Proposal acronym

Download 220.24 Kb.
Date conversion02.06.2016
Size220.24 Kb.


(Delete as appropriate and include as header on each page)

Part B Template



Individual Fellowships (IF)

Call: H2020-MSCA-IF-2014



This proposal is to be evaluated as:
[Standard EF] [CAR] [RI] [GF]

[Delete as appropriate]


In drafting PART B of the proposal, applicants must follow the structure outlined below.

Start page count





STOP page count

5. CV of the experienced researcher


7. Ethical aspects

8. Letters of commitment of PARTNER ORGANISATIONS

  • Applicants must ensure that sections 1 - 4 do not exceed the limit of 10 pages.

  • No reference to the outcome of previous evaluations of this or any similar proposal should be included in the text. Experts will be strictly instructed to disregard any such references.

List of Participants

Please provide a list of all participants (both beneficiary and, where applicable, partner organisations) indicating the legal entity, the department carrying out the work and the supervisor of the action.

If a secondment in Europe is planned but the partner organisation is not yet known, as a minimum the type of organisation foreseen (academic/non-academic) must be stated.

For non-academic beneficiaries, please provide additional data as indicated in the table below.


Legal Entity Short Name

Academic (tick)

Non-academic (tick)



Division /



Role of Partner Organisation1



Partner Organisation


Data for non-academic beneficiaries


Location of research premises

(city / country)

Type of R&D activities

No. of full - time employees

No. of employees in R&D

Web site

Annual turnover

(approx. in Euro)

Enterprise status (Yes/No)

SME status2 (Yes/No)

Note that:

  • Any inter-relationship between different participating institutions or individuals (e.g. family ties, shared premises or facilities, joint ownership, financial interest, overlapping staff or directors, etc.) must be declared and justified in this part of the proposal;

  • The information in the table for non-academic beneficiaries must be based on current data, not projections;

  • The data provided relating to the capacity of the participating institutions will be subject to verification during the Grant Agreement preparation phase.

Start page count

1. Summary
Please provide a short summary of the proposal, which could be the same as the proposal abstract, built around a research/innovation project.

2. Excellence3
Please note that the principles of the European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers promoting open recruitment and attractive working conditions are expected to be endorsed and applied by all beneficiaries in the Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions.
2.1 Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research (including inter/multidisciplinary aspects)
You should develop your proposal according to the following lines:

  • Introduction, state-of-the-art, objectives and overview of the action

  • Research methodology and approach: highlight the type of research and innovation activities proposed

  • Originality and innovative aspects of the research programme: explain the contribution that the project is expected to make to advancements within the project field. Describe any novel concepts, approaches or methods that will be employed.

The text should emphasise how the high-quality, novel research is the most likely to open up the best career possibilities for the Experienced Researcher and new collaboration opportunities for the host organisation(s).

2.2 Clarity and quality of transfer of knowledge/training for the development of the researcher in light of the research objectives

A two way transfer of knowledge should be described (please see Section 5.2 of this Guide):

  • The text must show how the Experienced Researcher will gain new knowledge from the hosting organisation(s) during the fellowship through training.

  • These organisations may also benefit from the previous experience of the researcher. Outline the capacity for transferring the knowledge previously acquired by the researcher to the host organisation(s).

2.3 Quality of the supervision and the hosting arrangements

Required sub-heading:

  • Qualifications and experience of the supervisor (s)

Information regarding the supervisor(s) must include the level of experience on the research topic proposed and document its track record of work, including the main international collaborations. Information provided should include participation in projects, publications, patents and any other relevant results.

To avoid duplication, the role and profile of the supervisor(s) should only be listed in the "Capacity of the Participating Organisations" tables (see section 6 below).

The text must show that the Experienced Researcher should be well integrated within the hosting organisation(s) in order that all parties gain the maximum knowledge and skills from the fellowship.

The following section of the European Charter for Researchers refers specifically to career development:

Career development

Employers and/or funders of researchers should draw up, preferably within the framework of their human resources management, a specific career development strategy for researchers at all stages of their career, regardless of their contractual situation, including for researchers on fixed-term contracts. It should include the availability of mentors involved in providing support and guidance for the personal and professional development of researchers, thus motivating them and contributing to reducing any insecurity in their professional future. All researchers should be made familiar with such provisions and arrangements.

2.4 Capacity of the researcher to reach and re-enforce a position of professional maturity in research

Please keep in mind that the fellowships will be awarded to the most talented researchers as shown by their ideas and their track record, where it is a fair indicator given their level of experience.

3. Impact

3.1 Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills, and working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and to provide new career perspectives

In this section, please explain the impact of the research and training on the Experienced Researcher’s career. The fellowship, including any secondments in Europe should maximise the impact on the researcher’s activity on European society, including the science base and/or the economy, in a manner appropriate to the research field.

3.2 Effectiveness of the proposed measures for communication and results dissemination

Required sub-headings:

  • Communication and public engagement strategy of the action

  • Dissemination of the research results

  • Exploitation of results and intellectual property

Concrete plans for the above must be included in the Gantt Chart. The new knowledge generated by the action should be used wherever possible to enhance the career of the researcher, to advance research, to foster innovation, and to promote the research profession to the public.

The following sections of the European Charter for Researchers refer specifically to public engagement and dissemination:

Public engagement

Researchers should ensure that their research activities are made known to society at large in such a way that they can be understood by non-specialists, thereby improving the public's understanding of science. Direct engagement with the public will help researchers to better understand public interest in priorities for science and technology and also the public's concerns.

Dissemination, exploitation of results

All researchers should ensure, in compliance with their contractual arrangements, that the results of their research are disseminated and exploited, e.g. communicated, transferred into other research settings or, if appropriate, commercialised. Senior researchers, in particular, are expected to take a lead in ensuring that research is fruitful and that results are either exploited commercially or made accessible to the public (or both) whenever the opportunity arises.

4. Implementation

4.1 Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources

The proposal should be designed in the optimal way to achieve the desired impact. A Gantt Chart should be included in the text where the following should be listed:

  • Work Packages description;

  • List of major deliverables;4 5

  • List of major milestones;6

  • Secondments if applicable.

The schedule should be in terms of number of months elapsed from the start of the project.

4.2 Appropriateness of the management structure and procedures, including quality management and risk management

Develop your proposal according to the following lines:

  • Project organisation and management structure, including the financial management strategy, as well as the progress monitoring mechanisms put in place;

  • Risks that might endanger reaching project objectives and the contingency plans to be put in place should risk occur.

The following could be also included in the Gantt Chart:

  • Progress monitoring;

  • Risk management;

  • Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).

Example Gantt Chart
Reflecting work package, secondments, training events and dissemination / public engagement activities


























Work package








Public engagement


Delete rows and columns that do not apply.

4.3 Appropriateness of the institutional environment (infrastructure)

Give a description of the legal entity/ies and its main tasks (per participant).

Explain why the fellowship has the maximum chance of a successful outcome.

NB: Each participant is described in Section 6. This specific information should not be repeated here.
4.4 Competences, experience and complementarity of the participating organisations and institutional commitment

Here describe how the fellowship will be beneficial for both the Experienced Researcher and host organisation(s).

  • Commitment of beneficiary and partner organisations to the programme (for partner organisations, please see also section 6)

Partner organisations: The role of Partner organisations in MS/AC for secondments and their active contribution to the research and training activities should be described.

STOP page count – MAX 10 pages

5. CV of the Experienced Researcher
This section should be limited to maximum 5 pages and should include the standard academic and research record. Any research career gaps and/or unconventional paths should be clearly explained so that this can be fairly assessed by the independent evaluators.

The Experienced Researchers must provide a list of achievements reflecting their track, and this may include, if applicable:

1. Publications in major international peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary scientific journals and/or in the leading international peer-reviewed journals, peer-reviewed conference proceedings and/or monographs of their respective research fields, indicating also the number of citations (excluding self-citations) they have attracted.

2. Granted patent(s).

3. Research monographs, chapters in collective volumes and any translations thereof.

4. Invited presentations to peer-reviewed, internationally established conferences and/or international advanced schools.

5. Research expeditions that the Experienced Researcher has led.

6. Organisation of International conferences in the field of the applicant (membership in the steering and/or programme committee).

7. Examples of leadership in industrial innovation.

8. Prizes and Awards.

[The template below is provided only for guidance. It may be modified as necessary and appropriate.]

Curriculum Vitae (max. 5 pages)

Family name, First name:

Researcher unique identifier(s) (such as ORCID, Research ID, etc. ...):

Date of birth:

URL for web site:



Name of Faculty/ Department, Name of University/ Institution, Country


Name of Faculty/ Department, Name of University/ Institution, Country


DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Current Position

Name of Faculty/ Department, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Current Position

Name of Faculty/ Department, Name of University/ Institution/ Country


DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Position held

Name of Faculty/ Department, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Position held

Name of Faculty/ Department, Name of University/ Institution/ Country


DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Name of Faculty/ Department/Centre, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Award received from Name of Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Scholarship, Name of Faculty/ Department/Centre, Name of University/ Institution/ Country


DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Number of Postdocs/ PhD/ Master Students

Name of Faculty/ Department/ Centre, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

  • TEACHING ACTIVITIES (if applicable)

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Teaching position – Topic, Name of University/ Institution/


DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Teaching position – Topic, Name of University/ Institution/



DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Please specify your role and the name of event / Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Please specify type of event / number of participants /


DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Faculty member, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Graduate Student Advisor, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Member of the Faculty Committee, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Organiser of the Internal Seminar, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Member of a Committee; role, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

  • COMMISSIONS OF TRUST (if applicable)

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY – Scientific Advisory Board, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Review Board, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Review panel member, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Editorial Board, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Scientific Advisory Board, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Reviewer, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Scientific Evaluation, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Evaluator, Name of University/ Institution/ Country


DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Member, Research Network “Name of Research Network

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Associated Member, Name of Faculty/ Department/Centre, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Funding Member, Name of Faculty/ Department/Centre, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

  • MAJOR COLLABORATIONS (if applicable)

Name of collaborators, Topic, Name of Faculty/ Department/Centre, Name of University/ Institution/ Country

  • CAREER BREAKS IN RESEARCH (if applicable)

DD/MM/YYYY – DD/MM/YYYY Please indicate the reason for the break, the place of residence during this period, the duration in months and why do you want to restart a career in research.

6. Capacity of the Participating Organisations

All organisations (whether beneficiary or partner organisation) must complete the appropriate table below. Complete one table of maximum one page for the beneficiary and half a page per partner organisation (min font size: 9). The experts will be instructed to disregard content above this limit.

Beneficiary X

General Description

Role and Commitment of key persons (supervisor)

(Including names, title, qualifications of the supervisor)

Key Research Facilities, Infrastructure and Equipment

(Demonstrate that the team has sufficient facilities and infrastructure to host and/or offer a suitable environment for training and transfer of knowledge to recruited Experienced Researcher)

Independent research premises?

Previous Involvement in Research and Training Programmes

Current involvement in Research and Training Programmes

(Detail the EU and/or national research and training actions in which the partner is currently participating)

Relevant Publications and/or research/innovation products

(Max 5)

Partner Organisation Y

General description

Key Persons and Expertise (supervisor)

Key Research facilities, infrastructure and equipment

Previous and Current Involvement in Research and Training Programmes

Relevant Publications and/or research/innovation product

(Max 3)

7. Ethics Issues

Ethics is an integral part of research funded by the European Union within Horizon 2020. Compliance with the relevant ethics provisions is essential from the beginning to the end of the project.

Although research ethics is most developed within the context of medical research and life sciences, research ethics is of crucial importance for all scientific domains. Informed consent and confidentiality are as important for a sociological study as they are for clinical research. There is a strong connection between research ethics and human rights. Ethical research conduct implies the application of fundamental ethical principles to scientific research.

Applicants submitting research proposals for funding within Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions in Horizon 2020 should demonstrate proactively to the REA that they are aware of and will comply with European and national legislation and fundamental ethics principles, including those reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union7 and the European Convention on Human Rights and its Supplementary Protocols. Applicants applying for funding should clearly identify ethics issues and proactively address them in their proposal.

The Ethics Review Procedure in Horizon 2020

All research proposals submitted to the European Commission are evaluated both on their scientific merit and on its ethical and social impact. When submitting a proposal to Horizon 2020, all applicants are required to complete an “Ethics Issues Table (EIT)”. Applicants who flag ethics issues in the Ethics Issues Table have to complete in addition a more in depth Ethics Self-Assessment.

Please note that all proposals retained with a view to funding will be submitted to the Ethics Review procedure. A careful analysis and description of any potential ethics issues in a given proposal and a detailed self-assessment will help all actors involved to undergo the Ethics Review in an efficient manner without unnecessary delays.

Ethics Issues Table (EIT) in Part A

If you entered one or more ethical issue/s in the Ethical Issues Table in Part A of the proposal, you are asked to submit an Ethics Self-Assessment in Part B.

Please ensure that a careful analysis of any potential ethics issues which may arise in the proposed research is done before the Ethics Issues Table (EIT) is completed.

For more information, please consult the Ethics- section on the Research Participant Portal which comprises the Ethics Self-Assessment Guidelines and an Ethics-Issues-Table Checklist:

Ethics Self-Assessment in Part B
Once you have flagged an ethics issue in the Ethics Issues Table of Part A, the Ethics Self-Assessment in Part B must:
1) For each area flagged in the Ethics Issues Table, describe how the proposal meets:

  • the EU legislation on Ethics (e.g. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, existing EU legislation on data protection and privacy etc.);

  • national legislation and good practices on research ethics;

  • ethical requirements of any TC where research raising ethical issues are to be carried out.

For more information on how to deal with Third Countries please see Article 34 of the Model Grant Agreement, as well as the following link:

Please list the documents provided with their expiry date.

Ensure early compliance of the proposed research with EU and national legislation on ethics in research. Should your proposal be selected for funding, and if you have not done this already, you will be required to provide as soon as possible the following documents:

  • an opinion from an Ethics Committee/Authority, required under national law;

  • any other ethics-related documents mandatory under EU or national legislation;

  • if you didn’t apply for/ receive the ethics approval/ required ethics documents yet when submitting the proposal, please indicate in the proposal the approximate date when you will provide a missing approval/ any other ethics documents to the REA (scanned copy). Please state explicitly that you will not proceed to any research with ethical implications before the REA received a scanned copy of all documents proving compliance with existing EU/ national legislation on ethics.

If these ethics documents are not issued in English, you are requested to submit also an English summary (containing notably, if available, the conclusions of the Committee or Ethics Authority concerned).

If you plan to request these documents specifically for your proposed project, your request must contain an explicit reference to its title.

2) Explain in detail how you intend to address the ethics issues flagged in the Ethical Issues Table of Part A of your proposal, in particular with regard to:

  • the research objectives (e.g. study of vulnerable populations like elderly people, sick or illiterate persons, cooperation with a Third Country, dual use, etc.);

  • the research methodology (e.g. clinical trials, involvement of children and related information and consent/assent procedures, use of human tissues from blood banks, interviews with healthy adult volunteers, data protection and privacy issued related to data collected, etc.);

  • the potential impact of the research (e.g. dual use issues, environmental damage, stigmatisation of particular social groups, political or financial retaliation, benefit-sharing, malevolent use, etc.).



Individual Fellowships (IF)

Call: H2020-MSCA-IF-2014



This proposal is to be evaluated as:
[Standard EF] [CAR] [RI] [GF]

[Delete as appropriate]

Part B - Page X of Y

1 For example hosting secondments

2 As defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.

3 Literature should be listed in footnotes, font size 8 or 9. All literature references will count towards the page limit.

4 A deliverable is a distinct output of the action, meaningful in terms of the action’s overall objectives and may be a report, a document, a technical diagram, a software, etc.

5 Deliverable numbers ordered according to delivery dates. Please use the numbering convention .. For example, deliverable 4.2 would be the second deliverable from work package 4.

6 Milestones are control points in the action that help to chart progress. Milestones may correspond to the completion of a key deliverable, allowing the next phase of the work to begin. They may also be needed at intermediary points so that, if problems have arisen, corrective measures can be taken. A milestone may be a critical decision point in the action where, for example, the researcher must decide which of several technologies to adopt for further development.

7 The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union:

The database is protected by copyright © 2016
send message

    Main page