Nominate a Chair

Overview

The Canada Research Chairs Program (CRCP) offers eligible Canadian degree-granting institutions the opportunity to nominate a diverse cadre of outstanding researchers for professorships in areas that will further the institution’s strategic research plan and enable them to maximize their contributions as centres of research and research training.

Eligible postsecondary institutions receive a set number of chair allocations based on the funding received by their researchers from the three federal research granting agencies: the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR); the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council (NSERC); and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) (the agencies). See Method of Allocating Chairs for more information.

Institutions subsequently submit Chair nominations to one of the program’s deadlines for peer review in order to fill their allocations. Note that individuals cannot apply to the program directly.

Chair positions are awarded to individual researchers who take up the chair on a full-time basis. Chairs cannot be shared, nor can they be occupied on a part-time basis.

Commitment to Equity, Diversity and Inclusion

The Government of Canada and the CRCP are committed to excellence in research and research training for the benefit of Canadians. Achieving a more equitable, diverse and inclusive Canadian research enterprise is also essential to creating the excellent, innovative and impactful research necessary to seize opportunities and for responding to global challenges. As such, the program is committed to the federal government’s policies on non-discrimination and employment equity.

Participating institutions administer funds in partnership with the agencies and the Tri-agency Institutional Programs Secretariat (TIPS). Therefore, all institutions that accept agency funding are expected to make concerted efforts to meet their equity and diversity targets, and provide a supportive and inclusive workplace. This supports the goals of equity, diversity and inclusion within the CRCP and the broader Canadian research enterprise.

Visit the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Requirements and Practices page for more information.

Considering Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in Managing Chair Allocations

When managing their allocation of chairs, all institutions must consider their equity and diversity targets. They must put safeguards in place (such as training) to minimize potential negative impacts of unconscious bias in their decision-making processes.

Unconscious bias is a positive or negative bias that all individuals have that they are unaware of, which happens outside of their control and affects decision-making. These unconscious biases are influenced by an individual’s background, environment and personal experiences.

Value and Duration

There are two types of Canada Research Chairs positions:

Tier 1 Chairs, tenable for seven years and renewable once, are for outstanding researchers acknowledged by their peers as world leaders in their fields. For each Tier 1 Chair, the institution receives $200,000 annually for seven years.

Tier 2 Chairs, tenable for five years and renewable once, are for exceptional emerging researchers, acknowledged by their peers as having the potential to lead in their field. For each Tier 2 Chair, the institution receives $100,000 annually for five years, with an additional $20,000 annual research stipend for first-term Tier 2 Chairs.

Notes:

• Once a Tier 1 Chair has held a position for two terms, they cannot be nominated as a new Tier 1 Chair at the same or another institution, regardless of the number of years completed in the second term.
• In the same way, a Tier 2 Chair who has held a position for two terms cannot be nominated as a new Tier 2 Chair at the same or another institution, regardless of the number of years completed in the second term.
• If a researcher resigns from a chair position during their first term at one institution and accepts a chair position at another, this is considered their second term and not a new first term.
• Tier 2 Chairs are not meant to be a feeder group for Tier 1 Chairs. The intent of funding Tier 2 Chairs is to provide emerging researchers with support that will kick-start their careers. As part of their strategic considerations in managing their chair allocations, institutions should develop a succession plan for their Tier 2 Chairs.

Eligibility of Nominees: Tier 1 and Tier 2 Chairs

Tier 1 Chairs

Nominees for Tier 1 Chair positions must be full professors or associate professors who are expected to be promoted to the full professor level within one or two years of the nomination. Alternatively, if they come from outside the academic sector, nominees must possess the necessary qualifications to be appointed at these levels.

Tier 2 Chairs

Nominees for Tier 2 Chair positions must be emerging scholars. They should, at a minimum, be assistant or associate professors, or possess the necessary qualifications to be appointed to these levels. See Tier 2 Justifications below for more information.

Tier 2 Justifications

Nominees for Tier 2 Chair positions must be emerging scholars; nominating institutions may nominate a professor or a researcher who is more than 10 years from their highest degree at the time of nomination and has experienced legitimate career interruptions (see acceptable justifications below). In such cases, institutions must submit to TIPS a formal justification (via the institutional application dashboard on the Convergence platform), explaining why the nominee is still considered to be an emerging scholar. When assessing a Tier 2 Justification:

• all eligible leaves (e.g., maternity, parental, medical, bereavement) are credited at twice the amount of time taken;
• part-time leaves will be taken into consideration, calculated according to the percentage of leave taken, and credited at twice the amount of time taken;
• professional leaves (e.g., sabbatical) are not credited, but certain training or administrative leaves may be considered.

Other leaves that have had an impact on the nominee’s research career may be taken into account (e.g., mandatory military service, non-research-related positions, unemployment and training unrelated to the research career). This information must be supported by the information contained in the nominee’s CV.

Research interruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., closures) are recognized as, and may be counted as, an eligible delay (credited at twice the amount of time) beginning March 1, 2020.

Multiple Degrees

Where the potential candidate has obtained more than one PhD, or has obtained a professional degree (MD, DVM, DDS, DC, etc.) in addition to a PhD, and the first of these degrees is obtained more than 10 years previous, a Tier 2 justification is required.

In cases where a habilitation qualification (or equivalent) is being pursued or has been attained, the candidate’s PhD or professional degree is deemed to be the highest degree. In addition, time spent completing the habilitation qualification (or equivalent) is not considered a break in career, and therefore, cannot be used as a justification.

Acceptable Justifications

Acceptable justifications are generally limited to breaks in the candidate’s research career due to maternity or parental leave, extended sick leave, clinical training, and family care.

The quality or excellence of the individual is not an acceptable justification for nominating an individual who does not meet the eligibility requirements of a Tier 2 position.

Justification Submission Process

The institution must submit the Tier 2 Justification via the institutional application dashboard on the Convergence platform. Justifications may be submitted at any time throughout the year.

The CV information that accompanies the Tier 2 justification must list all research contributions and sources of research support over the candidate’s entire career.

Full Nomination in Conjunction with a Justification

Institutions may submit a full nomination for a candidate to one of the program’s deadline dates while a decision is pending on that candidate’s Tier 2 justification.

This is unlike the CV information required for the decision regarding a Tier 2 justification, which requires a listing of research contributions and sources of research support over the candidate’s entire career.

Justification Evaluation Process

All Tier 2 justifications submitted that follow the required process will be considered by TIPS. Institutions may expect a turnaround time of approximately four weeks from receipt of the justification by TIPS to the notification of the decision. TIPS will not provide an update to institutions on the status of the review during the review period.

Note that only the completed justification will be examined as part of this review process, even in cases where a full nomination has been submitted concurrently.

In cases where a full nomination has been submitted while a decision on the justification is pending and where the candidate is deemed eligible to apply for a Tier 2 Chair, the nomination will be evaluated following the program’s peer review process. If the justification is not accepted, the nomination will be withdrawn from the cycle.

In cases where only the justification is submitted and is accepted, the institution must then submit a full nomination to one of the program’s regular nomination deadlines within the timeframe provided by TIPS; or, in the case of foreign researchers, within the timeframe provided by TIPS. Peer review of the nomination will then be carried out according to the program’s full evaluation criteria. If the Tier 2 justification is not accepted, the institution may not put the candidate forward as a Tier 2 Chair nominee.

Please note that if a nomination linked to an accepted Tier 2 justification is not recommended for funding through the program’s peer review process, the institution will be required to resubmit a Tier 2 justification prior to any subsequent resubmission of that candidate.

Advance a Tier 2 Chairholder to a Tier 1 Chair

After an open and transparent recruitment process, institutions can advance a current Tier 2 chairholder to a Tier 1 Chair during the term of the Chair. Institutions must use the same nomination process as for new nominees. The advancement nomination must be submitted by a nomination deadline early enough to ensure that the funding decision on the advancement nomination may be made prior to the end of the term of the Tier 2 Chair.

In order to advance a Tier 2 chairholder to a Tier 1 Chair, the Chair must be continuing at the same institution. If the Tier 1 Chair will be held at a different institution, the advancement nomination will be considered a new Tier 1 nomination.

If a nomination for advancement is not successful, it is possible to submit either a Tier 2 renewal nomination for the chairholder (if applicable) or to resubmit an advancement nomination (in cases where the term of the Tier 2 Chair has not yet ended).

Requirements for the Recruitment and Nomination Process

All institutions must ensure that their recruitment and nomination processes abide by the program’s Requirements for recruiting and nominating Canada Research Chairs. These apply to all new nominations, including foreign candidates, whether the position is used for internal recruitment (only open to existing faculty) or external recruitment (to attract new faculty), and when an active Tier 2 chairholder is nominated as a Tier 1 Chair at the same institution.

Chair Position Postings for Tier 2 Chairs

Institutions must ensure that the language relating to eligibility for Tier 2 Chairs in their Canada Research Chair postings is neither misleading nor exclusionary.

Chair position postings must:

• Encourage applications from all eligible candidates, and not imply that Tier 2 Chairs are exclusive to candidates who are, at the time of nomination, no more than 10 years from having earned their highest degree. Where breaks in the candidate’s research career exist due to maternity or parental leave, extended sick leave, clinical training, family care, etc., the Tier 2 justification process may be used to review a candidate’s eligibility. Job postings must acknowledge the option available to potential applicants who are more than 10 years from having earned their highest degree and/or where applicable exceptional circumstances are present, to have their eligibility reviewed through the Tier 2 justification process.
• Separate the specific eligibility criteria required by the institution from that required by the Canada Research Chairs Program (as outlined on the Canada Research Chairs website). For example, while universities may require that applicants hold a PhD for a given position, this is not a program requirement (i.e., some chairs may hold other terminal degrees, or a combinations of degrees, that render them eligible for the program). Statements such as “In accordance with the regulations set out for Tier 2 Canada Research Chairs, the candidate will hold a PhD (obtained within the last 10 years)” must not be used.

TIPS suggests including the following points in postings:

• Tier 2 Chairs are intended for exceptional emerging scholars (i.e., candidates must have been an active researcher in their field for fewer than 10 years at the time of nomination).
• Applicants who are more than 10 years from having earned their highest degree (and where career breaks exist, such as maternity, parental or extended sick leave, clinical training, etc.) may have their eligibility for a Tier 2 Chair assessed through the program’s Tier 2 justification process. Please contact the research grants office for more information.

TIPS monitors institutions’ adherence to CRCP’s recruitment and nomination requirements and public accountability and transparency requirements. It reserves the right to ask institutions to provide, at any time within the 48 months following the submission of a nomination, evidence that the process used followed these requirements. See examples of requested documentation.

Peer Review Process

The CRCP is founded upon an uncompromising commitment to excellence in research and research training. It follows a peer review process governed by the College of Reviewers and the Interdisciplinary Adjudication Committee.

All nominations, whether for a new Chair, the renewal of a current Chair, the advancement of a Tier 2 chairholder to a Tier 1 Chair at the same institution, or a resubmission, are assessed by the College of Reviewers.

Deferred Recommendation Process

Nominations that the Interdisciplinary Adjudication Committee does not recommend for support are automatically entered into the Deferred Recommendations Process.

Interdisciplinary Adjudication

All nominations are peer reviewed by a minimum of three experts in the field of research of the proposed program of research. Nominations may also be peer reviewed by an interdisciplinary committee composed of researchers with expertise in various disciplines within the health sciences, natural sciences, engineering, social sciences and humanities. Because of the potential for adjudication by an interdisciplinary committee, institutions should ensure that their nominations are written in a way that will convincingly demonstrate to an interdisciplinary panel how the nomination meets the CRCP’s evaluation criteria. In particular, institutions are advised to avoid the use of jargon, acronyms and highly technical terms, where possible, and to describe the proposed program of research in a way that allows informed assessment by committee members who may not have direct expertise in the area.

For complete details about the CRCP’s peer review process, see Peer Review.

Selection Criteria

Reviewers and the Interdisciplinary Adjudication Committee assess all nominations against the following criteria:

1. quality of the nominee and the proposed research program; and
2. quality of the institutional environment, institutional commitment, and fit of the proposed chair with the institution’s strategic research plan.

Nomination Deadlines and Related Dates

All nominations must be submitted through the Convergence Portal by the relevant nomination deadline. Nominations received after the deadline will be withdrawn from the cycle. Please see the summary of nomination process table to ensure the nomination is complete.

Foreign Nominations and Off-Cycle Nominations

Foreign nominations

A foreign nominee (whether a foreign national or Canadian citizen) may be either:

• a foreign researcher who has been employed at the nominating institution on a full-time basis for less than one year prior to the date of the submission of the nomination.
  • These foreign nominations must be submitted to one of the program’s nomination deadlines and the peer review process is not expedited; or
• a foreign researcher who is employed outside of Canada at the time of the submission of the nomination (note that the extension to submit reference letters does not apply).
  • TIPS has an “open” submission process for the nomination of foreign researchers who are employed outside of Canada at the time of submission, meaning that these foreign nominations are not subject to the set nomination deadlines and are accepted at any time during the year. In cases where peer review is unanimously favourable, the associate vice-president of the CRCP has the delegated authority to approve the funding recommendation made by the College of Reviewers.

The CRCP imposes no restrictions on nominees with regard to nationality or country of residence. Procedures to allow non-Canadian chairholders to work in Canada have been established by Employment and Social Development Canada and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

Other procedures have been established by the provincial government of Quebec for foreign researchers taking up a Chair in that province.

Institutions in the National Capital Region (Ottawa-Gatineau) should strongly encourage non-Canadian chairholders to live in the same province in which they work. This is to avoid undue hardship related to the process of becoming a permanent resident.

Off-cycle nominations

In alignment with its commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion, the program will accept off-cycle nominations that could contribute to institutions meeting and sustaining their equity and diversity targets for the period of 2021 to 2029, to address the underrepresentation of individuals from the four designated groups (women, persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples and racialized minorities). Nominees must self-identify as belonging to one of the four designated groups in order for an institution to submit the nomination off-cycle.

TIPS has an “open” submission process for these nominations, meaning that they are not subject to the set nomination deadlines and are accepted at any time during the year. In cases where peer review is unanimously favourable, the associate vice-president of the CRCP has the delegated authority to approve the funding recommendation made by the College of Reviewers.

Letters of Reference

All nominations must include three letters of reference from references who meet the CRCP’s conflict of interest requirements. The letters are required before the nomination can be submitted. Institutions should consult the Convergence Portal to monitor the receipt of letters and ensure that all three letters are received for each of their nominations before the submission deadline.

Please consult the complete guidelines for letters of reference for further information.

CV Updates ¹

TIPS will accept, by the relevant CV update deadlines indicated above, supplemental information strictly limited to updates regarding newly accepted publications and research support recently secured. This supplemental information must be sent to TIPS as an email attachment (PDF) by the institution’s research office. TIPS will forward the information to members of the Interdisciplinary Adjudication Committee as necessary. The information will not be seen by members of the College of Reviewers. Note that only nominations that have received one or more unfavourable assessments from members of the College of Reviewers will be reviewed by the Interdisciplinary Adjudication Committee.

Institutions are encouraged to submit all CV updates by the relevant CV update deadline to ensure that committee members have adequate time to consider the supplemental information prior to the committee meeting. Should institutions need to, in extenuating circumstances, submit supplemental information after the relevant CV update deadline, they should contact their institution’s designated program officer with their request.

Presentation Specifications

Presentation specifications and page limits are indicated in the instructions. These requirements ensure that all institutions and nominees have exactly the same amount of space to present their information. This in turn facilitates the work of peer reviewers who must review multiple nominations.

Agency Allocation

Each postsecondary institution nominates researchers to fill its allocation of Canada Research Chairs. Institutions must ensure that nominations are submitted under the appropriate agency allocation: CIHR for chairs in health sciences; NSERC for chairs in engineering and natural sciences; and SSHRC for chairs in social sciences and humanities. Complete guidelines on selecting the appropriate federal granting agency for nominations are available at www.science.gc.ca.

Institutions will be asked to change the allocation of a nomination in cases where the proposed research is deemed to be within the mandate of a different agency, and may be required to use the corridor of flexibility to change the allocation.

Agency Requirements for Certain Kinds of Research

All research activities must comply with the Tri-Agency Framework for the Responsible Conduct of Research, including but not limited to section 2.4 Agency Requirements for Certain Types of Research. Institutions and nominees  should reassure peer reviewers in the “proposed research program” section of their nomination that these requirements will be implemented within the research activities where appropriate (e.g., research involving the First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples of Canada, research involving human pluripotent stem cells, and integration of gender and sex into health research).

Environmental Impact

Institutions and nominees must review the Environmental Information form (PDF, Appendix A) and determine if any of the situations listed in Part II apply to the proposed research. If the answer is “yes” to at least one of the four questions in Part II, they must complete Appendix A. If none of the situations apply to the proposed research activities, completion of Appendix A is not required.

Nomination Resubmissions

If a nomination is not recommended for funding, the institution may nominate the same candidate two more times, for a maximum of three nominations, should its Chair allocation permit.

Please note that if a nomination linked to an accepted Tier 2 justification is not recommended for funding through the program’s peer review process, the institution will be required to resubmit a Tier 2 justification prior to any subsequent resubmission of that candidate.

Requests for Infrastructure Support

Institutions may include a request for infrastructure support from the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) with their chair nomination.

Through its John R. Evans Leaders Fund, the CFI contributes up to 40 per cent of the total cost of the infrastructure project. The institution and its partners are responsible for securing the remaining funding. Small institutions (those that receive less than one per cent of total granting agency funding) may request up to 100 per cent of the eligible costs of the Canada Research Chairs infrastructure project if the total cost of the project does not exceed $75,000. As well, institutions may also request funding from the CFI for infrastructure that will be shared by two or more chairs.

The CFI’s board of directors is responsible for the review of requests for infrastructure support for successful chair nominations, including foreign nominations. Following the review process, the CFI will communicate the decisions directly to the host institutions.

To apply for CFI infrastructure funding, institutions must use the CFI’s Awards Management System (CAMS), following these steps:

1. Using the candidate’s account username and password, log in CAMS at: https://www2.innovation.ca/sso/signIn.iface?camsLanguage=en.
2. Choose Create a new proposal.
3. Choose John R. Evans Leaders Fund - Funding for research infrastructure associated with an application for research support funding from another program.
4. Under “Joint funding with,” select CRC.

Note that all CFI requests submitted in conjunction with a chairs nomination must be submitted through CAMS by the program’s application deadlines.

Summary of Nomination Process

Institutions are responsible for ensuring that all submissions meet the program’s specification requirements, as outlined both on the program’s website and in the instructions. Pages or information beyond the limits outlined in the specifications will be removed before the nomination is peer reviewed.

More Information