European Research Council

1
FP7 ERC UPDATE WP2008 characteristics,
priorities, specific elements (AdG)
Theodore Papazoglou, PhDERC/European
CommissionRTD, Directorate S
2
Basic / Frontier researchin Europe

• National activities
• Research councils (DFG-1920, CNR-1923, CNRS-1939,
  SNF-1952), academies, etc.
• Intergovernmental activities
• CERN (1953), ESO (1962), ESA (1962/1975), EMBO
  (1963), ILL (1967), COST (1971), ESF (1974), EMBL
  (1978), Eureka (1985), ITER (1988), ESRF (1988),
  INTAS (1993)
• EU activities (supranational)
• ECSC Euratom EC (1957), JRC (1959), JET
  (1973),FP1 (1984) FP7 (2006-2013)
• European Research Area ERA (2000)
• FP7 (2006-2013) Ideas/ERC, Marie Curie
  fellowships, research infrastructures, thematic
  priority areas

3
ERC, Ideas and FP7

• A new institution
• Which is also part of the family of FP7
• Co-operation
• Ideas
• People
• Capacities
• Complementary to other FP7 support to targeted
  research (bottom-up vs. targeted research)

4
FP7 Ideas Programme

• Creates ERC
• Provides funding
• Budget (2007-2013) 7.51 bn (around 15 of FP7
  budget)
• Average budget 1 bn per year
• Sets overall objectives for researchand
  operating principles

5
Strategy ActivitiesERC Scientific Council

• Retain Repatriate Recruit
• Favour brain gain and reverse brain drain
• increase competition, recognition and
  international visibility for excellent individual
  scientists and scholars in Europe
• ERC Advanced Grant attract reward established
  independent research leaders
• Keep (young) researchers in Europe
• improve career opportunities and independence -
  especially for young researchers
• ERC Starting Grant attract retain the next
  generation of independent research leaders

6
The Scientific Council Organisation

• 22 Members of the Scientific Council elected the
  Chair and Vice-Chairs
• One Chair Prof. Fotis Kafatos
• Two Vice-Chairs Prof. Helga Nowotnyand Dr
  Daniel Estève

• Regular Plenary Meetings (every 1-2 months)
• Secretariat of the ScC(Directorate S)

7
The Agency

• Executes annual work programme as established by
  the Scientific Council
• Implements calls for proposalsand provides
  information and support to applicants
• Organises peer review evaluation
• Establishes and manages grant agreements
• Administers scientific and financial aspectsand
  follow-up of grant agreements

8
The European Union(represented by the European
Commission)

• Provides financingthrough the EU framework
  programmes
• Guarantees autonomyof the ERC
• Assures the integrity and accountabilityof the
  ERC
• Adopts annual work programmesas established by
  the Scientific Council

9
The ERC Board

• Prof. Fotis Kafatos
• President of the ERC
• Prof. Helga Nowotny
• Dr Daniel Esteve
• Vice-Presidents of the ERC
• Prof. Ernst-Ludwig WinnackerERC
  Secretary-General

• Jack Metthey
• Director of ERC DIS
• (EC RTD Directorate S)

10
The first homefor the ERC

• Madou Plaza Tour Madou
• Brussels
• 2 dedicated floors (5th/6th)
• 140 work places
• 5 meeting rooms
• 1 auditorium (192 seats)

11
ERC Advanced Grant (ERC Advanced Investigator
Researcher Grant)

• Flexible grants for ground-breaking,
  high-risk/high-gain research that opens new
  opportunities and directions including those of a
  multi- and inter-disciplinary nature
• Complement to the ERC Starting Grants, targeting
  researchers who are already established
  independent research leaders
• for up to 5 years, i.e. normally up to 2,500,000
  Euro per grant (may go up to 3.5 MEuro in
  specific cases)
• ? of ERC annual budget, annual calls ( 300
  Advanced Grants per year)

12
ERC GrantsWho can apply ?

• Individual Research Teams
• headed by a single Principal Investigator (team
  leader)
• of any nationality
• if necessary, including additional team members.
• The PI has the freedom to choose the research
  topic and the power to assemble his/her research
  team (including co-Investigators) meeting the
  needs of the project.
• Teams can be of national or trans-national
  character
• Hosting institution located in an EU member state
  or associated country

13
ERC Advanced Grant Lessons learned from StG 1

• Managing demand for grants
• Maximise call budget
• By combining budgets over 2 successive years
  (only one application per researcher in either
  2008 or 2009)
• Encourage the best to apply
• Excellent track record (in recent years)
• Strong leadership profile
• Discourage trivial or low-quality applications
• Applications should be substantive (one-stage
  submission with two stage evaluation)
• Disincentives to submission of applications which
  are not of the highest quality

14
Benchmarks of 10 year track record

• Senior author publications in major peer-reviewed
  multi-disciplinary scientific journals and/or in
  the leading peer-reviewed journals of their
  respective research fields
• Monographs and any translations of monographs (if
  applicable).
• Granted patents (if applicable)
• Invited presentations into peer-reviewed,
  internationally established conferences and/or
  international advanced schools (if applicable)
• Expeditions that the applicant has led (if
  applicable)
• International conferences in the field of the
  applicant that have been organised (member of the
  steering and/or organising committee) by him/her
  (if applicable)
• International Prizes/Awards/Academy memberships
  (if applicable)

15
Indicators of leadership profile

• Content and impact of the major scientific or
  scholarly contributions of the applicant to his
  or her own research field and/or neighbouring
  research fields and, if applicable, their wider
  societal impact
• The international recognition and diffusion that
  these major contributions have received from
  others (publications or appropriate
  equivalents/additional funding/
  students/international prizes and awards/
  institution-building/other)
• Ability to productively change research fields
  and/or to establish new interdisciplinary
  approaches

16
ERC Advanced Grant Re-application restrictions

• Only one ERC Grant per investigator may be active
  at any time
• One submission may be made to ERC-2008-AdG or
  ERC-2009-AdG
• PIs submitting to ERC-2008-AdG or ERC-2009-AdG
  and failing quality threshold(s) will not be
  permitted to apply to ERC-2010-AdG
• Additional restrictions on multiple submissions

17
Re-application AdG
AdG1 (2008)
AdG2 (2009)
Step 1 Step 2
Step 1 Step 2
AdG3 (2010)
AdG3 (2010)
Step 1 -
Step 1 -
AdG 4 (2011)
18
ERC Calls Indicative Schedule (2007-2010)
ERC Starting Grant Calls Indicative Schedule 2007
- 2010
Work Programme Revision ERC Action Call open Call Deadline Estimated Call value( M) Budgetary year Evaluation
Feb. 2007 StG1 Winter 06 Spring 07 290 2007 Spring - Autumn 07
Spring 2008 StG2 Summer 08 Autumn 08 290 2009 Winter 08 - Spring 09
Spring 2009 StG3 Summer 09 Autumn 09 340 2010 Winter 09 - Spring 10
Spring 2010 StG4 Summer 10 Autumn 10 400 2011 Winter 10 - Spring 11


ERC Advanced Grant Calls Indicative Schedule 2007
- 2010
Work Programme Revision ERC Action Call open Call Deadline Estimated Call value( M) Budgetary year Evaluation
Oct. 2007 AdG1 Autumn 07 Spring 08 517 2008 Spring 08 - Autumn 08
Spring 2008 AdG2 Autumn 08 Spring 09 480 2009 Spring 09 - Autumn 09
Spring 2009 AdG3 Autumn 09 Spring 10 741 2010 Spring 10 - Autumn 10
Spring 2010 AdG4 Autumn 10 Spring 11 869 2011 Spring 11 - Autumn 11
19
ERC Advanced Grant Lessons learned from StG 1

• Evaluation
• Methodology
• Single stage application with 2-step peer review
  evaluation
• Separate indicative budget for interdisciplinary
  and high risk proposals
• Panel structure
• 25 panels across the 3 domains
• Additional panels to take account of uneven
  demand and improve the boundaries between
  research areas

20
ERC Advanced Grant 1-stage submission / 2-step
evaluation

• Proposals must contain
• CV 10 year track record scientific leadership
  profile extended synopsis (and
  co-investigator(s), if necessary)
• Research proposal
• Research Environment description
• Special role (and assessment of co-investigators)
  in proposals that are anticipated for
  interdisciplinary research
• Evaluation
• 1st step Evaluation of P.I. (with special
  emphasis on track record/leadership profile/CV)
  Extended Synopsis
• 2nd step Evaluation of Full Proposal (with
  referees, no interview)

21
ERC Advanced grant Indicative budgets

• 3 main research domains interdisciplinary
  research, with separate indicative budgets
• Physical Sciences Engineering (39)
• Life Sciences (incl. medical) (34)
• Humanities Social Sciences (14)
• Interdisciplinary (13)

22
ERC Advanced Grant Panel structure

• Increase panels to 25
• Provisionally, each panel consists of the panel
  chair and ca. 10 panel members
• Panel Chair oversees evaluation process for the
  proposals assigned to his/her panel in
  collaboration with the ERC staff
• The Panel Chair gives high level credibility
  stamp and visibility to the whole evaluation
  process

23
ERC Grant schemesPanels Interdisciplinary,
forward-looking constitution

• Examples (Panels for ERC Advanced Grant)
• SH1 Individuals, institutions and markets
  economics, finance and management
• PE10 Earth system science physical geography,
  geology, geophysics, meteorology, oceanography,
  climatology, ecology, global environmental
  change, biogeochemical cycles, natural resources
  management
• LS5 Evolutionary, population and environmental
  biology evolution, ecology, animal behaviour,
  population biology, biodiversity, biogeography,
  marine biology, ecotoxicology, prokaryotic
  biology

24
ERC Advanced Grant Submission of Proposals

• Early registration (via EPSS)
• To provide ERC with indication on number area
  of proposals
• One-stage electronic submission (only via EPSS)
• Full Proposal
• Including elements that will be evaluated during
  the first step

25
Evaluation CriteriaScientific Excellence is the
sole Criterion

• Quality of Principal Investigator
• Quality of research project
• Research Environment and Resources
• Referees and panels evaluate and score criteria 1
  and 2 numerically, which will result in the
  ranking of the proposals
• Criteria 3 will be considered (step 2) on a
  "pass/fail" basis and commented but not scored

26
Coordination Support Actions (CSA)

• Support for monitoring and assessment of the ERC
  through call for tender and call for proposals
• Assessing the direct and indirect impacts of the
  ERC
• Evaluating the implementation of the Ideas
  programme
• Contributing to future ERC policy and initiatives
• Support to Scientific Council (chairman and
  vice-chairs) through grants to named
  beneficiaries

27
Submission Deadlines

• ERC-2008-AdG
• Physical Sciences Engineering (PE1-PE10)
  28/02
• Social Sciences Humanities (SH1-SH6) 18/03
• Life Sciences (LS1-LS9) 22/04
• ERC-2008-Suport 06/03

28
Documentation

• ERC Work Programme (to be revised in Autumn 2007)
  
• ERC Guide for Applicants (Research Grants plus
  CSAs)
• ERC Grant agreement
• Other
• ERC Guide for Grant Holders
• ERC Guide for Peer Reviewers
• ERC Rules on submission, evaluation, selection
  and award procedures

29
Applicants Services

• ERC National Contact Pointsinform, raise
  awareness and provide advice on ERC funding
  opportunities, application, follow-up
• ERC helpdesk
• EPSS helpdesktechnical support on electronic
  proposal submission
• ERC website http//erc.europa.eu?News Alert

30

• Some preliminary data from
• the ERC-2007-StG call

31
ERC-2007-StGEvaluation (Stage 1)

• Eligibility Check
• 9167 incoming proposals
• 8799 eligible
• 5 withdrawn
• 368 ineligible
• Individual assessment
• 8794 eligible proposals evaluated at first stage
• 8235 rejected
• 559 selected (LS206, PE251, SH102)

32
ERC-2007-StGEvaluation (stage 1) some statistics

• Time after PhD
• 87 of PIs received PhD between 4 and 9 years ago
• Age
• 36 years in average
• Gender
• 24 female applicants (PE 18, LS 21, SH 44)

33
ERC-2007-StG Evaluation (stage 1) Distribution
over Scientific Domains
Domain Number of proposals of proposals of budget pre-allocated
Life Sciences 206 37 40
Physical Sciences Engineering 251 45 45
Social Sciences Humanities 102 18 15
Total 559
Indicative budget (Scientific Council, ERC work
programme 2007)
34
ERC-2007-StG Evaluation (stage 1) Geographical
distribution
Cluster Number of proposals PI residence Host Institution location
European Union New Member States 475 30 85 5 89 4
Associated countries 47 8 11
Overseas 37 7 0
  100 100 100

• Based on the total of 559 retained proposal

35
ERC-2007-StGTimeline

• Call closure 25/04/2007
• Remote evaluations (stage 1) May-June 2007
• Panel meetings (stage 1) June-July 2007
• Invitation for stage 2 July 2007
• Letters of rejection August 2007
• Submission deadline (stage 2) 17/09/2007
• Panel meetings Interviews Oct-Nov 2007
• Feedback to applicants Dec 2007-Jan 2008
• First ERC Grant agreements Spring 2008

36
ERC-2007-StG Evaluation overview
8794 proposalsevaluated representing about 10
Bvalue of requested funding
559 retained proposals representing about 535 M
289.5 M available for this call ? 250 projects
37
Number of proposals by evaluation step
368 ineligible
9167
Submitted stage 1
5 withdrawn
8794
Evaluated stage 1
8235 rejected
559
Selected stage 1
5 not submitted to second stage
1 withdrawn
Submitted stage 2
554
2 passed away
553
3 ineligible
548
Evaluated stage 2
117 rejected
300
131 above threshold, reserve list
Selected stage 2
38
Country of host institution
Number of proposals by domain and country of host
institution (head quarters)
21 countries
39
Age
Number of PIs by age
Average age 35.5 years
40
Time after first PhD
Number of PIs by number of years after first PhD
Average number of years after PhD Average number of years after PhD Average number of years after PhD Average number of years after PhD
Domain Female Male Total
Life Sciences 7.1 6.4 6.5
Physical Sciences Engineering 6.2 6.2 6.2
Social Sciences Humanities 6.5 6.1 6.3
Total 6.6 6.3 6.3
41
Nationality
Number of proposals by gender and nationality
32 countries
42
Country of residence
Number of proposals by gender and country of
residence
27 countries
43
Intra-European Mobility Remaining and moving
grantholders
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
4
0
0
0
2
IL
0
CY
0
0
Source Sample 300 The size of the quadrats and
arrows indicates the relevance green1 person
blue2 persons
44
Repatriation Moving back to Europe
Australia
45
Interdisciplinarity 1
46
Interdisciplinarity 2 (cross-panel)
47
Interdisciplinarity 3 (cross-domain)
48

• Thank you !