Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1. By July 6th early drafts of applications must be submitted to Rob Oxoby. These need not be
complete drafts, but must contain at least the project description and knowledge mobilization
sections along with a preliminary budget and justification. These will be reviewed and
comments will be provided from at least three people by August 15th. Reviewers will include
current and past grant holders, past members of adjudication committees, and current
applicants. The received comments will not be anonymous so that you can contact the reviewer
to seek additional comments.
2. Between July 13th and August 10th those participating in the review program will be asked to
review at most two applications from others participating in the program. Please provide
comments to Rob Oxoby by August 10th. These comments will not be anonymous when they are
returned to the applicant.
3. By September 1st please submit a complete draft (with all sections) to Rob Oxoby.
4. Between September 1st and 15th reading groups will meet. In these groups participants will
review applications face-to-face and discuss details of the applications. The feedback from
these sessions will be useful in preparing the final drafts.
5. By September 21st final drafts must be received by the Deans office for review and signature
by an Associate Dean. Comments will be provided on the final drafts.
6. By October 1st submit final drafts to Research Services for detailed administrative review.
7. By October 13th (prior to final submission) applicants must provide a note regarding if and
how they incorporated the comments from the reviewers, the ADR, and RSO.
For applicants who cannot make all above deadlines, we will be providing peer reviews and ADR
reviews whenever individuals have drafts available. Please do not hesitate to forward your
application to Rob Oxoby for distribution to reviewers.
4.
5.
6.
7.
the expertise to undertake the project and a publishing record (as evidence of communicating
results). Individuals with modest publication records may wish to consider applying for the
Insight Development Grant (February deadline).
Committee members look for clearly articulated and feasible projects. Ensure your project is
not too grandiose to be successfully completed in the time frame laid out. In recent rounds,
overly ambitious projects have not been funded.
If a multidisciplinary evaluation is requested, click the box marked Multidisciplinary
Evaluation. If numbers warrant, a multidisciplinary committee will be established within the
applications research group.
Proposals need to strike a balance between the presentation of methodological details
regarding what will be done and a grasp of the overall contribution of the project to the
field/discipline. As a general rule, the proposal should demonstrate how a portion of the
proposed research contributes to the big questions/picture within a field. This can be included
in the mobilization plan via discussions with individuals outside academia/journal audiences.
There has been an increasing importance attempting to communicate research results and
reach non-academic audiences through the Knowledge Mobilization Plan.
While there is variation across the different committees, committees are cutting some budgets
(typically no more than 10%). While SSHRC will be giving committee members clearer
directives on their role in scrutinizing budgets, it should be noted that budgets considered
significantly inflated or not well justified have received feasibility scores less than 3.0, putting
them below the 50% percentile and making them ineligible for funding. Budgets need clear
justifications and budgets without enough detail receive lower scores in the committees
assessment.
1. Participants
Individual applicants as well as teams can apply. However, the contributions by team members
must be articulated to demonstrate the value of a team approach.
Participants from other countries must be Collaborators for the Insight Grant. Funds for
collaborators participation in research (e.g., equipment, travel) is not eligible for funding from
SSHRC. The only costs that may be covered are to attend conferences to disseminate results. The
expectation from SSHRC is that Collaborators will have funds through their home
institutions/countries to conduct the research. (See below for eligible and ineligible expenses.)
2. Research Activity Aboriginal Research and Research Creation
Priority areas are no longer used by SSHRC. These have been replaced by Future Challenge
Areas. Applicants may make reference to these areas in their applications if they wish (e.g. to
demonstrate significance) but this will not affect the adjudication of applications and
committees will not be formed around them.
SSHRC has retained the Aboriginal Research and Research Creation categories. If you indicate
alignment with these areas, your application will likely be routed to adjudication committees
formed for that purpose (instead of the disciplinary RGs). Be sure that your research aligns with
these areas, as defined by SSHRC, before selecting them. Research Creation projects may be
adjudicated in conjunction with the Canada Council for the Arts.
3. Response to Previous Critiques: This is an optional section as there is no official memory of
4
previous submissions (i.e., the committee does not see previous applications or comments on those
applications). If you respond to previous critiques, provide a thorough, well-crafted response.
Defensive or non-neutral responses raise concerns regarding the overall quality of the application.
Provide an appropriate strategy for disseminating results within the academic community
(peers through refereed journals, conferences, etc.) and the non-academic community
(practitioners, policy makers, etc.). Detail specific activities and tools (e.g., including new digital
technologies, Open Access, and plans to engage the various audiences).
Consider who is interested in your research and where would they go to find the outcomes.
Note that SSHRC now has an Open Access policy for peer-reviewed publications resulting from
SSHRC-funded research. See http://goo.gl/gVH8ox for the open access policy.
7. List of References (max. 10 pgs.) : List referenced literature referenced in conventional format.
Cost your budget carefully. Committees may suggest minor cuts to budgets, but if perceived as
inflated you will receive low scores for feasibility. Budgets considered inflated or inadequately
justified by greater than 30% or including ineligible costs may result in your application being
rejected. Include costs associated with inflation (e.g., increases of 2-3% per year).
SSHRC no longer specifies amounts for stipends to graduate students and post-doctoral fellows.
Research assistants (graduate and undergraduate students) and postdoctoral fellow cannot be
paid both in the form of a stipend and a wages during a given year. As such, indicate how you
would like to pay your research assistants as well as how much you would like to pay them. The
current GSA agreement sets a minimum rate of $17.50 an hour for Graduate Research
Assistants with a maximum of 450 hours per academic year.
If paying by stipend, the students work should align with their thesis research. The value of a
stipend should be in line what is required to attract graduate students in your discipline. A
typical rate for a stipend is approximately $24K (including benefits).
Note that it is possible to change the form of payment from year to year. Student support should
also include funds for conferences (fees and travel money).
If you are requesting funds for a postdoctoral fellow, the University of Calgary recommends a
minimum rate of $45K per year, plus $2K per year for mandatory Plan C benefits.
Observe the Universitys travel expense guidelines for travel and subsistence expenses.
SSHRC, as part of a tri-council harmonized initiative, has adopted an Open Access Policy for
peer-reviewed journal articles arising from SSHRC-funded research that awardees must comply
with as of May 1, 2015. As such, include appropriate funds for open access fees in your budget.
See http://goo.gl/gVH8ox for the open access policy. As a no-cost alternative, you can deposit
peer-reviewed manuscripts in the UofCs institutional repository to comply with the policy,
provided you have retained these rights from your publisher.
Include any in-kind support. This is increasingly becoming important to SSHRC as a means of
demonstrating institutional support for the research.
Please pay attention to the SSHRCs list of eligible and ineligible expenses, available in Research
Services Tri-Council Guidelines (http://goo.gl/KLSPs9) and Tri-Council Financial
Administration Guide (http://goo.gl/XKWuHW). Please note that expenses for collaborators
are only permitted as they relate to the dissemination of results (e.g., conferences).
9.1 Budget Justification
The budget justification is not just a breakdown of expenses. It must justify all expenses in
terms of the needs of the research.
Justification should be presented in the categories of the Funds Requested from SSHRC screen.
All resources referred to in the methodology should be in the budget justification.
Distinguish between travel for research purposes and travel for communication purposes.
Include student hours and salary in justification, reserving what they will be doing for the
training section although you may make brief reference to their role for justification.
For supplies, stress their relation to the research.
To justify computer hardware and other non-disposable equipment requests, you must mention
these items are not accessible through the institution.
Applicants should demonstrate that there is no overlap between funding sources. If other funds
from other sources are held, those projects should be delineated from current project.
10. Exclusion of Potential Assessors (max. 1 pg.) : This page is optional and held in strict
confidence. It is not provided to external assessors or members of the adjudication committee.
7
11. Intended Outcomes of Proposed Activities: Describe the potential benefits/outcomes that
could emerge from the proposed research and/or related activities in the text box.
Once the support material is ready to be submitted, make sure that the hyperlink is functional and the
website of the best possible quality. Provide the necessary information in the application forms
support material section (one-page attachment).Only links provided in the support material attachment
will be viewed during the adjudication meeting.
What should I do?
Determine if your research falls under the SSHRC mandate before submitting your proposal. Firsttime applicants might find it helpful to contact the research office of their institution or the program
officer to clarify eligibility, assessment criteria or other details.
When working with new technologies, the sciences or architecture ensure that the research falls
within the SSHRC mandate and not NSERC. The objectives and outcomes should be related to the social
sciences and the humanities. Clearly incorporate and describe the creation process and artistic output.
Verify with your research office of any ethical considerations regarding research involving humans or
involving Aboriginal Peoples.
Proposals should contain, simultaneously, a developed scholarly apparatus and an integral connection
to contemporary literary/artistic practices. A Research-Creation approach has to do with sustained,
reflective research set directly and actively within the creation process itself, not simply research
about the creation process or about literary/artistic productions, nor creative work involving minimal
scholarly investigation.
The research-creation proposal must address clear research questions, offer theoretical
contextualization within the relevant field(s) of inquiry, present a well considered methodological
approach and creation process, and produce an artwork. Both the research and the resulting
literary/artistic works must meet peer standards of excellence and be suitable for publication, public
performance or viewing.
Propose a project that meets the requirements as outlined in the definition of research-creation and
the funding opportunities guidelines. Proposals that do not meet the requirements for example, do not
involve research questions or a creation process will be considered not relevant for ResearchCreation. However, this does not render them ineligible; they will be redirected to the selected group
committee for adjudication. Applicants will be informed of the decision.
Show that your project is well thought out and can be carried out as planned. Ensure that the theory
and methodology are aligned with the objectives of the proposal, and contribute to the advancement
of the artistic practice, knowledge or the arts in general. Clearly describe how the research informs
the creation process and how the creation process is integrated and relevant to the project.
Provide relevant background information. Do not presume that the merit review selection committee
is familiar with your work or the specific terminology and peculiarities of your field of specialization.
Be concise and to the point. Do not write lengthy, vague, general statements about your proposed
project.
What are the last steps in preparing my application?
Make sure your text is free of spelling mistakes and your budget is realistic and well justified. Ensure
that your application is complete. Incomplete applications are automatically ineligible.
TIP: Ask someone who has not read your application to read it and give you constructive criticism.
Submit your application to the research office of your institution by the internal deadline.
Knowledge
Mobilization
What do you
want to do with
your research?
What kind of
change you are
hoping to bring
about?
Types of KM
Curiosity-based KM Researcher develops and implements a plan for making knowledge users
aware of the knowledge generated.
Problem-based KM: partners in research process: participatory/collaborative approach that is
action oriented.
Audience engagement
Active versus passive engagement
Goals to generate:
Awareness
Interest
Policy change
Policy action
Behavior change
Inform research
Gain knowledge
Products
Tools
Documents: Policy briefs, reports, publications (professional and academic venues)
Presentations: public, academic, community lectures, webinars, workshops, training sessions
Media: Press releases, media articles, radio programmes, TV (interviews), opinion pieces
Networking and expertise sharing: advisory committee, e-bulletins, social media, online fora,
testifying/serving as an expert, networking event
Evaluate Impact
What is your research outcome? Choose outcome measures that match the context of your
target audience.
Who is your audience and why them? In what setting and context will the target audience apply
your research?
How do you reach them?
Existing contacts, communities of practice,
Evaluate impact of the activities
Sources:
Building Knowledge mobilization plans.
KNAER. http://www.edu.uwo.ca/research/documents/Info_Sheets_Building_KM_Plans.pdf
Writing your knowledge mobilization plan. Shawna Reibling, Wilfrid Laurier
University. http://www.slideshare.net/sreibling/how-to-write-a-knowledge-mobilization-plan
Building a Knowledge mobilization strategy for research projects. Michael Johnny, University of
York. http://www.slideshare.net/KMbYork/building-a-knowledge-mobilization-strategy