Barriers to accessibility and issues of ableism in CIHR funding processes

Overview of the scan

CIHR conducted a scan of its funding processes to identify barriers to accessibility for persons with disability and issues of ableism. This work was guided by consultations with CIHR staff, the research community, and the CIHR External Advisory Committee on Accessibility and Systemic Ableism. The barriers identified are summarized below, grouped into five phases that follow the health research funding process at CIHR.

Barriers in the pre-application phase

These are barriers that may be experienced before applying for CIHR funding.

• Communication challenges^{Footnote i}: Information on accessibility and support is often difficult to find, with limited ways to interact with staff. Some web-based materials are inaccessible. Access to language supports, such as sign language interpretation and CART captioning, may be limited.
• Unknown representation of persons with disabilities on advisory and decision-making committees: Self-identification information was not collected until recently to inform the selection of members of advisory or decision-making committees.
• Inaccessible program design (e.g., application materials): General principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion are considered in design and launch of programs, but concepts of universal design may not be used consistently.
• Challenges with eligibility criteria: Persons with disabilities may be disadvantaged by evaluation criteria that considers academic affiliation and time limits on publication records.
• Inconsistent standards for engagement: CIHR does not have consistent standards for engagement and integration of knowledge-holders/users, patient partners, and researchers with lived/living experience across the research process.
• Inconsistent compensation for expertise: CIHR does not consistently use compensation practices for knowledge-holders/users and patient partner participation in research.

Barriers in the application phase

These are barriers that may be experienced when applying for a grant or award.

• Inaccessible application platforms and required documentation: Features of the online application process may not be fully accessible, making it difficult to complete and submit applications to funding opportunities.
• Inconsistent application requirements across funding opportunities: Use of different forms, templates or processes means producing the same or similar information in multiple formats.
• Challenges with requesting an extension: Applicants or potential applicants may not know that they have the option to request an extension. In general, CIHR considers extensions on a case-by-case basis and only upon request.
• Concerns related to disability disclosure: Perceived lack of transparency on how self-identification questionnaire data is used can result in a person being hesitant to indicate they identify as having a disability.

Barriers in CIHR peer review

These are barriers that may be experienced during the evaluation of applications for a grant or award.

• Narrow measures of research excellence: Criteria to evaluate research proposals and the expertise of applicants do not consider the needs of persons with disabilities or the impacts of disability on career trajectories.
• Conscious and unconscious bias: Bias related to disability can include those towards applicants, research areas and inclusion of persons with disabilities as research participants.
• Lack of information for peer reviewers on disability, accessibility, and ableism: CIHR does not provide peer reviewers with explicit instructions or tools on how to take disability into account when evaluating an application.
• Lack of guidelines on accessibility-related budget: CIHR does not provide peer reviewers with explicit instructions or tools related to the assessment of budget requests for accessible equipment and other accommodations.
• Unknown representation of persons with disabilities on peer review committees: In 2022, CIHR launched a self-identification questionnaire for all peer reviewers. The extent to which persons with disabilities have been part of a peer review committee or members of the College of Reviewers is unknown prior to 2022.
• Challenges becoming, and carrying out duties of, a peer reviewer: Application processes to become a peer reviewer (e.g., forms, membership criteria) are not fully accessible. Typical requirements of serving as a CIHR peer reviewer (e.g., volume of work, training requirements) may disadvantage or prevent persons with disabilities from participating.

Barriers in CIHR funding policy

These are barriers that may be experienced related to policies that must be followed once a grant or award application is successful.

• Lack of clarity on cost of accessibility-related needs: CIHR's policies do not provide separate funding for accessibility-related support. This means that researchers with disabilities who might need to purchase supports must produce an equal research output to that of non-disabled researchers but with fewer funds available to conduct the research.
• Ableist approach to disability: While access to medical or disability leaves or accommodations is available, a valid reason for interruptions is required. This often includes providing proof of disability, placing unpaid burden on persons with disabilities.

Next steps

This scan of our health research funding process is the beginning of our work to find and address issues of ableism and barriers to accessibility. In the time between conducting this scan and publishing the findings, CIHR has started to implement actions to address some of these barriers, many of which can be found in the CIHR Accessibility Plan 2023-2026. Additional actions to address these barriers will be developed through our forthcoming in-depth Accessibility and Systemic Ableism Action Plan (to be published in 2024).

Date modified:

2024-12-03