Shared Services Canada System Maintenance Notice
Please note that the network will not be available for 15 min on December 3, 2022, anytime between 19:00 and 23:00 (EST).
Insight Grants—Application Instructions
Note: For the purposes of these instructions, “applicant” and “project director” refer to individual applicants and the person acting on behalf of an institutional applicant.
SSHRC recommends clearing your browser cache to ensure the most up-to-date instructions are consulted. Verify the date modified at the bottom of this webpage to ensure these instructions are for the latest funding cycle.
- Documents to read before applying
- Application process
- Activity details / research activities (mandatory)
- Request for multi/interdisciplinary evaluation
- Response to previous critiques
- Summary of proposal (mandatory)
- Detailed description (mandatory)
- Knowledge mobilization plan (mandatory)
- List of references or bibliography (mandatory)
- Expected outcomes (mandatory)
- Research-creation support material (if applicable)
- Research team, previous output and student training (mandatory)
- Funds requested from SSHRC (mandatory)
- Budget justification (mandatory)
- Funds from other sources
- Impact assessment—Appendix A
- Joint Initiatives (statement of relevance)
- Suggested reviewers
- Exclusion of potential reviewers (if applicable)
- Research contributions (mandatory)
- Career interruptions and special circumstances
Documents to read before applying
Write your proposal in clear, plain language. Use non-technical terms that can be understood by a range of audiences with varied areas of expertise.
SSHRC advocates for the practices listed below when applicable in your application. In addition, costs related to these activities are eligible:
- responsible research data management strategies;
- open access publishing activities;
- dissemination in both official languages;
- promotion and support of official language minority communities; and
- effective research training.
If you experience technical difficulties, contact the helpdesk as early as possible in the application process. The helpdesk has a higher volume of requests during peak periods (i.e., September 1 to December 1) and on deadline days.
Accommodations and accessibility
If you need help completing online application forms due to circumstances arising from a disability, contact your institution (scholarship liaison officer, research grant office or other applicant support office) as early in the application process as possible to investigate available supports. If your institution cannot provide help, or needs SSHRC to collaborate on a solution, contact firstname.lastname@example.org. You can also contact SSHRC if you have questions or are seeking specific adaptation arrangements. You do not need to share your medical or sensitive personal information, and, to protect your privacy, should avoid doing so.
Frequently requested accommodations include, but are not limited to:
- one-on-one phone or video appointments to clarify funding program information or the application process, or receive technical support;
- alternative formats of online materials to enable access using assistive technology; and
- submission of the application (in full or part) through alternate means or format (e.g., hard copy, voice recording, or data entry by SSHRC staff on the applicant’s behalf).
Applicant or project director responsibilities
By clicking “Submit,” the applicant or project director certifies that all information is accurate. They are also responsible for:
- completing all mandatory fields (bold labels);
- attaching mandatory electronic files (application);
- ensuring all co-applicants and collaborators have submitted their “Accept Invitation Form;”
- verifying and correcting the data until the “Verification Report” confirms verification; and
- clicking “Submit” (to research administrator) for approval by your institution’s or organization’s internal deadline. The electronic submission process ensures validation of the information by an institution’s or organization’s administrator before they forward your application to SSHRC on your behalf (status is “Forwarded”). Once processed by SSHRC, the status will change to “Received.”
Research or financial administrator responsibilities
By clicking “Forward” (Forward to SSHRC), the research administrator or financial administrator (institutional approval) certifies that:
- the applicant or project director:
- is affiliated with the institution or organization; and
- has the necessary time and facilities to carry out the activity;
- the postsecondary institution:
- is willing to administer any grant received according to SSHRC policies;
- agrees to take the necessary steps to ensure that machine-readable files or computer databases are preserved and accessible under conditions agreed to by the institution and the researcher;
- will release funds to the successful candidate once all necessary certification requirements and conditions have been met;
- will notify SSHRC of any change in the grant holder’s status during the tenure of the grant; and
- has verified that the budgetary estimates are in accordance with its rates and policies.
Electronic submission process and acknowledgement of receipt of applications
Applicants must allow enough time for their institution’s or organization’s internal approval process, as specified by the relevant authorities. SSHRC will acknowledge receipt of your electronic application form and will assign you an application number. Cite this number in all correspondence with us.
Applications remain available for download via the SSHRC online system for 30 days after the deadline, after which they are deleted.
Eligible postdoctoral fellows and doctoral candidates can submit their application directly to SSHRC. See Administering organization for more information.
Attaching a document
Many modules in your application will require you to attach a PDF document. You must follow the specified requirements for margins and font size, or your application will be deemed ineligible. An error message will appear if the file you are trying to attach does not meet the required specifications for page length and file size. Once you have attached the electronic file, we recommend you click “View attached file” to ensure you have the proper file and that your file is not corrupted.
Provide a short, descriptive title for your proposal in non-technical terms. Restrict use of acronyms (e.g., UN, NATO). Use uppercase for only the first word of the title, proper nouns and acronyms.
Note: The application title is provided to external reviewers. The title, therefore, should communicate as clearly as possible the application’s subject matter.
Language of the application
Indicate the language in which the application will be submitted. The main body of your application should be written in either English or French, rather than in a mix of both official languages.
You must choose from one of two streams, depending on the amount of funding required:
- Stream A for requests between $7,000 and $100,000 over two to five years; or
- Stream B for requests between $100,001 and $400,000 over two to five years.
Preferred merit review committee
Click “List…” and in the “Select a committee” window, select the committee that is most appropriate based on the subject and discipline(s) of your proposal. If you are not sure which merit review committee to choose, contact SSHRC before submitting your application.
Request for multi/interdisciplinary evaluation
If you would like your proposal to be evaluated by one of the multi/interdisciplinary merit review committees, you must (1) select a multi/interdisciplinary merit review committee from the drop-down list; (2) select “Yes” at “Request for multi/interdisciplinary evaluation;” and (3) complete the Request for multi/interdisciplinary evaluation module.
Note: SSHRC can adjust the committee structure from year to year, as disciplines evolve and the number of applications received changes. SSHRC will make efforts to accommodate applicant preferences; however, it reserves the right to determine an application’s review process and committee assignment without consulting the applicant.
See the funding search tool for a complete list of joint initiatives that may be relevant to your application. If you want your project to be considered for one of these initiatives, select it in the drop-down list in the “Joint or special initiative” field in the Identification module.
Before you select “Yes,” refer to the definition of research-creation for more information and examples of fields involving research-creation.
If you select “Yes,” see Research contributions and relevant experience and the Guidelines for Research-Creation Support Meterials for instructions about creative outputs and support material.
You should also complete the Research-creation support material module according to the instructions.
Does your proposal involve Indigenous research, as defined by SSHRC?
Select “Yes” if you wish to signal to the merit review committee that your application should be reviewed in the context of SSHRC’s definition of Indigenous research and its Guidelines for the Merit Review of Indigenous Research.
Names and initials
This information has automatically been transferred from your account. To change your family name or first name, you must contact email@example.com. To change your initials, you must return to the “My Account” section of your portfolio to update the information.
The organization has automatically been transferred from the “current position” screen of your CV. To have a different affiliation on record for this application, click “List…” and make the necessary selection.
Administering organization (individual grants) or lead organization (institutional grants)
Only an eligible Canadian institution or organization can administer grant funds. Institutions interested in administering SSHRC individual or institutional grants must meet the institutional eligibility requirements for the administration of grants and awards for the three federal research granting agencies, which is independent of the application process.
If you are a doctoral student or a postdoctoral fellow who is submitting an application directly to SSHRC, you must leave this field blank. To pass the validation process, ensure your SSHRC CV indicates that your current position is either “student” or “postdoctoral fellow or associate.”
Activity details / research activities (mandatory)
State whether or not your proposal involves human beings as research subjects. If it does, select “Yes” and consult the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans—TCPS 2 (2018) and submit your proposal to your organization’s research ethics board.
The Impact Assessment Form (Appendix A) must be completed and submitted with grant applications ONLY if at least one of the following situations applies to your research or research-related activities, as per the Impact Assessment Act, 2019 (IAA):
- any phase of the proposed research takes place on federal lands, other than lands under the administration and control of the Commissioner of Yukon, the Northwest Territories or Nunavut, as interpreted in section 2 of the IAA;Footnote *
- any phase of the proposed research takes place in a country other than Canada;Footnote *
- the grant funds permit a designated project (listed in the Physical Activities Regulations) to be carried out in whole or in part; or
- any phase of the proposed research depends on a designated project (listed in the Physical Activities Regulations) being led or carried out by an organization other than SSHRC.
For more information, see SSHRC’s Guidelines on Impact Assessment.
List keywords, separated by semicolons, that best describe your proposal.
Disciplines, areas of research, temporal periods, geographical regions and countries
Indicate and rank each entry relevant to your proposal, with entry 1 as the most relevant and the last entry the least relevant.
Participant invitation process:
- Select the role.
- If applicable, select “academic” or “non-academic.”
- Enter the family name. If you incorrectly type in a participant’s family name, you will receive an error message. The system will recognize the discrepancy only after the participant has accepted the invitation. For your application to be successfully verified, the participant’s family name must be identical to the family name found in SSHRC’s database.
- Enter the email address.
- Click “Save.” The system will generate an email to each person, inviting them to participate in the application.
It is the responsibility of each invited person to complete, verify and submit their Accept Invitation form.
Note : Your application will not be “Verified Successfully” if all participants you invited have not successfully completed and verified their invitation.
Invitation not yet accepted
Participant has not accepted the invitation.
Invitation accepted but not yet verified
Co-applicant has accepted the invitation and a copy of their CV was attached to their “Accept Invitation Form” on creation. The “Accept Invitation Form” is incomplete. Click “View CV” to preview the co-applicant’s CV and form.
Invitation accepted and verified
Co-applicant’s “Accept Invitation Form” has been completed and verified. Click “View CV” to preview the co-applicant’s CV and form.
Co-applicants must submit a full SSHRC CV.
Request for multi/interdisciplinary evaluation
If you selected one of the multi/interdisciplinary committees to review your proposal, you must provide a justification for doing so.
SSHRC will secure expertise from the disciplines covered by the committee (focused on social sciences or humanities, as well as the Tri-Agency Interdisciplinary Peer Review Committee). Relevant expertise from within the larger pool of Insight Grants merit review committee members can also be sought.
Explain how your research will integrate intellectual resources (e.g., theories, methodologies, perspectives) drawn from two or more disciplines. List the various disciplines / areas of research from which expertise should be drawn to assess the research proposal.
To select the pilot Tri-Agency Interdisciplinary Peer Review Committee, you must select Committee 24 and attach a one-page justification. Applications considered relevant for review by this committee must respond to the definition of “interdisciplinary” on the pilot webpage and represent collaboration across disciplines and subject areas pertaining to two or more of (1) social sciences and humanities; (2) natural sciences and engineering; and (3) health and wellness, and clearly articulate interdisciplinary approaches.
Response to previous critiques
You may, if you wish, address criticisms and suggestions offered by merit review committees and external assessors who have reviewed your previous applications.
Note: Merit review committees are not bound by the deliberations or scores of previous committees. Members of current committees will not be given copies of earlier applications.
Summary of proposal (mandatory)
Provide a clear summary of your proposal indicating:
- the challenges or issues to be addressed;
- the potential contribution of the research in terms of the advancement of knowledge; and
- the broader potential benefit of the research (e.g., Will this research be of interest to other disciplines / areas of research? Will it be of interest outside the academic community? How will it be used and by whom?).
Detailed description (mandatory)
Using the headings below, describe the proposed research in enough detail to allow informed assessment by committee members:
- Context (including literature review and theoretical approach)
Your detailed description must address the Challenge and Feasibility evaluation criteria listed under Evaluation and merit review in the funding opportunity description, except for those criteria addressed in other sections of the application, that is:
- Knowledge mobilization plan;
- Expected outcomes;
- Research team, previous output and student training;
- Funds requested from SSHRC;
- Budget justification; and
- Funds from other sources.
Contingency plans related to the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on your research project may be described in this section, if appropriate. This is not mandatory, but it may assist the merit review committee in assessing the feasibility of your proposal if your research plans are significantly disrupted (e.g., if international travel is not possible).
Knowledge mobilization plan (mandatory)
In planning your research project, consider the ways in which merit reviewers assess knowledge mobilization activities. For example, reviewers are advised to evaluate, under the Feasibility criterion, the “quality and appropriateness of knowledge mobilization plans, including effective dissemination, exchange and engagement with stakeholders within and/or beyond the research community, where applicable.”
SSHRC encourages its funding recipients to disseminate research knowledge in both official languages, whenever feasible and/or appropriate.
Include a plan to increase knowledge uptake by target audiences, and anticipated outputs, outcomes and/or impacts of social sciences and humanities knowledge among various appropriate audiences or participants (academic and/or non-academic), including:
- methodologies and approaches to engage appropriate target audiences or participants, including, as applicable, diverse groups of researchers, policy-makers, business leaders, community groups, educators, media, international audiences, practitioners, decision-makers and the general public;
- timeframes or a schedule for the intended knowledge mobilization activities; and
- justifications for how the above points fit within the project’s particular knowledge mobilization objectives.
Open access and data management
Grant holders must follow the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications. To the extent possible, and in keeping with this policy and SSHRC’s endorsement of open access forms of knowledge dissemination, grant holders should make their research results openly available through, for example, open access publications, websites, publicly accessible databases and/or institutional repositories. To learn more, see Open Access overview.
List of references or bibliography (mandatory)
List all references cited or works referred to in your proposal. SSHRC recognizes and allows the use of different referencing styles.
Expected outcomes (mandatory)
The project’s expected outcomes are essential for the merit review of the proposal and are part of the Challenge evaluation criterion. Elaborate on the potential benefits and/or outcomes of your proposed project. You will be able to share how your outcomes have evolved in follow-up achievement reports.
Research and related outcomes include enhanced curriculum and teaching material, enriched public discourse, improved public policies, enhanced business strategies and increased innovations in every sector of society, as well as graduate supervision opportunities. Research outcomes, which are facilitated by the effective mobilization of knowledge, then permeate daily life in the form of new thinking and behaviour that lead to improvements in our economic, social, cultural and intellectual well-being.
For “Scholarly benefits,” “Social benefits” and “Audiences,” indicate and rank selections in order of importance. If the information is not listed, select “Other” from the list and type the information in the box provided.
Expected outcomes summary
Describe the potential benefits and outcomes (e.g., evolution, effects, potential learning and implications) that could emerge from the proposed project as a result of knowledge mobilization activities.
Research-creation support material
If you are submitting a proposal involving research-creation, you should attach a research-creation support material document to provide samples of creative work that best illustrate the qualifications of the team and/or the nature of the proposed research-creation.
When including a website link, follow these instructions:
- Include a list of up to three works or excerpts of works to which you would like to direct the reviewers (e.g., images, audio, video, written material). Provide titles, dates of creation/production and a brief context for the works presented. Explain why you are including these items and how they relate to your proposed project.
- Provide the complete and exact URL and indicate the path to access the intended support material on the website.
- Ensure the website and all links involved will be operational up to six months after the application deadline.
- Specify the browser and version that should be used.
SSHRC reserves the right to remove this section from the application if it does not relate to research-creation. SSHRC assumes no responsibility in cases where links provided are broken or the server is unavailable during the merit review period. Reasonable efforts will be made to view or listen to support material; however, due to technical challenges, SSHRC cannot guarantee the samples will be accessed. Consider that reviewers will have very limited time per application to view, read or listen to samples of work. Only links provided in this section will be used by merit reviewers.
See SSHRC’s Guidelines for Research-Creation Support Materials for more information.
SSHRC also provides specific guidance for preparing an application involving research-creation for Insight and Insight Development Grants.
Research team, previous output and student training (mandatory)
Describe your research team, previous output and student training, using the following subtitles in the same order:
A. Description of the research team (if applicable)
- why a team approach is appropriate for the proposed research by describing the relative roles, responsibilities and contributions of the applicant (principal investigator), each co-applicant, and each collaborator;
- the relative proportion (in percentages) of each team member’s contribution to the proposed research;
- the proportion of time to be spent on this research project in relation to any other ongoing research projects or programs (exclude prospective grants); and
- if the project involves community participants such as knowledge users, the support provided by the community and the applicant’s ties with said community.
Note: If the merit review committee determines that the applicant (principal investigator) is not responsible for, or equipped to exercise, the leadership of the research team, the Feasibility score may be lowered.
B. Description of previous and ongoing research results
Summarize the results of your most recent and ongoing research. Where appropriate, indicate the relevance of each to the proposed research. In the case of team research, include summaries for any relevant projects undertaken by co-applicants.
C. Description of proposed student training strategies
Clearly describe the specific roles and responsibilities of students and research assistants, and indicate the duties, especially with respect to research, that they will be undertaking, as well as how these will complement their academic training.
Consult the Guidelines for Effective Research Training in preparing this section of the application. These guidelines will also be provided to reviewers.
Funds requested from SSHRC (mandatory)
For each budget year, estimate the costs you are asking SSHRC to fund. All budget costs must conform to the rates and regulations of the applicant’s or project director’s institution and take into account the Tri-Agency Guide on Financial Administration’s principles governing the appropriate use of funds. All costs must be justified in terms of the needs of the project, including costs for organizing and integrating team activities and for communicating results to audiences, stakeholders and the public. The budget will be reviewed according to the appropriateness of the requested budget, and to the justification of other planned resources (e.g., time, human and financial), including cash and in-kind support already or to be secured from partner organizations.
SSHRC provides the following guidelines to committee members regarding the merit review of the budget subcriteria of the overall Feasibility score:
- Committees may consider failing a project on the Feasibility criterion if they determine that 30% or more of the overall budget request is insufficiently justified and/or not appropriate to the proposed objectives or outcomes of the project.
- Committees will use the principle of minimum essential funding to guide their budget discussions.
- Committees may recommend minor budget reductions when they determine the request is inadequately justified and/or not appropriate as described above, and where they judge that savings could be achieved without jeopardizing the project objectives.
- An application will automatically be failed if the committee deems that 50% or more of the overall budget is insufficiently justified and/or not appropriate to the proposed objectives or outcomes of the project.
Enter amounts rounded to the nearest dollar without any spaces or commas (e.g., 2000). For blank entries, leave in the “0” value.
For each of the categories below, enter the number of students and non-students you plan to hire, whether as salaried employees or as recipients of stipends.
Student and non-student salaries and benefits
For each applicable category, enter the number of students and non-students to be hired. Specify the total amount to be paid. When students are paid by wage, the amounts should follow the institution’s collective agreement or policy.
You may request stipends for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers. Stipends must be justified in terms of the research, research training and/or research-related objectives. The work performed by stipend recipients should be an integral part of the project. Stipend rates are set by the institution concerned.
Travel and subsistence costs
Enter, by budget year, the total amounts requested for travel abroad and within Canada for both the research team and student personnel. Project directors must obtain the lowest possible travel fares.
Subsistence costs must be based on rates approved by the institution or organization that will administer the funds.
Professional or technical services
Consulting fees for professional and technical services are eligible expenditures if the budget justification demonstrates expert advice is needed.
You can include other supply items (e.g., software, stationery, postage and telephone calls) only if they directly relate to the research and are not provided by the administering institution to their research personnel or by the employer.
Non-disposable equipment—computer hardware
Purchase or rental of computers and associated hardware is allowable only if these are not provided by the administering institution to their research personnel or by the employer.
Other non-disposable equipment
Purchase or rental of equipment (e.g., audio or video equipment) is allowable only if these are not provided by the administering institution to their research personnel or by the employer.
Specify other research and/or related expenses not already included.
Tools for research and related activities
For tools for research and related activities, select “Other expenses” and specify “Tools.” You must combine all requested expenses related to tools (i.e., for software, equipment, and professional and technical services) into this category. You must then elaborate on these items in the Budget justification section. Consult SSHRC’s Guidelines for Support of Tools for Research and Related Activities for more information on social sciences and humanities tools.
Budget justification (mandatory)
Using the categories listed on the Funds requested from SSHRC page, explain how you will use the funds in each budget category to achieve the project objectives.
Justify any funds that appear in the category “Other.”
Fully justify all budget costs in terms of the needs of the research, keeping in mind that the appropriateness of the requested budget and justification of the proposed costs are a subcriterion within the Feasibility criterion. It is imperative to distinguish between types of travel when explaining your travel expenses. The types are:
- travel for research purposes; and
- travel for communication purposes (e.g., conference travel).
Briefly describe all attempts at obtaining funds from other sources and, if applicable, provide details in your budget justification.
Equally important is the justification for budget costs for research assistants or associates who are not students. These expenditures must be fully justified in terms of the needs of the research. Also, justify the number of students to be hired relative to the objectives of the proposed research.
- Insight Grant funds cannot be used for remuneration, and/or the travel and subsistence costs of presenters or guest speakers.
- Insight Grant funds cannot be used to remunerate team members (applicant, co-applicant or collaborator). This includes postdoctoral fellows serving in any of these capacities.
- Insight Grant funds cannot be used for collaborators’ research costs. However, their travel and subsistence expenses related to research planning, the exchange of information with the grantee, and for the dissemination of research results are considered eligible.
- Consultation fees are eligible for expert and/or professional and technical services that contribute directly to the proposed research as long as the service is not being provided by a team member or other persons whose status would make them eligible to apply for a SSHRC grant.
For tools for research and related activities: Within the page limit, you must include in your Budget justification a table clearly indicating amounts by item (e.g., professional/technical services, supplies). This presentation is mandatory, as these separate amounts cannot be included individually in the Funds requested from SSHRC module. Provide clear justification for each item proposed.
Funds from other sources
List all contributors (e.g., host institution or organization, individuals, philanthropic foundations and private-sector organizations) that are providing cash and/or in-kind contributions for the proposal. Indicate whether or not these funds have been confirmed.
If a funding source is not listed, select “Other” using the “List…” button. Type in the source name and amount and identify the contribution type.
If you have received more than one contribution of the same type from a single funding source (i.e., cash or in-kind) and with the same confirmation status, you must combine these into one entry (e.g., two confirmed $20,000 cash contributions from a university become one confirmed $40,000 cash contribution). Enter amounts rounded off to the nearest dollar—in Canadian currency—without spaces or commas (e.g., 40000). For blank entries, leave in the “0” value.
When you save the data, five new blank entry lines will be added to the screen to allow you to enter additional funding entries, if necessary.
Include a description of funds from other sources in the Budget justification section.
Impact assessment—Appendix A
If you have selected “Yes” to at least one of the questions in the Impact assessment section on the Activity details screen, you must complete the “Impact Assessment Form” (Appendix A) and upload it to the Impact assessment page.
Joint initiatives (statement of relevance)
Sport Participation Research Initiative
The Sport Participation Research Initiative (SPRI) offers grants to conduct research on enhancing participation in sport in Canada. Sport Canada has funding available for those Insight Grant applications that propose programs of research relevant to its policy priorities and that the Insight Grants merit review committee has recommended for funding, but which, due to budgetary constraints, did not receive a regular Insight Grant. SPRI Research Grant Supplements worth up to $20,000 are also available to successful Insight Grant recipients, in addition to the value of their grant.
If you have selected “Sport Participation Research Initiative” in the “Joint or special initiative” field in the Identification module, provide a statement of relevance that clearly explains how the proposed research meets the initiative’s objectives.
Department of National Defence
If you selected “Department of National Defence” in the “Joint or special initiative” field in the Identification module, provide a statement of relevance that clearly explains how the proposed research meets the Department of National Defence joint initiative’s objectives.
List up to three Canadian and/or foreign specialists whom SSHRC may ask to assess your proposal. SSHRC will solicit no more than one review from a suggested reviewer. Suggesting fewer reviewers may be advantageous in cases where the number of qualified specialists is small. SSHRC reserves the right not to select a reviewer from the submitted list.
Suggested reviewers cannot be:
- affiliated with your institution or that of any member of your research team (including co-applicants and collaborators);
- someone with whom you or any member of your research team has collaborated in the past (e.g., as a co-author or co-editor or as a co-organizer of a conference or workshop);
- someone with whom you or any member of your team has a personal relationship; or
- a previous thesis supervisor or anyone who has had a similar supervisory or mentoring relationship with you or a member of the research team over the course of doctoral or postdoctoral studies.
Complete all mandatory fields (those in bold) and click “Save.” When you save the information, the “Clear entry” button will appear. Click “Clear entry” if you want to remove one of your reviewers, then click “Save” again.
Exclusion of potential reviewers (if applicable)
List potential reviewers who, in your opinion, would be unlikely to provide an impartial review. Provide a justification for excluding potential reviewers (e.g., experts with whom you or members of your research team have had serious disputes). While SSHRC cannot be bound by this information, it will be taken into consideration in the selection of reviewers.
This information will be held in strictest confidence and will not be provided to external reviewers or members of the merit review committee. Any exclusion should be renewed with any subsequent applications, if still relevant.
Research contributions (mandatory)
Research contributions content must address the Capability evaluation criteria listed in the funding opportunity description.
Applicants must attach research contributions in this order:
- Relevant research contributions over the last six years
- Other research contributions
- Most significant career research contributions
- Contributions to training
Co-applicants must also provide their research contributions (maximum four pages), which they will be able to upload once they have accepted the invitation to participate.
1. Relevant research contributions over the last six years
Outline your research contributions within six years of the application deadline. Candidates who have experienced interruptions or circumstances that delayed their career progression can extend the six-year period to account for the delays. Interruptions, delays and other circumstances should be addressed in the Career interruptions and special circumstances attachment.
Provide details, as appropriate, about the contributions you listed, as follows:
- In the left margin, identify with an asterisk (*) research contributions that resulted from previous SSHRC support.
- Specify your role in co-authored publications.
- Identify each student author with a plus sign (+).
- For published contributions, provide complete bibliographic notices (including co-authors, title, publisher, journal, volume, date of publication and number of pages) as they appear in the original publication.
- For publications in languages other than French or English, provide a translation of the title and the name of the publication.
- For recent graduates, list theses.
Group your contributions by category in the following order, as applicable, listing your most recent contributions first.
Examples include books (where applicable, subdivide according to those that are single-authored, co-authored and edited works), monographs, book chapters, articles in scholarly refereed journals and conference proceedings.
A “refereed work” involves its assessment:
- in its entirety—not merely an abstract or extract;
- before publication; and
- by independent (at arm’s length from the author), anonymous, qualified experts.
Other refereed contributions
Examples include papers presented at scholarly meetings or conferences and articles in professional or trade journals.
Examples include book reviews, published reviews of work, research reports, policy papers and public lectures.
Indicate one of the following statuses: “submitted,” “revised and submitted,” “accepted” or “in press.” Provide the name of the journal or book publisher and the number of pages. Do not list contributions not yet submitted.
Examples of creative outputs may include exhibitions, performances, publications, presentations, and film, video and audio recordings. List your most recent and significant achievements grouped by category. Creative outputs will be evaluated according to established disciplinary standards and creative and/or artistic merit.
If applicable, you can include a website link. SSHRC cannot guarantee that links will be accessed.
2. Other research contributions
Describe any other contributions to research and the advancement of knowledge within the last six years, including your research contributions to non-academic audiences (e.g., public, policy-makers, private sector and not-for-profit organizations.) Interruptions, delays, and other circumstances should be addressed in the Career interruptions and special circumstances attachment.
3. Most significant career research contributions
List and rank up to five of your most significant contributions over your entire career. The six-year rule does not apply to this section. Therefore, contributions listed here may differ from those listed in other sections of your CV. Explain briefly the significance of the contributions listed.
4. Contributions to training
Provide the following information on students you have helped train within the last six years.
- Indicate your role in supervising or co-supervising ongoing and/or completed theses, listing these by the student’s level of studies.
- Describe efforts you have made to involve students (e.g., doctoral, master’s or undergraduate) in your research activities.
- Specify if opportunities for such contributions have been limited because your institution does not have graduate degree programs in your field or discipline.
Career interruptions and special circumstances
SSHRC asks its merit review committees to consider career interruptions and special circumstances that have affected candidates’ record of research. In doing so, merit review committee members will be able to assess the productivity of each researcher more accurately and equitably, independent of any career interruptions or special circumstances in the last six years. Previous productivity is one element that can predict the success of the proposed research project.
All information provided to SSHRC is subject to the Privacy Act. The information included in this section of your application will be shared with both external assessors and merit review committee members for consideration as part of their assessment. Note that Research Office Administrators will also have access to your application when submitting on behalf of the administering organization. For more information, see merit review. All SSHRC merit reviewers are subject to the Tri-Agency Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Policy, and are prohibited from sharing this information outside of the merit review process.
Career interruptions occur when researchers are taken away from their research work for an extended period of time for health, administrative, family or other reasons, or reasons related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Special circumstances involve slowdowns in research productivity or any circumstances that impact the progression of academic careers in a distinctive way. Researchers can use this section to indicate that their research work was impacted by circumstances related to health (and/or disability), administrative, family, cultural or community responsibilities, socio-economic context, COVID-19, or other factors. For example, applicants from small institutions could indicate their teaching load in this section if the change in workload impacted their research output. Indigenous applicants can use the “Special Circumstances” section of their application form to describe special circumstances that may have had an impact on their academic or career paths.
Use this optional section to outline any career interruptions or special circumstances that have affected your research activities. Provide dates of interruptions and indicate the reason for the delay in general terms (e.g., illness, disability, family loss or illness, cultural or community responsibilities, socio-economic context, COVID-19).
SSHRC offers the following information for your awareness when considering how to describe your details of career interruptions and/or special circumstances:
- Applicants do not need to disclose any personal details of the career interruption or special circumstance.
- Applicants are asked to indicate how their research was impacted by delays to enable the reviewers to make an equitable assessment of the excellence of their research contributions while taking into account the impact of the interruption or special circumstances on their research production.
- Applicants are asked to quantify the impact on their research production as best they can, providing estimates of time or opportunities lost due to the interruption or special circumstances. For example, the amount of time and effort involved in seeking and receiving accommodations would be helpful to inform the committee’s assessment, by accounting for the impact of the special circumstances on the applicant’s research production.
- Date modified: