MSCA-IF 2014 Proposal Strengths & Weaknesses
MSCA-IF 2014 Proposal Strengths & Weaknesses
Criterion 1 – Excellence (50%)
Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research (including inter/multidisciplinary aspects) Clarity and quality of transfer of knowledge/training for the development of researcher in light of the research objectives Quality of the supervision and the hosting arrangements Capacity of the researcher to reach or re-enforce a position of professional maturity in research
Strengths:
- The objectives of the proposal are clearly explained against the current state-of-the-art.
- The description of the scientific work, expected outcomes and state-of-the-art are clearly outlined for all objectives
- The transfer of knowledge would enhance the researcher’s skills in various methods for better understanding of the proposed research.
- It is outlined that the current project would be beneficial for the host institution and the researcher would transfer their previous experiences to the other researchers and students in the host institution through mentoring and supervision of their work.
- The host’s expertise in training, mentoring/tutoring researchers is outlined and is excellent.
- The track record of the supervisor is excellent and the hosting arrangements are appropriate for theproject proposed.
- It is proposed that a career development plan would be developed, regular supervision and review meetings are planned in detail.
-The supervisor and co-supervisor are very competent and experienced in the proposed field of study.
-The supervisory mechanisms for the successful completion of the proposed project are clearly defined.
- The supervisor has already established collaborations.
- The quality of the supervisor and their track record of mentoring post-doctoral fellows is very good.
- The CV of the candidate supports not only their strong scientific background in the proposed research but also their capacity and initiative for reaching a position of professional maturity and independence.
- The project has multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary aspects and modern methodologies.
-The proposed project is timely and has potential to bring new insights into the field of study.
-The research methodology involves cutting edge technology and novel approaches, which are appropriate to the overall project objectives.
-The transferable skills offered are of sufficiently high quality and quantity.
-The applicant has sufficient capacity to acquire/learn new knowledge and skills.
-The match of the project and the applicants profile is very good.
-The administrative arrangements and support for hosting of the candidate are very good.
-This proposal addresses an important issue in European Healthcare.
-The research objectives and methodology is described and based on earlier work. The methodology used, is available in the host lab, and is up and running.
-The training objectives are well stated and they will positively influence the development of the researcher.
-The publication record of the applicant is very good, the applicant presents evidence of scholarships and research training abroad, which is indicative of independent thinking.
- The training and transfer of knowledge objectives are relevant for the career development of the applicant in both the public and private sectors;
- The capacity of each host institution (academic & industrial partners) is appropriate to implement the project objectives and to support theapplicant;
-The collaboration between industry and academia and the proposed training plans will enhance the job prospects of the researcher and will enable the applicant to reach a position of professional maturity.
-Research methodology and approach are advanced, with clearly assigned objectives and expected results. The methodological approaches include cutting-edge methods.
-The timeliness and relevance of the project are very good.
-The overall originality and the innovative character of the proposed scientific approach are evident. The project concept is very complex and logically interlinked.
-The candidate brings complementary knowledge for the host institution and is very well-suited to the project.
-The measures to set practical arrangements for the implementation and management of the scientific project are properly described.
- The methodology proposed for the project is good-quality and appropriate for the study.
- The novel methods that would be developed have been described clearly in the proposal, underpinning the originality.
- The researcher would be trained in new scientific techniques
- There are also plans for the researcher to be trained in relevant complementary skills.
- The researcher would be able to transfer their prior knowledge to the host through their experience - the ToK would take place through workshops to train students in the host institution. Therefore, the training and ToK objectives are clearly described and of good quality.
- The host institution has good-quality systems in place to facilitate the integration of new researchers and for developing their research careers.
- The potential for the researcher to acquire new knowledge is high.
- The general experimental approach is novel and original and has good potential.
- The training possibilities for the researcher at the host institution are appropriate and they are well described.
- The transfer of knowledge by the fellow to the host institution is very valuable.
-The training goals, additional training and transferrable skill options are well addressed.
- The applicant has publications in high impact scientific journals and has obtained several fellowships and young investigator awards.
-The applicant´s research experience matches well with the proposed work.
- The potential of the applicant to re-enforce the position of professional maturity and pursue a career as an independent researcher has been clearly demonstrated.
- The researcher has previous experience in training.
Weaknesses:
- The methodological strategies of the project are not sufficiently discussed.
- Innovative aspect and originality of the project are not convincingly described or explained.
- Some research methodology is not described in sufficient detail.
-The project goals are too ambitious for the project time line
-The experimental details are not sufficiently outlined making it hard to assess feasibility; e.g. the duration and timing of the treatments are not satisfactory addressed.
-The experimental details of the secondment to industry sector are not clearly described so the relevance of this secondment to the project goals are not clearly defined.
-While reinforcement of a position of professional maturity is expected, future career plans are not sufficiently described. The capacity of the researcher to reach or re-enforce a position of professional maturity in research should be more convincingly demonstrated.
- The contribution that the project is expected to make to advance the state-of-the-art within the field has not been convincingly explained.
- The host‘s expertise in training researchers in the field and capacity to provide mentoring/tutoring is not described in sufficient detail.
- The researcher’s publication record is comparatively weak. Evidence for ability of independent thinking and leadership potential is not convincingly described or detailed. Therefore, the proposal does not adequately demonstrate, at this stage, that the researcher has the capacity to develop to a position of professional maturity in research.
- The detailed aspects of some techniques and the hypotheses behind experiments are not sufficiently described.
- The career development plan has not been described in sufficient details.
-The number of first authorship papers is lower than what would have been expected given the career stage of the applicant.
- Training in transferable skills such as communication tools, entrepreneurship and project management is not sufficiently detailed.
- The host’s expertise is not fully in line with the project’s methodologies and goals.
- Hosting arrangements are not completely convincing and, although a professional development plan is included, the frequency of meetings with the host supervisor is too infrequent.
- The experienced researcher expertise relevance to this project is not fully convincing.
Criterion 2 – Impact (30%)
Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills, and working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and to provide new career perspectives Effectiveness of the proposed measures for communication and results dissemination
Strengths:
- The impact of competences acquired during the fellowship on the future various cutting-edge techniques.
- The benefits of the proposed project to the European research area is described.
- Public engagements will be targeted to the different audience groups, such as young people, patients groups and consumers.
- Dissemination of the results and outreach of the results activities are planned in a variety of innovative ways that are appropriate.
-The proposed research has the potential to enhance the research skills of the applicant.
-The wider impact of the proposed research on society and economy is credible.
-Dissemination plans directed towards the scientific community are appropriate to the proposed project.
-Benefits of the project are significant, justifying the mobility.
-The project is part of a larger study with various objectives from which the applicant will benefit.
-The proposed project would enable the applicant to pursue research challenges which help develop develop a future scientific career.
- Communication and dissemination to the scientific community in the field is well addressed. The applicant will participate in events at the host institution and all work packages have dissemination activities for industrial partners, participation in conferences, seminars and conferences.
- The host laboratory maintains a good international position in the field which would strengthen the applicant's scientific networking opportunities.
- The career plan outlines clear and specific objectives to maximise the career development and potential of applicant;
-The foreseen plans for acquisition of cross sectorial skills by the applicant are mentioned
- A list of specific measures for dissemination and communication is outlined.
- The proposed mobility would benefit the applicant´s scientific career by providing them with solid scientific skills.
- The strategy for engaging stakeholder groups and public workshops contributes to an efficient communication plan.
- The IPR strategy is clearly presented and would positively impact the exploitation of the results.
- The results from the project are likely to have an impact on the economy and environment.
- There are definite plans described for dissemination of results to the scientific community and well suited arrangements for exploitation of results and IP protection, if necessary.
-The applicant has the potential to achieve important contributions in the field
-The mobility would have a positive impact on the applicant´s career development.
- The fellowship would provide new career perspectives to the researcher through the network of the participating organizations.
- The project has some translational potential which could pave the way to new therapeutic approaches.
Weaknesses:
- The development of long lasting collaborations and cooperation with other countries needs to be more clearly specified.
-The extent to which new career perspectives would open up for the researcher is not convincing.
- The benefit of the proposal in terms of career development for the fellow is not convincingly explained.
-The intellectual property issues are addressed only briefly, given the potential importance of this type of a project.
- The outreach activities are not described in sufficient detail.
- The plan of dissemination of the project´s results is not presented in sufficient detail.
- The communication in public engagement is described only at the host institute level.
-The outreach activities associated with the public in the project are poorly developed and not described in sufficient detail. Thus their impact is likely to be low.
-The impact of some of the proposed secondment activities and the overall benefit to the applicant's career is not clearly described.
- It was unclear from the Gantt chart, text and work plan table whether there would be a secondment to the partner organisation and the extent to which this partner would provide training.
- Quantification of the research outputs (i.e. number of publications, patents) would have been beneficial to assess the effectiveness of the dissemination plan.
- Measures and training activities aimed at helping the applicant to diversify their professional and research profile are not fully convincing.
- Measures for dissemination of scientific results will follow classical channels and are not described in sufficient detail.
Criterion 3 – Implementation (20%)
Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including quality management and risk management Appropriateness of the institutional environment (infrastructure) Competences, experience and complementarity of the participating organisations and institutional commitment
Strengths:
- A clear, coherent and credible work plan with clear deliverables and milestones is provided and the feasibility is assured by the allocation of tasks and the experience of the researcher.
- A clear organization chart of the project is given. The host institution has extensive experience in project management including EU-funded fellowship. An analysis of major risks is very well discussed. It is clearly indicated that host institute is highly experienced in project management that would be beneficial for the researcher.
- The commitment of the host institution on the planned research and its impact on the development of the researcher are convincingly documented.
- The available infrastructures, services, cooperation and European collaborations in the host institution are specified and these infrastructures correspond to the needs set out for the implementation of the project.
-Possible risks and the associated contingency actions are well addressed.
-Suitable practical and administrative arrangements are in place.
-The implementation and management plans for the project are good.
-Quality management aspects are covered.
-The available infrastructures and facilities of the host institution required to successfully implement the projectare appropriate and sufficiently detailed.
-The host has very good training experience for advanced level researchers.
-The project will benefit greatly from the international collaborations of the host.
-The research project is organized into work-packages that generally address the project goals.
-The overall project management structure and procedures are well presented.
-The human resource department and research offices will provide support and training opportunities to the fellow that are available in the hostinstitute.
- The work plan includes independent but interconnected work packages with defined deliverables and milestones;
- The work plan includes research, knowledge transfer, training, communication and dissemination and management activities;
- The proposal includes a good management plan;
- The environment of the host institution and partner organisation are regarded very good for the planned research;
- The competencies of the participating organisations and applicant are complementary and very good.
- A coherent, realistic and credible work plan is presented.
- The measures regarding practical arrangements for the implementation and management of the scientific project are properly described. The management structure is adequately presented and the decision making procedures and monitoring are transparent.
- The host´s experience in the management of European funded research projects is relevant and the host’s experience in technical and financial management is well demonstrated.
- The host has the capacity and access to the necessary resources to achieve the research and training objectives.
- The detailed work plan for the work packages is described clearly and in sufficient detail to convince that the work plan is coherent and would be effective.
- Milestone and deliverable planning is very good, very realistic and likely achievable in the time lines provided on the Gantt chart.
- The research environment is appropriate for this project. The host has the relevant scientific knowledge and expertise. The host institution is high-quality and has the required infrastructure available to support the project. The environment with the host department is well suited to facilitate career development, publications and networking.
- The host institution and the researcher complement each other in their skills and experience. The host demonstrates commitment to the project and the host institution demonstrates commitment to supporting researchers and their career development.
- The work plan presented is adequate, including a list of major deliverables and milestones.
- The financial management of the project is well addressed by the host institution.
-The administrative arrangements and support for the hosting of the fellow are very good.
- The competence of the applicant and the match with the host institution and the project are good.
- Progress monitoring and management, in particular financial management and IP issues, are appropriately considered.
Weaknesses:
- The potential to acquire competences that are complementary to partner organisations during the fellowship is not adequately elaborated.
-The description of the work package tasks, particularly the modelling element, is not sufficiently detailed.
-The Gantt Chart is not very informative and requires more thorough development.
-The scientific complementarities between the host and the applicant are not convincingly addressed.
- The project lacks overall coherence with a lack of specific experimental details throughout.
- The risk management aspects of the project, including contingencies have not been sufficiently addressed.
- The time line for training is not included in the project plan or Gantt chart.
- Quality management structures and procedures are not very well addressed.
- The risk analysis and contingency plans are not covering all relevant aspects, as the risk analysis only addresses methodological issues and the contingency plan is to outsource the work.
- It is not clearly presented whether the infrastructure and particular expertise for the project are available in the host laboratory.
- The work packages do not include all objectives presented in the methodology of research.
- The workload is too limited for a 2-year post-doctoral fellowship.
- The quality of the intellectual environment of the host lab is insufficiently documented. Moreover, details on the type of equipment, ad-hoc facilities and research tools that will be available to carry out this project are not sufficiently described.