APRE 2013

www.apre.it

Horizon 2020European Research Council (ERC)

Marco Ferraro,

6 July 2016

The structure of the scientific project proposal

The Researcher (PI : Principal Investigator)

ERC funds individual scientists

Any nationality, age or current place of work in the world

Make Europe more attractive for global scientific talent- Favor "brain gain" and reverse "brain drain"

Starting, consolidator or advanced grant (depending on work experience and scientific achievements)

Exceptional profile

Research team (to be created)

The PI can choose national or trans-national team members if scientific added value proven

The grant covers the salary of team members

ERC basicsSubstantial grants to the very best

ERC basicsSubstantial grants to fund frontier research

Frontier research project

All fields of fundamental research: Physical Sciences & Engineering, Life Sciences, Social Sciences & Humanities

Bottom-up: no predetermined subjects, no priorities

High risk/high gain. Curiosity-driven research

5 years projects

No consortia

Host Institution (HI) in EU countries or AC

The one where the researcher already works, or any other

institution established in the EU or associated countries

Grants are portable (= the PI can change Host Institution)

Universities, research centres; public or private

Profile of the ERC Starting Grant Principal Investigator

The Principal Investigator shall have been awarded their first PhD over 7 and up to 12 years prior to 1 January 2017 and must have

produced at least one important publications without the participation of their PhD supervisor

The Principal Investigator shall have been awarded their first PhD over 7 and up to 12 years prior to 1 January 2017.

A competitive Consolidator Grant Principal Investigator must have

produced several important publications without the participation of

their PhD supervisor.

Profile of the ERC Advanced Grant Principal Investigator

ERC Advanced Grant Principal Investigators are expected to be active

researchers and to have a track record of significant research

achievements in the last 10 years which must be presented in the

application

Profile of the ERC Consolidator Grant Principal Investigator

ERC Proposals: Forms

A Forms:

• To be completed online (administrative information & Budget)

B1 Form

• Extended synopsis (5 pages)

• CV (2 pages)

• Track record (2 pages)

B2 Form

• Scientific proposal -including budget table (15 pages)

Annexes

• HI commitment letter

• Ethical issues

Content of the application

Three separate components to the application, prepared on the EC Participant

Portal Submission System (PPSS) – familiarise yourself with this early!

•Administrative Proposal Submission Forms (not actually now termed “Part A”)

•Research Proposal (still confusingly called “Part B”!)

•Supporting Documentation

• Five sections to the Administrative Proposal Submission Forms:

1. General information

2. Administrative data of participating organisations

3. Budget

4. Ethics

5. Call-specific questions

Content of the application 2

Part B – Research Proposal: Separated into two parts (Parts B1 and B2)

• Part B1 – divided into four sections:

Cover page (template provided)

a) Extended synopsis of the scientific proposal (max. 5 pages)

b) Curriculum vitae (max. 2 pages – suggested format given but can be modified)

c) Early achievements or 10-year track record (max. 2 pages)

• Part B2 – the Scientific proposal (max. 15 pages, divided into three sections):

a) State of the art and objectives

b) Methodology

c) Resources (including project costs)

• Supporting Documentation (PDF format)

a)Host institution letter of support (template provided)

b)Scanned copy of PhD certificate or other documents confirming eligibility

c)Any other supporting documents (e.g., ethical self-assessments)

Application Process

Single-stage application with two-stage evaluation (with panel interviews in Brussels at

2nd stage, only for StG and CoG)

• All applications must be electronic via the Commission’s Participant Portal (use link

at

http://erc.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/index.

html )

• Register as soon as possible to obtain a login and password

• Complete A forms

• Download, complete & upload PDF files of Part B & Annexes

Application Process 2

Start in plenty of time and check you can save as pdf!

• Remember to save your work every 30 minutes or it may be lost

• Can revise and resubmit up to deadline (submit often!)

• Remember to press submit button!

• Ensure all forms and documents are uploaded correctly before

the deadline – double-check by downloading them

• Deadlines and page limits are strictly enforced

Participants Portal Help and Support

Contact the Participants Portal IT Helpdesk at

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/api/contact/index.html for help with technical

aspects of submission of proposals

Application Process 3

The ERC starting and consolidator grants have two rounds of testing – the written

application (with a ~20% success rate) and the interview (with a 30~40% success

rate). You need to succeed at both to get a grant.

The application and interview are two distinct rounds - not simply a written and oral

version of the same grant.

Fully utilise every section of Part B1 and Part B2 to sell your application.

- Abide by every rule of length and format. Don’t try to cheat length by using a tiny

font or cramming – the reviewers read a lot of applications, and they’ll pick up your

application and be exhausted and irritated before they read a word. Equally, don’t

have a short application. If you only use 13/15 pages in Part B2 it looks like you just

ran out of ideas.

What to do before applying

• Focus on high-quality science

• Try to be independent

• Identify your panel(s)

• Find and meet grantees in your panel(s)

• Compare your CV with those of grantees

• Ask grantees evaluate your CV

How Evaluators Read the Proposals

• They first read title and abstract.

• The abstract already decides if they are interested in reading more.

• The second thing they read is the publication list.

• They often flip through the pages. This means: Your proposal needs to be

well structured. Important parts of your proposal should be eye catching.

• They normally make a triage of 3 piles: A) best, B) intermediate, C) out.

• They have many proposals to read. They have little time. Make their work

easier in presenting them a nice proposal.

• The following criteria are not used: nationality, gender, age, amount of

requested grant.

Cosmetics and Finish 1

What does this mean for your proposal?

In terms of formalities:

• Subdivision of your text: subheaders, paragraphs...

• Bulleting, numbering...

•Ask yourself: which sub-headers are best to describe yourself and your

achievements?

• Hierarchy of titles should be clear

• Include graphs, tables

Such aspects make your text light and easier to read!

Cosmetics and Finish 2

What does this mean for your proposal?

In terms of content:

• Clear structure, logical flow

• Your idea, goal, method should be visible at once

Cosmetics and Finish 3

The finish of your proposal:

• Proof-read your proposal with the evaluation criteria before you. Imagine you‘re

an evaluator, evaluating point per point your proposal (stage 1 and 2).

• Does your proposal answer the following questions: What, why, how, why now,

why you?

• Check the format (eligibility!)

• Do not go beyond the allowed maximum number of pages

• No repetition, no double information

• Figures have to be understandable in black-and-white

• Have your English checked by a native English speaker. Some evaluators care

about the English.

One evaluator pointed it like this:

“An applicant who does not take his time to write a clear and nice proposal

delegates the work to the evaluator, because the evaluator then has to struggle

through the proposal to find the essence. The more the applicant can save the time

of the evaluator, the better is his chance. An evaluator never has enough time“.

Another evaluator‘s opinion:

“In the top 15% everybody deserves the grant. If a person is in the

top 15%, a nice proposal can make the difference”.

• Read the Guide for Applicants and the Ideas Work Programme.

• Any doubts about your eligibility or any other questions, contact one of the

NCPs or the ERCEA

• subscribe to the ERC newsletter http://erc.europa.eu/keep-updated-erc

│ 17

Preparing an application

Guidelines and other Resources

http://erc.europa.eu/

│ 19

Preparing an application Check the already Funded Projects

Menu allows

searching by

Funding Scheme,

Call Year and

Country of Host

Institution.

│ 20

Submission of ProposalsCheck the statistics

Menu allows

searching by

Funding Scheme,

Domain/Panel

and Grantees by

Country of Host

Institution.

APRE 2013

www.apre.it

Part B1: Extended synopsis, CV and Track Record

Preparing an application Hints and tips ( Part B 1)

Pay particular attention to the ground-breaking nature of the research project – no incremental research! Think big! State-of-the-art is not enough.

Know your competitors – what is the state of play and why is your idea and scientific approach outstanding?

Remember that only the extended Synopsis is read at Step 1 that gives first impression – concise and clear presentation is crucial (evaluators are not necessarily all experts in the fields!)

Also in Part B1 outline of the methodological approach (feasibility!)

Show your scientific independence in you CV

Avoid any suspicion of plagiarism!

Key tip:

Write about your career projection in the same way you write a scientific paper. Youwouldn’t write “we investigated gene X, because of the twelve candidate genes the lab next door had a knockout of this one available”. Instead you would write up results that placed intent and direction in your activity, justifying gene X as your primary focus for a reason.

Likewise, don’t describe your career trajectory as it actually occurred, “I did a PhD inmetabolism, then my partner moved to Leuven so I looked for a post-doc and got offered one in dendritic cell biology”, rewrite it with intent and direction – “I have had a long-term interest on the impact of metabolism on the innate immune response, so in order to gain skills in both disciplines I first pursued a PhD in biochemistry and afterwards moved to a ….. laboratory.

Now I am able to utilize my training in both disciplines, with my independent laboratory focused on the effect of metabolic processes on monocyte activity.”

Do not use the extended synopsis in Part B1 to simply summarise the project of Part B2. Use it to discuss the novelty of the approach or the concept. You do not know which part a reviewer will read first, so each document needs to be able to stand alone.

Ensure that Part B1 of your proposal is approachable and convincing to specialists and non-specialists alike. Part B1 is evaluated only by panel review, by reviewers who can have specific or general knowledge of the field. Thus you should look at the disciplines represented on your panel and at the panel members in previous years to obtain an idea of the level of prior knowledge that you can assume.

THE CV AND THE TRACK RECORD

• It is important to demonstrate leadership. Give examples of your track-record, forexample:

a. Student supervision history—where they are now, their funding successes, etc.

b. Your experience in leading research collaborations (national and international).

• If your proposal includes interdisciplinary elements, illustrate how you will be the seniorpartner in the project.

• You need to provide irrefutable evidence for impact and excellence, e.g., facts on awards,services, papers, talks, students, tools; lasting impact in academia and industry; yourquality as networker and advisor; and, last but not least, your ability to shape and createresearch fields. Don’t be afraid to use numbers such as acceptance rates, citations anddownloads where appropriate to do so, but don’t use numbers where you might becompared to other applicants in a negative light.

• Use bibliographic query tools to help you find statistics and numbers for your profile but,again, only use them to give statistics that will clearly be seen in a positive light byreviewers.

• Be specific where possible:

a. "I am a Marie Curie Fellow" vs. "I am the youngest European marie curie fellow in the fieldof X".

b. "700 citations" vs. "Most cited paper on the subject of X since 1999".

• Avoid any claim that cannot be independently verified.

• Your proposal will be assessed on two criteria. 50% is your project, and it will be up toyou to come up with a great idea. 50%, however, is your past achievements, and you willhave to work hard on these. What you need is irrefutable evidence for impact andexcellence. That is, facts on awards, services, papers, talks, students, tools; lasting impactin academia and industry; your quality as networker and advisor; and, last but not least,your ability to shape and create research fields. Play by numbers: acceptance rates,citations, downloads. Check the list of past grantees, their numbers and achievements toget an idea of what you're up against.

Starting Grant/Consolidator Grant specific suggestions:

• a. Demonstrate your independence both in the profile and in your responses toquestions at the interview stage.

• b. Describe your international experience and how it has benefitted your career.

• c. Explain how the award will enhance your independent career and how your plansalign to the aims and goals of the ERC programme.

CV preparation: Examples

“Highest GPA award in Civil Engineering” BAD

“Highest GPA award in Civil Engineering (1st in a class of 130,admission rate: 25%)” GOOD

APRE 2013

www.apre.it

Part B2: Full scientific proposal

Preparing an application

Hints and tips (Part B 2)

• Do not waste the second part (Part B2) – provide sufficientdetail on methodology, work plan, selection of case studiesetc. (15 pages)

• Check coherency of figures, justify requested resources

• Explain involvement of team members.

• Provide alternative strategies to mitigate risk.

• Not evaluated at Step 1

• Max. 15 pages

• Consists of:a.State-of-the-art & objectivesb.Methodologyc.Resources including project costs & costing table – justification is

key

• As a rough length guide, think of ~4 pages for state-of-the-artand objectives, ~2 pages for progress beyond state-of-the-art,~8 pages for methodology, ~1 page for budget. Adapt to yourparticular project

• You need to be ambitious. Prove that you are thinking as future PI, not as a post-

doc.

• This is not a conservative grant, where they pick solid projects. The ERC wants to

fund the best and brightest. You can definitely go too far, but the panel is generally

much more forgiving on over-ambition than under-ambition.

• Refer to your unique edge on this project. Is this a direct continuation of your post-

doc work? If so, describe how this builds off some technique or tool that you

pioneered, giving you an edge over the competition.

• Is this a meld of the skills you picked up in your different training periods? Then

work in references to strategies you have used in the past. Is this possible due to a

unique combination of institute resources or collaborations? Then work in the

network you created. Be relatively subtle, the place for direct marketing of your

work is Part B1, but references like “using the strategy that I previously designed

for …” show that you are highly capable of getting this to work.

Preparing an application

Hints and tips

The application needs to have an accurate assessment of risk – do you have a back-up

plan in case that approach doesn’t work? Why is it that you have a shot of getting this

to work while no one else does? (if it is due to your training or past successes, this

should be the focus on Part B1). It is not enough to have a grand idea; you need to

show that you will have a decent change at success.

- For Starting and Consolidators, you need to show a future career path. The ERC is

not just funding a project, it is funding the start of a new elite laboratory. You need to

have tangible outcomes during the 5 year period, but there should also be a sense of

how you will build on this after the grant has finished.

Ethical issues need to show that you have a realistic idea of what is involved, but you

do not need to have approval at the time of application (you will need to before you get

money from the ERC, however). If it just involves mice a simple referral to an animal

ethics committee should be sufficient, if it involves humans or primates you need to

demonstrate that you have sufficient knowledge of the ethical and legal framework to

make your project practical.

Preparing an application

Hints and tips

State-of-the-art and Objectives

Remember this should be your dream project – consider what excites you about the

research and convey this in your application

• Emphasise the ground-breaking nature and potential impact of the research

• Explain how your project will open new horizons and opportunities

• Keep the evaluation checklist (pp 31-31 in WP) by you while writing the application to

ensure you cover every point fully:

a)To what extent does your proposed research address important challenges?

b)To what extent are your objectives ambitious and beyond the state-of-the-art ?

c) How much is the proposed research high risk/high gain ?

Methodology

Provide a clear, concise work plan giving details of intermediate goals

• Explain what each team member is doing (and his/her background/recruitment

profile)

• Highlight any intermediate stages where you may need to adjust your project

planning

• Provide a risk assessment and Plan B

• Clearly explain how you will manage your project and disseminate the results

• Include diagrams to aid explanation

• Include a Gantt chart to illustrate the project schedule

• Include a PERT (Program Evaluation Review Technique) chart to show the

inter-relationship of the tasks involved in completing the project

Methodology 2

Again, remember the ERC evaluation criteria for the research project:

a) To what extent is the outlined scientific approach feasible?

b) To what extent is the proposed research methodology appropriate to achieve the

goals of the project?

c) To what extent does the proposal involve the development of novel methodology?

Resources

Evaluators will be judging to what extent are the proposed timescales and resources

necessary and properly justified – the crucial points here are to list clearly and justify

fully all your requested resources

• Ensure your text matches the figures in the costing table!

• Remember to include all possible eligible direct costs e.g., personnel, consumables,

equipment, travel and subsistence, publication costs, audit costs

• In H2020 the ERC Grant Agreement specifies that scientific publications arising from

ERC funding must be made available through open access – so don’t forget to include

costs for open access publications during the project

• ERC also now encourages data and data-related products, e.g., computer codes, to

be deposited in relevant open access databases – include costs for this too during the

project

Cost table

APREAgenzia per la Promozione della Ricerca

europeavia Cavour, 71 00184 - Romawww.apre.it

Tel. (+39) 06-48939993Fax. (+39) 06-48902550

Serena Borgnaborgna@apre.it

Angelo D‘Agostinodagostino@apre.it

Marco Ferraroferraro@apre.it

Facebook Linkedin APRE Youtube