Displaying 21 - 25 of 159. Show 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 60 results per page.
Q: Is it possible to apply to the ERC Synergy Grant (ERC-2018-SyG) for a Principal Investigator (PI) who holds an ongoing ERC grant?
A:

A Principal Investigator (PI) may hold only one ERC grant at any time. A new frontier research project can only start after the duration of the project fixed in a previous frontier research grant agreement has ended (ERC Work Programme 2018 page 19). These eligibility requirements are the same as for the other frontier research grants.
However, grantees can submit a proposal to the SyG call for proposals if their existing project ends no more than two years after the SyG call deadline (ERC Work Programme 2018 page 20). For the SyG 2018 call, this means that the current grant has to end before 14 November 2019.

Q: Under call ERC-2018-SyG, where is it possible to find information on the ERC Synergy Grants ?
A:

The information about the ERC Synergy Grants (SyG) can be found in the ERC Work Programme 2018, in the Information for Applicants to the Synergy Grant 2018 Call, through the Participant Portal, in the Information Package of the submission webpage for the relevant call and through the ERC website.
 

Q: What type of feedback will applicant be receiving during and after evaluation for a proposal submitted to the ERC Starting Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-STG) call?
A:

During each step of the ERC Starting Grant 2018 evaluation, the two main elements of the proposal (Principal Investigator and research project) will be evaluated and rated. At the end of each evaluation step the proposals will be ranked by the panels on the basis of the marks they have received and on the panels' overall appreciation of each proposal's strengths and weaknesses.
At the end of Step 1 of the evaluation, on the basis of the assessment of Part B 1 of the proposal, applicants will be informed that their proposal:
A. is of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation;
B. is of high quality but not sufficient to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation; or
C. is not of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation. 
At the end of Step 2 of the evaluation, on the basis of the assessment of the full proposal, applicants will be informed that their proposal either:
A. fully meets the ERC's excellence criterion and is recommended for funding if sufficient funds are available; or
B. meets some but not all elements of the ERC's excellence criterion and will not be funded.More information on the results of the peer review evaluation can be found at section 3.7 of the ERC Rules for Submission and Evaluation.

Applicants may also be subject to restrictions on submitting proposals to future ERC calls based on the outcome of the evaluation. Applicants will need to check the restrictions in place for each call (for 2018 calls see restrictions on submission of proposals under 'Eligibility criteria'of the ERC Work Programme 2018.
In addition, once the evaluation of their proposal has been completed, applicants will receive an evaluation report which will include the ranking range of their proposal out of the proposals evaluated by the panel (for more details, see Information for applicants to the Starting and Consolidator Grant 2018 Calls).
More information on the evaluation procedure can also be found in the ERC Work Programme 2018 section relevant to the call.

Q: Under call ERC-2018-STG, should the applicant provide the names and the Curriculum Vitae of the team members in the proposal ?
A:

The CVs of individual team members should not be included. Although it is not mandatory to provide the names of individual team members, the proposal should describe the composition of the team that will carry out the proposed activities.Further explanations can be found in the Information for the applicants of the Starting and Consolidator 2018 Grants.

Q: Do peer reviewers receive all parts of a proposal in the case of the ERC Starting Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-STG) call?
A:

For the ERC Starting Grant 2018, Step 1 of the peer review evaluation process is based only on the extended synopsis, the Principal Investigator's CV and the track record (Part B1 only), and peer reviewers do not have access to the full scientific proposal. At Step 2, the peer reviewers base their assessment on the complete version of the retained proposals, including the full scientific proposal (Part B2).For more information on the evaluation process, please refer to the ERC Work Programme 2018 (section 'Evaluation procedure and criteria').