The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) is eliminating its investigator and senior investigator awards, and many researchers are shocked by the sudden change.
Mark Bisby, CIHR's vice-president of research, says the decision was prompted by budgetary concerns. “This was a tough decision. To cut programs with 20- or 30-year histories is never easy, especially when those programs have such proud and distinguished reputations.”
Researchers consider the change significant. They say the awards represented an important revenue stream for them, and many wonder how they will secure time for research.
Although the awards have been around for decades, the body that distributes them is relatively new. CIHR was launched in 2000, and has seen annual budget increases since then. In fiscal year 2002/03 its grants and awards budget was $527 million, and this jumped by 10%, to $580 million, in 2003/04.
Despite the growth, CIHR has faced a perennial problem: the inherent conflict between a system based on annual budgets and research funding that is spread over several years. This means that most of the CIHR's budget is already locked into long-term commitments.
Consistent budget increases have allowed the agency to fund programs beyond established obligations, but this appears likely to change. “If there is a budget increase [next year], it may not come early enough in the fiscal year for us to apply it to our major grants and awards competitions,” Bisby explained.
This year CIHR has about $170 million in uncommitted funds, and without a budget increase it predicts it will have $70 million next year. As a result, the investigator and senior investigator awards were eliminated, and about half of the money earmarked for those programs will be funnelled into new investigator salary awards. “We are continuing to fund new investigators,” Bisby said. “We are just getting out of the senior levels, which are very well covered by the Canada Research Chairs.”
The federal government has allocated $900 million to support the establishment of 2000 new research chairs by 2005. The program is governed by a steering committee of presidents from the CIHR, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, as well as the deputy minister of Industry Canada. In the program, universities are granted a specific number of chairs, which correspond to their federal funding structure.
Bisby argues that the cancelled awards have been duplicated by the chairs program and were an obvious choice for “the chopping block.” He also says the chairs program is more lucrative, offering an average of $200 000 a year per researcher, compared with $70 000 from CIHR. “Why are we still providing career awards when there is this separate federal program which can do it much better?” asks Bisby.
As well, the success rate for applicants to the cancelled programs was expected to fall below the 10% level, given the number of applications and the likelihood of no budget increase. “There comes a point where you waste an awful lot of people's time by running competitions that you can't really support very well.”
Dr. David Naylor, dean of medicine at the University of Toronto and a CIHR governor, opposed the decision. “I know these awards are competitive, but as a dean of medicine I remain concerned that the CIHR has retreated too far from personnel support, leaving the field to the [chairs] program.”
And Dr. Brian Hennen, dean of medicine at the University of Manitoba, says there is no guarantee the chairs program will be preserved after 2005. Even if it is maintained, Hennen says the CIHR awards are an important contribution. “These programs really nourish the scientific community and it is a mistake to discontinue them.
“This decision will make it increasingly difficult to develop career salary support in this country and will be an incentive for people to look south of the border.”
Bisby argues that the investigator awards were never meant to be a career support system. He notes that of the 44 senior investigator awards offered last year, only 4 recipients had previously held a CIHR award. “Picking up a CIHR salary award if you already have one is a remote possibility, and the probability of getting a Canada Research Chair is probably somewhat better,” he says.
Hennen disagrees. “The CIHR awards need to be there to offer scientists more options to continue to grow and develop.”
And so does Dr. Peter St George-Hyslop, a past recipient whose pioneering work in the identification of genes causing inherited forms of Alzheimer's disease has revolutionized the field. He is skeptical the Canada Research Chairs program will be able to fill the void and echoed concerns the program may not be renewed after 2005. “CIHR salary awards, whether they are new, senior or distinguished, attract the crème de la crème of Canadian biomedical science. These are the people you can't afford to lose.”
Denis Croux, director of operations for the Canada Research Chairs, says concerns about the program being discontinued are unfounded. Croux has “confirmation the intent is the [chairs] will be funded on a continuing basis.”
CIHR career awards are granted to individual researchers, but the chairs are awarded to universities. The role of the institution is therefore much greater in the chairs program, and researchers are unable to transfer the award should they relocate.
Bisby says there's always a possibility that program changes will be reversed. “My interpretation of the governing council's decision was that this is permanent, but it can always go back and revisit things. I think the reaction to some of these changes will probably prompt a re-examination. And that's perfectly appropriate.” — Allison Gandey, CMAJ