1 Framework Programme 7 Evaluation Criteria. 2 Proposal Eligibility Evaluation by Experts Commission ranking Ethical Review (if needed) Commission rejection.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Info Day – 31/05/2010 Overview Peter Crawley European Commission DG RTD – H2 Surface Transport Rail Road Water Sustainable Surface Transport - Call 2010.
Advertisements

Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in the Seventh Framework Programme Recorder briefing ICT Call 4 Brussels : May-June 2009.
1 17/3/2009 European Commission Directorate General Information Society & Media Briefing for Remote Reading How to fill in the (IER) Individual Evaluation.
Launch of the ESPON 2013 Programme Procedures for Call for Proposals under Priorities 1-3.
Integrating the gender aspects in research and promoting the participation of women in Life Sciences, Genomics and Biotechnology for Health.
HORIZON 2020 PROPOSAL EVALUATION
Page 1 Marie Curie Schemes Science is not the whole story! (How to write a successful Marie Curie RTN Proposal) Siobhan Harkin.
Chisinau, November 6th, 2012 Dr Sebastiano FUMERO
Getting European Research Funds Dr Philip Griffiths Associate Head of School, Built Environment Centre for Sustainable Technologies University of Ulster.
Graduate Research Support Program (GRSP). 2 Content of the presentation 1.Introduction 2.Objectives of the program 3.Expected Outcomes 4.Target groups.
Dir S ERC/European Commission RTD, Directorate S The European Research Council The evaluation of the ERC-2007-StG Call IDEAS Programme Committee, January.
Date: in 12 pts Assessment of applications. Date: in 12 pts Qualitative assessment Relevance of mobility project Internationalisation strategy Types of.
EVALUATION Prof.Dr.Şakire Pöğün Ege Ün. Tıp Fakültesi (expert evaluator) Intra-European (IEF) International Outgoing (OIF) Fellowships International Incoming(IIF)
Procurement of Consultancy Services. 2 Differences between.
NSF Research Proposal Review Guidelines. Criterion 1: What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? How important is the proposed activity.
Review of EIA Quality A formal step in the EIA process Purpose is to establish if the information in the EIA report is sufficient for decision –making.
1 EFCA - 21th March 2002 Raul Mateus Paula. 2 This presentation underlines: The key objectives of the Relex Reform The division of the responsibilities.
R.König / FFG, European and International Programmes (EIP)Page 1/18 Submission and Evaluation of Proposals Ralf König FFG - Austrian Research Promotion.
FP6 PROPOSAL WRITING. What makes a good proposal - A strong proposal idea - Avoiding common weaknesses and pitfalls What to know about evaluation - Process.
PRESENTER: DR. ROBERT KLESGES PROFESSOR OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AND MEMBER, DEPARTMENT OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND.
1 The ICT Theme in FP7 How to participate to ICT in FP 7 3. Submission, evaluation and selection ICT Proposer’s Day Köln, 1 February 2007.
How experts evaluate projects; key factors for a successful proposal
1 Major changes Get ready! Changes coming to Review Meetings Considering Potential FY2010 funding and beyond: New 1-9 Scoring System Scoring of Individual.
Provisional FP7-ICT InfoDay, Torino, 11/12/ The ICT Theme in FP7 How to submit a proposal 3. Submission and selection.
Proposal evaluation process in FP7 Moldova – Research Horizon 29 January 2013 Kristin Kraav.
Info Day on New Calls and Partner Café Brussels, 10 February 2011 How to apply: Legal Framework – Beneficiaries – Application and Selection Procedure.
APRE Agency for the Promotion of European Research Lifecycle of an FP 7 project Caterina Buonocore Riga, 13th September, 2007.
Bidding for EU ICT research projects Stephen Brown, 15 June 2008.
IST programme 1 IST KA3: The Evaluation Introduction & Contents Principles Outline procedures Criteria and Assessment What this means for proposers.
TEN-T Experts Briefing, March Annual Call Award Criteria.
Dr. Marion Tobler, NCP Environment Evaluation Criteria and Procedure.
Writing the Proposal: Scientific and technological objectives PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia
1 Proposal Preparation J. Cosgrave, CSJU IT Officer Clean Sky Call 11 Info Day Brussels, 20th January 2012.
ICT Programme Operations Unit Information and Communications Technologies Recorder briefing ICT Calls 2013.
Overview of the IST Priority Information Package National Contact Points 23rd Oct 2002 Tom McKinlay: IST Operations.
ICT Programme Operations Unit Information and Communications Technologies How to fill in the IER form ICT Calls 2013.
Marie Curie Initial Training Networks (ITN) Building knowledge about evaluation process and criteria into own proposal.
The ICT Theme in FP7 Proposal evaluation The Evaluation criteria: Keys to success and reasons for failure - The Golden Rules.
Proposal Evaluation Practical Rules. Training Module: The MED-Dialogue project (611433) is co-funded by the European Community's ICT Programme under FP7.
Evaluation Process 2014 Geoff Callow Director-Technology Turquoise International Ltd IMPART: July 2015.
How is a grant reviewed? Prepared by Professor Bob Bortolussi, Dalhousie University
Regional Policy The Seal of Excellence A concrete example of operational synergies between Horizon 2020 and the ESIF Magda De Carli Deputy Head of Unit.
Annual Call 2012 Briefing to experts for the 'Remote' evaluation Chris North TEN-T EA Head of Unit T3 7 th March 2013.
Evaluation of proposals Alan Cross European Commission.
Personal Comments on the NSERC ICT Panel’s Decision-Making Process Carl McCrosky.
Grading Rubric – Research Papers Dennis Duncan University of Georgia.
Horizon 2020 Ian Devine European Advisor – UK Research Office University of Manchester, 11 September 2014.
Date: in 12 pts Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions Award criteria Education and Culture Policy Officers DG EAC.C3 People NCPs Training on H2020, Brussels,
Practical Aspects of participation in FP7 Tania Friederichs DG RTD International Cooperation FP7 Info Day Sarajevo, 23 April.
ERANETMED Joint Activities, particularly the 1st Joint Call ERANETMED is funded by the European Commission’s 7th Framework Programme ERANETMED multi-tasks.
Status of the first joint call “Extended Working Life and its Interaction with Health, Wellbeing and beyond” WP 2 of J-Age II Wenke Apt 13th General Assembly.
Training Event, Sofia – Feb 22 nd, 23 rd 2007 Recommendations for building successful proposals in FP7* Dipl.-Ing. Pierre.
“Preparing competitive grant proposals that match policy objectives - project proposal evaluators' viewpoint ” Despina Sanoudou, PhD FACMG Assistant Professor.
HORIZON 2020 PROPOSAL EVALUATION A NEW TYPE OF EU R&I PROGRAMME.
NIH Scoring Process. NIH Review Categories 1.Significance How important is the research? 2. Investigator Is the team comprised of experts in the area?
The Assessment Process 11/07/2016. Types of calls and proposals Calls are challenge-based, and therefore more open to innovative proposals − Calls are.
Sharing solutions for better regional policies European Union | European Regional Development Fund Erika Fulgenzi Policy Officer | Interreg Europe JS
The view of a reviewer Johan Ahnström, PhD Ecology (SLU)
NATA Foundation Student Grants Process
EIA approval process, Management plan and Monitoring
The ICT Theme in FP7 How to participate to ICT in FP 7
Marie Curie Individual Fellowships
NATA Foundation General Grants Program Process
COST European Cooperation in Science and Technology
Insights to proposal submission and evaluation
Evaluation processes Horizon 2020 Info Days November 2017
Proposal Preparation &
The Evaluation Phase Juras Ulbikas.
2012 Annual Call Steps of the evaluation of proposals, role of the experts TEN-T Experts Briefing, March 2013.
NATA Foundation General Grants Program Process
Presentation transcript:

1 Framework Programme 7 Evaluation Criteria

2 Proposal Eligibility Evaluation by Experts Commission ranking Ethical Review (if needed) Commission rejection decision Applicants informed of Commission decision Negotiation Consultation of Programme Committee (if required) Commission funding or rejection decision Applicants informed of results of evaluation Signature of contract The Selection Process

3

4

5 Evaluation rules Evaluation scores are awarded for each of the three criteria, not for the sub-criteria (bullet points). The relevance of a proposal is considered in relation to the topic(s) of the work programme open in a given call, and to the objectives of a call. These aspects will be integrated in the application of the criterion "S/T quality", and the first sub-criterion under "Impact" respectively. When a proposal is partially relevant because it only marginally addresses the topic(s) of the call, or if only part of the proposal addresses the topic(s), this condition will be reflected in the scoring of the first criterion. Proposals that are clearly not relevant to a call ("out of scope") will be rejected on eligibility grounds.

6 Evaluation marks Each criterion will be scored out of 5. Half marks can be given. 0 The proposal fails to address the criterion under examination or cannot be judged due to missing or incomplete information 1 Very poor. The criterion is addressed in a cursory and unsatisfactory manner. 2 Poor. There are serious inherent weaknesses in relation to the criterion in question. 3 Fair. While the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses that would need correcting. 4 Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, although certain improvements are possible. 5 Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion in question. Any shortcomings are minor. No weightings will be applied. Thresholds will be applied to the scores. The threshold for individual criteria will be 3. The overall threshold, applying to the sum of the three individual scores, will be 10.

7 Questions ?