1. Evaluation of research proposals. Experience of Moldovan Advisory Expertise Council Science evaluation as a prerequisite for promoting excellence in research. Regional workshop Chiinău, November 6-th, 2012 Dr. Veaceslav KULCIKI Advisory Expertise Council, Moldova

2. OUTLINE 1.Competition based selection of research projects in RM. Background 2.Founding of Advisory Expertise Council (AEC). Launching of national competition based research. 3.Project management cycle in Moldovan Research Institutions 4.Evaluation of project proposals performed by (AEC) 5.Current trends in evaluation process Science evaluation as a prerequisite for promoting excellence in research Regional workshop Chiinău, November 6-th, 2012

3. COMPETITION BASED SELECTION OF RESEARCH PROJECTS IN MOLDOVA. BACKGROUND 1.Activity of international funds: Soros foundation (1992), INTAS (1993), NATO, MRDA-CRDF (1999) 2. Projects supported: Individual research projects, collaborative projects (research teams), conference grants, travel grants 3.Evaluation activity International peer review – most projects. Limited involvement of local experts

4. LAUNCHING OF MOLDOVAN NATIONAL COMPETITION BASED RESEARCH 1.Founding of Advisory Expertise Council – 2004. Major goal – promotion of research on competitive basis. Project calls launched by Supreme Council For Science and Technological Development (SCSTD). Priorities promoted: state research programs, projects for young scientists, scientific equipment, international collaborations Institutional projects on competitive basis 2. Evaluation activity Local peer review – most projects. Limited involvement of international experts.

5. MOLDOVAN R&I AREA. EVALUATION MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES 1.Separation of evaluation from policy-making and executive activities. Actions: Establishing of separate entities for executive activities and separation of Advisory Expertise Council (AEC) as an individual Public Institution. 2.Clear project management procedures and selection principles. Actions: Procedures defined in the official agreement between Moldovan Government and Academy of Sciences 3.Assignment of independent evaluators and peer reviewing promotion. Actions: Setting-up a database (> 500) of local experts grouped by research directions

6. MOLDOVAN R&I AREA. PROJECT MANAGEMENT CYCLE Definition of strategic priorities/policies Launching project calls Proposals evaluation Running the projects Projects monitoring SCSTD Center for B&ARF Center for IntProjects Agency for I &TT AEC Research units Launching units Step Responsible organization Macro monitoring SCSTD

7. EVALUATION PROCEDURE PERFORMED BY MOLDOVAN ADVISORY EXPERTISE COUNCIL. GENERAL OBJECTIVES 1.Promotion of research activities under competition based on excellence; 2.A transparent and unambiguous definition of the entire evaluation process; 3.Establishing clear responsibilities for all process participants; 4.Reaching high process quality by promotion of objective approach; 5.Monitoring of evaluation process and setting up of performance criteria; 6.Planning of corrective actions for removal of discrepancies in evaluation; 7.Measures for continuous improvement of evaluation process

8. PROJECT PROPOSALS SUBMISSION 1.Project proposal collection in printed and soft format via www portal. Deadlines are set for each call. 2.Eligibility check by the project launching bodies. Eligibility criteria defined in call announcement. 3.Valid projects are submitted to Advisory Expertise Council for evaluation. A formal letter with the list of projects accompanies the package.

9. INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEWERS – BASIC EVALUATION TOOL 1.AEC maintains a database of experts for a set of relevant research fields; 2.The expert database is updated on continuous basis. This process is based on recommendations from scientific community and as well as minimal formal requirements; 3.Members of scientific Diaspora are actively promoted as evaluators; 4.Highly qualified professionals from industry, business sector or NGOs are promoted as evaluators on recommendation of Governamental institutions (Ministers and other agencies).

10. SELECTION OF INDEPENDENT PROJECT EVALUATORS 1.Selection of evaluators represent a joint task of AEC staff and AEC Advisory Board 2.On the recommendation of the relevant Advisory Board members (research field related), the AEC staff selects two evaluators for each national project (one for bilateral ones). AEC expert database represents an input for this step. The decision is taken basing on the narrow specialization data of evaluators. 3.The expert is contacted by AEC staff and project summary is submitted. The selected expert decides either to evaluate or not the submitted project. On his approval, the integral project is submitted. 4.AEC concludes a written contract with each evaluator. He is paid for his services. 5.Evaluators are being evaluated by AEC according to a special procedure. AEC staff AEC Advisory Board Expert database 7 20 700

11. EVALUATORS ACTIVITY 1.Evaluation form – the basic tool for experts activity. Elaboration of these forms – a very responsible task. Should be done before call launch on agreement with entities responsible for call launching. 2.The first requirement – a total match between project proposal layout and evaluation criteria integrated in the evaluation form. The evaluation elements should be made known to applicants as priority items of project definition. 3.Additional tools: thresholds and weights 4.Mandatory fields: strengths and weaknesses of proposal 5.All this must be made known to public on call launch !!! Project definition fieldEvaluation criteria Project proposalEvaluation form Specific items Evaluation elements

12. EVALUATION FORM SAMPLE

13. ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS 1.Are launched after evaluation is complete. The members of the advisory board examine and discuss the evaluations performed by independent experts. 2.Projects are recommended for financing basing on the total score accumulated and considering available resources. 3.Winning projects are distributed to all strategic directions of research, in proportional number of total applications received within the call. 4.All the decisions are taken by consensus. 5.The competition results are delivered to the entities that have launched the call.

14. CURRENT TRENDS IN PROJECTS EVALUATION 1.Internationalization of evaluation. Regional cooperation 2.Overcoming language barriers – switch to submission in English 3.Deeper involvement of scientific Diaspora in the evaluation 4.Elaboration of criteria and procedures for a better selection of experts and their evaluation. Making use of scientometric data.

15. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !