1. Evaluation of Proposals
4/23/2017
ERC Grants in 2013:
Evaluation of Proposals
Dr. Frank Kuhn
Social Sciences & Humanities
Scientific Management Department
B.2 Starting Grant Unit August, 2012
Research Funding Symposium (cancelled)
APSA, New Orleans

2. Outline Part 1 – Funding Schemes 2013
focus on:
Starting Grant
Consolidator Grant
Part 2 – Data from previous calls 2

3. ERC profile
ERC grants aim to support 'Frontier Research', in other words the pursuit of questions at or beyond the frontiers of knowledge, without regard for established disciplinary boundaries.
Proposals of a multi- or interdisciplinary nature which cross the boundaries between different fields of research, pioneering proposals addressing new and emerging fields of research or proposals introducing unconventional, innovative approaches and scientific inventions are encouraged, as long as the expected impact on science, scholarship or engineering is significant.
The research proposed should has a high-gain/high-risk profile, i.e. if successful the payoffs will be very significant, but there is a higher-than-normal risk that the research project does not entirely fulfil its aims.

4. ERC Funding Schemes ERC offers independence, recognition & visibility
Freedom of the individual grantee
ERC offers independence, recognition & visibility
to work on a research topic of own choice, with a team of own choice
to gain true financial autonomy for 5 years
to negotiate with the host institution the best conditions of work
to attract top team members (EU and non-EU) and collaborators
to move with the grant to any place in Europe if necessary (portability of grants)
to attract additional funding and gain recognition; ERC is a quality label

5. ERC grant schemes - Strategic principles
All fields of science and scholarship are eligible
Investigator-driven, bottom-up
Excellence is the only valid criterion
Individual team + research project
Irrespective of nationality, gender or age of researchers
Investment in research talent
Attractive, flexible grants, up to five years
Under control of the Principal Investigator
Independent individual teams in Europe
All nationalities can apply
Host organisation to be located in EU or Associated Country

6. ERC Grant schemes Four types of grants: ERC Starting Grant (StG):
Starting own independent research team or programme – € 1.5 M (up to € 2.0 M)/5 y
ERC Consolidator Grant (CoG):
Consolidating own independent research team or programme – € 2.0 (up to € 2.75 M)/5 y
ERC Advanced Grant (AdG):
Attract & reward established independent research leaders – € 2.5 (up to €3.5 M) /5 y
ERC Synergy Grants:
Small groups of Principal Investigators – up to € 15 M/6 y
+ Proof of Concept funding
Starting Grant now largest share of budget: €730m Advanced Grant: €680m

7. “Can I apply as a Non-European?”
ERC Grants
Applicants from outside Europe
“Can I apply as a Non-European?”
Yes, you can. Candidates from outside Europe only need to find a EU-based host institution (HI) willing to host them for the duration of the project.
ERC Grants by now a household name in European academia
Likely to find a HI
cp. ERC website for succesful HIs ("funded projects")
Additional incentives for Non-Europeans
can apply for substantial additional funding
in general: European universities offer additional incentives to ERC Grantees (e.g. professorships, additional team positions)

8. ERC Funding schemes Planned budget 2012 & 2013 4/23/2017
2014 calls not determined yet – refer to H2020 negotiations

9. StG and CoG 2013: Two separate calls
The two streams of previous Starting Grant will be separated into two separate calls:
Starting Grant: 2 – 7 years after PhD
Consolidator Grant: 7 – 12 years after PhD
│ 9

10. ERC Starting Grants Objective
"ERC Starting Grants boost the independent careers of excellent researchers by providing adequate support at the critical stage where they are starting their own independent research team or programme." 10

11. ERC Consolidator Grants Objective
"ERC Consolidator Grants boost the independent careers of excellent researchers by providing adequate support at the critical stage where they are consolidating their own independent research team or programme." 11

12. 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

13. Submission of proposals
4/23/2017
Submission of proposals
Single submission
► one deadline per Call (new )
► to a targeted panel
► electronically only
► proposals have two parts:
Part A: administrative forms
Part B: scientific proposal itself
Complete information: Guides for Applicants
GfA AdG and StG already published, CoG to follow later (new submission platform SEP)

14. Submission of proposals
Proposal structure
PART A – online forms
A1 Proposal and PI info
A2 Host Institution info
A3 Budget
PART B1 – submitted as .pdf
CV p.
Track Record p.
Extended Synopsis 5 p.
Annexes – submitted as .pdf
Statement of support of HI
If applicable: explanatory
information on ethical issues;
copy of PhD (StG & CoG); document
for extension of eligibility
window (StG & CoG)
PART B2 – submitted as .pdf
Scientific Proposal 15 p.
(incl. budget table)

15. Timetable of 2013 ERC calls ERC calls Call Publication
Submission Deadline
Starting Grants
ERC-2013-StG
10 July 2012
17 Oct. 2012
Advanced Grants
ERC-2013-AdG
22 Nov. 2012
Synergy Grants
ERC-2013-SyG
10 October 2012
10 Jan. 2013
Consolidator Grant
ERC-2013-CoG
7 November 2012
21 Feb. 2013
│ 15 15 15

16. Review Process: two steps
4/23/2017
Review Process: two steps
Submission of full proposals
Individual assessment of full proposal by panel members & referees
Eligibility check
Step 1 (remote) evaluation on the basis of section 1 of proposal* by panel members
AdG : 2nd Panel meeting
StG: 2nd Panel meeting incl. interviews of applicants
1st Panel meeting
Proposals
selected for funding
Proposals passing to step 2 16 16

17. ERC StG and CoG Schemes Evaluation of Excellence: Criterion 1: Research Project
Ground-breaking nature and potential impact of the research:
To what extent does the proposed research address important challenges?
To what extent are the objectives ambitious and beyond the state of the art (e.g. novel concepts and approaches or development across disciplines)?
How much is the proposed research high risk/high gain?
1- 4 per criterion
Threshold : ≥ 2 for both criteria 17

18. ERC StG and CoG Schemes Evaluation of Excellence: Criterion 1: Research Project
Scientific Approach:
To what extent is the outlined scientific approach feasible (based on Extended Synopsis)?
To what extent is the proposed research methodology appropriate to achieve the goals of the project (based on Scientific Proposal)?
To what extent does the proposal involve the development of novel methodology (based on Scientific Proposal)?
To what extent are the proposed timescales and resources necessary and properly justified (based on Scientific Proposal)?
1- 4 per criterion
Threshold : ≥ 2 for both criteria 18

19. ERC StG and CoG Schemes Evaluation of Excellence: Criterion 2: Principal Investigator(s)
Intellectual capacity, creativity and commitment:
The PI has demonstrated the ability to propose and conduct ground-breaking research and his/her achievements have typically gone beyond the state-of-the-art.
The PI provides abundant evidence of creative independent thinking.
The ERC Grant would contribute significantly to the establishment and/or further consolidation of the PI's independence.
The PI is strongly committed to the project and demonstrates the willingness to devote a significant amount of time to the project (min 50% of the total working time on it and min 50% in an EU Member State or Associated Country) (based on Scientific Proposal).
fully agree, agree partially, disagree partially, strongly disagree
1- 4 per criterion
Threshold : ≥ 2 for both criteria 19

20. Feedback to Applicants New scoring system (2012 – 2013)
A, B, C system replaces numerical Scoring
Scoring system during remote evaluation and panel meeting is the same as in the previous year

21. Feedback to Applicants New scoring system (2012 – 2013)
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;
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

22. Feedback to Applicants New scoring system (2012 – 2013)
4/23/2017
Feedback to Applicants New scoring system (2012 – 2013)
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.
Three types of A at the end of the process: A funded immediately, reserve list A (likely to get funded), A outside budget (unlikely to be funded)

23. Feedback to Applicants Ranking range – Step 1
“A” proposal do not receive an Evaluation Report
“B” proposal will receive 10% ranking slices starting from the cut-off point between A and B
e.g. Ranking range 36% - 45%
Last tranche will be rounded up (larger)
“C” proposal will receive simply the top and the bottom percentage positions
E.g. From 68% to 100%

24. Feedback to Applicants Ranking range – Step 2
“A” proposals within panel budget at meeting (funding for sure) will simply receive the top and bottom percentage of group
E.g. Top 45%
“A” proposal outside panel budget (i.e. not sure if budget available) will receive their individual ranking position with a 2% ranking range
E.g %
“B” proposal will simply get top and bottom of group
e.g. between 58% and 100%

25. Possibility to exclude reviewers (new since AdG 2012)
Applicants can nominate up to three persons to be excluded from the evaluation of their proposal, specifying the reason for exclusion:
Direct scientific rivalry
Professional Hostility
Similar situation which would impair or put in doubt the objectivity of the potential evaluator
Exclusion may concern any independent expert, including the panel chair, panel members as well as remote referees
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

26. Scientific domains
For operational reasons : 25 panels in 3 main domains
PE: Physical Sciences, Engineering (10 panels)
LS: Life Sciences (9 panels)
SH: Social Sciences and Humanities (6 panels)
Allocation of call budget per domain as follows:
PE domain: 44%
LS domain: 39%
SH domain : 17%
Within domains, budgets are allocated to the panels in proportion to the number of submissions
No more budget for ID domain 4 26

27. FP7 budget € 50. 5 billion ERC budget € 7
FP7 budget € 50.5 billion ERC budget € 7.5 billion; Increase by € 250 M/year
Co-operation
(65 %)
Ideas
(15 %)
People
(9 %)
Capacities
(8 %)
JRC non-
nuclear (3 %)

28. ERC Panel Structure: 3 Domains, 25 Panels
4/23/2017
ERC Panel Structure: 3 Domains, 25 Panels
Social Sciences and Humanities (SH)  6
SH1 Individuals, institutions & markets
SH2 Institutions, values, beliefs and behaviour
SH3 Environment & society
SH4 The Human Mind and its complexity
SH5 Cultures & cultural production
SH6 The study of the human past
Physical Sciences & Engineering (PE)  10
PE1 Mathematical foundations
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
Each panel :
Panel Chair and Panel Members
Life Sciences (LS)  9
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
Selection of the panel PI responsibility, they can select a primary and then a secondary panel in case their proposal is cross-panel
│ 28
│ 28 28

29. Eligibility
For the Starting Grant the Principal Investigator shall have been awarded his/her first PhD at least 2 and up to 7 years prior to the publication date of the call for proposals of the ERC Starting Grant.
For the Consolidator Grant the Principal Investigator shall have been awarded his/her first PhD over 7 and up to 12 years prior to the publication date of the call for proposals of the ERC Consolidator Grant.
The effective elapsed time since the award of the first PhD can be reduced in the following properly documented circumstances.
Extension may be requested - must be supported by official documents:
- maternity /paternity leave
- long-term illness, clinical training or national service
WP2012 specifies: more than 90 days 29

30. Eligibility & Re-Submissions
Ineligibility
submission after the deadline
incomplete proposals including annexes
no commitment letter from HI
HI outside EU MS or AC
PhD award date (>12 or <2)
Missing supporting official document
Re-application
only one active ERC grant at any time
only one application per PI under the same WP
if 2012 ► 2013: only if > evaluated at least as A or B in step 1 30

31. Host Institution
Applicant legal entity: institution that engages and hosts the PI for the duration of the project
Any type of legal entity: universities, research centres, business research units … as long as it is in MS or AC
Commitment of HI: to ensure that the PI may
- apply for funding independently
- manage research and funding for the project
- publish independently as senior author
- have access to reasonable space and facilities
│ 31 31

32. ERC Structure The European Commission The Scientific Council
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 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 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 32

33. The ERC Scientific Council Members (re-newed 1 February 2011)
Prof. Claudio BORDIGNON (IT – Medicine)
Prof. Nicholas CANNY, (IE – History)
Prof. Sierd A.P.L. CLOETINGH (NL – Earth Sciences)
Prof. Mathias DEWATRIPONT (BE – Economics)
Prof. Tomasz DIETL (PL – Physics)
Prof. Daniel DOLEV (IL – Computer Sciences)
Prof. Carlos M. DUARTE (ES – Biology)
Prof. Daniel ESTEVE (FR – Physics)
Prof. Pavel EXNER (CZ – Applied Mathematics & Mathematical Physics)
Prof. Hans-Joachim FREUND (DE- Physics & Physical Chemistry)
Prof. Carl-Henrik HELDIN (SE – Molecular Cell Biology), ERC Vice President
Prof. Timothy HUNT (UK - Biology)
Prof. Norbert KROO (HU – Physics)
Prof. Maria Teresa LAGO (PT – Astrophysics)
Prof. Henrietta L. MOORE (UK – Social Anthropology)
Prof. Helga NOWOTNY (AT – Social Studies of Science), ERC President
Prof. Christiane NÜSSLEIN-VOLHARD (DE – Genetics)
Prof. Alain PEYRAUBE (FR – Linguistics)
Dr. Jens ROSTRUP-NIELSEN (DK – Chemistry)
Prof. Mart SAARMA (EE – Biology)
Prof. Anna TRAMONTANO (IT- Biochemistry)
Prof. Isabelle VERNOS (ES – Molecular Biology)
Prof. Helga Nowotny
Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF)

34. ERC Website

35. Essential documents
Call published on Participants Portal:
Work Programme Ideas
Guide for Applicants (ERC Starting Grant 2013)
Step by step submission via EPSS
ERC website:
ERC Guide for Grant Holders
ERC Guide for Peer Reviewers

36. Results of completed calls

37. Panel Members and Chairs

38. Outline Part 1 – Funding Schemes Part 2 – Data from previous calls
Starting Independent Researcher Grant
Part 2 – Data from previous calls 38

39. Data from previous calls ERC Starting grant calls 2007 - 2012 Submitted proposals by domain
│ 39

40. Data from previous calls ERC Advanced grant calls 2008 - 2011 Submitted proposals by domain
│ 40

41. Data from previous calls ERC Competitions 2007 - 2011 Success rates
│ 41
│ 41 41

42. Success rates by country of Host Institution
Data from previous calls ERC Competitions Success rates by country of Host Institution
Success rates by country of Host Institution

43. Origin of Grantees ERC Starting & Advanced grant calls 2007 – 2011
│ 43
*) Host institution refers to the organisation with which the first grant agreement was signed

44. International exchange of researchers ERC Starting & Advanced grant calls 2007 - 2011

45. ERC Starting grant 2007-2011 ERC Advanced grant 2008-2010 Over 2000 ERC grantees
500
486
400
AdG
StG
303
301
300
Funded Proposals
200
174
161
150
132
125
100 92 74 56 42 37 24 22 20 20 16 9 8 4 3 2 1 1 1 IL FI UK DE FR NL CH IT ES SE BE AT DK HU NO EL IE PT PL CZ CY BG EE IS SI TR
Country of HI
│ 45 45

46. Age of StG and AdG grantees
4/23/2017
Age of StG and AdG grantees
No funding gap between StG and AdG, considerable overlap (although average age for AdG 53)

47. Thank you! ERC: http://erc.europa.eu/
Euraxess: