writing a competitive erc proposal - part 1 · • only 1 proposal may be submitted per work...
TRANSCRIPT
Rolf Vermeij
Liaison Officer
THE EU-OFFICE AT THE UT
www.utwente.nl/subsidies
[email protected] Twitter UT_EU_Office
Melanie ten Asbroek & Telma Esteves
Grant Advisors
FP7 PROFILES
University of Twente
DCU
FP7 database of National Contact Point Bricks database for complete info
EUROPEAN POLICIES
CitizenRegion
EU Sector EU Science
Int-national
Societal challenges
Smart specialis'n
Industrial leadership
Excellent science
EU research @ global level
SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF RTD FUNDING
Art. 179/180 European Research Area
Art. 182 Multi-annual
Art. 184 Inter-gov
Art. 185 OMC
Art. 186 Third Country
Art. 187 Joint Undt
Horizon 2020 EIT EIB
EIRO EUREKA
COST ESciFnd
ERAnet ERAplus
AAL BONUS EMRP
EUROSTARS EDTCP
ICPC SICA Artemis Clean Sky
ENIAC GMES HFP IMI
Why?:
• World class science is the foundation of tomorrow’s technologies, jobs and wellbeing
• Europe needs to develop, attract and retain research talent
• Researchers need access to the best infrastructures
EXCELLENT SCIENCE
• ERC
• Future and Emerging Technologies
• Marie-Skłodowska-Curie Actions
• Access to research infrastructures
EXCELLENT SCIENCE
13 094
2 696
6 162
2 488
€ Million
Why?:
• Strategic investments in key technologies (e.g. advanced manufacturing, micro-electronics) underpin innovation across existing and emerging sectors
• Europe needs to attract more private investment in research and innovation
• Europe needs more innovative SMEs to create growth and jobs
INDUSTRIAL LEADERSHIP
INDUSTRIAL LEADERSHIP
Why?:
• Concerns of citizens and society/EU policy
objectives (climate, environment, energy, transport etc) cannot be achieved without innovation
• Breakthrough solutions come from multi-disciplinary
collaborations, including social sciences & humanities
• Promising solutions need to be tested,
demonstrated and scaled up
SOCIETAL CHALLENGES
€ Million
1. Health, demographic change and wellbeing 7 472
2. Food security, sustainable agriculture, marine and maritime research & the bio-economy 3 851
3. Secure, clean and efficient energy 5 931
4. Smart, green and integrated transport 6 336
5. Climate action, resource efficiency and raw materials 3 081
6. Inclusive, innovative and reflective societies 7. Secure societies
1 309
1 695
SOCIETAL CHALLENGES
INFLUENCING THE WORK PROGRAMMES
European Innovation Partnerships:
Research to Market
Joint Programming: European collaboration
STEPPING STONES FOR INDIVIDUALS
Apply at ITN
Apply for your own MC
grant
Apply for ERC grant
Set up your first network
or ITN
Apply for ERC
Consolidator
Set up your first
cooperation
Apply for ERC
advanced
Apply for JD
Have several EU projects
in place
Build your career: work in excellent groups, publish or perish, publish in top journals, apply for prestigious (national) grants
PhD Post-doc Independent PI
Senior PI
Professor
• Frontier research • Basic and applied research • Any field of science, engineering or scholarship • Independence, consolidation or established • Any nationality • Any age • Host institution in EU Member state or Associated Country • Grants are portable
ERC - SHORT VERSION
Starting 2-7 yrs past PhD
1.5 M€ 0.5 M€ extra
Consolidator 7-12 yrs past PhD
2.0 M€ 0.75 M€ extra
Advanced 10+ yrs past PhD
2.5 M€ 1.0 M€ extra
• Frontier research • Scientist, engineer, scholar • Independent • PhD equivalent degree • PhD date - national rules • PhD window • Host institution • Portability
• Career breaks • Research team • Resubmission
DEFINITIONS
• Total breaks max. 4.5 years
• Parental leave •First event <7 years past PhD date for starting grant •Maternity: 1.5 years for each birth certificate •Paternity: actual amount of time taken
• Other breaks: sick leave >90 days, clinical training, national services •After PhD date
CAREER BREAKS
• Resubmission (next slides)
• 30% / 50% time commitment
• Minimum time in EU 50%
• Only 1 ERC grant per PI active
• Only 1 proposal may be submitted per Work programme year
• Not a panel member for the same type of call in recent past
• ERC laureates: check cut-off date of current project before resubmission
SUBMISSION RESTRICTIONS
RESUBMISSION
2014 2015 2016 2017 20182013 A +2013 B +2013 C -2014 A +2014 B - +2014 C - - +2015 A +2015 B - +2015 C - - +
• Deadline always 17:00
• 3 Domains (PE 44%, LS 39%, SH 17%) •25 Panels
• Keywords (1-4 in A-Form, online) •8-21 per panel
DEADLINES, BUDGET
Starting Consolidator AdvancedPublication 11 December 2013 11 December 2013 17 June 2014
Deadline 2014 25 March 20 May 21 October
# Projects 2014 370 400 200
Deadline 2015 21 March 15 May 28 August
# Projects 2015 315 340 285
• Horizon 2020 participant portal
• ECAS user account
• PIC of host institution
• Abstract, title, acronym (can be changed)
• Panel choice
REGISTER YOUR PROPOSAL
• General Information • ERC primary and secondary panel • Keywords • Abstract • Declarations
• Administrative data of participating organisations
• Contact person
• Budget
• Ethics
• Call specific questions • Exclusion of evaluators
ONLINE FORMS
• Select based on main keywords (ERC Work Programme 2014)
• Keywords from online forms
• Check previous evaluators
• Check laureates
• Where is your main impact?
• Which panel is likely to appreciate your objectives?
CHOOSING THE RIGHT PANEL
EVALUATION PROCEDURE
A-Forms (online)
B1: Extended Synopsis 5p CV 2p Track Record 2p FundingID annex B2: Full Proposal 15p Additional: Letter of Support PhD Certificate Ethical issues annex Birth Certificates Career break
Eligibility, administrative
Step 1 + Step 2
Step 2
Eligibility, funding
• Step 1 based on B1 only • Individual assessment & marking by panel members • Panel meetings • Ranking • Pass or fail
• Step 2 based on B1 and B2
• Same as Step 1, but external reviewers possibly added
• Numerical scores up to 8
• Final score A-C with ranking range
EVALUATION PROCESS
• Step 1 • Proceed to step 2 ("A") • Not selected, B or C
• Step 2
• Selected for funding • Not selected, A or B
• Current situation (appr): • C 35% • B 40% • A 10% • Funded 10%
EVALUATION OUTCOME
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Idea
Opportunity
Consortium
Write & submit
Negotiate
Project
Evaluate
Evaluation criteria
• Part B1:
• Cover page with summary and panel justification
• 1a - Extended Synopsis • 1b - CV • 1c - Track Record
• Funding ID
PART B1 - PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
1 page 5 pages 2 pages 2 pages No limit
ERC - PRINCIPLE INVESTIGATOR
Intellectual capacity, creativity and commitment To what extent has the PI demonstrated the ability to propose and conduct ground-breaking research? To what extent does the PI provide evidence of creative independent thinking? To what extent have the achievements of the PI typically gone beyond the state-of-the-art? To what extent has the PI demonstrated sound leadership in the training and advancement of young scientists? (Advanced only) Commitment 50% or 30%
PRINCIPLE INVESTIGATOR
A-Forms (online)
B1: Extended Synopsis 5p CV 2p Track Record 2p FundingID annex B2: Full Proposal 15p Additional: Letter of Support PhD Certificate Ethical issues annex Birth Certificates Career break
FACTUAL INFORMATION IN CV
Curriculum Vitae
Standard academic record
Research record
Research career gaps
Track Record
Publications
Patents
Prizes & Awards
Proof of professional experience, scientific leadership potential, international scientific recognition
Funding ID in separate annex
• Standard academic record • Name, affiliation, hyperlink • Education (incl PhD) • Affiliations • Academic services
• Research record
• Description of research (field mobility), skills, methods, responsibilities • Major outcomes and impact • Supervision (MSc, PhD, post-doc, staff) • International collaborations
• Research career gaps, unconventional paths • Added value of ERC grant
CV - 1
• Membership professional associations: why were you nominated?
• Editorial activities • Editor, member of editorial board, etc • Name of journal • Frequency
• Reviewer
• For which journals, frequency • For which funding agencies, frequency
• Collaborations with internationally well-known groups/researchers, proof (i.e.
Joint publications, projects)
• Organising conferences • Committee member, type, year, chair of sessions, initiator, etc.
CV - 2
• Publications:
• Start with a summary in opening paragraph •Statistics: total number, total citations, H/G- index (source!), cover pages, highlights, authorship #s, publication/citation growth, impact factor, top-papers •Explain publication culture
• Per publication: •Highlight authorship •Papers without PhD supervisor •Papers under your supervision •Citations (excl selfcit), IF, ABC, Faculty of 1000 list •Mention (for selected) your contribution, recognition, content •Proof of independence
(EARLY ACHIEVEMENT) TRACK RECORD - 1
• Conferences • International conferences • Part of a recurring event or not
• Presentations
• Keynote lectures, plenary lectures, parallel session, etc • Basis for invitation
• Other types of presentations • Advanced schools • Workshops
• Advanced: norm ref 10 invited presentations in well-established
internationally organized conferences and advanced schools
(EARLY ACHIEVEMENT) TRACK RECORD - 2
• Patents • Indicate their use • Open source: downloads
• Prizes & Awards
• Expeditions, organisation of conferences & workshops, contribution to early careers, innovation leadership.
(EARLY ACHIEVEMENT) TRACK RECORD - 3
BIBLIOMETRICS ERC Adv CALL 1 Zyczkowski, 10-year track record
Physical Sciences & Engineering Papers Cit -auto H-indexPE1 mathematical foundations 29 281 141 9PE2 fundamental constituents of matter 106 4192 2148 30PE3 condensed matter physics 109 2357 1253 23PE4 physical & analytical chemical sciences 137 4051 2248 33PE5 materials & synthesis 254 5782 3735 38PE6 computer science & informatics 55 564 262 10PE7 systems & communication engineering 51 949 384 15PE8 products & process engineering 55 503 242 12PE9 universe science 125 4039 2162 33PE10 earth system science 92 1514 910 21
BIBLIOMETRICS ERC Adv CALL 1 Zyczkowski, 10-year track record
Life sciences Papers Cit -auto H-indexLS1 molecular & struct. Biol & biochemistry 121 4604 2521 29LS2 genetics, genomics, bioinformatics 112 5906 2388 39LS3 cellular and developmental biology 61 2414 1573 25LS4 physiology, pathophys & edocrinology 176 4825 3587 41LS5 neurosciences & neural disorders 70 2469 1461 24LS6 immunity & infection 83 3157 2224 28LS7 diagnostic tools, therapy & public health 81 2909 1555 28LS8 evolutionary, population & environ biol 68 2415 1310 22LS9 applied life sciences & biotechnology 79 1677 721 23
BIBLIOMETRICS ERC Adv CALL 1 Zyczkowski, 10-year track record
Social sciences & humanities Papers Cit -auto H-index
SH1 individuals, institutions & markets 4 11 5 1
SH2 institutions, values, beliefs & behavior 1 0 0 0
SH3 environment & society 11 62 46 3
SH4 the human mind and its complexity 29 268 217 7
SH5 cultures & cultural production 1 0 0 0
SH6 the study of the human past 1 0 0 0
ERC EXPERIENCE WITH EXCELLENCE
Independence Maturity Scientific leadership Publications with high visibility Mobility experience: short & long Referee Speaker Conference organization Obtained funding Scientific management capacity Supervision experience
To-do Apply for national grants already at Master level Apply for small grants for publications, short stay visits, etc. Apply for (private) grants to organize conferences Prepare for research grants, Marie Curie individual Prepare for national grants Apply for PhDs, post-docs
DEMONSTRATION OF PERSONAL EXCELLENCE
I was the first to develop a technology to measure the size of nano particles by.... This technology is now widely used / standard ..... I validated the use of this technology for applications in complex systems.... This technology was shown indispensable for applications in ... Summarize the total number of publications, books, etc. Summarize citations, h-index, etc. Do not forget invited presentations, prizes, reviews, activities, editing Use of "lecturer" Statistics and relevance Added value of ERC
ERC - RESEARCH 1
Ground-breaking nature and potential impact of the research project To what extent does the proposed research address important challenges? To what extent are the objectives ambitious and beyond the state of the art (e.g. novel concepts and approaches or development across disciplines)? To what extent is the proposed research high risk/high gain?
... at the frontiers of science
substantially
where in proposal?
ERC - RESEARCH 2
Scientific approach To what extent is the outlined scientific approach feasible (based on the Extended Synopsis)? To what extent is the proposed research methodology appropriate to achieve the goals of the project (based on the full Scientific Proposal)? To what extent does the proposal involve the development of novel methodology (based on the full Scientific Proposal)? To what extent are the proposed timescales and resources necessary and properly justified (based on the full Scientific Proposal)?
For step 1
Not too much, not too little
Required
Complete, integrated project
RESEARCH
A-Forms (online)
B1: Extended Synopsis 5p CV 2p Track Record 2p FundingID annex B2: Full Proposal 15p Additional: Letter of Support PhD Certificate Ethical issues annex Birth Certificates Career break
RESEARCH
• Template: • B2a State-of-the-art and objectives • B2b Methodology • B2c Resources (incl. project costs)
• Maximum 15 pages • Includes bibliography (often smaller font size)
• Budget in A-Forms and in B2c
• Level of detail
• Feasibility
• Justification of the methodology in relation to the State-of-the-Art
• Development of novel methodology
• Not matching expertise in B1
PART B2 - COMMENTS
• Start with background/introduction • Short (max 1/3rd of first page) • Big research question, (scientific) challenge, urgency • Importance to the field (and beyond) • Impact: new horizons and opportunities (for science)
• Objectives (SMART)
• Resources
• Bibliography
PART B2 - STRUCTURE
• State-of-the-art (world wide)
• Scientific approach, Work Packages
• Timescales, risk analysis
• Why now? • Urgency
• Why ERC? • Opening up new research horizons
• Why me? • Match with unique set of expertise
• Novelty: theory, insight, technology, method, equipment, etc
• Groundbreaking potential: new direction, idea, challenging theories, blind spots
FROM RESEARCH QUESTION TO CONCEPT
The researcher has the concept in mind but • is not able to express it in writing, or • simply has not written it down, or • has not fine-tuned the concept in mind for this project
• Visualize yourself and your project in relation to state-of-the-art • Axes • Gap • Significantly beyond state-of-the-art • Breakthrough
PART B2 - STATE-OF-THE-ART AND OBJECTIVES
Theo
retic
al
Experimental
• Formulate objectives SMART
• Do not formulate different ways in proposal
• When using sub-objectives, activities, etc, keep clear relationships • Not too many layers
PART B2 - OBJECTIVES
• State-of-the-art misses some aspects
• PI has not contributed significantly
• Objectives not clear
• Objectives not ambitious enough (or too ambitious)
PART B2 - COMMENTS
FEEDBACK FROM PANELS
Selected projects
Coherent project
Overarching aim/research question with objectives
Clear content
Hypothesis driven
Insight: mechanistic, structural, empirical
Rationale behind concept and approach
Rejected projects
No coherence
Only research questions
Explorative
Collecting stamps'
No rationale of choices made
• Describe the proposed methodology in detail including, as appropriate key intermediate goals
• Explain and justify the methodology in relation to the state-of-the-art
• Including novel or unconventional aspects
• Highlight any intermediate stages where results may require adjustment to the project planning
• Justify the scientific added value of other host institutes
B2b SCIENTIFIC APPROACH
• Logical work plan: coherent activities/tasks/work packages
• Each part covers activities that are appropriate to achieve the objectives
• Provide detailed information: • Preliminary data (figures) • Methods already running in your group • Milestones linked to planning • Risk analysis (alternatives, high gain)
FEASIBILITY
ADVICE FOR FEASIBILITY
• Divide your work in activities, sub projects and/or tasks
• Plot and plan the work in time (Gantt chart) and identify interdependencies of subparts
• Describe intermediate goals (milestones) and important outcomes and interdependencies in wording.
• Link the personnel to the planned work
• Carry out an analysis indicating feasibility
WORK PACKAGESWork Package number WP3 Start date: month 12
Work package title: Analysis of existing technologies
Activity type: RTD WP leader: Twente
Participants Twente ChalmersWP objectives and description of work: The objectives of WP3 are to benchmark the existing technologies in 5 countries and report on their relative qualifications. This WP will serve as input for WP5 and WP6
Tasks and role of participants:T3.1 Collecting data on existing technologies T3.2 Collect data on test samples from actual users T3.3 Synthesize report on outcomes
Deliverables in work package:
D3.1 Report on existing technologies Due date: month 16
D3.2 Report on qualifications and comparison Due date: month 30
MILESTONES AND DELIVERABLES
Milestone Is a point in time to measure
progress
Deliverable Tangible result to fulfill contractual obligations
Adoption of a technology as a basis for the next phase of the
project
Nature of a deliverable is a report, product, patent,
prototype, etc
GANTT CHART
Gantt chart Year 1 Year 3
Month: 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 36
WP1 Inventory techniques
Inventory
Test samples
Report
Milestone 1.1 *
WP2 Benchmarking
Standardization
Analysis
RISK ANALYSIS
• Identify the risky elements of your project proposal
• Quantify the risk and feasibility: low, medium, high
• Describe how you are going to adapt your research plan in case an element is not feasible
• In writing or in a table (with a proper legend)
RISK ANALYSIS FOR ERC
Challenge ImpactNovel &
unconventional aspects
Risks (Low, Medium, High) and
feasibility
A New knowledge New model Medium
Preliminary data
B Low Feasible
C High Backup plan
• Describe participating current and future team
• Describe all resources and their rationale: • Data • Material • Technology • Equipment, etc
• Choice of parameters, specifications, compare with other sources
• Explain amount of data, tools to be developed all realistic
• Are all objectives, periods covered?
RESOURCES
• Your salary
• Other persons on the project (increasing focus on post-docs)
• Equipment (or use of equipment)
• Consumables
• Travel
• Publications
• Subcontracting
• Budget cuts!
RESOURCES
• Ethical issues table online (mandatory) • Broad perception of ethical issues
• Describe ethical issues that may arise
• Used as guide for negotiation
• Indicate compliance • Legal • Codes of conduct • Ethical issues boards • Permissions
ETHICAL ISSUES ANNEX
ERC SCIENTIFIC PROPOSAL
Presentation & evaluation of principal investigator is
strongly correlated to the presented proposal
Principal investigator
Research record Academic record
Publications Prizes
Scientific proposal
State of the Art Objectives
Methodology Resources
• Concise presentation
• Not additional to B2
• No cross-references
• Feasibility on concept-level
• Groundbreaking nature
• State-of-the-art, including own work
PART B1
• Original, creative
• Focus on challenges
• Robust concept
• Novel approach with justification of rationale
• Preliminary data/prof of concept
• Impact
PART B1