Frequently asked questions

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.

Yes, if the net effect of taking out a membership in the society is a reduction in the cost of the article processing charges (APCs) that is higher than the cost of the membership fee, then the membership fee (for the year concerned) is an eligible cost, provided that it is 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.

There is no requirement to use 'green open access' rather than 'gold open access'. If an ERC funded researcher opts for 'gold open access' although 'green open access' would be possible within the maximum acceptable delay of six months, costs related to APCs are still eligible, provided that they have been incurred during the lifetime of the project and that they are in line with the general rules for eligibility of direct costs as described in the Grant Agreement (see Article II.14.1.d of the General Conditions of the ERC Grant Agreement, Single and Multi-Beneficiary). If 'gold open access' is chosen, the publication must still be deposited in a repository for scientific publications and open access must be provided immediately to that deposited version (no embargo period).

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.

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.

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.

ERCEA does not recommend, as a common practice, to include names of individual researchers. Exceptions can be requested and have to be motivated. However, a list of all team members will be requested together with each financial report.

At the beginning of an ERC project, 5% of the maximum contribution will be offset from the pre-financing and transferred to the Guarantee Fund as a financial contribution from the beneficiary. The Guarantee Fund aims at covering financial risks and specifically non-reimbursement of amounts due by a beneficiary. At the end of a project, the beneficiary usually recovers its full contribution to the Guarantee Fund.

The choice of user groups should correspond to the specific goals and research claims of the project.

It should allow for appropriate user involvement in the design and development of the virtual coach and the proof of concept.

The proposal should convincingly explain the criteria for user recruitment, the research claims and the testing and validation methods.

During each step of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 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 2017).

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 2017 Calls).

More information on the evaluation procedure can also be found in the ERC Work Programme 2017 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 2017 Grants.

For the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017, the applicant must choose a primary evaluation panel and may also indicate a secondary evaluation panel. He/she should indicate when he/she believes that his/her proposal is of a cross-panel or cross-domain nature. Further explanations can be found in the Information for the applicants of the Starting and Consolidator 2017 Grants. The primary panel structure and description are also described in Annex 1 to the ERC Work Programme 2017.

For the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017, 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). At Step 2, the peer reviewers base their assessment on the Step 1 document (Part B1) and the scientific proposal (Part B2).For more information on the evaluation process, please refer to the ERC Work Programme 2017 (section 'Evaluation procedure and criteria').

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, the applicant must choose a primary evaluation panel and may also indicate a secondary evaluation panel. He/she should indicate when he/she believes that his/her 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.

These restrictions are specified in the ERC Work Programme 2017 and may be modified in future Work Programmes by the ERC Scientific Council in light of experience. As a team member, it is possible to participate in more than one ERC grant.

No, according to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, the Principal Investigator must have been awarded a PhD or equivalent doctoral degree to be eligible. First-professional degrees will not be considered 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 2017, Annex 2.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 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 2017 – Annex 2.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, there is no eligibility restriction to holders of a 'habilitation'. The reference date used for calculation of the applicant's eligibility is the PhD award date or medical doctor degree award date. 

For more information please consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2017, Annex 2.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, in order to be eligible to apply, a Principal Investigator must have been awarded a PhD or equivalent doctoral degree. It is recognised that in certain fields some other doctoral titles have the same status and represent variants of the PhD. All of them have similar content requirements. These cases will be examined individually, as part of the ERCEA's decision on eligibility. First professional degrees will not be considered in themselves as PhD-equivalent, even if mentioning the title "Doctor".

For more information please consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2017 - Annex 2.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, for medical doctors (or applicants holding a degree in medicine), a medical doctor degree will not be accepted by itself as equivalent to a PhD award. To be considered an eligible Principal Investigator, medical doctors (or applicants holding a degree in medicine) needs to provide the certificates of both a medical doctor degree and a PhD, or proof of an appointment that requires doctoral equivalency (e.g. post-doctoral fellowship, professorship appointment). Additionally, candidates must also provide information on their research experience (including peer reviewed publications) in order to further substantiate the equivalence of their overall training to a PhD. In these cases, the certified date of the medical doctor degree completion plus two years is the time reference for calculation of the eligibility time-window (i.e. 9-14 years past the medical doctor degree for Consolidators).

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, as long as no PhD document or equivalent is uploaded in the Participant Portal Submission Service (PPSS), it will not be possible to validate/submit the proposal. A warning message will inform the applicant of the missing document. If another document is uploaded instead and the PhD certificate is finally missing in the proposal, the proposal is not eligible and will not be evaluated.

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, the reference date for calculating the eligibility period should be the date of the actual award according to the national rules in the country where the degree was awarded.

In the case of applicants having been awarded several PhDs, the reference date is the award date of the first PhD.

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2017 call, eligible career breaks that can be considered for the extension of the eligibility window are:

• Maternity or paternity leave,
• Long-term illness (over ninety days for the Principal Investigator or a close family member),
• Clinical training,
• Military service.

All these circumstances need to be properly documented.

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017.

As a Research and Innovation Action the interdisciplinary topic H2020-SC1-PM-15-2017 should include testing and validation on a small-scale prototype in a laboratory or simulated environment.

It should, however, also allow for appropriate user involvement (e.g. patient involvement), even if the number of users may be small, in order to base the project's proof of concept on real user needs and to ensure end-user acceptance.

In addition, proposals may contain closely connected but limited demonstration or pilot activities.

Regarding the validation of effectiveness and usefulness of the solution, the proposal should include key performance indicators and appropriate metrics to measure the progress towards the expected impact, if successful.

No, according to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 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 2017, Annex 2.

Yes, an applicant can submit to the ERC Proof of Concept 2017 call and at the same time to one of the 3 main ERC frontier research calls (since the restrictions stated in the ERC Work Programme 2017 do not apply to Proof of Concept grants).

Where an ERC PoC proposal has initially indicated a duration of 12 months, during grant preparation Principal Investigators (PIs) are usually advised to go for a longer timespan (18 months) just in order to cope with eventual delays and always finish the ERC PoC project in an acceptable period of time, although the final decision will be with the PI. The reason is that under H2020, extensions of duration to PoC projects are typically not granted once the project has started. It should also be noted that in case a PI opts for the 18 months duration, but the project’s activities are finished within 12 months (or any other month before the 18th), the costs cannot be claimed for reimbursement immediately, but the PI will have to wait until the contractual end of the Grant in order to submit the Final Reports and cost claims (Article 20 of the GA).

More information can be found in the H2020 Model Grant Agreements for ERC Proof of Concept grants:

ERC POC mono-beneficiary MGA

ERC POC multi-beneficiary MGA

Yes, the time sheets are needed if the PI charges salary to the ERC PoC action. All team members for which personnel costs are being charged should maintain timesheets of the hours worked on the project. See also Article 18.1 of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement.

Although there is no minimum commitment percentage regarding the time that the Principal Investigator (PI) is required to work on the action, in the grant agreement the PI must enter a minimum of their working time, as the PI is responsible for managing the ERC PoC project. The cumulative percentage commitment that the PI spends on the ERC PoC action and on the main ERC StG/CoG/AdG grant (if still ongoing) must not exceed 100%.For more information please refer to the ERC Work Programme 2017.

Yes, the related costs for establishing a company (i.e. accountant, notary) could be considered eligible, but only if the establishment of the company happens during the duration of the project and only if there is a need to bring a product on the market. The establishment of the company should not be an end in itself, it must be a mean to an end.Hence, either the POC project will bring a finished product on the market (and this result will happen during the project lifetime), or the cost of establishing the company is not eligible. As this result can hardly be planned in advance, it would be advisable not to include this type of costs in the budget.

No, Co-investigators (Co PI) are not eligible for an ERC Proof of Concept grant.

Only Principal Investigators (PI) in Research main grants (ERC Starting, Consolidator or Advanced grants), as well as PI and corresponding PI of Synergy grants are eligible to submit a proposal to the ERC Proof of Concept Call.

More information on the eligibility criteria for the Principal Investigator can be found in the ERC_Work_Programme_2017, section relevant to the call.

When applying for an ERC PoC grant, Financial viability check is applicable to the coordinators.Sole applicants are not considered as ‘coordinators’. They will only be subject to a financial viability check if there are justified grounds to doubt their financial viability.

There are, on the basis of available information, grounds to doubt the financial capacity of the entity, if the entity e.g.:

− has weak financial viability results from other projects or another sources

− has been involved in cases of serious administrative errors or fraud

− is subject to pending legal procedures or judicial proceedings for serious administrative errors or fraud

− is subject to an attachment order

− is subject to a recovery order for an outstanding amount issued by the Commission/Agency on which the payment is significantly overdue;

− has been subject to substantial findings in an audit by the Commission/Agency, Court of Auditors or an OLAF investigation within the last 2 years that put in doubt its financial capacity).

Further information on the financial viability check is available in the H2020 Online Manual.

Yes, submitting an application with a spin-off company as Host Institution is feasible, as long as it complies with the eligibility criteria defined in the ERC Work Programme 2017.

The Host Insitution (HI) of the ERC Proof of Concept proposal does not have to be the same as the Host Institution of the main frontier research grant.

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 Portal.

ERC Proof of Concept 2017 proposals are evaluated on a 'Pass/Fail' basis on each of the evaluation criteria. The applicant receives an evaluation report on the outcome. 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 2017, section relevant to the call.

For the Proof of Concept 2017 Call, although it is not mandatory to provide the names of individual team members or their CVs, the Proof of Concept 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 Part B - section 3.

More information on the submission and evaluation procedures can be found in the ERC Work Programme 2017, section relevant to the call.

For the Proof of Concept 2017 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 2017.

Yes, an applicant could submit a proposal to the ERC Proof of Concept 2017 call and at the same time to one of the 3 main ERC frontier research calls (since the restrictions stated in the ERC Work Programme 2017 (http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2016_2017/erc/h2020-wp17-erc_en.pdf) do not apply to Proof of Concept grants).

There are no shares or quotas by domain or discipline for the ERC Proof of Concept 2017 call. No domain or field is excluded (*) and the possibility for innovation arising from the social sciences and humanities to apply for a Proof of Concept funding is fully recognised.

(*) As stated in the ERC Work Programme 2017, page 15: "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."

No, as stated in the ERC Work Programme 2017, a Principal Investigator may submit only one application per the ERC Proof of Concept 2017 call.Important note: More than one Proof of Concept Grant 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.

For ERC projects under FP7, the open access obligation involves all results of the project. Therefore, it also affects all team members working on the project, regardless whether the ERC funded author (Principal Investigator or team member) is the main/corresponding author or not.

The European Union has a range of programmes which have been set up to support projects and initiatives in various domains across the EU and beyond.In accordance with the Commission's guidelines on visual identity, all EU programmes must be identified exclusively by the EU emblem and the mention of the programme name.The names of programmes, such as Horizon 2020 and FP7, will be used as verbal brands, i.e. references to them will be made without a specific logo.Commission services will apply the Commission’s visual identity guidelines when communicating about EU programmes. Beneficiaries of EU funding will use the European emblem in their communication to acknowledge the support received under EU programmes.The guidelines mentioned below are intended for beneficiaries of EU funding and other third parties who communicate about EU programmes to show how the European Union emblem can be used in conjunction with text which highlights the fact of EU funding.

For further information please see :  The use of the EU emblem in the context of EU programmes - Guidelines for beneficiaries and other third parties 

In H2020 all interactions with the ERCEA will take place online via the Funding and Tenders Portal (F&T Portal).

The handling of documents will be fully electronic as there is no need anymore to exchange any paper document. The grants for the successful proposals submitted to the ERC calls will be prepared and then signed electronically. Requests of amendments will be prepared, submitted and either accepted or rejected electronically. All Reports will have to be submitted for review via the F&T Portal. According to the various phases of the project lifecycle the correct actors (HIs and/or PIs) will be informed via email that certain tasks must be performed in the F&T Portal.

Notwithstanding the above and in effort to keep on offering a high level service, the Agency strongly encourages both the Host Institutions and the Principal Investigators to contact the respective Agency staff for discussion in an informal phase about all developments of changes in their respective action. This is of utmost importance in order to avoid cancellation of documents or requests submitted via the F&T Portal which are incomplete or incorrect.

The name and surname of the ERC officer responsible for the Principal Investigator's grant can be found in the F&T Portal. The officer can be easily contacted via the messaging tool embedded in the F&T Portal, allowing the Principal Investigator to communicate directly with the officer without having to use emails.

Furthermore, the ERCEA has set up a helpdesk to provide Principal Investigators with assistance and guidance throughout the lifetime of the project. The helpdesk can be contacted by email at: ERC-C2-PI-HELPDESK@ec.europa.eu.

The reporting requirements for an ERC research frontier projects granted under H2020 Programme (Starting Grant / Consolidator Grant / Advanced Grant or Synergy Grant) 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 Funding and Tenders Portal (F&T Portal).

When applying to the ERC Advanced Grant (AdG) 2019 call, it is recommended that the researcher provides evidence of recent achievements of intellectual productivity and creativity. If a researcher returned to their original or new project(s) following a sabbatical leave, the reviewers are asked to take such circumstances into consideration.

For maternity, the track record considered can be extended by 18 months for each child born before or during the last ten years.

For paternity, the track record considered can be extended by the actual amount of paternity leave taken for each child born before or during the last ten years.

For long-term illness, clinical qualification or national service the track record considered can be extended by the amount of leave taken for each incident which occurred during the last ten years.

For more information, please refer to the ERC Work Programme 2019 or the Information for Applicants to the Advanced Grants 2019 call.

No, a Principal Investigator (PI) whose proposal was evaluated as category C in the step 1 Starting (StG), Consolidator (CoG) or Advanced (AdG) Grant calls for proposals under ERC Work Programme 2017 and 2018, as well as Synergy Grant (SyG) call for proposal under ERC Work Programme 2018, may not submit a proposal to the ADG call for proposals made under Work Programme 2019. For more information, please refer to the restrictions on submission of proposals in the ERC Work Programme 2019.

The call text of topic SC1-PM-15-2017 clearly refers to developing a proof of concept for radically new solutions.

These solutions should also be validated, so the focus is really on new research and development which means the project starting point may be associated with a lower Technology Readiness Level (TRL) rather than a higher TRL. The outcome of a successful project that addresses the expected impact as required in the call text may be able to progress towards a higher TRL.

However, SC1-PM-15-2017 does not make any references to specific TRLs in the published call, therefore TRLs as such are not relevant for the evaluation.

The European emblem (flag) may be used by third parties only if is not:

• likely to create confusion between the user and the European Union or the Council of Europe;
• linked to aims or activities incompatible with the principles and objectives of the European Union or the Council of Europe.In the case of EU-funded projects:
• logos that are developed for projects funded by the EU, and that are not owned by the EU, may not be identical or similar to the European emblem (this includes logos that incorporate the twelve stars);
• the European emblem should be given appropriate prominence when displayed in association with a logo;
• contractors are exempt from the obligation to obtain prior permission from the Commission to use the emblem, but are subject to the general third-party-use restrictions mentioned above. This tacit authorization to use the European emblem implies no right of exclusive use. It does not permit the appropriation of the emblem, or of any similar trade mark or logo, whether by registration or by any other means.For further information please see :  Europa - The European Flag  (see the Graphics guide to the European flag link for more details)

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call, eligible career breaks that can be considered for the extension of the eligibility window are:

- Maternity or paternity leave,

- Long-term illness (over ninety days for the Principal Investigator or a close family member),

- Clinical training,

- National service.

All these circumstances need to be properly documented.

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017.

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call, the reference date for calculating the eligibility period should be the date of the actual award according to the national rules in the country where the degree was awarded.

In the case of applicants having been awarded several PhDs, the reference date is the award date of the first PhD.

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017.

The Call deadline as stated in the ERC Work Programme and on the Participant Portal is the cut-off date when calculating the extension of the eligibility window.

For further information, please refer to the section concerning 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2016

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call, as long as no PhD document or equivalent is uploaded in the Participant Portal Submission Service (PPSS), it will not be possible to validate/submit the proposal. A warning message will inform the applicant of the missing document. If another document is uploaded instead and the PhD certificate is finally missing in the proposal, the proposal is not eligible and will not be evaluated.

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017.

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call, a medical doctor degree (or applicants holding a degree in medicine) will not be accepted by itself as equivalent to a PhD award. To be considered an eligible Principal Investigator, medical doctors (or applicants holding a degree in medicine) need to provide the certificates of both a medical doctor degree and a PhD or proof of an appointment that requires doctoral equivalency (e.g. post-doctoral fellowship, professorship appointment). Additionally, candidates must also provide information on their research experience (including peer reviewed publications) in order to further substantiate the equivalence of their overall training to a PhD. In these cases, the certified date of the medical doctor degree completion plus two years is the time reference for calculation of the eligibility time-window (i.e. 4-9 years past the medical doctor degree for Starters).

For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2017

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call, in order to be eligible to apply, a Principal Investigator must have been awarded a PhD or equivalent doctoral degree. It is recognised that there are some other doctoral titles that enjoy the same status and represent variants of the PhD in certain fields. All of them have similar content requirements. These cases will not be automatically considered eligible or ineligible but examined individually, as part of the ERCEA's decision on eligibility. 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 2017 - Annex 2

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call, there is no eligibility restriction to holders of a 'habilitation'. The reference date used for calculation of the applicant's eligibility is the PhD award date or medical doctor degree award date. 

For more information please consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2017, Annex 2.

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 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 (2-7 years after the date of award of the PhD or 4-9 years past the medical doctor degree completion for Starters).

For more information please consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2017 - Annex 2.

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.

According to the conditions of the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call, the applicant must choose a primary evaluation panel and may also indicate a secondary evaluation panel. They should indicate when he/she believes 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.

For the ERC Starting Grant, 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). At Step 2, the peer reviewers base their assessment on the Step 1 document (Part B1) and the scientific proposal (Part B2).

For more information on the evaluation process, please refer to the the ERC Work Programme 2017  (section 'Evaluation procedure and criteria').

For the ERC Starting Grant 2017, 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. Further explanations can be found in the Information for the applicants of the Starting and Consolidator 2017 Grants. The primary panel structure and description is also described in Annex 1 to the ERC Work Programme 2017.