CCS Challenge Grants

Seven expert review committees will be assembled to review the full applications. Applicants will be asked to select 1st and 2nd choices for desired panels as part of the abstract registration and application process, however CCS reserves the right to assign an application to whichever panel possesses the necessary expertise to review the proposal. After the relevance review process, panel topics may be re-organized to better accommodate the invited applications.

The expert review committees will be composed of diverse (gender, geography, career stage, race) scientists, end-users/decision-makers and patient/survivor/caregiver reviewers who, collectively, possess relevant expertise and experience to review the submitted applications (see review criteria below for more information).

Please review the application guide prior to submitting your abstract.

Abstract registration is mandatory. Abstract submissions will undergo a relevance review process to ensure alignment with the Challenge Grants program (i.e. clear identification of a challenge to be addressed that is demonstrably meaningful to people affected by or at risk of cancer), and will help to inform the composition of the review panels. A maximum of one application per Principal Investigator is permitted in this competition (applicants may be listed as Co-PIs on multiple applications).

Abstract registration includes:

1. Applicant and (known) team details (Principal Investigator (PI), Co-PIs, Co-Applicants, Additional Authors, Patients/Survivors/Caregivers, Implementers/Decision-makers, Collaborators etc.) (team members may be added at the full application stage)
2. A Scientific abstract that describes the rationale (including ‘how’ the project is meaningful to people affected by cancer), objectives/aims, methods, and anticipated results and potential impact of the project (4200 characters, spaces included)
3. A Public Summary that describes (in plain language understandable to a non-scientist) why this work is important to people affected by cancer (rationale); the goal or purpose of the project (objectives/aims); the research plan (methods); and the anticipated results and potential impact of the project (2000 characters, spaces included)
4. A Relevance Statement that clearly articulates the Challenge to be addressed and what makes it important to solve (including, but not limited to ‘how’ it is meaningful to people affected by cancer). For example, how have affected individuals/communities contributed to your research design? How do you know that this work has value for those whose lives you are aiming to impact? What cost or resource burden could be solved if this project (and its downstream impacts) were successful? (2500 characters, spaces included)
5. Keywords
6. Panel recommendation
7. Suggested reviewers
8. Research tracking information

Please consult the abstract registration guide for additional details. Eligible abstract registrations will be invited to submit a full application. Substantive changes that significantly alter the overall goals and aims of the proposal relative to the Abstract Registration are not permitted.

Please review the application guide prior to submitting your application. When preparing the full application, the following additional information is required:

1. Team member CVs or Letters of Support
2. A detailed scientific proposal including goal(s)/hypothesis and aims of the project, supporting evidence/rationale/theoretical framework, experimental/research design, methods, analysis (including alternative approaches and mitigation of risks), anticipated results and potential impact of the research. Describe the data management plan (how data will be collected, documented, protected, and shared, with consideration for the First Nations Principles of Ownership, Control, Access and Possession (OCAP) where relevant). While sex, gender and other dimensions of diversity, as well as patient and stakeholder engagement are called out below, these should be evident within the research plan where relevant (21,000 characters, spaces included). An additional 2 pages of figures/tables/charts and associated legends are permitted (and may be embedded in the proposal as images without affecting character count).
3. A description of how sex and/or gender and/or other dimensions of diversity and their intersectionalities have been factored into the research plan through to dissemination of results/next steps towards implementation (where relevant).
4. A description of knowledge translation/mobilization activities - both for the current project, as well as describing what the next steps towards (eventual) impact could be should the project aims be achieved. This could include engagement of patients, survivors, caregivers, clinicians and other practitioners or end-users to ensure utility of the proposed solution, utilization and/or uptake of project results as relevant (depending on the stage of the research proposed). Public and/or patient engagement strategies (including co-design where appropriate) are encouraged. Equitable access to results should be considered (as relevant).
5. A draft Terms of Reference (ToR) (word/pdf) inclusive of all team members, and detailing how all members of the team have been and will be integrated into the work proposed (including barriers to participation and how these will be addressed), decision-making (and conflict resolution) process, evaluation of engagement (where relevant), and a description (or descriptions) of the research environment(s). Consideration of equity, diversity and inclusion principles in the composition of the research team must be evident. It is expected that all team members will have reviewed, contributed to, and agreed to the ToR as submitted, however it is expected that the ToR will change throughout the lifetime of the project.
6. A detailed budget and justification providing rationale for the requested consumables, personnel, and equipment associated with the research project. Details must include the number of personnel required to complete the work, a description of their experience and/or education level, and their time commitment to the project. Consult SPOR guidance, CCS policy or contact CCS for additional information on remuneration eligibility.

Two scores – Scientific Merit and Relevance and Potential Impact – are averaged together to create a final score upon which applications are ranked. Scientific Merit includes an assessment of the Research Strategy, Team Composition, and Environment where the research will take place. The Relevance and Potential Impact score considers relevance of the project to the funding opportunity, including alignment with CCS’s Research Strategy goals, meaningful patient and stakeholder engagement, commitment to equity, diversity and inclusivity, knowledge translation and mobilization, and the potential for the research, if successful (and used/applied), to have an impact on cancer

Evaluation scales can be viewed here.

All grant recipients must submit annual progress reports and statements of account throughout the grant (and 2 years post-grant for progress reports). Principal Investigators will be emailed instructions about completing the report in our online system (EGrAMS). Submission of these reports is mandatory. Failure to submit the required reports will result in the future installments of a grant being withheld.