ORGANIZATION LIAA NOMINATION CRITERIA:

1. The advocacy work has resulted in a significant act(s) or specific decision(s) advantageous to the health research enterprise and the advocacy work has been the primary reason the decision was made.

“As an example, [the nominee] presented to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health regarding the science of the pandemic and has been quoted by CBC and L’Actualité regarding this interaction. [The nominee] also submitted recommendations for Budget 2021 and the government appears to have listened to their case for increased investment in biomedical research.”

“[The nominee] took the lead in advocating for Federal Government assistance for wage support and assistance with costs for the national research staff community who found themselves unable to enter their work environment in hospitals and universities due to COVID-19. […] the campaign was highly effective and resulted in the announcement, on May 15th, of a $450 million funding package to help Canada’s academic research community.”

“[The nominee] was able to successfully challenge federal regulatory authorities, which at the time were not willing to authorize the simultaneous use of experimental agents in such extreme cases [of highly resistant HIV infections]. The landmark success with the “Tiko Kerr Case” opened the door for novel combinations [of anti-HIV drugs] to be used not only in Vancouver but throughout Canada, a practice that has become part of the standard of care.”

2. The advocacy action(s) or decision(s) advantageous to the health research enterprise were marked by outstanding efforts, process or innovation.

“In my opinion, the most impactful efforts of [the nominee] include their clear and effective advocacy for the Fundamental Science Review (the “Naylor report”), in the widespread support of EDI efforts at the ground level and in the communication of the scientific communities role in supporting the fight against Covid-19. Indeed, it’s leading edge implementation of these initiatives at its own events and incorporation into governance and policies is an example of walking the talk.”

“There is no question that [the nominee] has consistently put forth an outstanding effort in advocating for health research. In the context of our current situation, that outstanding effort was evidenced by the time and energy [the nominee] devoted to securing a wage subsidy for Canada’s health researchers and funding for institutions to restart their research activities. [The nominee] operated at “over capacity” levels – executing its health research and wage subsidy campaign, while also ensuring that its other important research advocacy and policy projects did not lose momentum.”

“[The nominee] has been active at the local, provincial, and national levels, using innovative communication tools to build networks of like-minded trainees and change the outlook of policy-makers and the public… Was their work “marked by outstanding efforts, process or innovation”? Unequivocally. We have never seen students mobilize this way, and all signs are that [the nominee], fortunately, has engaged in smart succession planning and networking so as to remain active and relevant for years to come.”

3. The advocacy work generated support or raised new awareness among policymakers, the media and/or Canadians about the nature of health research, its economic and/or social benefit to Canadians and its critical role in nation building.

“I heard personally from several decision-makers who had taken careful note of [the nominee’s social media] campaign […] it is telling that [the nominee] was invited to attend the stakeholders’ lockup and met with the Prime Minister after the milestone budget was presented.”

“With COVID-19 infections rising dramatically in March and April, [the nominee] made numerous appearances in prominent media, such as the Toronto Star, to stress the urgent need for hospitals and healthcare organizations to be eligible to apply for wage support. Their presence in the media has continued to this day, and they have been instrumental in supporting individual health care research leaders across the country remain active and engaged in the media as well.”

“As a result of [the nominee] being able to demonstrate scientifically its research has virtually eliminated AIDS in BC, and decreased new HIV cases by over 65%, they have unprecedented political support from the municipal and provincial governments, including opposition leaders.”

4. The advocacy work mobilized grassroots advocacy—action at the local, regional or community level.

“[The nominee] takes its communications with our politicians very seriously and works hard to build new relationships and to pursue these at the local level, as well as in Ottawa. This is a strategic advantage as we are in a minority government in extraordinary times. Having grass roots support at the riding level commands attention and creates bonds that have depth and persistence beyond less frequent interactions and allow for experiential interactions through visits to labs and exposure to the trainees and technicians – at least until the pandemic.”

“One of the most important elements of [the nominee’s] approach is that they recognize they cannot do everything on their own – they live by the motto of “by and with,” not “to and for,” and engage as many of their stakeholders as possible in their advocacy. Thus, mobilizing grassroots advocacy was a key component of [the nominee’s] advocacy campaign. They provided template letters to members to send to their MPPs, MPs, and federal Ministers, and shared with their Foundations and network of charities. This letter writing campaign was supported by a phone and e-mail campaign.”

“To that end, they are continuing to build capacity at the local level by engaging students not only in forward-looking science policy cafés on the future of scholarships and fellowships in Canada, but also more generally on how students can engage their MPs and electoral candidates on science.”

OTHER CRITERIA INCLUDE:

a) Shares its knowledge of and passion for health research with others through writing, speaking and/or consulting.

“[The nominee] is working closely with Indigenous and non-indigenous leaders from Saskatchewan and Manitoba, two provinces experiencing significant increases in HIV with the idea to support their introduction of the made in BC model of TasP®. Indeed, not only is [the nominee] working with other Canadian provinces, Indiana, US and Glasgow Scotland have reached out to [the nominee] for assistance in addressing their escalating new HIV cases among injection drug users.”

b) Has played a lead role in developing/growing community, provincial or national awareness related to health research and is generally recognized as a leader in this field.

“I think that it is appropriate to say that thanks to these sustained efforts, the [nominee] is now on the map in Ottawa as an organization that should be listened to when science policy is being discussed. As a consequence, the (now) past president was invited by the standing committee on health (HESA) in the House of Commons as a witness in the spring of 2020, and this event attracted significant media attention (e.g. CBC, L’Actualité).”

c) Actively participates in stakeholder groups dedicated to advancing health research and/or other means of advocating for health research.

“Building on their inclusive approach, [the nominee] actively participated in stakeholder groups dedicated to advancing health research by being members and the lead of various Research Community Groups. For example, one group […] meets regularly to discuss research issues and to coordinate responses and messaging. That work was amplified and accelerated during the pandemic, but even in “normal times” [the nominee] also regularly works with and forms alliances with a broad range of organizations.”

d) Has actively championed the health research advocacy tool/program/strategy within its organization.

“Additionally, over the past two years [the nominee] has created a new sub-group of the VPR community focused on the needs of emerging research institutes, with the goal of developing advocacy capacity in those organizations and ensuring that the distinct needs of smaller research institutes are represented in all of [the nominee’s] advocacy work.”