., length, specific projects) in which HQP will be involved, the HQP’s contributions and pertinence to the research program proposed. • Applicants should discuss the soundness of their plans and the expected outcomes. • Enhancement of training arising from a collaborative or interdisciplinary environment (where applicable) TIPS: Answer : How will they be trained, why you as an advisor, why Guelph? What is the evidence that your training makes a difference?

  6. Relative Cost of Research • Determined by the reviewers as Low, Normal or High as compared to the norm for the research areas represented in the applications considered by the EG(s). • Factors considered include: • salaries and benefits; equipment and/or facilities; materials and supplies; travel; and dissemination. TIPS The budget does not make the grant but it could break the grant be realistic in the NSERC context, NSERC trains HQPs. Link student costs to specific objectives

More Related