Application Workshop Marie Curie Fellowships 12th July 2010

Application WorkshopApplication Workshop

Marie Curie Marie Curie FellowshipsFellowships

12th July 2010

ProgrammeProgramme

Welcome & IntroductionWelcome & Introduction Structure of Fellowship ProposalStructure of Fellowship Proposal Part B: examples, assessors’ commentsPart B: examples, assessors’ comments Success storiesSuccess stories EPSS systemEPSS system RefereesReferees Proposal coordinator/scientist in chargeProposal coordinator/scientist in charge Evaluation processEvaluation process Final Hints & Tips Final Hints & Tips Q & AQ & A

Tell us…..Tell us…..

– Who you areWho you are– Your organisationYour organisation– Your projectYour project

Your projectYour project

Marie Curie Fellowships Marie Curie Fellowships in a nutshell in a nutshell

FP7 is designed to achieve the Lisbon and FP7 is designed to achieve the Lisbon and Barcelona objectives and complement Barcelona objectives and complement activities in Member States.activities in Member States.

Support to the European Research AreaSupport to the European Research Area Administered by the Department for Administered by the Department for

Education and Culture.Education and Culture.

Objectives and Policy Objectives and Policy ContextContext

Make Europe more attractive to researchersMake Europe more attractive to researchers Encouraging transnational and intersectoral Encouraging transnational and intersectoral

mobility to create a European labour market mobility to create a European labour market for researchersfor researchers

Encouraging people to become researchersEncouraging people to become researchers Attract researchers to EuropeAttract researchers to Europe

Individual Individual FellowshipsFellowships

Aimed at Experienced ResearchersAimed at Experienced Researchers Focus on skills diversification and Focus on skills diversification and

knowledge sharingknowledge sharing Three categories: IEF, IIF & IOFThree categories: IEF, IIF & IOF Fellow can apply for one fellowship Fellow can apply for one fellowship

per call. per call. Host can host as many fellows as Host can host as many fellows as

they want.they want.

Individual Individual Fellowships - Part BFellowships - Part B

Cover Page, Table of ContentsCover Page, Table of Contents S & T QualityS & T Quality Training/Transfer of KnowledgeTraining/Transfer of Knowledge ResearcherResearcher Implementation Implementation ImpactImpact

Evaluation criterion: Evaluation criterion: Scientific / tech. Scientific / tech. qualityquality

Interdisciplinary/mulitidisciplinary Interdisciplinary/mulitidisciplinary aspectsaspects

Research methodologyResearch methodology Originality/InnovationOriginality/Innovation Timeliness/RelevanceTimeliness/Relevance Host scientific expertiseHost scientific expertise Quality of the group/supervisorQuality of the group/supervisor

3/53/5 25%25%

Assessor CommentsAssessor CommentsS&T QualityS&T Quality

Positive FeedbackPositive Feedback

Research is timely with number of Research is timely with number of innovations beyond „state of the art‟innovations beyond „state of the art‟

Research methodology is detailed and clearly Research methodology is detailed and clearly explainedexplained

Negative FeedbackNegative Feedback

The techniques to be used are well known in The techniques to be used are well known in the field so not very innovativethe field so not very innovative

Research methodology not given in Research methodology not given in full detail full detail

Training – IEF/IOFTraining – IEF/IOF

Clarity and quality of the trainingClarity and quality of the training Relevance and quality of Relevance and quality of

additional scientific trainingadditional scientific training Host expertise in trainingHost expertise in training

Your opportunity to make a difference!Your opportunity to make a difference!

3/53/5 15%15%

Assessor Comments Assessor Comments TrainingTraining

Negative Feedback Negative Feedback

A research project with no training elementA research project with no training element

The host asserts skills without presenting The host asserts skills without presenting convincing evidence of competence convincing evidence of competence ((your your examples?examples?))

The range of techniques described would The range of techniques described would clearly be valuable to the researcher, but the clearly be valuable to the researcher, but the lack of detailed description lack of detailed description does not inspire does not inspire confidence in the quality of training availableconfidence in the quality of training available

Assessor Comments Assessor Comments TrainingTraining

Positive feedbackPositive feedback

Contemplates training courses Contemplates training courses specifically specifically designed for postdoctoral fellowsdesigned for postdoctoral fellows

Research training objectives are clearly Research training objectives are clearly identified, described, and identified, described, and plannedplanned

Both participants will benefit from their Both participants will benefit from their mutual collaboration, not only through direct mutual collaboration, not only through direct joint work, but also through the interaction joint work, but also through the interaction with the whole research groupwith the whole research group

Transfer of Transfer of Knowledge - IEFKnowledge - IEF

Transferring knowledge to European Transferring knowledge to European host and/or bringing knowledge to host and/or bringing knowledge to EuropeEurope

Clarity and quality of the transfer of Clarity and quality of the transfer of knowledge objectives knowledge objectives

No thresholdNo threshold 15%15%

Assessor CommentsAssessor CommentsTransfer of KnowledgeTransfer of Knowledge

Positive feedbackPositive feedback

Fellow has range of relevant Fellow has range of relevant knowledge and expertise to be knowledge and expertise to be brought to the project brought to the project

Negative feedbackNegative feedback

Objective are research objectives with Objective are research objectives with out specifying the unique knowledge out specifying the unique knowledge the fellow will bringthe fellow will bring

ResearcherResearcher

Research experienceResearch experience Patents/publications/teachingPatents/publications/teaching Independent thinking and leadership Independent thinking and leadership

((ability to transfer knowledge for IIFability to transfer knowledge for IIF)) Match between profile and projectMatch between profile and project Potential – IOF, IEF (Potential – IOF, IEF (acquire new acquire new

knowledge, promotionknowledge, promotion))

4/54/5 25%25%

Points to considerPoints to consider

Relevant industrial experienceRelevant industrial experience Generic skills base (Generic skills base (your examplesyour examples)) Tangible impact on other researchTangible impact on other research Triggered new research (Triggered new research (your your

examplesexamples)) RefereesReferees

Assessor Comments Assessor Comments Researcher (1)Researcher (1)


CV lacks data on recordCV lacks data on record

Continuation of previous research so Continuation of previous research so exposure to new approaches is lacking exposure to new approaches is lacking

References were similar and from one References were similar and from one institution institution

Assessor CommentsAssessor CommentsResearcher (2)Researcher (2)

Positive feedbackPositive feedbackClear proof of independent thinking during Clear proof of independent thinking during PhD and the PhD and the possibility to progress and possibility to progress and developdevelop

Clear evidence of leadership qualitiesClear evidence of leadership qualities

Potential to acquire new knowledge is high Potential to acquire new knowledge is high

Good references and clear list of Prizes, Good references and clear list of Prizes, Awards, Lectures, etc Awards, Lectures, etc

ImplementationImplementation

Quality of infrastructure/facilitiesQuality of infrastructure/facilities Practical arrangementsPractical arrangements Feasibility and credibility of projectFeasibility and credibility of project Practical and administrative Practical and administrative

arrangementsarrangements

No thresholdNo threshold 15%15%

Points to considerPoints to consider

Include work plan and milestonesInclude work plan and milestones Support to fellow in moving to the Support to fellow in moving to the

foreign country (visas, language foreign country (visas, language courses, courses, your examplesyour examples))

Host infrastructure and accessHost infrastructure and access

Many applications are scored down on Many applications are scored down on this sub-criteria!this sub-criteria!

Assessor CommentsAssessor CommentsImplementation (1)Implementation (1)


Practical arrangements for Practical arrangements for management, administration, and management, administration, and support for hosting the fellow are not support for hosting the fellow are not well describedwell described

The amount of work and timeline may The amount of work and timeline may be too ambitious be too ambitious

Assessor CommentsAssessor CommentsImplementation (2)Implementation (2)


The facilities of the host are The facilities of the host are appropriate for the research projectappropriate for the research project

The research activities, milestones, The research activities, milestones, foreseen deliverables and schedule is foreseen deliverables and schedule is very comprehensive, well described very comprehensive, well described and appropriateand appropriate

ImpactImpact

Potential of acquiring competencies during Potential of acquiring competencies during the fellowshipthe fellowship

Contribution to career developmentContribution to career development Contribution to European excellence and Contribution to European excellence and

competitivenesscompetitiveness Benefit to European Research AreaBenefit to European Research Area Potential for long term collaboration between Potential for long term collaboration between

EU and other countries (IOF/IIF)EU and other countries (IOF/IIF)

3.5/53.5/5 20%20%

TipsTips

IEF – application in the industryIEF – application in the industry Links between research and Links between research and

industryindustry Look at policy documents per Look at policy documents per

area of researcharea of research

Assessor CommentsAssessor CommentsImpactImpact


Contribution to European excellence and Contribution to European excellence and competitiveness is well presentedcompetitiveness is well presented

Skill acquired during the project will greatly Skill acquired during the project will greatly contribute to the fellow‟s career contribute to the fellow‟s career developmentdevelopment


Lack of career development plan for the Lack of career development plan for the applicant applicant

Lack of details means it is difficult to judge Lack of details means it is difficult to judge whether a independent position is achievable whether a independent position is achievable

Questions?Questions?

Dr Graeme HayesSchool of Languages and Social Sciences

Aston University

Two-year Intra-European Fellowship Centre de recherches sur l’action politique en Europe, IEP de

Rennes, France Social science, non-laboratory Opposition to nuclear power in the 1970s/80s and now:

changing institutions, discourses, strategies Relationship between public policy and civil society Starts September 2010

Initial contact with partner over possibility of project, November 2008

AWM Travel Grant to support FP7 proposals, June 2009 Completed application July, submitted August Notification of evaluation results, end November 2009 Invitation to Negotiate, 22 December 2009 Grant Agreement Preparation form submitted by Host,

February 2010 Commission has not yet issued a contract…

Score out of 5 issued for each sectionCriterion 3. RESEARCHER (award) (Threshold 4.00/5.00)Mark: 4.80 Weight: 0.25

- The applicant has already a good research experience in the field of this project.

- There is a good match between his profile and the project.- The positions of editor, chair or convenor in various of the fellow’s

research initiatives demonstrate good leadership qualities.- The professional maturity of the applicant is evident.

Weaknesses of the proposal - The publication is unconvincingly presented.Score out of 5 issued for each section

Strengths and weaknesses clearly listed 575 out of 1857 eligible projects to be funded…

Follow the guidelines Write as if for a en educated/interested broadsheet reader Use bullet points / indenting, etc. Importance of fit between researcher and host, project and

place The project is important The information you need may not be provided the way you

need it by your partner You can’t rely on your partner to do the work The process is lengthy and time consuming Use existing documentation sources for the tricky bits

(impact, ethics) Contact your referees early Get your colleagues to read it through for you

B1: Link context to project to analysis to outcomes Demonstrate the wider transferable interest of your project Give condensed (300 word) biographies of your partners B3: Values are more important than lists of achievements B4: Set out the workplan graphically; link skills acquisition

to objectives to outcomes

Total value of the award is €222,047.20 Of which the host institution receives €17,539.20 for

overheads The money does not go through my institution’s books!

International Incoming Fellowship (IIF)

SHIRMAN

Ecology and Evolution of SHIfting Range MArgiNs in Glacier-fed Streams

Glacier-fed streams provide an ideal ecological observatory for monitoring the dynamics of the leading edges of shifting ranges as glaciers rapidly recede and make available new stream habitat.

The main objective of the proposed research is to use a novel blend of evolutionary and ecological tools to evaluate key influences on the shifting locations of range margins in glacier-fed streams.

A secondary objective is to infer the outcome of upward range shifts on regional-scale patterns of stream biodiversity.

Evaluation Criterion

Weighting (%) Threshold Score out of 5

S&T Quality 25 3

Transfer of Knowledge

15 N/A

Researcher 25 4

Implementation 15 N/A

Impact 20 N/A

Criterion 3 - Research experience

1. Research results including patents, publications, teaching etc

2. Independent thinking and leadership qualities, and capacity to transfer knowledge

3. Match between the proposed fellow's profile and project

Ten papers published or in press

Two previous postdoc appointments – 1 in Oregon (2006-2008) and 1 in Zurich (2008-2009).

Eight fellowships and awards

Extensive teaching experience and supervised 7 undergraduate projects.

15 presentations at national/international meetings and 11 invited seminars.

Reviewing and extensive committee membership

The applicant has a broad range of experience in both ecological and evolutionary methodologies, creative study design and implementation in the field and laboratory, and successful scientific collaborations with many international colleagues and has had two postdoctoral positions.

Her research results have been published in peer-reviewed journals.

All records show that her skills and experience are well suited for the proposed project.

Independent thinking and leadership potential demonstrated.

Good match between profile and potential.

OVERALL COMMENT - A very good candidate who shows potential as future research leader –

SCORE - 4.8 out of 5.0 - WEIGHT 25% = 24

Criterion 1 - Scientific/technological quality, including any interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary aspects of the proposal.

1. - Research methodology

2. - Originality and innovative nature of the project, and relationship to the 'state of the art' of research in the field

3. - Timeliness and relevance of the project

4. - Host scientific expertise in the field

5. - Quality of the group/researchers in charge

Strengths of the proposal

Very well presented proposal with a clear overarching objective to link two major approaches – one evolutionary and one ecosystem-based – in order to provide a synthetic understanding of the dynamics of shifting range margins within a glacier-fed stream system.

Very good planned methodology and very timely given the climate change debate and range shifts.

The host institution is particularly strong in the physical, chemical and biological sciences (We talked about conferences hosted etc.).

The researcher in charge is a renowned scientist with proven record of publications and citations.

Weaknesses of the proposal

The amount of work and the project length may be a problem

OVERALL COMMENT

Very good and interesting proposal, likely to be successful

Score 4.6 out of 5 – Weight: 25% = 23

Criterion 2 – Transfer of Knowledge

1.Potential of transferring knowledge to European host and/or bring knowledge to Europe –

2. Clarity and quality of the transfer of knowledge objectives

Strengths of the proposal:

Her background in research and experience with different methods and tools will be an asset.

Applicant’s expertise in developing novel solutions to ecological questions, allows strong potential for knowledge transfer at many levels.

Overall comments:

The strong application gives the idea that the applicant is strongly motivated and is likely to achieve a substantial knowledge transfer.

Overall Score = 4.7 out of 5 Weight: 15% = 14.1

Criterion 4 - Implementation

1.Quality of infrastructure / facilities and International collaborations of host -

2. Practical arrangements for the implementation and management of the scientific project.

3. Feasibility and credibility of the project, including work plan - Practical and administrative arrangements, and support for the hosting of the fellow

Detailed description of the host infrastructure and its international cooperation.

A clear work plan is presented. Expected indirect (apart from papers) products of the research have been specified.

All facilities will be provided.

Weaknesses: The part of practical arrangements for the implementation and management of the scientific project lacks some detail.

Overall comments: Generally very good to excellent. Score 4.6 out of 5. Weight: 15% = 13.8

Criterion 5 - Impact

1.Potential for creating long term collaborations and mutually beneficial co-operation between Europe and the third country.

2. Contribution to European excellence and European Competitiveness.

3. Contribution to the socio-economic development of the Developing Countries or emerging and transition economies by transfer of knowledge and human capacity building (where relevant)

4. Benefit of the mobility to the European research area

Strengths of the proposal:

The fellow has demonstrated capabilities in this field, thus it is expected that long-term cooperation will be set up.

The project could stimulate research in other types ofecological systems, which could contribute to European excellence and European competitiveness.

Weaknesses:

The part about benefit of the mobility to the European research area needs more detail.

Score 4.5 out of 5. Weighting 20% = 18

Overall Score = 92.9 / 100 (Threshold 70)

Main points re success?

Summary

Identification of a very strong candidate.

Funds from Advantage West Midlands to meet Deb and complete proposal.

Xavier Rodde (Research Support & EU/international research funding)

Development of novel methods

Strong development of home institution as base for IIF

Collaboration and international links particularly for future

Knowledge transfer and impact

Marie CurieMarie Curie

Stuart RussonStuart Russon

EU Funding AdvisorEU Funding Advisor

Submission and Submission and EvaluationEvaluation

12th July 2010

Submission and Submission and evaluationevaluation

EPSS systemEPSS system RefereesReferees Proposal coordinator/scientist in Proposal coordinator/scientist in

chargecharge Evaluation processEvaluation process

..... or Electronic Proposal ..... or Electronic Proposal Submission ServiceSubmission Service

Proposals must be submitted Proposals must be submitted electronically using EPSSelectronically using EPSS

Proposals arriving by any other Proposals arriving by any other means will not be evaluatedmeans will not be evaluated

EPSSEPSS

Use of the Use of the EPSS systemEPSS system

Only one login and password is providedOnly one login and password is provided

Proposal to be completed by the ‘proposal Proposal to be completed by the ‘proposal coordinator’coordinator’

The experienced researcher should register as The experienced researcher should register as the proposal coordinatorthe proposal coordinator

EPSS – role of the EPSS – role of the Proposal CoordinatorProposal Coordinator

Register your organisation’s interestRegister your organisation’s interest Complete Part A of the proposalComplete Part A of the proposal Download the document template for writing Download the document template for writing

Part BPart B Upload the completed Part BUpload the completed Part B Submit the complete proposal Part A and Part Submit the complete proposal Part A and Part

BB Nominate refereesNominate referees

Accessing EPSSAccessing EPSS

Access EPSS from the call page Access EPSS from the call page http://www.epss-fp7.org/epss

The EPSS Preparation and The EPSS Preparation and Submission Guide is available at Submission Guide is available at http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/epss_en.html

Submit early and oftenSubmit early and often

RefereesReferees

Up to 3 referees can be Up to 3 referees can be nominatednominated

Proposal coordinator nominates Proposal coordinator nominates refereereferee

Provide referees before deadlineProvide referees before deadline Referee issued with login and Referee issued with login and

passwordpassword

Proposal Proposal CoordinatorCoordinator

The proposal coordinator is the The proposal coordinator is the single point of contact between single point of contact between participants and the REAparticipants and the REA

Before the call deadline the Before the call deadline the experienced researcher is experienced researcher is considered ‘proposal coordinator’considered ‘proposal coordinator’

Scientist in Scientist in ChargeCharge

The scientist team leader located at host The scientist team leader located at host organisationorganisation

Will supervise the researcher during the Will supervise the researcher during the projectproject

After the call deadline the scientist in After the call deadline the scientist in charge will be the only single contact charge will be the only single contact point.point.

Experienced researcher and scientist Experienced researcher and scientist in charge cannot be the same personin charge cannot be the same person

Evaluation Evaluation processprocess

EvaluationEvaluation

Assessed by at least 3 expertsAssessed by at least 3 experts

Overall threshold is 70%Overall threshold is 70%

Do not exceed page limitsDo not exceed page limits

Do not make any assumptionsDo not make any assumptions

Final checksFinal checks

Check eligibilityCheck eligibility

Correct font size and page Correct font size and page limitationslimitations

The deadline is important!The deadline is important!

TimetableTimetable

Deadline for submission of proposals Deadline for submission of proposals 17 August 17 August 2010 at 17.00.00 Brussels local time2010 at 17.00.00 Brussels local time

Evaluation of proposals Evaluation of proposals 04-29 October 201004-29 October 2010 Evaluation Summary Reports sent to proposal Evaluation Summary Reports sent to proposal

coordinators coordinators End of November 2010End of November 2010 Invitation letter to successful coordinators to launch Invitation letter to successful coordinators to launch

grant agreement negotiations grant agreement negotiations with the REA services with the REA services December 2010December 2010

Letter to unsuccessful applicants Letter to unsuccessful applicants From From December December 20102010

Signature of first Signature of first grant agreements grant agreements From March From March 20112011

Hints and Hints and tips!tips!

Have clear aims and objectivesHave clear aims and objectives Good rationaleGood rationale What you want to do, with whom and why?What you want to do, with whom and why? European added-valueEuropean added-value Must relate to FP7 objectives and priorities Must relate to FP7 objectives and priorities Communicate clearly in the application form – keep it Communicate clearly in the application form – keep it

simplesimple Management and MonitoringManagement and Monitoring Impact and benefitsImpact and benefits

Documents

Application Workshop Marie Curie Fellowships 12th July 2010