EUROPEAN RESEARCH COUNCIL Advanced Grants Information and Proposal Writing January 2008 UK National Contact Points Christina Miller and Joanna Frost Science and Technology Facilities Council Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Economic and Social Research Council Medical Research Council Natural Environment Research Council Arts and Humanities Research Council UK Research Office Overview of Event Agenda • Introduction to UKRO and UK ERC NCP • Introduction to the ERC: Aims and Structure • ERC Advanced Grant • The Submission and Evaluation Process • Writing your ERC Application • Experience from the first call for the Starting Grants • Model Grant Agreement for ERC • Key differences to StG and UK RC • Questions and Answers UK Research Office UKRO’s Aim …promotes effective UK participation in EU-funded research programmes, higher education programmes, and other related activities… Based in Brussels, UKRO: Provides early insight and briefing; • Disseminates EU funding opportunities; • Provides high quality guidance and training; • Exchanges information between the UK and EU ERC Introduction to UKRO and UK ERC NCP UK Research Office UKRO Subscriber Services include… -Website with information on programmes, FAQs and Guidance http://www.ukro.ac.uk -Information services – email updates (& searchable database) Register/Update your profile at: http://ims.ukro.ac.uk -Enquiry service -Annual visit from an UKRO European Advisor -Specialist training courses and information events -Annual conference for European officers -Meeting room in Brussels -Monthly publication -British Council ‘RTD Insight’ -National Contact Point (Marie Curie and ERC) European Research Council National Contact Point helpdesk • Website http://www.ukro.ac.uk/erc • ERC mailing list for events and key updates • Helpdesk via email and telephone (erc-uk@bbsrc.ac.uk or 0032 2289 6121) • Specialist training courses and information events UK Research Office – ERC NCP• Advice on applying for ERC actions • Eligibility • Application help • Results • Contractual issues • Advice to those with ERC grants ERC -Introduction ERC Overview • New • Independent Scientific Governance • Support for a PI and (if necessary) team-members • Investigator driven (bottom-up) • Frontier Research • Excellence is only criterion • Flexible and Portable • Promote excellence through EU wide competition ERC Introduction to the ERC: Aims and Structure ERC Grant Schemes Starting Independent Researcher Grants ERC -Introduction • aims to provide adequate support to researchers at the stage at which they are intending to establish or are already leading their first independent research team or, depending on the field, developing their first independent research programme • researchers applying for an ERC Starting Grant must be able to demonstrate their potential to becomeindependent research leaders • ~1/3 Annual ERC Budget ERC -Introduction What is the ERC? What is the European Research Council (ERC)? • a new pan-European funding organisation • designed to support the best in Europe -scientists, engineers and scholars • funding of €7.51 billion (2007-13) What are the aims of the ERC? • Encourage highest quality research in Europe • Competitive, flexible funding • Investigator-initiated frontier research across all fields of research, on the basis of scientific excellence • Retain, repatriate and recruit (career support) ERC -Introduction ERC Grant Schemes Advanced Investigator Grants • aims to encourage and support excellent, innovative and investigator-initiated research projects carried out by recognised leading advanced investigators • complements the ERC Starting Grant scheme by targeting researchers who have already established themselves as being independent research leaders in their own right • ~2/3 Annual ERC Budget ERC How is the ERC Organised? ERC Board Jack Metthey Director of ERC DIS (DG RTD Directorate S) Prof. Fotis Kafatos ERC President and Chair of the ScC Prof. Helga Nowotny, and Dr Daniel Esteve ERC Vice-Presidents and ScC Vice-Chairs Prof. Ernst-Ludwig Winnacker ERC Secretary-General ERC -Organisation ERC -Organisation ERC -Organisation ERC Dedicated Implementation Structure • Execute annual work programme (which was established by the Scientific Council) • Implements calls for proposals • Provides information and support to applicants • Organises peer review evaluation • Establishes and manages grant agreements • Administers scientific and financial aspects and follow-up of grant agreements • Dedicated Services of the European Commission (an Executive Agency will be established in the future) Roles and Responsibilities in the ERC? • European Research Council Structure • ERC Scientific Council (ScC) • ERC Board • ERC Dedicated Implementation Structure • Role of the European Commission • Role of EU Member States ERC -Organisation ERC -Organisation The Role of the Commission • Represents the European Union • Provides financing through the EU Framework Programmes • Guarantees autonomy of the ERC • Assures the integrity and accountability of the ERC • Formally adopts annual work programmes (as established by the Scientific Council) Who sits on the Scientific Council? Scientific Council (ScC) members are • Independent, respected scientists • Reflecting full scope of European research • Acting in their personal capacity 22 Members (In personal Capacity) Nominated via an independent identification procedure (Patten Committee) • Chairman of ERC: Fotis Kafatos – Imperial College, London • Includes Wendy Hall -Southampton, Lord Robert May – Oxford/Imperial The Scientific Council has responsibility for: • Overall strategy, including the annual work programmes, calls, funding rules and selection criteria • ERC’s scientific management and implementation (including peer review & the selection process) • Control of scientific operations ERC -Organisation Role of EU Member States • Programme Management Committee • Oversight of the key documents • Can be consulted for advice by the Scientific Council • Can not lobby for proposals to be funded ERC AdG -Introduction Advanced Grants (AdG) ERC Budget • Funding of €7.51 billion (2007-13) • ~ 2/3 Annual ERC Budget for AdG • ~1/3 Annual ERC Budget for StG • Spending profile increases 2007-13 ERC-2008-AdG • Call budget ~€517 million • Hope to fund ~300 Proposals? ERC Advanced Grants Introduction to the ERC Advanced Grant ERC Advanced Grants Calls ERC AdG -Introduction Indicative Call Schedule 2007-10 Work Programme Revision ERC Action Call open Call Deadline Estimated Call value (€ M) Evaluation Oct. 2007 AdG1 Autumn 07 Spring 08 517 Spring 08 Autumn 08 May 2008 AdG2 Autumn 08 Spring 09 480 Spring 09 Autumn 09 May 2009 AdG3 Autumn 09 Spring 10 741 Spring 10 Autumn 10 May 2010 AdG4 Autumn 10 Spring 11 869 Spring 11 Autumn 11 Please note that resubmission and multiple application rules apply ERC AdG -Introduction Advanced Grants (AdG) AdG aims to support • Excellent, innovative and investigator-initiated research projects* • Flexible projects to promote substantial advances in the frontiers ofknowledge, such as: • new lines of enquiry • new methods and techniques • unconventional approaches • investigations at the interface between established disciplines • opening up new lines of enquiry in research field or other domains • high-risk, high-reward research • multi-and inter-disciplinary proposals, which are strongly encouraged • Carried out by leading advanced investigators • whatever their nationality • must be already established and recognised as being independent researchleaders in their own right • PI can lead a team, if needed (more on this later) *all fields of science and scholarship are eligible, except nuclear research ERC AdG -Introduction PI Profile Overview PI Profile • Active researcher • Track record of significant achievements in last 10 years • Exceptional leaders in terms of originality and significance of research contribution • (Does not need to have a PhD) • All this needs to be shown in your application…. …which will include: -a ten year track record -a scientific leadership profile -a cv ERC AdG -Introduction ERC AdG -Introduction ERC AdG -Introduction PI Profile 10 year track record Benchmarks of “10 year track record” • Top 10 Senior author publications in major peer-reviewed multidisciplinary scientific journals and/or leading peer-reviewed journals of their respective research fields (~10) • Monographs and any translations of monographs (if applicable) (~3) And if applicable • Granted patents (~5) • Invited presentations into peer-reviewed, internationally established conferences and/or international advanced schools (~10) • Expeditions that the applicant has led (~3) • International conferences in the field of the applicant that have been organised by PI (member of the steering and/or organising committee) (~3) •International Prizes/Awards/Academy Memberships ‘Individual Team’ Concept Overview ERC AdG -Introduction PI Profile Leadership profile Possible indicators of “leadership profile” • Content and impact of the major scientific or scholarly contributions of the applicant to his/her own research field and/or neighbouring research fields and, if applicable, the wider societal impact •The international recognition and diffusion that these major contributions have received from others (publications or appropriate equivalents /additional funding/ students /international prizes and awards /institution building /other) • Ability to productively change research fields and/or establish new interdisciplinary approaches ERC AdG -Introduction ‘Individual Team’ Concept -PI Principal Investigator (PI) = Team Leader • Central to the grant and review criteria • Must be a leading investigator already established as an independent research leader in their own right… • ..and must be seen as such by peers • Has the power to assemble a research group of team members(and in certain cases only, co-investigators) • Freedom to chose the research topic • Can be of any nationality or current location • But must carry out their research at an institution in EU MemberState or Associated Country if funded • Chooses a host institution and applies in conjunction with host • If funded, signs ‘supplementary agreement’ with the host • Host institution can not be changed during review process (tbc) but researchers can move once funded under certain conditions PI Independence Host must give PI independence to: • Apply for funding independently of senior colleagues • Manage the funding for the project • Publish as senior authors and invite as co-authors onlythose who have contributed substantially to the reported work • Supervise & recruit team members, including students •Have access to facilities and space for research • Statement from Host Decided by the Peer Review Panels (Does not apply to team members) ERC AdG -Introduction ‘Individual Team’ Concept -PI’s Host Institution PI’s Host Institution • Can be any type of legal entity • Must be in an EU Member State or Associated Country • The PI does not have to be based there at the time of application • Must guarantee independence of PI • Must not constrain the PI to the research strategy of the institution • Must provide most of the infrastructure necessary for the research • Has appropriate intellectual environment and infrastructural support • This is assessed during Peer Review • Is the ‘applicant legal entity’ • Signs a Supporting Statement as part of application • If funded signs up to the Grant Agreement • If funded, signs a ‘Supplementary Agreement’ with the PI • Host institution can not be changed during review process (tbc) but researchers can move once funded under certain conditions ERC AdG -Introduction ERC AdG -Introduction ‘Individual Team’ Concept Team Members Team Members (if needed) • Grouping of researchers which meets the needs of the project without ‘artificial administrative constraints’… …but NOT a traditional network or research consortium • Normally in the same institution as the PI • But could be national or trans-national • However, if in a separate legal entity involved, participation must be fully justified in terms of scientific added value (assessed during peer review) • Team members can be of any nationality & established in almost any country (not just EU/AC) • PI has freedom to choose appropriate team members • Team members do not need to be independent • Smaller role in applications forms and review than the PI (and Co-I) • Institution (s) where Teams based sign up to Grant Agreement • Named v’s un-named? ERC Advanced Grants AdG Submission and Evaluation Process ‘Individual Team’ Concept -CoI Co-Investigators (Co-I) (If needed) • Only as an exception • For interdisciplinary* projects only • Must bring knowledge and skills from a different discipline to the PI • Led by PI, but could lead others in the interdisciplinary field? • Must be named • Interdisciplinary Co-I projects can have a larger budget • Competes part of application form and quality of Co-I is assessed duringPeer Review • Scientific Added Value of Co-I(s) also assessed during Peer Review • Can have more than one Co-I • Can be at same institution or different institution • Co-I can be of any nationality Co-I’s Institution • Can be any type of legal entity • Co-I’s host organisation must be in EU Member State or AssociatedCountry • Institution where Co-I is based signs up to Grant Agreement • TBC whether Co-I signs a ‘Supplementary Agreement’ (*interdisciplinary within the remit of a panel or across panels/domains) ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation AdG Submission and Evaluation Overview Submission • Single Stage Submission, But 2-Step Peer Review (no interviews) • Electronic Submission via EPSS Deadlines (for the ERC-2008-AdG Call) • Physical Sciences and Engineering Panels – 28 February 2008 tbc • Social Sciences and Humanities – 18 March 2008 tbc • Life Sciences – 22 April 2008 tbc All are at 17.00 Brussels local time Around 20,000 proposals expected? Funding Levels and Duration of Grant Direct Costs: 100% of eligible and approved direct costs funded Indirect Costs: 20% flat rate (of the total direct costs excluding subcontracting) is allocated and charged (no proof needed of how spent) Normally Up to €2.5 million over 5 years EC contribution (or pro-rata for shorter projects) Can be higher, but only if: • Co-Investigator Project (which MUST be inter-or multi-disciplinary) or • The PI is coming from outside the EU/AC (‘third country’) to establish a research team at a host institution in an EU MS/AC or • Proposal requires the purchase of major research equipment In these cases: up to €3.5 million over 5 years EC contribution (or pro-rata) ERC AdG -Introduction ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation AdG Resubmission & Multiple Application Rules . Only one ERC Grant managed by a PI may be active at any time . One submission (as PI or Co-I) may be made to ERC-2008-AdG or ERC-2009-AdG . PI or Co-Is submitting to ERC-2008-AdG or ERC-2009-AdG and failing quality threshold(s) will not be permitted to apply to ERC2010-AdG . A PI or Co-I who has submitted to ERC-2008-AdG or ERC-2009-AdG can not submit for a Starting Grant in 2008 or 2009 For full text, see the Work Programme AdG Evaluation Criteria Principal Investigator (and Co-I if applicable) • Quality of research output/track record • Intellectual capacity and creativity Research Project • Ground breaking nature of the research • Potential impact • Methodology • High gain/high risk balance Each evaluation criterion (Heading 1 and 2) will be marked on a scale of 1 to 4: 4 = Outstanding, 3 = Excellent, 2=Very Good, 1=Non-fundable • A quality threshold of =2 will be applied to these criteria. • Proposals ranked on basis of marks received and an overall appreciation of their strengths and weaknesses 1-4 1-4FP7 – ERC – Evaluation Criteria Research environment (only at step 2) • Contribution of the research environment • Participation of other legal entities Pass/Fail ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation Structure of AdG Application ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation AdG Peer Review Panels Panels • Are different from StG panels • Modified structure • Different members • ERC Scientific Council Selected Panel Members • Expected to be published? • Two sets of panels, meeting on alternative years? • Members of ‘shadow panel’ for can be used for remote evaluation? • Each panel to consist of • Panel Chair • ~10-15 Panel Members Remote Evaluators • Used in second stage only • No call for Peer Reviewers (do not use normal FP7 database) • Selected and approved by ScC and ERC Panels • Expected to be published as overall list only AdG Structure of Application Forms Part A – Administrative and Summary Forms (completed directly onto EPSS) • A.1 Proposal & PI information • A.1T Forms – 10 year track record & leadership profile ( PI +Co-I tbc) • A.2 Host institution information • A.3 Budget – financial information Part B – Proposal Details (template from EPSS) • Cover page – Abstract • Section 1 • Scientific Leadership Profile (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • CV (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • 10 Year Track Record (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • Extended Synopsis (5 pages) • Section 2 • Scientific Proposal (15 pages) • Section 3 • Research Environment ( 2 pages) Annexes • Host institutions Commitment Statement • Ethical Form & Additional Ethical Issues information** *For projects with a Co-I max 6 additional pages ** If applicable ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation AdG Peer Review Panels -Examples Examples: • PE10 -Earth System Science: (deadline 28th February 2008) physical geography, geology, geophysics, meteorology, oceanography, climatology, ecology, global environmental change, biogeochemical cycles, natural resources management • SH3 -Environment and Society: (deadline 18th March 2008) environmental studies, demography, social geography, urban and regional studies • LS8 -Evolutionary, Population & Environmental Biology: (deadline 22nd April 2008) evolution, ecology, animal behaviour, population biology, biodiversity, biogeography, marine biology, ecotoxicology, prokaryotic biology For full list of all 25 panels see the Work Programme AdG Peer Review Structure 3 main research domains, and 25 panels within this (each with an indicative budget) • Physical Sciences and Engineering (10 panels) – 39% • Life Sciences (including Medical) (9 panels) – 34% • Social Sciences and Humanities (6 panels) – 14% The remaining 13% has been allocated to further support interdisciplinary research Remote Reading and Assessment by Panel members (only) If oversubscribed, only: •A1T (Summary of Track Record and Leadership Profile) •Extended Synopsis Panel Meetings and Ranking Proposals retained for stage 2, or rejected STEP 2 -Evaluation Panel meetings Domain Panel Chairs ranking and selection per domain Proposals selected Reading and Assessment by Panel Members and Remote Evaluators of Full Proposal Applicant • Logs into EPSS • Completes Full Proposal • Chooses Primary Panel (and Secondary Panel if needed) • Presses SUBMIT before the Primary Panel deadline! STEP 1 -Evaluation Eligibility Check All 25 Panel Chairs rank remaining interdisciplinary proposals ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation AdG Peer Review Process AdG Electronic Proposal Submission Service (EPSS) EPSS Tips • Start in plenty of time, and check you can save as .pdf! • Double check all details • Can revise up to deadline • Deadline strictly enforced • Remember to press submit! • Check acknowledgement contains all parts of your proposal EPSS Help and Support • EPSS Guidelines • EPSS Helpdesk (technical problems) • E-mail: support@epss-fp7.org • Tel: +32 2 233 3760 ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation Step 1: • Proposal evaluated against Criterion 1 (PI) and 2 (Research Project) • Proposal needs to pass threshold for both criteria to pass to second step • In case of major oversubscription, panels may base their decisions on Form A1T (Track Record) + Extended Synopsis • Evaluated by Panel Members + possibly “shadow” panel members where necessary Step 2: • All three sections evaluated against all three evaluation criteria • Evaluated by Panel Members + Remote Evaluators • Special role (application forms and assessment) of PI and any Co-I’s • Feedback • Redress (http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/redress_en.html) Key Documents FAQs EPSS Guide Background Submission Focus ERC Rules on Submission, Evaluation, Selection and Award Procedures Guide for Peer Reviewers Updatable Financial, Negotiation, IPR, Certification and Reporting Guidelines Work Programme (annual?) FP7 Rules of Participation Guide for ERC Grant Holders (to follow) Model Grant Agreement Ethics Guidance ERC Guide for Applicants (call specific) Call Fiche (specific) ERC AdG – Submission/Evaluation AdG Peer Review of Interdisciplinary Proposals What is ‘Interdisciplinary’? • Interdisciplinary = cross-domain, cross-panel or within panel How are interdisciplinary proposals handled? • Proposal submitted to a primary panel • Step 1: • Primary panel determines if proposal is “interdisciplinary” • Can take into account if secondary panel is indicated • Proposal “flagged” as interdisciplinary, if appropriate • Possibility to invite reviews from members of other panels • Step 2: • Interdisciplinary proposals, not funded within panel budget, will be transferred to the Interdisciplinary Domain for consideration there How much money is allocated to the Interdisciplinary Domain? • Indicative budget for the Interdisciplinary Domain is 13% of total budget ERC Advanced Grants Writing Your Application AdG Electronic Proposal Submission Service (EPSS) EPSS • EPSS will be unavailable from Friday 30th November at 2.00pm (Brussels time) • EPSS is …expected to resume from after the 24th December 2007… ... but will resume at the latest from Monday 14th January 2008 • Check at https://www.epss-fp7.org/epss Using EPSS • Pre-registration = PI must register on EPSS and will be sent password and access details (as early as possible, but no date given tbc) • Passes on access to other participants • Complete A forms • Download, complete and upload .pdf files of Part B (10Mb limit) and Annexes • Automated check of some things only AdG Structure of Application Forms Structure of AdG Application Part A – Administrative and Summary Forms (completed directly onto EPSS) • A.1 Proposal & PI information • A.1T Forms – 10 year track record & leadership profile (PI + Co-I tbc) • A.2 Host institution information • A.3 Budget – financial information Part B – Proposal Details (template from EPSS) • Cover page – Abstract • Section 1 • Scientific Leadership Profile (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • CV (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • 10 Year Track Record (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • Extended Synopsis (5 pages) • Section 2 • Scientific Proposal (15 pages) • Section 3 • Research Environment ( 2 pages) Annexes Principal Investigator (1) APPLICATION • A.1T: Summary 10 year track record & leadership profile (+Co-I tbc) • B1: Scientific Leadership Profile (2 pages) (+2 per Co-I)* CV (2 pages) (+2 per Co-I)* 10 Year Track Record (2 pages) (+2 per Co-I)* AdG -Application – PI (1) CRITERIA • Quality of the research output/track record: • How well qualified is the PI (& Co-I) to conduct the project? • To what extent are the publications and achievements of the PI ground breaking and demonstrative of independent thinking and capacity to go significantly beyond the state of the art? • To what extent does the quality and quantity of funding the PI has attracted in the last 10 years demonstrate his/her reputation as a performer of ground breaking research? • Host institutions Commitment Statement • Ethical Form & Additional Ethical Issues information** *For projects with a Co-I max 6 additional pages ** If applicable Evaluation Criteria Principal Investigator (2) APPLICATION • A.1T: Summary 10 year track record & leadership profile (+Co-I tbc) • B1: Scientific Leadership Profile (2 pages) (+2 per Co-I)* CV (2 pages) (+2 per Co-I)* 10 Year Track Record (2 pages) (+2 per Co-I)* AdG -Application – PI (2) CRITERIA • Intellectual capacity and creativity: • To what extent does the PI record of: • research, • collaborations, • project conception, • supervision of students • and publications • demonstrate that he/she is able to confront major research challenges in the field, and to initiate new productive lines of thinking? Evaluation Criteria Excellence is the sole criterion of evaluation 1. Principal Investigator (and Co-I if applicable) • Quality of research output/track record • Intellectual capacity and creativity 2. Research Project • Ground breaking nature of the research • Potential impact • Methodology • High gain/high risk balance 3. Research environment (only at step 2) • Contribution of the research environment • Participation of other legal entities ERC Advanced Grants Writing Your Application Principal Investigator (+Co I) Scientific Leadership Profile •a ‘self evaluation’ of the research career achievements demonstrating the applicants capacity to go beyond the state of the art; • a presentation of the content and impact of the major scientific orscholarly contributions of the applicant to his or her own research field and/or neighboring research fields and, if applicable, their wider societal impact; • the international recognition and diffusion that these major contributions have received from others (publications, citations orappropriate equivalents/additional funding/ students/international prizes and awards/ institution-building/other); • evidence of efforts and ability to inspire younger researcherstowards high quality research (highlights of research mentoring record, information on the careers of supervised graduate and post-doctoral students, etc.); • where applicable: proven ability to productively change research fields and/or to establish new interdisciplinary approaches AdG-Application – PI (3) AdG -Application – PI (6) AdG-Application – PI (5) AdG-Application – PI (4) Curriculum Vitae • Academic record; • Research record; • Succinct ‘funding ID’ • Current research grants and their subject • Ongoing application for work related to the project. AdG -Application – PI (7) Hints and Tips PI Criteria • Sell yourself! • Remember the Funding ID section in the CV is important. • Make sure you address the full requirements of the leadership profile, and consider what makes your leadership profile stand out? • Clarify specific points to strengthen your application and give additional relevant details. • Explain anything that is UK specific. • The Co-I(s) will also be evaluated – do they strengthen your proposal? • The evaluators will review the PI (+Co-I) on the basis of their experience and information the PI (+Co-I) provide in the application form! • If you refer to journal impact factors, state which one you are using. • Leave plenty of time to do the A1T forms on EPSS. 10 Year Track Record Benchmarks • Top 10 publications, as senior author (or in those fields where alphabetic order of authorship is the norm, joint author) in major international peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary scientific journals and/or in the leading international peer-reviewed journals of their respectiveresearch fields, also indicating the number of citations (excluding auto- citations) they have attracted. • Research monographs (and any translations*) Other • Granted patents* • Invited presentations to peer-reviewed, internationally established conferences and/or international advanced schools * • Research expeditions that the applicant has led* • Organisation of International conferences in the field of the applicant (membership in the steering and/or organising committee)* • International Prizes/Awards/Academy memberships* (*if applicable) AdG -Application – PI (8) FAQs on the PI Criteria • Is there a set style for the CV? • What if I have more than 10 years experience, will this count for the AdG application? • What if I have changed research fields? • I’ve taken a career break for 3 years in the last 10 years what should I do? • I’ve mainly been teaching for the last 5 years, but before then I was an active researcher – can I still apply? • Which publications are considered to be high quality? • What do I do if my experience does not match the profile of the PI? A Forms – Summary of Track Record and Leadership Profile • A1. T Forms • Online electronic template to be filled in directly in EPSS • Summary of data from the Track Record • Summary of the Leadership Profile ERC Advanced Grants Writing Your Application Research Project Research Project (1) CRITERIA • Ground-breaking nature of the research: • Does the proposed research address important challenges at the frontiers of the field(s) addressed? • Does it have suitably ambitious objectives, which go substantially beyond the current state of the art (e.g. including inter-and trans-disciplinary developments and novel or unconventional concepts and/or approaches)? • How well conceived and organised is the proposed activity? AdG Application – Project (1) APPLICATION • Part B: Abstract • B1: Extended Synopsis: concise presentation of the scientific proposal, with particular attention to the ground-breaking nature of the research. • B2: Scientific Proposal: description of scientific and technical aspects of the project demonstrating the ground-breaking nature of the research, its potential impact and research methodology. Research Project (4) CRITERIA • High-gain/High-risk balance: • Does the proposed research involve highly novel and/or unconventional methodologies, whose high risk is justified by the possibility of a major breakthrough with an impact beyond a specific research domain/discipline? AdG Application – Project (4) APPLICATION • Part B: Abstract • B1: Extended Synopsis: concise presentation of the scientific proposal, with particular attention to the ground-breaking nature of the research. • B2: Scientific Proposal: description of scientific and technical aspects of the project demonstrating the ground-breaking nature of the research, its potential impact and research methodology. Research Project (2) CRITERIA • Potential impact: • Does the research open new and important, scientific, technological or scholarly horizons? • Will the project significantly enhance the research environment and capabilities for frontier research in Europe (including the host institution)? AdG Application – Project (2) APPLICATION • Part B: Abstract • B1: Extended Synopsis: concise presentation of the scientific proposal, with particular attention to the ground-breaking nature of the research. • B2: Scientific Proposal: description of scientific and technical aspects of the project demonstrating the ground-breaking nature of the research, its potential impact and research methodology. Hints and Tips Research Project Criteria • Consider what excites you about the research and convey this in yourapplication. • Think about your audience and remember to explain UK specific terminology • Explain how the research will open new horizons or opportunities. • Provide a clear, concise work-plan which gives details of the immediate goals. • Explain what each team member is doing (and their background/ recruitmentprofile) • Highlight any intermediate stages where you may need to adjust your projectplanning. • Clearly explain how you will manage and disseminate your project. • Justify the resources you need for your research proposal and ensure the resources are appropriate. (Have you included all staff costs) Research Project (3) CRITERIA • Methodology: • Is the outlined scientific approach (including the activities to be undertaken by the individual team members) feasible? (step 1) • Is the proposed research methodology (including when pertinent the use of instrumentation, other type of infrastructures etc.) comprehensive and appropriate to the project? (step 2) • Will it enable the goals of the project convincingly to be achieved within the timescales and resources proposed and the level of riskassociated with a challenging research project? (step 2) AdG Application – Project (3) APPLICATION • Part B: Abstract • B1: Extended Synopsis: concise presentation of the scientific proposal, with particular attention to the ground-breaking nature of the research. • B2: Scientific Proposal: description of scientific and technical aspects of the project demonstrating the ground-breaking nature of the research, its potential impact and research methodology. FAQs on the Research Project • Does it have to be a totally new project? • Should I include a bibliography as an annex to my proposal? • What level of knowledge should I expect from the evaluators? • Why do I need to provide a synopsis as well as the full proposal? • Should I name my team members in my application? • Should I include a Plan B? • How much time am expected to spend on the project? AdG Application – Project (6) AdG Application – Project (5) ERC Advanced Grants Writing Your Application Research Environment AdG -Application – Enviroment (3) FAQ on the Research Environment • Would an additional team member based in another organisation strengthen my proposal? • Should I describe my team members if they are at the same institution, and where should I include this information? • What do I need to include about the equipment and resources available at my host institution? • Where can I find some standard text I can use to describe my institution or do I need to tailor it to my application? • What is the difference between a team and a consortium? Research Environment (1) CRITERIA (Step 2 only) • Contribution of the research environment to the project: • Does the host environment provide most of the infrastructure necessary forthe research to be carried out? • Is it in a position to provide an appropriate intellectual environment and infrastructural support and to assist in achieving the ambitions for the project and the Principal Investigator? • Participation of other legal entities: • If it is proposed that other legal entities participate in the project, in addition to the applicant legal entity, is their participation fully justified by the scientific added value they bring to the project? AdG -Application – Enviroment (1) APPLICATION • Research Environment: description of the research environment and research project/activity. For AdG “Research Environment" is the immediate setting of the research team, such as department (rather than the sponsoring institution as a whole), and when appropriate, the wider "milieu" of the team's operation, including collaborating laboratories, groups, departments etc ERC Advanced Grants Writing Your Application ERC Finances Your Project Budget AdG -Application – Enviroment (2) Hints and Tips Research Environment Criteria • Sell your research environment in terms of appropriate intellectual environment and infrastructural support. • If you have team members based in other legal entities have you justified this on the basis of scientific added value? • Remember – if you project involves more than 1 legal entity then theyneed to sign the Grant Agreement too (make sure you include theirresearch office in the proposal preparation). • If you are planning to have a Co-I in your proposal make sure their role is clear and well justified (in terms of the research project and research environment). AdG – ERC Financial Issues (1) Background Finance information (1) • Direct costs: up to 100% of eligible costs • Indirect costs: Flat rate of 20% * (of eligible direct costs) (*excluding subcontracting) • Direct eligible costs are those which support all the research, management, training and dissemination activities necessary for the conduct of the project such as • Personnel cost, Equipment, Consumables, Travel and Subsistence & Publication Costs • How are eligible costs defined? •Actual • Incurred by the beneficiary during the project • Determined according to usual accounting and management principles • Used solely for project objectives • Consistent with principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness • Recorded in accounts • Exclusive of non-eligible costs AdG – ERC Financial Issues (4) AdG – ERC Financial Issues (3) AdG – ERC Financial Issues (2) Background Finance information (2) Hints and Tips Budgets • Important! – The figures must match – otherwise the figure fromthe A3 form will be used! • Budget must be in Euros (exclude VAT) Further information and justification should be given in proposal AdG – ERC Financial Issues (5) • Non-eligible costs, in particular: • Any identifiable indirect taxes, including VAT or duties; • Interest owed; • Provisions for possible future losses or charges; Exchange losses; • Costs declared, incurred or reimbursed in respect of another Community project; • Costs related to return on capital; • Debt and debt service charges; • Excessive or reckless expenditure; • Any costs not related to the project • Others? … FAQs on Budgets • Do I need to show how my budget is distributed across the project? AdG – ERC Financial Issues (6) Background Finance information (3) Indirect costs are allocated and charged as a 20% flat rate. • Indirect eligible costs are those which cannot be identified as directly attributable to the project, but which are incurred in direct relationship with the project's direct eligible costs, such as: • Costs related to general administration and management; • Costs of office or laboratory space, including rent or depreciation of buildings and equipment, and related expenditure such as water, heating, electricity, • Maintenance, insurance and safety costs; • Communication expenses, network connection charges, postal charges and office • Supplies; • Common office equipment such as PCs, laptops, office software; • Miscellaneous recurring consumables. • What rules apply to subcontracting? • Is there a list of standard costs published anywhere? • Should I include patent costs? • Can the evaluators cut my budget? • Can I claim PI’s/Co-I’s/team members time on the grant, and what % time is reasonable? • How does the flat rate work for indirect costs in the ERC? • What information is required in the • Administrative Form? • Research Project ? ERC Advanced Grants Writing Your Application Supporting Documentation Hints and Tips Budgets • Work Closely with your ELO or Finance Office! • ERC is part of FP7 -FP7 Rules of Participation apply. • All costs must be calculated and claimed according to your host organisations’ ownaccounting rules. • A3 Form -provide a full breakdown of the budget including: • personnel costs, • Other direct costs (not subcontracts) • Indirect costs • Subcontracts • Eligible costs • Requested grant • Research Project • Explain budget, divide into personnel costs, equipment and infrastructure, consumables, travel, publication costs, subcontracts, explain budget distribution. • Remember you can only budget for costs directly related to carrying out the project. • If you have asked for €3.5 million because you are purchasing major researchequipment, was the majority of the extra money (above €2.5 million) spent on equipment? AdG – Supporting Documentation (2) AdG – Supporting Documentation (1) AdG – Supporting Documentation (6) AdG Supporting Documentation 1. Commitment of the Host Institution 2. Ethical Information • Important practical information: • All documents scanned and submitted via EPSS as (separate?) PDF files. • File names must be in the exact format given in the Guide for Applicants • E.g. Host_Letter_[proposal_short_name] (tbc) AdG – Supporting Documentation (4) FAQs on Ethical Annex • Does everyone need to complete the Ethical Issues Table? • What happens if I forget to include the ethical table in my application? • Where do I describe the ethically sensitive issues? Explain the burden and benefit of the experiment and the effects it may have on the research subject •Informed consent •Data Protection •Use of Animals •Human embryonic stem cells • What is an ethical review? • Do I need to attach national legislation documents? • Are there any resources available to help with this section? FAQs on Commitment of the Host • Where do you find the Commitment of the Host letter? • Who should sign the Commitment of the Host letter? • Can we/should we make any changes to the Commitment of the Host letter? • Is the ERC looking an explicit financial commitment from the host institution? • What will happen if I do not attach the letter of Commitment from the Host Institution? AdG – Supporting Documentation (5) EC Resources on Research Ethics EU Website -http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ethics_en.html • Guide to Ethics in FP7 -FP7 Ethics for Researchers • Ethics Guidance Notes • Informed Consent • Developing Countries •Privacy •Dual Use • Use of Animals in Research • Human Embryos • Slides and Training Notes on a range of topics Ethical Issues Table AdG – Supporting Documentation (3) AdG Checklist for your application Part A – Administrative and Summary Forms (completed directly onto EPSS) • A.1 Proposal & PI information • A.1T Forms – 10 year track record & leadership profile ( PI + Co-I tbc) • A.2 Host institution information • A.3 Budget – financial information Part B – Proposal Details (template from EPSS) • Cover page – Abstract • Section 1 • Scientific Leadership Profile (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • CV (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • 10 Year Track Record (2 pages) (+2 Co-I)* • Extended Synopsis (5 pages) • Section 2 • Scientific Proposal (15 pages) • Section 3 • Research Environment ( 2 pages) Annexes • Host institutions Commitment Statement • Ethical Form & Additional Ethical Issues information** *For projects with a Co-I max 6 additional pages ** If applicable ERC Starting Grants Summary and Useful Feedback Other ERC Funding ERC – StG Starting Grants First Call Statistics • 9167 first stage (outline) proposals • Average grant requested ~ €1 Million (indicated range €500k to €2 million) • 559 invited to submit second stage applications • Approximately 50% success rate at the second stage European Research Council (ERC) A Quick Recap – Starting Grants Potential of the Principal Investigator, Quality of the research project and the research environment Evaluation Criteria Two stage, strict page limits for each stage, interview at second stage reserve of 20% to promote interdisciplinarity Evaluation Process Projects submitted to 20 panels split across Social Sciences and Humanities, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences and Engineering Evaluation Panels € 100,000 to €400,000 per year up to 5 years Project Size Between 2 and 9 years post PhD (some allowance for maternity and other reasons), any nationality but PI must be based in EU or Associated State (once awarded ERC grant), any legal entity (incl industry) Eligibility Around €300 million / ~ 250 grants? Call budget First call launched Dec 06, annual calls to 2013 1st Stage Deadline: 25 April 2007 (17:00 CET) Call ERC – StG Feedback on EPSS • High Demand on the FP7 Electronic Proposal Submission ERC – StG System (EPSS) • Problems at Submission (~100 proposals) • Late submission (tentative uploads after deadline) • Some failure to comply with technical requirements (invalid format of the proposal: not PDF format, protection by password) • Late download of annexes (statements of support not signed by HI on time) ERC – StG ERC Starting Grants Calls Indicative Call Schedule 2007-10 Work Programme Revision ERC Action Call open Call Deadline Estimated Call value (€ M) Evaluation Feb. 2007 StG1 Winter 06 Spring 07 290 Spring -Autumn 07 May 2008 StG2 Summer 08 Autumn 08 290 Winter 08 –Spring 09 May 2009 StG3 Summer 09 Autumn 09 340 Winter 09 –Spring 10 May 2010 StG4 Summer 10 Autumn 10 400 Winter 10 –Spring 11 Please note that resubmission and multiple application rules apply ERC – StG Feedback on Eligibility Issues • Eligibility criteria issues • Completeness (including statement of support from institution) • Related to the ERC Starting Grant scheme: PhD, Host country • Around 350 non-eligible proposals • Mainly for missing or invalid statement of support (more than 250 cases) • Also for ineligibility of PI (PhD outside eligibility period) • Eligibility Committee • In case of doubt on eligibility, evaluation may proceed after a decision by the eligibility review committee (~ 50 proposals) • Invalid statement of support (statement signed by the applicant on behalf of the host) ERC – Other Funding in 2008 ERC – StG ERC – StG ERC AdG Lessons learned for StG Maximise the Call Budget • By combining budgets over two successive years (one application per researcher in 2008 or 2009) Limit oversubscription • Only the best are encouraged to apply • Excellent track record in recent years is a pre-requisite • Applications should be substantive (one stage submission with two step evaluation) • Disincentives for submissions which are not of the highest quality Adjusted panel structure • Additional panels to take into account uneven demand and improve the boundaries between fields covered by panels Need to encourage interdisciplinary proposals • Separate interdisciplinary budget • Higher budget limit ERC Grants Grant Negotiation and Management Lessons learned • Often applicants did not fully understand ERC concepts (frontier research, ‘individual team’) • Applicants often not ambitious enough • Often applicants did not explain why the research is important or what the impacts would be • Many applications resembled job description written by a supervisor rather than showing the PI’s ideas • Many people already fairly experienced (i.e. having UK fellowships) • Applicants should aim their proposal at generalist reviewers (panel members) in Stage 1 • Although the top ranked proposals were outstanding, many averageones were also submitted Overview of Process ERC – Negotiation/Management ERC Work Programme Decision (from ERC) Negotiation? Project StartPreparation of Grant Agreement Authorisation Project Account Staff Recruitment ESR Grant Agreement Ranking CV, Track Record and Leadership Profile Application Process Statement of Host Resources & Environment Science Ethics Budget Other ERC Funding in 2008 Co-ordination & Support Actions (CSA’s) 1. ERC Support via open calls – Monitoring and Assessment Strategy . Support for monitoring and assessment of the ERC through call fortender and call for proposals: . Assessing the direct and indirect impacts of the ERC . Evaluating the implementation of the “Ideas” programme . Contributing to future ERC policy and initiatives . Call for proposals: Development of a portfolio of projects to understand the impact of the ERC based on exploratory, state of the art, scholarly work on broadly deigned topic areas and questions. – call for proposals . Call for tender: Preparation for robust longer term monitoring and evaluation by building up sufficient evidence to enable an evaluation of the functioning, performance and process of the ERC. 2. Support to Scientific Council (chairman and vice-chairs) through grants to named beneficiaries ERC – Negotiation/Management What Happens Next? • After review process • Funding decision • Preparation of the grant agreement between the host and the Commission • Feedback • When the project starts • Sign grant agreement • Also supplementary agreement between PI and host • Set up project account • Recruit staff onto project ERC – Negotiation/Management ERC – Negotiation/Management ERC – Negotiation/Management IPR in ERC Grant Agreement ERC Grant Agreement ERC – Negotiation/Management "background“ Agreement between ERC and Principal Investigator’s (PI’s) hosting • Information which is held by beneficiaries prior to their accession to the grant organisation (principal beneficiary) agreement, as well as copyrights or other intellectual property rights pertaining to suchinformation, the application for which has been filed before their accession to the • Rights/obligations on scientific, financial, ethical conduct and agreement, and which is needed for carrying out the project or for using foreground. • Monitoring, eligible costs, IPR, amendments, grant portability "foreground" • The results, including information, whether or not they can be protected, which are Supplementary Agreement between PI and its hosting organisation generated under the project. Such results include rights related to copyright; designrights; patent rights; plant variety rights; or similar forms of protection. • Rights/obligations: administration, project execution, IPR • Single grant holder approach PI and members from same • Foreground shall be the property of the beneficiary carrying out the work and organisation generating that foreground. • Multi-partner/multi-national teams are possible • Employees or other personnel working for a beneficiary are entitled to claim rights to foreground. No project negotiations as such? • Where foreground is capable of industrial or commercial application, its owner shall • Grant agreement based on the proposal and the peer review decision provide for its adequate and effective protection. (budget) • Access to foreground and background is royalty free if it is needed to carry out the • Can accept/reject the offered grant work. ** See Annex 2 of the Model ERC Grant Agreement for More information** Structure of Grant Agreement • Core Grant Agreement (between ERC and principal beneficiary) • Description of work (Annex I) • General Conditions (Annex II) • Accession Form (if more than one beneficiary -Annex III) • Financial Statement Form (Annex IV) • Terms of reference for the certification of costs and on the methodology (Annex V) • Supplementary Agreement (between PI and principal beneficiary) • Special Clauses ERC Advanced Grants Key Differences with StG and UK Research Council Funding Management Issues to consider when preparing your application • Grant Agreement • Technical annex – description of work •Flexibility • Scientific • Portability • Progress reporting • Scientific – submitted by the PI • Financial – submitted by the beneficiary • Publication and exploitation of results • Open Access • European Charter for Researchers & Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers ERC – Key Differences Key differences Key differences compared to StG • Panels, submission and review process different • No interview • Co-I must be in MS/AC • Funding Limits • PI Does not need a PhD • PI can choose one or two panels only. EC will not reallocate as they did for StG • Research Environment means something different Key differences compared to UK Research Council Funding • Co-I – must be from a different discipline for ERC • EPSS can submit many times, on Je-S can’t ERC Advanced Grants Final Comments Other FP7 Funding Sources to Explore Tips on Writing your Application 1. Liaise with your HoD and Research Office 2. Use clear and concise language 3. Pay careful attention to each section 4. Be ambitious, but show awareness of cutting edge 5. Look at examples of successful applications to other similar funding schemes 6. Read all the documentation, including the Grant Agreement 7. Be realistic with the budget, clearly link your budget to activities. Has your institution agreed your budget? 8. Proof read your application 9. Get application reviewed by colleagues? 10.Stick to page, font size, budget limits and format 11.Remember you can submit your proposal on EPSS as many times as you wish before the deadline. 12.Make sure you press submit on EPSS! ERC – Final Comments Opportunities available Structure of FP7 Health Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, Biotechnology Information and Communication Technologies Energy Environment (including Climate Change) Transport Socio-Economic Sciences and the Humanities Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and new Production Technologies Security Research Infrastructures Research for the Benefit Of SMEs Regions of Knowledge Research Potential Science in Society Activities of International Co-operation Coherent Development of Policies Individual Fellowships & Reintegration Grants Initial Training Networks Industry-Academia Partnerships and Pathways International Research Staff Exchange Scheme Researcher’s Night Starting Independent Researcher Grants Advanced Investigator Grants Co-operation – collaborative research Ideas – European Research Council (ERC) Capacities Space People -Marie Curie Plus JRC and Euratom Any Questions? ERC Advanced Grants Useful Links FP7 – Links ERC – Links Further Information ERC – UK Helpdesk Links • UK ERC NCP Website www.ukro.ac.uk/erc • UK ERC NCP Helpdesk erc-uk@bbsrc.ac.uk or 0032 2289 6121 • UK ERC NCP Newsletter http://www.ukro.ac.uk/erc/events_ukro/events_alerts.htm ERC – EU links • EU ERC Website http://erc.europa.eu • EU ERC Newsletter http://erc.europa.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=reg.edit#01 • ERC Europa Helpdesk http://ec.europa.eu/research/index.cfm?lg=en&pg=enquiries UKRO Information Services (For UKRO subscribers) • http://ims.ukro.ac.uk Further Information EPSS Helpdesk • E-mail: support@epss-fp7.org • Tel: +32 2 233 3760 IPR helpdesk Website • http://www.ipr-helpdesk.org European Commission FP7 Ethics Website • http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ethics_en Cordis FP7 pages • http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html