Research Unit Task Force

1
2005 2006 Research Unit Competition



2
Overview of Presentation

• Historical Context
• Research Unit Program Expansion
• Two types of Team Building Awards
• Team Planning Award
• Team Start-up Award
• Research Unit Award

3
Historical ContextInfrastructure Program

• Objective Enhance researchers
  productivitythrough support of vital research
  infrastructure
• 25 million over three years, beginning 2003
• Three components
• Institutional Support (approx 11 million)
• Research Unit Support (approx 11 million)
• Networking Support (approx 3 million)

4
Historical ContextInfrastructure Program
Principles

• Funding is for support of health research
• Will evolve to meet needs, with emphasis on
  increasing productivity
• Work with partners to explore ways to build in
  areas where capacity is desirable but lacking
• Funds are awarded based on the vision and
  excellence of research development plans

5
Historical ContextInfrastructure Program
Principles

• Graduated levels of support
• Funds are to augment, not to replace, existing
  budgets
• Ability to leverage MSFHR funding is a priority

6
Consultation

• Feedback from first 2 Research Unit Competitions
• Forward Planning
• Infrastructure Research Unit Task Force
• Research Advisory Council
• Broad research community consultation

7
Expansion of Research Unit Program

• Include methodology, and technology development
  and assessment units
• Annual Competition
• Flexible researchers enter at different stages
  of team development
• Two new Team Building Awards
• Team Planning Awards
• Team Start-up Awards
• Research Unit Awards

8
Team Building AwardsTeam Planning Awards

• Objectives One-time start-up funds to do the due
  diligence to develop business plans for new
  research programs
• Minimum 3 QHRs per Team
• Up to 25,000, non-matching
• 11 matching, up to 50,000 total
• Receive applications in March, June, September
  and December
• Funding commences 30 business days from the
  deadline
• Up to 15 Team Planning Awards per year

9
Team Building AwardsTeam Planning Awards
...contd

• Applications
• A brief description of the background and the
  nature of the research opportunity
• The scope of the planning activities contemplated
• The expected outcome at the end of the planning
  phase if the award were granted
• A budget request stating how the funds would be
  used

10
Team Building AwardsTeam Planning Awards
...contd

• Evaluation criteria
• Clear justification that the proposed
  program/project is new, unique and innovative
• Significance of the special research opportunity
• The need for funds at this time
• Potential to lead to new discoveries, scientific
  and/or socio-economic advances for British
  Columbia
• Excellence and appropriate mix of expertise
• Reviewed by MSFHR, supplemented by external
  expertise as required

11
Team Building AwardsTeam Start-up Awards

• Objective to create the environment for groups
  of researchers to excel
• Minimum 3 QHRs
• Begin to launch the team infrastructure plan
• Precursor to the Research Unit Infrastructure
• 3 years, non-renewable
• Maximum 75,000 per year
• Fund up to 4 Start-up awards per year

12
Team Building AwardsTeam Start-up Awards...contd

• 2 stage submission
• External Merit Review Panel
• 3-5 page LOI by Nov 15, 2005
• Full application by March 15, 2006
• Funding commences July 2006
• Encourage application to Research Unit/Team
  competitions when ready

13
Team Building AwardsTeam Start-up Awards...contd

• Stage 1 Evaluation Criteria
• Innovative research ideas
• Good training potential
• Recognizable potential for cohesiveness,
  collaboration and commitment of members
• Recognizable potential impact on economic
  development and improvements to health care
  delivery
• Plan to leverage external funding

14
Team Building AwardsTeam Start-up Awards...contd

• Stage 2 Selected Evaluation Criteria
• Excellence of the 3 year Research Development
  Plan
• Measurable outcomes, and measurement tools and
  standards to demonstrate the Team has achieved
  its objectives and outcomes
• Value and benefits of collaborative approach to
  health research
• Plan to communicate and support uptake of
  research results to appropriate audiences
• Sustainability after the end of the MSFHR Team
  award

15
Research Unit Awards

• Objectives
• Enhance researcher productivity and
  competitiveness
• Improve research and training environment
• Leverage additional funding
• Small Units 3 10 QHRs, 200,000/year
• Large Units gt11 QHRs, 300,000/year
• 4 years funding renewable for an additional 4
  years

16
Research Unit Awards...contd

• 2 stage submissions
• External Merit Review Panel
• 5 page LOI by Nov 15, 2005
• Full application by March 15, 2006
• Funding commences July 2006
• Fund up to 4 Research Units per year
• QHRs can only be on two stage 2 Research Unit
  applications

17
Research Unit Awards...contd

• Stage 1 Evaluation Criteria
• Innovative research ideas
• Excellent training opportunities
• Demonstrated cohesiveness, collaboration and
  commitment of members
• Impact on economic development and improvements
  to health care delivery
• Leverage external funding

18
Research Unit Awards...contd

• Stage 2 Selected Evaluation Criteria
• Excellence of the 4 year Research Development
  Plan and Measurable outcomes
• Enhance productivity and strengthen cohesion
  among unit members
• Value and benefits of collaborative approach to
  the users of research
• Evidence of success in communicating and
  supporting uptake of research results to
  appropriate audiences
• Sustainability after the end of the Research Unit
  award

19
THANK YOU!

• Visit our website for more details
• www.msfhr.org
• Or contact us at
• infrastructureprogram_at_msfhr.org