TÜBİTAK
15 / 12 / 2003
EVALUATION
Intra-European (IEF)
International Outgoing (OIF)
International Incoming(IIF)
Fellowships
International Re-integration
Grants
Prof.Dr.Şakire Pöğün
Ege Ün. Tıp Fakültesi
(expert evaluator)
Individual driven actions
Outgoing Fellowships
• World-wide
• up to 2 years outside Europe
+ up to 1 year return phase
Incoming Fellowships
• World-wide
• Return phase possible if from emerging,
transition or developing country
Intra-European Fellowships
Return and Reintegration Mechanisms
Marie Curie Outgoing
International Fellowships
• Researchers from EU and Associated States
– Minimum 4 years experience or doctorate
– Joint proposal by fellow and host institution
• To Third Countries
• Coherent project up to 3 years with 2 phases:
– experience outside Europe up to 2 years and
– obligatory return to Europe,
typically half the duration of the 1st. phase
 “valorisation” in Europe of experience gained
 reinforce relations between EU and third countries
Marie Curie Incoming
International Fellowships
• High level third country researchers
– Minimum 4 years experience or doctorate
– Joint proposal by fellow and host institution
• Towards Europe
• Return mechanism for researchers
– from developing countries
– from emerging and transition economies
 reinforce the research potential of these countries
 strengthen relations between the EU and third countries
Marie Curie Return and
Reintegration of European
Researchers
• having undertaken research outside Europe
during at least 5 years
• Precise project evaluated on its intrinsic merits
• Up to 2 years funding for a 3 year contract
– Research project (via host institution)
• Compensate partly for the brain drain
Calendar & Budget for
2003
Deadline Budget
(€)
Indicative
Number *
April/May
10
Million
42 – 55 - 83
Incoming International
Fellowships
April/May
9 Million
55 - 73 – 110
(half with return)
International
Reintegration Grants
midMarch
7 Million
85
Action
Outgoing International
Fellowships
* Assuming a minimum of 1.5 years, an average of 2.25
years and a maximum of 3 years for Outgoing and Incoming
with return, 1.5 years for incoming without return, and 2
years for Reintegration Grants.
Eligible Expenses
Outgoing
Fellowships
Type of Expense
Incoming
Fellowships
Outward
Phase
Return
Phase
Inward
Phase
Possible
Return
Phase
 Monthly living allowance



Single
 Travel allowance
 Mobility allowance



()

 Researcher’s programme costs
 Laboratory Research Costs



Grant
to cover





 Overheads




 Management activities
(including audit certification)




N.B. International Reintegration Grants: up to a
standard maximum to cover research costs, extension of
research facilities, etc. but not the researcher’s salary.
Eligible expenses (IRG)
Max: 80 000 Euros/year
• All expenditure necessary for the project
(On the basis of the reintegration project
submitted by the proposer and approved
by the commission)
• Personnel other than the eligible
researcher, equipment, consumables,
travel, etc.
Marie Curie Intra-European
Fellowships
Aims
To provide advanced training tailored to the researchers
individual needs in order to become independent.
Marie Curie Intra-European
Fellowships
Who can Apply
 Experienced researchers;
 Mobility required;
 EU or Associated States Nationals.
 No age limits
Marie Curie Intra-European
Fellowships
Profile of the host institutions
 Universities, research centres, or enterprises
established and located in an EU or Associated State.
Marie Curie Intra-European
Fellowships
How does it work
The applicant applies to the Commission jointly with
the host institution;
Commission selects the applicant and signs a contract
with the host;
Selected fellow signs an agreement with the host;
Fellow stays from 1 to 2 years.
Marie Curie Intra-European
Fellowships
Indicative scope of activity
For each 100 M €, this action should allow:
 Conclusion of 750 contracts, involving 750 host organisations
 Selection of 1400 researchers/year
The size of the projects will vary between 60 000 and 180 000 €
Marie Curie Intra-European
Fellowships
Provisional Timetable
Envisaged date of publication: 17 December 2002
Envisaged Deadlines : one open call with 2 deadlines :
March/April 2003 (~ 55 M€)
February 2004 (~ 55 M€)
PROPOSAL
Eligibility
Individual evaluation
Consensus
Ethical issues
Thresholds
Hearings
Panel
Ranking by Commision
Commision rejection decision
NEGOTIATION
NEGOTIATION
Negotiation result
Consultation of
Programme Committee
Commission Funding Decision
and/or Rejection Decision
Proposal marking
0 - The proposal fails to address the issue under
examination or cannot be judged against the criterion
due to missing or incomplete information
1 – poor
2 – fair
3 – good
4 – very good
5 – excellent
Activity Specific Evaluation Criteria
a) Scientific & technological excellence and the
degree of innovation
Scientific Quality of the Project
Quality of Research Training
b) Ability to carry out successfully and to ensure
its efficient management, assessed in terms of
resources and competencies and including the
organizational modalities foreseen by the
participants
Quality of Host
Quality of Researchers
Activity Specific Evaluation Criteria
c) Relevance to the objectives of the specific
programme (Scheme / Activity)
d) EU added value, critical mass of resources and
contribution to Community policies
e) Quality of the plan for using or disseminating
the knowledge, potential for promoting
innovation, and clear plans for the management
of intellectual property
Criterion (a):
Scientific Quality of the Project
IEF/ OIF / IIF
• Scientific/ technological quality of the project
• Is the scientific content of the project important and
relevant
• Originality/innovative aspects
• Assessment of the research method
• Assessment of the interdisciplinary and
multidisciplinary aspects of the proposal
• Does the proposal describe the state of the art for the
scientific area and the relevance of the project
Weight:
%15
Threshold: --
Criterion (a):
Scientific Quality of the Project
IRG
• Scientific/ technological quality of the project
• Is the scientific content of the project important and
relevant
• Assessment of the research method
• Assessment of the originality and innovative nature of
the project or training area
Weight:
%15
Threshold: --
Criterion (a):
Quality of Research Training
IEF/ OIF / IIF
• Clarity and quality of the research training objectives for
the researchers
• Complementary training and skills offered
Weight:
%15
Threshold: 3
Criterion (a):
Quality of Research Training
IRG
• Clarity and quality of the research training objectives for
the researchers
• Complementary training and skills offered
Weight:
%15
Threshold: 3
Criterion b):
Quality of Host
IEF/ OIF / IIF
• Scientific expertise in the field
• Quality of the group/supervisors
• Expertise in training researchers in the field and their
capacity to provide mentoring/tutoring
• International collaborations
• Quality of infrastructure / facilities
Weight:
Threshold:
%15
--
Criterion b):
Quality of Host
IRG
• Scientific expertise in the field
• Quality of infrastructure / Facilities
• Expertise in training researchers in the field and their
capacity to provide mentoring/tutoring;
• Quality of the group/supervisors
• International collaborations
Weight:
Threshold:
%15
--
Criterion b):
Quality of Researchers
IEF/ OIF / IIF
REFERENCE LETTERS!
• Research experience,
• Research results; independent thinking and leadership
qualities
• Potential for the development of the researchers
• Suitability of skills for the project proposed
Weight:
Threshold:
%15
4
Criterion b):
Quality of Researchers
IRG
•
•
•
•
REFERENCE LETTERS!
Research experience
Research results
Independent thinking and leadership qualities
Adequacy of skills for the project proposed
Weight:
%15
Threshold: 4
Criterion (b):
Management and Feasibility
IEF/ OIF / IIF
• Ability to carry out the action successfully and to ensure
its efficient management, assessed in terms of resources
and competencies and incl. the organizational modalities
foreseen by the participants
• Practical arrangements for the implementation and
management of the fellowship
• Feasibility and credibility of the project methodological
approach to the project and work plan
Weight:
%5
Threshold: --
Criterion (b):
Management and Feasibility
IRG
• Practical arrangements for the implementation and
management of the fellowship
• Feasibility and credibility of the project
• Methodological approach to the project and work plan
Weight:
%5
Threshold: --
Paid position!
Criterion (c):
Relevance to the objectives of the
specific programme (Scheme / Activity)
IEF/ OIF / IIF
• Benefit to the researchers from the period of advanced training/mobility
• Match between project and researcher’s profile
• Likeliness for the researchers to pursue the line of research after end of
fellowship
• Capacity of the fellowship to enhance EU scientific excellence (where
appropriate)
• For incoming fellowships: Contributing to the socioeconomic development
of DCs by the transfer of knowledge and human capacity building (where
appropriate)
Weight:
Threshold:
IEF %25; OIF & IIF%15
--
Criterion (c):
Relevance to the objectives of the
specific programme (Scheme / Activity)
IRG
• Benefit to the career of the researchers from the
training/period of re-integration
• Match between project and researcher profile
• Contribution to scientific excellence by attracting a first
class confirmed EU researcher
• Prospects of successful re-integration within the framework
of European Research
Weight:
%15
Threshold: 3
Criterion (c):
Added Value to the Community
IEF/ OIF / IIF
• Extent to which the proposed fellowship contributes
towards the objectives of the European Research Area
• Benefit of mobility through the transfer of knowledge and
improved collaborations through the mobile researchers
• Contribution to research excellence and European
competitiveness
For international fellowships
• Potential for creating long term collaborations
• Potential for improving the gender balance in the
scientific/training area
Weight:
IEF %10; OIF & IIF%20
Threshold: --
Criterion (c):
Added Value to the Community
IRG
• Extent to which the proposed fellowship contributes
towards the objectives of the European Research Area
• Contribution to the reversal of brain drain to and
recuperation of expertise from third countries
Weight:
%10
Threshold: --
Consensus Report
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Scientific quality of the project
Quality of the training activities
Quality of the host
Quality of the researcher
Management and feasibility
Relevance to the objectives of the activity
Added value to the Community
Overall remarks
(highlighting strengths and weaknesses)
Consensus Report
(YES or NO & Comments)
• Does this proposal have ethical issues that need further
attention?
• Do you recommend this proposal to be reviewed by the
Ethical Review Panel?
• Has ethical approval from the country in which the
research will take place been supplied in the proposal?
• Is the research described in the proposal laboratory
based?
• Do you make any recommendadtions to be into account
at negotiation?
• Have you suggested indicators to be used to monitor the
implementation of the proposal, if funded?
Has the proposal passed all evaluation thresholds? (YES or NO)
Criteria
1
2
3
4 5
6
7
Threshold
Evaluator names Evaluator signatures Non-wieghted marks (0-5)
Commission
Initial averages
Representative’s
Consensus marks
signature
Weighing %
Total
Score
Weighed score
Total expressed out of 100