Definition of Ratings

The Canada Excellence Research Chairs (CERC) program supports Canadian universities in their efforts to build on Canada’s growing reputation as a global leader in research and innovation by attracting and retaining top researchers and their teams to establish ambitious programs.

The selection of successful nominees is based on the highest standards of research excellence. The program will use a rigorous and competitive review process for awarding CERC grants. All applications submitted to the competition, regardless of award value and/or career stage of the nominee, will be assessed against each other using the selection criteria for the program.

The following rating scale will apply for each criterion:

1. Fully satisfies and exceeds
2. Fully satisfies
3. Mostly satisfies
4. Does not satisfy

Applications must meet a minimum rating of “Fully Satisfies” and align with the Government of Canada’s science, technology and innovation (ST&I) priorities for the CERC program in order to be considered for funding.

The following definition of ratings for each criterion will be used for the selection process:

Criterion 1: Research/academic merit and leadership skills of the nominee

Reviewers will consider the following subcriteria and corresponding rating scale:

• Nominee is a top-tier researcher whose accomplishments have made a major societal impact (as appropriate based on career stage) and who is recognized internationally as a leader. In cases where the nominee is a Canadian Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit or Métis) researcher based in Canada, the impact can be at the international level and/or at the community, regional or national level. Quality and impact of the nominee’s research track record, including their record of service to the research community (e.g., service on peer review committees, faculty recruitment committees, advisory committees).
• Nominee’s record of attracting and mentoring a diverse group of students, trainees and research personnel, and establishing an equitable and inclusive research environment.
• Plan for establishing and maintaining a diverse core team (at the student, trainee, personnel and early-career researcher levels), and an environment that is safe and inclusive and allows all team members to reach their full research potential (e.g., through the recruitment and outreach strategy, equitable training opportunities, professional development and mentoring).

Criterion 2: Quality of the institutional support

Reviewers will consider the following subcriteria and corresponding rating scale:

• Quality of the institutional environment (existing or planned) that will support the chairholder and the CERC core team throughout the tenure of the award to ensure the success of the research program. This assessment will include the activities planned to support the Chair, such as establishing governance committees and advisory bodies, stewardship plans, etc., and the core team throughout the award.
• Ability to sustain the research advantage created by the proposed Chair after the term of the Chair ends, including retention of the Chair beyond the period of the award.
• Institution’s research strengths in the proposed field, assessed against global standards of excellence.
• Strength of the institution’s overall commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in research and academia, and the level of support it will provide to the chairholder in helping to establish and sustain an equitable, diverse and inclusive research team and environment that also contributes towards a more equitable, diverse and inclusive research ecosystem.
• Quality of the institutional support in terms of its ability to leverage additional resources to promote knowledge mobilization and translation through partnerships with the private sector, public sector, international research institutions, academic and/or philanthropic organizations.
• Level of additional support that will be provided to ensure the success of the research program, protected time for research (e.g., release from certain teaching or administrative duties), mentoring (if applicable), training, additional funds, office space, administrative support, and hiring of other faculty members.
• Quality of the outreach and selection processes used by the institution to recruit the nominee, in terms of the institution’s demonstrated commitment to open, transparent, fair and equitable processes and to identifying and addressing systemic barriers (e.g., strategy used to identify a diverse pool of applicants, advertising venues, accommodations). For more information, refer to the recruitment requirements in the application instructions.

Criterion 3: Quality of the research program

Reviewers will consider the following subcriteria and corresponding rating scale:

• Extent to which the proposed research program aligns with one or more of the Government of Canada’s science, technology and innovation (ST&I) research priority areas for the CERC and CFREF programs.
• Promise of the proposed field of research for the Chair, measured in the context of leading global research in the field.
• Extent to which the proposed research program enhances knowledge mobilization and translation so that all sectors of society (industry, government, academia, not-for-profit, etc.) benefit from the research and data generated.
• Extent to which the Chair fills a gap within existing expertise at the institution or in Canada.
• Quality of the proposed research program in terms of how it has embedded EDI considerations (i.e., GBA+ or SGBA+) at each of stage of the research process (research questions, design, methodology, data collection, analysis and interpretation and dissemination of results), as applicable.
• Quality of the proposed research program in terms of how research is co-created and co-led by and with First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, as investigators, trainees, partners and collaborators, and its recognition of Indigenous ways of knowing (as applicable).

Criterion 4: Potential contribution to the excellence of the Canadian and international research ecosystem

Reviewers will consider the following subcriteria and corresponding rating scale:

• Likelihood that the work associated with the proposed research program will be recognized as globally relevant and will advance the frontiers of research in the field on a global scale.
• Opportunities for collaboration with other researchers working in the same or related areas at the nominating institution, in the same region, within Canada and abroad.
• Likelihood that the work of the proposed Chair will advance Canada’s reputation as a global centre for science, research and innovation excellence.
• Plan of the Chair and core team members to communicate the research results and their impacts to the world and a variety of audiences.
• Potential to apply the research results from the Chair to advance public policy and/or the potential to commercialize research discoveries from the Chair in order to create social and economic advantages for Canada.