European Research Council (ERC)

European Research Council (ERC)
Jornada informativa sobre los proyectos financiados por el ERC dentro del programa Horizonte 2020 Veronica Beneitez Pinero. European Research Council Octubre 2014

Contents 1. H2020 and ERC 2. ERC basics 3. ERC submission of proposals
4. ERC achievements 5. Spain at ERC 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 2

1. H2020 and ERC 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 3

H2020 and the ERC Main Characteristics
HORIZON 2020: Current EU Research and Innovation programme, with nearly €80 billion of funding available over 7 years (2014 to 2020). The HORIZON 2020 main components (3 pillars): A. Excellent Science World class science is foundation of technologies, jobs, well-being Europe needs to develop, attract, retain research talent Researchers need access to the best infrastructures B. Industrial leadership C. Societal challenges │ 4

Funding opportunities in Horizon 2020
10/08/12 H2020 and the ERC Funding opportunities in Horizon 2020 A. Excellent Science European Research Council - Support of the most talented and creative individual researchers (ERC budget proposal : € 13 billion*) Collaborative research for Future and Emerging Technologies Training and career development through Marie Curie Actions Research Infrastructures B. Industrial leadership Key Enable Technologies (Nanotechnologies, Advanced Materials, Biotechnology, etc) Access to risk finance Innovation in SMEs C. Tackling Societal Challenges Health, demographic change and wellbeing; Food security, sustainable agriculture, marine and maritime research, and the bio-economy; Secure, clean and efficient energy; Smart, green and integrated transport; Inclusive, innovative and secure societies; Climate action, resource efficiency and raw materials. Excellent Science: reinforcing and extending the excellence of the EU’s science base and consolidating ERA to make EU’s R&I system more competitive on a global scale

European Research Council (budget under H2020: € 13.1 billion)
H2020 and the ERC REMINDER: A. Excellent Science: European Research Council (budget under H2020: € 13.1 billion) Future and Emerging Technologies Marie Sklodoswka Curie Actions Research Infrastructures │ 6

H2020 and the ERC Researchers career development and complementary EU funding schemes- Possible path for individuals ERC Advanced ERC Consolidators Post-docs Senior Professor Students Post Graduates Junior Professor/ Junior Researcher Associated Professor Full Professor ERC Starters Marie Curie Erasmus

H2020 and the ERC Budget Horizon 2020
H2020 budget € 77 billion ERC budget € 13.1 billion FP7 budget € 50.5 billion ERC budget € 7.5 billion Co-operation (65 %) Ideas (15 %) People (9 %) Capacities (8 %) JRC non- nuclear (3 %)

H2020 and the ERC 2014 – 2020 budget

H2020 and the ERC Changes and continuity in ERC
Essential features maintained: Same schemes, same principles, same selection procedures/criteria Independent Scientific Council with full authority over funding strategy Executive Agency with autonomous operation Increased budget (13.1 Bio € in current prices for ): More opportunities than ever for top research talents Strengthening the Scientific Governance of the European Research Council: Strengthening the links between the Scientific Council and ERC exec. agency Merging positions of President of ERC and Secretary General Full-time President based in Brussels 3 Vice-Chairs elected from amongst the Scientific Council members

2. ERC basics 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 11

ERC basics What is ERC? An autonomous funding body set up by the EU in 2007 and led by scientists. Funding excellent researchers of any nationality, to carry out frontier research in EU countries or Associated Countries, via annual competitions. In all fields of science and humanities, without thematic priorities. Bottom-up approach. 1 researcher (no pre-established networks), 1 Host Institution, 1 project, 1 selection criterion (EXCELENCE). Substantial grants (2.0 Mio Euro-3.5 Mio E) and a recognised label of excellence. International, top level peer-review process. │ 12

ERC basics ERC structure
The European Commission Provides financing through the EU framework programmes Guarantees autonomy of the ERC Assures the integrity and accountability of the ERC Adopts annual work programmes as established by the Scientific Council The ERC Scientific Council 22 prominent researchers proposed by an independent identification committee Appointed by the Commission (4 years, renewable once) Establishes overall scientific strategy; annual work programmes (incl. calls for proposals, evaluation criteria); peer review methodology; selection and accreditation of experts Controls quality of operations and management Ensures communication with the scientific community The ERC Executive Agency Executes annual work programme as established by the Scientific Council Implements calls for proposals and 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 Carries out communications activities and ensures information dissemination to ERC stakeholders 13

ERC basics ERC Scientific Council Members (22)
Prof. Klaus BOCK (Chemistry) Prof. Jean-Pierre BOURGUIGNON (Mathematics), ERC President Prof. Nicholas CANNY (History) Prof. Sierd A.P.L. CLOETINGH (Earth Sciences) Prof. Tomasz DIETL (Physics) Prof. Daniel DOLEV (Computer Sciences) Prof. Athene DONALD (Biological Physics) Dr. Barbara ENSOLI (Medicine) Prof. Pavel EXNER (Applied Mathematics & Mathematical Physics), ERC Vice-President Prof. Reinhard GENZEL(Astrophysics) Prof. Carl-Henrik HELDIN (Molecular Cell Biology), ERC Vice-President Prof. Timothy HUNT (Biology) Prof. Matthias KLEINER (Engineering) Prof. Eva KONDOROSI (Biology) Prof. Mart SAARMA (Biology) Prof. Nuria SEBASTIAN GALLES (Psychology), ERC Vice-President Prof. Nils Christian STENSETH (Ecology & Evolution) Prof. Martin STOKHOF (Philosophy) Prof. Anna TRAMONTANO (Biochemistry) Prof. Isabelle VERNOS (Molecular and Cell Biology) Prof. Reinhilde VEUGELERS (Economics) Prof. Michel WIEVIORKA (Sociology)

ERCEA Organigramme Before we start with the core of the presentation, I would like to give you a hint of our structure and their implication in your work Directorate B – Science Directorate C – Operations B is organised thematically as you can see and since the beginning of the year C is organised by type of call. St/Co (PoC and SyG)/Ad Full cycle Granting/Payment/Amendment │ 15

ERC basics ERC funding schemes
Starting Grants starters (2-7 years after PhD) up to € 2.0 Mio for 5 years Consolidator Grants consolidators (7-12 years after PhD) up to € 2.75 Mio for 5 years Advanced Grants track-record of significant research achievements in the last 10 years up to € 3.5 Mio for 5 years Synergy Grants (!!) 2 – 4 Principal Investigators up to € 15.0 Mio for 6 years Proof of Concept bridging gap between research - earliest stage of marketable innovation up to €150,000 for ERC grant holders No Synergy Call is foreseen for Depending on the analysis of the pilot phase of the ERC Synergy Grant, there may be a Synergy Grant call for 2015.

ERC basics Substantial grants to the very best
The Researcher (PI : Principal Investigator) ERC funds individual scientists Any nationality, age or current place of work in the world Make Europe more attractive for global scientific talent- Favor "brain gain" and reverse "brain drain" Starting, consolidator or advanced grant (depending on work experience and scientific achievements) Exceptional profile Research team (to be created) The PI can choose national or trans-national team members if scientific added value proven The grant covers the salary of team members

ERC basics Substantial grants to fund frontier research
Frontier research project All fields of fundamental research: Physical Sciences & Engineering, Life Sciences, Social Sciences & Humanities Bottom-up: no predetermined subjects, no priorities High risk/high gain. Curiosity-driven research 5 years projects No consortia Host Institution (HI) in EU countries or AC The one where the researcher already works, or any other institution established in the EU or associated countries Grants are portable (= the PI can change Host Institution) Universities, research centres; public or private

ERC basics Evaluation of proposals: main features
Goal of the evaluation: select the best frontier research proposals Only evaluation criteria: EXCELLENCE ("Olympic games") Method: peer review Structure: 25 panels distributed in 3 scientific domains (10 Physical Sciences, 9 Life sciences and 6 Social Sciences and Humanities) Each panel consists of 1 panel chair and panel members What makes ERC evaluation exceptional? 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 Peers Review procedure │ 19

ERC basics Evaluation of proposals: panel structure
Social Sciences and Humanities SH1 Markets, Individuals and Institutions SH2 The Social World, Diversity, Institutions and Values SH3 Environment ,space and population SH4 The Human Mind and its complexity SH5 Cultures & cultural production SH6 The study of the human past Physical Sciences & Engineering PE1 Mathematics PE2 Fundamental constituents of matter PE3 Condensed matter physics PE4 Physical & Analytical Chemical sciences PE5 Materials & Synthesis PE6 Computer science & informatics PE7 Systems & communication engineering PE8 Products & process engineering PE9 Universe sciences PE10 Earth system science Life Sciences LS1 Molecular & Structural Biology & Biochemistry LS2 Genetics, Genomics, Bioinformatics & Systems Biology LS3 Cellular and Developmental Biology LS4 Physiology, Pathophysiology & Endocrinology LS5 Neurosciences & neural disorders LS6 Immunity & infection LS7 Diagnostic tools, therapies & public health LS8 Evolutionary, population & environmental biology LS9 Applied life sciences & biotechnology │ 20

ERC basics Evaluation of proposals: peers
Other (7%) Panel members: typically 375 / call High-level scientists Recruited by ScC from all over the world: ~14% from outside Europe About members plus a chair person Referees: typically 2000 / call Evaluate only a small number of proposals Similar to normal practice in peer- reviewed journals US (7%) EU and Associated Countries (86%)

ERC basics Evaluation of proposals: review procedure
STEP 1 STEP 2 Remote assessment by Panel members of section 1 – PI and synopsis Remote assessment by Panel members and reviewers of full proposals Panel meeting Panel meeting + interview (StG and CoG) Proposals retained for step 2 Ranked list of proposals Feedback to applicants Right balance between generalist + specialized review Appropriate treatment of interdisciplinary proposals │ 22

ERC basics Submission of Proposals: Panel meeting – Step 1 Scoring
End of Step 1: A Proposal is of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation. B Proposal is of high quality but not sufficient to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation. The applicant may also be subject to resubmission limitations in the next call(s). C Proposal is not of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation. The applicant may also be subject to resubmission limitations in the next call(s). 23

ERC basics Submission of Proposals: Panel meeting - Step 2 scoring
End of Step 2: A Proposal fully meets the ERC's excellence criterion and is recommended for funding if sufficient funds are available. B Proposal meets some but not all elements of the ERC's excellence criterion and will not be funded. The applicant may also be subject to resubmission limitations in the next call(s). 24

ERC basics Resubmission restrictions
! ERC basics Resubmission restrictions Increasing number applications causes low success rates and high panel workload Currently 2013 applicants who received "C" at step 1 cannot resubmit in 2014. For 2014 applicants tighter resubmission rules have been implemented: Those who receive B (Step 1 or Step 2) have to wait out one year (next submission: 2016 call!!) Those who receive a C will have to wait out two years (next submission: 2017 call!!)

ERC basics Feedback to applicant
Evaluation Report includes: Score (A, B or C) "Ranking Range" in percentile for panel Individual Reports of all experts (3-8) Panel Comment Note: Some countries run complementary funding schemes for A or B proposals…!

3. Submission of Proposals
44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 27

Submission of Proposals Reminder: ERC funding schemes
Starting Grants starters (2-7 years after PhD) up to € 2.0 Mio for 5 years Consolidator Grants consolidators (7-12 years after PhD) up to € 2.75 Mio for 5 years Advanced Grants track-record of significant research achievements in the last 10 years up to € 3.5 Mio for 5 years Proof of Concept bridging gap between research - earliest stage of marketable innovation up to €150,000 for ERC grant holders Invation in SMEs

Submission of Proposals: Work program 2015, summary of main features
Publication date of first calls : October, 2014 Three ERC frontier research grants will be available under Work Programme 2014: Starting; Consolidator; and Advanced Grants The Scientific Council will analyse the pilot phase of the ERC Synergy Grant (calls were made under Work Programmes 2012 and 2013) before deciding on the scope and timing of future calls. No SyG call under Work Programme 2015 Extension of restrictions on applications will apply to the 2015 calls based on the outcome of the evaluation of the 2014 calls Overhead: 25% Indicative budget for 2016 to help the research community to plan applications

Submission Deadline(s)
Submission of Proposals Work program 2015 calendar ERC calls Budget Call Publication Submission Deadline(s) Starting Grants ERC-2015-StG 485 M€ 7 October 2014 3 February 2015 Consolidator Grants ERC-2015-CoG 713 M€ 13 November 2014 12 March 2015 Advanced Grants ERC-2015-AdG 450 M€ 10 February 2015 2 June 2015 Proof of Concept ERC-2015-PoC 15 M€ 7 November 2014 5 February 2015 28 May 2015 1 October 2015 │ 30 30 30

Submission of Proposals ERC Starting and Consolidator Grants.
10/08/12 10/08/12 Submission of Proposals ERC Starting and Consolidator Grants. The applicant’s profile “Am I COMPETITIVE enough?” Potential for research independence Evidence of scientific maturity At least one (StG) /several (CoG) publications without participation of PhD supervisor Promising track-record of early achievements Significant publications Invited presentations in conferences Funding, patents, awards, prizes │ 31 31

Submission of Proposals ERC Advanced Grants. The applicant’s profile
10/08/12 10/08/12 Submission of Proposals ERC Advanced Grants. The applicant’s profile Track-record of significant research achievements in the last 10 years Exceptional leaders and mentors 10 publications as senior author in major scientific journals 5 granted patents 10 invited presentations at international conferences 3 international conferences where Principal Investigator was an organiser International prizes/awards │ 32 32

Submission of proposals ERC Evaluation process
10/08/12 10/08/12 10/08/12 Submission of proposals ERC Evaluation process Single submission, but a 2-step evaluation ► one deadline per Call ► to a targeted panel (careful selection of keywords) ► electronically only – via Participant Portal ► proposals have two parts: Part A: administrative forms Part B: scientific proposal itself (part B1 and B2) Complete information: Guides for Applicants downloadable form the ERC's website and from the Participant Portal GfA AdG and StG already published, CoG to follow later (new submission platform SEP) │ 33 33 33

Submission of Proposals
What is evaluated? Excellence is the sole evaluation criterion Evaluation of excellence at two levels: Excellence of the Research Project Ground breaking nature Important challenge? Substantially beyond the current state of art? High-gain/high-risk balance Potential impact Possibility of a major break-through? Scientific Approach Feasibility, novel concepts/methodology Excellence of the Principal Investigator Intellectual capacity:Track-record, capacity to go significantly beyond the state of the art, evidence of creative independent thinking Creativity Commitment : Willing to devote a significant part of PI's working time (minimum of 50% for Starting, minimum of 40% for Consolidator Grant, minimum of 30% for Advanced Grant) Referees and panels evaluate and score each criterion, which results in a ranking of the proposals. 34

Submission of Proposals Evaluation Questions - Project

Submission of Proposals Evaluation Questions - PI

Submission of proposals Proposal structure
Administrative forms (Part A) 1 – General information 2 – Administrative data of participating organisations 3 – Budget 4 – Ethics 5 – Call specific questions Research proposal (Part B1) a – Extended synopsis p b – Curriculum vitae (with funding ID) 2p c – Track-record p Research proposal (Part B2) not evaluated in Step 1 Scientific proposal 15p a – State-of-the-art and objectives b – Methodology c – Resources Annexes Commitment of the host institution for ERC Calls 2014, etc 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 37

Submission of Proposals Differences in Part B1 and Part B2
Reminder: In Step 1: Panel members (generalists and with multidisciplinary approaches) see only Part B1 of your proposal: Prepare it accordingly! In Step 2: Both Part B1 and B2 are also send to specialists around the world (specialized external referees)

4/12/2017 Reviewer Exclusion Applicants can nominate up to three persons to be excluded from the evaluation of their proposal, specifying : Name Institution, City, Country Webpage The concerned persons will be excluded from the evaluation of the proposal assuming that the ERCEA is still in a position to evaluate the proposal properly. Exclusion may concern any independent expert, including the panel chair, panel members as well as remote referees 39

Submission of Proposals:
Some interesting aspects: Possibility of eligibility extensions Eligibility window can be EXTENDED in StG & CoG for up to 4.5 years for following cases: Maternity leave: 1.5 years per child before or after deadline Paternity leave: for whatever documented paternity leave that has been taken before or after deadline National service, long-term illness, clinical training: whatever documented time after deadline

Submission of Proposals
Some interesting aspects: Possibility to exclude panelists/ reviewers Up to three persons No reason has to be given Any independent expert, including panel chair, panel members The concerned persons will be excluded from the evaluation of the proposal assuming that the ERCEA is still in a position to evaluate the proposal properly

Most common ineligibility reasons Submission after the deadline.
4/12/2017 Eligibility Most common ineligibility reasons Submission after the deadline. Incomplete proposals. No commitment letter from the HI. PhD award date outside the window. Multiple-submission (only one application per PI under the same WP). 42

Preparing an application Hints and tips ( Generalities)
4/12/2017 Preparing an application Hints and tips ( Generalities) Register early, get familiar with the system and templates and start filling in the forms A submitted proposal can be revised until the call deadline by submitting a new version and overwriting the previous one Follow the formatting rules and page limits. Download and proof-read the proposal before submitting. 43

Preparing an application Hints and tips ( Part B 1)
10/08/12 Preparing an application Hints and tips ( Part B 1) Pay particular attention to the ground-breaking nature of the research project – no incremental research!. Think big! State-of-the-art is not enough. Know your competitors – what is the state of play and why is your idea and scientific approach outstanding? Remember that only the extended Synopsis is read at Step 1 that gives first impression – concise and clear presentation is crucial (evaluators are not necessarily all experts in the fields!) Also in Part B1 outline of the methodological approach (feasibility!) Show your scientific independence in you CV Avoid any suspicion of plagiarism! Part B 1  needs to be carefully drafted as it will give first impression of proposed research (panel will only evaluate Part B1 at step 1)

Preparing an application Hints and tips (Part B 2)
10/08/12 Preparing an application Hints and tips (Part B 2) Do not waste the second part (Part B2) – provide sufficient detail on methodology, work plan, selection of case studies etc. (15 pages) Check coherency of figures, justify requested resources Explain involvement of team members. Provide alternative strategies to mitigate risk. Part B 1  needs to be carefully drafted as it will give first impression of proposed research (panel will only evaluate Part B1 at step 1)

Preparing an application Hints and tips (Generalities)
10/08/12 Preparing an application Hints and tips (Generalities) Register early, get familiar with the system and templates and start filling in the forms Submit often: only the latest version is kept and you can overwrite it any time until the call deadline Make use of the help tools and call documents (FAQ, GfA, WP) to prepare your proposal Talk to the NCPs and OPEs Part B 1  needs to be carefully drafted as it will give first impression of proposed research (panel will only evaluate Part B1 at step 1)

Guidelines and other Resources
Preparing an application Guidelines and other Resources Read the Guide for Applicants and the Ideas Work Programme. Any doubts about your eligibility or any other questions, contact one of the NCPs or the ERCEA. subscribe to the ERC newsletter

Preparing an application Check the already Funded Projects
Menu allows searching by Funding Scheme, Call Year and Country of Host Institution.

Submission of Proposals Check the statistics
Menu allows searching by Funding Scheme, Domain/Panel and Grantees by Country of Host Institution.

4. ERC achievements 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 50

ERC achievements Time line
Adoption of FP7 and IDEAS Programme 6th StG, AdG calls 3nd PoC call 2st SyG call & 1st CoG call 3rd StG and AdG calls 5th StG, AdG calls 2nd PoC call & 1st SyG call 1st AdG call Appointment of 22 Scientific Council Members Launch of ERC & 1st StG call 4th StG, AdG calls & 1st PoC call 2nd StG and AdG calls 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 H2020 │ 51

ERC achievements Rising applications

ERC Calls │ 53 53

ERC achievements After 7 years of existence…
Highly recognised by the research community 4 300 top researchers funded (65% are at an early-career stage); 64 nationalities represented Highly competitive (average success rate 12%) Working in almost 600 different institutions in 29 countries 50% of grantees in 50 institutions : “Excellence attracts excellence” Benchmarking effect: impact on national programmes and agencies; national funding for best "runners-up" Efficient and fast grant management │ 54

ERC achievements Grants per country of host institution
ERC Starting, Consolidator, Advanced Grant calls Current Host Institutions

European Institutions hosting at least 30 ERC Grantees by funding
Top European Institutions hosting at least 30 ERC Grantees by funding Schemes StG/CoG AdG First legal signatories of the grant agreement Data as of 16/12/2013

ERC achievements ERC grantees with ERA nationality*
*) nationality as last declared by the principal investigator

ERC achievements ERC grantees with a non-ERA nationality*
ERC Starting and Consolidator Grant calls TOTAL number of grantees with non-ERA nationality : 207 StG/CoG and 101 AdG Data as of 16/12/2013 *) nationality as last declared by the principal investigator

ERC achievements Developing a new generation of excellent scientists
2/3 of staff are people in the training phase of their career Analysis of 995 ERC projects

Most non-ERA from China, US, India, and Russia
ERC achievements Attracting excellent researchers Composition of ERC teams (PIs not included) Analysis of 995 Starting and Advanced Grants EU: 67% Assoc. Countries: 12% non-ERA: 18% unknown: 3% 53% of non-ERA team members ''attracted'' to Europe with the ERC grant (10% of all team members) Most non-ERA from China, US, India, and Russia

ERC achievements Publication from ERC funded projects
Already over papers acknowledging ERC support published in international, peer reviewed journals. │ 61 * Thomson Reuters, WoS, End of 2012 61

Christoforos Pissarides Other Prizes awarded to ERC grantees
ERC achievements Highly distinguished grantees Serge Haroche Nobel 2012 ERC Grantee AdG 2009 Konstantin Novoselov Nobel 2010 ERC Grantee StG 2007 Ada Yonath ERC Grantee AdG 2012 Andre Geim ERC Grantee AdG 2012 Christoforos Pissarides ERC Grantee AdG 2012 Theodor Hansch ERC Grantee AdG 2010 James Heckman ERC Grantee AdG 2010 Jean-Marie Lehn ERC Grantee AdG 2011 ERC Grantee SyG 2012 Stanislav Smirnov AdG 2008 Simon Donaldson AdG 2009 Elon Lindenstrauss AdG 2010 2013 Wolf Prize awarded to Peter Zoller - SyG 2012 2013 Holberg Prize awarded to Bruno Latour - AdG 2010 2013 Crafoord Prize awarded to Lars Klareskog - AdG 2009 Other Prizes awarded to ERC grantees EMBO GOLD MEDAL 2011 – Simon BOULTON - AdG 2010 FEBS|EMBO WOMEN IN SCIENCE Carol ROBINSON - AdG 2010 EMBO GOLD MEDAL 2010 – Jason W CHIN - StG 2007 THE SHAW PRIZE IN MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES Christodoulou Demetrios - AdG 2009 CRAFOORD PRIZE 2011 and EUROPEAN LATSIS PRIZE 2010 – Ilkka Hanski - AdG 2008 L'ORÉAL-UNESCO AWARD FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE Anne L'Huillier - AdG 2008 WOLF PRIZE 2010 – Anton ZEILINGER, David BAULCOMBE - AdG 2008, Alain ASPECT - AdG 2010 MILLENIUM AWARD 2010 – Michael GRATZEL - AdG 2009 2012 Prizes awarded to ERC grantees EMBO GOLD MEDAL 2012 Jiri FRIML - StG 2011 BALZAN PRIZE 2012 David BAULCOMBE - AdG 2008 EUROPEAN LATSIS PRIZE 2012 Uffe HAAGERUP - AdG 2009 KELVIN PRIZE 2012 Colin McINNES - AdG 2008 LEIBNIZ PRIZE 2012 Michael BRECHT - AdG & Joerg WRACHTRUP - AdG 2010 Similarly several of the ERC ”main list” Principal Investigators have received recently very prestigious awards. │ 62

ERC achievements A success story for European research
More than 5 years of excellent IDEAS Events around the world - ERC goes global campaign Wide media coverage (both specialised & general press) User-friendly website and social media accounts NCPs AV products Quarterly e-newsletter Specific brochures & more │ 63 │ 63

ERC achievements ERC around the world
"Summer Davos" in China AAAS, USA Global Research Council meetings Global Research Council

5. Spain at ERC 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 65

Spain at ERC Evaluated proposals from hosts in Spain
Ineligible and withdrawn proposals not taken into account

Spain at ERC Granted proposals at host institutions in Spain
* * current host institutions; data as of 11/02/2014

Spain at ERC Success rates per country of Host Institution

Spain at ERC Success rates per domain

Spain at ERC ERC grant distribution to countries of HI
ERC StG, CoG and AdG calls *) Host institution refers to the organisation with which the first grant agreement was signed

Spain at ERC Mobility of researchers
ERC StG, CoG and AdG calls 176 Spanish PIs in the country 61 foreign PIs in Spain from 21 different nationalities, mainly IT (16), DE (10), UK (5), NL (4), US (4) 45 Spanish PIs abroad, mainly in UK (17), CH (7), FR (7), DE (6) 61 foreign PIs in Spain 45 Spanish PIs abroad Current host institutions; data as of 11/02/2014

Spain at ERC Host institutions in Spain
ERC StG, CoG and AdG calls Current host institutions; data as of 11/02/2014

Spain at ERC PoC grants by country of host institution ERC PoC calls 2011, 2012 and 2013-1
Current host institutions; data as of 11/02/2014

Spain at ERC Synergy Grant Calls 2012 and 2013

The European Research Council Audiovisual Materials-Spain
1) Video clip entitled “Miradas cruzadas sobre el ERC” and is 2) Two short video clips produced by two ERC grantees on their respective research, whom we also featured in the general clip above. PRESBYOPIA NANOFORCELLS

The European Research Council
- More information on - To subscribe to the ERC newsletter - National Contact Point in your country and OPE in UZ Follow us on: EuropeanResearchCouncil ERC_Research

6. ERC PI engagement 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 │ 77

Agenda Central role of the Principal Investigator in ERC GA
Introduction Legal basis Contractual specificities Rights & Obligations ERC services focused on PIs This presentation will give you an overview on the specific role played by PI in ERC projects and the specific rights and obligations related to this role. After a quick introduction we will see the legal basis related to that specific role, the ERC contractual specificities And then the main R&O of the PIs To conclude I will introduce you to different services provided by the Agency to PIs

PI central role I. Introduction
Proposal/Project Expertise/Knowledge Principal Investigator central role You PIs are the main actor of the ERC projects. You are the initiator of your OWN project (you have submitted the proposal that was utlimately awarded). Thanks to your expertise and knowledge, you ensure the excellency of the project, and therefore you must be free to run your project autonomously, to achive the scientific objectives (autonomy with regards budget, recruitment, methodology). PIs cannot be replaced by any other researcher, whatever his/her expertise. Without PI there is no ERC project. PIs are a key element of the broader strategy of the ERC. Indeed, beyond the knowledge gained through the realisation of your projects, the Agency's goals are to: - attract the best researchers within Europe - develop/consolidate career of all researchers involved in the GA. - and thus strenghtening the european scientific research community Strengthening ERA Scientific leadership CANNOT REPLACE PI WITHOUT PI NO ERC GA

PI central role II. Legal basis
Grant Agreement – PI named, but not signatory Annex II – General conditions II.2 & II.3 Supplementary agreement Work Programmes – Commitments on project and in EU The PI is mentioned in the GA but does not sign it. Your Rights and Obligations are included in : the General conditions of the GA The Supplementary agreement which is signed by the PI and the HI And in the different work programmes defining specific requirements (notably the PI's commitments regarding to the time to be spent on the project and in Europe) These differents legal basis are completed by the national regulations applicable in the country hosting the PI as well as by the HI's usual practices (e.g. social security, depreciation method, legal provisions framing the recruitment of researchers from outside Europe: while some countries rather encourage such international cooperation, other national legislations are rather restrictives) Completed by national legislation & HI practice

PI central role III. Contractual specificities
Principal Investigator Host Institution ERCEA Evaluation & Award Scientific Reporting & Commitment Supplementary Agreement As said previosuly, although PIs are the central actors of the project, they do not sign the GA. This is one of the ERC specificities, the two parties signing the GA are the HI and the Agency. The PI and the HI are linked by the supplementary agreement which defines the modalities of their relationship (R&O, confidentiality, settlement in case of dispute, transfer of the GA and so on). However, please remember that you must be hosted and engaged by your HI during the whole duration of the project. The SA is not sufficient as such, you need to have a formal contractual relationship with your, which must be applicable in court if necessary. Grant agreement

PI Rights and Obligations
Scientific Autonomy Access rights to background and foreground Adequate working conditions Independent publications Portability Scientific Responsibility Confidentiality & IPR Time Commitment & in EU Dissemination Inform HI about changes Let's see a bit more in detail Your main Rights and Obligations Concerning the rights we will examine: - the respect of their scientific autonomy - their right to access to the background and foreground necessary to the project implementation - their rights to have legal and adequate contractual conditions - the respect of their autonomy regarding the publications - the right to mobility and therefore to transfer the GA These rights are mirorred with obligations: - the obligation to ensure an efficient scientific supervision of their projects - the respect of the beneficiary's IPRs and confidentiality (not to disclose any confidential information) - obligation to ensure a quick and efficient dissemination of the results generated by the projectsthe respect of time commitments (indicated in the work programmes) - Finally, we will detail the the to inform their HI and the Agency about ny event affecting substantially the GA

PI central role IV. Rights (i) – Scientific Autonomy
Access to facilities required for the project Infrastructures Equipment Autonomy in the selection and management of the team Control on the budget PIs are autonomous in the daily managment of their project: - they must have access to the infrastructures and resources required to implement the project as described in the Annex I - they are responsible for the management of the staff involved on the project (from their selection to the allocation of tasks) - as well as of the management of the whole budget. This autonomy is complete of course within the the legal restictions imposed by: - national and european legislations - as well as the usual practice of the institution hosting their project Attn: Possible restrictions due to: National legislations HI usual practices

PI central role IV. Rights (ii) – IPR Access Rights
HI has to provide the PI and his/her team with: Free access to background information owned by the institution before the project started and necessary for its implementation Free access to the foreground results generated by the project & necessary for its achievement The Host Institution must ensure to the PI and the staff involved on the project a free access: - to any information/knowledge owned by the beneficiary before the GA but necessary for the project implementation - to the results generated by the project This free access must be ensured even after the GA is transferred to another beneficiary. even after the transfer of the GA

Standards fixed by national legislations & HI practices
PI central role IV. Rights (iii) – Working conditions/labour law HI has to provide the PI with: Health and safety environment to work (accoring to European and international standards) Proper/ legal social security schemes: Leaves (annual, sickness, parental) Pensions The instituion hosting the GA must provide the PI with legal and adequate contractual conditions: - a health and safe working environment - and the usual social rights (leaves and pension scheme) These standards can vary from one country to another and from one institution to another Standards fixed by national legislations & HI practices

PI central role IV. Rights (iv) – Independent Publications
Authority to deliver scientific reports to the Agency Authority to publish as senior author Authority to invite as co-authors only those who have contributed substantially to the reported work PIs have the authory to prepare independently the scientific reports to be delivered twice during the overall project duration to the Agency. Their rights to publish scientific articles as senior author must be respected. No one can force them to modify the the content of these publications or to include anybody as co-author (if these persons did not take part in the project implementation leading to the results described in the publications). Please note that co-authors are usually staff members employed by beneficiaries, but subcontractors can exceptionally take part in these publications if necessary.

(eligibility criteria, EWS, non-detrimental to the project)
PI central role IV. Rights (v) – Portability Reasons: Better professional conditions Better research conditions Problems with HI Others HI cannot object unless for legal obstacles Transfer of GA, PF, unused budget (staff & equipment) Mobility is a right for the PIs as for any worker employed in Europe. They can decide to change their employer for different reasons (others = private) The former host institution cannot object to the transfer of the GA, unless legal obstacles preventing it. The transfer of a GA has many impact on the project (completely new scientific environment): - transfer of the pre-financing - transfer of the budget (part not yet consumed) - and eventually transfer of the equipment especially bought and solely used for the project - and of (part of the staff) The transfer of the equipment and staff are not automatic and require an agreement between the former and the new HI with regards to the transfer modalities. Please note that such transfer requires the prior agreement from the ERC (possibility of refusal). The timing to inform the Agency is vital in order to avoid any risk of termination of the GA PRIOR AGREEMENT FROM ERC (eligibility criteria, EWS, non-detrimental to the project)

PI central role IV. Obligations (i) – Scientific Responsibility
Effective supervison of the project: Project to be implemented as indicated in the Annex I Staff under direct supervision of the PI Management of all resources necessary for the project Scientific Reporting: ERC grants have only two scientific reporting periods This should : (i) Be submitted in due time (ii) Demonstrate substantial progress (Annex I) Regarding the PIs 'obligations, they are responsible for the scientific implementation of the project They must ensure an effective supervision of their project (in order to achieve the objectives as described in the Annex I). - All the staff involved on the project are under their direct supervision - They manage all the resources allocated to the project PIs are also responsible for the preparation of the scientific reports describing the project implementation. Not meeting these obligations can lead to the termination of the GA Failure to meet these obligations can lead to termination – AT THE END

PI central role IV. Obligations (ii) – Confidentiality & IPR
PI must preserve the confidentiality of any data, documents or other material that is identified as confidential This obligation no longer applies when: information is made public by means other than a breach of confidentiality information is communicated to the recipient without any obligation of confidence by a third party who is in lawful possession disclosure of the confidential information is foreseen by (national) law or by other provisions of this grant agreement or the supplementary agreement; This obligation ensuring the respect of the beneficiaries' IPRs is the other side of your rights to have free access to the beneficiaries' background. It is obvious that if the beneficiary must provide you with this free access, you cannot disclose any confidential information, and use such information only in the frame of the project. The respect of beneficiaries' IPRs goes beyond the GA duration. PI must respect beneficiary's IPRS during and after the project

PI central role IV. Obligations (iii) – Time Commitment & in EU
StG & CoG at least 50% of their total working time to the ERC-funded project at least 50% of their total working time in EU/AC AdG & SyG at least 30% of their total working time to the ERC-funded project Calculation on the whole duration of the project Synergy – PIs core time together As we saw it in the beginning of this presentation, ERC, through its funding activities, aims to achieve several objectives: - through the project realisation, it particpates to the development of the scientific knowledge (new solutions to societal challenges) - through the development of PIs and staff members careers, and the attraction of the best researchers in Europe, it reinforces the European Scientific Community In order to achieve these objectives, the ERC has set up fixed thresholds to be respected by each PI: - PIs must spend a substantial part of their working time on the project - PIs must spend at least 50% of their working time in Europe These thresholds are to be calculated on the whole duration of the GA (no need to meet the thresholds at each period, but completely unbalanced are not acceptable either) However, they are to be understood as minimum legal requirements, higher thresholds can be imposed during the GA preparation (depending on the specificities of each project). Higher thresholds can be imposed at the evaluation stage or later in the implementation by the Agency

PI central role IV. Obligations (iv) – Dissemination
Wide access through efficient dissemination of research results are key to further scientific progress. Results of the research shall be disseminated as swiftly as possible by the beneficiary, in line with the rule for IPR protection (Art. II. 30 General Conditions) ERC financial support shall always be acknowledged PIs must disseminate the results achieved by the project. These results are to be made public as soon as possible, without contrevening to the beneficiaries' IPRs, in order to be used. The dissemination can be done through several media: - scientific revues - conferences - websites - but also through open access: the European Commission invites the beneficiaries to do the best efforts to publish their results in open access (free access to electronic copy of the results), as soon as possible (and at the latest 6 months after their publication through other means). Of course, do not forget that any publications related to research funded by the ERC is to acknowledge this funding source. Open Access (best efforts)

Risk of ineligible costs
PI central role IV. Obligations (v) – Inform HI about changes Obligation to inform HI & ERC about: Any substantial change in methodology/objectives Any event jeopardising or affecting substantially the project Substantial financial reorganisation Transfer of the project to a new Host Institution Timing is important It is obvious that between the moment of the submission of the proposal and the completion of the GA (usually more than 5 years later) a lot of unexpected issues/changes are most probably affecting the GA (new scientific discoveries, change of objectives/methodology, administrative changes or changes related to the staff composition, etc.). Although the ERC GAs allow for some flexibility regarding the transfer between costs categories and/or beneficiaries, which do not necessarily require a formal amendment to the GA (prinicple is as long as tasks are foreseen in Annex I), it is very important to inform in due time the host institution as well as the Agency about any substantial change in order to avoid complications (costs declared ineligible or even the termination of the GA). Once again, timing is paramount, whatever the nature of the changes at stake, it is always safer to report them to the Agency which will help you finding the best legal solution. Risk of ineligible costs Risk of termination

PI central role V. ERC services focused on PIs
Daily support (procedures, communication, and dissemination) PI helpdesk Simplified & pre-filled templates Scientific reporting Financial reporting Amendment request FAQs Outreach events for Principal Investigators The Agency has set up different means to help you in the daily management of your projects. Further to the project officers, in charge of the follow-up of your project, that you can contact directly for any question, you can also contact the PI helpdesk (FMB which forward any question to the most relevant officer within the Agency depending on the nature of the issue The ERC has also prepared templates (scientific and financial reports, amendments) and guides (including FAQs) to facilitate your understanidng on our procedures. Finally, several outreach events, as the one that gathers us today, are organised every year in order to have a direct communication with you, to reply to your question and to share your personal experiences.

Useful links ERC-C2@ec.europa.eu ERC-C2-amendments@ec.europa.eu
Grant Management mailbox: Amendment mailbox: PI helpdesk mailbox:

Thank you for your attention!

European Research Council (ERC)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "European Research Council (ERC)"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

European Research Council (ERC)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "European Research Council (ERC)"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback