NSERC supports research excellence in Canada. Therefore, a wide range of contributions to research, training and mentoring are considered and valued as part of the merit review process, with a focus on the quality and impact of these contributions. Furthermore, NSERC recognizes that the entire research ecosystem is strengthened by equitable, diverse and inclusive access and participation. One of the objectives of the Tri-agency Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Action Plan is equitable and inclusive access to granting agency funding opportunities for all eligible members of the research community. This includes recognizing EDI-related considerations as integral criteria used to assess research excellence. The intended outcomes of the Tri-agency EDI Action Plan and recommendations from the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) inform these guidelines.

NSERC, along with four Canadian research funding agencies, has signed the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). The other signatories are the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Genome Canada, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). In a joint statement, the agencies have reaffirmed their commitment to meaningful assessment of excellence in research funding.

See 4.2 Consideration of equity, diversity and inclusion in the training plan.

CIHR's approach to research assessment within the Project Grant competition already reflected many of the DORA principles, such as encouraging peer reviewers to consider a range of research outputs broader than published journal articles. However, CIHR heard from stakeholders that additional guidance was needed to support applicants and peer reviewers in the inclusion of a broad range of research contributions in their applications and assessments, respectively. That's why CIHR updated its program guidance to provide examples of more inclusive and expansive contributions to help in the crafting and assessment of applications. These updates encourage the assessment of the content and output/outcomes of research rather than the prestige of the journals in which researchers publish, including directing reviewers to not use journal-based metrics as surrogate measures of the quality of individual research publications.

SSHRC acknowledges that the quality and impact of research cannot be measured through journal publications alone. This is especially true in social sciences and humanities and interdisciplinary research, where research results and outcomes are multifaceted and can reflect multiple types of knowledge and ways of knowing.

To meet the NFRF program’s expectations for equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI), projects must pass each of the following elements. In Feasibility see Indigenous research, and GBA+/SGBA.

SSHRC has developed these guidelines to ensure that the merit review of Indigenous research upholds SSHRC’s principles for merit review. These guidelines are intended to supplement the SSHRC Manual for Adjudication Committee Members, but might also be used by applicants, external reviewers and the postsecondary institutions and partnering organizations that support Indigenous research.

An important evaluation criterion in the Canada Research Chairs Program (CRCP) is the excellence of the nominee. A key factor in assessing this criterion is the productivity of the individual. When assessing their assigned nominations, reviewers must consider the following:
- Career Interruptions and Personal Circumstances
- Chairholders in Senior Administrative Positions
- Publication conventions by discipline
- Collaborative Endeavours and Interdisciplinary Research
- Equity and Diversity within the Program’s Peer Review Process