Stipend and Duration: 

All awards are provided without benefits. Successful awardees are expected to organize their own benefits with the host institution. Stipends are valued in Canadian dollars and are not subject to income tax. 

For Doctoral learners who defend their thesis before the 4-year term ends, the last day of the month that the revised thesis is accepted will act as the new end date for the award.  It is the supervisor’s responsibility to inform ENRICH of this change.  If funds are paid out beyond this time point, then it will need to be refunded to ENRICH by the Host Institution and/or supervisor.

Parental leave: 

Learners for the doctoral award are eligible to receive paid parental leave up to a maximum of 6 months if (a) interrupting the ENRICH award within six months of childbirth or adoption, (b) the learner will be the primary caregiver for the child, AND (c) the learner is not eligible for and will not be receiving employment insurance or other parental benefits from any other sources.  The leave must be requested at minimum 30 days in advance of leave start date. The maximum benefit payable by ENRICH is $12,500 for 6 months. This is equivalent to $2083.33 per month of the requested leave. Host institutions are not required to match parental leave funds. Any additional benefit-matching amounts are payable at the discretion of the learner’s host university/training center.   For further information regarding your eligibility and requirements, please contact the ENRICH Program Manager and/or your Center Leader. 

Individuals who hold faculty positions (fellows and new investigators) are eligible to receive Employment Insurance (EI) benefits and/or parental leave benefits based on the salary received at the host center.  Under these circumstances, ENRICH will not provide additional parental leave benefits on the ENRICH award amount.  

The award paid from the ENRICH’s grant will be placed “on hold” for the duration of the leave, and will resume upon the return of the individual to the training environment.  The term of the award will be extended by the length of the approved leave up to but not exceeding twelve months.

Medical or Family Caregiver Leave: Learners are eligible for medical or a family caregiver’s leave. The latter is to provide care or support to certain family members who have a serious medical condition. Awards will be placed “on hold” for the duration of the leave with supported documentation from the local institution. Awards will resume upon the return of the individual to the training environment.  

Research Allowance:  No research or travel allowance will be provided. However, the Award recipients and their supervisors will have their expenses paid to attend the ENRICH Annual National Symposia and relevant Regional Mini Symposia. A written commitment from the supervisor/mentor stating his/her agreement to attend National Symposia, for each year that the learner is in the program, is mandatory with the application.

Deadline to apply:

A letter of Intent will be due September 1st at 5pm EST for Clinician Researcher awards only.  Candidates that make it to the next round will be notified via email.

A Full application will be due November 1st of each year at 5pm EST. Late or incomplete applications will not be considered. If the application competition date falls on a weekend or statutory holiday, applications will be due on the first business day following (i.e. If November 1st falls on a Saturday, applications will be due on Monday, November 3rd 5pm EST).

When you are ready to submit your application click on the “submit now” button on our website to complete the online form. You will be asked to upload each of the required documents below.

A complete full application that is due November 1st consists of:

1. Proof of citizenship: A pdf of your passport, birth certificate, or residency card are all acceptable forms of verification.   Please name it “1 CandidateLastname_Citizenship”.  The identity documentation will not be circulated to the Selection Committee, and only used to review eligibility.
2. Proof of Canadian licensure (clinician researcher applications only): Documentation of general or academic license by an appropriate licensing body. Must be valid within the province you are studying. Please include expiration date or proof of renewal on uploaded document. If you are in a combined clinical and research program, please upload a letter of proof of clinical training, end date and intent to apply for a license from your clinical supervisor.  Please name it "2 CandidateLastname _License". 
   
   OR

   Proof Indigenous Heritage: Indigenous scholars applying to the Indigenous doctoral scholars award must provide proof of an indigenous heritage by way of a letter from the band office or status card. Please name it "2 CandidateLastname _Indigenous ID".

3. The application: Name it "3 CandidateLastname _App".

4. Common CVs: CIHR Academic Common CVs for yourself and all your supervisors and Mentors should be ready for upload. Please name them as follows:4 CandidateLastname_CV
   4a Mentor/Supervisor 1 Lastname_CV
   4b Mentor/Supervisor 2 Lastname_CV
5. Letter from supervisor:

   
   Doctoral and Post-Doctoral Awards: A maximum 2 page letter signed by all supervisors and mentors (when applicable) is to be uploaded describing:a. The commitment of the supervisor and the advisory committee towards the candidate’s research training and endorsement of the candidate.
   b. The space, facilities and personnel support for the candidate.
   c. The interdisciplinary nature of the training.
   d. The commitment of the learner to participate in the core curriculum.
   e. The commitment of the supervisor and learner to participate in regional and national symposia of the ENRICH
   f. The commitment of the supervisor and learner to participate in annual ENRICH evaluation, which includes in person consultations at the Annual Symposia.
   g. Mentorship Plan: This portion of the letter should be a separate section within the letter that clearly outlines a mentorship plan. It should explain step by step what each supervisor and/or mentor will aid you in, how they will accomplish this, and how often this will take place.  ENRICH strongly encourages each applicant to meet with your mentorship team to develop a clear strategy for your mentorship to ensure expectations of all parties are met.
   h. This letter must be signed by all supervisors and mentors.
   i. Kindly name this file “5 CandidateLastName_SuperLtr

   New Investigator Awards: A maximum 2 page letter signed by all mentors is to be uploaded describing:a. The commitment of the research mentor and the advisory committee towards the candidate’s research training and endorsement of the candidate
   b. The commitment of the candidate to participate in the core curriculum.
   c. The commitment of the mentors and candidate to participate in regional and national symposia of the ENRICH.
   d. The commitment of the mentors and learner to participate in annual ENRICH evaluation, which includes in person consultations at the Annual Symposia.
   e. Mentorship Plan: This portion of the letter should be a separate section within the letter that clearly outlines a mentorship plan. It should explain step by step what each mentor will aid you in, how they will accomplish this, and how often this will take place. ENRICH strongly encourages each applicant to meet with your mentorship team to develop a clear strategy for your mentorship to ensure expectations of all parties are met.
   f. This letter must be signed by all mentors.
   g. Kindly name the file “5 CandidateLastName_MentorLtr”

6. Letter from host institution:

   
   Doctoral and Post-Doctoral Awards: A maximum 1-page letter from the host institution is to be uploaded describing:a.Expression of support of the candidate’s research training within the institution.
   b. Commitment to 50% of protected research time for the applicant (clinician researcher awards only)
   c. Kindly name it "6 CandidateLastName_HostLtr"

   New Investigator Awards: All candidates must be nominated by their Institution. A letter of support is to be completed by the Head of the Department or Research Institute that includes:a. A statement of nomination with the candidate’s current academic appointment, the date the appointment took effect and a brief job description for the candidate.
   b. The space, facilities, and personnel support for the candidate.
   c. The interdisciplinary nature of the candidate’s research.
   d. Commitment to 50% protected research time for the applicant.
   e. Kindly name it "6 CandidateLastName_HostLtr".

7. Official transcripts: For new applicants, official transcripts are required including the candidate's graduate and/or health professional training, along with proof of any degrees. Transcripts should be emailed directly to the platform manager from the institution at linda.pires@sickkids.ca. If this is not possible, transcripts should be snail-mailed in an original sealed envelope, directly from the Institution of origin. Mail transcripts to: Program Manager. ENRICH Platform. The Hospital for Sick Children. 555 University Avenue, Room 7291. Toronto, ON M5G 1X8. If this is a reapplication, copies are accepted. Kindly make note in your online application. Please submit a digital copy of your transcripts and name it "7 Candidate Lastname_transcripts".

8. Indigenous Research: Applicants conducting Indigenous research must provide a letter of support from the community which they are engaging with, for this research. We define Indigenous Research as research in any field or discipline that is grounded in or engaged with First Nations, Inuit, Métis or other Indigenous nations, communities, societies or individuals, and their wisdom, cultures, experiences or knowledge systems, as expressed in their dynamic forms, past and present. Please name this support letter “8 Candidate Lastname_Indigenous Community Support”
9. Sponsor Assessments:  Candidates must have three (3) individuals provide assessments on their behalf.  Additional assessments will not be considered.  These should include (if applicable) assessment from each of the candidate’s two most recent research supervisors.  For Postdoctoral candidates, one of these assessments should be from the PhD supervisor (if applicable).  You will be asked to list the names of your sponsors in the online application. It is the responsibility of the candidate to ensure that their sponsors complete the appropriate assessment form (PhD/PDF form or NI form). Sponsors should email their assessments directly to linda.pires@sickkids.ca . Assessments are confidential and should NOT be seen by the candidate.

French applications: Applications may be submitted in French. Please note, you are requested to advise the ENRICH National Office of your intent to submit in French a minimum 4 weeks prior to the application deadline.  If you are successful in the written portion, all interviews are conducted in English. Interviews can be accommodated in French at the candidate’s request.

Issues/Questions? Email linda.pires@sickkids.ca ENRICH Program Manager

SOAR (Salary and Other Awards for Researchers)

TIMELINE AND PROCESS

Important Dates:

Letter of Intent (clinician-researcher applications only):

1. Platform Manager will review the application to ensure the candidate meets all the eligibility requirements.
2. If yes, a subcommittee of the selection committee will evaluate in detail the relative strengths and weaknesses of submitted LOIs, based on the evaluation criteria. The Review Panel provides recommendations regarding the most meritorious pool of LOI applicants to invite to submit a full proposal.

Reviewer Assignment and Conflict of Interest:

1. Upon application deadline, the Platform Manager collates applications and ensures that each applicant meets all eligibility requirements.

2. An email is sent to all Selection Committee members with a list of applicants and their demographics, for conflicts of interest and declaration of expertise.

3. The Platform Manager sends the Selection Committee Chair, Co-Chair and Director the list of applicants with demographics, project title, abstract, and conflicts of interest. Individuals with a conflict of interest for certain applicants, and from the same centre will not be assigned to the applicant in question.

4. The Selection Committee Chair and Co-Chair assign the following reviewers to each candidate:
   • Scientific review: 3 reviewers consisting of selection committee members, ENRICH mentors, or external reviewers if needed
   • Patient Engagement review: 1 patient partner
   • EDI review: 1 EDI Champion

Emails are sent to the reviewers to accept or decline and declare any conflict of interest. A new reviewer will be assigned if a reviewer declines or has a conflict. Reviewers who accept a review will also be required to join the Selection virtual meeting. The Platform Manager sends each reviewer the applications they will be reviewing with an evaluation form.

Reviews and Scoring:

5. Reviewers are given approximately 4-6 weeks to complete their reviews and return the evaluation form with scores one week before the Selection Committee virtual meeting.
6. Scoring:

Scientific Review: Reviewers will score the candidates based on (1) research proposal (clarity, feasibility, rationale) (2) research training environment (research team, resources, interdisciplinary nature) and (3) applicant qualifications (research experience, publications, productivity, honours, awards and sponsor assessments). The distribution of weight for each award will be as follows:

Patient Partner Review: Reviewers will be asked to read through the lay summary and patient engagement section. The candidates will receive a pass, revision, or major revision rating based on the relevance and impact to perinatal and child health and well-being, communication in plain language, and the patient engagement plan.

EDI Review: An EDI champion will review the lay summary and EDI section of the application. The candidates will receive a pass, revision, or major revision rating based on the CIHR Best Practices in Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in Research guide.

Preparation for panel review (Selection Virtual Meeting):

7. The Platform Manager sends out a personal scorecard to each Selection Committee member one week before the meeting.

8. The Platform Manager shares the reviewer scores and their averages with the Selection Committee Chair, Co-Chair and Director. If scores for a candidate are highly variable, the Selection Committee Chair, Co-Chair and Director may request to see the reviews.

9. Based on (a) the compatibility of the scores among reviewers for each candidate and (b) conflicts of interest among Selection committee members, the Selection Committee Chair and Co-Chair will determine the order of discussion for each candidate. Reviewers with a conflict of interest will be asked to leave the meeting when reviewing the applicant in question and prompted to return when the discussion is complete. Should the Director have a conflict, the Director will leave the call and the Selection Chair will act as the Director and Selection Co-Chair as the Chair. Should the Selection Chair have a conflict, they will leave the call and the Selection Co-Chair will act as the Selection Chair.

Selection meeting and consensus scoring:

10. At the Selection Committee meeting, each candidate will be reviewed in the order determined by the Selection Committee Chair and Co-Chair.

11. Streamlined applications: For applicants who attained low scores, the Selection Committee Chair and Co-Chair may request to streamline the application. If approved by all reviewers, this application will not be discussed. Candidates can be streamlined if

• Scientific Review:
  
  4. Two reviewer scores are under 4.0
  5. The average of all 3 reviewer scores is under 4.0.

Should there be a copious number of applications, the boundary for streamlining applications may change to ensure that only 15 applications maximum are reviewed in full by reviewers. The scores reported to streamlined candidates will be the average score for each review category and will be identified as “Streamlined: score”.  Candidates whose applications are not streamlined are identified with only a score in the feedback report.

12. Discussed applications:
    • Scientific review: Reviewers 1, 2, and 3, will each state their scores and then respectively outline their reviews of the proposed application.
    • Patient Partner review: The patient partner will state their rating, providing reasoning.
    • EDI Review: The EDI Champion will state their rating, providing reasoning.

13. A discussion then follows with the rest of the selection committee who may have additional questions, concerns or insights.

14. The 3 scientific reviewers agree on a consensus score based on the application discussion, taking into consideration both the patient partner and EDI Champion feedback. If the reviewers cannot reach a consensus, the Selection Co-Chairs will negotiate a consensus score. All scientific review members of the selection committee are then asked to (a) record the consensus score on their scorecards; (b) score the candidate plus or minus (+/-) 0.5 of the consensus score.

15. Items 11 to 14 are repeated for each candidate until all candidates have been reviewed. Selection Committee members with conflicts are asked to leave before and return after (via text message) the conflicting application.

16. Immediately following the virtual meeting, each reviewer emails the Platform Manager their completed personal scorecards. Any revisions to reviews must be submitted within 24 hours of the Selection Committee virtual meeting.

17. A tally and average of the personal scores is created by the Platform Manager. The Selection Committee Chair, Co-Chair, and Director are sent the final average only of the tally for each candidate. Candidates who have scored 4.0 or above are considered for an interview approximately 4 weeks later. Should many candidates have attained a score of 4.0 or higher, at least two candidates will be interviewed for each award. These candidates will be the two candidates with the highest score for each award.

18. Candidates who have not been selected for an interview will be sent copies of each reviewer’s forms, along with official notes from the Selection Committee detailing any constructive feedback that came up during the discussion. These notes will be drafted by the Platform Manager, then reviewed by the Selection Committee Chair, Co-Chair and Director. The Centre Leaders of the respective Centers will be cc’d on the feedback.

Interview preparation:

19. Candidates who will be interviewed may will be sent official constructive feedback in the form of a letter. This will include feedback from the scientific reviews, patient partner, and EDI Champion. Candidates will be requested to submit a brief 2-page response before their interview.

Interview day and ranking:

20. The Interviews will be conducted by a representation of the Selection Committee panel consisting of the Selection Chair, Co-Chair, Director, 2 other Selection Committee members, a patient partner, and the Platform Manager (ex-officio). Any member of the interview panel with conflicts will be asked to leave during the interview. Should the Director have a conflict, the Director will leave the room, and the Selection Chair will act as the Director and Co-Chair as the Chair. Should the Selection Chair have a conflict, they will leave the room and the Co-Chair will act as the Chair.

21. Candidates will be scored on a 5-point scale based on their vision for a scientific career, ability to clearly articulate the research project to the non-expert and discuss the project in the broader context of research in the field, address any reviewer comments raised in the written feedback, mentorship plan, discuss interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary integration potential for their project, and explain their patient engagement and EDI plan for the research. Panel members will also ask follow-up questions as they may arise during the discussion.

22. Based on post-interview discussions and average panel scores, a rank order will be determined for fundable candidates.

Executive Committee Approval:

23. The rank order will be presented, and funding cut-off will be discussed and approved at the Executive Committee. This decision will be based on funding availability and recommendations from the Director and Selection Committee Chair and Co-Chair.

Notice of Award:

24. Following the Executive vote, notification letters will be sent to the interviewed candidates. These letters will be drafted by the Platform Manager, then vetted by the Selection Committee Chair, Co-Chair, and Director.

Grievances:

25. All grievances with the selection process can be brought to the Executive Committee via the Chair or Co-Chair of the committee.
26. A follow-up telephone call with the Selection Committee Chair can be requested if a candidate has specific questions regarding feedback provided by the selection committee and the outcome of the competition.