Analysis of Feedback on the Design Discussion Document – Questions and Answers

When and how was the feedback collected?

Feedback from the research community on the proposed changes to the Open Suite of Programs and peer review process was collected from February 8, 2012 to May 1, 2012 using a number of feedback mechanisms including a feedback form, web-based discussion forum, face-to-face discussions and the submission of emails and letters.

Was the feedback received representative of all the research community (by region, by pillar, by institution, by career level, etc.)?

CIHR received feedback from across the research community representing the viewpoints of different pillars, career stages and institution sizes. We also received valuable input from our partners and research institution administrators.

Can I still submit my feedback and suggestions to CIHR?

CIHR continues to work with targeted stakeholders in the research community to help refine and improve on the proposed changes. The broader research community can forward their comments to CIHR at: Roadmap-Plan.Strategique@cihr-irsc.gc.ca

How will this feedback be used by CIHR?

CIHR has been using the feedback to help decision makers improve the design. For example, CIHR has heard the community's concerns regarding the impact a multi-stage review process may have on our peer reviewers and we are currently looking at alternative scenarios.

The feedback I had sent hasn't been incorporated into the report. Was it ignored or not taken into consideration?

All of the feedback that we received has been logged and shared with the Reforms Task Force. For the purposes of the What we Heard: Analysis of Feedback on the Design Discussion Document, CIHR categorized and weighted the feedback in order to make general observations about the response from the community.

How did CIHR proceed to select, classify and analyse the feedback?

An attempt has been made to summarize in a qualitative and quantitative manner both the structured and unstructured/free form feedback received by CIHR. To assist with the synthesis of the unstructured comments, an organizing framework was developed. All individual comments and questions received, including those within and outside the scope of the proposed changes to the New Open Suite of Programs and Peer Review Enhancements were carefully read, coded, and catalogued according to 14 pre-defined areas.

If a letter was sent by a large group of co-signatories, was it weighted the same way as a letter sent from an individual?

All narrative feedback received was assigned a weight based on the number of signatories/co-signatories. For example, if a letter was signed by 10 individuals, then the comments in that letter were each assigned a weight of 10.

When will CIHR present an updated version of the Design that has taken into consideration and integrated the feedback?

CIHR anticipates that the final design and implementation plan will be announced in the fall of 2012.

Will CIHR still move forward with the implementation of the reforms if the results of the pilots are not conclusive?

Wherever possible, CIHR will use the results of the pilots to improve on the design of the Open Suite of Programs and peer review process. The organization is also committed to continuously monitoring the programs and making course corrections, if needed, as we move from transition into full implementation to ensure that the new programs and processes address the current challenges and avoid creating new ones.

What are the timelines for implementing the reforms?

CIHR is currently working on a transition plan and more details will be available in the fall. However, CIHR is committed to providing the community with at least one (1) year between the announcement of the new design and the launch of the first competition.

Now that CIHR has gathered and analysed all the feedback, what are the next steps?

Over the coming months, CIHR will be working with targeted stakeholders to develop the next level of detail for the Foundation/Programmatic Research Scheme and Project Scheme and continue to refine the peer review process and transition plan. CIHR expects to announce the new design in the fall of 2012.

Will there be training for applicants and peer reviewers during the transition period?

Yes. Once the details of the Open Suite of Programs and Peer Review Process have been determined, CIHR will develop and implement a training strategy for applicants, peer reviewers, grants administrative staff and CIHR employees.

Will project grants be renewable, and will this decision be made in the fall?

CIHR is still thinking this through and no decision has been made. This will be addressed as part of the design and implementation announcement in the fall.

Why did CIHR decide to move forward with the Foundation/Programmatic Funding scheme and Project Scheme if some people in the research community do not support it?

Although CIHR heard some concerns from the community regarding the two funding schemes, the majority of the feedback we received was supportive of this model. CIHR's Governing Council and senior executives feel that this is the right direction to take to address the challenges and objectives of the reforms. We are also using feedback received to inform design details.

What is the Reforms Task Force?

The Reforms Task Force is a working committee of CIHR executives whose mandate is to develop the high level program design and conceptual model for Roadmap Reforms and provide strategic advice with respect to transition planning and implementation. The committee reports to CIHR's Science Council and is comprised of the following members:

  • Chair: Dr. Alain Beaudet, MD, PhD, President, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Vice Chair: Dr. Paul Lasko, PhD, Scientific Director, Institute of Genetics

Members:

  • Dr. Jane E. Aubin, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer and Vice-President Research and Knowledge Translation
  • Dr. Joy Johnson, PhD, Scientific Director, Institute of Gender and Health
  • James Roberge, Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer
  • Dr. Philip M. Sherman, PhD, Scientific Director, Institute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes
  • Dr. Kelly VanKoughnet, PhD, Associate Vice-President Research and Knowledge Translation
  • Jennifer O'Donoughue, Director, Program Planning, Process and Reform Implementation