overview: erc starting grants - europea · new “scoring” move away from “absolute marks”...

ERC – European Research Council

Monique SMAIHIERC

Florence, 30 November 2011

Overview:ERC Starting Grants

Outline

Part 1 - ERC- What is the ERC?- ERC Starting and Advanced Grant Schemes

Part 2 – Evaluation- Submission- Evaluation process- What’s new & deadlines

Part 3 - Data from previous calls- General- Italy

Cooperation – Collaborative Research

Ideas – Frontier Research

People – Marie Curie Actions

Capacities – Research Capacity

Main instrument of the EU for funding research

Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development FP7 (2007-13)

European Research Council

Total FP7 Budget: € 50.4 billion

• Funds top scientists based all over Europe working on “Frontier Research”

� Evaluation only based on “excellence ”� Bottom up, Principal Investigator approach� Sizeable and flexible grants that make a difference

• Activities: 4 grant schemes

ERC Grant SchemesFunding Strategy

� ERC Starting Grants (StG)� ERC Advanced Grants (AdG )

� ERC Synergy Grants (from 2012)

� ERC Proof of Concept Grants (only for ERC grantees!)

│ 5

ERC Grant SchemesFunding Strategy


│ 6

PoC €10M

other €8M50M

AdG €680M

StG €730M

Syn €150M

AdG: Advanced Grants

StG: Starting Grants

Syn: ERC Synergy

PoC: Proof of Concept

European Research Council ERC grant schemes 2012 Call budget distribution

2012 total budget: €1,578.1M

ERC Granting schemes

Starting Grants Advanced Grants

StG 2010AdG 2010

• Attract/retain next-generation top

scientists

• Address funding gap early in

independent career

• Establish or consolidate an

independent research team & program

• Up to € 2.0 Mio

• Attract/retain current world-top

scientists

• Stimulate investigator-driven,

breakthrough research

• Up to € 3.5 Mio

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73

Age of the grantees

Num

ber o

f gra

ntee

s

Age of grantees

Nu

mb

er o

f g

ran

tees

• Possible requested amount:

max. € 1,500,000 for 5 years+ € 500,000 if new research activity in EU: moving from third country or purchase of major equipment

• Eligible costs: Costs supporting the project (personnel, equipment, consumables, travel, admin)

• Dedication of min. 50% of PI’s working time to the ERC-funded project and min. 50% of PI’s working time to the ERC-funded project

• First PhD awarded 2-12 years before call publication date (i.e.20 July 2011)

- starters (PhD award: 2-7 years) - consolidators (PhD award: 7-12 years) - Extension may be accepted for specific and duly justified reasons (maternity leave,…)

ERC Starting GrantsSize of the grant and eligibility

│ 9

• Possible requested amount:

− max. € 2,500,000 for 5 years

− + € 1,000,000 if new research activity in EU by moving from third country to MS or AC or if purchase of major equipment

• Eligible cost: costs supporting the project (personnel, equipment, consumables, travel, admin)

• Dedication of min. 50% of PI’s working time in a EU MS or AC and min. 30% of PI’s working time to the ERC-funded project

ERC Advanced Grants (AdG)Size of the grant and eligibility

Researchers Career development and complementary funding schemes

Post-docs

Senior

Professor

Students

Post

Graduates

Junior Professor/

Junior Researcher

Associated Professor

Full Professor

Erasmus

Marie Curie

ERC Advanced

ERC StG - Starters

ERC StG – Consolid.

Research assistants in ERC research projects

Researcher in ERC research projects

ERC grant holder

│ 11│ 11

ERC Grant schemes:Who can apply? What type of research – General requi rements

• Excellent Researchers (PIs)

� Any nationality, age or current place of work

• In conjunction with a Host Institution

� Based in EU or associated countries

• Individual research team

� Under control of the lead researcher (PI)

• All fields of science and scholarship are eligible

� Investigator-driven, bottom-up (no thematic priorities)

• Research

� Innovative breakthrough research: high risk/high gain

Who evaluate the proposals ?

• Panel members : typically 600 / call� High-level scientists� Recruited by ScC from all over the world:

~14% from outside Europe� About 12 members plus a chair person

• Referees : typically 2000 / call� Evaluate only a small number of proposals� Similar to normal practise in peer-reviewed

journals

Europe and AssociatedCountries

(86%)

US (7%)

Other (7%)

ERC review panelsEuropean Research Council

� Peer review is carried out through 25 panels

� Panels have about 12 members plus a chair person and are coordinated by an ERC Research officer

� Panels may be assisted by external reviewers

� Panels are grouped along the main scientific domains covering all fields of science, engineering and knowledge

International peer-reviewing

│ 14│ 14

ERC Grant Schemes (StG & AdG) Panel structure : 3 domains and 25 panels

Social Sciences and Humanities� SH1 Individuals, institutions & markets

� SH2 Institutions, values, beliefs and behaviour

� SH3 Environment & society

� SH4 The Human Mind and its complexity

� SH5 Cultures & cultural production

� SH6 The study of the human past

Physical Sciences & Engineering� PE1 Mathematical foundations

� PE2 Fundamental constituents of matter

� PE3 Condensed matter physics

� PE4 Physical & Analytical Chemical sciences

� PE5 Materials & Synthesis

� PE6 Computer science & informatics

� PE7 Systems & communication engineering

� PE8 Products & process engineering

� PE9 Universe sciences

� PE10 Earth system science

Life Sciences� LS1 Molecular & Structural Biology &

Biochemistry

� LS2 Genetics, Genomics, Bioinformatics & Systems Biology

� LS3 Cellular and Developmental Biology

� LS4 Physiology, Pathophysiology & Endocrinology

� LS5 Neurosciences & neural disorders

� LS6 Immunity & infection

� LS7 Diagnostic tools, therapies & public health

� LS8 Evolutionary, population & environmental biology

� LS9 Applied life sciences & biotechnology

Each panel :Panel Chair and

10-15 Panel Members


│ 15

Outline





│ 16│ 16

• Single submission � “1 stage, 2 step” evaluation

• Electronic submission via EPSS only• Deadlines strictly enforced• Proposals have two parts:

� Part A: Administrative forms� Part B: Scientific proposal itself

Submission of proposals


│ 17│ 17

Submission is to Panels

• Applicant submits to a Targeted Panel (of PI choice)

� Can flag one “Alternative Review Panel”

• Applicant chooses his/her panel , that panel is “responsible” and takes ownership for the evaluation of that proposals

• Only switch proposals between panels in case of clear mistake on part of applicant

• Switching proposals between domains (deadlines) not possible

• But: In case cross-panel or cross-domain proposals, evaluation by members of other panels possible


│ 18│ 18

Proposal structure: Part A

• Part A : “Administrative forms” containing � A1 Information on PI

• Request for change of stream (StG only)

� A2 Information on Host Institution� A3 Budget breakdown by year and partner

• Not detailed


│ 19│ 19

Proposal Structure: Part B

• Section 1 = “The PI”

• Scientific Leadership profile (1 page)

• CV (including “funding ID”) (2 page)

• 10-year track record (or “early achievements” for StG) (2 page)

• Extended synopsis (5 page)

• Section 2 = Full Scientific proposal (15 page)

• Ethical Review information (where appropriate)

• Separate additional document: � Host Institution Support Letter (compulsory StG + AdG)

� Copy of Ph.D. (compulsory StG)

� Documents to prove extension to 10 year eligibility window (StG)


│ 20│ 20

ERC Grant SchemesEvaluation criteria

• Criterion 1: Quality of Principal Investigator

• Criterion 2: Quality of Research Project

Referees and panel members evaluate and score each criteria ranking of the projects

Numerical score for each criteria• 4 (A) : outstanding • 3 (A or B) : excellent• 2 (B) : very good• 1 (C) : non-competitive


│ 21│ 21

Two step evaluation

• Step 1� Section 1 of Part B evaluated � Evaluated by Panel Members + possibly “alternate”

panel members where necessary

• Step 2� Sections B1 + B2 evaluated � Evaluated by Panel Members + Remote Referees� StG: Step 2 includes interviews in all cases


│ 22

Eligibility check

Step 1 (remote) evaluation on the basis of section 1 of

proposal* by panel members

Proposals passing to step 2

Individual assessment of full proposal by panel members &

referees

AdG :2nd Panel meeting

Submission of full proposals

Proposals selected for funding

ERC Grants: how does it operate?Submission, evaluation and selection

1st Panel meeting

StG: 2nd Panel meeting incl. interviews of applicants


│ 23│ 23

Remote part of evaluation

• Remote part of evaluation takes part completely electronically

• Step 1: proposals assigned to ~4 PMs

• Step 2: proposals also sent to specialized remote experts (to be determined at Step 1 panel meeting)


│ 24│ 24

What are panels looking for in an interview? (StG only)

• Maturity, leadership and vision

• Proposal is the applicant’s (not his/her supervisor’s)

• Answer technical questions and uncertainties / feasibility

• Mastery of detail


│ 25│ 25

Call budget distribution for 2012 calls

� Starting Grant : ~ €730m� Advanced Grant: ~ €680m

Indicative call budget• Life Sciences – LS• Physical Sciences &

Engineering – PE• Social Sciences &

Humanities – SH

� Within each domain, budget is broken down according to total funding requested per panel (equal chance in each panel)


│ 26

New “scoring”

Move away from “absolute marks” and towards A, B and C + approximate rank-in-panel information to give applicants a better idea of how close (or how far) they got to being funded

In Step 1:

• A is of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation;

• B is of high quality but not sufficient to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation;

• C is not of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation.

In Step 2:

• A fully meets the ERC's excellence criterion and is recommended for funding if sufficient funds are available

• B meets some but not all elements of the ERC's excellence criterion and will not be funded


│ 27│ 27

ERC open calls

Publication of call

Size of Grants Submission Deadline(s)

Starting GrantsERC-2012-StG

20 July 2011 Max. €1,500,000 for five years

(+ €500,000*)

PE: 12 Oct. 2011LS: 09 Nov. 2011SH: 24 Nov. 2011

Advanced GrantsERC-2012-AdG

16 Nov.2011 Max. €2,500,000 for five years

(+ €1000,000*)

PE: 16 Feb. 2012LS: 14 Mar. 2012SH 11 Apr. 2012

Timetable of StG and AdG callsEuropean Research Council

* Extra funds for PIs to establish themselves in EU or assoc. country:• ‘start-up’ costs for PIs moving from abroad• Purchase of major equipment

Panels decide whether requests are justified


│ 28

Summary

• Funds top scientists all over Europe working on “Frontier Research” � Evaluation only based on “excellence”� Bottom up, Principal Investigator approach� Sizeable grants that make a difference

• Has the ambition/objective of having a “structuring effect” on European research

• Continued growth in FP7: future in FP8 under discussion


│ 29

� ERC Work Programme 2012

� ERC Guide for Applicants – StG, AdG, PoC, SyG

� ERC Rules on submission, evaluation, selection and award procedures

� ERC Grant agreement (and guidance)

� ERC Guide for Grant Holders

� ERC Guide for Peer Reviewers

Essential documentshttp://erc.europa.eu => funding and grants

│ 29


│ 30

Outline





│ 31│ 31

ERC Competitions 2007-2011

Evaluated* Funded success rates**

Starting Grant 2007 9.167 8.794 299 3,4

Starting Grant 2009 2.503 2.392 245 10,2

Starting Grant 2010 2.873 2.767 436 15,8

Starting Grant 2011 4.080 4.005 478 11,9

Starting Grant 18.623 17.958 1.458 10,3

Advanced Grant 2008 2.167 2.043 282 13,8

Advanced Grant 2009 1.587 1.526 245 16,1

Advanced Grant 2010 2.009 1.967 271 13,8

Advanced Grant 2011*** 2.284 2.246

Advanced Grant 8.047 7.782 798 14,5

* withdrawn and ineligible proposals not taken into account;

** percentage of funded proposals in relation to evaluated proposals

*** evaluation not yet completed

Total number of applications

received

of which


│ 32│ 32

Success rates per country

13

12 12 1210

98

7 7 7 76

55 4 4 4

3 32

1

20

14

7

4

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

Franc

e UK

The N

ethe

rland

sAus

triaGer

man

yBelg

iumSwed

enDen

mar

kSpa

inEsto

niaHun

gary

Finlan

dIre

land

Cypru

sPor

tgua

l

Czech

Rep

ublic

Italy

Bulgar

iaGre

ece

Poland

Sloven

ia

Switzer

land

Israe

lNor

wayIce

land

Turke

y


│ 33│ 33

ERC Starting grant 2007-2011ERC Advanced grant 2008-2010Over 2000 ERC grantees

486

303 301

174161 150

132 125

9274

5642 37

24 22 20 20 16 9 8 4 3 2 1 1 10

100

200

300

400

500

UK

DE

FR NL

CH IT ES IL SE

BE

AT FI

DK

HU

NO EL IE PT

PL

CZ

CY

BG EE IS SI

TR

Country of HI

Fun

ded

Pro

posa

ls AdG StG


│ 34

ERC STG 2009-2011 Success Rates

ERC STG 2009-2011 Success rates by Years passed PhD with eligibility limits

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

# Complete years passed PhD

Suc

cess

rat

e by

C

ateg

ory

success rate 2009success rate 2010success rate 2011

2009

2010

2011


│ 35

ERC Starting Grant: 2011 CallGrantees by country of host Institution, 21 countri es Source: 486 proposals

│ 35

124

6458

49

29 2722 22 21

14 13 10 106 5 4 3 2 1 1 1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

UK DE FR NL IT ES CH IL BE SE AT DK FI IE NO EL HU PL CZ EE SI

Country of Host Institution

# F

unde

d P

ropo

sals

Social Sciences and Humantities

Physical Sciences and Engineering

Life Sciences


│ 36

ERC Starting Grant: 2011 CallGrantees by nationality – 38 nationalitiesSource: 486 proposals

│ 36

ERC STG 2011 Results Of Call% Funded proposals, and # proposals, by Applicant N ationality

83

57

504843

3125

21

141010 9 8 8 7 6 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

DE

UK IT FR NL

ES IL BE

US

DK FI

SE

CH IE EL

PT

CA

HU

NO AT

RU

CZ

HR IN RO

UA

AU

BG EE JP MX PL

BY C LT NZ

RS

TR

Applicant Nationality

% F

unde

d P

ropo

sals

0

90


│ 37

ERC Starting Grant: 2011 Call - Mobility

ERC STG 2011 Results Of Call # Main list Proposals Changing Country (total 34)

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

AT BE CH DE DK EE EL ES FR HU IL IT NL NO SE TR UK US

Country of Application or Host Institution

# P

ropo

sals

GainLoss


│ 38

ERC STG 2011 Success Rates by Domain

ERC STG 2011 Results Of CallSuccess rates by DomainCall success rate ~ 11.9 %

12.9211.73

9.4

13.5612.14

9.59

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

PE domain LS domain SH domain

Domain

% S

ucce

ss r

ate

by S

trea

m

Starters Consolidators


│ 39

StG 2011 – Age of Grantees

ERC STG 2011 Results Of Call* Average age of Grantees F = 37.44, Median Age = 3 7.85, Standard Deviation = 5.58Average age of Grantees M = 36.61, Median Age = 36. 89, Standard Deviation = 4.32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Unk

now

n 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

Age at Call Publication

# M

ain

list P

Is

MF


│ 40

SH – Female Applicants vs. Female Interviewees vs. Female Grantees

ERC STG 2011 - Monitoring Female results in Evaluation - SH domain

27.75%

22.35%

20.99%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%55%

SH1 SH2 SH3 SH4 SH5 SH6 Overallcall

Allocated Panel

% o

f F a

t diff

eren

t sta

ges

% submissions from F (378/950)

% step 2 who are F (68/188)

% funded who are F (30/90)


│ 41

STG 2011 F Panel Members Vs F Success rate

ERC STG 2011 % F Panel Members vs F Success rate

SH6SH5

SH4

SH3

SH2

SH1

PE9

PE8

PE7

PE6

PE5PE4PE3

PE2

PE10

PE1

LS9

LS8 LS7

LS6

LS5

LS4LS3

LS2

LS1

R2 = 0.1232

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

% F Panel Members

% F

Suc

cess

Rat

e


│ 42

ITALY in ERC Competitions


│ 43│ 43

Proposals by Host Institutions from Italy by call and domain

* Basis: ERC Starting & Advanced grant calls 2007 - 2011, evaluated proposals (withdrawn and ineligible proposals not taken into account)

96 117 96

825

181141

217

60 6288

557

161110

153

40 51 67 83

192

76 98 105123

115

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

AdG 2008 AdG 2009 AdG 2010 AdG 2011 StG 2007 StG 2009 StG 2010 StG 2011

AdG StG

PE

LS

SH

3814 evaluated proposals from Italian host institutions, by ERC call and domain


│ 44│ 44

ERC calls 2007 - 2011Granted proposals at Italian host institutions, by call and domain

* Italian research organisation to which the first grant agreement was signed

6

8

14

8

11

16

5

7 7

56 6

43

54

5 5 5

10

5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

AdG 2008 AdG 2009 AdG 2010 StG 2007 StG 2009 StG 2010 StG 2011

AdG StG

PE

LS

SH

145 selected projects from Italian host institutions, by ERC call and domain


│ 45

Success rates Italian Host institutions

* Basis: ERC Starting & Advanced grant calls 2007 - 2011, success rates : selected over evaluated proposals

10,2

11,9

13,8

16,1

13,8

1,6

4,3

6,35,7

15,8

3,4

6,8 6,8

8,1

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

18,0

20,0

StG 2007 StG 2009 StG 2010 StG 2011 AdG 2008 AdG 2009 AdG 2010

StG AdG

ERC call IT

Success rates: selected over evaluated proposals


│ 46│ 46

ERC grant distribution by countries of HI

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

UK FR DE NL CH IT ES IL SE BE AT FI DK HU NO IE EL PT PL CZ CY BG EE IS SI TR

Advanced Grant

Staring Grant

2,256 projects have been selected, one fifth corresponding to women PIs.

145 projects funded in Italy

* Institutions to which the first grant agreement was signed


│ 47

Selected institutions hosting ERC Grantees in Italy

* Institutions holding 5 or more grantees

1

3

5

4

5

6

10

4

2

1

2

2

4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE FLORENCE

FONDAZIONE CENTRO SAN RAFFAELE

UNIVERSITA COMMERCIALE 'LUIGI BOCCONI'

UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI TRENTO

UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA TOR VERGATA

UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA LA SAPIENZA

CONSIGLIO NAZIONALE DELLE RICERCHE

Starting Grants Advanced Grants


│ 48│ 48

Mobility Patterns I : Origin of Grantees

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

UK FR DE NL CH IT ES IL SE BE AT FI DK HU NO EL IE PT PL CZ CY BG EE IS SI TR

Foreign Nationals in the Country

Nationals In Country


│ 49

Mobility Patterns II : Residence of Grantees

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

UK FR DE IT NL IL ES SE BE FI CH DK HU AT EL NO IE PT PL CZ CY BG EE IS TR AL HR LT LU MT RO RS SI SK

Nationals Abroad

Nationals in theCountry


│ 50

321308

266

196194

125114

10510185 81 77

66 6555

44 41 37 3627 21 16 15 11 9 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

UK DE FR US IT CH ES NL SE BE AT DK FI PL HU IL CZ NO PT EL IE TR JP CA RO AU RS BG CY SK TW HR LT CL EE HK IS RU SI UA AR MX

Men

Women

Num

ber o

f pan

el m

embe

rs

Country of Panel Member's Host InstitutionBased on the eight ERC StG and AdG calls 2007 - 2011

ERC panel members by country of HI and gender

Averaged over the first eight ERC calls 34% of the ERC panel members were women.


│ 51

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !

[email protected]


│ 52

OTHER ERC SCHEMES


│ 53

� “Investigator-driven ‘blue sky’ research

� 2-4 excellent PIs with complementary skills

� Interdisciplinary research with added value

ERC Synergy GrantsEuropean Research Council

ERC call name

Budget Size of Grant

Publication of call

Submission Deadline(s)

ERC Synergy grantERC-2012-SyG

€150M (10% total 2012 budget)

Max. €15M for upto six years

25 Oct. 2011 25 Jan. 2012


│ 54

� Sole criterion is excellence – not collaboration for its own sake

� Investigator driven: no preset themes or priorities� Projects interdisciplinary in nature, using

multidisciplinary approaches� Projects involve new combinations of skills and

disciplines, bringing together researchers from different institutions, sectors or countries

ERC Synergy: project profileEuropean Research Council


│ 55

� Small groups of 2 – 4 Principal Investigators, notconsortia

� No transnationality requirement� PIs ideally located in the same place for significant

periods of the project� Time commitment of all PIs to project: expected to

spend at least 30% working time on project and 50% in an EU Member State or associated country

� PIs with excellent track records of independent creative thinking, regardless of career stage

ERC Synergy: PI profileEuropean Research Council


│ 56

PART A – online forms

A1 Proposal and PI infoA2 Host institution infoA3 Budget

PART B1 – submitted as .pdf

Section 1 Scientific proposal 15 p.

PART B2 – submitted as .pdf

Section 2 Track Record of all PIsExtended synopsis 5 p.CV (including “funding ID”) 2 p./PItrack record 2 p./PI

Annexes – submitted as .pdf- Statement of support by HI- If applicable: explanatory information on ethical issues

ERC Synergy: proposalEuropean Research Council


│ 57

Remote evaluation of full proposals by panel members and external

referees

Panel members meet and examine retained proposals and their reports

Select proposals for interview

Select proposals up to available budget

Approx top quarter

Approx top half

ERC Synergy: evaluationEuropean Research Council

Step 1 Panel meeting

Proposals retained for step 2

STEP 1 (5 panels)

Feedback toapplicants

STEP 2 (new panel)

Step 2 Panel meeting and interviews

Feedback toapplicants


│ 58

Objective:

“….to provide funds to enable ERC-funded ideas to be brought to a pre-demonstration stage where potential commercialisation opportunities have been identified.” (RevisedERC Work Programme 2011)

ERC Proof of Concept Grant


│ 59

• Eligibility: Holders of an ERC grant with an idea substantially drawn from an ERC-funded project

• Possible requested amount• max € 150 000 for a period of 12 months• may be awarded only once per ERC funded

project

• Outcome: A "package" to be presented to venture capitalists

The ERC “proof of concept” funding

Total budget for 2011: €10 million


│ 60

Proposal description

• A short description of the idea and itsrelation to the previous ERC grant

• Outline an early-stage innovation strategy for the idea

• Outline a reasonable and plausible plan of the activities

• Budget : list of requested resources and proper justification


│ 61

Evaluation

Evaluation: check that the proof of concept plan is reasonable and acceptable No scientific evaluation

Evaluators:

• From key innovation stakeholders (national public agencies, government/ministry departments, technology transfer offices of Universities, etc)

• Independent experts working remotely and if necessary meeting as an evaluation committee


│ 62

Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation criteria:

1. Innovation potentialMove the output of research towards the initial steps of pre-commercialisation

2. Quality of the proof of concept planSound approach for establishing technical and commercial feasibility

3. BudgetNecessary for the implementation of the proof of concept and properly justified


│ 63

ERC Proof of ConceptTime table 2011

• 2011 call deadlines:

� 1st Deadline: 15/06/2011

� 2nd Deadline: 08/11/2011

Guide for Applicants!!Published on the ERC homepage


│ 64

ANNEXES


│ 65

� A PI may hold only 1 ERC grant at any one time

� A PI may only submit 1 proposal per calendar year

� A PI who holds an ERC grant can only submit a proposal for ERC synergy if their grant expires before November 15 th 2013

� A PI who is a panel member in 2010 or 2012 may not apply in 2012 for the same type of grant

� A PI who submitted a proposal to a 2011 ERC call can only apply in 2012 for the same type of grant if their proposal was above the quality threshold at the end of step 1.


Restrictions on Submissions


│ 66│ 66

Host institution

Applicant legal entity: institution that engages and hosts the PI

for the duration of the project

Any type of legal entity: universities, research centres, b usiness

research units … as long as it is in MS or AC

Commitment of HI: to ensure that the PI may

- apply for funding independently

- manage research and funding for the project

- publish independently as senior author

- have access to reasonable space and facilities


│ 67

� Simple and flexible , no negotiations – take it or leave it

� Are portable

�Additional funding for StG or AdG for researchers moving to Europe or Associated Countries or for purchase of major equipment

� Cover 100% total eligible costs plus 20% indirect costs

ERC Grant agreementsEuropean Research Council


│ 68│ 68

Interdisciplinary Proposals

• Approach for Interdisciplinary proposals: “mainstreaming”

• Proposal submitted to a target panel primarily responsible for its evaluation

• Both Step 1 and Step 2:

� Assigned for reviews from PMs outside primary panel, if necessary

• Step 2:

� Remote reviewers: any reviewer in the world (hence any domain)


│ 69│ 69

Approach taken for “streaming” (StG only)

• “By default”: people fall into the stream that corresponds by the number of years past Ph.D. (covers 90-95% of cases)� Starters 2 – 6 years past Ph.D� Consolidators: 7 – 12 years past Ph.D

• Change of stream: rather strict / conservative approach� Applicants need to argue their case for different consideration.� All “objective” (parental leave, military service, long term illness, etc)

reasons that apply for extending the eligibility window apply by analogy to extending the “starter” window.

� Subjective reasons: “Career break” outside science/research (e.g. volunteer work, professional activity completely unrelated to research career, unemployment, etc)

� Applicant needs to attach a minimum amount of documentation to make claim credible