1. Marie Curie Individual Fellowships
Building knowledge about evaluation process and criteria into own proposal (Guide for Applicants Annex 2)
Dr Dragana Avramov, PSPC
Brussels 6 November 2009

2. Evaluation Process Submission Individual reading Consensus Panel
Finalisation
Full Proposal
Proposal
forms
Evaluators
Evaluators
Evaluators
Rejection list
Criteria
Criteria
Criteria
Proposals in
suggested
priority order
Eligibility
COMMISSION
EVALUATORS
COMMISSION

3. How a proposal is evaluated
Stage 1. Individual readings
Each proposal is read independently by three experts
The experts each prepare an Individual Evaluation Report IER on that proposal

4. How a proposal is evaluated
Stage 2. Consensus Group
The three experts who read the proposal meet together to come to a consensus view
The group prepares a Consensus Report CR

5. How a proposal is evaluated
Stage 3. Panel meeting
All the experts within the area meet together as a panel to review ranked list
In case of ex aequo priority criteria are applied

6. https://cordis.europa.eu/emmfp7/
Who are the evaluators?
Must be registered in the database of experts for research activities FP7 EMM
Selected from the database on the basis of the high level of expertise relevant to a specific call

7. What is expected from evaluators?
Give a fair and clear opinion on each proposal
Evaluate proposals against the Objectives and impact defined in the Workprogram
Evaluate proposal as written. Make no additional assumptions, do not read between the lines
Consistently apply the same standard of judjement to each proposal
Evaluate on 5 criteria (and use sub-criteria as issues to be considered in the assessment)

8. Responsibilities of evaluators
Evaluators are:
Independent : they do not represent their employer, nor their country
Objective : evaluate the proposal as written
Accurate : use the official evaluation criteria only
Consistent : apply the same standard of judgment to each proposal
Incommunicado : external contacts on evaluation are not permitted during or after the evaluation

9. What does this mean for applicants?
Reassurance that the evaluation process is of high quality, guided by principles of transparency, equality of treatment, fairness and transparency
Never loose out of sight Evaluation criteria

10. Evaluation criteria (example for IEF)

11. Evaluation sub-criteria
The sub-criteria are issues that the experts should consider in the assessment of the relevant criterion
Failure to meet any of the sub-criteria is reflected in the overall criterion mark
MAKE SURE YOU PROVIDE INFORMATION FOR EACH CRITERION AND EACH SUB-CRITERION