Docstoc

CIHR at Queens

Document Sample
CIHR at Queens Powered By Docstoc
					Information Webinar
September 8, 2010
           Outline

•PHSI: An overview
•Merit Review
•How to Apply
•Additional Tips and Resources
           What is PHSI?
•Partnerships for Health System Improvement (PHSI) offers
Canada’s health-system decision makers evidence-based
answers to their most pressing questions.
•A funding program founded on partnerships, every PHSI
project involves collaboration between decision makers and
researchers interested in working together to address health
system challenges.
•Any applied health services and policy research topic can
be addressed so long as it responds to the information needs
of the participating decision makers.
     PHSI: The Snapshot
 What is eligible? Any applied health systems and/or
  services research question that is deemed useful to
  health system managers/policy makers
 Team composition: Teams must include researchers
  and decision makers
 Length of grant: Up to 3-years
 Sources of funding: A mix of CIHR and partnership
  support – CIHR provides most of the funding ($350K or
  $400K, depending on province) and partners provide the
  rest (20% or 30% of the total grant budget, depending
  on province)
 KT requirement: Comprehensive knowledge translation
  plan required
        Examples of PHSI projects
         Title (Years)               Principal        Location        Decision Maker &
                                  Investigator(s)                         Partners
Youth Matters in London: Mental   Cheryl Forchuk    University of   Mental Health
Health, Addiction and                               Western         Commission of Canada
Homelessness                                        Ontario
                                                    (London, ON)


Modèles d'organisation des        Louise Fournier Institut          Aboriginal Peoples'
services de première ligne en                     national de       Health; Neurosciences,
santé mentale pour les                            santé publique    Mental Health and
personnes consultant dans les                     du Québec         Addiction
régions du Nunavik et des                         (Montréal,
Terres-Cries-de-la-Baie-James                     QC)
Reducing the Acute Care Burden    Bruce Carleton    University of   Child Health BC;
of Childhood Asthma on Health                       British         MSFHR; Provincial
Services in British Columbia                        Columbia        Health Services
                                                                    Authority (BC)
Pandemic influenza:               Gail Tomblin      Dalhousie       Nova Scotia Health
Competency-based health           Murphy            University      Research Foundation
human resources planning for                        (Nova Scotia)
teams
              Success Rates


                                                           Success
                          Apps in       Apps      Success    Rate
                Apps     Fundable    Approved       Rate   Fundable
Competition   Reviewed    Range     for Funding    Overall  Range

   2005         39         21           21         54%      100%
   2006         35         16           15         46%      94%
   2007         31         18           17         58%      94%
   2008         24         16           16         67%      100%
 Apr-2009       55         19           19         35%      100%
 Oct-2009       59         20           20         33%      100%
             PHSI Partnership
            Development Funds
Objective
• To provide the opportunity for researchers and decision makers to
  apply for development funds to facilitate the formation and
  development of partnerships between researchers and decision
  makers interested in applying to PHSI.
Examples of eligible activities
• Planning and partnership-building meetings
• Activities that assist potential teams of researchers and decision
  makers identify emerging issues and priorities that could be
  addressed via a PHSI grant

Funding
   • Up to $15,000 per grant
   • Applications accepted three times/year: Oct, Feb, June
        Key Words
       IHSPR Vision and
        Mandate (2008-
• Integrated Knowledge Translation
• Decision maker
                 2013)
• Competition partners and Project-
 specific partners
• Merit Review
• Potential Impact
Integrated Knowledge Translation

Knowledge translation at CIHR: Definition

  Knowledge translation is a dynamic and iterative process that
includes synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically sound
  application of knowledge to improve the health of Canadians,
     provide more effective health services and products and
                strengthen the health care system.
 This process takes place within a complex system of interactions
   between researchers and knowledge users that may vary in
 intensity, complexity and level of engagement depending on the
nature of the research and the findings as well as the needs of the
                     particular knowledge user.

                  www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29418.html
             IHSPR Vision and
Integrated Knowledge Translation


              Mandate (2008-
• This approach is also known by such terms as collaborative
  research, action-oriented research, and co-production of
  knowledge

                  2013)
• Knowledge users (decision makers) are engaged in the entire
  research process
• Collaboration extends to: defining the research questions,
  deciding on the methodology, being involved in data collection
  and tools development, interpreting the findings, and helping
  disseminate the research results.
• Integrated KT should produce research findings that are more
  likely be relevant to and used by the end users.
       Knowledge User
           IHSPR Vision and
•A Knowledge User is an individual:
            Mandate (2008-
•who is likely to be able to use the knowledge generated
through research in order to make informed decisions

                2013)
about health policies, programs and/or practices;
•whose level of engagement in the research process may
vary in intensity and complexity depending on the nature of
the research and their information needs;
•who can be, but is not limited to, a practitioner, policy-
maker, educator, decision-maker, health care
administrator, community leader, or an individual in a
health charity, patient group, private sector organization or
a media outlet.
      Knowledge User
         IHSPR Vision and
          Mandate (2008-
• Knowledge User is also an official applicant category at
CIHR.


              2013)
• CIHR has created two new roles – Principal Knowledge
User and Knowledge User – to recognize the participation
of decision makers (and other types of knowledge users)
in integrated knowledge translation projects. At least one
decision maker must be involved in each application as
the Principal Knowledge User and must be included
among the list of applicants on the grant application.
    Decision makers
       IHSPR Vision and
•A decision maker is a knowledge user
who hasMandate (2008-
         the authority to influence or

                    2013)
make decisions about health policy or the
delivery of health services. In the PHSI
competition a decision maker is typically
a health-system manager, policy-maker
or clinician leader capable of making
significant changes to policy or practice.
PHSI partners & partnerships
            IHSPR Vision and
 •Applicants need to find a minimum of 20% or 30% of their

             Mandate (2008-
 grant budget (depending on province) from partners.
 Support can be in-kind or cash, or a combination of both.
 There are two sources for this support:


                 2013)
 1. Competition Partners
     •   These are provincial health funding organizations, the
         Mental Health Commission of Canada, the Heart and Stroke
         Foundation, and potentially others
     •   In most cases they need to be contacted with a request for
         support 6 weeks before the PHSI application deadline (e.g.,
         August 31st for FRSQ, September 3rd for the MHCC and
         September 15th for all other competition partners – for the
         November 1st 2010 application deadline)

 •2. Project-specific partners
     •   Contributions can be in-kind or financial
     •   Often linked to the decision-maker team member
PHSI partners & partnerships
                   IHSPR Vision and
 •Example of 80/20 financial commitment:
List of Partners
                    Mandate (2008-
                      Type of
                      Contribution
                      (cash/in-
                                     Year 1    Year 2    Year 3    TOTAL




                        2013)
                      kind)
CIHR                  Cash           $100,000 $200,000 $100,000 $400,000

Named Competition Cash               $25,000   $25,000   $15,000   $65,000
Partner
Named Project-        In-kind        $5,000    $5,000    $5,000    $15,000
specific partner #1
Named Project-        In-kind        $5,000    $5,000    0         $10,000
specific partner #2
Named Project-        Cash           0         $5,000    $5,000    $10,000
specific partner #3
Total partner         Cash and or                                  $100,000
contributions         in-kind
  2010 Competition Partners
         IHSPR Vision and
          Mandate (2008-
• Alberta Innovates – Health Solutions
• Fonds de la recherche en santé du Québec et ministère


              2013)
  de la Santé et des services sociaux du Québec
• Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
• Manitoba Health Research Council
• Mental Health Commission of Canada
• Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research
• New Brunswick Health Research Foundation
• Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation
• Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
• Saskatchewan Health Research Foundation.
Merit Review
     Decision makers/ knowledge users




                                        Researchers
Merit Review

   Panel composed of researchers and decision
    makers
   Decision makers/ knowledge users not required
    to have academic backgrounds (expertise is
    related to their practice)
   Each application is reviewed by at least one of
    each
   Dual score review: one score for science and
    one for potential impact
Merit Review Criteria 1
Research Question
• To what extent does the project respond to the objective(s) of the Funding Opportunity?
• To what extent does the research question respond to an important need identified by
  the decision-maker(s) on the research team?

Research Approach
• To what extent is it likely that the proposed methods will address the research
  question(s)?
• To what extent is the study design appropriate and rigorous?
• To what extent is the study rationale informed by a complete review of the relevant
  literature?
• How well have the applicants have identified and addressed the limitations to their
  approach?
• To what extent are the decision-maker team members meaningfully engaged where
  appropriate (e.g. in defining the research questions, informing the research plan,
  interpreting the findings, informing the end-of-grant KT plan)?
• To what extent does the end-of-grant KT plan detail strategies appropriate for its goals
  and target audiences?
  Merit Review Criteria 2
Feasibility
• To what extent are the decision-makers on the team committed to applying the
  findings when they become available and is their application achievable in the
  particular practice, program and/or policy context?
• To what extent does the researcher-decision-maker team have the necessary
  expertise and track record to deliver on the project’s objective(s), including the
  objectives of the end-of-grant KT plan?
• To what extent is the project accomplishable in the given timeframe with the resources
  available/described?

Outcomes
• To what extent will the project have a substantive and sustainable impact on health
  outcomes, practice, programs and/or policy in the study context?
• To what extent will the project’s findings be transferable to other practice, programs
  and/or policy contexts?
Review Criteria Headings
          IHSPR Vision and
           Mandate
Review Criteria Headings: (2008-
•Research question
•Research approach2013)
•Feasibility
•Outcomes
       Research Question
              IHSPR Vision and
               Mandate (2008-
Explanation of the research project and justification for the
need to conduct the research.

                   2013)
What this means for you:
• Be clear about what the question is right away
• Be clear about the origin of the research question: why it is
interesting, who is interested in it and what the knowledge-user
partners think about it
     Research Approach
             IHSPR Vision and
              Mandate (2008-
Detailed description of the research approach and
justification for the proposed methods/strategies.

                  2013)
What this means for you:
•Be clear and specific about your proposed methods – the reviewers
need to know that you know what you are doing
•Demonstrate the participation of and commitment to the project by
the knowledge users – this can be written into the text or shown
through letters of support
                Feasibility
               IHSPR Vision and
                Mandate (2008-
Demonstration that the researcher-knowledge-user team
has the requisite skills, experience and resources to

                    2013)
complete the project in the proposed time frame.

What this means for you:
•Be sure to demonstrate a “pull” for the results of this study on the part
of your knowledge-user co-applicants
•Document the expertise of each team member and their role in the
proposed study
•Demonstrate that this is this is a “doable” study – from both a
scientific and a practical perspective
•Demonstrate willingness of the knowledge-user partner to use the
results of the study
                Outcomes
              IHSPR Vision and
               Mandate (2008-
Results expected from the successful uptake of project
findings.

                   2013)
What this means for you:
•Consider the potential impact of your study and its generalizability
•If it is not generalizable, acknowledge and justify this
•Develop a reasonable evaluation plan to be able to measure the
outcomes and impacts of your study
              Key Dates
             IHSPR Vision and
              Mandate (2008-
Current Competition
•June 24, 2010

                  2013)
•Application deadline: November 1, 2010
    •Funding start date: April 1, 2011
          *PHSI launched annually each June


MPD-PHSI Development Funds
•MPD-PHSI launch (deadline) dates: August (October),
December (February), April (June)
How to Apply



              Our best advice:
 Start your application as soon as possible!
Understanding Eligibility

 Step 1: Assemble an eligible team
 • In order for your application to be eligible, grant
   participants must include:

 • At least two Principle Applicants, including the
   Nominated Principal Applicant. Of these two Principal
   Applicants, we require:
    – At least one Independent Researcher:
        • is autonomous regarding their research activities; and
        • has an academic or research appointment
    – At least one Knowledge User
        • Uses the knowledge generated through research in order to make
          informed decisions about health policies, programs and/or practices;
          (e.g. a practitioner, policy-maker, educator, decision-maker, health
          care administrator, community leader, or an individual in a health
          charity, patient group, private sector organization or a media outlet).
Create Accounts:
Create a ResearchNet Account

      ** If you have already created these accounts, you’re ahead of the pack!
      Please do not create more than one ResearchNet account, CommonCV
                                                      account, or CIHR PIN. **


 Step 2: Create a ResearchNet account:
   http://www.researchnet-recherchenet.ca/
 • ResearchNet is the Canadian health research
   community’s secure, online interface with CIHR
 • One-stop access to the full database CIHR
   funding opportunities, your applications for
   funding (completed and in progress), notices of
   decision, etc
Create Accounts:
Create a CIHR PIN & CommonCV Account


 Step 3: Request a CIHR PIN
 • On ResearchNet, visit the “Register for a CIHR
   PIN” link to request a new PIN.
 • It can take up to 24-hours for a PIN to be issued

 Step 4: Create a CommonCV account:
 • https://www.ccv-cvc.ca/
 • The Common CV System is designed for
   researchers and decision makers to prepare and
   submit a CV to an organization when applying
   for funding
Prepare Application:
Before you begin



  Find out:
    Who is the “authorized official” at the
    institution that would be handling your
    grant’s finances? This person has the
    authority to bind the institution to the
    general conditions governing grants. You
    will need this person’s signature.
Prepare Application
Before you begin



  Please read the instructions and guidelines in the
    funding opportunity thoroughly and contact us if
    you have any questions. CIHR no longer
    accepts incomplete applications (e.g. An
    application missing required signatures will be
    automatically withdrawn).
Prepare Application:
Prepare CommonCV
 Step 5: Prepare Common CVs
 • All applicants, whether knowledge users or
   independent researchers, must complete a CV through
   Common CV
 • Your role determines the type of CV you must submit:
    – Independent researchers submit full CV modules
    – Knowledge users/Decision Makers submit a Knowledge User CV

 • Each applicant can only “wear one hat” – an applicant
   cannot be both a researcher and knowledge user on the
   same grant

 ! Note to night owls: The system is available 24/7, but maintenance and
    upgrades are performed daily between 1 am and 6 am EST. Access
        is not guaranteed during this time. Save your work before the
           maintenance period begins or you might lose your data!
Prepare Application:
Prepare Research Proposal
  Step 6: Prepare Research Proposal
  • Maximum of 13 pages, not including references, figures, tables,
     letters of support, etc
  • In the first 12 pages of the Research Proposal the scientific merit
     and potential impact assessment criteria in the section Review
     Process and Evaluation Criteria should be considered. The following
     questions should also be addressed:
       – What issue does the proposed research address within the eligible research
         theme area?
       – What evidence is there that this issue is important from a manager or policy
         maker perspective?
       – How do you see the results of this project affecting the financing, organization,
         management, regulation, or delivery of services for Canadians?
       – What are the research questions and objectives? The appropriate literature
         should be referenced.
       – What are the methods and approach to analysis?
       – What linkages does the project have and/or will it develop with specific
         individuals and/or groups of managers and/or policy makers?
       – What strategies will be used to encourage knowledge translation involving
         individuals, managers and/or policy makers identified above?
  •   The last page of the research proposal (page 13), should outline the main
      activities and milestones for the proposed funding period in diagram form
      (i.e., the research timeline). Each of these sections must address the merit
      criteria as presented earlier and detailed in the funding opportunity.
 Prepare Application:
 Prepare Budget
p 7: Prepare Budget
wable expenses can include:
 – Release time funding may be used to replace part of the salary of a decision maker
    to allow them time to participate in the research program.
      • The maximum amount paid to an individual is $50,000 per annum (including
        the Nominated Principal Applicant).
      • A release time stipend will only be awarded upon the approval of the employer
        of the decision maker, if applicable.
      • Recipients of release time funding are not considered employees of CIHR.
 – Consulting fees, provided that such costs are well justified;
 – Costs of networking activities, including collaboration, planning, and research
    exchange activities directly related to the Team's research project, and extra travel
    funds required for members and trainees separated by a significant distance;
 – Costs involved in dissemination of the results of the work funded under this funding
    opportunity to target audiences;
 – Travel, accommodation, workshop/seminar costs, and other KT related activities.
Prepare Application:
Prepare Budget
 Step 7: Prepare Budget

 •   In the Financial Assistance Requested Details attach a document
     detailing the justification of all project costs including all costs associated
     with the knowledge translation plan.

 •   Include costs, both cash and/or in-kind, to be covered by the competition
     and project funding partners. These must be listed in the "Other Funding"
     column of the Financial Assistance Requested section. The budget
     requested from CIHR must be listed under the "CIHR" column.

 •   Funding requested from CIHR exceeding the maximum allowable amount
     ($350,000 for BC, AB, ON, QC and $400,000 for SASK, MB, NB, NS, PEI,
     NL, YK, NWT, NU) are ineligible and will not be merit reviewed. The
     minimum partner funding requirements for each application must also be
     met in order to be eligible (e.g., 20% or 30% of the total amount of the grant,
     depending on the province or territory of residence).
Prepare Application:
Gather Letters of Support


   Step 8: Gather Letters of Support

   • Letters of Support are required from all partners.

   • Signed letters of support from cooperating agencies or
     groups (for data access or provision, permission for
     interviews, plans for use of results by decision makers,
     organizations etc.)

   • We strongly encourage Knowledge Users to write a letter
     of support. Reviewers look favorably upon this explicit
     illustration of knowledge user commitment
Prepare Application:
Identify Partner Task


 Step 9: Identify Partner Task

 • Enter the names and information details for all the Partners
   (Competition Partner & Project-Specific Partner) participating in your
   project by clicking on the Identify Application Partners task in
   ResearchNet

 • Print the Partnership Details PDFs and obtain signatures from each
   Partner

 • Attach the signed “Partnership Details” in PDF format by clicking on
   the “Manage Attachments” link
 ** Don’t forget that a signed letter of support must also be completed for all funding partners, i.e.,
     project-specific partner(s) and/or competition partner(s) contributing cash and or in-kind support.
Prepare Application:
Apply to Funding Pool (Optional)


 Step 11: Apply to Funding Pool (Optional)
 •   Applicants can also apply to funding pools which are relevant to their
     research area. Below is the list of institutes offering to fund research related
     to its mandate:

     1)Institute of Aboriginal People's Health;
     2)Institute of Health Services and Policy (Research in the area of Primary
     and Community-based Healthcare
     3)Institute of Health Services and Policy Research;
     4)Institute of Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis;
     5)Institute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes;
     6)CIHR HIV/AIDS Research Initiative priorities.

 Note:    To apply for funding through a Funding Pool, you must select the
          Funding Pool Title in ResearchNet and the Relevant Research Area(s)
          addressed by your proposal (Applicants may apply to a maximum of
          three funding pools)
Prepare Application:
Collect Required Signatures
  Step 11: Collect Required Signatures
  •   Print the signature page PDF file from ResearchNet

  •   Obtain required signatures:
       – All grant participants, EXCEPT for the Nominated Principal Applicant, whose
          electronic submission of the application via ResearchNet constitutes his or her
          signature
       – The authorized official at the institution paid with the ability to bind the
          funding partner to the cash and/or in-kind contribution to the grant. In some
          situations (i.e. small organizations), this may be the Nominated Principal
          Applicant

  •   Scan and upload the signed signature pages including the routing slip in the
      Print/Upload Signature Pages task in ResearchNet prior to submitting your
      application.

  •   You do not need to courier the signature pages to CIHR—even if you receive an
      email from ResearchNet telling you otherwise.
Prepare Application:
Collect Required Signatures: Participants
Prepare Application:
Collect Required Signatures: Authorized Official at Institution Paid
How to Apply:
What is a complete application?

  A complete application will include:
   One independent researcher must be involved as either the Nominated Principal
    Applicant of Principal Applicant on the team: one decision maker must be involved as
    either the Nominated Principal Applicant of Principal Knowledge-User on the team

   Common CVs for all applicants (Independent researchers submit full CV modules;
    Knowledge users submit a Knowledge User CV)

   Complete research proposal, respecting the 13-page limit

   Budget information: The minimum partner funding requirements (e.g., 20% or 30% of
    the total amount of the grant, depending on the province or territory of residence).

   Each partner's financial authority has signed the Partnership Details. This signature
    may be different from that of the letter of support.

   Signed Letters of support for all funding partners, i.e., project-specific partner(s)
    and/or competition partner(s) contributing cash and or in-kind support
   Signatures from all grant participants (except for the Nominated Principal Applicant)
    and the authorized official at the institution paid
How to Apply:
Frequently Asked Questions

  Q: Do any documents need to be mailed to CIHR?
  A: No. All documents, including signature pages,
    should be submitted online through
    ResearchNet.

  Q: Is there a limit on the number of Principal
    Applicants on an application?
  A: No, the number of participants on the grant is
    not limited.
How to Apply:
Frequently Asked Questions
  Q: What distinguishes the different types of applicants/grant participants?

  A: CIHR defines a Nominated Principal Applicant as an individual who will:
      – be responsible for the direction of the proposed activities;
      – assume the administrative and financial responsibility for the grant or award; and
      – receive all related correspondence from CIHR.

  A Principal Applicant is an individual who shares responsibility for the
     direction of the proposed activities.

  A Co-Applicant is an individual who contributes to the proposed activities.

  A Collaborator is an individual whose role in the proposed activities is to
     provide a specific service (e.g., access to equipment, provision of specific
     reagents, training in a specialized technique, statistical analysis, access to a
     patient population, etc.).
Funding Decision

 • Applications receiving a score of less than 3.5 on any
   evaluation criteria (potential impact/scientific merit) will not
   be considered for Funding
 • CIHR Institutes/Branches will receive the ranking list, rating
   and recommendations on funding level and term for the
   application that fall in the fundable range and have been
   determined to be relevant to the specific research areas
   and objectives of the initiative.
 • Unless otherwise stated, the applications relevant to the
   specific research focuses will be funded from the top down,
   in order of ranking, as far as the budgets will allow. The
   remaining applications will be funded by the general pool of
   funds from the top down, in order of ranking, as far as
   budgets will allow.
Feedback to applicant

  Your results will be available through
    ResearchNet

    – Notice of Decision
    – Internal reviews (anonymised)
    – Scientific Officer’s notes of discussion
    – External reviews (if applicable)

    https://www.researchnet-recherchenet.ca
 IHSPR Vision and
   PHSI Tips

  Mandate (2008-
      2013)
For writing a successful
    grant application
       Applying for a Grant
  Adequate preparation

• Read relevant documents thoroughly
• Consult CIHR staff with any questions
• Invest enough time in preparation
  – CIHR PIN, Common CVs, signatures
• Have others review your application (not just
  your friends and collaborators)
  – Start your application several months in
    advance and revise, revise, revise
       Applying for a Grant
 Adequate preparation
• Seek a mentor
• Local pre-review process
• Ask colleagues to review
   – Listen to what your reviewers say
   – If they express a concern, recognize that
     greater clarification in the proposal may be
     warranted even if you do not agree with the
     comments/concerns
• Don’t be defensive, try to see their point of view
   – e.g., think about what you might have written
     to mislead them
       Applying for a Grant
            Writing

• Remember:
       Good grantsmanship
      cannot save a bad idea
               BUT
       Poor grantsmanship
       can sink a good idea
           Applying for a Grant
                 Writing

• Write with the reviewer in mind; reviewers do
  not simply read, they interpret
• Write to convey and inspire confidence
• Establish the need, importance and originality
  of your research
• Set challenging yet realistic goals
• Clearly articulate the theoretical or conceptual
  framework – do not neglect the literature
  review
           Applying for a Grant
                Writing

• Ensure the proposal flows logically from section
  to section, and argument to argument
• The application should be clearly written and
  easy to read
• Use simple declarative sentences
• Avoid use of imprecise words, jargon, unusual
  abbreviations, acronyms, and poor syntax
• Use headings, bold, underline, italics as needed
• Proof-read! Proof-read! Proof-read!
Committee’s Favorite Comments!


  • Low potential Impact – or not “generalizeable”
  • Lack of theoretical rationale or incoherent
    theory with objectives and methods
  • Lack of specificity in the methodology
  • Lack of Gender-based analysis
  • Lack expertise on the team
    How to Annoy the
      Committee…

• Write in a really small font
• Avoid paragraph breaks and headings
• Reduce the space between the lines
• Reduce the margins
• Do all of the above and whine that you
  do not have enough space to fully
  develop your methodology
• Don’t proof read for grammatical errors
    How to Annoy the
      Committee…
• Say there is NO research on “your topic” when
  you are not 100% certain
• Manage to work in a critique about last year’s
  committee
• Assume you are so prominent you can get by
  on your track record and don’t put a lot of
  efforts on writing the proposal
• Include a prominent researcher as a co-
  investigator but do not give them a clearly
  defined role
• Submit the same support letter for every
  partner
Budget: Things to Avoid

• Say you will need a full time Research Director
  as well as 3 or 4 full-time Research Assistants
  to run your apparently straightforward study
• Say computers cost 6K
• Plan to attend many conferences in the first
  year
• Say you will hire students but do not give them
  a definite and meaningful task
• Use lots of non-student personnel to minimize
  the impact of the grant’s funding
KT Resources


• Knowledge to Action: A Knowledge Translation Casebook
• Knowledge to Action: An End-of-Grant Knowledge Translation
  Casebook
• KT in Health Care – Moving from Evidence to Practice: A KT
  Handbook
• The KT Clearinghouse
• Online learning modules
• CIHR Guides to KT
• CIHR Funded Research Database
• CIHR resources for applying for a grant
Knowledge to Action: A KT
Casebook

  • Provides insight into the real world
    of researchers and knowledge
    users
  • Presents important lessons about
    successful EGKT and IKT
  • Published early 2009

    www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29484.html
Knowledge to Action: An End-of-
Grant KT Casebook


  • Features end-of-grant
    (EoG) KT activities supported by CIHR's
    KT Supplement Grant program
  • Showcases unique and effective ways to
    share research results covering a broad
    spectrum of research
  • Published April 2010

      www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29484.html
A KT Handbook

Chapters cover:
• Knowledge creation
• Knowledge-to-Action cycle
• Theories and Models of Knowledge-to-Action
• Knowledge exchange
• Evaluation of Knowledge-to-Action
• Any royalties will go to a fellowship fund at CIHR

Available at:
 http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/product
 Cd-1405181060,descCd-description.html

Presentations based on chapters available at:
  http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/40618.html
KT Clearinghouse




   Provides a
 large number
     of KT
   resources
  compiled in
   one place




                   http://ktclearinghouse.ca/
On-Line Learning Modules

 Three interactive educational modules:
    1) A Guide to Researcher and Knowledge-User Collaboration
       in Health Research
        Participatory Research at McGill (PRAM)

    2) Introduction to Evidence-Informed Decision Making
        Donna Ciliska, McMaster University

    3) Critical Appraisal of Intervention Studies
        Donna Ciliska, McMaster University

 Other on-line learning resources:
    1) A Guide to Knowledge Synthesis
        Jeremy Grimshaw, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute


                        www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/39128.html
CIHR’s Guides to KT


  Format:
     •   1 for IKT
     •   1 for EGKT
     •   Designed for use in all funding opportunities

  Objectives:
     •   To bring consistency and rigor to the assessment of KT
         requirements in grant and award applications
     •   To make it transparent to applicants how CIHR reviews KT

  Status:
     •   To be posted on CIHR website Fall 2010: www.cihr-
         irsc.gc.ca/e/38766.html
CIHR Funded Research
Database
 A useful tool to view examples of funded projects.




                         http://webapps.cihr-
      irsc.gc.ca/funding/Search?p_language=E&p_version=CIHR
CIHR Resources for
Applying for a Grant
   • Guidebook for New Principal Investigators
     www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/27491.html
   • Grants & Awards Guide
     www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/805.html
   • ‘How to Apply for Funding’
     www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/795.html
   • PHSI funding opportunity
     http://www.researchnet-
     recherchenet.ca/rnr16/vwOpprtntyDtls.do?prog=1052&&view=c
     urrentOpps&org=CIHR&type=AND&resultCount=25&sort=progr
     am&all=1&masterList=true
Contact Us
 For questions on CIHR funding guidelines, how to apply, and
 the merit review process contact:
              Marie-France Gamache
              Acting Team Lead, Program Delivery
              (613) 941-3420
              phsi-pass@cihr-irsc.gc.ca

 For questions about the PHSI initiative and research
 objectives contact:
              Andrea Smith, Acting Manager,
              Evidence On Tap and PHSI
              (613) 941-0805
              andrea.smith@cihr-irsc.gc.ca

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:5
posted:7/22/2012
language:
pages:67