polish academy of sciences, warsaw (2)...1. publications in major international peer-reviewed...
TRANSCRIPT
European Research Council Grants in H2020
Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw (2)
Research Operations
Presenter: Bethan Hosking JonesEmail: [email protected]
Research Operations
The ERC ‘Ideology’
The ERC’s goal is to fund excellent PIs to explore the frontiers of research across all
disciplinary fields.
In particular it encourages proposals of an interdisciplinary nature which cross
boundaries between fields of research, pioneering proposals addressing new and
emerging fields of research or proposals introducing unconventional, innovative
approaches and scientific inventions.
Think:
� Ground-breaking nature
� Potential impact on the frontiers of research
� Intellectual excellence
� ‘Bottom up’ funding without pre-determined priorities
Scientific excellence is the sole criterion on which ERC frontier research
grants are awarded.
Research Operations
Eligibility Criteria – Who can apply
Starting Grant Consolidator Grant Advanced Grant
Eligibility
Criteria
PI’s PhD would have been
awarded between
≥2 and ≤ 7 years prior to 1/1/15
PI’s PhD would have been
awarded between
≥ 7 and ≤ 12 years prior to
1/1/15
None
Profile of
candidate
Already shown the potential for
research independence with at
least one ‘important’ publication
without the participation of their
PhD Supervisor.
Already demonstrated research
independence with several
‘important’ publications
without the participation of
their PhD Supervisor
Experienced researchers with
significant research
achievements in the last 10
years.
Track
Record
• Five publications
• Research Monographs
• Granted Patents
• Invited presentations
• Prizes/Awards/Memberships
• Ten publications
• Research Monographs
• Granted Patents
• Invited presentations
• Prizes/Awards/Memberships
• Ten publications
• Research Monographs
• Granted Patents
• Invited presentations
• Prizes/Awards/Memberships
• Research Expeditions
• Organisation of Conferences
• Major contribution to careers
of excellent researchers
• Industrial innovation/DesignBe realistic! Am I ready to apply?
Research Operations
ERC Re-application restrictions
More restrictions on resubmissions at application stage in H2020:-
� Score A at step 1 = able to resubmit to a 2016 ERC call
� Score B at step 1 = not able to resubmit to a 2016 ERC call
� Score C at step 1 = not able to resubmit to a 2016 or 2017 ERC call
Research Operations
Structure of the Applications Forms
Part A – Administrative and Summary Forms (completed directly onto system)
� A1 Proposal & PI information & HI Legal Representative (including abstract)
� A2 Host Institution(s) information & PIC (one A2 form per institution)
� A3 Budget (summary financial information)
Part B1 – Proposal Details (template from Participant Portal, submitted as .pdf)
� Cover page & proposal summary/abstract
� Extended Synopsis (5 pages)
� Curriculum Vitae including Funding ID (2 pages)
� Track Record (2 pages)
Part B2 – Research Proposal (template from PPSS, submitted as .pdf)
Section 2 - Research Proposal (15 pages, excluding ethical issues table and annex)
a) State-of-the-art and objectives
b) Methodology
c) Resources (including project costs)
d) Ethical and security sensitive issues (including ethics table)
Annexes
Commitment of the Host Institution (template from PPSS, submitted as .pdf)
PhD Certificate, and (if applicable) evidence of extensions (as .pdf)
Ethical Issues Annex (if applicable) (template on PPSS, 2 pages, excl. copies of authorisations)
Same
Research Operations
The Assessment Process
STEP 1 - EvaluationSTEP 1 - Evaluation Eligibility CheckEligibility CheckProposal reviewed by panel
(part B1 only)Proposal reviewed by panel
(part B1 only)Panel meetings and rankingPanel meetings and ranking
Applicants informed if their proposal is
retained for stage 2
Applicants informed if their proposal is
retained for stage 2
STEP 2 - EvaluationSTEP 2 - Evaluation
Full proposal reviewed by independent remote
reviewers and Panel Members (parts B1 and B2)
Full proposal reviewed by independent remote
reviewers and Panel Members (parts B1 and B2)
Interviews of PIs
(StG & CoG only)
Interviews of PIs
(StG & CoG only)Panel meetings and rankingPanel meetings and ranking
Applicants informed if their proposal has been
recommended for funding
Applicants informed if their proposal has been
recommended for funding
Applicant submits full proposal through the Participant Portal
selecting primary panel (and secondary if needed)
Research Operations
What are the reviewers asked to review?
PI’s Excellence (intellectual capacity), Creativity and Commitment are central
Intellectual Capacity and Creativity
• The PI demonstrates the ability to propose and conduct ground-breaking research.
• The PI provides evidence of creative independent thinking.
• The PI’s achievements have typically gone beyond the state-of-the-art.
• The PI demonstrates sound leadership in the training and advancement of young
scientists (Advanced Grants)
Commitment
• The PI demonstrates the necessary level of commitment to the project’s execution and
willingness to devote a significant amount of time to the project: ≥50% PI time for
Starters, ≥40% for Consolidators, ≥30% for Advanced Grants.
• PI will work for minimum of 50% time in EU Member State or Associated Country
The Principal Investigator
Research Operations
What are the reviewers asked to review?
Ensure to clearly address every criteria!
Reviewers are asked to choose : Fully agree / Agree partially / Disagree partially/ Strongly disagree
The ground-breaking nature, ambition and feasibility of the project are central
Potential impact of the project
• The proposed project addresses important challenges and is high risk/high gain.
• The objectives are ambitious and beyond state of the art (e.g. novel concepts and
approaches or development across disciplines).
Scientific approach
• The outlined scientific approach is feasible and the methodology is appropriate to
achieve the goals of the project.
• The proposal involves the development of novel methodology
• The proposed timescales and resources are necessary and properly justified.
The Project
Research Operations
CV – Part B1.b
2 Pages maximum - template available from the Participant Portal.
� Remember: career breaks or unconventional gaps in your ten-year track record
need to be clearly explained!
� Academic record� Research record� Fellowships, Awards and Prizes� Supervision of graduate students
Additional appendix (not included in 2 page limit) relating to funding.
� Details of on-going grants� Details of applications
… and their relation to current proposal.
Research Operations
Presenting yourself / CV
� Remember to address the full requirement of the track record and highlight your best
achievements. Avoid ‘British’ understatement – I am an excellent researcher! **
� Include a wide range of research highlights, including extra activities (outreach work and research
symposia) – can you lead a team?
� Explain national prizes and well-renowned fellowships or anything that is unique to your country
� Highlight achievements which shows international standing and wider impact of research
� Website, scientific blog or podcasts? Add a link to it …but remember to keep it UP TO DATE
� Provide evidence of international cooperation and activities, if applicable
� Refer explicitly to the criteria used in the Grant Call documents – use their terms/phrases
� Remember, you need to let the reviewers know why YOU and why NOW?
� Ask as many people as possible to review it...
Sell yourself!
Research Operations
Strengthening your CV – with evidence
Research What are your key achievements?
• A creative approach you’ve
taken
• New knowledge you’ve
generated
• How this has influenced your
field
• Fruitful collaborations you’ve
set up/initiated
• Technical difficulties you’ve
overcome
Teaching • Have you supervised
students/what types?
• Have you designed any
projects?
• Have your students been
successful?
Be very specific about
your outcomes!!
Be creative(and daring)
but
be concise(you only have 2
pages!)
Use it to demonstrate
your leadership
Research Operations
‘Early achievements track record’ – Part B1.c
1. Publications in major international peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary scientific
journals and/or in the leading international peer-reviewed journals, peer-reviewed
conferences proceedings and/or monographs of their respective research fields,
highlighting five representative publications, those without the presence as co-
author of their PhD supervisor, and the number of citations (excluding self-citations)
they have attracted (if applicable).
2. Granted patent(s) (if applicable).
3. Invited presentations to peer-reviewed, internationally established conferences
and/or international advanced schools (if applicable).
4. Prizes and Awards (if applicable).
Research Operations
Track record – some ideas
• Try to make it interesting to read - think about including pictures
of journals relating to your work or relate it to current issues!
• Find interesting angles on your achievements e.g. “I was the first
UK national invited to be editor of XYZ journal…” – it might be
happenstance but use it to your advantage!
• Provide plenty of evidence to support your statements - h-index, cumulative citation
index excluding self-citations, average impact factor of first/corresponding
publications (excluding reviews)
• You have limited space (2 pages) so be creative –
use graphs/images to convey information succinctly
Citations per year Publications per yearRemember: Your ‘Excellence’ needs to stand
out, you are competing against the best
Research Operations
Track Record – some examples
� My most important scientific contributions have been my work on the hereditary breast
cancer gene xxxx conducted while I was a tenured Assistant Professor at McGill University
where I led a research group comprising a research assistant, a research genetic counsellor
and a variable number of students.
� On the basis of this work I set up an international group of around 20 researchers who study
the xxx and I have arranged four meetings of this group since 2009 in the Netherlands, UK,
USA and Canada.
� As a clinician-scientist who is equally at home in the clinic and the laboratory, I feel that I am
especially well positioned to lead research projects on patient-based problems and deliver
translational benefits of research back to the clinic. I have both depth and breadth of
expertise in the field of hereditary cancer and I have obtained over $600K in grants for
hereditary breast cancer research over the last four years …, and I was the local lead
investigator for a national trial ….breast and ovarian cancer (Gelmon et al., Lancet Oncology,
2011).
� I completed my PhD in 2007 and have taken 18 months career break with maternity leave
since then so I would categorise myself eligible as a “starting investigator” for this application.
Research Operations
Abstract – Part B1 cover & Part A1
My great idea
Be ambitious
(but feasible)
Ground breaking research
‘State of the art’
Novelty
Risky and path breaking
Multi disciplinary
element
Novel methodology
‘Readable’ by
generalists
Look at past
examples!
Ask colleagues from
different fields to
review it.
Make sure to
use ‘key’ words
Start with the Start with the
basics details (so
that generalists can
understand) …go in
to more depth.
If possible and If possible and
appropriate, mention
the contribution of the
planned research to EU
policy objectives!
Be enthusiastic,
positive and
demonstrate a clear
vision (and language)
Consider writing the
full description of the
proposal (Part B2
Section 2) first!
Think of a catch
acronym!
Research Operations
Abstract – some examples
� The proposed project seeks to open a new research front within the field…
� Outputs from the project will be a complete understanding of the properties of these new
objects and a road map charting the next steps for research in the field.
� An innovative and emerging materials science led approach is now required to understand the
factors at play limiting xxx, thus opening the door to realising their functional potential. … This
proposal strikes at the heart of all these issues and …
� This world-leading study will enhance Europe’s strengths in public health, nutrition and genetic
epidemiology, and create a valuable future resource.
� Our study will provide decisive evidence on this debate by proposing a new methodology for
studying the impact of economic policies on public health, and in so doing advancing an
emerging new research tradition…
� Paleomagnetism has played a pivotal role in developing our modern understanding of the Earth,
and remains one of the primary tools used to study the structure and dynamics of the Earth and
other planets…… Adopting cutting-edge techniques from physics and materials science …
� Some of the most interesting and controversial periods of Earth’s history occur far beyond the
current limits of our confidence in the paleomagnetic signals used to study them. xxx will solve
this problem by…
