1 / 13

Application Evaluation Criteria for Proposal Submission in Moldova (January 2013)

This document outlines the structure and evaluation criteria for the application process in Moldova, divided into two parts - Part A for technical information and Part B for the scientific part. It includes information on content, participants, budget, and evaluation criteria related to scientific and technological quality, implementation, and impact. It also emphasizes the importance of addressing ethics considerations and providing a dissemination plan.

jsanderson
Download Presentation

Application Evaluation Criteria for Proposal Submission in Moldova (January 2013)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Structure of the Application Evaluation Criteria Oskar Otsus January 2013 Moldova

  2. 2 parts: Part A – technical information Part B – the scientific part

  3. Proposal Part A (online submission): • A1: Content • Title, acronym, duration, etc. • keywords • Proposal abstract • previous/current submission • A2: Participants • Administrative data • Personal data • Organisation Status: SME/Public body/Research centre/Educ. Establishment (Prefilled with the PIC number) • Applicant identification code PIC • Dependencies • A3: Budget • A3.1: Individual Partners: RTD/Demo/MANAG/Other & Personel/Subc/Other/Indir costs • A3.2: All

  4. Proposal Part B (pdf submission): • Part B format directly linked to evaluation criteria • S&T quality • Implementation • Impact • Ethics • Gender aspects • Security Sensitive Issues • Section lengths recommended

  5. Evaluation criteria

  6. I criteria: Scientific and technological quality

  7. Gantt table

  8. PERT graph

  9. II criteria: implementation

  10. Management structure

  11. III criteria: Impact • Contribution on Europeanlevel, expectedimpact • Link theimpacttotheWork Programme • Impacthastobeambitious and inthesametimeachievable • Suggestion: read Europeanpolicydocuments • Differentiatebetweenshort term goalsachievedduringyourproject and long term goalsachievedaftertheproject • Writealsoaboutdifferentrisks • 2. Disseminationplan • 3. Connectionstostakeholders and thepublic • UseEuropeanpolicydocuments! • III criteriaisoftennot so importanttotheresearchers, butthemostimportantforthereviewers!

  12. Ethics questionnaire • Research on humanembryo/foetus • Research on humans • Privacy • Research on animals • Researchinvolvingnon-EUcountries • Dual-use • Evenifyourprojectdoesn’thaveanyethicalissues, youhavetoanswerthequestions!

  13. What you don’t write, the reviewer doesn’t know! • The project has to adress the call! • Ambitious but realistic • Create a schedule and organize your work • Make your proposal easy to read Oskar Otsus Estonian Research Council tel: +372 7 317 350 e-mail: oskar.otsus@etag.ee

More Related