Frequently Asked Questions about Program Architecture Renewal
- When will the renewed program architecture be in place?
- What is happening with student funding under the renewed program architecture?
- Will existing funding opportunities continue to be offered as usual until the new funding opportunities are launched?
- Can I expect my application to be adjudicated by my peers?
- Have there been significant changes to how applications are evaluated?
- Are there any changes to the way applicants can, or should, propose their application budgets?
- The application forms now require applicants to provide a knowledge mobilization plan and a description of expected outcomes. What is the difference between these?
1. When will the renewed program architecture be in place?
The overall structure and design of the renewed program architecture were endorsed by SSHRC’s governing council in June 2010. New funding opportunities are being phased in over three years. This process began in July 2010 with the launch of the Partnership Development Grants and Partnership Grants, continued with the launch of the Insight Development Grants and Insight Grants, and will be completed in 2012 with the launch of new and renewed funding opportunities under the Connection and Talent programs.
Funding opportunities under the renewed program architecture:
- SSHRC Doctoral Awards
- SSHRC Postdoctoral Fellowships
- (CGS, Vanier, Banting and Foreign Study Supplement)
- Insight Development Grants
- Insight Grants
- Connection Grants (Expected launch in 2012)
- Connection Tools Grants (Expected launch in 2012)
Partnership Development Grants
*Program architecture for Talent funding opportunities currently under review
2. What is happening with student funding under the renewed program architecture?
SSHRC has begun consultations with the community regarding the renewal of funding opportunities under the Talent program, with an expected launch of the new and renewed funding opportunities in late 2012.
3. Will existing funding opportunities continue to be offered as usual until the new funding opportunities are launched?
Due to the various cycles of existing funding opportunities, some adjustments to competition schedules may be necessary as existing funding opportunities are phased out and the new funding opportunities are launched.
As they become available, details about the renewal process will continue to be sent to SSHRC Leaders, as well as to the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, the Canadian Association of University Research Administrators and the Canadian Association for Graduate Studies, to share with their members.
4. Can I expect my application to be adjudicated by my peers?
Adjudication committees for SSHRC competitions may be either disciplinary or multidisciplinary. Non-academic experts from other sectors may also be invited, as appropriate, to participate in the adjudication process.
Commended for its peer review system through the 2008 Blue Ribbon Panel report, SSHRC remains committed to excellence in its review process.
5. Have there been significant changes to how applications are evaluated?
SSHRC has adopted three evaluation criteria:
- Challenge—The aim and importance of the endeavour
- Feasibility—The plan to achieve excellence
- Capability—The expertise to succeed
These evaluation criteria will be applied across all funding opportunities in order to ensure consistency in evaluating proposals. The weighting assigned to each of the criteria may vary according to the funding opportunity. Please see individual funding opportunity descriptions for weighting assigned.
6. Are there any changes to the way applicants can, or should, propose their application budgets?
The appropriateness of the proposed budget and the justification of the proposed costs are now subcriteria under Feasibility (see Question 5). Budgets judged by the adjudication committee to be inappropriate (whether too large or too small) with respect to the activities described should result in a low or failing Feasibility score; therefore, applicants should propose budgets that are firmly in line with their plans and provide a full justification of the proposed costs.
7. The application forms now require applicants to provide a knowledge mobilization plan and a description of expected outcomes. What is the difference between these?
Both of these elements are required as part of grant proposals requesting funding for either research or research-related activities.
Knowledge mobilization plan
The knowledge mobilization plan will describe specific activities to engage with various audiences and participants (academic and/or non-academic) and to facilitate the multidirectional flow and exchange of research knowledge among them. It will also describe the timelines for undertaking these activities.
Description of expected outcomes
The description of expected outcomes will include the potential benefits of the proposed research and/or research-related activities. These benefits could include, for example, enhanced curriculum and teaching material, graduate student supervision, enriched public discourse, improved public policies, enhanced business strategies, and innovations in every sector of society.
Partnership Development Grants and Partnership Grants
Insight Development Grants
General enquiries about SSHRC’s program architecture renewal