Review guidelines for the Multidisciplinary Selection Committee

This document provides guidelines for the Canada Impact+ Research Chairs Multidisciplinary Selection Committee in the review of applications. It describes activities to be undertaken, and outlines the policies, and deliverables relevant to these activities.

The Canada Impact+ Research Chairs program is a one-time initiative designed to support eligible Canadian institutions in attracting world-leading researchers who will advance ambitious and transformative projects that will advance one or more strategic priorities established by the Government of Canada, build and maintain exceptional research teams, and collaborate with partners across sectors and borders. The program aligns with the Government of Canada’s value of knowledge mobilization, translation and commercialization as critical pathways to ensuring research delivers tangible benefits at both national and global levels.

The Canada Impact+ Research Chairs program is a tri-agency initiative of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). It is administered by the Tri-agency Institutional Programs Secretariat (TIPS), which is housed within SSHRC.

The objectives of the program are to support institutions to:

• attract world-leading researchers to strengthen Canada’s global competitiveness and innovation leadership;
• transform bold discoveries into innovative products, ideas, policies and solutions that benefit Canadians and the world;
• help Canada grow and sustain a critical mass of expertise in priority areas identified by the Government of Canada through the development of high-impact research teams; and
• incentivize strategic partnerships across sectors, such as industry, health systems, government and not-for-profit organizations, to accelerate translation of research into practice and enhance long-term adoption and impact.

A rigorous and competitive review process will be used to assess the excellence of the applications. 

The Canada Impact+ Research Chairs program has two award values:

• $8 million over eight years ($1 million per year); or
• $4 million over eight years ($500,000 per year).

The two award values recognize the varying costs of research within different research disciplines and aim to be inclusive of all areas of research.

In addition, there is potential for a four-year extension at 50% of the initial award value per year. This extension will be determined by an external review in Year 7 of the award. The funding extension will be granted based on 1) clear, tangible evidence of the knowledge translation, commercialization or policy impact of the research, and 2) identification of sustained partnerships with industry, government, academic or not-for-profit organizations. This is in keeping with the program’s overall goal of generating transformational research and maximizing its application to benefit the Canadian economy and society more broadly. 

The program is excellence-based, and awards will be allocated based on this competitive review. No special consideration is given to nominees based on region, size of nominating institution or factors other than the selection criteria.

There is no established distribution of chairs based on career stage, award value ($500,000 or $1 million annually); however, decisions will be guided by the competition budget for each of the three granting agencies:

• Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC): up to $530 million
• Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR): up to $340 million
• Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC): up to $198.5 million

Chairs will be offered to the highest ranked applications recommended for funding by the Multidisciplinary Selection Committee, within its available budget per intake. All applications that meet the funding requirements and that receive a minimum rating of “Good” on all criteria, but fall below the competition budget line, would be placed on a ranked reversion list if any awards are declined.

To ensure the equitable participation of a variety of institutions and individuals, approximately 30 chairs will be reserved for the second intake, in alignment with the relative budgets of each agency.

Any unused funds from the first intake, due to insufficient meritorious applications, will be made available for the second intake.

Impact+ Research Chairs are awarded in strategic priority areas established by the Government of Canada to address pressing global and domestic challenges, strengthen Canada’s contribution to international research and innovation, and generate lasting social and economic benefits.

Chairs are expected to build significant new partnerships and collaborations with both Canadian and international entities (industry, health systems, government and not-for-profit organizations), as well as by and with Indigenous Peoples and communities, where appropriate.

A core expectation is that Chairs, and their research teams, will actively translate and mobilize research outcomes into practice, policy, and commercialization pathways that deliver measurable social and economic benefits for Canada and the world.

Applications must explain how the Chair will advance one or more of the following strategic priority areas:

• advanced digital technologies (including artificial intelligence, quantum and cybersecurity);
• health, including biotechnology;
• clean technology and resource value chains;
• environment, climate resilience and the Arctic;
• food and water security;
• democratic and community resilience;
• manufacturing and advanced materials; and/or
• defence and dual-use technologies.

On an exceptional basis, institutions may request an additional $500,000 per year (bringing the annual award value to $1.5 million) over eight years if their nominee has received exceptional international recognition through prestigious awards or prizes. This additional support is provided with the expectation that the international recognition will elevate the visibility of the Chair. The committee will assess the justification provided in the “Distinguished Chair award justification” section of the application when reviewing/discussing it during the committee meetings and determine the outcome. The “Distinguished Chair award justification” must:

• Explain on what basis this award is being requested and describe the exceptional international recognition of the nominee. Examples of such awards or prizes include, but are not limited to, Nobel, Turing, Fields, Abel, Wolf, Tyler, Draper, Johan Skytte and Berggruen. It could also mention the prize’s value, if applicable, and how that distinction elevates the nominee amongst their peers.
• Describe how this additional support will enhance the visibility of the Chair. Particularly, how the Distinguished Chairs award will directly benefit partnerships, including high profile and high-quality partnerships with private (or other) entities. Specific reference should be made to Canada’s commercial interests and to the elements of Criterion 5: Potential for knowledge translation, mobilization and application of research results (see the Selection Criteria).
• Explain how the increased budget will be used to attain the objectives described above, as well as the overall goals of the Canada Impact+ Research Chairs.

Canada Impact+ Emerging Leaders is a $120 million investment to help institutions bring more internationally based early-career researchers (ECRs) to Canada.

Institutions submitting a nomination for an Impact+ Research Chair may request an additional $100,000 per year over six years to recruit an ECR. The ECR must be recruited within the same strategic priority area as the Impact+ Research Chairs nominee, but the ECR and Impact+ Research Chair do not need to be in the same discipline or research field, or be aligned with the same federal research funding agency.

Contrary to the Canada Impact+ Research Chairs, there is no predetermined agency-specific budget envelope for Canada Impact+ Emerging Leaders. The ECR nominees are expected to have an independent program of research, with potential for impact through collaborations with, but not limited to, the Impact+ Research Chairs.

As both programs are related, the Emerging Leaders award will be granted after the chairholder and the nominating institution formally accept the Impact+ Research Chair award. The Multidisciplinary Selection Committee does not evaluate the request for an Impact+ Emerging Leader. Institutions will manage the recruitment and nomination of an ECR for a tenure-track position, in compliance with the Impact+ Research Chairs requirements. Only candidates who are internationally based (both working and residing outside of Canada) when the Impact+ Research Chair is accepted are eligible. Successful nominees will be expected to start their position at the host institution, on a full-time basis, within 12 months of the acceptance by the chairholder.

Institutions awarded a Canada Impact+ Research Chair are eligible for infrastructure support from the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI). The infrastructure may support the research program of chairholders and, if applicable, ECRs under the Impact+ Emerging Leaders program. The CFI is an independent organization established by the Government of Canada to invest in research infrastructure to increase the capability of Canada’s universities, colleges, research hospitals and non-profit research organizations to carry out high quality research. This is a distinct funding request that is separate from the budget for the Chair. Through the new Canada Impact+ Research Infrastructure Fund, the CFI will invest up to $400 million to support the infrastructure needs of the chairholders and complementary ECRs (as applicable), including both capital and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs.

The Multidisciplinary Selection Committee does not evaluate the CFI applications. Nominating institutions must submit the application for these infrastructure support requests directly to the CFI within three months of the chairholder accepting the award. 

Canada’s federal research funding agencies have signed the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). This reaffirms their commitment to excellence in research evaluation and the importance of knowledge mobilization. DORA is a global initiative to support the development and promotion of best practices in the assessment of scholarly research that go beyond journal publication as an indicator for research output. When assessing evidence of research excellence, a variety of research contributions, including both traditional academic publications and other kinds of services and relevant experience should be taken into consideration.

Success of the Impact+ review process depends on the willingness and ability of all reviewers to be fair and reasonable; to exercise rigorous judgment; and to understand and consider the specific context of each application in a balanced way.

To help ensure that equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) best practices are followed throughout the process and to make members aware of their own unconscious biases, Multidisciplinary Selection Committee members are required to complete two online biases trainings prior to their review of applications:

1. Bias in the research ecosystem
2. Mitigating bias in peer and merit review processes

The Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Policy of the Federal Research Funding Organizations ensures the effective management of conflict of interest of any participant in the peer review process and ensures the confidentiality of personal and commercial information submitted to the program during the review process. Members will be asked to read and agree to the policy.

A conflict of interest is a conflict between a person’s duties and responsibilities regarding the peer review process, and that person’s private, professional, business or public interests. For further details, refer to the Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Policy.

Committee members must declare any real, perceived or potential conflicts of interest. The TIPS team is responsible for resolving any issues of uncertainty. 

The information included in the applications is protected by the Privacy Act, the Access to Information Act and the Policy on Government Security, and is provided for the purposes of review only. Details of the application, scoring, discussions and recommendations for a specific application are confidential and must never be divulged. Under no circumstances should reviewers disclose their review to anyone; this also applies when the competition is over and the award recipients are announced. Improper or unauthorized collection, use, disclosure, retention and/or disposal of this information can result in a privacy breach. See the Guide on Handling Documents Used in Peer Review for further details.

The three federal research funding agencies are committed to excellence in research and research training, and prioritize achieving an equitable, diverse and inclusive Canadian research enterprise. Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) is essential to creating the excellent, innovative, impactful research needed to seize opportunities and respond to global challenges. To be successful, applications must demonstrate and implement the highest EDI standards.

The application needs to be aligned with the program’s commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion and with the institution’s EDI action plan. To achieve its research excellence-based objectives and outcomes, institutions are required to take active and rigorous measures to identify and prevent systemic barriers and ensure that excellent students, trainees, early-career researchers and faculty from underrepresented, equity-seeking, and rights-seeking populations, including racialized individuals, African, Caribbean and Black individuals, Indigenous Peoples, persons with disabilities, women and individuals from 2SLGBTQIA+ communities can fully contribute to the research program.

Supporting early career researchers is a tri-agency priority, as it enhances Canada’s position as a world leader in building talent and strengthening the research ecosystem. Chairs and host institutions are expected to implement measures that specifically support a diverse cohort of early career researchers.

If a committee member reviews an application in which the nominee has answered “Yes” to the question “Does your proposal involve Indigenous research as defined by SSHRC?” they must refer to SSHRC’s Indigenous Research Statement of Principles and Guidelines for the Merit Review of Indigenous Research when assessing the application. The guidelines are provided to help reviewers build understanding of Indigenous research and research-related activities, and to assist them in interpreting the specific selection criteria in the context of Indigenous research.

To ensure that the Canadian research ecosystem is as open as possible and is safeguarded as necessary, the Government of Canada has introduced the Policy on Sensitive Technology Research and Affiliations of Concern (STRAC Policy) and the National Security Guidelines for Research Partnerships, which apply to this funding opportunity.

Reviewers need not raise research security concerns as part of their review and should focus their assessments on the selection criteria. Any reviewer with concerns or questions related to research security is advised to contact the Impact+ team.

For more information about research security at the federal research funding agencies, see the Tri-agency Guidance on Research Security.

The Multidisciplinary Selection Committee is composed of a diverse group of world-leading national and international academics, scientists and leaders from the public, private and not-for-profit sectors. Its members will play a crucial role in upholding the integrity and quality of the review process. They will ensure that the high international standards of research excellence and the objective of selecting applications with research projects that hold strong transformational and translational potential established for the program are respected.  

The Multidisciplinary Selection Committee will succeed in its role by ensuring that the applications are reviewed against the program’s selection criteria.

Members will not represent their own disciplines or their own jurisdictions. Rather, they will use their experience to provide a fair and balanced assessment of the applications to ensure that the program’s ambitious objectives are met.

The Multidisciplinary Selection Committee members commit to:

• signing a conflict of interest and confidentiality agreement and agree to the Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Agreement for Review Committee Members, External Reviewers, and Observers describing expectations and requirements; 
• completing the Self-Identification Questionnaire for Reviewers in the Convergence Portal;
• agreeing to act in accordance with Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service, if they are public servants;
• providing preliminary ratings for the applications they were assigned to in the Convergence Portal; and
• attending the two four-day virtual selection meetings and partake in the deliberations that will lead to a recommendation of a rank-ordered list.

The Multidisciplinary Selection Committee co-chairs commit to:

• ensuring the Multidisciplinary Selection Committee functions smoothly, effectively, objectively and according to the program’s policies;
• ensuring the committee members understand and base their assessment on the program’s objectives and selection criteria;
• establishing a positive, constructive, fair-minded environment in which the applications are evaluated;
• mitigating unconscious biases in the selection committee’s deliberations;
• ensuring potential conflicts of interest are raised at the beginning of each meeting and during the evaluation of each application;
• fulfilling an oversight role, including ensuring consensus on committee recommendations; and
• presenting the committee’s funding recommendations to the program’s Steering Committee.

To account for the large volume of applications, committee members are distributed into three sub-committees as per the split of applications. Each will be chaired by one individual (co-chair). The composition of the sub-committee will remain the same for the duration of each intake’s selection meetings. Applications will be assigned to three committee members, considering expertise, conflicts of interests and workload balance. Members will be assigned to review proposals that are outside of their area of expertise.

Committee co-chairs will not be assigned applications.

Applications are approximately 20-pages long, in addition to the CV and letters of support.

Applications will be provided in PDF format. The sections of the application and their corresponding selection criteria are included below to help guide your review.

The virtual selection meetings will be moderated by the Multidisciplinary Selection Committee co-chairs. The goal is for the committee members to agree on consensus ratings for each of the five selection criteria for all applications.

Committee members are expected to attend the two four-day virtual selectin meetings. Time zones and workload will be taken into consideration in determining the start and end times of each meeting day.

Canada Impact+ Research Chairs are awarded for a period of eight years, with a possibility for a four-year funded extension, at 50% of the original award value. The Impact+ Research Chairs program funding supports expenses related to compensation, as well as research activities for the chairholder and the chairholder’s team. Indirect costs can equal up to 25% of the direct costs of the proposed research. Indirect costs calculations exclude the salary of the chairholder (including benefits), teaching replacement costs of the chairholder, and eligible recruitment and relocation costs for the chairholder and/or the chairholder’s team.

Nominating institutions are instructed to complete the budget projections over eight years and include a budget justification for their proposed chairholder grant. The three budget projections tables include:

• Funding from the Impact+ Research Chairs program: How the Impact+ funds will be used according to the line items.
• Contribution from the university: Funds (cash and/or in-kind) committed in support of the chair by the institution.
• Contribution from other sources: Funds (cash and/or in-kind) committed in support of the chair by sources other than the Impact+ program or the institution.

Committee members are invited to consider the budget when evaluating the different criteria and comment on the appropriateness of the budget to reach the objectives of the program.

All applications submitted to the competition, regardless of award value and/or the career stage of the nominee, will be evaluated using the program’s selection criteria:

1. Research/academic merit and leadership skills of the nominee
2. Quality of the institutional support
3. Quality of the research program
4. Potential contribution to the excellence of the Canadian and international research ecosystem
5. Potential for knowledge translation, mobilization and application of research results

Five ratings are provided for each selection criterion, with references to major points of consideration to guide committee members toward arriving at a rating for a given criterion. Committee members are asked to provide a rating for each of the five selection criteria in the Convergence Portal (preliminary ratings).

Refer to the selection criteria table for the definition of ratings of all five selection criteria.

Committee members are encouraged to use the full range of ratings, as appropriate, to achieve a distribution of ratings that reflects the quality of the applications being reviewed.

Applications must meet a minimum rating of “Good” for each criterion in the Multidisciplinary Selection Committee’s final assessment to be considered for funding.

From an overall ranking, the committee will make funding recommendations to the program’s Steering Committee for their consideration and approval, along with a ranked reversion list should any awards be declined or terminated early in the process.

The program Steering Committee is composed of the presidents of CIHR, NSERC, SSHRC and the CFI as well as the deputy ministers of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and Health Canada. It will ratify the Multidisciplinary Selection Committee’s funding recommendations, ensuring the selection process was rigorous, objective and transparent, in line with the standards of peer review excellence expected by the three federal research funding agencies and consistent with the program’s objectives.

A Canada Impact+ Research Chair will be offered to the highest ranked applications recommended for funding by the committee, within its available budget per intake. Other meritorious applications will be placed on reversion lists and will be offered an award if a chair is declined.   

Each application discussed at the selection meetings will receive a consensus rating for each of the selection criterion and consensus comments.

Individual ratings and comments from committee members will not be shared with the applicant institution.

Applicants will receive the final ratings and consensus committee comments as part of their results package.

Multidisciplinary Selection Committee members will receive an email with detailed instructions describing how to register and use the Convergence Portal to assess applications.

The Convergence Portal is supported on the latest versions of Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Apple Safari and Mozilla Firefox. Use of an unsupported browser or a mobile device is strongly discouraged.

After reviewing the applications, follow the instructions provided for the Convergence Portal to complete and submit your ratings and comments (if applicable) for each of the five selection criteria.

Written comments can be added to the comment boxes in the Convergence Portal. Your comments will not be shared with the other reviewers in writing. You will have access to your written comments in the Convergence Portal to support the discussions during the virtual selection meetings. At a minimum, we ask that you enter written comments when your rating for a specific criterion is lower than “Good”. When you are ready to submit your assessment in the Convergence Portal, review your ratings and any comments to ensure they are complete. Click the “Submit Assessment” button to complete the assessment of each assigned application. The status of your submission will change to “Assessed”. Once all assessments are completed, select “IMPC-2026-1” from the Competition dropdown list, then select “Application” from the Stage dropdown list. Finally, click the “Submit All Assessments” button. The status of your submission will change to “Submitted”.

Review documents contain personal information, as well as information that, if disclosed in an unauthorized manner, could reasonably be expected to cause serious injury (such as prejudicial treatment, loss of reputation or competitive advantage) to an individual, organization or government. Therefore, these documents are protected by the Privacy Act, the Access to Information Act and the Policy on Government Security. Protocols must be followed to ensure information contained in applications, internal and external reviews, and selection committee discussions remains strictly confidential. Improper or unauthorized collection, use, disclosure, retention and/or disposal of this information can result in a privacy breach. See the Guide on Handling Documents Used in Peer Review for further details.

Canada’s federal research funding agencies—CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC—are committed to fostering and maintaining an environment that supports and promotes the responsible conduct of research. The Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct of Research (2021) sets out the responsibilities and corresponding policies for researchers, institutions and the agencies that together help support and promote a positive research environment.

Personal information refers to any information about an identifiable individual. Based on the Privacy Act, personal information provided in the nomination must only be used for assessing applications, making funding decisions, and related uses describing nominees at the time that their personal information is collected. Committee members are reminded that the use or disclosure of this information for any other purpose is illegal. It is important for committee members to adhere strictly to the guidelines set out in the Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Agreement for Review Committee Members, External Reviewers, and Observers.

The activities of CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC are subject to the Canadian Human Rights Act. See Purpose of the Act.

All committee members must be aware of their obligations and rights under the Official Languages Act.