- About ERC
- Projects & figures
- News & Events
- Managing your project
According to the conditions of the ERC Advanced Grant 2017 call, the restrictions on applications only apply to Principal Investigators and Co-Investigators (Co-Investigator projects were supported under the Ideas Work Programmes from 2008 – 2011).
There is no restriction for a team member to submit a proposal to an ERC grant as Principal Investigator as long as the required working-time commitment can be respected.
For more information, please see the ERC Work Programme 2017 : Restrictions on submission of proposals.
In the ERC Proof of Concept 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 Proof of Concept Grant Agreement defines the reporting requirements.
The ERC POC report must be prepared and submitted online via the Participant Portal.
The ERC reporting requirements foresee two different reporting streams to cover the financial aspects on the one hand, and the scientific aspects of the grant on the other hand, as described in Article 20 of the ERC Model Grant Agreement.
Scientific reports are the sole responsibility of the Principal Investigator and are submitted via the Host Institution usually twice during the lifetime of a project (at mid-term and at the end). The financial reports are prepared by the Host Institution in consultation with the Principal Investigator and must usually be submitted every 18 months; this report must include information on the use of resources and the general implementation of the project (see Article 20.3 of ERC Model Grant Agreement.
At the end of a project, the Host Institution will also have to submit a Certificate on Financial Statements for each beneficiary (and linked third party) depending on the amount of the costs claimed (if the entity requests a total contribution of €325.000 or more). Both types of reports (Scientific and Financial) are prepared and submitted online via the Participant Portal.
There are three main restrictions to be considered for Principal Investigators in this regard:
A Principal Investigator may submit proposals to different ERC frontier research grant calls published under the same Work Programme, but only the first eligible proposal will be evaluated.
A researcher may participate as Principal Investigator or Co-Investigator (please note that projects with a Co-Investigator were supported under the Advanced Grant in ERC Work Programmes from 2008 – 2011) in only one ERC frontier research project at any one time. Please note that a new frontier research project can only start once a previous frontier research grant agreement has ended.
A researcher participating as Principal Investigator in an ERC frontier research project may not submit a proposal for another ERC frontier research grant, unless the existing project ends no more than two years after the call deadline (please note that this should be calculated according to the duration of the project as stated in the current frontier research project grant agreement).
These restrictions may be modified in future work programmes by the ERC Scientific Council.
As a team member, it is possible to participate in more than one ERC grant. Please refer to the ERC Work Programme 2016 (section “Eligibility criteria”) and to the relevant call for more information.
During each step of the ERC Consolidator 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 B1 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 (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.
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.
For the ERC Consolidator 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').
According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, the applicant must choose a primary evaluation panel and may also indicate a secondary evaluation panel. They should indicate when they believe that their proposal is of a cross-panel or cross-domain nature. In most cases the proposal will be evaluated by the primary panel indicated by the applicant. However, if the scope of a proposal does not correspond to the expertise of the primary panel, the proposal can be reallocated to another panel, if the panel chairs of the original and the new panel unanimously agree to do so.
Further explanations can be found in the Information for the applicants of the Starting and Consolidator 2018 Grants. The primary panel structure and description is also described in Annex 1 of the ERC Work Programme 2018.
No, according to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, the Principal Investigator must have been awarded a PhD or equivalent doctoral degree to be eligible. First-professional degrees will not be considered in themselves as PhD-equivalent, even if recipients carry the title "Doctor".
For more information, please, consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2018, Annex 2.
According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, for medical doctors who have been awarded both a medical doctor degree and a PhD, the date of the earliest degree that makes the applicant eligible takes precedence in the calculation of the eligibility time-window (7-12 years after the date of award of the PhD or 9-14 years past the medical doctor degree completion for Consolidators).
For more information, please, consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2018 – Annex 2.