evaluation guide en formatted - fct · evaluation guide – call for phd studentships and...

EVALUATIONGUIDE–CALLFORPhDSTUDENTSHIPSANDPOST-DOCTORALFELLOWSHIPS–20162

EvaluationGuideCallforPhDstudentshipsandPost-doctoralfellowships–2016

_____________May2016


TABLEOFCONTENTS

TABLEOFCONTENTS.................................................................................................................3

ABBREVIATIONS........................................................................................................................4

1.Call........................................................................................................................................5PhDStudentships(BD)................................................................................................................................5Post-doctoralfellowship(BPD)...................................................................................................................5

2.ELEGIBILITY...........................................................................................................................52.1.EligibilityRequirementsofApplicants..................................................................................................5GeneralRequirements................................................................................................................................5SpecificRequirementsforBDApplicants.....................................................................................................6SpecificRequirementsforBPDApplicants...................................................................................................62.2.ApplicationEligibilityRequirements.....................................................................................................6MandatoryDocuments...............................................................................................................................6OptionalDocumentstosubmitwiththeApplicationForm..........................................................................8

3.PANELEVALUATIONPROCESS...............................................................................................8GuidingprinciplesforPeerreview..................................................................................................................8

3.1.FormationoftheEvaluationPanel.......................................................................................................93.2.Chairingtheevaluationprocess...........................................................................................................93.3.Remoteandpanelmeetingevaluation..............................................................................................10

Initialprocedure:Remoteevaluationofeachapplication...........................................................................10Subsequentprocedure:MeetingoftheEvaluationPanel............................................................................11

3.4.CommentstobeconveyedtoApplicants............................................................................................123.5.FinalMinutesoftheMeetingoftheEvaluationPanel........................................................................123.6.ConflictofInterest(CDI).....................................................................................................................133.7.Confidentiality...................................................................................................................................14

4.EVALUATIONCRITERIA........................................................................................................144.1.MeritoftheApplicant............................................................................................................................144.1.1.EvaluationoftheMeritoftheApplicantsinBDApplications.............................................................14Bonusesandspecificcasesforthesub-criterion“academicpath”(BD).......................................................164.1.2.EvaluationoftheMeritoftheApplicantsinBPDapplications...........................................................17Bonuses,penaltiesandspecificcasesinthepersonalcurriculumcriteria(BPD)..........................................184.2.MeritoftheWorkPlan(BDandBPDapplications)................................................................................194.3.MeritofHostconditions(BDandBPDapplications)..............................................................................20

AnnexI–ScientificAreas,adaptedfromtheFOSClassificationintheFrascatiManual..............21


ABBREVIATIONS

BD–PhDstudentship

BPD–Post---doctoralfellowship

CDI---ConflictofInterest

FCT–FundaçãoparaaCiênciaeaTecnologia,I.P.

FAI–IndividualEvaluationReport

FPC–Pre-consensusReport

FAF–FinalEvaluationReport

ORCID–OpenResearcherandContributorIdentifier


1.Call

In 2016 there will be a single call for applications, for: PhD studentships and Post-doctoral

fellowships.

PhDStudentships(BD)

Areaimedatapplicantsseeking todevelopresearchwork leading to theacademicdegreeofDoctor

andwhosatisfythenecessaryenrolmentconditionsforthecorrespondingcycleofstudies.

Asarule,thestudentshipisannual,renewableuptoamaximumoffouryears.Theworkplanmaybe

carried out fully or partially at a Portuguese institution (with studentships held in Portugal ormixed

studentships),orfullyataforeigninstitution(studentshipsheldabroad).

Post-doctoralfellowship(BPD)

AreintendedforPhDholders,preferablythosewhoobtainedthedegreelessthansixyearspriortothe

call,tocarryoutadvancedresearchatPortuguesescientificinstitutionsofrenownedcompetence.

Asarule,thedurationofthefellowshipisannual,renewableuptoamaximumofsixyears,pending

favourable evaluation at the end of the first three years. Exceptionally, and depending on budget

availabilityofthefundingagency,aBPDmayincludeperiodsabroad,uptoamaximumofoneyearfor

PhDsawardedinPortugalandsixmonthsforPhDsawardedabroad.

2.ELEGIBILITY

2.1.EligibilityRequirementsofApplicants

GeneralRequirements

• TobeaPortuguesecitizenoracitizenofanotherEuropeanMemberState.

• Tobeacitizenofathird-country,holdingavalidresidencepermit,ortohaveacquiredlong-term

residentstatus, inaccordancewiththetermssetout inLawno.23/2007of4July,amendedby

Lawno.29/2012of9August.

• Tobeacitizenofthird-countrieswithwhichPortugalhasreciprocityagreements.

• InthecaseofBPD,foreigncitizenswhoarenon-residents inPortugalmayalsoapply,as longas

the application is underwritten by an institution of the Portuguese science and technology

system,andtheworkplantakesplaceentirelyinPortugal;

• Onlycitizens(Portugueseorforeign)whoareabletoprovideproofofpermanentandregular


residence in Portugal may apply to studentships/fellowships with work plans taking place

totallyorpartiallyinforeigninstitutions.

SpecificRequirementsforBDApplicants

• To have finished, at the time of application submission, aMasters degree, or alternatively, to

comply, at thatdate,with the conditions for access to the cycleof studies leading to thePhD

degree, specified in sub-paragraph a) or c) of article no. 30 of Decree-Law no.74/2006 of 24

March,amendedbyDecree-Lawno.115/2013of7August.

• Not have been selected for a studentshipwithin any FCT PhD programme, irrespective of type

(researchfellowship,PhDstudentshiporPhDstudentshipinindustry)orduration.

• Nothavebenefited fromaPhDstudentshiporPhDstudentship in industrydirectly financedby

FCT,irrespectiveofitsduration.

SpecificRequirementsforBPDApplicants

• TohaveconcludedaPhDdegreeattimeofapplicationsubmission.

• NothavebenefitedfromaBPDdirectlyfundedbyFCT,irrespectiveofitsduration.

2.2.ApplicationEligibilityRequirements

MandatoryDocuments

It is absolutely required, under penalty of the application not being accepted, to follow the

procedures described below and to upload the following documents to the application form

(applicabletoBDandBPDs).

• Toupdatetheapplicant´sCurriculumVitae(CV)ontheFCT-SIGorDeGóisplatforms.

• Toensurethatthescientificsupervisorassociateshim/herselftotheapplicationandthathe/she

lockshis/herCVtotheapplication.

• Toensurethattheco-supervisor(s)associatethemselvestotheapplicationandlocktheirCVs(this

procedureisonlyapplicableiftheapplicantoptstoindicateaco-supervisor(s)).

• Theworkplantobedeveloped(notethatattendanceof lecturesofadoctoralprogrammemay

notconsideredtobepartofaworkplan)

• Amotivationletter.

• Tworeferenceletters.


It is also absolutely required,under penalty of the application not being accepted, to submit the

followingdocuments,foreachtypeofstudentship/fellowship.

PhDstudentships:

• Certificatesofall theacademicdegreesobtained, specifying the final grade,andpreferably, the

gradesobtainedinallsubjects.Thus,forpost-Bolognadegreesacertificateforthefirstandsecond

cycleofstudiesshouldbesubmitted,orincasethedegreeisnottwo-stage,anintegratedMasters

certificate; for “pre-Bologna” degrees both the first degree (Bachelors) andMasters certificates

shouldbesubmitted.

• ApplicantsthatdonotholdaMastersdegreewillhavetoprovideastatementattestingtotheir

capacity to carry out the cycle of studies, issued by the legally binding scientific body of the

university theywish to attend for their PhD. If applicantshavealreadybeenaccepted in the

PhD Programme for which they are applying for a studentship, proof of admission to the

programme is sufficient. Proof of enrolment in ongoing or completed PhD programmes,

wheretheinstitutionsthatawardthedegree/orrunthePhDprogrammearedifferenttothe

oneshownintheapplicationforthestudentship,willnotbeaccepted.

• In the case of academic degrees awarded by foreign institutions, registration of recognition of

suchdegreesandtherespectiveconversionsofthefinalscores(ifapplicable)tothePortuguese

grade scale, issued by the Direção-Geral do Ensino Superior or by a Portuguese public higher

education institution should be submitted (as regulated by Decree-Law no.341/2007 of 12

October). Alternatively, proof of recognition/equivalence of foreign qualifications to the

corresponding Portuguese qualifications, provided by a Portuguese public higher education

institution shouldbe submitted (as regulatedbyDecree-Lawno.283/83of 21 June).Applicants

are advised to visit the website of the Direção-Geral do Ensino Superior (DGES) for more

information:http://www.dges.mctes.pt.

• A document that the applicant considers to be as the most representative of his/her

scientific/professionalpath(seeevaluationcriteriabelow).

Post-doctoralfellowships:

• PhDcertificate.

• ForPhDdegreesobtainedataforeigninstitution,proofofregistration/equivalenceoftheforeign

qualification to the corresponding Portuguese qualification is mandatory. However, this may

occuruponprovisionalgrantingofthefellowshipduringthecontractingstage.


• Therefore,eitherattheapplicationstage,or,later,duringthecontractingstage,itisnecessaryto

submit either proof of recognition of the PhD degree, issued by the Direção-Geral do Ensino

Superior or by a Portuguese public higher education institution (as regulated by Decree-Law

no.341/2007 of 12 October), or, alternatively, proof of recognition/equivalence of foreign

qualifications to the corresponding Portuguese qualifications, provided by a Portuguese public

highereducation institution shouldbe submitted (as regulatedbyDecree-Lawno.283/83of 21

June).

Applicants are advised to visit the website of the Direção-Geral do Ensino Superior (DGES) to

obtaintheregistration/equivalenceoftheforeignPhDdegree:http://www.dges.mctes.pt.

If registry/proof of equivalence is provided after application, it is necessary to attach the PhD

certificatetotheapplicationform,inoneofthefollowinglanguages:Portuguese,Spanish,English,

orFrench.

• Oneor twodocuments that theapplicantconsiders tobeas themost representativeofhis/her

scientific/professionalpath(seeevaluationcriteriabelow).

OptionalDocumentstosubmitwiththeApplicationForm

Itisoptionaltosubmitthefollowingdocuments:

• The applicant´s ORCID code. ORCID registration is recommended but does not substitute

submissionoftheup-to-dateCVontheFCT-SIGorDeGóisplatform.

• TheORCIDcodeofthescientificsupervisor(andco-supervisor(s),ifany).

• Proofofpermanentorlong-termresidentstatusinPortugal,whennecessary.Thisdocumentmay

besubmitteduponprovisionalawardingofthefellowship,duringthecontractingstage,aslong

asthedateofemissionisequaltoorprevioustotheapplicationdeadline,andifitisstillvalidat

thetimethecontractissigned.ApplicantsareadvisedtoreadtheApplicationGuide.

3.PANELEVALUATIONPROCESS

GuidingprinciplesforPeerreview

ItisFCT’smissiontoassuretheoverallscientificqualityofthepeerreviewprocess:

• Theevaluatorswillgiveprecedencetoqualityandoriginalityoverquantity.Thisprincipleapplies

irrespectivelyofwhatisatstake,beitacademicdegrees,CVs,careerprogressionorworkplans.

Thescientificcontentrepresentsthecoreofpeerreview,thusrequiringanintegratedviewofall


thecomponentsofascientificcareer,orofaresearchworkplan.Countsofscientificpapersand

the cumulative impact factor, for example, do not in themselves or on their own allow the

identification of the characteristics that define the quality of scientific accomplishments and

career paths, namely, “originality”, “consistency and coherence”, and “contribution to the

advancementofknowledge”.

• Impartiality and transparency are the fundamental principles of evaluation decisions. All

applications are treated and evaluated in an impartial manner, grounded on their merit and

independentlyoforiginortheapplicant’sidentity.

3.1.FormationoftheEvaluationPanel

Theevaluationpanelsareconstitutedbyexpertsofrenownedscientificmeritandexperience,selected

toundertakeevaluationofthesubmittedapplications.Thefollowingcriteriaareappliedinsettingup

the panel, whenever possible: broad subject and multidisciplinary range, gender balance and

institutionaldiversity.

Eachpanelischaired,oninvitationbyFCT,byoneofit´smembers,whohastheresponsibilitytoassure

thattheevaluationexerciseisundertakenwithtransparency,impartialityandequity.Thechairofeach

panelwill be a researcher of renowned scientificmerit. The chairmaynever be a supervisor or co-

supervisor of applicants in the evaluation exercise, even if the applications have been submitted in

differentscientificareastothatofthepanel;thechairshouldnotevaluateanyapplication.

TheevaluationpanelswillbeformedaccordingtotheadaptedOECD’sRevisedFieldofScienceand

Technology Classification in the Frascati Manual (see Annex I). Depending on the number of

applications received in each panel, these may be subdivided by type of studentship/fellowship

(BD/BPD).

Applicationswillbeautomaticallyattributedtodifferentpanelsaccordingtothemainscientificarea,

secondaryscientificareaandsub-areas indicatedbytheapplicant, incompliancewithAnnexI.The

scientificareasandsub-areasidentifiedbytheapplicantcannotbechangedbytheevaluationpanel.

TheevaluationguideandconstitutionofthepanelaremadepublicontheFCTwebsite.Thechairswillbe

known when the call for applications opens; the remaining panel members will be known when

applicationscloseandbeforethepanelmeeting.

3.2.Chairingtheevaluationprocess

ThechairofeachevaluationpanelreceivesfromFCTasetofaccesscodesthatwillallowonlineaccessto

alltheapplicationssubmittedtohis/herevaluationpanel.


IncollaborationwithFCTthechairisresponsiblefor:

• Assuringthattheevaluationexerciseistransparent,impartialandfair.

• Verifyingthattheapplicationsmatchthepanel.

• Allocating the applications for remote evaluation and indicating the first reader of each

application.

• Identifyingandsolvingpossibleconflictsofinterest.

• Ensuring that all panelmembers knowand apply the criteria and sub-criteria established, and

respectiveweighting.

• Ensurethatevaluatorscomplywithdeadlinesforwriting individualevaluationreportsandpre-

consensusreports(ifapplicable).

• Ensuringthatintheindividualandpre-consensusevaluationreports,evaluatorsjustifytheir

classifications substantially and clearly, allowing full understanding of the evaluation and

scoreassignedtoeachapplicant.

• Chairingthepanelmeetingsandensuringacollegialconsensusanddecisionprocess.

• Ensuringthatthefinalevaluationreportiscompletedbytheendofthepanelmeeting.

• Ensuringthatthecommentsunderpinningthedecisionsaremadefollowingwhatisestablished

in this guide, in accordance with the applicable legislation, that they are consistent and

coherent.

• Namingasubstitutechairpersonifneeded.

• Producingthepanelmeetingminuteswithallpanelmembers.

• Cooperatingwith FCT in solving problems and/or unforeseen events thatmay happen before,

duringand/orafterapanelmeeting.

• Coordinatingtheprocessoftheappeals.

3.3.Remoteandpanelmeetingevaluation

Initialprocedure:Remoteevaluationofeachapplication

• Eachapplicationisindividuallyevaluatedbyatleasttwomembersoftheevaluationpanel.

• If any of the evaluators has a conflict of interest with any of the applications, he/she should

declareitformallytothechairandtotheevaluationpanel.Inthiscase,theapplicationmaynot

be assigned to that evaluator. Any statement of conflict of interest should be included in the


meetingreport.

• Wheneverdeemednecessary,thechairmay,duringtheremoteevaluationperiod,askFCT

fortheopinionofanexternalexpertor,ifnecessary,foranadditionalevaluatortojointhe

panel.

• An applicationmay be deemed non-assessable if it is considered to move substantially away

fromthepanel´sscientificareaofexpertise(afinalclassificationequivalenttozeroisawarded).

The evaluation panel shall, as a whole, validate this decision during the evaluation panel

meeting;thedecisionshouldbeclearlystatedandjustifiedinthepanelmeetingminutes.

• Theindividualevaluationiscarriedoutonline,inwriting;theevaluatorsshouldremotelyfillinan

individualevaluationform,foreachapplicationthatisassignedtohim/her.

• In the individual evaluation report, evaluators should separately classify the three evaluation

criteria(seebelow)andwritetherespectivecommentsjustifyingthegradegiven.

• Foreachapplication,oneoftheevaluatorswillbethefirstreader.

• Whentheindividualevaluationreportsarefinishedit isthefirstreader´stasktowritethepre-

consensus report (FPC), in a timescale defined by FCT and always before the panel meeting,

where all the reports are considered and validated. The pre-consensus report implies an

agreementbetweenevaluatorsregardingthecommentsandtheprovisionalfinalgrade.

• In the event that it is not possible for the two evaluators to come to an agreement, the pre-

consensus report should not be completed. It shall be the chair´s task to ensure the final

consensusonevaluationforthatapplication,basedontheindividualevaluationreportsandon

thepre-consensusreport,duringthepanelmeeting,resorting, ifnecessary,totheopinionofa

furtherevaluatororofanexternalreviewer.

Subsequentprocedure:MeetingoftheEvaluationPanel

Theobjectivesofthemeetingoftheevaluationpanelare:

• To analyse the merit of the applications submitted to the panel, based on the individual

evaluation reports and the pre-consensus report (if any) and on the provisional ranking

proposed,whichcomesoutoftheclassificationsinthetwoindividualevaluationreports.

• To provide a collective and collegial dialogue on the merit of each application. During the

meetingtheevaluators,thefirstreadersinparticularshouldbepreparedtobrieflypresentthe

strengths and weaknesses of each of the applications assigned to them. Any panel member,

irrespectivelyofhis/herareaofexpertise,mayquestionandcommenttheinformationsupplied


ortheopinionofanyothermember.

Whendiscussingtherelativemeritoftheapplications,ifanevaluatororthechairhasaconflict

of interest, he/she shall have to leave the room and shall appoint someone from among the

remainingpanelmemberstoreplacehim/herwhileabsentfromthemeeting.

• Toproceedtothecompletionandvalidationofthefinalevaluationreport(FAF).Theelaboration

ofthefinalevaluationreportisthefirstreader´sresponsibility,andshouldtakeintoaccountthe

individualevaluationreportsandthepre-consensusreport,aswellasthediscussionandcollegial

panelopinion.

• To produce the final ranked list of all applications. All panelmembers are responsible for the

discussionoftherelativemeritofeachapplication,andfortheproductionofasinglerankedlist

ofapplicants,perpanelandpertypeofstudentship/fellowship.

3.4.CommentstobeconveyedtoApplicants

• Evaluators should pay attention to the requirement of giving clear, coherent and solid

justification for the scores awarded. It is the responsibility of the chair to ensure that in the

completion of the final evaluation report the evaluators justify their score with substantive

arguments that allow understanding of the evaluation carried out, identifying the strong and

weak points, under each criterion. Thus comments of a generic nature will not be accepted,

namely“theworkplanisveryweak”,“adequateCV”,etc.

• Besidesthecommentsqualifyingthescoreawardedforeachofthethreeevaluationcriteria,the

final evaluation report to the applicants shall give an explanation for any bonuses (e.g.,

disabilitybonus)orpenaltiesawarded,aswellasfornon-awardingofthebonuses.

Furthermore, the evaluation panel shall follow the general recommendations below about the

commentsjustifyingthescores:

• Avoidcommentswhichdescribeorareasummaryofitemscontainedintheapplication;

• Donotusethefirstperson.

• Useananalytical and impartial language,avoidingderogatory commentson theapplicant, the

workplan,thesupervisor,etc.

• Avoidaskingquestions,giventhattheapplicantisunabletorespond.

3.5.FinalMinutesoftheMeetingoftheEvaluationPanel

Theminutesofthemeetingofthepanelaretheresponsibilityofallpanelmembersandshouldbe


signedbyall;itswritingupthecoordinator´sresponsibility.

Thereportshouldinclude:

• ThenameofallthoseparticipatingintheEvaluationPanelmeeting;

• Alistofanyconflictsofinterest;

• Theidentificationoftheapplicationsconsideredtobenon-assessable.

• Therankingoftheapplicants.

• Anyproxyvotingthatmayhaveoccurred,fordulyjustifiedreasonsofabsence.

3.6.ConflictofInterest(CDI)

If theevaluationpanel chairhasaconflictof interestwithanapplicationsubmitted to thepanel,

this should be declared to FCT at the beginning of the process of allocating the applications to

evaluators.

If an evaluator has a conflict of interest with any of the applications, he/she should declare it

formallytothechairofhis/herpanelwiththemaximumadvance.Inthiscasethepanelchairshould

notallocatethegivenapplication(s)tothisevaluator.

Declarationsofconflictsof interestarerequiredtobeincludedinthepanelmeetingminutes.The

chair of the evaluation panel, in collaboration with FCT, has the responsibility to compile a list

mentioning the reference of the application, as well as the name of the applicant and of the

evaluatorinconflictofinterest.

Conflictsofinterestofachairorevaluatorsincludebutarenotlimitedto:

• Belongingtothehostinstitutionspecifiedintheapplication(DepartmentorResearchUnit);

• Having published articles with the applicant or with supervisor(s), co-supervisor(s) of the

applicantuptothreeyearsbeforetheapplicationdeadline;

• Having ongoing, or planned, scientific cooperation with the applicant, supervisor(s) or co-

supervisor(s);

• Havingafamilyrelationshipwiththeapplicant,supervisor(s)orco-supervisor(s);

• Havinganyscientificorpersonalconflictwiththeapplicant,supervisor(s)orco-supervisor(s);

• Any other situation whichmay raise reservations, either on the part of the applicant or of an

externalbody,regardingtheircapacitytoimpartiallyassesstheapplication.


3.7.Confidentiality

Confidentialityofallapplicationsshouldbeassuredandprotected,atalltimes.Allreviewersshall

sign a confidentiality agreement regarding the content of the applications, as well as events

occurring during the evaluation process, so that they are not allowed to copy, quote or use any

formofmaterialcontainedwithintheapplications.

4.EVALUATIONCRITERIA

All applications should be scored from 1,000 (minimum) to 5,000 (maximum) on the three

evaluationcriteria:

i) Meritoftheapplicant.

ii) MeritoftheWorkplan

iii) MeritoftheHostinstitution

Forsubsequentdecisionmakingaboutthegrantingofastudentship/fellowship,applicantswillbe

rankedaccordingtotheweightedaverageofthescoresofthethreecriteria.Thethreeevaluation

criteria, i) to iii)willhaverelativeweightsof, respectively,40%,30%,30%forBD,and40%,40%,

20%forBPD.

Incaseofa tie, thescoreawardedto themeritof theapplicantwillbeconsidered,and if the tie

persists,thescoreawardedtotheworkplan.Thescoreawardedtothemeritofthehostinstitution

willbethethirdcriterionusedincaseofatie.

Thescoresofanyoftheevaluationcriteriaincludethreedecimalplaces.Thevaluesresultingfrom

the application of the algorithm will be rounded to the third decimal place, according to the

followingcriteria:whenthefourthdecimalplaceisequaltoorabovefiveitwillberoundedup;if

belowfive,thevalueofthethirddecimalplacewillbekept.

4.1.MeritoftheApplicant

4.1.1.EvaluationoftheMeritoftheApplicantsinBDApplications

ThemeritoftheapplicanttoaPhDstudentshipisevaluatedbytwosub-criteria:

i)Academicpath(fromabaselinescore),witha60%weightontheapplicant’smerit.

ii)Personalcurriculum(whichreflectstheapplicant’sscientificandprofessionalpath),witha40%

weightontheapplicantsmerit.


a) AcademicPathsubcriterioninBDapplications

Theapplicant’sclassificationforthesub-criterion“AcademicPath”resultsfromthefinalclassificationof

thefirstandsecondcyclesofstudies(oronlyfromthefirstcycle,whenapplicable), inaccordancewith

thereferencetableforthedefinitionofthebaselinescore(Table1).

Table1:Referencetableforthedefinitionofthebaselinescore

FinalAverageFirst(Bachelors)+

MastersorIntegratedMasters

FinalClassificationPreorPost-BolognaFirst

Degree(Bachelors)

BaselineScore

≥17 - 5,00016 - 4,000- ≥17 3,50015 - 3,500- 16 3,00014 - 2,500- 15 2,500

<14 - 1,500- 14 1,500- <14 1,000

ThefollowingappliesforTable1:

• The finalaverageof “Bachelors+Masters” (first column inTable1) inapostorpre-Bologna

path, results from the arithmetic average of the final score attained in the first study

cycle/Bachelorsandthe final scoreattained in thesecondstudycycle/Masters,byapplying

thefollowingalgorithm:

Final Average (Bachelors +Masters) = !"#$% !"#$% !!" !"!#$ !"#!!"#$% !!"#$% !"#$% !!" !"!#$ (!"#$%&#)

!

The average score resulting from application of the algorithm will be rounded to units,

accordingtothefollowingcriteria:whenthefirstdecimalplaceisequaltoorabovefiveitwill

beroundedup;whenitisbelowfivetheunitvaluewillbekept.

• In theeventof IntegratedMasterswhose institutionsdonot issuecertificateswith the1st

and 2nd cycle final scores, the final grade registered on the degree certificate after

completionofthecycleofstudies(300to360ECTS)willbeconsidered.

• ThecaseswhichdonotfallwithinanyofthesituationsinTable1,namelyMastersobtained

afternon-academicpaths,e.g.,Masters thatarenotprecededeitherbyapost-Bologna1st


cycleofstudiesorbyapre-BolognaBachelors,willbespecificallyanalysedandresolvedby

theevaluators.

• Thecertificatesthatdonotspecifythefinalgrade(eitherquantitativeorqualitative)willbe

equatedtotheminimumgrade(baselinescore=1),forthepurposeofscoringthe“meritof

theapplicant”inthesub-criteria“academicpath”.

Bonusesandspecificcasesforthesub-criterion“academicpath”(BD)

• In the case of certificates that specify only one qualitative classification (for example pre-

BolognaMasters),thiswillbeconvertedasdefinedinTable2,forthepurposeofcalculation

ofthefinalaverage(Bachelors+Masters)andthesubsequentcalculationofthebaselinescore

(thirdcolumninTable1).

Table2:Tableforqualitativetoquantitativegradeconversion

QualitativeGrade

QuantitativeConversion

VeryGoodwithDistinction/withDistinctionandHonours 18

VeryGood/ApprovedwithDistinction 16

Good/Approved/ApprovedbyUnanimity 14

• Applicantsthatshowdulyprovenincapacityequaltoorhigherthan90%willhaveabonus

equivalent to 10% of the baseline score. Applicants that show a duly proven incapacity

equaltoorhigherthan60%willhaveabonusequivalentto5%ofthebaselinescore.

• WhenapplicantsprovideproofofmorethanoneBachelorsorMastersdegree,itisuptothe

evaluationpaneltodecidewhichacademicdegreesarethemostadequatefortheworkplan

and should therefore be considered for the baseline score in the sub-criterion “academic

path”. The evaluation panel may also consider all the degrees shown by the applicant in

evaluatingthepersonalcurriculum.Ineithercase,thecriteriaappliedshouldbemadeclear

intheminutesandinthefinalevaluationreport.

Thescoreforthesub-criterion“academicpath”shallbeobtainedusingthefollowingalgorithm:

𝐴𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝑝𝑎𝑡ℎ 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 1 +𝑏𝑜𝑛𝑢𝑠 %100

×0,6


b) “Personalcurriculum”sub-criterioninBDapplications

Intheassessmentofthissub-criteriontheevaluatorsshouldanalysethecurriculumoftheapplicantinan

integratedway, starting from a global overview of the applicant’s scientific and professional path. It is

important to consider the motivation and reference letters (mandatory documents) and the several

dimensionsofthecurriculumthatmaydemonstraterelevantscientificandprofessionalcareerpaths. In

particular the document that the applicant submits as the most representative of his/her

scientific/professionalpathshouldbeassessedforitsquality.Thisdocumentmaybe:

• a scientific publication (paper in a national or international peer-review journal, book, a book

chapter,apaperoracommunicationatanationalorinternationalconference,areport,Bachelor

orMastersthesis,etc.);

or,

• proofofscientificorprofessionalachievement(aperformance,anartisticwork,etc.).

Thescoreshouldconveytheevaluator´sconclusionontheglobalcurriculumandshouldbejustifiedinas

muchdetailaspossible,andinaclearandconsistentway,identifyingthestrongandtheweakpoints.

Thescoreofthe“personalcurriculum”sub-criterionwillbecalculatedbythefollowingalgorithm:

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑚 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑚 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 0,4

c) TotalscoreforthemeritoftheapplicantsinBDapplications

Incompliancewith theaforementionedparagraphs, the total scorefor themeritof theapplicants toa

PhDstudentshipisobtainedbythefollowingalgorithm:

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑀𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒

= 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 1 +𝑏𝑜𝑛𝑢𝑠 %100

×0,6 + (𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑚 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 0,4)

4.1.2.EvaluationoftheMeritoftheApplicantsinBPDapplications

The merit of the applicant to a post-doctoral fellowship is evaluated on a single criterion: the

personalcurriculum(whichreflectstheapplicant’sscientificandprofessionalpath).


PersonalcurriculumcriterioninBPDapplications

In the assessment of this criterion the evaluators should analyse the curriculum of the applicant in an

integratedway,startingfromaglobaloverviewoftheapplicant’sscientificandprofessionalcareerpath.It

is important to consider themotivation and reference letters (mandatory documents) and the several

dimensionsofthecurriculumthatmaydemonstraterelevantscientificandprofessionalcareerpaths. In

particular,thequalityoftheoneortwodocumentsthattheapplicantsubmitsasthemostrepresentative

ofhis/herscientific/professionalpathshouldbeassessedforitsquality.Thesedocumentsmaybe:

o A scientific publication, such as papers in national or international peer-review journals, books,

chapters of books, papers or communications at national or international conferences, scientific

reports,PhDthesis,amongothers;

or,

o Proofofscientificandprofessionalachievements,suchasaperformanceoranartisticwork.

The scorewill convey the evaluator´s conclusion on the global curriculumand should be justified in as

muchdetailaspossible,andinaclearandconsistentway,identifyingthestrongandtheweakpoints.

Bonuses,penaltiesandspecificcasesinthepersonalcurriculumcriteria(BPD)

Abonus equivalent to 20%of the “personal curriculum” scorewill be awarded to applicants that

obtainedtheirPhDinaPortugueseuniversity,andthatconcomitantlyintendtodoapost-doc:

o Atadifferenthostinstitutiontotheonethatawardedtheirdegree

or,

o Inadifferent regionofPortugal to theonewhere thePhDhost institution is located,even if the

hostinstitutionbelongstothesameuniversityastheonethatawardedthedegree;

or,

o At the same institution where they obtained their PhD degree, after a two-year (at least)

professionalorscientificpathawayfromtheinstitution.

• Apenaltywillbeappliedtoapplicantsthathaveobtainedthedoctoratedegreemorethan72

monthspriortoapplication.Thepenaltywillbe,equivalentto20%ofthescoreawardedtothe

“personal curriculum” criterion. This procedure values applicants who have finished their PhD

more recently and looks to allow academic/professional paths to be more comparable, since

theseusuallyimprovewithelapsedtime.

Toassess timeelapsedafter thePhDdegree, thenumberofmonthsbetweenthePhDdegree


awardandtheapplicationdeadlinewillbecounted.Thisperiodof timewillbereducedby12

months foreachdulyprovenmaternity/paternity leave takenafter thePhDdegree.After this

assessment,applicantshavingobtainedaPhDdegreemore72monthspriortoapplicationwill

bepenalised.

• Applicants that show duly proven incapacity equal to or higher than 90% will have a bonus

equivalentto10%ofthescoreawardedtothe“personalcurriculum”criterion.Applicantsthat

showdulyprovenincapacityequaltoorhigherthan60%andlowerthan90%willhaveabonus

of5%.

• Wheneverapplicants showproofofmore thanonPhD, itwillbeup to theevaluationpanel to

decide which of the academic degrees is the most adequate for the work plan and should

thereforebeconsidered.Theevaluationpanelmayalsoconsiderallthedegreesindicatedbythe

applicant for the evaluation of the personal curriculum; for the purposes of bonuses and/or

penalties the longest-held degreewill be considered.Whichever the case, the criteria that are

appliedshouldbeclearlydescribedintheminutesandinthefinalevaluationreport.

Thefinal totalscore for themeritof theapplicanttoapost-doctoral fellowship iscalculatedby

thefollowingalgorithm:

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑀𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒(𝑎) = 𝐶𝑃× 1 +𝐵1100

+𝐵2100

−𝑃1100

where:

CP = Personal curriculum score

B1 = 20(%), in the event of entitlement to a bonus for change of institution/region for the post-doc relative

to the PhD degree

B2 = 10(%) or 5(%), in the event of entitlement to a bonus due to proven disability

P1 = 20(%), in the event of application of a penalty due to more than 72 months elapsing since award of

PhD degree

4.2.MeritoftheWorkPlan(BDandBPDapplications)

ForapplicantstoaBDthiscriterionhasa30%weight.ForapplicantstoaBPD,whoshouldhavea

moreconsolidatedworkplan,thiscriterioncarriesa40%weight.

The evaluator shall assess the merit of the work plan based on the following three main quality

criteriaofaresearchplan:

• Substantiatedrelevanceoftheobjectofstudy;

• Scientificapproach(stateoftheart,methodology);


• Viabilityoftheworkplan.

Asregardstherelevanceoftheobjectofstudythefollowingshouldbeconsidered:acleardefinition

ofthegoalsandresearchquestions;thepotentialcontributionoftheprojecttotheexistingbodyof

knowledge and to the advancement of science and technology; if relevant, its possible

socioeconomicimpact.

Regarding the scientific approach the merit of the state of the art that is described, and of the

proposed methodology should be considered, underlined by their clearness, consistency and

coherence,inaccordancewithinternationallyacceptedstandards.

As regards the viability of the work plan, the suitability of human resources and the proposed

methodologiestothetasksandpredictedgoalsintheworkplanandrespectivedeadlinesshouldbe

assessed.Ifapplicable,aanalysesofinherentriskstothedifferentstagesthatmakeuptheworkplan

shouldbeanalysed,potentiallywithpreliminaryidentificationofcriticalpointsandthecontingency

measurestobeadopted.

The score translates the evaluator´s conclusion about the threedimensions, in an integratedway,

andshouldbejustifiedinasmuchdetailaspossible,inaclearandconsistentway.

4.3.MeritofHostconditions(BDandBPDapplications)

Forapplicants toaBDthiscriterionwillhavea30%weight.ForBPDthiscriterionwillhavea20%

weight.

Theevaluatorswillassess themeritof theconditionsofferedby thehost institutionbasedontwo

main dimensions that underpin the quality of supervision and the framework of institutional and

researchteamsupportforaPhDstudentorpost-doctoralfellow:

• Thescientificmerit,andtheestablishedcompetenciesandexperienceofthesupervisor(andco-

supervisorsifany)intherelevantscientificarea;

• The quality of the working conditions and of supervision of the applicant, as assessed by the

adequacyoftheresearchteamandofthemeansmadeavailablebytheresearchunitforthefull

accomplishment of the proposed work plan. This evaluation is based on the applicant’s

descriptionof the suitability of themeans available at the institutionwhere theworkplanwill

takeplace.

Thescorereflectstheevaluator´sconclusionaboutthetwodimensionsconsidered,inanintegrated

way;itshouldbejustifiedinasmuchdetailaspossible,andinaclearandconsistentway.


AnnexI–ScientificAreas,adaptedfromtheFOSClassificationintheFrascatiManual

MainScientific

AreaSecondaryScientific

Area Sub-area EvaluationPanel(BDandBDP)

1aExactSciences 1.1Mathematics PureMathematics

MathematicsAppliedMathematicsStatisticsandProbabilityOther,pleasespecify:

1.2ComputerandInformationSciences

ComputerSciences

ComputerandInformationSciences

InformationSciencesBioinformaticsOther,pleasespecify:

1.3PhysicalSciences

AtomicPhysics

Physics

MolecularPhysicsChemicalPhysics

CondensedMatterPhysicsParticlePhysicsNuclearPhysicsFluidsandPlasmaPhysicsOpticsAcousticsAstronomy

Other(pleasespecify):

1.4ChemicalSciences

OrganicChemistry

Chemistry

InorganicChemistryNuclearChemistryPhysicalChemistryPolymerScienceElectrochemistryColloidChemistryAnalyticalChemistryOther(pleasespecify

EVALUATIONGUIDE–CALLFORPhDSTUDENTSHIPSANDPÓST-DOCTORALFELLOWSHIPS–2016

5

MainScientificArea

SecondaryScientificArea Sub-aarea EvaluationPanel(BDandBDP)

1bNatural

Sciences

1.5EarthSciencesandEnvironmentalSciences

GeosciencesandMultidisciplinaryStudies

EarthSciences

MineralogyPalaeontologyGeochemistryGeophysicsPhysicalGeographyGeologyVolcanologyMeteorologyAtmosphericSciencesClimaticResearchOceanographyHydrologyWaterResourcesOther(pleasespecify)EnvironmentalSciences Environmental Sciences andOther

NaturalSciences

1.6.BiologicalSciencesCellbiology

ExperimentalBiologyandBiochemistry

MicrobiologyVirologyBiochemistryMolecularBiologyBiochemicalResearchMethodsMycologyBiophysicsGeneticsandHeredityReproductiveBiologyDevelopmentalBiologyBotany

BiologicalSciences

ZoologyMammalogyHerpetologyIchthyologyOrnithologyEntomologyBehaviouralSciencesBiologyMarineBiologyAquacultureFreshwaterBiologyLimnologyEcologyBiodiversityConservationEvolutionaryBiologyOther(pleasespecify)

1.7OtherNaturalSciences

Other(pleasespecify) EnvironmentalSciencesandOtherNaturalSciences


6

MainScientific


Area Sub-areaEvaluationPanel(BDandBDP)

2Engineering

Sciencesand

Technology

2.1CivilEngineeringCivilEngineering

CivilEngineering

ArchitectureEngineeringConstructionEngineeringMunicipalEngineeringStructuralEngineeringTransportEngineeringOther(pleasespecify):

2.2ElectricalEngineering,ElectronicEngineeringandInformationEngineering

Electrical and ElectronicEngineering

ElectricalEngineering,ElectronicEngineeringandInformationEngineering

RoboticsAutomationandcontrolsystemsCommunicationEngineeringandSystemsTelecommunicationsComputerHardwareandArchitectureOther(pleasespecify):

2.3MechanicalEngineering

Mechanical Engineering andEngineeringSystems

MechanicalEngineering

AppliedMechanicsThermodynamicsAerospaceEngineeringNuclearRelatedEngineeringManufacturingProcessesAudioEngineeringandReliabilityAnalysisOther(pleasespecify):

2.4ChemicalEngineering

ChemicalEngineeringChemicalEngineeringChemicalProcessEngineering


2.5MaterialEngineering

MaterialsEngineering

MaterialsEngineering

CeramicsCoatingsandFilmsCompositesPaperandWoodTextilesOther(pleasespecify):

2.6MedicalEngineering

MedicalandBiomedicalEngineering BioengineeringandBiotechnology

LaboratoryTechnologyOther(pleasespecify):

2.7EnvironmentalEngineering

EnvironmentalEngineering

EnvironmentalEngineeringandEnvironmentalBiotechnology

GeologicalEngineeringGeotechnicsPetroleumEngineering,EnergyandFuelsRemoteSensingMiningandMineralProcessingMarineEngineeringSeaVesselsOceanEngineeringOther(pleasespecify):


7

MainScientificArea

SecondaryScientificArea Sub-area

EvaluationPanel(BDandBDP)

2EngineeringSciencesandTechnology

2.8EnvironmentalBiotechnology

EnvironmentalBiotechnology

EnvironmentalEngineeringandEnvironmentalBiotechnology

BioremediationDiagnosticBiotechnologiesinEnvironmentalManagementEnvironmentalBiotechnologyRelatedEthicsOther(pleasespecify)

2.9IndustrialBiotechnology

IndustrialBiotechnology

BioengineeringandBiotechnology

BioprocessingTechnologiesBiocatalysisFermentationBioproducts

BiomaterialsBioplasticsBiofuelsBio-derivedNewMaterialsBio-derivedChemicalsOther(pleasespecify)

2.1Nanotechnology NanomaterialsNanotechnologiesNanoprocesses

Other(pleasespecify)

2.11OtherEngineeringSciencesandTechnologies

FoodEngineeringandTechnologies

AgriculturalandFoodTechnologiesandOtherEngineeringSciencesandTechnologiesOther(pleasespecify)


8

MainScientificArea

SecondaryScientificArea Sub-area EvaluationPanel(BDandBDP)

3MedicalandHealthsciences

3.1BasicMedicine Biomedicine

BiomedicineandBasicMedicine

AnatomyandHistologyHumanGeneticsImmunologyNeurosciencesPharmacologyMedicinalChemistryToxicologyPhysiologyPathologyOther(pleasespecify):

3.2ClinicalMedicine Andrology

ClinicalMedicineandHealthSciences

ObstetricsandGynaecologyPaediatricsCardiacandCardiovascularSystemsHaematologyRespiratorySystemCriticalCareMedicineandEmergencyMedicineAnaesthesiologyOrthopaedicsSurgeryRadiology, Nuclear MedicineandMedicalImagingTransplantationStomatologyOralSurgeryandMedicineDermatologyInfectiousDiseasesAllergologyRheumatologyEndocrinologyandMetabolismGastroenterologyandHepatologyUrologyandNephrologyOncologyOphthalmologyOtorhinolaryngologyPsychiatryClinicalNeurologyGeriatricsandGerontologyGeneralandFamilyMedicineInternalMedicineOtherClinicalMedicineAreasIntegrativeandComplementaryMedicineOther(pleasespecify):


9

MainScientific


Area SubareaEvaluationPanel(BDand

BDP)

3MedicalandHealthsciences

3.3HealthSciences HealthCareandServices

ClinicalMedicineandHealthSciences

HealthPolicyandServicesNursingNutritionandDieteticsPublicandEnvironmentalHealthTropicalMedicineParasitologyInfectiousDiseasesEpidemiologyOccupationalMedicine

OccupationalHealthSportsSciencesSocialBiomedicalSciencesBioethicsandHistoryandPhilosophyofMedicineOtherOther(pleasespecify)

3.4MedicalBiotechnology

Health-relatedBiotechnology

BioengineeringandBiotechnology

TechnologiesinvolvingthemanipulationofCells,Tissues,OrgansorthewholeOrganismGene-basedDiagnosticsandTherapeuticInterventionsBiomaterialsMedicalBiotechnologyRelatedEthicsOther(pleasespecify)

3.5OtherNaturalSciences

ForensicScience ClinicalMedicineandHealthSciencesOther(pleasespecify)


10

MainScientific


Area Sub-areaEvaluationPanel(BDand

BDP)

4AgriculturalSciences

4.1Agriculture,ForestryandFisheries

Agriculture

Agriculture,ForestryandFisheriesandotherAgriculturalSciences

ForestryFisheriesSoilScienceHorticultureViticultureAgronomyPlantsBreedingandPlantProtectionOther(pleasespecify):

4.2 Animal and DairyScience

AnimalandDairyScience

AnimalandVeterinarySciences

CattleFarming/HusbandryPetsOther(pleasespecify)

4.3VeterinaryScience

VeterinaryScience


4.4AgriculturalBiotechnologyandFoodBiotechnology

AgriculturalBiotechnologyandFoodBiotechnology

AgriculturalandFoodTechnologiesandOtherEngineeringSciencesandTechnologies

GeneticManipulationTechonologyLivestockCloningMarkerassistedselectionDiagnosticsBiomassfeedstockManufacturingTechnologiesTransgenicBiopharmingEthicsRelatedtoAgriculturalBiotechnologyOther(pleasespecify)

4.5OtherAgriculturalSciences

Other(pleasespecify) Agriculture,ForestryandFisheriesandotherAgriculturalSciences


11

MainScientificArea SecondaryScientificArea

Sub-area EvaluationPanel(BDandBPD)

5SocialSciences 5.1Psychology Psychology PsychologyOther(pleasespecify)

5.2EconomicsandManagement

EconomicsEconomicsandManagementManagement


5.3EducationalSciences GeneralEducation EducationalSciencesOther(pleasespecify)

5.4Sociology Sociology SociologySocialWorkAnthropology AnthropologyOther(pleasespecify) Sociology

5.5LawLaw

LawOther(pleasespecify)

5.6PoliticalSciencePoliticalScience

PoliticalSciencesMilitarySciences


5.7SocialandEconomicGeography

SocialandEconomicGeography SocialandEconomicGeography


5.8MediaandCommunications

DocumentalandInformationSciences MediaandCommunicationSciencesJournalismandMediaStudiesOther(pleasespecify)

5.9OtherSocialSciences ScienceCommunicationandManagement

ScienceCommunicationandManagementandOtherSocialSciencesOther(pleasespecify)


12

MainScientificArea SecondaryScientificArea

Sub-area EvaluationPanel(BDandBPD)

6.1HistoryandArchaeologyHistory

HistoryandArchaeology6.Humanities

ArchaeologyandConservation Other(pleasespecify) 6.2Languagesand

Literature

Literature

LiteraryStudies

PortugueseStudies RomanceStudies EnglishStudies ClassicalStudies AfricanandAsianStudies GermanStudies Other(pleasespecify) Linguistics Linguistics 6.3Philosophy,Ethicsand

Religion

PhilosophyPhilosophy,EthicsandReligion TheologyandReligiousStudies

Other(pleasespecify) 6.4Arts Finearts

Arts

Musicology

PerformingArtsStudies(Film,Television,Theatre,Dance,etc.)

Other(pleasespecify) HistoryofArt MuseologyandHistoryofArt ArchitectureandDesign Design,ArchitectureandTown

Planning 6.5OtherhumanitiesHistoryofScienceandTechnology HistoryofScienceandTechnologyand

OtherHumanities Other(pleasespecify)