How to organize science funding: The new Canadian Institutes for Health Research, an opportunity to increase innovation

Why are Bell, 3M and the intramural program at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) so successful at inspiring innovation? How does the Medical Research Council of Canada (MRC) compare and conflict with innovation in these examples? Will the existing and proposed structure and culture of the new Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), which are replacing MRC, produce relatively little innovation from the outset? Our examination leads to recommendations for an alternative funding system and organizational structure for CIHR: minimal structure with baseline funding at the initial, idea stage (40 percent of budget); more formal structure and competitive funding at the feasibility stage (50 percent); and matching industrial grants for the commercialization stage (10 percent). Our alternative CIHR budget would permit baseline grants of approximately $20,000/year for each of 10,000 qualified medical investigators, 8,000 more than presently funded.