91��ɫ

Applicant Level Criteria

• Hold a full-time tenure or a tenure track position at the University of Ottawa
• Demonstrate previous research project experience
• Demonstrate expertise contributing to the larger academic/research community
• Demonstrate a minimum of 5 years of research activities and experience as an independent researcher
• Demonstrate a strong track record in the research discipline of the application
• Hold external funding; preference will be given to applicants with Tri-Council funding
• Not have received funds through the IRGFO stream 2 in the past

Team Level Criteria

Involve a minimum of 3 researchers in distinct disciplines

• The principal investigator applying to the IRGFO Stream 2
• One researcher from a different 91��ɫ faculty
• One researcher from an external institution

Application deadlines

• Researchers can apply at any time to the GDP competition
• Researchers progressing from Stream 1 to Stream 2 are required to submit their proposal prior to the end of the funded year from Stream 1
• Researchers with an established Interdisciplinary team (meeting criteria of GPD) can apply directly to Stream 2 and bypass Stream 1

Researchers must submit their applications electronically (in a single PDF file) to:

GPD– Grant Proposal Development

Research Management Services 
[email protected]

IMPORTANT NOTE: The applicant’s faculty must review and approve the application.  Applicants must submit an RE form with the appropriate signatures. RMS will not accept applications past the deadlines nor without the faculty approval.  RMS will reject incomplete applications.  

Application Requirements 

A preliminary description of the proposed research project, including:

• A summary/abstract
• A description of the envisioned project:
  • Hypothesis, objectives, proposed methodology and feasibility of the research
  • Linkages with the University of Ottawa Strategic Areas of Development
  • University of Ottawa student involvement/participation in the project
  • Expected outcomes
• A draft plan and timeline (project development plan) for the proposal development:
  • The potential resources required for the proposal development
  • A short description of the expertise required
  • The planned activities and proposed deliverables with budget projection and justification to submit proposal to the funding organization
• Letter of recommendation from the Dean, Vice-Dean or Associate Dean, Research of the Faculty confirming the faculties’:
  • support in an amount at least equal to the amount being requested of the Stream 2
  • support the researcher in creating the team and the development of a large-scale project
• The common CV or equivalent of the principal investigator (PI)
• The CV of all confirmed co-researchers.
  • Three researchers from at least two different 91��ɫ faculties
  • Two researchers from two different external institutions

IMPORTANT NOTE: A multi-disciplinary Selection Committee will review the applications. Therefore, the application should be written for non-experts. Any additional pages will be automatically removed.

Budget justification, eligible and non-eligible expenses

The maximum award for the RTC funding is $20,000.00 ($10,000.00 RGD & $10,000.00 from the faculty) over one year. The budget section should describe the entire budget, including the RTC & the Faculty contributions.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Applicants must submit two RE forms:

• In the first RE form, the “Amount Requested” field should define the amount that is being requested from the RTC only.
• In the second RE form, the “Amount Requested” field should define the amount that is being requested from the Faculty only.

 Budget Justification must:

• explain how the costs were established for each item in the budget
• describe and justify how the funds will be used to recruit the members of the interdisciplinary team
• contribute to the direct costs to recruit members for the interdisciplinary team and to develop the research project
• show economical use of the funds 

Two selection committees will be established for the GPD:

• In the Social Sciences and Humanities; and
• In Sciences, Engineering and Health Sciences.

IMPORTANT NOTE:  The Vice-President, Research or their delegate will chair the review committees. Applicants can suggest which committee should review their proposal.  For each competition, RMS will draw committee members from a pool of potential members.

Evaluation Criteria 

Reviewers will assess the application based on the documentation available in the original application. Reviewers use the following criteria to assess the applications: 

• Confirmed interdisciplinary research team:
  • Three researchers from at least two different 91��ɫ faculties
  • Two researchers from two different external institutions
  • Value added of member/expertise required
• Scientific merit of the proposed research project to be developed including, without limitation:
  • Originality and innovation
  • Clarity and scope of objectives
  • Linkage with the 91��ɫ strategic research priorities
  • Feasibility and adequacy of the methodological approach
  • Importance/impact of the expected outcome of the research
• Strategy for the grant proposal development for submission to external, peer-reviewed funding competition:
  • Resources required
  • Activities and deliverable with associated projected budget
• Quality of the presentation:
  • Proposals should be clear, concise, and complete.
• Record of research achievement:
  • Quality and significance of past contributions
  • Level of research activity relative to the stage of the applicant's career
• Need for funds, including, without limitation, the following factors:
  • Justify the budget relative to the requirements of the proposed project
  • Justify the request relative to other currently-held and/or available funding. Other currently-held funds must be clearly indicated in the applicant's C.V.
  • Plan for accessing large-scale peer-reviewed external funding (specifically target granting councils, industry, foundations, government etc.)
  • Explain how the application aligns with the evaluation criteria and guidelines of the external funding organizations 

Researchers should develop their application in a format that respects the presentation standards generally accepted by the granting councils. 

General Presentation

• Text must be single-spaced, with no more than six lines per inch and must be in black color
• The accepted font is Times New Roman regular 12 pts, or any comparable font – nothing smaller
• Condensed font and applications completed strictly in italics are not acceptable

Research Proposal

• Use portrait format, with a single column, unless specified otherwise
• Set margins at 3/4 of an inch (1.9 cm) all around (minimum)
• Number your pages sequentially

IMPORTANT NOTES:

• All text, including references, must conform to these standards
• Incomplete applications and/or applications that do not meet the presentation standards may be rejected or be at a disadvantage in comparison with those that are complete and respect the presentation standards
• Color images submitted in the application will not be duplicated in colour for the peer reviewers

Suggestions for the Preparation of Proposals

• Be concise
• Avoid acronyms and abbreviations or explain them fully
• Write the proposal for a multidisciplinary scientific audience not expert in your discipline
• Include a clear description of your research objectives, why the research you are proposing is important, how it relates to prior work/state of the art and what the impact of the findings will be on the discipline
• Explain and support the methodological approach
• Describe any prior work that you may have performed to demonstrate your ability to deliver on the project
• Outline the risks and pitfalls, if any, and explain how they will be addressed
• Outline the resources available to you for this project and specify how they help you advance your research
• Provide a realistic timeframe
• Explain your plans for the disseminating results
• Explain how the proposed research supports or enhances a future application

Awardees must, on request of the Office of the Vice-President Research (or delegate), submit a final report to RMS (1 page) describing progress in light of original project objectives and your plans to pursue the research.

• The funds will be release once all certification requirements are met (ethics of research with human subjects and/or stem cells, animal care, radiation safety, etc.)
• Any unused funds at the end of the project must be returned to the RTC program.  Researchers can request an extension to use the funds.  The extension will be in time only, not funds. To request a one year extension, researchers have to write to RMS and justify how the extension will help them advance their project.  For more information please contact Research Management Services at [email protected].