You are here

Displaying 41 - 50 of 151. Show 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 60 results per page.
Q: Under an ERC 2018 PoC, what are the reporting requirements of a project?

In the ERC PoC Grants, given the shorter length, the project report is required only once, at the end of the project, and will combine the technical and financial aspects in one single document.
Article 20 of the H2020 ERC PoC Grant Agreement defines the reporting requirements. 
The ERC POC report must be prepared and submitted online via the Participant Portal.

Q: Under ERC 2018 PoC, which type of feedback will I receive for my proposal during and after evaluation for the ERC Proof of Concept (PoC) call?

ERC PoC 2018 proposals are evaluated on a 'Pass/Fail' basis on each of the evaluation criteria. The applicant receives the feedback on the outcome of the peer review evaluation in the form of an evaluation report. This indicates whether the proposal is retained for funding and provides the passed/failed status for each of the evaluation criteria, with corresponding comments given by the panel.
More information on the evaluation procedure can be found in the ERC Work Programme 2018, in the section relevant to the call.

Q: Under call ERC 2018 PoC, should the applicant provide the names and the Curriculum Vitae (CV) of the team members in the proposal?

For the PoC 2018 Call, although it is not mandatory to provide the names of individual team members or their CVs, the PoC plan needs to include justification that the persons working on the tasks are well qualified for the purpose. The description of the team needs to be filled in the Part B – section3.
More information on the submission and evaluation procedures can be found in the ERC Work Programme 2018, in the section relevant to the call.

Q: Under ERC 2018 PoC call, do peer reviewers receive all parts of a submitted proposal ?

For the Proof of Concept 2018 Call, applicants submit the whole proposal that is evaluated in a single step by the peer reviewers.
For more information on the evaluation process, please refer to the ERC Work Programme 2018.

Q: Under ERC-2018 PoC call, can an applicant submit a proposal to the ERC Proof of Concept (PoC) call and also to one of the four main ERC Frontier Research calls (Starting, Consolidator, Advanced or Synergy)?

Yes, an applicant can submit to the ERC PoC 2018 call and at the same time to one of the four main ERC frontier research calls (since the restrictions stated in the ERC Work Programme 2018 do not apply to PoC Grants).

Q: Under the ERC 2018 PoC call, are there any share or quota limitations per domain or discipline?

There are no shares or quotas by domain or discipline for the ERC PoC 2018 call. No domain or field is excluded (*) and the possibility for innovation arising from the social sciences and humanities to apply for a PoC funding is fully recognised.
(*) As stated in the ERC Work Programme 2018: “Research proposals within the scope of Annex I to the Euratom Treaty, namely those directed towards nuclear energy applications, shall be submitted to relevant calls under the Euratom Framework Programme.”

Q: Under the ERC 2018 PoC call, if a proposal was not funded in the first deadline (cut-off-date), can it be resubmitted for the second or third deadline of the same call?

No, as stated in the ERC Work Programme 2018, a Principal Investigator may submit only one application per call to the ERC Proof of Concept 2018 call.Important note: More than one Proof of Concept Grant (PoC) may be awarded per ERC funded frontier research project, but only one Proof of Concept project may be running at any one time for the same ERC frontier research project.

Q: For ERC projects, are costs charged by journal publishers for the provision of immediate open access to publications (article processing charges, APCs) eligible costs?

Yes, these costs are eligible if they are incurred during the lifetime of the project and provided that they are in line with the requirements for direct costs as listed in Article II.14 of the General Conditions of the ERC Grant Agreement Single and Multi-Beneficiary.

Q: For ERC projects, if a grant is transferred from one host to another, which organisation is responsible for ensuring open access to publications based on work carried out at the first host institution?

If the Grant Agreement contains a Special Clause 39 ERC, then the initial host institution is responsible for providing open access to those publications that have been published while it was the beneficiary. For any publication after the transfer of host institution, the new host institution is responsible as far as the deposit in a repository and the provision of open access is concerned, irrespective whether the publication is based on work carried out at the old or the new host institution.

Q: For ERC projects, why are the reporting periods for financial (every 18 months) and scientific (every 30 months) reports different and how are they linked?

One of the specificities of the ERC Grant Agreement is the split of the reporting into two distinct sets of reporting periods, in order to diminish the administrative burden on the researchers:
-Scientific reports, usually after half of the project (30 months) and at the end of the project in Starting and Advanced Grants and two intermediate reports (usually every 24 months) and one at the end of the project in Synergy Grants. Scientific reports are submitted by the Principal Investigator on behalf of the Host Institution/beneficiary;
- Financial reports, usually every 18 months and at the end of the project. Financial reports are submitted by the Host Institution with a contribution from the Principal Investigator, as per General Conditions to the ERC Grant Agreement, Article II.3.1.b for Single or Article II.3.bis.1.b for Multi-beneficiary Grant Agreements.
Two different departments/units in the ERCEA follow the (two) separate reporting streams to independently ensure appropriate work progress, follow-up and monitoring of the project. The templates are sent via advance notice letter 15 days before the end of the reporting period (in order to ensure that the beneficiary uses the latest version available).
If the scientific report has been approved without conditions, the payment will be performed at the end of the next financial reporting period without the need of any additional scientific requirements (if no new scientific issues arise meanwhile). If the scientific report has been approved conditionally, at the end of the next financial reporting period, the payment will be subject to verification that the suggested scientific recommendations have been properly fulfilled in the meantime. If the scientific report has been rejected and a revised version of the report was requested, the payment at the forthcoming financial reporting period will be suspended, until a satisfactory revised scientific report is submitted and approved by the scientific department. If the scientific report has been rejected, the ERCEA may start the procedure for termination of the Grant Agreement.
Final reports submitted within the framework of the termination will be due 45 days after the decision on termination became definitive.
In the evaluation of scientific reports, the ERCEA Scientific Department may require sometimes additional experts review. In these cases the time to evaluate the reports and disburse payments can be suspended till the review is satisfactory.