Healthy Cities Research Training Platform (HCRTP) Webinar Q&A

From the webinar held on September 23, 2019

What are the full application requirements related to Indigenous participation?

In addition to meeting the LOI eligibility requirements, for a Full Application to be eligible:

Applications involving research with Indigenous communities must include at least one applicant who self-identifies as Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit or Métis) and/or applicants who can demonstrate their experience working in an Indigenous research environment, which may include Indigenous living experience, addressing power imbalances and cultural safety^{Footnote 1}. Applicants must submit a one (1) page "Other" attachment describing how their team meets this requirement. See How to Apply section for more details.

Note that there are some additional evaluation criteria for applications involving research with Indigenous communities.
Does the HCRTP need to host or to be involved in the Healthy Cities Annual Meeting? Will there be CIHR / Tri-Agency support for organizing the Annual Meeting (Support being: staff/logistics/translation/costs/etc.)?

As per the conditions of funding, the HCRTP team must lead the planning and execution of an annual meeting for the training initiative participants and include the wider CIHR Healthy Cities Research Initiative and participating stakeholders. More information will be given to the HCRTP LOI recipients during the HCRTP Strengthening Workshop regarding the expectations for the Annual Meetings.
How large do you expect this Healthy Cities Annual Meeting to be?

The Healthy Cities Annual Meeting should be large enough to accommodate all anticipated HCRTP participants and participating stakeholders, and ensure there is a secured space for CIHR Healthy Cities Research Initiative participants. More information will be given to the HCRTP LOI recipients during the HCRTP Strengthening Workshop regarding the expectations for the Annual Meetings.
For the HCRTP Strengthening Workshop, the three co-leads of each team will be attending. The emphasis of the workshop suggests that co-leads from various teams may decide there to create other alliances or alternative teams which could be formed after the fact. Is this the case?

There is no requirement or preference given for teams to create alliances or collaborations to apply at the Full Application stage. Teams may form alliances or bring on new collaborators following the workshop if it would strengthen their application.
Is the intent of the community training opportunities (implementing an intervention) for Masters and Doctoral students intended to be completed with a community collaborator, or be a more formal co-op/internship position within an academic program?

The model is flexible. At the full application stage, applicants need to demonstrate how the proposed training initiative will provide trainees with ‘real world’ experience including internship, networking or other innovative training opportunities.
Is it envisioned that students will receive their training (academic, internship) at one host institution or several host institutions across Canada?

There are no requirements for where students need to be trained; however, the program must serve a national purpose and be national in scope. It is up to the team to decide how they wish to distribute the training opportunities.
Is it expected that the LOI leadership team is from a single institution or multiple institutions? Should cross-institutional connections be established at the LOI stage or later?

There are no requirements to have multiple institutions represented at the LOI stage. However, major shifts in the team leading the initiative are not expected between the LOI and full application stage. Cross-institutional connections could be established at the LOI stage or the Full Application stage. See Eligibility section of the Funding Opportunity for more details.
It was said that up to six (6) LOIs could be funded. Does it mean that only 6 LOIs will be accepted?

No, there is no maximum in the number of applications being accepted at the LOI phase. We are hoping to receive as many LOI applications as possible although up to six (6) developmental grants will be granted.

Note: The same proposal cannot be submitted more than once to CIHR; however, it is possible for a team to submit multiple proposals as long as the application title and content are not the same.
Could a Public Health Unit be a co-lead as part of the initial LOI? Or do external agencies such as Public Health Units have to wait until the Full Application submission before they can get involved?

The Nominated Principal Applicant (NPA) must be either an independent researcher or organization with a research or knowledge translation mandate. A Public Health Unit does not need to wait until the Full Application stage to be involved.
Will the peer review panel include only researchers/academics? Will any implementors sit on the panel?

CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC will collaborate to put together an interdisciplinary peer review panel that appropriately reflects the funding opportunity, including representation of other stakeholders. Peer review membership has not been determined yet but it is anticipated that non-researchers/academics may be on the panel.
Do the implemented interventions (research and training opportunities) need to be across Canada, or can they all occur in one place?

There is no specific requirement for the research and training opportunities to occur across the country; however, the program must serve a national purpose and be national in scope. It is up to the applicants to build on their strengths and networks to develop a proposal that will have a pan Canadian scope and impact.
Is it encouraged or discouraged to have international team members?

The peer review criteria at the Full Application stage indicate that collaborations with international stakeholders, while not mandatory, could be considered a strength.
Is an indication of institutional (university or other) support considered in the LOI decisions and are letters of support allowed at the LOI stage?

Letters of Support from the co-lead’s home institutions will only be accepted and reviewed at the Full Application stage.
At the full application stage, applicants are required to provide a letter of support from each of the co-leads’ home institutions. What are the required elements in this letter?

The Letters of Support should demonstrate the support from the co-lead’s home institutes to ensure they have the time and institutional support needed to lead this national training initiative.
If the Tri-Council peer review panel will be deciding on six teams that will be invited to submit a Full Application, will there be an opportunity for the six teams invited to submit Full Applications to be made aware of other LOIs that are aligned with their proposal, but that were not invited to submit a Full Application? Knowing the other LOIs would be useful in the development of the Full Application.

The abstracts, institutions, leaders, project titles and keywords of only the six (6) applications granted LOI funds will be made available on ResearchNet. Teams may choose, either during LOI development or Full Application Development, to submit information regarding their proposed project or desired partners to the Linkage Tool where it will be publicly available. Submitting information to the Linkage Tool is optional and does not confer any advantages in the evaluation and/or funding of applications. The linkage tool is available on CIHR website to facilitate linkages between teams.
If 20% of the budget is to be used to support trainee travel and so on, does that mean that 80% of the total budget must be used for stipends?

No. A maximum of 20% can be allocated to support travel, accommodation and meals to attend conferences, seminars and other training events, including opportunities to meet with international peers and exchange between institutions. Although there is flexibility in the use of the balance of funds, all funds must be used to meet the HCRTP objectives, recognizing that this funding opportunity is to support a platform for training and capacity-building focused on trainees. Note that these funds must not be used to support direct research costs.
Given the role in hosting/organizing the Healthy Cities Annual Meeting, does the Full Application budget need to include funds for this meeting?

Yes. More information will be provided to the HCRTP LOI recipients during the HCRTP Strengthening Workshop regarding the expectations for the Annual Meetings.
Will staff that do not attend the Strengthening Workshop be made aware of information shared at the Strengthening Workshop? Will details provided at the Strengthening Workshop be shared?

All participating teams will have the opportunity to ask questions and get additional details on the full application stage at the Strengthening Workshop. They will be able to share these details with their Research Grant Offices, team, co-applicants etc.. In addition, this Q&A page will be updated with key information.

Footnotes

Footnote 1

Respectful relationships can be established when the research environment is socially, spiritually, emotionally and physically safe. Cultural safety is a participant-centered approach that encourages self-reflexivity among health researchers and practitioners. It requires an examination of how systemic and personal biases, authority, privilege and territorial history can influence these relationships. Cultural safety requires building trust with Indigenous Peoples and communities in the conduct of research.

Realizing cultural safety in health and wellbeing research entails understanding the social, political and historical contexts that have resulted in power imbalances. It requires an individual to have cultural humility, competence, sensitivity and awareness in determining relevant health research policies, programs, models and projects with Indigenous Peoples.

Meaningful and culturally safe practices refer to equity in health research and delivery. In a meaningful and culturally safe research environment, each person’s identity, beliefs, needs and reality is acknowledged. Participants feel safe based on mutual respect, meanings, learning experiences and shared knowledge. Cultural safety empowers people and ensures that the participating community, group or individual is a partner in decision-making.

Bourassa, C., Oleson, E., Diver, S., & McElhaney, J. (in press). Cultural safety. In K. Graham, D. Newhouse, & C. Garay (Eds.), Sharing the land, sharing a future. Winnipeg, MB: University of Manitoba Press.

Return to footnote 1 referrer

Date modified:: 2019-11-25

Language selection

Search and menus

Search

Healthy Cities Research Training Platform (HCRTP) Webinar Q&A