MSCA-RISE & MSCA-ITN Marie-Skłodowska Curie Actions - Research and Innovation Staff Exchange & Innovative Training Networks
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
MSCA-RISE & MSCA-ITN
___________
Marie-Skłodowska Curie Actions
Research and Innovation Staff Exchange & Innovative Training Networks
Jakub Zeman (Research Office MU)
22.10.2020
WHY SHOULD WE APPLY…?
HIGH SUCCESS RATES
A single shallow reason to apply for MSCA-RISE
PANELS CHE ECO ENG ENV LIF MAT PHY SOC TOTAL
N. of proposals per Panel 52 14 126 58 50 13 43 52 408
N. of Above threshold Proposals per Panel 40 9 82 34 26 10 33 30 264
Number of successful proposals 10 2 25 9 10 3 6 9 73
Success rate in panels and overall 19% 14% 20% 16% 20% 23% 14% 17% 18%
% of above threshold projects 77% 64% 65% 59% 52% 77% 77% 58% 65%
Compare with success rates in 2019 29% 25% 30% 20% 16% 25% 25% 19% 24%
% of above threshold projects 87% 58% 76% 50% 58% 88% 79% 77% 70%
Panels: Chemistry (CHE); Economic Sciences (ECO), Information Science and Engineering (ENG); Environment and Geosciences (ENV); Life
Sciences (LIF); Mathematics (MAT), Physics (PHY) and Social Sciences and Humanities (SOC).
(ENTRY) EXPERIENCE & DIVERSE BENEFITS • (Mild) introduction to the Coordinator’s role – (probably) the easiest type of international H2020 consortium project • Develop your staff • Develop networks, international collaboration and publication outcomes • Potential to establish/boost novel lines of your research • Participation in international grants = an important aspect of evaluation and „institutional“ budgets/funding
MSCA-RISE at MU in H2020 • We have submitted 15 proposals in H2020 • 7 proposals succeeded in the competition, i.e. SR = 53% • 5 proposals were coordinated ones and 4 succeeded, i.e. SR = 80% • CEITEC was/is partner in two RISEs obtained, and coordinates other 3 • Faculty of Arts has just won 1 coordinated project
MSCA-RISE projects at MU
CEITEC
MICROBRADAM
2015
• Martin Bareš – as a partner
Coordinator Dr. Federico Giove – Centro Fermi, Italy
US partner – CMRR - Center for Magnetic Resonance, Minneapolis
Budget
• MU: 87K EUR
• FNUSA: 87K EURMSCA-RISE projects at MU
RECETOX
INTERWASTE
2016
• Jana Klánová – as a partner
Coordinator Prof. Stuart Harrad – University of Birmingham, UK
Consortium consisting of 10 beneficiaries and 17 partner organisations
Budget
• MU: 90K EURMSCA-RISE projects at MU
CEITEC
CoBeN
2016
• Irena Rektorová – coordinator
US partner: University of Arizona
The first coordinated research H2020-RISE in the Czech Republic
Rector's Award (2017) – Extraordinary International Grant Competition Results
Budget
• MU: 306K EURMSCA-RISE projects at MU
CEITEC
RNADIAGON
2018
• Ondřej Slabý – coordinator
US partner: MD Anderson Cancer Center‚ University of Texas
Industrial partner: BioVendor
Budget
• MU: 166K EURMSCA-RISE projects at MU
CEITEC
InterTAU
2019
• Jozef Hritz – coordinator
Non-European partners: University of Pittsburgh (USA), Oregon State University (USA),
University Health Network (Canada), Universidad Nacional De Cuyo (Argentina)
Industrial partner: AXON Neuroscience (Slovakia)
Budget
• MU: 396K EURMSCA-RISE projects at MU
Faculty of Arts
CONQUES
In negotiation!
2020
• Ivan Foletti – coordinator
Non-European partners: The City University of New York Graduate Centre (USA), Rutgers
University (USA),
Non-academic partners: Viella Libreria Editrice (Italy), Association pour le Développement
Économique et Culturel de Conques (France)
Budget
• MU: 414K EURWHAT IS IT…?
Structure of HORIZON EUROPE
Types of MSCA
Doctoral Postdoctoral Staff
COFUND
Networks Fellowships ExchangesMain features of MSCA-SE
• MOBILITY through secondments
• For international, inter-sectoral and interdisciplinary mobility of R&I staff leading
to knowledge transfer between participating organisations
• Bottom-up research topics!
• Built on joint research and innovation activities
• Implemented through secondments (1-12 months long)
• Project max size: 360 person month of seconded staff
• Budget constructed as a product of person-months and person-month unit cost
• Project max duration: 48 months
• All research areas, 8 evaluation panels
• Annual calls – if not successful, you can re-apply next yearObjectives of MSCA-SE For staff members • Increased set of research and transferable skills and competences, leading to improved employability and career prospects within and outside academia; • More knowledge and innovative ideas converted into products, processes and services; • More entrepreneurial mind-sets, testing new and innovative ideas; • Increased international exposure leading to extended networks and opportunities. For participating organisations • Innovative ways of cooperation and transfer of knowledge between sectors and disciplines; • Strengthened and broader international, interdisciplinary and inter-sectoral collaborative networks; • Boosted R&I capacity
A typical (RI)SE project
RISE Consortium
6-8 partners
(min. 3 partners)
RISE Project
48 months (max 360
person-months)
Research
&
Staff SecondmentsEligible exchanges of staff
SENDING
(Seconding Staff from Organisation) NOVELTY in
Academic Non-academic Organisation
Horizon Europe
organisation organisation in TC
in MS/AC (1) in MS/AC (2)
Academic
Interdisciplinary
(Receiving seconded staff)
organisation in
MS/AC (1) secondments
within European
HOSTING
Non-academic
academic
organisation in
MS/AC (2) institutions
Organisation in
(1/3 max)
TC
Eligible organisations Academic sector public /private higher education establishments awarding academic degrees public /private non-profit research organisations whose primary mission is to pursue research international European interest organisations (e.g. CERN, EMBL) Non-academic sector any entity not included in the academic sector: e.g. large companies, SMEs, NGOs, museums, hospitals international organisations (e.g. UN, WHO)
Countries eligible for funding • All EU member states (EU MS) • Associated countries (AC), e.g. Norway, Israel, Bosnia and Hercegovina… etc: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/3cpart /h2020-hi-list-ac_en.pdf • Some of the Third countries (TC), generally the developing TCs, e.g. Mali, Sudan, Burkina Faso…Argentina… etc.: https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/wp/2016- 2017/annexes/h2020-wp1617-annex-ga_en.pdf • TCs ineligible for funding, but eligible for participation include specifically: Australia, Brazil, Canada , China, India, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Russia, United States
Eligible staff
• All staff is eligible!
• Specifically:
• ESR (Early stage researchers) = PhD students
• ER (experienced researchers) = postdocs or four-years in research (and more
advanced researchers)
• Technicians
• Administrative staff
• Managerial staff
• Minimum duration of activity in research at the sending
organisation at least one month (full-time equivalent) before the
secondmentsEligible costs - Staff member unit costs
Structure of the RISE proposal template
(RI)SE evaluation criteria • Evaluated by experts on the basis of the award criteria: EXCELLENCE (50%), IMPACT (30%), IMPLEMENTATION (20%) • Scores are 1-5 in each criterion, with a resolution of one decimal place and will be subject to the indicated weighting factor • Applications scoring equal to or above 70% will be considered for funding — within the limits of the available call topic budget. • Successful RISE projects in H2020 had to score (on average) above 88%
RISE Assessment grid
Proposal Number/Acronym: Assessment
Subcriteria
Very good
Notes on strengths and weaknesses for IER
RISE Assessment Grid
Excellent
Good
Poor
and for consensus meetings
Fair
Fail
Excellence
• Is the quality and novelty of the planned research / innovation activities properly demonstrated and relevant against the current state-of-the-art? 2.1
• Are the remaining parts of the proposal (methodology, transfer of knowledge, dissemination etc.) clearly linked to the scientific objectives 2.1
• Is the defined methodology credible and appropriate to achieve the scientific objectives? 2.1
• Where applicable , is the multidisciplinary knowledge described in the proposal sufficient to achieved the scientific objectives? 2.1
• Is the promotion of gender equality and equal opportunities between male and female staff, including at the decision making level well addressed? 2.1
• Is the approach ensuring knowledge sharing between participants well explained and pertinent? 2.2
• Is it clearly described how the knowledge transfer will directly contribute to achieving the aims of the research and innovation activities? 2.2
• Is the interaction between the participants well described, relevant and necessary to achieve the objectives of the project? 2.3
Impact
• Are the skills / knowledge to be obtained by the individuals seconded described appropriately? 3.1
• Are these new skills / knowledge likely to improve the staff career perspectives (taking into account the seconded staff profile: ESR, ER, technician, 3.1
• Does the proposal show how secondments and resulting activities are likely to develop sustainable collaborations between the participants 3.2
• Is the project proposed likely to impact research / innovation capacity at the European and/or Global level? 3.2
• Is the strategy to disseminate the results clear and consistent? Does the project plan to reach targets that will maximise the results' impact (the
3.3
scientific community, policymakers, commercial actors, etc.)?
• Does the proposal describe how results could be used and if applicable why their exploitation or commercialisation would be relevant? 3.3
• Does the proposal describe how project results could impact society in a pertinent way? Can they lead to relevant progress in societal challenges
3.3
(healthy ageing, low carbon society, enhanced cyber-security, etc.)?
• Is the plan to exploit results relevant? When applicable , are the IPR aspects sufficiently described considering the results expected? 3.3
• Is the plan to engage the public to communicate on the project and its results detailed and adequate? 3.4
• Does the consortium foresee specific activities to reach non-specialist / non-scientific audiences such as the public or the media? 3.4
• Are the communication channels used during the entire project lifetime to communicate results and their benefit to society clearly explained? 3.4
• Does the proposal assess the potential impact of the proposed communication and outreach activities for the project and the public ? 3.4
Quality and efficiency of the implementation
• Are the secondments proposed necessary to implement the activities described? Is their duration appropriate to achieve the objectives? 4.1
• Are the activities proposed concrete and credible, and is the feasibility of the project clearly demonstrated? 4.1
• Are all the deliverables significant and are they not too ambitious in the context of the workplan outlined? 4.1
• Is the governance structure adequate and well described and is the role of the coordinator and WP leaders in this management structure appropriate? 4.2
• Are the management processes (administrative aspects, financial strategy, progress monitoring, etc.) properly addressed? 4.2
• Is the capacity of the coordinating organisation to manage an international/intersectoral consortium funded by a EU grant convincingly 4.2
• Does the proposal adequately address the potential risks (scientific obstacles, delays in secondments, lack of resources, etc.) and does it provide 4.2
• Are the number of available staff and the staff member profiles described appropriate to implement the activities linked to the different 4.3
• Do the host institutions provide suitable conditions (staff, infrastructures, etc.) for the secondments to be executed correctly? 4.3
• Are the infrastructures to implement the activities adequate and described appropriately in the proposal? 4.3
• If entities associated to a beneficiary by a legal/capital link are expected to participate in the project , is the proposal clearly differentiating the tasks and
4.3
secondments allocated to the beneficiary or to the affiliated entities?
• Are all the beneficiaries (and partner organisations) in the consortium necessary to complete the tasks described? 4.4
• Is it well demonstrated that the complementarities of the beneficiaries (and partner organisations) are needed to implement the activities 4.4
Exceptional Funding
• Is there any organisation from a third country not eligible to receive EU funding that requests exceptional EU funding (in part B)?
• If yes , is the participation of this entity essential to achieve the project ojectives (outstanding competence/expertise; access to particular research
infrastructure or geographical environments; access to data)?MSCA-RISE – pros & cons
• Pros – all benefits mentioned above… they include:
• International funding and related knowledge and experience
• Development of international networks
• Transfer of knowledge and potential to attract and „try out“ talents from abroad
• Great opportunity for students and other staff – skills, creer perspectives
• Boosting your research output, and perhaps prepare follow-up research projects
• Cons
• Not much money to cover RTN (research) costs – you should have some other complementary
grant(s)
• Your staff will be gone for some months, which may have an impact on the operation of your lab
• There is no specific budget to cover Open Access publication fees (must be cover from RTN
cost)
• The seconded employee has to work full-time at the hosting institution – which may have
specific consequencesSupport of Research Office
What we offer
• Primary consultation of your consortium and expected project benefits and
knowledge transfer
• A half-day / full-day workshop on the overall aim and specific objectives as well as
overall structure of the proposal
• Ideas and approaches regarding the dissemination plan
• Expert project management advice on preparing the implementation part
• Consultation of your texts, editorial revisions & tips
• A detailed and agreed preparation plan to avoid stress
• Major part of communication with the partners, including all of the „formal“ and
technical stuff (ID information, tables, numbers, forms, …)Useful documents & links Overview of the MSCA-RISE proposals selected in 2020: https://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/sites/mariecurie2/files/msca_rise_2020_projects_se lected_for_funding_countries.pdf MSCA website on RISE: https://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/actions/staff- exchange_en MSCA-RISE „Guide for Applicant“ – https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/guides_for_applicants/h2020-guide- appl-msca-rise_en.pdf MSCA Work Programme: To be available in January 2021, currently only confidential drafts – consult Research Office on the developemnt and expected details MSCA-RISE Handbook 2020: https://www.net4mobilityplus.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/N4M__RISE_2020_Handbook.pdf - elementary „text-book“ on how to prepare a RISE project
MSCA-RISE/ITN Implementation
Collecting & sharing experience
Financial Management of Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions (MSCA) in Horizon 2020
– The practitioner's perspective (November 2017)
• The document is a result of collaborative effort of a number of administrators with comprehensive
experience with MSCA
• It can provide some basic answers on regular and frequent issues
• We should try to collect more of the existing experience and information – suggestions?
• NCPs, international partners (Utrecht Network, EU-Life, Alliance4Life, running consortia…)MSCA-ITN
___________
Marie-Skłodowska Curie Actions
Innovative Training NetworksWHAT IS IT…?
Structure of HORIZON EUROPE
Types of MSCA
Doctoral Postdoctoral Staff
COFUND
Networks Fellowships ExchangesMSCA-ITN at MU in H2020 • We have submitted 82 (!) proposals in H2020, majority of them in a partner role • 7 proposals succeeded in the competition, i.e. SR = 8.5% • We coordinate 1 ITN project – PRORISK (prof. Bláha)
NaToxAq (one representative for all…)
• European Training Network
• Doc. Hilscherová, Prof. Bláha, as a partner
• Coordinator Prof. Hans Chr. Bruun Hansen (University of
Copenhagen)
• Budget for the MU: 465k EUR
A prequel of PRORISK ;)? More from prof. Bláha in a few moments
… stay with us!Main features of MSCA-DN
• Funding for PhD students – usually 36-month FTE job
• MOBILITY– open and fair recruitment of international PhD student
• For international, inter-sectoral and interdisciplinary mobility leading to skills and knowledge
development and knowledge transfer
• Bottom-up research topics!
• Built on joint research and innovation activities
• Project max size: 360 person month of seconded staff
• Budget constructed as a product of person-months and person-month unit cost
• Project max duration: 48 months
• All research areas, 8 evaluation panels
• Annual calls – if not successful, you can re-apply next year
In HORIZON EUROPE re-submission allowed only to proposals scoring >80% (WP draft!) –
motivation for such a decision is to reduce number of submissions, reduce the loads of evaluations and
increase success rateObjectives of MSCA-DN For supported doctoral candidates • New research and transferable skills and competences, leading to improved employability and career prospects within and outside academia; • New knowledge allowing the conversion of ideas into products and services, where relevant For participating organisations • Improved quality, relevance and sustainability of doctoral training programmes and supervision arrangements • Enhanced cooperation and transfer of knowledge between sectors and disciplines; • Increased integration of training and research activities between participating organisations • Boosted R&I capacity • Increased internationalisation and attractiveness • Regular feedback of research results into teaching and education at participating organisations
Scope of MSCA – Doctoral Network
Scope of MSCA – Doctoral networks
MSCA Doctoral Networks will implement doctoral programmes, by partnerships of
universities, research institutions and research infrastructures, businesses including SMEs, and
other socio-economic actors from different countries across Europe and beyond.
These doctoral programmes will respond to well-identified needs in various R&I areas, expose
the researchers to the academic and non-academic sectors, and offer training in research-
related, as well as transferable skills and competences relevant for innovation and long-term
employability (e.g. entrepreneurship, commercialisation of results, Intellectual Property Rights,
communication).Some interesting accents Steering committee • Each MSCA Doctoral Network will have a clearly identified steering board co-ordinating network-wide training and research activities … continuous communication and exchange of best practice Training activities • Doctoral Networks will develop substantial training modules, including digital ones • Doctoral Networks should adequately prepare doctoral candidates for increased research collaboration and information-sharing made possible by new (digital) technologies Supervision • High attention to quality of supervision and mentoring arrangements as well as career guidance Career Development Plan • A Career Development Plan must be established jointly by the supervisor and each recruited doctoral candidate … this plan comprises the researcher's training and career needs, including training on transferable skills, teaching, planning for publications and participation in conferences and events aiming at opening science and research to citizens.
A typical Doctoral Networks project
DN Consortium
10-30 partners
(min. 3 partners)
DN Project
48 months (max 360
person-months)
Recruited doctoral
candidates – FTE
fellowships 3-36
monthsDoctoral Networks – main eligibility rules • Not more than 40% of the EU contribution may be allocated to beneficiaries in the same country. • Legal entities established in low R&I performing EU Member States may possibly join already selected actions, subject to the agreement of the respective consortium and provided that legal entities from such EU Member States are not yet participating in it. • All beneficiaries must recruit at least one doctoral candidate. They are required to host at their premises and supervise recruited researchers, or use linked associated partners to do so. • Supported researchers – only doctoral candiates • mobility rule - must not have resided … in the country of the recruiting beneficiary for more than 12 months in the 36 months immediately before their recruitment date.
Eligible costs in Doctoral Networks
Structure of the DN proposal template
DN evaluation criteria • Evaluated by experts on the basis of the award criteria: EXCELLENCE (50%), IMPACT (30%), IMPLEMENTATION (20%) • Scores are 1-5 in each criterion, with a resolution of one decimal place and will be subject to the indicated weighting factor • Applications scoring equal to or above 70% will be considered for funding — within the limits of the available call topic budget. • Successful ITN projects in H2020 had to score (on average) above 95%!
Useful documents & links Overview of the MSCA-ITN proposals selected in 2020: https://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/sites/mariecurie2/files/itn_2020_list_of_projects_ma in_final_0.pdf MSCA website on ITN: https://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/actions/research- networks_en MSCA-ITN „Guide for Applicant“ – https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/guides_for_applicants/h2020-guide- appl-msca-itn_en.pdf MSCA Work Programme: To be available in January 2021, currently only confidential drafts – consult Research Office on the developemnt and expected details MSCA-ITN Handbook 2020: https://www.net4mobilityplus.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/N4M__MSCA_ITN_Handbook_2020.pdf - elementary „text-book“ on how to prepare an ITN project
Contacts
Grant support team at your department or faculty
RMU Research Office: grants@rect.muni.cz; improve@muni.cz
Jakub Zeman: zeman@rect.muni.czYou can also read
