1 / 16

ERC - Advance Grant Call 2008

ERC - Advance Grant Call 2008. Alejandro MARTIN HOBDEY ERC DG RTD Unit S-2 PC Meeting Brussels, 30 January 2008. Overview of presentation. Proposal structure Evaluation process Evaluation criteria Interdisciplinarity Demand management Planned Calls. Submission of proposals.

otto-castaneda
Download Presentation

ERC - Advance Grant Call 2008

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. ERC - Advance Grant Call 2008 Alejandro MARTIN HOBDEY ERC DG RTD Unit S-2 PC Meeting Brussels, 30 January 2008

  2. Overview of presentation • Proposal structure • Evaluation process • Evaluation criteria • Interdisciplinarity • Demand management • Planned Calls

  3. Submission of proposals • Single submission (1 stage, 2 step) • Electronic submission via EPSS • Early registration strongly recommended (though submission can be performed at the end) • 3 deadlines • Physical Sciences on 28th February (open) • Social Sciences on 18th March • Life Sciences on 22nd April

  4. Proposal structure • Part A: Contains “normal” A1-A3 forms • Plus additional “A1T”: “Track Record” • Summary of Scientific Leadership profile • Summary table of 10 year Track Record • Part B: contains 3 sections & 1 annex • Section 1 • Scientific Leadership profile (2 pages) • CV (including “funding ID”) • 10-years track record • Extended synopsis • Section 2 = Scientific proposal • Section 3 = Research Environment description • Statement of support from the Host Institution

  5. Panel structure • 3 domains – 25 panels (modification of StG panel structure) • AdG Panels distinct from StG Panels • Selection of Panel Members responsibility of the ScC • Two sets of panels, meeting on alternate years • Members of “shadow panels” for given year can/will be used to help active panels for extra expertise and in case of oversubscription

  6. Submission to Panels • Applicant submits to a Targeted Panel (of PI choice ) • Can choose one additional “Alternative Review Panel” • In case cross-panel or cross-domain proposal, evaluation by members of other panels • Indicative call budget • Physical Sciences – 39% • Social Sciences – 14% • Life Sciences – 34% + 13% for Interdisciplinary – Cross Panel / Cross domain

  7. Two step evaluation • Step 1: • Section 1 of Part B evaluated against Criterion 1 (PI) and 2 (Research Project) • Proposal needs to pass threshold for both criteria to pass to second step • Panels have information extracted from Form A1T (Track Record) to assist them in their decisions • Evaluated by Panel Members + possibly “shadow” panel members where necessary • Step 2: • All three sections evaluated against all three evaluation criteria • Evaluated by Panel Members + Remote Evaluators

  8. Submission Step 2 (Panel + remote) Step 1 (panel) Section 1 Proposal Proposal Proposal Section 2 Section 1 Section 3 Section 1 Section 2 Section 2 Section 3 Section 3 + HI support letter Indiv assessments Individual marks Interdisciplinary flag PANEL MEETINGS Ranking Indiv Assessments Individual Marks PANEL MEETINGS Ranking Eligibility Check Evaluation process

  9. Managing demand: lessons from StG Managing demand for grants • Maximise call budget • By combining budgets over 2 successive years (only one application per researcher in either 2008 or 2009) • Encourage the best to apply • Excellent track record (in recent years) • Strong leadership profile • Discourage trivial or low-quality applications • Applications should be substantive (one-stage submission with two stage evaluation) • Disincentives to submission of applications which are not of the highest quality

  10. Resubmission rules • Only one AdG application for 2008 and 2009 calls (combined) • Can only re-apply for 2010 AdG call if you are above threshold in Step 1 in 2008 or 2009 AdG Call • If you apply for AdG in 2008 or 2009, cannot apply for a StG during same period

  11. Marking scheme • Criteria 1 and 2 will be marked according to the following scheme: • 4: Outstanding • 3 Excellent • 2 Very good • 1 Non-fundable / fail • Criteria 3 is pass fail • Quality threshold of: >=2 • Proposals below the quality threshold for either of the two criteria are eliminated (Step 1) / not fundable (Step 2) • Proposals passing from Step 1 to Step 2 have to pass all thresholds, but also will be limited according to a given multiple of the funding available for that panel (~x3) • Only those proposals that pass both quality thresholds in step 1 will be allowed to re-submit in 2010. Others have to wait to 2011. • Eliminates the link between “proposal quality” and “passing to Step 2” that was criticized by many in the StG

  12. Interdisciplinary Proposals / Domain • Interdisciplinary Research domain (cross-domain & cross-panel)  indicative budget of 13% total budget • Proposal submitted to a primary panel • Step 1: • Primary panel determines if proposal is “interdisciplinary” • Can take into account if secondary panel is indicated Proposal “flagged” as interdisciplinary, if appropriate • Possibility to invite reviews from members of other panels • Step 2: • Interdisciplinary proposals, not funded within panel budget, will be transferred to Interdisciplinary Domain for further consideration there • Decision taken at end of process by combined panel of all Panel Chairs • Any funds not spent in ID domain to be returned “pro-rata” to the other three domains

  13. “Co-Investigator projects” • In addition to the PI, a project can have one or more “Co-PIs” or “Co-Investigators” • These projects are subject to a higher financial limit (3.5 M€) BUT the CO-PIs are subject to the same re-submission rules as PIs! • CO-PIs do not complete the A1T form, but have to complete Scientific leadership profile, CV and 10 year track record in Part B • No link between Co-PIs (scientific issue) and existence of partners (administrative issue)

  14. Financial limits • Normal limit: 2.5 M€ for five years (pro-rata) • Certain cases, limit raised to 3.5 M€ (pro-rata) • Co-investigator projects • Proposals that require the purchase of major research equipment • PI coming from third country to establish him/her self in the EU or Associated state • Up to panel to decide whether this is justified or not.

  15. ERC Calls Indicative Schedule (2007-2010) ERC Starting Grant Calls Indicative Schedule 2007 - 2010 ERC Advanced Grant Calls Indicative Schedule 2007 - 2010

More Related