280 likes | 568 Views
CCCESD University of Ottawa November 5, 2010. Dave Bowen Team Leader Environmental Sciences Discovery Grants NSERC. Outline. 2010 Federal Budget & NSERC news 2010 Discovery Grants Competition & Results Questions and Discussion. Federal Budget 2010. NSERC Frontiers.
E N D
CCCESDUniversity of OttawaNovember 5, 2010 Dave Bowen Team Leader Environmental Sciences Discovery Grants NSERC
Outline • 2010 Federal Budget & NSERC news • 2010 Discovery Grants Competition & Results • Questions and Discussion
NSERC Frontiers • Initiative includes two elements: • Discovery Frontiers, focused on discovery research • Innovation Frontiers, focused on research partnerships with industry • All funded projects will include an international partnership component that taps into global expertise
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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) Geosciences (1506)Research Topics (F180s received in 2011)
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 C1-1 Research Topics C1 and B5 Section B1-1 Research Topic B1 Section C3-1 Research Topic C4 Section A1-1 Research Topic A1 Section A3-1 Research Topic A5 Section A4-1 Research Topics A7 and A8 Section B3-1 Research Topic B4 Section B4-1 Research Topics B2 and B6 Section B2 Research Topic B3 Section C2 Research Topic C3 Section A2 Research Topic A3 Section C1-2 Research Topic C2 Section A1-2 Research Topics A2 and A4 Section C3-2 Research Topics C5 and A5 Section A3-2 Research Topic A6 Section A4-2 Research Topics A9 and B5 Section B3-2 Research Topics B1 and B5 Section B4-2 Research Topics B7 and C6 Section B1-2 Research Topics B2 and A10 How does the Conference Model work?
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.
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.
Change in Grant Level for All Established Researchers – 2010 Competition
Change in Grant Level for All Established Researchers – 2008 Competition
Average Grant Awarded by University Size – Competitions 2000 to 2010
RTI Results by Evaluation Group Evaluation Group Total Received Success Rate Genes, Cells & Molecules (1501) 165 30.91% Biological Systems and Functions (1502) 246 32.11% Evolution & Ecology (1503) 114 34.21% Chemistry (1504) 230 28.70% Physics (1505) 133 27.07% Geosciences (1506) 109 26.61% Computer Science (1507) 59 28.81% Mathematics & Statistics (1508) 11 54.55% Civil, Industrial & Systems Engineering (1509) 119 26.05% Electrical and Computer Engineering (1510) 136 23.53% Materials and Chemical Engineering (1511) 177 24.86% Mechanical Engineering (1512) 170 27.06% * Funding rate for all EGs was ~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
Ship Time Allocation Committee (STAC) Results 2010 EGs requesting STAC support: 1502-1, 1503-4, and 1506-8 Northern Research Supplements (NRS) Results 2010 EGs requesting NRS support: 1503-11, 1504-1, 1506-10, and 1509-1
Questions? Program Officers • Geosciences – Tiffany Lancaster tiffany.lancaster@nserc-crsng.gc.ca • Geosciences – Kenn Rankine kenn.rankine@nserc-crsng.gc.ca