FP7 Marie Curie
Initial Training Network
Application workshop
Tatiana Panteli
3rd November 2011
What is ITN?
Bottom up: The topic of the project is freely chosen
Duration: 4 years
Post-grads: aimed at researchers in their first five years of their career (3 to 36
months appointments)
Partnership: typically multi-host but single host or twining possible
Private sector involvement: participation is essential. Two level possible
Who do you need in
your consortium?
•
•
•
•
•
•
Partners must match activities in
proposal
Every partner mast add value:
unique knowledge, expertise, etc
Appropriate balance of sectors –
industry, academia, civil society,
user groups, etc
The purpose of the scheme is
RESEARCH TRAINING
NOTE – no more than 40% of
funding should go to one country
EU dimension/ added-value!
Part A
PART A provides participant details and the information for the budget
estimation
– A1 – Proposal information (abstract, acronym, evaluation panel
etc)
– A2 – Information on host organisation. Coordinator is Participant 1
(not for associated partners)
– A3 – Not for ITNs
– A4 – Number of fellows. Includes details for seconded and
recruited researchers
– A5 – details on associated partners including their role in the
project
The proposal – Part B
headings
B.1 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
B.2 S&T QUALITY (30%, 3/5)
B.3 TRAINING (30%, 4/5) Quality supervision! (new)
B.4 IMPLEMENTATION (20%, 3/5)
B.5 IMPACT (20%, 4/5)
B.6 ETHICAL ASPECTS
B7. TABLE CAPACITIES OF THE HOST
P. 31
Guide for
Applicants
S&T Quality Criteria
• S&T objectives of the research programme,
(inter/multi-disciplinary, intersectoral and/ or
newly emerging supra-disciplinary fields)
• Scientific quality of the research programme
• Appropriateness of research methodology
• Originality and innovative aspect of the research
programme
• Contribution of the private sector and possible
other socio-economic actors
Examples
•
•
•
•
Aim: The overall goal of this network is to train a new generation of analytical
scientists in the skills necessary for the use, development and adoption of ….
Objectives: This will be achieved through the following scientific objectives
(SOs), which will result in a number of scientific deliverables (SDs):…
Work packages: This network will provide coherent interdisciplinary training
across various research disciplines in an intersectoral network combining
private, governmental, health and academic sectors to address a number of
topical analytical issues. To realise the goals of this ITN and its S&T
objectives, and to provide an interdisciplinary and intersectoral approach,
research will be delivered and organised through the interlinking work
packages (WPs).
The emphasis on a cross-thematic and intersectoral approach that directly
addresses the needs of “end-users” is achieved by having the majority of
partners within this ITN not academically based.
Evaluators feedback:
points to consider
• Interdisciplinary aspect
• Clear references to state-of-the-art and scientific
originality
• The final research outputs and the practical results of
the training programme should be clearly described
• Role of the industrial partners must be well explained
• A precise description of the research methodology
Training (1)
Quality of the training programme;
– Contribution and relevance of
private sector training
– Transferable skills offered:
Management, Communication,
IPR, Ethics, Grant writing,
Commercial exploitation of
results, Research Policy,
entrepreneurship, etc. .
– Qulaity of Supervision (new subcriteria!)
• Importance and timeliness of the
training needs (e.g. multidisciplinary,
intersectoral , and newly emerging
supra-disciplinary fields)
The Training Programme (1)
The specific training programme objectives are:
TO1 To make a career in LPD research more attractive to early stage researchers by
delivering a structured training programme taught by leading international scientists in
the state-of-the art infrastructure which covers a portfolio of interdisciplinary techniques.
TO2 To provide academic, industrial and public sector employers with researchers
skilled in a wide range of techniques and direct experience of interaction across
disciplines and sectors.
TO3 To produce researchers with excellent transferrable skills, and able to transform
abstract ideas into influential outcomes.
TO4 To create an active, life-long network of young researchers whose personal
contacts, support and expertise will help Europe shape the future of LPD research.
TO5 To cascade expertise and spread good practice throughout Europe by personnel
exchange, and delivering European researchers able to become leaders in the field in
the near future.
Training (2)
• For ITN / IDP
– Meaningful exposure of each researcher to another
sector – particularly secondments
– Adequate combination of local specialist training with
network-wide activities
• For EID
– Appropriate time spent by the ESR in each sector
– Adequate supervision arrangements and
combination of local specialist training with wide
training activities
the Training Programme (2)
Training in a ITN involves activities to
learn and improve the researcher’s
- core skills
- task specific skills
- generic and transferable skills
the Training Programme (3)
Be specific and emphasise AGAIN the complementary expertise and synergy …
Training tips
•Training in research methods and techniques
•Personal Development Plan
•Complementary skills training – ethics, research
management
•Transferable skills training
•Graduate School Provision
•Conferences, seminars, public fora et
•Supervision!
Intersectoral, international,
interdisciplinary.... (1)
Intersectoral dimension might be addressed by:
- Inviting researchers working in other sectors to deliver
courses on entrepreneurship, exploitation, etc.
- Mentoring of doctoral candidates by researchers/experts
from industry/other socio-economic actors
- Exposing researchers to various socio-economic actors
gathered in a single campus or hub
- Offering placement opportunities to young researchers to
develop their research projects at the premises of future
employers
Intersectoral, international,
interdisciplinary.... (1)
International dimension might be addressed by:
- Offering possibilities to take courses abroad
- Developing partnerships and/or joint degrees with other
research institutions or companies in different countries
Interdisciplinary dimension might be addressed by:
- Proposing common courses or projects to doctoral
candidates from different disciplines
- Bringing together doctoral candidates in multi-disciplinary
projects involving different teams from the same/different
institutions
- Offering possibilities of laboratory rotations or visits
Implementation (1)
• Capacities (expertise / human resources / facilities
/infrastructure) to achieve the research and adequate task
distribution and schedule
• Adequate exploitation of complementarities and synergies
among partners in terms of research and training
• Private sector involvement at the highest possible level
appropriate to the research topic & sufficient evidence of
commitment
• Non-ICPC participation – essential to the objectives of the
research training programme?
Implementation (2)
• Networking and dissemination of best practice among
partners. Clarity of the plan for organising training events
(workshops, conferences, training courses)
• Appropriateness of the overall management of the training
programme (responsibilities, rules for decision-making)
• Clarity of recruitment strategy (incl timetable)
– Competitive international recruitment
– Equal opportunities
– In light of Charter and Code principles
Evaluators feedback:
points to consider
• The industry involvement is poor in comparison to
the industrial importance of the project theme and
potential results
• Description of a research PhD theme for each
ESR is not provided
• More details should be provided on the
milestones and deliverables within the workplan
• Limited rules for decision making
Impact (1)
• Contribution of the proposed training
programme to:
– Structure training at doctoral level
(skills needed in both the public
and private sectors)
– Improvement of career prospects
– Stimulation of creativity and
entrepreneurial thinking
• Contribution of the training programme
to the policy objective of structuring
the initial research training capacity at
European level (through establishing
longer-term collaborations and/or
lasting structured training programmes
between the partners’ organisations)
Impact (2)
• The contribution of the training programme towards the
policy objective of enhancing public-private sector
collaborations in terms of research training
• Where appropriate, mutual recognition by all partners of
the training acquired, including training periods in the
private sector
• Where appropriate, plans for exploitation of results
• Impact of the proposed outreach activities
Example
• This network will deliver researchers who can add value to
technological development and manufacturing through their expertise,
helping to make Europe the most competitive and dynamic
knowledge-based economy in the world. This project will make
important contributions to European industrial development, especially
through the involvement of 4 industrial Partners. Considering that
broadly skilled experts are in short supply European industries will
benefit from highly trained experts.
Presenting your proposal (1)
•Use the key words given in Guide and highlight them in the
application (but they must be justified)
•Use the headings as requested in the guide – do not place
important requirements in different sections – think of the
referee; he/she will be looking for key phrases at particular
points in the application and justification for them. (WMES
can provide considerable help here as an impartial referee)
•Use figures/graphs where possible; tables crossed
referenced with each other
Presenting your proposal (2)
•Use other partners whenever possible – but only on selected sections (full
document sent for approval only at end); do not expect too much from partners
(actually easier to be a partner rather than coordinator)
•Use all guidance material from the WMES
• Make sure proposal is concise and readable and covers all points in the
Guide and that all aspects are addressed: science, socio-economic,
management, integration, training, technology transfer, dissemination,
impact etc
Financial Information
Category 1: Monthly Living Allowance
• €38,000 per ESR/year x country co-efficient (134.4% for UK!)
• €58,500 per ER/year x country co-efficient
Category 2: Mobility Allowance
• €1000/€700 per researcher month x country co-efficient (flat rate)
Category 3: Contribution to Training and Research Costs
• €1,800 per researcher month (multi ITN)
• €1,200 per researcher month (EID and IDP)
Category 4: Management Activities
• Maximum 10% of total EU contribution (real costs category)
Category 5: Overheads
• 10% of direct costs (flat rate)
Funding thresholds
2010 results
ITN
Scientific panels
–
–
–
–
–
Chemistry (CHE)
Social and Human Sciences (SOC)
Economic Sciences (ECO)
Information science and Engineering
(ENG)
Environmental and Geo-Sciences(ENV)
app nos.
funded
success rate
LIF
230
19
ENG
199
MAT
12
ENV
threshold
8.30%
94
14
7%
90
1
8.30%
88
95
7
7.40%
91
ECO
18
1
5.60%
95
SOC
77
6
7.80%
91
PHY
126
8
6.30%
91
CHE
100
7
7%
91
TOTAL
857
63
7.40%
2011 results
–
Life Sciences (LIF)
–
Mathematics (MAT)
–
Physics (PHY).
ITN
app nos.
funded
success rate
threshold
LIF
285
27
9.50%
92.8
ENG
204
19
9.30%
91.2
MAT
15
1
6.70%
87.2
ENV
121
11
9.10%
91.4
ECO
15
1
6.70%
92
SOC
72
7
9.70%
91.4
PHY
99
9
9.10%
94.2
CHE
108
9
8.30%
91.4
TOTAL
919
84
9.10%
Final tips for a good
proposal (1)
o ITN that build on existing collaborations will ‘look’ stronger
o What is available in single country? Why EU level needed? Why
need for trained researchers in the field?
o Consider ESRs (and ER) as a group/cohort, not individual PhD
students
o Provide a clear link between the project aim and objectives and
individual ESR projects
o Important to review and make available through the ITN any
relevant in-house training including those courses from industry
partners
Final tips for a good
proposal (2)
o Consider the number of ESRs in line with partner organisations’
capacities
o Avoid having one partner dominate research/training activities and
budget
o For multi-partner ITN: recruit mainly ESRs, not ERs.
o Include networking activities and senior scientists only when
adding value to the project activities
o Consider the commercial aspects i.e. impact and exploitation of
the research carried out
ITN call 2012
Increased budget!
EUR 423.23 M
An extra EUR 75 M! This will allow for an
extra 30 to 35 projects to be funded.
Results: May – June 2012
Deadline: 12 January 2012
Thank you!
Tatiana Panteli
European Funding Adviser
t.panteli@wmeuropeanservice.eu
www.wmeuropeanservice.org
International Research Staff
Exchange Scheme (IRSES)
Application Workshop
Mandy Heard
West Midlands European Service
3rd November 2011
Programme today
• Brief overview of WMES
• Brief overview of IRSES
• Structure of your proposal:
– Part B: What does the commission want (This session
will provide some detailed information on what should
be covered in part B of your proposal)
– Part A: How to complete
•
•
•
•
Tips provided by successful applicants
Submitting your proposal (EPSS system and process)
Evaluation process
Q&A
West Midlands European
Service – Who are we?
Birmingham
Team
(former EU
Connects)
Brussels
Team
(former
WMiE)
West Midlands European Service
The Birmingham office
• Support to the organisations
new to or with limited
experience of European
funding
• Advice on various funding
programmes
• Project development grants
• Training in the bid writing
and project management
• Free
The Brussels Office
• Support to the experienced
in EU funding
• Advice on the FP7
• Lobbying
• Policy updates
• Meeting spaces (WM
European Centre)
• Service Level Agreement
• Project Management
• Dissemination Partner
WMES Birmingham aims
• To increase the number and value of
successful trans-national projects aligned to
key regional priorities
• To draw together the jigsaw of European
opportunities and networks across the region
into a co-ordinated “offer” of real value to the
regional organisations
Our success so far
•592 submitted projects worth €65M
•280 successful projects so far
•€18,8M investment to the WM
2000 people trained
Life Long
Learning
Vocational training
skills
Employability
Innovative learning
Policy or delivery
Marie Curie
Actions
SMEs/universities
Networks
Research/Knowledge
Transfer
Fellowships
INTERREG
LIFE+
Regional level
Strategy
Policy
Exchange of
best practice
Environment
Protecting natural
Assets / species
Strategic / policy
Competitiveness
& Innovation
SMEs
ICT
Innovative products,
services
and processes
Intelligent
Energy Europe
Energy efficiency
Renewable energy
sources
Energy in transport
Integrated initiatives
Erasmus for Y.
Entrepreneurs
Work placements
in the successful
enterprises
Daphne III
Justice, freedom
and security
Which Funds do we support?
Your Project
Tell us…..
– Who you are
– Your organisation
– Your IRSES project
Marie Curie Objectives
Structuring training, mobility and career development for
researchers
•
•
•
•
•
•
Develop European human resources potential in R&D
Stimulate people to enter researcher profession
Attracting & retain researchers from around the world
Employment contracts with full social rights
Addressed to researchers at all stages of their careers
International cooperation and prestige
'International dimension',
• to contribute to the life-long training and career
development of EU-researchers, to attract research talent
from outside Europe and to foster mutually beneficial
research collaboration with research actors from outside
Europe.
• To increase the quality of European research by attracting
research talent from outside Europe and fostering
mutually beneficial research collaboration with
researchers from outside Europe.
Purpose of the IRSES
programme
 Strengthen research
partnerships between EU
and non EU research
organisations.
 Staff exchange and
networking activities.
 Establish or reinforce longterm collaboration.
Size of the consortium
Min 3 partners, but no maximum size
Duration
Project: 24-48 months
Partners
Public or private non-profit research organisations
Lead partner
Must be from EU or AC
IRSES: Participation rules
- Partnership: min. 2 independent EU/AC non-profit
research organisations of at least 2 different
countries and one or more organisations in a eligible
third country (S&T agreement and Neighbourhood
policy)
- Coordinator from EU MS/AC
- Duration of the Exchange Programme: 24- 48 months
- Any research topic is eligible (except EURATOM)
Who can participate?
• Early stage researchers
• Experienced researchers
• Technical and managerial staff
How long is the secondment?
max. 12 months (can be split)
Less than 1 month stay should be well justified.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Typical Activities
Joint research
Training
Joint workshops
Seminars
Networking
Transfer of Knowledge
Complementarity and synergies between partners
are critical
IRSES: Eligible Countries
Countries with EU agreements on S&T:
Algeria*, Argentina*, Australia, Brazil*, Canada, China*, Chile*,
Egypt*, India*, Japan, Jordan*, Rep. of Korea, Mexico*, Morocco*,
New Zealand, Russia*, South Africa*, Tunisia*, Ukraine*, United
States
Countries of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP):
Eastern Europe & Central Asia (EECA) Armenia*, Azerbaijan*,
Belarus*, Georgia*, Moldova*, Ukraine*
Mediterranean Partner Countries (MCP) Algeria*, Egypt*,
Jordan*, Lebanon*, Libya*, Morocco*, Palestinian-administrated
areas*, Syrian Arab Rep.*, Tunisia*
* International Cooperation Partner Countries (ICPC) than can receive funding
http://ec.europa.eu/research/iscp/index.cfm?lg=en&pg=countries
IRSES: Financial rules
– Staff are seconded (maintain their employment and
salary)
– Community contribution for EU MS/AC partners:
fixed 1900€/person/month (incl. travel, subsistence)
– Extra 200€ for long distance countries ICPC and
Neighbourhood policy countries: Community
contribution is envisaged
– Exchanges MS/AC<->MS/AC, non-ICPC>MS/AC,
ICPC<->ICPC are not eligible for Community funding
(own resources)
– Average requested budget: ca. 160.000 €
– Range: 13.000 - 1.044.000 €
Financing (Industrialised Countries*)
Secondment of outgoing staff members (from
EU/AC towards these countries) are eligible for
funding.
*Australia, Canada, Japan, Rep. of Korea, New Zealand, USA
IRSES – Part B
• Start and End pages with Project Acronym (20
characters max)
• Max length 30 pages (excl. Table of contents, ethics
issues, start and end pages)
• Minimum font size is 11 points. All margins should be
Part B
B1: Quality of Exchange Programme
(complementarities/synergies)
B2: Transfer of Knowledge (mutual benefits)
B3: Implementation (management)
B4: Impact (collaboration, ERA)
Can include additional sub-sections if required.
IRSES
Evaluated criteria and thresholds
What’s in a Proposal?
Why?
What?
?
When?
Who?
How?
B1: QUALITY OF THE EXCHANGE
PROGRAMME Weighting = 25%
B1.1:
Objective and relevance of the joint
exchange programme
B 1.2:
Research quality of the partners
B 1.3:
Complementarities/synergies
between the partners
B1: QUALITY OF THE EXCHANGE
PROGRAMME
Objectives:
– Strengthen/establish international research
partnerships between EU and OTC
– Bringing together complementary expertise
and knowledge through mobility to address
an issue and create new knowledge to
strengthen ERA
– Deliver a joint multi-annual research
programme and knowledge exchange
Quality of the Exchange Evaluation Strengths:
 The proposal addresses the science well and is a
vital area for development
 The general exchange programme plan is very well
identified: the context and goals of the project are
well presented
 All the partners are renowned institutions with very
good scientific quality
 The roles of partners are well described. There is a
good level of complementarity amongst partners
based on previous collaborations
Quality of the Exchange Evaluation
Weaknesses:
× The joint exchange programme presents very limited
innovation: the claimed innovative features are not
substantiated
× International collaborations are not suitably
identified for all partners
× The one month secondments of ESRs are too short
to both learn new knowledge and pursue the
planned research tasks
× The deliverables are mostly comprised of reports
and papers
B1: Key Areas
•
•
•
•
Describe the science and exchange scheme
What is the current State of the Art?
What is the gap or problem?
Why is this Science and project needed at
this time?
• Why are these partners the right people to
answer the problem/question?
• How will this create excellence in ERA?
B1: Key Areas
• Ensure exchanges are balanced
• Demonstrate excellence of individuals and
partners
– Track record in international collaboration,
publications and related research
• Demonstrate complementarities and
synergies
• Detail Scientific and Knowledge Transfer
activities in the Work Packages
EXAMPLE: AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The exchange scheme aims, through theoretical models and
computer simulations, at a basic general understanding and solution
of several important problems related to dynamics and cooperative
behaviour in complex physical and biological systems. In order to
accomplish our programme, we build a team of researchers
specializing in difference aspects of X, Y, Z. The project will be
carried out by several groups in 6 countries, 3 from the EU, with a
broad range of expertise A, B, C. The project will link together
groups with either previous well developed connections, or weak or
itinerant connections to form a well co-ordinated multidisciplinary
network through an active exchange of researchers stimulating a
close collaboration and dissemination of knowledge between
partners
Example:
The Scheme will thus:
• Significantly advance our understanding and
knowledge of cooperative behaviour and
dynamics in complex systems
• Involve important scientific partners from non-EU
countries XYZ
• Lead to long-term and large-scale cooperation
between partners in an international hub
• Disseminate the results via several international
workshops and conferences
B2: TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE
Weighting = 30% Threshold = 3
B 2.1:
Quality and mutual benefit of the
transfer of knowledge
B 2:2:
Adequacy and role of staff
exchanged with respect to the
transfer of knowledge
Transfer of Knowledge Evaluation Strengths:
 The Knowledge Transfer is strongly supported by
several training activities (workshops and schools)
with special attention to their organisation and
management
 There is a good degree of integration and sharing in
the execution of the work packages.
 The planned exchanges can bring significant added
value. All the partners are expected to learn new
expertise
 Objectives and implementation of TOK are well
described with a clear identification of goals per
research task
Transfer of Knowledge Evaluation
Weaknesses:
× The plans for transfer of knowledge toward the
scientific community through publication or
international conferences and its sustainability are
not sufficiently described
× The numbers and roles of the staff to be exchanged
are not fully justified in light of the work-plan
proposed and only generally described
× The durations of the secondments are quite short to
be useful and benefits for researchers are presented
generally
B2 Knowledge Transfer
• Describe and detail the activities and how
knowledge will be transferred and managed
• Detail the sustainability of the KT and through
what measures.
• What is the added value to partners. How will
all benefit?
• Consider dissemination to wider audiences.
EXAMPLE:
“Alongside the exchanges at the level of individual
researchers and students involved in WP1 and WP2, we
plan to organize four workshops which most of researchers
and Phd students will attend, and two international
conferences. The latter will be open to researchers outside
the IRSES project, to allow for maximum visibility of our
network”
EXAMPLE:
“An essential aspect of the project is the training and
preparation of researchers. We expect that the most
productive and creative PhD students from OTCs will
subsequently continue their research as post-doc
students at EU partners. Another highlight of the
present project is a variety of intermediate and
advanced courses for early stage researchers planned
by all participating teams”
EXAMPLE:
A key measure to define the success of the proposed
collaboration is its continuation beyond 2013. To
continue and expand the collaboration we will apply for
funding within the EU actions, as well as to national
funding agencies. This proposal is the first step
towards a lasting collaboration to be pursued through
face to face contact and discussions; promoting
movements of ESRs leading to stronger connection
within the network; creating routine collaboration and
communication between the groups
B2 Knowledge Transfer
2.2: Adequacy and role of staff exchanged
• Describe roles and goals of ESRs and ERs e.g. ERs:
provide training and supervision to ESRs, manage a WP.
• Goals for ERs: e.g. Gaining new skills and knowledge,
developing their career; exposure to international
exchanges and cultures, mobility
B3: IMPLEMENTATION
Weighting = 15% Threshold = N/A
B 3.1:
Capacities (expertise/human
resources/facilities/infrastructure)
to achieve the objectives
B 3:2:
Appropriateness of the plans for the
overall management of the
exchange programme
Implementation Evaluation Strengths:
The management structure is very clear and
well-suited for the exchange programme
State of the art facilities and infrastructures are
most appropriate to meet the requirements of
the planned cooperation
The partners have good capacities and the
human resources to carry out the proposed
activities
 The issues resulting from the European Charter for
Researchers are clearly described
Implementation Evaluation Weaknesses:
× The planned support to the incoming and
outgoing personnel is not sufficiently detailed
× A risk management procedure could have been
provided due to the large number of milestones
× The implementation plan is not fully justified, as
no exchanges take place at the second half of
the year
EXAMPLE:
“The overall project will be coordinated by (EU partner)
with local co-ordinators at each other site. They will be
assisted by group leaders who are experienced in
management of large-scale international projects. This
arrangement ensures both the efficient use of the
experience of senior scientists and the furthering of the
project management expertise of coordinators”
B 3.1 Capacities to achieve objectives




Describe the size and expertise within partner/host
research groups and departments
Facilities available that are relevant
Other relevant support?
Other aspects: e.g. Networks available through partners
to disseminate to the wider international community
Duplication from B1 is not an issue, as appropriate
EXAMPLE B 3.2:
An effective project management system is
crucial for the successful implementation of
the project. The project management and
administration will be provided by the
following roles and bodies:
Project Manager; Scientific Manager;
Dissemination Manager; Work Package
Leaders; Partner Representative
B 3.2: Appropriate of Management Plans
• European Charter for Researchers
– How will your actions and institutions support
this?
• Supportive research environment
• Working and training conditions
Proposal is evaluated with this in mind
B4: IMPACT
Weighting = 30%
Threshold = 3
B 4.1:
Relevance of the proposed
partnership to the area of
collaboration and for the ERA
B 4.2:
Potential to develop lasting
collaboration with eligible third
country partners, in particular in view
of setting-up joint research projects
Impact Evaluation Strengths:
 The proposal identified several possible impacts and
provided good analysis showing the contributions
 The partners are eager to develop lasting
collaborations beyond the limit of the proposed
programme and many credible opportunities are
mentioned
 The addressed topic is relevant within the objectives
of ERA
 The global scientific and technological benefits of
the proposal are very relevant to the field
Impact Evaluation Weaknesses:
× The contribution to wider dissemination and
exploitation of the research outcomes to extended
communities, and in particular industrial
communities is not full exploited in the proposal
× It is not clear how the project will be linked with
mainstream manufacturers and/or policy makers
relevant to the field. Exploitation plans are not fully
developed
× The specific contributions of each partner to the
area of collaboration are not sufficiently detailed
EXAMPLE:
“The project will bring together researchers across the
globe to create a best practice model for XY to be
used on a global scale. The partner network will bring
together expertise across the consortium and provide
a direct benefit to researchers engaged with the
project through hosting and exchanging activities. The
training and peer support provided through the project
will provide a growth in expertise in this limited areas
on a global scale, and provide a means by which to
further enhance this research area in the future”
EXAMPLE: Relevance to ERA
The final outcome of the project will be recognised
published comparison on XY as a profession and
it’s policies on a global scale. The publication can
be utilised by all and will support the Framework 7
ERA Action Area to enhance knowledge sharing to
grow Europe as a knowledge based economy.
EXAMPLE: IMPACT ON RESEARCHERS
“Experience abroad is, more and more, and important
criterion in career development. Any excellent science
career today has to be international. The project will
allow researchers to regularly update and expand their
skills and competencies building on networks.
Activities will encourage European researchers to stay
in Europe and avoid the “brain drain” and at the same
time will forge tighter ties between OTC participants,
especially a young generation of ESRs, and Europe”
KEY AREAS:
• Demonstrate wide aspects of impact
– area of research
– Individuals/partners
– ERA
– Lasting international cooperation
• Remember: MARIE CURIE and IRSES objectives
• Link to key documents: Policies for Research areas,
e.g. Country strategies/S&T
Part A
A1: Snapshot of your project (complete by the
lead partner)
A2: Partner Organisations (completed by each
participant)
A4: Funding request
Integral part of your proposal
Support unit help complete
PART A: A1
•
•
•
•
Acronym: 20 characters max.
Proposal title: no longer than 200 characters
Choose a Scientific panel
Abstract: clear – objectives, how, relevance.
Used in evaluation: limit 2000 characters
• Similar proposals? – proposal numbers
• Flag ethics issues
PART A: A2 Participant details
•
•
•
•
•
Insert PIC: may already have one
Legal, admin and financial
Status of organisation
Person in charge
Authorised legal rep
Scientific Panels








Chemistry (CHE)
Social Science and Humanities (SOC)
Economic Science (ECO)
Engineering & Information Science (ENG)
Environment & Geosciences (ENV)
Life Sciences (LIF)
Mathematics (MAT)
Physics (PHY)
Example: Novel medical adsorbents for
extracorporeal treatment of life threatening
conditions
This program gives the opportunity to cultivate a high scientific quality
consortium consisting of 2 European and 1 third country academic
institute, with the aim to sustain and create new collaborative
partnerships between EU partners and Ukraine, and transfer knowledge
and technologies in one of the most exciting fields of modern biomaterial
science. Focusing on the development of extracorporeal methods for
toxin removal, for the treatment of many life threatening conditions and
chronic conditions, that result in a low quality of patient life.
Partners: UK, France and Ukraine
Duration: 48 months
Funding: €113.400
IRSES
SUBMISSION AND
EVALUATION
EPSS: Electronic Proposal Submission
Service
• Coordinator registers/edits and uploads forms and
submits the proposal
• Registration is required for one proposal for the call
chosen.
• Register some time in advance of the deadline
• PIC: Personal Identification Code
• If your organisation has signed an FP7 contract with
the Commission then you should have a PIC
Accessing EPS
• Access EPS:
https://www.epssfp7.org/epss/welcome.jsp
•Register via the call:
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/port
al/page/people?callIdentifier=FP7-PEOPLE2012-IRSES
Final Checks
•
•
•
•
•
Ensure you check all eligibility
Correct font size and page limits
Complete Gantt chart
Ensure all forms are completed correctly
Cross check ensure the proposal flows and all
criteria are answered
Proposal
Eligibility
3 experts
ineligible
Individual
Evaluation
Individual
Assessment
report
Consensus
meeting
Consensus
report
Scientific disciplines
Withdrawn
Panel
Review
Evaluation
summary reports
Evaluation
• Assessed by three independent experts
• Overall threshold is 70%
• Evaluators do not make any assumptions or
interpretations
OTHER TIPS
•
•
•
•
Be clear and concise
Be explicit and not ‘loose’
Be sure that a generalist can understand
Do not assume the evaluator will remember
form previous sections
• Highlight important information
Key Success factors
• Clarity and quality of the research objectives
• Must relate to FP7 and Marie Curie objectives
• Demonstrate good rationale and substantiate
assertions
• Read carefully the 2011 People Work Programme and
the IRSES Guide for Applicants
• European Added Value
• Balanced exchanged programme
• Timeliness and relevance of the project
• Contribution to ERA and European excellence
Timetable
Deadline for submission of
proposals
18 January 2012 @ 17:00
Brussels local time
Evaluation of Proposals
February 2012
Evaluation Summary reports sent
to coordinators (initial information
letters
March 2012
Invitation letter to successful
coordinators to launch contract
negotiations with REA services
April 2012
Letter to unsuccessful applicants
From April 2012
Signature of first contracts
From July 2012
Useful links
• EPSS https://www.epss-fp7.org/epss/welcome.jsp
• IRSES call documents:
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/people?callIde
ntifier=FP7-PEOPLE-2012-IRSES
• Successful projects:
• http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/projects_en.html
• Euraxess: http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index_en.cfm?l=0&12=1
• http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/understanding/what/what_is_era_e
n.htm
• WMES: http://www.wmcouncils.gov.uk/west-midlands-europeanservice
• UKRO: National contact point
http://www.ukro.ac.uk/mariecurie/Pages/index.aspx
• (model grant agreements, reporting guidelines)
Mandy Heard
European Funding Adviser
m.heard@wmeuropeanservice.eu
0121 245 0185 / 07827 894749
www.wmeuropeanservice.org
Thank you!
GOOD LUCK