• Applicants must NOT be university academics with a research history and a research staff (applicants with an academic appointment to teach on an occasional basis may be eligible).

• At least one of the principal investigator(s) must be an orthopaedic surgeon working in a small Canadian orthopaedic centre both at the time of application and at the award’s receipt.

• At least one of the principal or secondary investigator(s) must be a COA member or associate member in good standing.

• The principal investigator working at a small Canadian centre may have as a mentor an academic from a large Canadian academic centre, but that individual must be an advisor only and not a study investigator. The community hospital applying for the study must be responsible for the vast majority of the patients involved in the study.

• The importance of the question, as judged by peers.

• The quality of the proposal, as judged by peers – for most clinical research this should involve prospective studies with adequate sample size/power calculation, or other rigorous/appropriate epidemiologic evaluation/biostatistics if utilizing regional/provincial/national databases.

• Applicants must be affiliated with institutions or organizations that are registered with Revenue Canada as conducting charitable activities within Canada. Health agencies including hospitals, provincial and municipal government departments and public health units, community groups or associations and non-profit organizations are eligible.

 

Research projects previously funded by the COF will not be considered for an award; that is, research projects will not be funded for linear growth. 

 

Applicants are expected to provide a systematic, logical description of the project or line of research, which demonstrates familiarity with the subject matter, and a carefully formulated plan of implementation. The rationale, the project plan, the methods and procedures to be used, and the mode of analysis to be employed should be clearly outlined. In general terms, the proposal describes the work, proceeding from general theoretical considerations to the specific project, and must include a budget. The budget qualifies the work in terms of personnel, materials, services, or other requirements.

 

In addition to the quality of the proposal, decisions on awards will also take into account:

• The intention that funds are to be awarded to novel short-term (1-2 years) research projects which could include:

  • New investigator starting a novel research project, possibly paired with an experienced team. (This experienced team must not be running the study.)

  • Experienced non-academic community investigator seeking funding for a pilot project. The experienced investigator should be listed as a secondary investigator on the application, and most research projects should be led by a newer investigator.

• Previous awards from the Canadian Orthopaedic Foundation, specifically the CORL Grant, including progress and final reports. (Awards are not intended to provide continuing support for one faculty member or one project; the intention is to fund as many researchers as possible.) When evaluating past performance with these awards, it is recognized that not all research may be entirely successful.

• Timely reporting on previous grants awarded, and responsiveness to COF administrators.

• The probable availability of outside funds and/or resources. This may be a function of the experience of the applicant and their existing resources, the amount of the request, the subject matter, or the nature of the research.  Applicants who appear to be otherwise well funded, and especially those who propose work which closely parallels other sponsored projects, should comment specifically on the circumstances of their application.

• Expected publication, further research or creative opportunities anticipated.

• Finite element models, saw bone models, etc. are unlikely to be funded.

 

If an applicant believes there are special considerations that should be taken into account, these should be noted for the reviewer’s attention.