Statement and recommendations regarding CIHR’s Project Scheme Pilot

A PDF of this statement is available here. 

We are gratified to have the concerns of early-career investigators (ECIs) acknowledged as we enter CIHR’s first Project Scheme Pilot. As key stakeholders, we hope to work with CIHR to determine how to best build research capacity through policies that support sustainable research funding.

Health research is an integral part of Canada’s innovation portfolio and is essential for the continued well-being of Canadians. But this enterprise is in jeopardy as many Canadian scientists face unprecedented challenges posed by an unsustainable funding environment. ECIs and mid-career investigators (MCIs) represent the future of health research in Canada. But without realistic opportunities to obtain operating funds from CIHR, many of these research programs are doomed to fail.

While researchers of all career stages are under tremendous funding pressure, the cohort of ECIs starting independent careers during the reform/transition period have had half the normal number of opportunities to obtain their first operating grant (due to cancelled competitions) while success rates are the lowest in CIHR’s history. Our situation is worsened by just 5% of the funds available in the first Foundation pilot being awarded to ECIs. This distortion means that, even if ECIs do as well in Project as in they did in the OOGP, there will be a large drop in overall funding to this group across the Open Programs. We realize these are pilot programs, but these are not our pilot careers.

Specific recommendations

1. There is an urgent need for increased overall support from the federal government for open programs, an investment that has fallen dramatically in adjusted dollars.
2. Project Grant success rates should be equalized across career stages according to unique nominated principal investigator applicant (NPI) numbers (count one per NPI, even if they submit multiple grants) to prevent the distortions caused by Foundation from being exacerbated.
3. The additional $30 million allocated to the first Project Grant pilot should be made available to the populations most in need, either in the form of additional full awards or bridge grants:
   1. ECIs who are not currently NPI on a 5-year CIHR operating grant.
   2. Previously-funded MCIs who are experiencing or facing immediate funding gaps.
4. Funds allocated specifically to ECIs or MCIs in the first Project Grant pilot should be in addition to this equalized success rate in order to partially offset the support lost in the Foundation Pilot.
5. Foundation awards--both in number and in size--represent a hugely disproportionate allocation of funds to established investigators. CIHR should take immediate measures to remedy the current shift and prevent future disproportionate allocation of operating grant dollars. Proportionate allocation across early-career, mid-career, and established investigators will allow CIHR to meet its mandate and respond to demographic changes in the applicant pool.
6. Better incorporation of leaves and career delays into evaluation and eligibility mechanisms, including by adjusting CCV time restrictions for Project and Foundation to allow applicants who took a leave within the 5- or 7-year time window to show a full 5 or 7 years’ worth of productivity. The current restrictions systematically disadvantage those who take leave, many of whom are ECIs taking maternity and parental leaves. Such systematic disadvantage may be particularly harmful to the careers of ECI and MCI women.