Grant Competition

2019/20 Grant Competition Information

Competition opens: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at noon (ET)
Competition closes: Thursday, October 10, 2019 at 23:59 (ET) [CLOSED]
Notifications will be emailed to the PI by January 31, 2020. If you have not received a notification by then, please contact Kelly Wyatt. Those who qualify for the Grizzly Den will be notified separately.

Available Grants

CAEP-SREMI Grants (2 x $5,000) 

CAEP continues its partnership with the Schwartz/Reisman Emergency Medicine Institute (SREMI) to support two $5,000 grants for the 2019/20 Grant Competition.

The grants are open to junior investigators (< 5 years post-EM-residency) and will be used to foster Canadian emergency medicine research, specifically:

  • 1 grant will be awarded to a research project pertaining to the evaluation of an innovative educational program of relevance to emergency medicine
  • 1 grant for research that is aligned with the SREMI Pillars of Inquiry (geriatrics and the ageing population; alcohol and substance use disorders; mental health, including youth mental health; shared decision-making; transitions of care; women’s health; and emergency care equity).

Unsuccessful CAEP-SREMI grant applicants will still be considered for one of the junior investigator grants.

CAEP-CanVECTOR Grant (1 x $5,000)

An ongoing partnership between CAEP and the Canadian Venous Thromboembolism Clinical Trials and Outcomes Research (CanVECTOR) will support one $5,000 grant for the 2019/20 CAEP Grant Competition.

The CAEP-CanVECTOR Grant is open to junior investigators (< 5 years post-EM-residency) for a research project that aims to reduce venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurrence, improve VTE diagnosis and therapeutic management, improve the safety of anticoagulant delivery, or enhance the quality of life of those impacted by VTE in the emergency care setting.

Unsuccessful CAEP-CanVECTOR grant applicants will still be considered for one of the junior investigator grants.

Junior Investigator Grants (4 x $5,000)
Four grants are available, up to $5,000 each. This category is open to junior investigators (< 5 years post-EM-residency).
NEW QIPS Grants (2 x $2,500)

CAEP is excited to offer a new category of grants for the 2019/20 Grant Competition, to support two projects using quality improvement (QI) methodology.

This category is open to EM fellows, graduate students, staff physicians, faculty, etc (i.e., not limited to junior investigators). These grants are to support initiatives targeted at improving any of the dimensions of healthcare quality (i.e. safety, timeliness, efficiency, equitability, effectiveness or patient-centeredness), on a local or broader level. Projects submitted for the QIPS Grant Competition must utilize QI methodology. Projects that involve the study of the effectiveness of a single intervention or studies on the topic of quality/safety utilizing clinical epidemiology or research methods will not be considered for the QIPS Grant Competition. Additional information is available in the “QIPS Grants” tab below.

EMAF Grants ($10,000)

This category is open to EM fellows, graduate students, staff physicians, faculty, etc (i.e., not limited to junior investigators). The top 3 runners-up in this grant category will be invited to participate* at the CAEP 2020 Grizzly Den competition in Ottawa, where presenters will compete for up to $10,000 in grant funding.
Thank you to our generous EMAF donors who have made these grants possible.
*Participation in the Grizzly Den is optional. 

Notes

  • You must be a CAEP member to submit a grant application and to receive grant funds. Click here to join/renew your membership.
  • Proposals submitted to multiple categories (Junior Investigator, EMAF, and QIPS), will only be considered for the lower-valued grant category. Unsuccessful CAEP-SREMI and CAEP-CanVECTOR grant applicants will still be considered for one of the junior investigator grants.
  • The grant competition is only open to residents of Canada.
  • Applications are not blinded for the reviewer.
  • Successful applicants to the 2019/20 and future grant competitions will need to submit their end-of-grant report before being eligible to apply for subsequent grant applications.
  • Funding provisions:
    • A PI can only hold one CAEP grant of any kind at a time, and will become eligible to re-apply once end-of-project reporting is received by CAEP.
    • A PI submitting more than one grant application (in a given year) whose multiple projects are eligible for funding at the $5,000 and $10,000 level will be asked to accept only one grant of their choosing.
    • A PI who is successfully offered a grant at the $5,000 level and is also invited to participate in Grizzly Den for a $10,000 grant will be asked to forfeit the $5,000 grant if they agree to participate in Grizzly Den (N.B. This implies the possibility of receiving no funds from CAEP).
    • CAEP grant money must be received and held by the recipient’s institution and will not be paid to the PI directly.
  • Admissible expenses and use of funds:
    • CAEP financial support cannot be a supplement to other funding sources or be used for meeting registration, travel, publication cost, or equipment purchases (software license excepted).
    • CAEP acknowledges that, given the timing of the grant application process, the projects of some investigators in training may be at various levels of implementation at the time of CAEP grant application. It is reasonable that project-related expenses that already occurred at the time of CAEP grant application could be recovered. This, provided the grant proposal represents a project completely independent of any other already funded project (i.e. CAEP grant costs cannot be covered by any another existing grant), and that the project submitted for funding by CAEP will be initiated and completed in the same academic year as the CAEP submission.

Junior Investigator (including CAEP-SREMI and CAEP-CanVECTOR) Grants - Criteria, Submission, Verification & Scoring

Applicant Criteria

  • The principal investigator (PI) and supervisor must both be current CAEP members at the time of application and when receiving grant funds.
  • The PI must be less than five years beyond date of completion of residency training in EM (FRCPC-EM or CCFP-EM).
  • Individuals in training can also apply as long as they meet one of these criteria:
    • Current emergency medicine resident (FRCPC-EM, CCFP-EM)
    • Current emergency medicine fellow in clinical, research, or subspecialty training* (see list of qualifying fellowships below)
    • Current graduate student (PhD or MSc in a related field) after completing an EM residency

*List of qualifying fellowships (EM subspecialty areas): Any fellowship training outside of this list requires special mention and justification for consideration in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.

Clinical Emergency Medicine
Education
Emergency Medical Services/Transport Medicine
Ethics
Global/International Health
Health Administration
Palliative Care
Pediatric Emergency Medicine
Research
Sports Medicine
Toxicology
Trauma
Ultrasound

Submission Instructions

  • Proposals are limited to 2000 words total: structured research abstract (250 words), research in depth (1500 words), and timeline and impact  (250 words).
  • The title and attachments are not included in the word count.
  • A cover letter is not required.
The submission process includes the following sections:
  • Title: Enter the title in sentence case. Do not put the title in quotation marks.
  • Structured abstract: Suggested headings include: Introduction, Research Question, Rationale, Methods, Impact, etc. (adjusted according to your topic).
  • Research in-depth:Required headings: Introduction, Rationale, Research Question, and Methods.
  • Timeline and impact: Required headings: Timeline, Impact of the Proposed Study, Future Plans (including Knowledge Translation)
  • Appendices, references, budget & justification, and data justification tool:
    • Include all the materials in a single file for the upload.
    • Excessive appendices (beyond references, budget & justification, and data justification tool) may not be reviewed.
    • Data justification tool: how you plan to analyze the data (i.e. is your sample size large enough to answer your questions). This section may not apply to all types of studies.
  • Tables and graphs: Upload as attachments with specific labels for cross-referencing.
  • CV of the primary investigator
  • Letter of support: 
    • PIs who are junior investigators (residents and fellows) –  include a letter of support from your supervisor (e.g. Director of the Residency Program, Director of the Fellowship Program or Graduate supervisor when appropriate) confirming training status, and training start and stop dates. For PIs without a supervisor, a letter of support from a colleague speaking to your ability to complete the project can be included.
    • PIs who are faculty members – include a letter of support from the Department Director of the ED or the EM academic lead for the University (Chair, Division Director, Chief) verifying that you have sufficient training, infrastructure, time and resources to complete the project.
  • List of all applicants describing their roles and time commitments on the project, starting with the principal investigator

—–

Submission Limit: There is no limit for the number of unique grant proposals that a person may submit. Note that if one proposal is submitted to multiple categories (Junior Investigator, EMAF, and QIPS), it will only be considered for the lower-valued grant category. Unsuccessful CAEP-SREMI and CAEP-CanVECTOR grant applicants will still be considered for one of the junior investigator grants.

Submitters: If you are submitting on behalf of the PI please do not include your name in the author list.

Title and Body: The title should be entered in sentence case, without abbreviations or quotation marks. For example: INCORRECT: “A Comprehensive Study to Reduce Falls in the ED.”, CORRECT: A comprehensive study to reduce falls in the emergency department

Authors: Supervisors should not be entered as a co-author.

Applicant Verification

  • Relevant start and stop dates (i.e., undergraduate MD, residency, fellowship) must be included in the application.
  • Applicants can specify parental or sick leaves that may extend their eligibility or alter their anticipated start and stop dates.
  • A letter of support is required from the PI’s supervisor (e.g. director of the residency program, director of the fellowship program etc.) confirming training status, and training start and stop dates.
  • Area of fellowship training must be mentioned in the letter of support from the fellowship director. Any fellowship training outside of the list* requires special mention and justification for consideration in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.
  • Applicants who misrepresent their eligibility or whose membership type is not accurate, will be disqualified.

Review & Scoring Process

  • Each grant proposal is assigned to three reviewers (outside of their university or hospital).
  • Assigned reviewers can declare a conflict of interest to have the proposal re-assigned.
  • Proposals submitted to multiple categories (Junior Investigator, EMAF, and QIPS), will only be considered for the lower-valued grant category. Unsuccessful CAEP-SREMI and CAEP-CanVECTOR grant applicants will still be considered for one of the junior investigator grants.
  • The reviewers are given approximately 2 weeks to review all their assigned proposal using standardized method-specific review criteria.
  • Once all of the reviews are submitted, the scores are ranked using the average score from the three reviews.
  • The top proposals by rank are further reviewed by the Research Committee Chair and the two other committee members to ensure that the applicants are appropriately qualified.
  • CAEP reserves the right to limit the number of grants offered in a given category if too few applications meet a minimal quality standard (to be determined by consensus annually).
  • Notifications will be emailed to the PI by January 31, 2020.
Reviewers consider:
  • Relevance to emergency medicine
  • Methodological quality
  • Originality of the topic and methodology
  • Level of training and strength of the team
  • Ability to complete the proposed study

Click here to download the scoring matrix.

EMAF Grants - Criteria, Submission, Verification & Scoring

Applicant Criteria

  • The principal investigator (PI) and supervisor (if the PI is not an emergency medicine faculty member) must both be current CAEP members at the time of application and when receiving grant funds.
  • The PI can be an emergency medicine faculty member, or in collaboration with an emergency medicine faculty member supervisor, the PI can be:
    • An emergency medicine resident (FRCPC-EM or CCFP-EM)
    • Current emergency medicine fellow in clinical, research, or subspecialty training* (see list of qualifying fellowships below)
    • An emergency medicine-related allied health provider (e.g. emergency nurse, paramedic, emergency research staff, etc.)
    • A medical student

*List of qualifying fellowships (EM subspecialty areas): Any fellowship training outside of this list requires special mention and justification for consideration in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.

Clinical Emergency Medicine
Education
Emergency Medical Services/Transport Medicine
Ethics
Global/International Health
Health Administration
Palliative Care
Pediatric Emergency Medicine
Research
Sports Medicine
Toxicology
Trauma
Ultrasound
 *Area of fellowship training must be mentioned in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.

Submission Instructions

  • Proposals are limited to 2000 words total: structured research abstract (250 words), research in depth (1500 words), and timeline and impact  (250 words).
  • The title and attachments are not included in the word count.
  • A cover letter is not required.
The submission process includes the following sections:
  • Title: Enter the title in sentence case. Do not put the title in quotation marks.
  • Structured abstract: Suggested headings include: Introduction, Research Question, Rationale, Methods, Impact, etc. (adjusted according to your topic).
  • Research in-depth:Required headings: Introduction, Rationale, Research Question, and Methods.
  • Timeline and impact: Required headings: Timeline, Impact of the Proposed Study, Future Plans (including Knowledge Translation)
  • Appendices, references, budget & justification, and data justification tool:
    • Include all the materials in a single file for the upload.
    • Excessive appendices (beyond references, budget & justification, and data justification tool) may not be reviewed.
    • Data justification tool: how you plan to analyze the data (i.e. is your sample size large enough to answer your questions). This section may not apply to all types of studies.
  • Tables and graphs: Upload as attachments with specific labels for cross-referencing.
  • CV of the primary investigator
  • Letter of support: 
    • PIs who are junior investigators (residents and fellows) –  include a letter of support from your supervisor (e.g. Director of the Residency Program, Director of the Fellowship Program or Graduate supervisor when appropriate) confirming training status, and training start and stop dates. For PIs without a supervisor, a letter of support from a colleague speaking to your ability to complete the project can be included.
    • PIs who are faculty members – include a letter of support from the Department Director of the ED or the EM academic lead for the University (Chair, Division Director, Chief) verifying that you have sufficient training, infrastructure, time and resources to complete the project.
  • List of all applicants describing their roles and time commitments on the project, starting with the principal investigator

—–

Submission Limit: There is no limit for the number of unique grant proposals that a person may submit. Note that if one proposal is submitted to multiple categories (Junior Investigator, EMAF, and QIPS), it will only be considered for the lower-valued grant category.

Submitters: If you are submitting on behalf of the PI please do not include your name in the author list.

Title and Body: The title should be entered in sentence case, without abbreviations or quotation marks. For example: INCORRECT: “A Comprehensive Study to Reduce Falls in the ED.”, CORRECT: A comprehensive study to reduce falls in the emergency department

Authors: Supervisors should not be entered as a co-author.

Applicant Verification

  • Relevant start and stop dates (i.e., undergraduate MD, residency, fellowship, appointment at the level of assistant professor) must be included in the application.
  • Applicants can specify parental or sick leaves that may extend their eligibility or alter their anticipated start and stop dates.
  • If the PI is a faculty member, a letter of support is required from the department director of the ED or the EM academic lead for the university (chair, division director, chief) verifying that the PI has sufficient training, infrastructure, time and resources to complete the project.
  • If the PI is not an emergency medicine faculty member, a letter of support is required from the PI’s supervisor (e.g. director of the residency program, director of the fellowship program, etc.) confirming training status, and training start and stop dates.
  • If the PI is an allied health member, a letter of support is required from the department director verifying that the PI has sufficient training, infrastructure, time and resources to complete the project.
  • Area of fellowship training must be mentioned in the letter of support from the fellowship director. Any fellowship training outside of the list requires special mention and justification for consideration in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.
  • Applicants who misrepresent their eligibility or whose membership type is not accurate, will be disqualified.

Review & Scoring Process

  • Each grant proposal is assigned to three reviewers (outside of their university or hospital).
  • Assigned reviewers can declare a conflict of interest to have the proposal re-assigned.
  • Proposals submitted to multiple categories (Junior Investigator, EMAF, and QIPS), will only be considered for the lower-valued grant category.
  • The reviewers are given approximately 2 weeks to review all their assigned proposal using standardized method-specific review criteria.
  • Once all of the reviews are submitted, the scores are ranked using the average score from the three reviews.
  • The top proposals by rank are further reviewed by the Research Committee Chair and the two other committee members to ensure that the applicants are appropriately qualified.
  • The top three runners-up in the EMAF grant category will be invited to participate in the CAEP 2020 Grizzly Den competition in Ottawa (participation in the Grizzly Den is optional).
  • CAEP reserves the right to limit the number of grants offered in a given category if too few applications meet a minimal quality standard (to be determined by consensus annually).
  • Notifications will be emailed to the PI by January 31, 2020. Those who qualify for the Grizzly Den will be notified separately.
Reviewers consider:
  • Relevance to emergency medicine
  • Methodological quality
  • Originality of the topic and methodology
  • Level of training and strength of the team
  • Ability to complete the proposed study

Click here to download the scoring matrix.

QIPS Grants - Criteria, Submission, Verification & Scoring

Applicant Criteria

  • The principal investigator (PI) and supervisor (if the PI is not an emergency medicine faculty member) must both be current CAEP members at the time of application and when receiving grant funds.
  • The PI can be an emergency medicine faculty member, or in collaboration with an emergency medicine faculty member supervisor, the PI can be:
    • An emergency medicine resident (FRCPC-EM or CCFP-EM)
    • Current emergency medicine fellow in clinical, research, or subspecialty training* (see list of qualifying fellowships below)
    • An emergency medicine-related allied health provider (e.g. emergency nurse, paramedic, emergency research staff, etc.)
    • A medical student

*List of qualifying fellowships (EM subspecialty areas): Any fellowship training outside of this list requires special mention and justification for consideration in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.

Clinical Emergency Medicine
Education
Emergency Health Services/Transport Medicine
Ethics
Global/International Health
Health Administration/Leadership
Palliative Care
Patient Safety
Pediatric Emergency Medicine
Public Health
Quality Improvement
Research
Sports Medicine
Toxicology
Trauma
Ultrasound
 *Area of fellowship training must be mentioned in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.

Submission Instructions

  • Proposals are limited to 2000 words total, including structured abstract (maximun 250 words). The title and attachments are not included in the word count.
  • A cover letter is not required.
  • Projects submitted for the QIPS Grant Competition must utilize QI methodology. Projects that involve the study of the effectiveness of a single intervention or studies on the topic of quality/safety utilizing clinical epidemiology or research methods will not be considered.
  • Projects must be based on a defined problem statement and have the primary purpose of improving the stated problem. They must include an improvement aim and show plans for an iterative approach (e.g., using Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, and/or the Model for Improvement), for repeated data sampling and measurements, and for an evaluation consistent with QI principles (e.g., run or control charts).
  • CAEP expects that authors follow any local guidelines for ethical review of QI projects, and that they seek Research Ethics Board (REB) approval or proof of exemption from their local institution’s REB Board.
  • A letter from the project’s sponsor is required (more details below).
  • For additional details on features of high-quality QI methodology, refer to the SQUIRE 2.0 Guidelines.
The submission process includes the following sections:
  • Title: Enter the title in sentence case. Do not put the title in quotation marks.
  • Structured abstract: Headings must include: Background/Rationale, Planned Methodology, Expected Results, and Impact.
  • QIPS project in-depth: Recommended subheadings (which mirror the evaluation matrix projects will be evaluated against) include:
    • Problem and Background: What is the quality gap/problem that you are trying to improve, and how do you know that there is an issue at all (locally or generally)?
    • Rationale/Importance and Benefits: Why is this an important problem to tackle (e.g., frequency & relevance to emergency medicine), and what are the expected benefits for patients and/or providers?
    • Aim Statement: What is the aim of this project? (E.g., what are you trying to achieve, by how much, and by when?)
    • REB, Scope and Infrastructure/Support/Context: What are the things (people, tasks, processes) that this project will and will not touch on, how feasible is it within the local context, and is Research Ethics Board (REB) approval/exemption necessary?
    • Measures & Evaluation Plan: What is/are the measure(s) that you will track, and what is your data/evaluation plan?
    • QI Methods and/or Change Ideas Planned: Which QI methods have you/will you utilize in this project, and what are your potential change theory/ideas (if already known)?
    • Milestones and Timelines: What are the milestones and timelines for this project, and how likely are they to be feasible/successful?
    • Project Leader, Sponsor, and Stakeholders: Who are the team leader(s), sponsor(s) and members, what will be their respective responsibilities and how well-prepared are they for success? How will stakeholders, including front-line healthcare providers and patients/families, be engaged in the development of tests of change and evaluation of impact?
    • Resources: What resources will you require – human, financial (please include in the budget appendix), equipment, authorizations and permissions, etc.?
  • Appendices: This section must include:
    • Budget and justification
    • References
  • Tables, figures and graphs: Upload as attachments with specific labels for cross-referencing.
  • CV of the primary investigator  
  • Letter(s) of support: 
    • In order to be successful, QI projects often necessitate the contribution of many stakeholders and champions, and the support (financial, clout or otherwise) of an executive sponsor that can open doors and ensure buy-in. As such, QIPS Grants require a letter of support of the project’s executive sponsor. Depending on the specific project, this person could be the Department/Division Chair/Chief, a relevant nursing manager, or a hospital Vice-President. This letter should comment on whether you have sufficient training, infrastructure, support, time and resources to conduct the project.
    • PIs who are junior investigators (residents and fellows) –  include a letter of support from your supervisor (e.g. Director of the Residency Program, Director of the Fellowship Program or Graduate supervisor when appropriate) confirming training status, and training start and stop dates. 
  • List of all applicants describing their roles and time commitments on the project, starting with the principal investigator

—–

Submission Limit: There is no limit for the number of unique grant proposals that a person may submit. Note that if one proposal is submitted to multiple categories (Junior Investigator, EMAF, and QIPS), it will only be considered for the lower-valued grant category.

Submitters: If you are submitting on behalf of the PI please do not include your name in the author list.

Title and Body: The title should be entered in sentence case, without abbreviations or quotation marks. For example: INCORRECT: “A Comprehensive Study to Reduce Falls in the ED.”, CORRECT: A comprehensive study to reduce falls in the emergency department

Authors: Supervisors should not be entered as a co-author.

Applicant Verification

  • Relevant start and stop dates (i.e., undergraduate MD, residency, fellowship, appointment at the level of assistant professor) must be included in the application.
  • Applicants can specify parental or sick leaves that may extend their eligibility or alter their anticipated start and stop dates.
  • If the PI is a faculty member, a letter of support is required from the department director of the ED or the EM academic lead for the university (chair, division director, chief) verifying that the PI has sufficient training, infrastructure, time and resources to complete the project.
  • If the PI is not an emergency medicine faculty member, a letter of support is required from the PI’s supervisor (e.g. director of the residency program, director of the fellowship program, etc.) confirming training status, and training start and stop dates.
  • If the PI is an allied health member, a letter of support is required from the department director verifying that the PI has sufficient training, infrastructure, time and resources to complete the project.
  • Area of fellowship training must be mentioned in the letter of support from the fellowship director. Any fellowship training outside of the list requires special mention and justification for consideration in the required letter of support from the fellowship director.
  • Applicants who misrepresent their eligibility or whose membership type is not accurate, will be disqualified.

Review & Scoring Process

  • Each grant proposal is assigned to three reviewers (outside of their university or hospital).
  • Assigned reviewers can declare a conflict of interest to have the proposal re-assigned.
  • Proposals submitted to multiple categories (Junior Investigator, EMAF, and QIPS), will only be considered for the lower-valued grant category.
  • The reviewers are given approximately 2 weeks to review all their assigned proposal using standardized method-specific review criteria.
  • In their evaluation of the QIPS Grants, the reviewers will consider all documents submitted, with an explicit emphasis on the items listed in the “QIPS project in depth” section.
  • Once all of the reviews are submitted, the scores are ranked using the average score from the three reviews.
  • The top proposals by rank are further reviewed by the Research Committee Chair and the two other committee members to ensure that the applicants are appropriately qualified.
  • CAEP reserves the right to limit the number of grants offered in a given category if too few applications meet a minimal quality standard (to be determined by consensus annually).
  • Notifications will be emailed to the PI by January 31, 2020.
Reviewers consider:
  • Problem and background
  • Rationale/importance and benefits
  • Aim statement
  • REB, scope and infrastructure/support/context
  • Measures & evaluation plan
  • QI methods and/or change ideas planned
  • Milestones and timelines
  • Project leader & sponsor, and stakeholders
  • Resources/budget
  • Overall impression and impact

Click here to download the scoring matrix.

End-of-Project Reporting to CAEP

  • Within 27 months of receiving CAEP funding (i.e. within 90 days following the completion of a 2-year project), recipients (and/or their supervisor) are expected to provide a financial report to CAEP demonstrating the use of funds and return any unused funds to CAEP.
  • This end-of-project report will also specify status of the project including presentation of any abstract of manuscript in preparation.
  • Recipients will not be eligible for future funding until such end-of-project report is received by CAEP.
  • Recipients intending to apply for additional CAEP funding in a following year can submit their end-of-project report ahead of the 27-month timeline.

Questions? Contact Kelly Wyatt (kwyatt@caep.ca)