Page 1 Marie Curie Schemes Science is not the whole story! (How to write a successful Marie Curie...
-
Upload
dustin-smallwood -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Page 1 Marie Curie Schemes Science is not the whole story! (How to write a successful Marie Curie...
Page 1
Marie Curie Schemes
Science is not the whole story!
(How to write a successful Marie Curie RTN Proposal)
Siobhan HarkinSiobhan Harkin
Page 2
Marie Curie Schemes
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Community fellowships Fellowships/year (average)
TrainingnetworksMarie Curiefellowships
History of Fellowships
Page 3
Marie Curie Schemes
Human Resources and Mobility in FP6Human Resources and Mobility in FP6
InitialTraining
Return and Reintegration Grants
AdvancedTraining
Excellence ChairsGrantsAwards
Research Training Networks
Conferences and Training Courses
Host Fellowships for Early-Stage
IndividualFellowships
Host Fellowships for Transferof Knowledge
Transfer ofKnowledge
Page 4
Marie Curie Schemes
Do’s and Don’ts
• Read the Guide for Proposers (application form!)
• http://fp6.cordis.lu/fp6/calls.cfm
• Follow the instructions to the letter!
• Use the Handbooks
• Use common sense!
• Electronic submission – don’t!!!!
Marie CurieMarie Curie
Page 5
Marie Curie Schemes
What is a Research Training Network (RTN)?
A Research Training Network consists of a consortium of research teams located in different countries that propose a common
research project to serve as a vehicle for providing training and, where necessary, transfer-of-knowledge.
Page 6
Marie Curie Schemes
• Well-defined collaborative research projects of recognised international stature
• Minimum 3 partners in 3 Countries (expected to be more)
• Flexible framework for the Training and Development of Researchers
• Appropriate mix of Early Stage and Experienced researchers
• Promotion of multidisciplinary research
• Up to 3 year fellowships, including short stays
Marie Curie Research Training Marie Curie Research Training NetworksNetworks
Page 7
Marie Curie Schemes
• B1 SCIENTIFIC QUALITY OF THE PROJECT– B1.1. Research topic (one A4 page) – B1.2. Project objectives (three A4 pages) – B1.3. Scientific originality of the project (two A4 pages) – B1.4. Research method (two A4 pages) – B1.5. Work plan (two A4 pages, plus tables and charts)
• B2 TRAINING AND/OR TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE ACTIVITIES– B2.1. Content and quality of the training and transfer of knowledge programme (three A4
pages)– B2.2 Impact of the training and/or transfer of knowledge programme (two A4 pages) – B2.3. Planned recruitment of early-stage and experienced researchers (one A4 page +
table) • B3 QUALITY/CAPACITY OF THE NETWORK PARTNERSHIP
– B3.1. Collective expertise of the network teams (one A4 page per network team) – B3.2. Intensity and quality of networking (one A4 page) – B3.3. Relevance of Partnership Composition (one A4 page)
• B4. MANAGEMENT AND FEASIBILITY– B4.1. Proposed management and organisational structure (two A4 pages) – B4.2. Management know-how and experience of network co-ordinator (one A4 page) – B4.3. Management know-how and experience of network teams (½ A4 page per network
team) • B5. RELEVENCE TO THE OBJECTIVES OF THE ACTIVITY (TWO A4 PAGES) • B6. ADDED VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY (TWO A4 PAGES) • B7. INDICATIVE FINANCIAL INFORMATION (ONE A4 PAGE, PLUS TABLE) • B8. PREVIOUS PROPOSALS AND CONTRACTS• B9. OTHER ISSUES (TWO A4 PAGES)
RTN - Proposal StructureRTN - Proposal Structure
Page 8
Marie Curie Schemes
• Individual evaluation of proposals
– Each proposal is evaluated against the applicable criteria independently by at least four experts who filled in individual evaluation forms giving marks and providing comments.
• Consensus– For each proposal a consensus report is prepared. The
report faithfully reflects the views of the independent experts.
• Panel evaluation– A panel discussion is convened to examine and
compare the consensus reports and marks in a given area, to review the proposals with respect to each other and, in specific cases (e.g. equal scores) to make recommendations on a priority order and/or on possible clustering or merging of proposals.
Marie Curie – Evaluation of ProposalsMarie Curie – Evaluation of Proposals
Page 9
Marie Curie Schemes
Scoring• There is a total of six sections (B1-B6) that are each scored 0-5
• A weighting factor is then applied
• Total score for a proposal is 100%
• For RTN’s the science score represents only 30% of total!!!!
– 15% for the “WHAT?”
– 15% for the “WHO?”
• Sections (B1, B2, B4) require a minimum score (threshold)
• There is a total minimum threshold of 70%
• Need to address all of the issues to maximise scores
• You must focus on the objectives of the activity to be successful
• Look carefully at the score matrix
Marie Curie – Evaluation of ProposalsMarie Curie – Evaluation of Proposals
Page 10
Marie Curie Schemes
RTNRTN
Activity Research Training Networks
W=Weighting(1)
T= Threshold W (%) T (/5)
Scientific Quality of the Proposal / Project15 3
Training Activities / Transfer of Knowledge20 4
Quality of the Host/ network partnership 15 -
Management and Feasibility15 3
Relevance to the objectives of the specific activity 20 -
Added value to the Community 15 -
Notes: All activities will be subject to a threshold in the total score of 70%(1) W = Weighting expressed as a percentage, T = Threshold score out of 5
Page 11
Marie Curie Schemes
RTNRTN
Activity Research Training Networks
W=Weighting(1)
T= ThresholdW Content
Content of the Proposal / Project
15
Training Activities / Transfer of Knowledge 20
Quality of the Host 15
Management and Feasibility 15
Relevance to the objectives of the specific activity
20
“Describe the extent to which the overall capacity to train / achieve transfer of
knowledge will be increased by the network. If relevant, describe the potential for the project to overcome fragmentation in the particular area of the networks’ research”
Added value to the Community
15
“Co-ordination or synergy with regional, national or international activities or
programmes in research, training or areas such as higher education should be
presented”
Page 12
Marie Curie Schemes
• Total of 326 proposals evaluated by 344 experts– 109 were below threshold = 33%!– Almost all of these missed the training threshold
(4/5)– 50% of those under Training threshold had total
>70%
• 41 on the funded list = 13% success (compared to 36% in FP%)!
• Irish success rate the highest at 16% (8 funded)
• Average size of funded RTN 11 partners with budget of €3.3m and about 450 researcher months
RTN – First Round ResultsRTN – First Round Results
Page 13
Marie Curie Schemes
RTN – First Round ResultsRTN – First Round Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Score
Fre
qu
en
cy
Frequency
Page 14
Marie Curie SchemesType of actions covered by the call Dead-line for reception of
proposals
Research Training Networks 3 April 03
19 November 03
Early Stage Training Fellowships 2 April 03
11 February 04
Conferences and Training Courses 1 April 03
20 April 04
Transfer of Knowledge fellowships 22 May 03
19 May 04
Intra-European Fellowships 12 March 03
18 February 04
International Incoming Fellowships 21 May 03
12 February 04
International Outgoing Fellowships 21 May 03
12 February 04
Excellence Grants (Teams) 20 May 03
18 May 04
Chairs 20 May 03
21 January 04
Excellence Awards 20 May 03
18 May 04
European Re-Integration Grants from 15 April 03 to October 04
International Re-integration Grants
from 15 April 03 to October 04
FP6: RoadmapFP6: Roadmap
Single call published on 17 December 2002. This roadmap and indeed the schemes and budgets covers first 2 years of FP6. The period 2004-2006 will be reviewed by the Commission in 2004
Page 15
Marie Curie Schemes
FP6: BudgetFP6: Budget
Budget breakdown for 2002-2004. There is a total of €636m over the first two years (includes €6.5 for coordination actions). This will be reviewed in 2003 and revised depending on take up in the various elements of the programme
Type of actions covered by the call Budget (2002-2004) €m
% of Total
Research Training Networks 115 (April & Dec) 18%
Early Stage Training Fellowships 130 20%
Conferences and Training Courses 20 3%
Transfer of Knowledge fellowships 85 13%
Intra-European Fellowships 110 17%
International Incoming Fellowships 20 3%
International Outgoing Fellowships 28 4%
Excellence Grants (Teams) 55 9%
Chairs 10 2%
Excellence Awards 0.5 0%
European Re-Integration Grants 39 6%
International Re-integration Grants 17 3%