The EDI basics checklist before writing an EDI section

鉁� Do I truly understand the difference between the three terms (Equity, Diversity and Inclusion) and how they are complementary?

鉁� Do I understand the difference between sex and gender?

鉁� Do I understand what could make my EDI section look performative instead of intentional?

鉁� Do I know what are the Equity Deserving Groups (EDGs) that D2R must report on for the Tri-Agency Programs Secretariat (TIPS)?

鉁� Do I understand typical mistakes that make an EDI section in an application weak?

If you read carefully all the sections in the left column, we bet that you will be able to complete the checklist above.

Definitions

Equity, unlike the notion of equality, is not about sameness of treatment. It denotes fairness and justice in process and in results. Equitable outcomes often require differential treatment and resource redistribution to achieve a level playing field among all individuals and communities. This requires recognizing and addressing barriers to opportunities for all to thrive in our university environment.

Diversity describes the presence of difference within any collection of people. In discussions of social equity, diversity addresses differences in social group membership related, for example, to race, Indigenous identity, class, gender identity or expression, sexuality, disability, ethnicity, and religion. Discussions about diversity linked to access and equity require knowledge and understanding of historical and contemporary experiences of oppression and exclusion. Diversity should be understood as uniting rather than dividing. The term calls upon us to appreciate both differences and interconnectedness, and to recognize and respond to systemic and institutionalized discrimination.

Inclusion refers to the notion of belonging, feeling welcome and valued, having a sense of citizenship. It also speaks to a capacity to engage and succeed in a given institution, program, or setting. Inclusion calls for recognizing, reducing, and removing barriers to participation created by social disadvantage or oppression, and can result in the reimagination of an institution, program, or setting.

Source: 涩里番's Strategic EDI Action Plan

Equity Deserving Groups (EDGs): A group of people who, because of systemic discrimination, face barriers that prevent them from having the same access to the resources and opportunities that are available to other members of society, and that are necessary for them to attain just outcomes.

Source:

The equity deserving groups identified by the Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF) (the main funder of D2R) are: Racialized Individuals; African, Caribbean and Black Individuals; Indigenous Peoples; Persons with Disabilities; Women; 2SLGBTQIA+.

Sex refers to a set of biological attributes in humans and animals. It is primarily associated with physical and physiological features including chromosomes, gene expression, hormone levels and function, and reproductive/sexual anatomy. Sex is usually categorized as female or male but there is variation in the biological attributes that comprise sex and how those attributes are expressed.

Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, expressions and identities of girls, women, boys, men, and gender diverse people. It influences how people perceive themselves and each other, how they act and interact, and the distribution of power and resources in society. Gender identity is not confined to a binary (girl/woman, boy/man) nor is it static; it exists along a continuum and can change over time. There is considerable diversity in how individuals and groups understand, experience and express gender through the roles they take on, the expectations placed on them, relations with others and the complex ways that gender is institutionalized in society.

Source:

Performativity is the practice of doing equity work for compliance or to make an organization or person 鈥渓ook good鈥� and increase its/their social capital versus making genuine efforts to create substantive change.

Tokenism, a type of performativity, is when inclusion or diversity are pursued in a perfunctory or symbolic fashion. An example of tokenism is the recruitment of individuals from underrepresented groups to create an appearance of diversity without also taking steps to address underlying inequities. Other examples include hiring someone, inviting someone to be on a committee, or inviting someone to be on a research project as a partner/collaborator, but not valuing their contributions, expertise or knowledge; making public commitment statements to prioritize EDI without appropriately funding the work required to support EDI in the organization; assigning work to individuals who have no relevant expertise or lived experience; or shifting priorities away from EDI work when other organizational priorities surface or when public urgency subsides.

Avoiding common mistakes in EDI sections of calls for proposals

Because of the lack of understanding of these definitions, there is a pattern of common mistakes in EDI sections. Therefore, we present 3 examples with insights on how to avoid them.

Common mistake example #1: Focusing only on the great representation of diversity in the research team or research lab.

Why is it a mistake? Because representation of diversity does not guarantee equity and inclusion in research practices. Adding the words Equity and Inclusion used in the appropriate way will help avoid that mistake. Also, a proposal that lacks a clear demonstration of the specific outreach measures planned to attract and retain EDGs and support their career progression makes the diversity component seem more performative and less intentional.

*** Please note that identifying team members and providing a census is an ethical issue because self-identification data can be sensitive. For instance, this would be an inappropriate statement: 鈥淭hree of my team members are from xx country, and two of these are women. Also, one of my team members is part of the 2LGBTQIA+ community鈥�.

Common mistake example #2: An EDI section that only demonstrates pride in being affiliated with research institutes/units at 涩里番 that are known for their stellar EDI work without explaining specifically how EDI will be tailored to the research project proposed.

Why is this a mistake? Because the applicants demonstrate that they did not take the time to think about the EDI challenges and opportunities specific to their research project. For instance, a thoughtful EDI section can address any EDI challenges related to inequities in treatment, access, mistrust, reproducibility or risk of harm in the specific context of the proposed research project.

Common mistake example #3: No indication of equitable contribution opportunities of EDGs in the research design.

Why is this a mistake? Because to build trust and empowerment of Equity Deserving Groups in genomic medicine and RNA therapeutics development, it is important to seize opportunities to not only do research that helps the creation of vaccines and drugs for everyone, but to have a research design that is done for, by and with everyone to be truly inclusive. This captures the Nothing About Us Without Us approach, one of the most meaningful best EDI practices in research. This means that the best EDI integration in research design demonstrates:

• inclusion of Equity Deserving Groups in informal discussions or formal consultations around building the research question;
• inclusion of, when possible, a literature review of different countries and/or written by researchers from EDGs (acknowledging some gaps or absence of these types of literature through a rigorous process can also be well perceived by EDI evaluators);
• for research done on animals: inclusion of samples of both females and males to foster explanatory power of similarities and differences in the epidemiology of the disease under study, and to avoid missed opportunities to discover sex differences and improve health by tailoring treatments differently for men and women;
• for research done on humans and/or using human data science: inclusion of data from people from different age groups, geographic locations, sex and gender, race, ethnicity, socioeconomical background, etc. to create more robust RNA therapeutics, more innovations to facilitate trust and access for all to RNA drugs and inclusive health policies;
• Analysis of differences and similarities within the diversity of the dataset studied. The analysis can also include limitations and an invitation to other research projects to reproduce this research on EDGs that may not have been analyzed in the context of the research project;
• Meaningful strategies to ensure that knowledge translation/dissemination is accessible to as many people as possible. For instance, this can be demonstrated by planning a lay summary, translating research findings in the language of the community being studied, offering audio versions for participants from Low Middle-Income Countries that may not be able to read, sharing with research associations led by EDGs, etc.

*** We understand that the integration of EDI is not always possible. When not applicable, a rigorous EDI Plan should include a thoughtful rationale presenting where and why EDI elements are not relevant.

Examples of applications of EDI

Examples to apply to EDI in research practice (this list is not exhaustive)

• Equity - Offering research opportunities to support equity deserving groups鈥� recruitment, retention and progression through outreach, best diversity hiring practices, accommodations, accessibility measures, mentoring, and sponsorships. Strategically sharing opportunities related to governance, conferences, publications, and employment.
• Diversity - Composition of research team through intentional recruitment and hiring practices.
• Inclusion - Ensuring the notion of belonging and feeling valued for equity deserving groups in research interactions through intentional welcoming and EDI informed collaborative practices.

Examples of opportunities to apply to EDI in research design (this list is not exhaustive)

• Participating in workshops on EDI in research (will be developed by D2R in 2025-2026).
• Including considerations of sex and gender in health research, when applicable.
• Including diverse perspectives in different stages of the research design, such as:
  • consulting members of equity deserving groups to contribute to shaping the design of the research questions;
  • including literature and texts from diverse cultural and geographic contexts in the literature review;
  • utilizing diverse datasets and analytical methods to encourage inclusive outcomes;
  • creating a knowledge dissemination strategy that reaches diverse audiences such as researchers, patient groups, and community organizations;
  • planning ahead to assess the potential impact of the research project on equity deserving groups.