MUHC Internal Grant Review

Internal Scientific Grant Review for grants submitted for peer reviewed funding from investigators at the MUHC (Montreal General Hospital and Royal Victoria Hospital sites)

 

Coordinator: Nicole Bernard, Ph.D.

e-mail: Nicole [dot] bermard [at] mcgill [dot] ca

Tel. : (514) 924-1934 (x-44584)

 

Purpose: To provide orientation and mentoring for investigators at the MUHC. To increase the success rate for applicants submitting grants for peer-reviewed funding.

 

Who should have their grants undergo internal scientific review: It is expected that all new researchers and scholarship applicants at the MUHC (MGH and RVH sites) submitting proposal to the major agencies submit their applications for internal scientific review.  All other investigators at the MUHC (MGH and RVH sites) submitting proposal to the major agencies are encouraged to take advantage of this opportunity to have their applications pre-reviewed by their peers.

 

Note: This should not be confused with the administrative review for CIHR grant applications which is for stylistic format only as per CIHR regulations (i.e. signatures, required pages etc). The administrative review occurs in the last week prior to electronic signature.

 

Instructions for investigators submitting new grant and/or scholarship applications

  1. log in to Http://muhc.gsubmit.net.
  2. First time users must set a login and password.
  3. Follow instruction on the site to upload submissions.
  4. Submissions must be received 3 weeks prior to the granting agency deadline
  5. Reviewers will be assigned and given 1 week to read the application.
  6. One week before the agency deadline the applicant will set up a meeting with reviewers to discuss ways to improve the application.
  7. Letters of invitation will be sent to MUHC investigators according to the subject of the submission requesting that they review the application that has been submitted.
  8. Because the timeline is short a speedy reply as to whether you are or are not able to help with the review is appreciated.
  9. Reviewers in conflict of interest with the applicant (i.e. applying to the same competition, same committee) would be expected to refuse the invitation to review.
  10. The review process consists of reading and evaluating the proposal, meeting the candidate in person (if possible along with the 2nd reviewer).
  11. The reviewer will be asked to complete a check list on the website. This latter is the proof needed that the process was completed.

Instructions for reviewers

 

Note: The whole review process must be kept confidential.

Time line of the Scientific Review

  • 3-weeks prior to deadline of the agency: applicant uploads his/her application for review
  • Internal scientific review coordinator solicits reviewers (can take up to a week to find available and willing reviewers)
  • Reviewer has one week to review the proposal and then meet with the applicant in person (the meeting is organized by the applicant)