2006 LEF/NIF Multidisciplinary Assessment Committees membership

Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee (MAC) Membership

 - 2006 MAC Chairs

 - 2006 MAC Members

Quality and experience are the CFI's prime considerations when it selects committee members. In addition, the CFI strives to achieve a reasonable balance in terms of language, gender, region, sector of the economy, field of study, and type of institution.

All Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee (MAC) members and experts involved in the review process signed a confidentiality agreement in which they agreed not to discuss any aspect of any proposal with anyone outside the committee.

In addition, the CFI expects that members of the research community will not contact MAC members to obtain information on committee deliberations. MAC members are instructed not to enter into discussions of any kind - related to the review process or specific projects - with other members of the research community.

Committees have reviewed applications on the basis of the three CFI LEF and NIF criteria: quality of the research and need for the infrastructure, contribution to strengthening the capacity for innovation, and potential benefits to Canada.

Eleven MACs composed of a chair plus 9 to 12 members with broad expertise in research, technology development, research management and the use of research results, were convened to review a total of 487 proposals requesting approximately $1.4 billion from the CFI. MACs met either on August 29, 30 and 31 or on September 12, 13 and 14 and were tasked with making a funding recommendation to the CFI Board of Directors.

Each Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee reviewed different type of projects:

• 5 MACs considered 236 NIF proposals from hospitals, not-for-profit organizations and larger universities (category A);
• 3 MACs considered 155 LEF proposals from hospitals, not-for-profit organizations and larger universities (category A);
• 1 MACs considered 35 LEF proposals from smaller universities (category B: universities receiving less than 1% of federal granting agencies funding);
• 1 MACs considered 40 NIF proposals from smaller universities (category B: universities receiving less than 1% of federal granting agencies funding); and
• 1 MAC considered 21 LEF and NIF proposals from colleges (category C).