2017 REPORT ON RESULTS An annual summary of project outputs and outcomes

Transcription

1 2017 REPORT ON RESULTS An annual summary of project outputs and outcomes

2 ABOUT THE CANADA FOUNDATION FOR INNOVATION Created by the Government of Canada in 1997, the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) strives to build our nation s capacity to undertake world-class research and technology development to benefit Canadians. The CFI s expected results are to enhance the capacity of institutions to: attract and retain the world s top research talent; train the next generation of researchers; enable researchers to undertake world-class research and technology development that lead to social, economic and environmental benefits for Canada; and support private-sector innovation and commercialization. Since its creation, the CFI has committed more than $7.7 billion in support of 10,081 projects at 148 research institutions in 71 municipalities across Canada (as of October 2017). For more information about the CFI, please visit Innovation.ca. THE REPORT ON RESULTS The purpose of the report on results is to provide a summary of the outputs and outcomes achieved through CFI-funded infrastructure as they relate to the overall objectives of the CFI, based on information provided through annual project progress reports (PPR). The PPR is an online questionnaire which is completed by the project leader and submitted by the host institution. Institutions are required to submit a PPR for each funded project by June 30 each year, for up to five years after the infrastructure becomes operational. The data collected pertains only to the past year (CFI fiscal year April 1 to March 31). Data is self-reported, and not independently verified. For information on the composition of the 2017 PPR sample, see the Appendix. Page 2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Researcher attraction...4 Researcher retention...5 Trainees using infrastructure...6 Quality of training environment...7 Highly qualified personnel employment...8 Operation and maintenance...9 Infrastructure quality and useful life...10 Infrastructure use...11 Sharing research results...12 Productive collaborations...13 Research agreements...14 From research to innovation...15 New jobs...16 A range of benefits...17 Users of research outcomes...18 Challenges...19 Appendix...20 Page 3

4 RESEARCHER ATTRACTION Among the 188 newly recruited project leaders, 97% indicated that CFI-funded infrastructure positively influenced their decision to join their institution. Nearly 60% of new recruits (of Canadian or non-canadian citizenship) were in foreign countries at the time of their hiring, suggesting that CFI-funded infrastructure contributed to attracting international talent and internationally trained Canadian talent. New recruits that were already in Canada (41%) came from all sectors but were predominantly from academia. Canada 77 (41%) Foreign countries 111 (59%) SECTORS CITIZENSHIP University/ college/ research hospital 67 (87%) Other public 3 (4%) Private 4 (5%) Non-profit 3 (4%) Foreign 47 (42%) Canadian 64 (58%) Page 4 ATTRACTING AND RETAINING WORLD-CLASS RESEARCHERS

5 RESEARCHER RETENTION 95% of project leaders indicated that CFI-funded infrastructure was important in their decision to remain at their institution. Infrastructure funding helped retain researchers from all disciplines. 100% 88 Researchers retained by area of application 80% 60% 436 Science 17% (254) Social sciences & humanities 7% (105) Engineering 19% (293) % of projects 40% 1,086 20% Environment 9% (134) 0% Contribution to researcher retention Health 48% (736) Not at all important Somewhat important Very important ATTRACTING AND RETAINING WORLD-CLASS RESEARCHERS Page 5

6 TRAINEES USING INFRASTRUCTURE 97% of project leaders reported that CFI-funded infrastructure was a key resource for the next generation of researchers. 25,701 postdoctoral fellows and higher education students had the opportunity to expand their research skills using CFI-funded infrastructure. Of those, 54% used the infrastructure for the first time in ,721 2,142 Postdoctoral fellows 100 first-time users 100 repeat users 3,073 5,295 Doctoral students 3,415 2,881 Master s students 5,701 1,473 Undergraduate students Page 6 DEVELOPING HIGHLY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL

7 QUALITY OF TRAINING ENVIRONMENT 93% of project leaders credited their CFI-funded infrastructure with having a high or very high impact on the quality of the training environment. The data is relatively consistent across all areas of application except social sciences and humanities where ratings are slightly lower. TOTAL Engineering Area of application Environment Health Science Social sciences & humanities 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Impact on the quality of the training environment (% of projects) Very high High Medium Low/very low DEVELOPING HIGHLY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL Page 7

8 HIGHLY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL EMPLOYMENT A total of 1,997 postdoctoral fellows and graduate students using the infrastructure last year completed their training and moved into the workforce. Among them, 80% (1,601) secured employment in Canada, the majority (58%) of whom joined the private sector. 1, (58%) 163 Postdoctoral fellows Doctoral students Master s students # of trainees (25%) (17%) Private University/ college/ research hospital Public/ Non-profit Sector of employment in Canada Page 8 DEVELOPING HIGHLY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL

9 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 87% of project leaders reported that they had both adequate financial and human resources for the operation and maintenance of their CFI-funded infrastructure. Diverse funding sources, including research contracts and user fees, contribute to the sustainability of the infrastructure. 1,200 1, Grants or awards # of projects 600 Revenues CFI Institutional (Infrastructure funds Operating Fund) Federal gov t Provincial gov t Foreign gov t Source of funding Municipal gov t Research contracts User/ Consulting service fees CAPACITY FOR WORLD-CLASS RESEARCH Page 9

10 INFRASTRUCTURE QUALITY AND USEFUL LIFE The quality of CFI-funded infrastructure was highly rated overall, with 88% of highly specialized research equipment reported as state-of-the-art. 100% 80% Infrastructure quality Obsolete Useful State-of-the-art % of projects 60% 40% 1, % % Highly specialized Non-specialized/ research standard research equipment equipment Computing hardware or software Research space Building(s) Remaining useful life (years) Page 10 CAPACITY FOR WORLD-CLASS RESEARCH

11 INFRASTRUCTURE USE 86% of projects leaders reported that their CFI-funded infrastructure was used to maximum capacity. Overall, 17,540 researchers (excluding students, postdoctoral fellows and technical and professional personnel) advanced their research using CFI-funded infrastructure. The majority of international infrastructure users were from the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany. INSIDE INSTITUTION 7,863 users Local 2,272 users Provincial 1,613 users National 2,046 users International 3,746 users OUTSIDE INSTITUTION 9,677 users TOTAL 17,540 users CAPACITY FOR WORLD-CLASS RESEARCH Page 11

12 SHARING RESEARCH RESULTS Conference, symposium and workshop presentations are the most frequent type of research output reported, closely followed by peer-reviewed publications. The proportion of projects reporting the various types of outputs varies little by reporting year except for peer-reviewed publications. 100% Reporting year 1 (332 projects) 50% % of projects with at least one output 0% 100% 50% 0% 100% 50% 0% 100% Reporting year 2 (404 projects) Reporting year 3 (427 projects) Reporting year 4 (410 projects) 50% 0% Presentations Peer-reviewed publications Research or technical reports Books Reference or training tools/ materials Internet publishing Type of research outputs Page 12 CAPACITY FOR WORLD-CLASS RESEARCH

13 PRODUCTIVE COLLABORATIONS Researchers have made use of CFI-funded infrastructure to enable external research collaborations that resulted in traditional academic activities and outputs. The most common is conference presentations with 6,570 reported by 751 project leaders. 23% of project leaders reported all four types, suggesting CFI-funded infrastructure enables broad and varied collaboration. 7,000 6,000 6,570 collaborations (751 projects) 5,751 (868) Reporting year 1 Reporting year 2 Reporting year 3 Reporting year 4 5,000 # of collaborations 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,901 (590) 1,952 (621) 1,000 0 Conference presentations Peer-reviewed publications Grant or award applications Funded grants or awards Type of external research collaborations PRODUCTIVE NETWORKS AND COLLABORATION Page 13

14 RESEARCH AGREEMENTS CFI-funded infrastructure facilitated new formal collaborative research agreements in 33% of projects, for a total of 1,852 agreements. The private sector was the most often identified sector for both consultancies and research contracts while the academic sector was most frequently reported for collaborative research. 141 consultancies (7%) 1,031 collaborative research agreements (56%) 680 research contracts (37%) Page 14 PRODUCTIVE NETWORKS AND COLLABORATION

15 FROM RESEARCH TO INNOVATION CFI-funded infrastructure has contributed to the development of new intellectual property and the creation of new companies. 176 project leaders reported at least one of the six types of research outcomes below. 174 provisional patents 88 patents granted 42 projects reported licensing agreements 39 spin-off companies 6 trademarks 1 copyright ECONOMIC GROWTH AND JOB CREATION Page 15

16 NEW JOBS 28% of project leaders reported one or more jobs created due to CFI-funded infrastructure. Just over two-thirds of all jobs created were within the host institutions. 70% of the 361 jobs created outside the institution were in the private sector # of jobs created outside host institution Outside the institution 361 jobs Within institution 840 jobs 0 Private University/ college/ research hospital Other public Non-profit Sector Page 16 ECONOMIC GROWTH AND JOB CREATION

17 A RANGE OF BENEFITS Almost half (47%) of all project leaders reported at least one type of benefit, highlighting the role of CFI-funded infrastructure in enabling research that produces outcomes for Canadians. 500 Among the benefits outlined: New method for delivering drugs to injured nerves 400 Greener road construction using material from recycled tires to replace natural soil # of projects Improved safety through digital technology simulations of high risk jobs for workers in manufacturing New/revised process, model or plan Public education, cultural enrichment New/improved product or service New/revised policy, regulation, bill or program Type of benefits BENEFITS TO CANADIANS Page 17

18 USERS OF RESEARCH OUTCOMES Overall, the most frequently reported user group benefiting from the research results was the private sector, followed by professional or industrial associations and practitioners. Research users varied by area of application of the research; for example engineering projects tended to benefit the private sector most while social sciences and humanities research tended to benefit the general public. TOTAL Engineering Area of application Environment Health Science Social sciences & humanities 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% % by user group Private-sector enterprise/industry Fed., prov., & municipal gov't Public and semi-public org./institution Professional or industrial assoc. & practitioners General public Charitable or non-profit org. & community group Page 18 BENEFITS TO CANADIANS

19 CHALLENGES Two-thirds of the project leaders reported one or more factors limiting the quality and impact of the research enabled by the infrastructure. The most common factor reported was funding support for the direct costs of research. 40% No challenges 573 projects % of projects 30% 20% 1 or more challenges 1,097 projects 10% 0% Funding/ support for direct costs of research Recruitment/ retention of trainees Updating and Acquiring upgrading of equipment equipment/ and becoming space-related operational issues Funding/ support for O&M Administration of CFI contributions Factor limiting research CHALLENGES Page 19

20 COMPOSITION OF THE 2017 PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT SAMPLE 83 institutions 1,670 reports received and included in analysis. # of projects BC 156 AB 57 SK 53 MB 600 ON 440 QC PE 82 NL Reporting year Projects by area of application 47% Health Projects by Fund IF 4% *Fund JELF 95% JELF 95% Other 0.12% Projects by $ awarded 10M-20M 0.12% <200k 71% 4M-10M 1% 1M-4M 2% 200k- 1M 26% NB # of projects NS 20% Engineering 17% Science Year awarded 9% Environment Social sciences & 7% humanities n=1 n=1 n= * Innovation Fund (IF) type: Innovation Fund 2015, Leading Edge Fund 2006/2009/2012 and New Initiatives Fund 2009/2012. John R. Evans Leaders Fund (JELF) type: Leaders Opportunity Fund (LOF) $1M to $2M, LOF CRC, LOF NSERC, LOF SSHRC, JELF Funding for research infrastructure, JELF CRC, JELF-CERC, JELF-NSERC and JELF-SSHRC. Other Funds: Research Hospital Fund-Large Scale Institutional Endeavors and 2013 Digging into Data Challenge. Page 20 APPENDIX

21

22