Changes

Examples of projects that took place during previous Hackathons include the following five listed below.  

Examples of projects that took place during previous Hackathons include the following five listed below.  

=== '''OptaPlanner Tool Development''' ===

=== OptaPlanner Tool Development ===

During the Discovery Grant (DG) Competition, there is a need for scheduling the review of approximately 3500 applications by 450 reviewers who change locations every 15 minutes over a 3-week period. Previously, this resulted in a complex, time-consuming, and non-optimized workflow for reviewers and NSERC personnel. This project involved: completing an environmental scan to search for existing tools that would meet their needs, testing several different types of software, obtaining approval for one of them, and customizing the tool for their unique needs. The Hackathon was used to jump-start this project which had previously had several unsuccessful attempts. Following its initial success during the Hackathon, some of the work outlined above continued afterwards.

During the Discovery Grant (DG) Competition, there is a need for scheduling the review of approximately 3500 applications by 450 reviewers who change locations every 15 minutes over a 3-week period. Previously, this resulted in a complex, time-consuming, and non-optimized workflow for reviewers and NSERC personnel. This project involved: completing an environmental scan to search for existing tools that would meet their needs, testing several different types of software, obtaining approval for one of them, and customizing the tool for their unique needs. The Hackathon was used to jump-start this project which had previously had several unsuccessful attempts. Following its initial success during the Hackathon, some of the work outlined above continued afterwards.

This project resulted in the reduction of the amount of time staff spent manually scheduling the DG competition: a savings of approximately 1875 hours annually. Other teams across the agencies have since adopted the tool.

This project resulted in the reduction of the amount of time staff spent manually scheduling the DG competition: a savings of approximately 1875 hours annually. Other teams across the agencies have since adopted the tool.

=== '''Administrative Review Tool''' ===

=== Administrative Review Tool ===

To reduce the administrative burden for applicants when an Alliance application fails its administrative review, the Alliance Grants team wanted to review its competition data and explore alternatives to rejection.  The team used an Ideas Lab to generate potential projects which were approved by management prior to the Hackathon. The Hackathon itself was devoted to analyzing the existing data on rejected applications and brainstorming alternatives to rejection. The work continued following the Hackathon where changes were recommended based on their previous work and community feedback.  

To reduce the administrative burden for applicants when an Alliance application fails its administrative review, the Alliance Grants team wanted to review its competition data and explore alternatives to rejection.  The team used an Ideas Lab to generate potential projects which were approved by management prior to the Hackathon. The Hackathon itself was devoted to analyzing the existing data on rejected applications and brainstorming alternatives to rejection. The work continued following the Hackathon where changes were recommended based on their previous work and community feedback.  

=== '''Modular Webinar Videos''' ===

==== Modular Webinar Videos ====

Prior to this work, a working group from Research Grants and Scholarship (RGS) directorate would prepare slides and a script for webinars, then get it approved and translated. Then comes the lengthy process of preparation and conducting the presentations at fixed times, not always convenient for applicants. There was a need to create reusable material with flexible access by applicants and reviewers for better information and communication outcomes; this is to replace the traditional and long 2-hour webinar sessions.

Prior to this work, a working group from Research Grants and Scholarship (RGS) directorate would prepare slides and a script for webinars, then get it approved and translated. Then comes the lengthy process of preparation and conducting the presentations at fixed times, not always convenient for applicants. There was a need to create reusable material with flexible access by applicants and reviewers for better information and communication outcomes; this is to replace the traditional and long 2-hour webinar sessions.

The outcome was an improved productivity for staff as they stopped preparing for webinars and allocated their time to more productive tasks.  The webinar videos were also more responsive to the needs of the researchers as they provide flexible access to information, when and as needed. As an additional benefit, this work proved especially useful when COVID-19 forced staff to work from home.

The outcome was an improved productivity for staff as they stopped preparing for webinars and allocated their time to more productive tasks.  The webinar videos were also more responsive to the needs of the researchers as they provide flexible access to information, when and as needed. As an additional benefit, this work proved especially useful when COVID-19 forced staff to work from home.

=== '''Program Scoring''' ===

=== Program Scoring ===

The goal of this project was to research methods of score standardization used at NSERC, at CIHR/SSHRC, or by other granting agencies across Canada and around the world, and recommend short-term changes, as well as envision long-term changes, to better improve score distribution across the Research Tools and Instruments (RTI) program. During the Hackathon, one person from the RTI team was able to complete the environmental scan, in part due to being able to consult with other participants. Following the Hackathon, they produced recommendations which were accepted and incorporated into the program in under 3 months. The changes resulted in many improvements, including eliminating uncalibrated scoring from reviewers, reducing concerns around unfair results, and eliminating the rescoring of applications.

The goal of this project was to research methods of score standardization used at NSERC, at CIHR/SSHRC, or by other granting agencies across Canada and around the world, and recommend short-term changes, as well as envision long-term changes, to better improve score distribution across the Research Tools and Instruments (RTI) program. During the Hackathon, one person from the RTI team was able to complete the environmental scan, in part due to being able to consult with other participants. Following the Hackathon, they produced recommendations which were accepted and incorporated into the program in under 3 months. The changes resulted in many improvements, including eliminating uncalibrated scoring from reviewers, reducing concerns around unfair results, and eliminating the rescoring of applications.