Debbie SaundersEuropean Funding Officer

Marie Curie Fellowships Overview

• Policy Setting• Eligibility• Fellowship Options• Application Process • Budget• Key Sections Part B• Evaluation & Feedback• Top Tips for Success• Horizon 2020

FP

7 –

Mar

ie C

urie

Act

ions

MC Objectives & Policy Context

“The People Work programme 2013 has been designed to support

the implementation of the Europe 2020 Flagship Initiatives

‘Innovation Union’, ‘Youth on the Move’ and ‘An Agenda for New

Skills and Jobs’.”

(2013 People Work Programme)Europe 2020:• http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/index_en.htm

Innovation Union:• http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfm

Youth on the Move:• http://ec.europa.eu/education/news/news2540_en.htm

Why Bid for MC Funding

Host Organisation• Prestigious - Benchmark of

Research Excellence • Bottom up Funding• Adds valuable Resource

capacity to research team• Increase Expertise• Diversity & Knowledge sharing• Networking Opportunities• Future Bid Development &

Collaborations

Researcher• Generous Financial Support

– 100% Researcher costs +– Training Expenses

• Prestigious - CV & future employment

• Professional Independence• International Working• All Research Disciplines• Training Opportunities &

Knowledge Development• Opportunity to work with key

team/ Access to key facilities

Eligibility & Key Principles• Experienced

Researchers – PhD– 4 years research work

experience post 1st degree

• Transnational Mobility• Country Eligibility• All Research

Disciplines*• Any Nationality

• Excellence– Researcher quality– Host Reputation

• Skills & Competence Development • Enhances Career Prospects• International Dimension• Equal Opportunities - Appropriate

gender and work/life balance• Good working environment,

Transparent Recruitment • Strong participation from

Enterprises

Marie Curie Country Eligibility

Individual Fellowships

• ‘Experienced Researchers’• Skills diversification and knowledge sharing• Three categories:

– Intra-European Fellowships (IEF)– International Incoming Fellowships (IIF)– International Outgoing Fellowships (IOF)

• Final MC Fellowship FP7 Call Deadline: 14 August 2013

Results in 2010/2011F

P7

– M

arie

Cur

ie

Scheme Submitted Main list Success rate

2010 IEF 2853 504 18%

2010 IIF 1175 137 11.7%

2010 IOF 737 120 16%

2012 IEF 3734 16%

2012 IIF 1462 13%

2012 IOF 962 16%

Deadline & Available Funding

Final Deadline 14/08/2013

• Intra- European Fellowships (IEF)

• International Incoming Fellowships (IIF)

• International Outgoing Fellowships (IOF)

• €134m (120 m 2012)

• €44.5m (40 m)

• €44.5m (40m)

Intra-European Fellowships - Training

• Funds 12 – 24 month projects for advanced research training

• Researcher applies with Host• Mobility between EU or Associated Countries • Training & Skill development/ diversification• Career Development• Professional Independence• Resuming a career in research

International Outgoing Fellowships - Training• Advanced Researcher training in a 3rd country (through

a high level research project,) to bring skills/ knowledge back to the EU/AS

• Funds 24 - 36 month Research & Career Development projects – 2 Phases:-

Outgoing 12 - 24 months moving from EU/ AC to a 3rd Party country e.g. USA, Mexico, New Zealand, Japan etc.

Re-Integration 12 - 24 months Mandatory return phase in Europe to transfer the knowledge acquired.

NB: Researchers must be EU/ AC Nationals (or lived In EU / AC for 5 years)

International Incoming Fellowships - Knowledge Transfer

• Top-class Researchers from 3rd Country’s move to EU/ AC to work on research projects.

• Knowledge Sharing / Transfer from a 3rd Country to EU/AC Host Organisation – builds collaborations between EU/AC & the rest of the world

Incoming 12 – 24 months in EU/AS Country

Reintegration 12 months for International Cooperation (Optional) Partner Countries (fixed budget €15,000)

• Mutually-beneficial research co-operation - between Europe and other parts of the world

• Researcher Career Advancement

Getting Started

• Identify Researcher• Participant Portal• Guidance • 2 Part Application• Part B is Science/ Art• Upload final Part B as

PDF• Referees Invited • Submit to EU

Application• Identify – Type of Fellowship

- Researcher- Host institution & Supervisor/ Scientist in charge- Research Project Idea

• Read carefully the Guide for Applicants• Set Up EPSS Account & Register an Application• Develop Application Jointly

Host Institution/ Supervisor & Researcher• Contact future host institution/ DRI for Supporting Information• Start writing your proposal early - DRI & the UKRO NCP can provide

some "pre screening“ & give feedback• Link proposal to the Key EU Strategic documents – slide 3• Book Mark Call 14th August deadline

N.B. No extenuating circumstances will be considered if missed

Application Form Part A

Part A (completed online via the PPSS system)

• A1 Information on the Proposal• A2 Information on the Host organisation – including

information about Supervisors & administration* • A3 Information on the Researcher• A4 Funding Request

*Contact DRI

BudgetCategory 1*: Living allowance €58,500 pa (€78,500)

Category 2*: Mobility allowance €700 pm (Dependants - €1000)

Category 3 : Training Expenses €800 pm

Category 5* : Overheads pm €700

Category 6: Other - IIF only; flat rate for one year of €15,000 if returning to ICPC country

*multiplied by Country Correction Coefficient

(UK Coefficient = 134.4%)

Application Form – Part B

Part B (maximum length is 27 pages, (exc table of contents, ethics issues section and start and end pages)

• B1 Research and technological quality (max 8 pages)• B2 Training / Transfer of Knowledge (max 2 pages)• B3 Researcher (maximum 7 pages)• B4 Implementation (maximum 6 pages)• B5 Impact (maximum 4 pages)• B6 Ethics issues (no page limit)

Draft your Proposal for an easy Evaluation

• Write exactly what is asked for – no more/ no less!• Stick to the scope of the call IEF & IOF = Training;

IIF = Knowledge Transfer

• Logical flow - Project/ Host Expertise/ Host Infrastructure/ Researcher Profile/ Researcher Ambitions; Cooperation: objectives/ work plan/ expertise / Impact

• Use ’Cross-references’ – page nos.in proposal, not ”as mentioned above”

• Be strong in all aspects - no weaknesses!

• Be clear, concise, consistent!

The key for writing a successful proposal: experience with proposal evaluation!

Training Tips – B2Training – IEF / IOF• APECS - Generic training• Individual training – list courses

– how many/ how long?• Monitoring training – How?• Meetings?• Any formal monitoring at Grad

School level?• Match of Training to Research?• Role of Scientist in charge –

experience in mentoring• Role of larger SU research

community

Transfer of Knowledge - IIF• What knowledge will be

transferred?• Researcher’s unique

skills/knowledge• Dissemination of knowledge?• Seminars?• Supervision of PhD students?• Teaching?• Conferences?

Training TIPS

Methods for Skills & Expertise Acquisition:-• Training-through-Research • Hands-on Training • Knowledge Transfer • Building Collaborations • Scientific and Financial management • Organisational Skills

Researcher Tips – B3• Work experience (in research)• Industrial experience and expertise• Transferable skills• Prizes, Awards, Lectures etc• Research potential• Independent thinking and leadership qualities• Match between fellow’s profile and project• Cross and multi-disciplinary experience

Give evidence of statements• Referee assessment

Implementation – B4

Contact DRI for Assistance

B 4.1 Quality of infrastructure/facilities and international collaboration of host

B 4.2 Practical arrangements for the implementation and management of the research project

B 4.3 Feasibility and credibility of the project, including work plan

B 4.4 Practical and administrative arrangements and support for the hosting of the fellow

Also ’Academic & Professional Enhancement Centre’ (APECs) can provide advice, guidance and generic material – Rebecca Williams

B 4.4 Practical and administrative arrangements and support for the hosting of the fellow

“Joint support from the Human Resources, Internationalisation Office, Academic and Professional Enhancement Centre and Student Support Services, ensures the researcher is able to settle quickly at Swansea University. They provide practical assistance with personal I.D., VISA/permits, health services, banking, tax issues, language courses, and up-to-date local Information.Guest researchers either stay in a room in the University’s residences or guest house accommodation is arranged. Residential Services provide support in finding suitable accomodation for guest researchers coming with their family. They are guaranteed a place in the University’s Nursery/ Childcare Scheme.”

Example for a STRONG proposal:

Describe what practical arrangements are in place to host a researcher coming from another country. What support will be given to him/her to settle into their new host country (in terms of language teaching, help with local administration, obtaining permits, accommodation, schools, childcare etc.)

B 4.4 Practical and administrative arrangements and support for the hosting of the fellow

Example for a WEAK proposal:

Describe what practical arrangements are in place to host a researcher coming from another country. What support will be given to him/her to settle into their new host country (in terms of language teaching, help with local administration, obtaining permits, accommodation, schools, childcare etc.)

“Assistance in finding an apartment and in administrative issues will be provided by colleagues.”

“The institutes’ secretaries will help the researcher with the administrative issues and practical arrangements”

College Support for MC Fellows • Develop Supportive Infrastructure for International Researchers

Welcome events - designated personel for practical helpProcedures for hosting international researchers

PreArrival SupportArrival Checklist – meet from airport/ stationUseful Contact NumbersFamiliarisation activities / meeting key staff in 1st week Introduction to local area etcResearcher Responsibilities Handbook & academic contacts

• Plan each fellowship individually with respect to specific needs (work permit, visa, childcare etc.)

• Communicate this Infrastructure /Procedures to the researcher at the Proposal Writing stage & assist them to develop the BidStrong proposal with high chance to get fundedSuccessful experience & good feedback

Impact Tips B5Impact on Researcher:-• Career and Skills

development • Improves career prospects -

How? • Mobility

– Benefits of working in a different country?

– Linguistic skills? Specialisation? Facilities?

• Will they have exposure to the commercial sector?

Impact of:-• Societal, Economic,

Academic impacts of the research

• How research meets EU priorities ?– Innovation Union, – Youth on the Move

• Dissemination/public engagement plans?

• Host organisation - List any lasting collaborations

• How will the host/ country/ EU benefit from researcher’s stay?

Impact Outreach

• Marie Curie Ambassador• Workshop Day• Summer-School• Marie Curie Project Open Day• Public talks, TV-Talks, podcasts and articles in newspapers• e-Newsletters• Multimedia releases

Evaluation

• Experts in the field• Need to address all of the issues to maximise scores• Total score = 100%• Overall threshold (70% or 3.5/5)• Most Criteria - have a threshold• Each area is weighted• When developing the Proposal, focus on the objectives

of the activity, to be successful

Proposal Evaluation

• Evaluation criteria for each chapter and sub-chapter is listed in the Guide for Applicants

• Experts use guiding questions to measure & check the evaluation criteria for each chapter

• A list of strengths and weaknesses is made for each chapter

• Based on the strengths/weaknesses: marks from 0 - 5 are given with justifications

Evaluation criteria - Marie Curie - IEF

Evaluation process: Marie CurieRemote phase:• 3 evaluators/proposal• 4-24 proposals/evaluator (!!!)• > 100 evaluators for > 700

proposals (ENV)• 3 weeks remote evaluation

Proposal Xcopy 1

Proposal Xcopy 2

Proposal Xcopy 3

IARexpert 1

IAR expert 2

IAR expert 3

CR 3 experts

Remote

Individual Assessment Reports:• Submitted online• Visible to other

experts after they submitted

Consensus meeting:• Experts meet in

Brussels• Consensus report

(CR)

Experts discuss their IARs: 30 min pr proposal!

Marie Curie Consensus Meeting - Brussels

Clear, consistent, detailed? Match marks and comments?

Checked + approved CRs delivered to commission

Yes

No

A commission member quality-controls the CR

Agree on strengths/ weaknesses and marks

Rapporteur drafts Consensus Report (CR)

Evaluation Criteria

Threshold Weighting  S & T Quality 3/5 25%Training 3/5 15%Researcher 4/5 25%Implementation NA 15%Impact 3.5/5 20%

S & T Quality Assessment Criteria

Threshold Weighting   3/5 25%• Scientific/technological quality, including any interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary aspects of the proposal• Appropriateness of research methodology and approach• Originality & innovative nature of project, and relationship to ‘state of the art’ of research in the field• Timeliness and relevance of project• Host scientific expertise in the field• Quality of the group / scientist in charge

S & T Quality Feedback

Positive Feedback• Research is timely with number of innovations beyond

‘state of the art’• Research methodology is detailed and clearly• Explained

Negative Feedback• Techniques to be used are well known in the field so not

very innovative• Research methodology not given in full detail

Training / Knowledge Transfer Assessment Criteria

Threshold Weighting   3/5 15%

IEF/ IOF –Training

• Clarity and quality of the research training objectives for the researcher

IEF/ IOFTraining

• Relevance & quality of the additional scientific training & complementary skills offered, with special attention to exposure to the industry sector, where appropriate

IEF/ IOF - Training

• Measures taken by the host for quantitative andqualitative mentoring and tutoring

IIF – Knowl’dgeTransfer

•Clarity and quality of the transfer of knowledge objectives

IIF – Knowl’dgeTransfer

• Potential of transferring knowledge to European host and/or bringing knowledge to Europe

Training/ Knowledge Transfer Assessor Feedback

Positive feedback• Contemplates training courses specifically designed for

postdoctoral fellows• Research training objectives are clearly identified,

described, and planned• Both participants will benefit from their mutual

collaboration, not only through direct joint work, but also through the interaction with the whole research group

• Fellow has range of relevant knowledge and expertise to be brought to the project

Training/ Knowledge Transfer Assessor Feedback

Negative Feedback• A research project with no training element• The host asserts skills without presenting convincing• evidence of competence• Techniques described will clearly be valuable to the

researcher, but the lack of detailed description doesn’t inspire confidence in the quality of training available

• Objective are research objectives with out specifying the unique knowledge the fellow will bring

Researcher Assessment Criteria

Threshold Weighting   4/5 25%• Research experience• Results including patents/ publications/ teaching• Independent thinking & leadership qualities (and capacity to transfer knowledge (IIF))• Match between the fellow’s profile and research• IEF and IOF: Potential for reaching a position of professional maturity• IEF and IOF: Potential to acquire new knowledge

Researcher FeedbackPositive Feedback• Clear proof of independent thinking during PhD and the

possibility to progress and develop• Clear evidence of leadership qualities• Potential to acquire new knowledge is high• Good references and clear list of Prizes, Awards, Lectures, etc

Negative Feedback• CV lacks data on record• Continuation of previous research so exposure to new

approaches is lacking• References were similar and from one institution

Implementation Assessment Criteria

Threshold Weighting   N/A 15%• Quality of infrastructure / facilities & internationalcollaborations of host• Practical arrangements for implementation & management of scientific projects• Independent thinking & leadership qualities (and capacity to transfer knowledge (IIF))• Feasibility & credibility of project, including work plan• Practical & administrative arrangements & support for the hosting of the fellow

Impact Assessment CriteriaThreshold Weighting

3.5/5 20%All • Potential for creating long term collaborations and mutually

beneficial co-operation with other countries (IEF) / between Europe and the other third country (IIF/IOF)

All • Contribution to European excellence and European Competitiveness regarding the expected research results (IEF) / through valuable transfer of knowledge (IIF/IOF)

All • Impact of the proposed outreach activities

IEF & IOF

• Impact of competencies acquired during the fellowship on the future career prospects of the researcher, in particular through exposure to transferable skills training (IEF only: with special attention to exposure to the industrial sector, where appropriate)

IEF & IOF

• Contribution to the career development, or re-establishment where relevant

IEF • Benefit of the mobility to the European Research Area

Impact Assessor Feedback

Positive Feedback• Contribution to European excellence and competitiveness

is well presented• Skill acquired during the project will greatly contribute to

the fellow’s career development

Negative Feedback• Lack of career development plan for the applicant• Lack of details means it is difficult to judge whether a

independent position is achievable

Major pitfalls• Too much focus on the research

project, too little on all other aspects• Host not sufficiently involved in

proposal writing (= weak implementation and training chapter)

• Imbalance between ”fellow profile and project match” and ”Benefit from training” (candidate not qualified / too experienced)

• Instructions in GFA not followed word by word; information insufficient or lacking

TOP TIPS for SUCCESS

• Find Successful Researcher• Develop Excellent Project• Allow sufficient time • Key Categories

– Impact *– Training *

* Get help from DRI / APECs

SCoRE Cymru –

Supporting Collaborative

Research and innovation in Europe

• Replaces WECF - Wales European Collaboration Fund• Provides 50% towards travel & subsistence for FP7

application development. • SCoRE can part cover a visit to an EU HEI/ Meeting/

Conference to discuss a potential Fellowship • UK researcher interested in IOF could visit 3rd country to

scope out application & meet non EU host.

Proposed Horizon 2020 StructureD

evel

opm

ent

of H

oriz

on 2

020

Dev

elop

men

t of

Hor

izon

202

0Excellent Science Base

•European Research Council (ERC)•Future and Emerging Technologies (FET)•Marie Curie Actions•Research Infrastructures

Industrial Leadership and Competitive Frameworks•Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies:

• ICT; Nanotechnologies; Advanced Materials; Biotechnology; • Advanced Manufacturing and Processing; and Space

•Access to risk finance•Innovation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs)

Tackling Societal Challenges•Health, demographics changes and well being•Food security, sustainable agriculture marine and maritime research •and the bio-economy•Secure, clean and efficient energy•Smart, green and integrated transport•Climate action and resource efficiency including raw materials•Inclusive, innovative and secure societies

European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)

Joint Research Centre (JRC) Euratom (2014-2018)

Horizon 2020

• Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions – MSCA• 4 Broader Actions

– Individual Fellowships (IF)– Innovative Training Networks (ITN)– Research & Innovation Staff Exchange (RISE)– Cofund

Excellent Science H

oriz

on 2

020

Overarching objective:“to ensure optimum development and dynamic use of Europe’s intellectual capital in order to generate new skills and innovation and, thus, to realise its full potential across all sectors and regions”

Goes from 9 actions to 4 broader lines of activity:• Fostering new skills by means of excellent initial training

of researchers• Doctoral level training: innovative, intersectoral,

interdisciplinary, international• Follows on from ITN scheme (including new

European Industrial Doctorate and Innovative Doctoral Programme strands)

Excellent Science H

oriz

on 2

020

• Nurturing excellence by means of cross-border and cross-sector mobility• Opportunities for researchers at all career levels• Supports cross-border and cross-sector mobility• Follows on from FP7 individual fellowships

• Stimulating innovation by means of cross-fertilisation of knowledge• Staff exchange – international cross-border and/or

inter-sectoral• Follows on from IAPP/IRSES schemes

• Co-funding of activities across other three strands• Aims to “leverage additional funds to increase

the numerical and structural impact of MCA”

UK Research Office

Swansea University UKRO contact

Edward Heelas UKRORue du Trône 4B-1000 Brussels, BelgiumTel.: 0032 2 230 5275 / 1535Fax: 0032 2 230 4803Email: ukro@bbsrc.ac.ukURL: http://www.ukro.ac.uk

EURAXESS UKResource for Recruitment and International Mobility of researchers/PhD to Europe and inside Europe Consists of 4 web portals:

• Jobs• Services - mobile researchers and their families going abroad• Rights & duties for employers and employees - regarding

recruitment and hiring of researchers and PhD’s.

Charter & Code documents• Links and resources in specific countries around the world,

currently USA, China, India, Japan and Singapore).

EURAXESS LCP – Rebecca Williams APECs

Tel 602390 r.j.williams@swansea.ac.uk

Recap• Fellowship Options• Eligibility• Application Process • Budgets• Key Sections Part B• Evaluation & Feedback• Top Tips for Success• Horizon 2020

Career Integration Grant• Research project funding to supports a fellow integrating back

into research career in Europe• Fixed amount €25 000 pa flat rate funding - for 2- 4 years, used

for:

Part of researchers salary (or other staff on project);

Equipment, Consumables, Travel; &

Overheads/ Management costs.• Host contributes to research costs• Researcher applies with Host Institution• Gives Fellow stability to do own research/ have own budget• Mobility Rule applies• Enables Transfer of Knowledge & Links with original Country• Deadline 18th September 2013

Good Luck with your Application

&Thank you for

Attending

Debbie SaundersEuropean Funding Officer

Room 709, Faraday BuildingTel 602094

d.e.f.saunders@swansea.ac.uk

DRI PreAward Team• Debbie Saunders European Funding Officer

ext 2094 d.e.f.saunders@swan.ac.uk Co-ordination & Support Actions; Convergence & Non research EU Funding

• Julie Williams Head of Pre Award & Senior External Funding Officer ext 5824 j.williams@swan.ac.uk European Projects

• Chris Beynon External Funding Officerext 5015 c.beynon@swan.ac.uk College of Business, Economics & Law; College of Science

• Bethan Lewis External Funding Officerext 6895 b.j.lewis@swan.ac.uk College of Arts & Humanities; College of Medicine

• Adrian Walters External Funding Officerext 3724 a.s.walters@swan.ac.uk College of Engineering; College of Human & Health Sciences

Member States - 27

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.

Associated Countries

Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Faroe Islands, Iceland, Israel, Liechtenstein, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Moldova, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland and Turkey

3rd Country Participants

• International Cooperation Partner Countries (ICPCs)ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/docs/icpc-list.pdf

• High-income countries USA, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand, Taiwan, Hong Kong & Macao, Vatican, San Marino, Monaco and Andorra

Interpretation of the scores0: Fail -The proposal fails to address the criterion under

examination or cannot be judged due to missing or incomplete information

1: Poor - The criterion is addressed in an inadequate manner, or there are serious inherent weaknesses

2: Fair- While the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses

3: Good - The proposal addresses the criterion well, although improvements would be necessary

4: Very Good - The proposal addresses the criterion very well, although certain improvements are still possible

5: Excellent - The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion in question. Any shortcomings are minor.