ERC Work

Programme
2018

(European Commission C(2017) 5307 of 2 August 2017)

1|Page
 Who should read this document?

This document is the annual work programme for the European Research Council funded by
the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. It is
the legal document which sets out how the ERC will allocate its funding for the corresponding
year. It is established by the Scientific Council of the ERC and subsequently adopted by the
European Commission.

Principal Investigators who wish to apply to one of the ERC’s calls will need to apply
through the Participants Portal. This contains all the information necessary for applying to
each ERC call as well as details of your National Contact Point who can provide information
and personalised support in your native language at:

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/home

Potential applicants, and those interested in more information on the ERC in general can find
out more, including the background to the ERC’s mission and organisation, a description of
the main funding schemes, a step by step guide to applying to the ERC and details of funded
projects here:

http://erc.europa.eu/

2|Page
 Summary of main features in 2018

The three main ERC frontier research grants will be available under Work Programme 2018:
Starting; Consolidator; and Advanced Grants.

In addition, building on the experience of the 2012 and 2013 pilot Synergy Grant calls, a
Synergy Grant call for groups of two to four Principal Investigators to jointly address
ambitious research problems will be reintroduced under Work Programme 2018.

Restrictions on applications will apply to the 2018 calls based on the outcome of the
evaluation of previous calls – see restrictions on submission of proposals under “Eligibility
criteria” below.

ERC Principal Investigators will also continue to be able to apply for Proof of Concept Grants.

Beneficiaries of ERC frontier research grants funded under this Work Programme will
automatically be covered by the provisions on research data sharing unless they specifically
decide to opt-out – see section on open access under “Objectives and Principles of ERC
Funding” below.

3|Page
 Indicative summary of main calls from the 2018 budget1

Starting Consolidator Advanced Proof of Concept

Synergy
Grant Grant Grant Grant
Grant

Call identifier ERC-2018-StG ERC-2018-CoG ERC-2018-AdG ERC-2018-SyG ERC-2018-PoC

Call Opens 03/08/2017 24/10/2017 17/05/2018 03/08/2017 06/09/2017

16/01/2018
Deadline or cut-off
17/10/2017 15/02/2018 30/08/2018 14/11/2017
dates for PoC 18/04/2018

11/09/2018
1
These opening dates and cut-off dates are indicative. The Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency may open it up to one month prior to or after the
envisaged opening date. The Director may delay the envisaged deadline by up to two months. The budget amounts for 2018 are subject to the availability of the
appropriations provided for in the draft budget for 2018 after the adoption of the budget for 2018 by the budgetary authority or if the budget is not adopted as provided
for in the system of provisional twelfths.

4|Page
 Budget million EUR
(estimated number of 581 (391) 550 (287) 450 (194) 250 (30) 20 (130)
grants)

23/04/2018 30/03/2018
Planned dates to
14/05/2018 06/07/2018 29/01/2019
inform applicants
29/08/2018 21/07/2018
(after each step or
14/08/2018 30/11/2018 08/04/2019
cut-off date)
19/10/2018 10/12/2018

Indicative date for 30/07/2018

signature of grant
agreements 14/12/2018 30/03/2019 08/08/2019 19/02/2019 21/10/2018
(by cut-off date for
PoC) 10/04/2019

5|Page
Table of contents
Summary of main features in 2018 3
Indicative summary of main calls from 2018 budget 4
Objectives and Principles of ERC Funding 7
Frontier Research Grants 13
- Funding rates 14
- Eligibility criteria 15
- Starting Grant profile 21
- Consolidator Grant profile 23
- Advanced Grant profile 25
- Synergy Grant profile 29
- Proposal submission and description 31
- Evaluation procedure and criteria 34
Proof of Concept Grants 41
Other Actions 48
Indicative Budget 53
Annexes 55
1. Panel structure 56
2. ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees 59
3. Countries associated to Horizon 2020 and restrictions applying to 61
some legal entities established in certain third countries
Early Detection Exclusion System (EDES) 62

6|Page
Objectives and
Principles of
ERC Funding

7|Page
The fundamental activity of the ERC is to Applications can be made in any
provide attractive, long-term funding to field of research
support excellent investigators and their
research teams to pursue ground- The ERC's frontier research grants operate
breaking, high-gain/ high-risk research. on a 'bottom-up' basis without
predetermined priorities.
Research funded by the ERC is expected to
lead to advances at the frontiers of The ERC puts particular emphasis on the
knowledge and to set a clear and frontiers of science, scholarship and
inspirational target for frontier research engineering. In particular, it encourages
across Europe. proposals of a multi- or interdisciplinary
nature which cross the boundaries
Scientific excellence is the sole between different fields of research,
criterion on the basis of which ERC pioneering proposals addressing new and
frontier research grants are emerging fields of research or
awarded proposals introducing unconventional,
innovative approaches and scientific
The evaluation of ERC grant applications is inventions.
conducted by peer review panels
composed of renowned scientists and Independent researchers of any age
scholars selected by the ERC Scientific and career stage can apply for
Council. The panels may be assisted by attractive long-term funding
independent experts working remotely.
The ERC awards funding to excellent
The ERC's peer review evaluation process investigators looking to set up or
has been carefully designed to identify consolidate their own independent
scientific excellence irrespective of the research team or programme, as well as to
gender, age, nationality or institution of already established research leaders.
the Principal Investigator and other
potential biases, and to take career The ERC awards flexible, long-term
breaks, as well as unconventional research funding for a period of up to five years for
career paths, into account. The the Starting, Consolidator and Advanced
evaluations are monitored to guarantee Grants and up to six years for the Synergy
transparency, fairness and impartiality in Grants. The Scientific Council will review
the treatment of proposals. funding conditions regularly to make sure
that grants remain competitive both at
European and international level.

The maximum grant varies by grant type.

An ERC grant can cover up to 100% of the

8|Page
total eligible direct costs of the research the EU or an Associated Country (see
plus a contribution towards indirect costs. “Eligible host institution” below).

ERC grants are portable2 as described in The ERC frontier research grants
the ERC Model Grant Agreement. aim to empower individual
The ERC aims to use procedures that researchers and provide the best
maintain the focus on excellence, settings to foster their creativity
encourage initiative and combine
simplicity and flexibility with The Starting, Consolidator and Advanced
accountability. The ERC is continuously Grants will support projects carried out by
looking for further ways to improve its individual teams which are headed by a
procedures in order to ensure that these single Principal Investigator. ERC Synergy
principles are met. Grants will support small groups of two to
four Principal Investigators and their
Principal Investigators from teams with a designated Corresponding
anywhere in the world can apply Principal Investigator. The constitution of
the research teams is flexible. Depending
for an ERC grant
on the nature of a project the research
ERC grants are open to researchers of any team may involve team members from
nationality who may reside in any country other research organisations situated in
in the world at the time of the application. the same or a different country (see
‘Eligible host institution’ below). The
The ERC is particularly keen to nature of the collaboration within an ERC
encourage excellent proposals Synergy Group is expected to be
from Principal Investigators based fundamentally different from that of a
outside Europe who wish to carry
network or consortium of undertakings,
out a project with a host institution
universities, research centres or other
in the EU or in one of the
legal entities (see Synergy Grant profile
Associated Countries.
below).

However the host institution must be The ERC supports individual

established in an EU Member State or Principal Investigators. Support for
consortia is provided by other calls
Associated Country. In certain conditions
under Horizon 2020.
team members may be based outside of

2
Portability means that the Principal Investigator
may request to transfer the entire grant or part of
it to a new beneficiary, under specific conditions
included in the ERC Model Grant Agreement. These
conditions may include provisions for the transfer
of equipment purchased and used exclusively for
the implementation of the project.

9|Page
Host institutions must provide The conditions4 offered by the host
appropriate conditions for the institution or institutions, including the
'portability' of the grant, are the subject of
Principal Investigator to
a supplementary agreement between the
independently direct the research Principal Investigator and the host
and manage its funding institution5 and must ensure that the
Principal Investigator is able to:
An ERC grant is awarded to the institution
that engages and hosts the Principal  apply for funding independently;
Investigator3. Grants are awarded to the
host institution with the explicit  manage the research and the
commitment that this institution offers funding for the project and make
appropriate conditions for the Principal appropriate resource allocation
Investigator to independently manage the decisions;
ERC funded research. .
 publish independently as main
In the case of Synergy Grants, where the author and include as co-authors
different Principal Investigators may be only those who have contributed
hosted by more than one host institution, substantially to the reported work;
each of the host institutions shall offer
 supervise the work of the team
their support to the Principal
members, including doctoral
Investigator(s) hosted by them for the
candidates or others;
duration of the grant. At submission stage,
however, only the Corresponding Host  have access to appropriate space
Institution must provide the host support and facilities for conducting the
letter for the Corresponding Principal research.
Investigator. The host institutions must
engage the Principal Investigators for at Public or private institutions, including
least the duration of the grant. universities, research organisations and
undertakings can host the Principal
Investigator and his or her team as long as
the principles indicated above are
respected and the Principal Investigator is
not constrained by the research strategy
3
Normally the Principal Investigator will be of the entity.
employed by the Host Institution, but cases where,
for duly justified reasons, the Principal
Investigator's employer cannot become the host 4
These conditions are consistent with “The
institution, or where the Principal Investigator is European Charter for Researchers” and “The Code
self-employed, can be accommodated. The specific of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers”.
conditions of engagement will be subject to
5
clarification and approval during the granting This is supplementary to the ERC Grant
procedure or during the amendment procedure for Agreement and is described in the ERC Model
a change of host institution. Grant Agreement.

10 | P a g e
 The ERC welcomes as set out in Article 29.3 of the ERC Model
applications from Principal Grant Agreement unless they specifically
Investigators hosted by decide to opt-out. In particular,
private for-profit research beneficiaries that do not opt-out will be
centres, including industrial required to submit a data management
laboratories. plan within the first six months of project
implementation. These provisions are
designed to facilitate access, re-use and
Host institutions are expected to make all
preservation of the research data
appropriate efforts to provide the
generated during the ERC funded research
conditions to attract and retain scientists
work.
and scholars of the calibre to be awarded
an ERC grant, within the framework Beneficiaries should carefully check the
provided by the ERC Model Grant additional obligations related to open
Agreement and any other available research data contained in Article 29.3.
administrative and legal possibilities. They may opt-out of the provisions of the
previous paragraph at any stage, thereby
Open access freeing themselves retroactively from the
The ERC supports the principle of open associated obligations.
access to the published output of
Gender Balance
research, including in particular peer-
reviewed articles and monographs, as a Under Horizon 2020, beneficiaries of ERC
fundamental part of its mission. It also grants must take all measures to promote
supports the basic principle of open access equal opportunities between men and
to research data and data related products women in the implementation of the
such as computer code. The ERC considers action and aim for a gender balance at all
that providing free online access to all levels of personnel assigned to the action,
these materials can be the most effective as set out in the Horizon 2020 ERC Model
way of ensuring that the fruits of the Grant Agreement. ERC Principal
research it funds can be accessed, read Investigators should also determine the
and used as the basis for further research. relevance of integrating sex and gender
analysis into their research. Specific
Under Horizon 2020, beneficiaries of ERC
activities promoting equal opportunities
grants must ensure open access to all
or gender balance or covering the gender
peer-reviewed scientific publications
dimension of research funded by the ERC
relating to their results as set out in Article
can be considered as eligible costs where
29.2 of the ERC Model Grant Agreement.
these costs are necessary for the
In addition, beneficiaries of ERC frontier implementation of the action.
research grants funded under this Work
Programme will automatically be covered
by the provisions on research data sharing

11 | P a g e
Ethical principles during the evaluation or throughout the
life cycle of an ERC funded project will be
The proposed research and innovation addressed vigorously by the ERC within
activities shall comply with ethical the applicable legal and procedural
principles and relevant national, Union framework. Any breach of research
and international legislation, including the integrity by Principal Investigators or
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the beneficiaries may be sanctioned by
European Union and the European measures such as the rejection of
Convention on Human Rights and its proposals from evaluation, requests for
Supplementary Protocols. Particular measures to be taken by the host
attention shall be paid to the principle of institution, reduction of the grant and
proportionality, the right to privacy, the suspension or termination of grants.
right to the protection of personal data,
the right to the physical and mental However, the host institutions that engage
integrity of a person, the right to non- and host ERC Principal Investigators have
discrimination and the need to ensure the primary responsibility for the
high levels of human health protection. detection of scientific misconduct and for
The proposed research and innovation the investigation, and adjudication of any
activities shall have an exclusive focus on breaches of research integrity that may
civil applications. arise. Therefore host institutions are
expected to have structures in place to
Funding of human embryonic stem cell uphold research integrity and to make all
research is possible within the ethical appropriate efforts to verify that no
framework defined in the Horizon 2020 allegations of scientific misconduct are
Framework Programme for Research and pending against any Principal Investigator
Innovation 2014 – 20206. applying for or participating in an ERC
grant and to bring to the attention of the
Research Integrity
ERC any such allegations or cases of
It is essential to maintain and promote a scientific misconduct.
culture of research integrity at all stages of
The ERC applies the same rigour to
the evaluation and granting process to
ensuring that its evaluation process is
make ERC competitions fair and efficient
governed by principles of research
and to maintain the trust of both the
integrity, in particular through rules on
scientific community and society as a
confidentiality and conflict of interest.
whole.

Cases of scientific misconduct such as

fabrication, falsification, plagiarism or
misrepresentation of data that may arise

6
As set out in Commission Declaration 2013/C
373/02 of 20 December 2013.

12 | P a g e
 ERC Frontier
Research Grants

13 | P a g e
 Funding rates

Maximum size of grant and grant Union Contribution

assessment
The Union financial contribution will take
The maximum grant varies by grant type. the form of the reimbursement of up to
100% of the total eligible and approved
During the peer review evaluation, direct costs and of flat-rate financing of
evaluation panels will assess the funding indirect costs on the basis of 25% of the
requested by the applicant, including any total eligible direct costs7. The level of the
request for additional funding for major awarded grant represents a maximum
costs (see “Size of ERC Grants” under each overall figure – the final amount to be paid
profile below), against the needs of the must be justified on the basis of the costs
project before making any actually incurred for the project.
recommendation for funding.
Call budgets
The funding requested must be fully
justified by an estimation of the real For the Starting, Consolidator, Advanced
project cost. The panels may suggest and Synergy Grant calls an indicative
modifications to the indicative budgetary budget will be allocated to each panel in
breakdown in the application, particularly proportion to the budgetary demand of its
where they consider funding requests to assigned proposals.
be not properly justified. In such cases
they shall explain in writing any such
suggested modification.

The Principal Investigator will have the

freedom to modify the budgetary
breakdown during the course of the
project. Requests to modify the budgetary
breakdown in respect of additional
funding to cover major costs may be
accepted only provided that such
modifications remain within the objectives
for which the additional funding was 7
Excluding the direct costs for subcontracting and
awarded. the costs of resources made available by third
parties which are not used on the premises of the
host institution.

14 | P a g e
 Eligibility criteria

Eligible proposals Eligible Scientific Fields

All proposals must be complete and Applications may be made in any field of
submitted before the relevant call research9.
deadline. A complete proposal needs to
include all parts or sections (see “Proposal Eligible Principal Investigator
submission and description” below). The ERC actions are open to researchers of
Incomplete proposals may be declared any nationality who intend to conduct
ineligible. their research activity in any Member
The content of the proposal must relate to State or Associated Country. Principal
the objectives and to the grant type set Investigators may be of any age and
out in the call, as defined in this work nationality and may reside in any country
programme. A proposal will only be in the world at the time of the application.
deemed ineligible on grounds of ‘scope’ in However Principal Investigators funded
clear-cut cases. through the ERC frontier research grants
shall spend a minimum percentage of
Where there is a doubt on the eligibility of their total working time in an EU Member
a proposal, the peer review evaluation State or Associated Country and a
may proceed pending a decision following minimum percentage of their total
an eligibility review committee8. If it working time on the ERC project (see
becomes clear before, during or after the Eligible Host Institution and profiles of
peer review evaluation phase, that one or Starting, Consolidator and Advanced Grant
more of the eligibility criteria has not been Principal Investigators below).
met, the proposal will be declared
ineligible and not considered any further. Starting, Consolidator and Advanced Grant
proposals are submitted by the Principal
Investigator who has scientific
responsibility for the project, on behalf of
the host institution. There are specific
eligibility criteria for a Principal
9
Research proposals within the scope of Annex I to
the Euratom Treaty, namely those directed
8
For further information see applicable ERC rules towards nuclear energy applications, shall be
for submission and evaluation which can be found submitted to relevant calls under the Euratom
on the Horizon 2020 Participant Portal. Framework Programme.

15 | P a g e
Investigator applying to the Starting or
Consolidator Grants based on the date of
award of his or her first PhD (or equivalent
doctoral degree10) as below. This
“streaming” allows applicants to be
compared with researchers at a similar
career stage.

Groups applying for the ERC Synergy Grant

must be made up of a minimum of two
and a maximum of four Principal
Investigators and, as necessary, their
teams. One of the Principal Investigators
must be designated as the Corresponding
Principal Investigator, who will be the
administrative contact point on behalf of
the Corresponding Host Institution.

No specific eligibility criteria are foreseen

for Principal Investigators applying for the
ERC Advanced and ERC Synergy Grants but
only exceptional proposals are likely to be
funded in what are expected to be
extremely competitive calls (see ERC
Advanced Grant and ERC Synergy Grant
profiles below).

10
See ERC Scientific Council's note on 'PhD and
Equivalent Doctoral Degrees' at Annex 2, including
specific provisions for holders of medical degrees.

16 | P a g e
 Starting Grant Consolidator Grant Advanced Grant
and Synergy Grant

Specific Principal Investigator Principal Investigator none

Eligibility shall have been shall have been
awarded his or her awarded his or her
Criteria
first PhD first PhD

> 2 and ≤ 7 years > 7 and ≤ 12 years

prior to 1 January prior to 1 January

2018 2018

Cut-off dates: Cut-off dates:

PhD awarded from 1 PhD awarded from 1
January 2011 to 31 January 2006 to 31
December 2015 December 2010
(inclusive) (inclusive)

The reference date towards the calculation of the eligibility period should be the date of the
actual award according to the national rules in the country where the degree was awarded.

However, the effective elapsed time since the award of the first PhD taken into consideration
for eligibility can be reduced in the following properly documented circumstances provided
they started before the call deadline.

For maternity, the effective elapsed time since the award of the first PhD will be considered
reduced by 18 months or if longer by the documented amount of leave actually taken for
each child born before or after the PhD award. For paternity, the effective elapsed time since
the award of the first PhD will be considered reduced by the documented amount of
paternity leave actually taken for each child born before or after the PhD award.

For long-term illness11, clinical training or national service the effective elapsed time since the
award of the first PhD12 will be considered reduced by the documented amount of leave
actually taken by the Principal Investigator for each incident which occurred after the PhD
award.

11
Over ninety days for the Principal Investigator or a close family member (child, spouse, parent or sibling).
12
For applicants whose first eligible degree is their MD such incidents can be considered from the date of the
completion of their MD degree.

17 | P a g e
Eligible Host Institution Principal Investigator. Where they bring
scientific added value to the project,
The host institution (Applicant Legal additional team members may also be
Entity13) must engage the Principal hosted by additional legal entities15 which
Investigator for at least the duration of the will be eligible for funding, and which may
project, as defined in the grant be legal entities established anywhere,
agreement. It must either be established including outside the European Union or
in an EU Member State or Associated Associated Countries, or international
Country as a legal entity created under organisations. Legal entities established
national law, or it may be an International outside the European Union or Associated
European Interest Organisation (such as Countries shall be eligible for funding
CERN, EMBL, etc.), the European provided that their participation is
Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) deemed essential for carrying out the
or any other entity created under EU law. action.
Any type of legal entity, public or private,
including universities, research Please also refer to Annex 3 - Countries
organisations and undertakings can host Associated to Horizon 2020 and
Principal Investigators and their teams. Restrictions Applying to Some Legal
Entities Established in Certain Third
It is expected that the research project will Countries.
be implemented within the territory of the
Member States or Associated Countries. Restrictions on submission of
This does not exclude field work or other proposals
research activities in cases where these
must necessarily be conducted outside the The ERC calls are highly competitive.
Thousands of high quality proposals are
European Union or the Associated
received each year and only outstanding
Countries in order to achieve the scientific
proposals are likely to be funded. In order
objectives of the project/activity14. to maintain the quality and integrity of
ERC’s evaluation process the Scientific
It is also expected that the host institution
Council decided to introduce restrictions
will be the only participating legal entity in on applications from 2009. These
the case of a Starting, Consolidator or restrictions were extended from 2015.
Advanced Grant. In a Synergy grant up to
four Host Institutions could engage a The restrictions for submission under the
ERC Work Programme 2018 are set out in
13 the box below. The Scientific Council may
Please see important information on possible
registration of economic operators in the decide in the light of experience that
Commission's Early Detection and Exclusion different restrictions will apply in
System (EDES) on final page.
subsequent years. The restrictions related
14
Time spent on such field work or other research
15
activities may count as time spent in the EU or the Consortia agreements are not required for ERC
Associated Countries for the purpose of the multi-beneficiary grants.
Principal Investigator’s time commitments.

18 | P a g e
to the outcome of the evaluation in 2015 and will have 2015 in the call
previous calls are designed to allow identifier (for example ERC-2015-StG).
unsuccessful Principal Investigators the
Ineligible or withdrawn proposals do not
time necessary to develop a stronger
count against any of the restrictions in the
proposal.
box below.
The year of an ERC call for proposals refers
to the Work Programme under which the
call was published and can be established
by its call identifier. A 2015 ERC call for
proposals is therefore one that was
published under the Work Programme

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.

No restrictions apply

A Principal Investigator whose proposal was evaluated as category A or category B at

step 2 in the 2017 Starting, Consolidator or Advanced Grant calls may submit a proposal
to the 2018 Starting, Consolidator, Advanced or Synergy Grant calls .

Restrictions apply

A Principal Investigator whose proposal was evaluated as category B at step 1 in the

2017 Starting, Consolidator or Advanced Grant calls may not submit a proposal to the
2018 Starting, Consolidator or Advanced Grant calls but may submit a proposal to the
2018 Synergy Grant call.

A Principal Investigator whose proposal was evaluated as category C in the 2016 or 2017
Starting, Consolidator or Advanced Grant calls may not submit a proposal to the 2018
Starting, Consolidator or Advanced Grant calls but may submit a proposal to the 2018
Synergy Grant call.

A Principal Investigator whose proposal was rejected on the grounds of a breach of

research integrity in the 2016 or 2017 ERC calls may not submit a proposal to the 2018
ERC calls.

A researcher may participate as Principal Investigator16 in only one ERC frontier research
project at any one time17.

16
Including all Principal Investigators supported under the Synergy Grant in ERC Work Programmes 2012 –
2013.

19 | P a g e
 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 ends18 no more than two years after the call deadline.

A Principal Investigator who is a serving Panel Member for a 2018 ERC call or who served
as a Panel Member for a 2016 ERC call may not apply to a 2018 ERC call for the same
type of grant19.

Restrictions that Scientific Council intends to apply

A Principal Investigator whose proposal was evaluated as category B at step 1 or step 2

in the 2018 Synergy Grant call may not submit a proposal to the 2019 Synergy Grant call.

A Principal Investigator whose proposal was evaluated as category C at step 1 in the

2018 Synergy Grant call may not submit a proposal to the 2019 Starting, Consolidator,
Advanced or Synergy Grant calls or for the 2020 Synergy Grant call.

All Principal Investigators whose proposal was rejected on the grounds of a breach of
research integrity in the 2018 Synergy Grant call may not submit a proposal to the 2019
ERC calls.

17
A new frontier research project can only start after the duration of the project fixed in a previous frontier
research grant agreement has ended.
18
According to the duration of the project fixed in the previous frontier research grant agreement.
19
The members of the ERC panels alternate to allow panel members to apply to the ERC calls in alternate years.

20 | P a g e
 Starting Grant profile

Objectives Profile of the ERC Starting Grant

Principal Investigator
ERC Starting Grants are designed to
support excellent Principal Investigators at The Principal Investigator shall have been
the career stage at which they are starting awarded their first PhD at least 2 and up
their own independent research team or to 7 years prior to 1 January 2018. The
programme. Applicant Principal effective elapsed time since the award of
Investigators must demonstrate the the first PhD can be reduced in certain
ground-breaking nature, ambition and properly documented circumstances (see
feasibility of their scientific proposal. “Eligible Principal Investigator” above).

Size of ERC Starting Grants A competitive Starting Grant Principal

Investigator must have already shown the
Starting Grants may be awarded up to a
potential for research independence and
maximum of EUR 1 500 000 for a period of
evidence of maturity, for example by
5 years20.
having produced at least one important
However, up to an additional EUR 500 000 publication as main author or without the
can be requested in the proposal to cover participation of their PhD supervisor.
(a) eligible "start-up" costs for Principal Applicant Principal Investigators should
Investigators moving to the EU or an also be able to demonstrate a promising
Associated Country from elsewhere as a track record of early achievements
consequence of receiving the ERC grant appropriate to their research field and
and/or (b) the purchase of major career stage, including significant
equipment and/or (c) access to large publications (as main author) in major
facilities21. international peer-reviewed
multidisciplinary scientific journals, or in
the leading international peer-reviewed
journals of their respective field. They may
20
also demonstrate a record of invited
The maximum award is reduced pro rata
temporis for projects of a shorter duration. This
presentations in well-established
does not apply to ongoing projects. international conferences, granted
21 patents, awards, prizes etc.
As any additional funding is to cover major one-
off costs it is not subject to pro-rata temporis
reduction for projects of shorter duration. All
funding requested is assessed during evaluation.

21 | P a g e
Early achievements track record
In the Track record (see “Proposal description” below) the applicant Principal Investigator
should list (if applicable):

1. Up to five publications in major international peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary scientific

journals and/or in the leading international peer-reviewed journals, peer-reviewed
conferences proceedings and/or monographs of their respective research fields, highlighting
those as main author or without the presence as co-author of their PhD supervisor (properly
referenced, field relevant bibliometric indicators may also be included);

2. Research monographs and any translations thereof;

3. Granted patent(s);

4. Invited presentations to internationally established conferences and/or international

advanced schools;

5. Prizes/ Awards/ Academy memberships.

Expected time commitment of the guarantee its proper execution. The time
Starting Grant Principal commitment will be monitored, and in
cases where the actual commitment is
Investigator
below the minimum levels set out above,
The question of whether the Principal or the levels indicated in the proposal (see
Investigator is strongly committed to the proposal description below), appropriate
project and demonstrates the willingness measures may be taken, up to and
to devote a significant amount of time to including reduction of the grant and
the project forms a key part of the suspension or termination of grants in
evaluation. accordance with the grant agreement.

Principal Investigators funded through the It is also expected that Principal

ERC Starting Grants shall spend a Investigators will be able to start their
minimum of 50% of their total working project within six months of receiving an
time in an EU Member State or Associated invitation letter from the ERC.
Country and a minimum of 50% of their
total working time on the ERC project22.

Principal Investigators shall ensure a

sufficient time commitment and presence
throughout the course of the project to

22
See Eligible Host Institution above regarding field
work.

22 | P a g e
 Consolidator Grant profile

Objectives Profile of the ERC Consolidator

Grant Principal Investigator
ERC Consolidator Grants are designed to
support excellent Principal Investigators at The Principal Investigator shall have been
the career stage at which they may still be awarded their first PhD over 7 and up to
consolidating their own independent 12 years prior to 1 January 2018. The
research team or programme. Applicant effective elapsed time since the award of
Principal Investigators must demonstrate the first PhD can be reduced in certain
the ground-breaking nature, ambition and properly documented circumstances (see
feasibility of their scientific proposal. “Eligible Principal Investigator” above).

Size of ERC Consolidator Grants A competitive Consolidator Grant Principal

Investigator must have already shown
Consolidator Grants may be awarded up
research independence and evidence of
to a maximum of EUR 2 000 000 for a
maturity, for example by having produced
period of 5 years23.
several important publications as main
However, up to an additional EUR 750 000 author or without the participation of
can be requested in the proposal to cover their PhD supervisor. Applicant Principal
(a) eligible "start-up" costs for Principal Investigators should also be able to
Investigators moving to the EU or an demonstrate a promising track record of
Associated Country from elsewhere as a early achievements appropriate to their
consequence of receiving the ERC grant research field and career stage, including
and/or (b) the purchase of major significant publications (as main author) in
equipment and/or (c) access to large major international peer-reviewed
facilities24. multidisciplinary scientific journals, or in
the leading international peer-reviewed
journals of their respective field. They may
also demonstrate a record of invited
23
presentations in well-established
The maximum award is reduced pro rata
temporis for projects of a shorter duration. This
international conferences, granted
does not apply to ongoing projects. patents, awards, prizes etc.
24
As any additional funding is to cover major one-
off costs it is not subject to pro-rata temporis
reduction for projects of shorter duration. All
funding requested is assessed during evaluation.

23 | P a g e
Early achievements track record
In the Track Record (see “Proposal description” below) the applicant Principal Investigator
should list (if applicable):

1. Up to ten publications in major international peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary scientific

journals and/or in the leading international peer-reviewed journals, peer-reviewed
conferences proceedings and/or monographs of their respective research fields, highlighting
those as main author or without the presence as co-author of their PhD supervisor (properly
referenced, field relevant bibliometric indicators may also be included);

2. Research monographs and any translations thereof;

3. Granted patent(s);

4. Invited presentations to internationally established conferences and/or international

advanced schools;

5. Prizes/ Awards/ Academy memberships.

Expected time commitment of the guarantee its proper execution. The time
Consolidator Grant Principal commitment will be monitored, and in
cases where the actual commitment is
Investigator
below the minimum levels set out above,
The question of whether the Principal or the levels indicated in the proposal (see
Investigator is strongly committed to the proposal description below), appropriate
project and demonstrates the willingness measures may be taken, up to and
to devote a significant amount of time to including reduction of the grant and
the project forms a key part of the suspension or termination of grants in
evaluation. accordance with the grant agreement.

Principal Investigators funded through the It is also expected that Principal

ERC Consolidator Grants shall spend a Investigators will be able to start their
minimum of 50% of their total working project within six months of receiving an
time in an EU Member State or Associated invitation letter from the ERC.
Country and a minimum of 40% of their
total working time on the ERC project25.

Principal Investigators shall ensure a

sufficient time commitment and presence
throughout the course of the project to

25
See Eligible Host Institution above regarding field
work.

24 | P a g e
 Advanced Grant profile

Objectives Profile of the ERC Advanced Grant

Principal Investigator
Advanced Grants are designed to support
excellent Principal Investigators at the ERC Advanced Grant Principal
career stage at which they are already Investigators are expected to be active
established research leaders with a researchers and to have a track record of
recognised track record of research significant research achievements in the
achievements. Applicant Principal last 10 years which must be presented in
Investigators must demonstrate the the application.
ground-breaking nature, ambition and
feasibility of their scientific proposal. A competitive Advanced Grant Principal
Investigator must have already shown a
Size of ERC Advanced Grants record which identifies them as an
exceptional leader in terms of originality
Advanced Grants may be awarded up to a
and significance of their research
maximum of EUR 2 500 000 for a period of
contributions.
5 years26.
Thus, in most fields, Principal Investigators
However, up to an additional EUR 1 000
of Advanced Grant proposals will be
000 can be requested in the proposal to
expected to demonstrate a record of
cover (a) eligible "start-up" costs for
achievements appropriate to the field and
Principal Investigators moving to the EU or
at least matching one or more of the
an Associated Country from elsewhere as
following benchmarks:
a consequence of receiving the ERC grant,
and/or (b) the purchase of major  10 publications as main author (or
equipment and/or (c) access to large in those fields where alphabetic
facilities27. order of authorship is the norm,
joint author) in major
international peer-reviewed
26 multidisciplinary scientific
The maximum award is reduced pro rata
temporis for projects of a shorter duration. This journals, and/or in the leading
does not apply to ongoing projects. international peer-reviewed
27
As any additional funding is to cover major one- journals and peer-reviewed
off costs it is not subject to pro-rata temporis conferences proceedings of their
reduction for projects of shorter duration. All
respective field;
funding requested is assessed during evaluation.

25 | P a g e
  3 major research monographs, of  3 well-established international
which at least one is translated conferences or congresses where
into another language. This the applicant was involved in their
benchmark is relevant to research organisation as a member of the
fields where publication of steering and/or organising
monographs is the norm (e.g. committee;
humanities and social sciences).
 International recognition through
Other alternative benchmarks that may be scientific or artistic prizes/awards
considered (individually or in combination) or membership in well-regarded
as indicative of an exceptional record and Academies or artefact with
recognition in the last 10 years: documented use (for example,
architectural or engineering
 5 granted patents;
design, methods or tools);
 10 invited presentations in well-
 Major contributions to launching
established internationally
the careers of outstanding
organised conferences and
researchers;
advanced schools;
 Recognised leadership in
 3 research expeditions led by the
industrial innovation.
applicant Principal Investigator;

Ten-year track record

In the Track Record (see “Proposal description” below) the applicant Principal Investigator
should list (if applicable):

1. Up to ten representative publications, from the last ten years, as main author (or in
those fields where alphabetic order of authorship is the norm, joint author) in major
international peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary scientific journals and/or in the leading
international peer-reviewed journals and peer-reviewed conference proceedings of their
respective research fields (properly referenced, field relevant bibliometric indicators may
also be included);

2. Research monographs and any translations thereof;

3. Granted patents;

4. Invited presentations to internationally established conferences and/or international

advanced schools;

5. Research expeditions that the applicant Principal Investigator has led;

26 | P a g e
6. Organisation of international conferences in the field of the applicant (membership in the
steering and/or organising committee);

7. Prizes/ Awards/ Academy memberships;

8. Major contributions to the early careers of excellent researchers;

9. Examples of leadership in industrial innovation or design.

If a Principal Investigator so chooses, his Expected time commitment of the

or her achievements over a longer period Advanced Grant Principal
than the past ten years can be considered
Investigator
in the following circumstances which
should be highlighted in the CV. The question of whether the Principal
Investigator demonstrates the level of
For maternity, the track record considered
commitment to the project necessary for
can be extended by 18 months, or if
its execution and demonstrates the
longer by the amount of leave actually
willingness to devote a significant amount
taken, for each child born before or during
of time to the project forms a key part of
the last ten years. For paternity, the track
the evaluation.
record considered can be extended by the
amount of paternity leave actually taken Principal Investigators funded through the
for each child born before or during the ERC Advanced Grants shall spend a
last ten years. For long-term illness28, minimum of 50% of their total working
clinical qualification or national service the time in an EU Member State or Associated
track record considered can be extended Country and a minimum of 30% of their
by the amount of leave actually taken by total working time on the ERC project29.
the Principal Investigator and clearly
explained in the career break section of Principal Investigators shall ensure a
their CV for each incident which occurred sufficient time commitment and presence
during the last ten years. throughout the course of the project to
guarantee its proper execution. The time
commitment will be monitored, and in
cases where the actual commitment is
below the minimum levels set out above,
or the levels indicated in the proposal (see
proposal description below), appropriate
measures may be taken, up to and
including reduction of the grant and
28
Over ninety days for the Principal Investigator or
a close family member (child, spouse, parent or
29
sibling). See Eligible Host Institution above regarding field
work.

27 | P a g e
suspension or termination of grants in project within six months of receiving an
accordance with the grant agreement. invitation letter from the ERC.

It is also expected that Principal

Investigators will be able to start their

28 | P a g e
 Synergy Grant profile

Objectives Size of ERC Synergy Grants

ERC Synergy Grants are intended to Synergy Grants may be awarded up to a
enable minimum two to maximum four maximum of EUR 10 000 000 for a period
Principal Investigators and their teams to of 6 years30.
bring together complementary skills,
However, up to an additional EUR 4 000
knowledge, and resources in new ways, in
000 in total can be requested in the
order to jointly address ambitious
proposal to cover (a) eligible "start-up"
research problems.
costs for Principal Investigators moving to
The aim is to promote substantial the EU or an Associated Country from
advances at the frontiers of knowledge, to elsewhere as a consequence of receiving
cross-fertilize scientific fields, and to the ERC grant and/or (b) the purchase of
encourage new productive lines of enquiry major equipment and/or (c) access to
and new methods and techniques, large facilities31.
including unconventional approaches and
investigations at the interface between Profile of the ERC Synergy Grant
established disciplines. This should enable Principal Investigators
transformative research not only at the
Groups applying for the ERC Synergy Grant
forefront of European science but also to
must be made up of a minimum of two
become a benchmark on a global scale.
and a maximum of four Principal
Applicants Principal Investigators must Investigators and, as necessary, their
demonstrate the synergies, teams. One of the Principal Investigators
complementarities and added value that must be designated as the Corresponding
could lead to breakthroughs that would Principal Investigator.
not be possible by the individual Principal
Applications are expected from a group of
Investigators working alone.
innovative and active Principal
30
The maximum award is reduced pro rata
temporis for projects of a shorter duration. This
does not apply to ongoing projects.
31
As any additional funding is to cover major one-
off costs it is not subject to pro-rata temporis
reduction for projects of shorter duration. All
funding requested is assessed during evaluation.

29 | P a g e
Investigators with competitive track ERC Synergy Grants are designed to foster
records as appropriate to their career research at the intellectual frontiers. New
stage and each must present as part of the types of joint effort may be needed that
proposal an early achievement track- allow for new combinations of skills and
record or a 10-year track-record disciplines, or the bringing together of
whichever is most appropriate for their researchers from different institutions,
career stage (see Starting, Consolidator sectors or countries.
and Advanced Grant profiles above and
Proposal description below).

Expected time commitment of the including reduction of the grant and

Synergy Grant Principal suspension or termination of grants in
accordance with the grant agreement.
Investigators
It is also expected that Principal
The question of whether each of the
Investigators will be able to start their
Principal Investigators is strongly
project within six months of receiving an
committed to the project and
invitation letter from the ERC.
demonstrates the willingness to devote a
significant amount of time to the project
forms a key part of the evaluation.

Principal Investigators funded through a

ERC Synergy Grant shall spend a minimum
of 50% of their total working time in an EU
Member State or Associated Country and
a minimum of 30% of their total working
time on the ERC project32.

Principal Investigators shall ensure a

sufficient time commitment and presence
throughout the course of the project to
guarantee its proper execution. The time
commitment will be monitored, and in
cases where the actual commitment is
below the minimum levels set out above,
or the levels indicated in the proposal (see
proposal description below), appropriate
measures may be taken, up to and

32
See Eligible Host Institution above regarding field
work.

30 | P a g e
 Proposal submission and description

Proposal Submission Proposal description

Starting, Consolidator and Advanced Grant A complete proposal shall consist of the
proposals are submitted by the Principal following elements34.
Investigator who has scientific
Extended Synopsis: 5 pages
responsibility for the project, on behalf of
the host institution. Curriculum Vitae: 2 pages for each
Principal Investigator
Synergy Grant proposals are submitted by
a Corresponding Principal Investigator Track Record: 2 pages for each
who will be the administrative contact Principal Investigator
point on behalf of the group. Together all
the Principal Investigators have scientific Scientific Proposal: 15 pages
responsibility for the group's project on
Host Institution Binding Statement
behalf of the host institution or host
of Support
institutions which are the applicant legal
entities. Ethics Review Table

Proposal submission is made PhD record and supporting

electronically. Early registration documentation for eligibility
and submission is strongly checking (for Starting and
recommended and should be Consolidator Grants only).
done as early as possible in
advance of the call deadline.

For each call, Information for Applicants33

is published on the ERC website and
Participants Portal, which describes in
detail how the electronic forms should be
completed.

33 34
As well as other relevant documents, including Incomplete proposals may be declared ineligible,
the ERC rules for submission and evaluation. see “Eligibility criteria” above.

31 | P a g e
 The host institution must confirm In fairness to all applicants, these
its association with and its support page limits will be applied strictly.
to the project and the Principal Only the material that is presented
Investigator. As part of the within these limits will be
application, the institution must evaluated (peer reviewers will only
provide a binding statement that be asked to read, and will be under
the conditions of independence are no obligation to read beyond, the
already fulfilled or will be provided material presented within the page
to the Principal Investigator if the limits). References and the funding
application is successful, according ID will not count towards the page
to the template provided in the limit. Exceptionally for Synergy
Information for Applicants. Grant applications the resources
Proposals that do not include this section that is included in the
institutional statement may be Scientific Proposal will also not
declared ineligible. count towards the 15 page limit.

For Synergy Grant applications,

only the host institution of the Extended Synopsis: This should be a
Corresponding Principal concise presentation of the full scientific
Investigator must confirm its
proposal, with particular attention to the
association with and its support to
ground-breaking nature of the research
the project and the Corresponding
project and the feasibility of the outlined
Principal Investigator, listing the
other participating Principal scientific approach. At step 1 the full
Investigators. However, if the scientific proposal is not assessed so all
application is successful and there essential information must be covered in
is more than one host institution, the synopsis. The applicant will choose a
each of the host institutions shall primary evaluation panel and may also
offer the commitments set out indicate a secondary evaluation panel. The
above subject to a supplementary applicant should indicate when he or she
agreement between the Principal believes that the proposal is of a cross-
Investigator or Principal
panel or cross-domain nature. In the case
Investigators and the host
of Synergy Grant applications only
institution.
keywords, and not panels should be
indicated.

Curriculum Vitae: The CV should include

the standard academic and research
record as well as a succinct "funding ID"
which must specify any current research
grants and their subject, and any on-going
application for work related to the
proposal. Any research career gaps and/or
unconventional paths should be clearly

32 | P a g e
explained so that they can be fairly For Synergy Grants the proposal should
assessed by the evaluation panels. also cover how the project will create
significant synergies and added value
Track Record: Each of the Principal
beyond the current work of the Principal
Investigator must provide a list of
Investigators allowing them to undertake
achievements reflecting his or her track
more original, valuable, and path-breaking
record. The type of achievements
research. Special emphasis should be
expected for Starting, Consolidator and
accorded to the innovative ways of
Advanced Grant applicant Principal
working together and specify how the
Investigators are set out in the relevant
time spent together will be utilised. Each
profiles above. Principal Investigators
Principal Investigator shall present their
applying to the Synergy Grant call can be
estimation of the real project cost.
at any of these career stages.

Scientific Proposal: Description of the Applications where the Principal

Investigator proposes to commit
scientific and technical aspects of the
less time in the EU or an Associated
project, demonstrating the ground-
Country or to the project than the
breaking nature of the research, its
minimum percentages set out
potential impact and research under the profiles of Starting,
methodology. The proposal should also Consolidator Advanced and
clearly specify the percentage of the Synergy Grant Principal
applicant's total working time that will be Investigators above will be
spent in the EU or an Associated Country declared ineligible.
and the percentage of the applicant’s total
working time that will be devoted to the
project, as well as a full estimation of the
real project cost.

33 | P a g e
 Evaluation procedure and criteria

Evaluation procedure agreement of both Panel Chairs

concerned.
For Starting, Consolidator and Advanced
Grants The panel to which a proposal is allocated
may request additional reviews by
A single submission of the full proposal appropriate members of other panel(s) or
will be followed by a two-step evaluation. additional remote experts.
The evaluation will be conducted by
means of a structure of high level peer The ERC strongly encourages
review panels as listed in Annex 1. The multi and interdisciplinary
panels may be assisted by independent research proposals. Proposals
experts working remotely. of this type are evaluated by
ERC's regular panels with the
The applicant Principal Investigator can appropriate external expertise.
request during the electronic proposal
submission that up to three specific
persons should not act as an evaluator in Proposals will be retained for step 2 based
the evaluation of their proposal35. on the outcome of the evaluation at step 1
(see below) and a budgetary cut-off level
At step 1, the extended synopsis and the of three times the panel's indicative
Principal Investigator's track record and budget.
CV will be assessed (and not the full
scientific proposal). At step 2 the Principal Investigators whose proposals
complete version of the retained are retained for step 2 of the evaluation
proposals will be assessed (including the for the Starting and Consolidator Grants
full scientific proposal). will be invited for an interview to present
their project to the evaluation panel,
The allocation of the proposals to the meeting in Brussels.
various panels will be based on the
expressed preference of the applicant
Principal Investigator (see “Proposal
description” above). Proposals may be
allocated to a different panel with the

35
The persons identified may be excluded from the
evaluation of the proposal concerned, as long as it
remains possible to have the proposal evaluated.

34 | P a g e
For Synergy Grants around 15 experts each. In step 3, the
interview panels may be reconfigured to
A single submission of the full proposal
ensure the best expertise for the
will be followed by a three-step
proposals.
evaluation, including interviews. The
evaluation will be conducted by means of
a structure of dedicated panels. The
panels may be assisted by independent
experts working remotely.

The applicant Corresponding Principal

Investigator can request on behalf of the
group during the electronic proposal
submission that up to four specific persons
should not act as an evaluator in the
evaluation of their proposal

At step 1, the extended synopsis of the

scientific proposal and the Principal
Investigators’ track records and CVs will be
assessed (and not the full scientific
proposal).

At step 2, the complete version of the

retained proposals will be assessed
(including the full scientific proposal).

At step 3, the most competitive of the

retained proposals will be identified and
their Principal Investigators may be invited
for an interview to present their project to
a panel meeting in Brussels.

The composition of the panels at each

step is not predefined but will be decided
dynamically in relation to the proposals
received. Step 1 panels will be formed
from approximately 80 panel members
and chairs. Five step 2 panels will be
formed after the step 1 filtering to ensure
the best expertise for a group of
proposals. The five step 2 panels will be
composed using the step 1 panel
members, grouping them into panels of

35 | P a g e
Evaluation criteria Investigators applying as part of a group
for a Synergy Grant will be evaluated
For all ERC frontier research grants, according to their individual career stage.
scientific excellence is the sole criterion
of evaluation. It will be applied in In general, projects wholly or largely
conjunction to the evaluation of both: the consisting in the collation and compilation
ground-breaking nature, ambition and of existing material in new databases,
feasibility of the research project; and the editions or collections are unlikely to
intellectual capacity, creativity and constitute ground-breaking or "frontier"
commitment of the Principal Investigator. research in themselves, however useful
such resources might be to subsequent
In the case of a Synergy Grant application original research. Such projects are
the peer reviewers will need to see that therefore unlikely to be recommended for
the collaborative working arrangements funding by the ERC's panels.
between the Principal Investigators can
ensure scientific excellence. Plagiarism detection software may be
used to analyse proposals submitted to
During the evaluation, the phase of the the ERC.
Principal Investigator's transition to
independence, possible breaks in the The detailed evaluation elements applying
research career of the applicant and/or to the excellence of the research project
and the Principal Investigator are set out
unconventional research career paths
below.
should be taken into account. Benchmarks
set in the relevant profiles above including
the expected minimum working time to be
spent on ERC projects, will also be taken
into consideration. Synergy Grant Principal

36 | P a g e
1. Research Project

Ground-breaking nature, ambition and feasibility

Starting, Consolidator, Advanced and Synergy

Ground-breaking nature and potential impact of the research project

To what extent does the proposed research address important challenges?

To what extent are the objectives ambitious and beyond the state of the art (e.g. novel
concepts and approaches or development between or across disciplines)?

To what extent is the proposed research high risk/high gain?

Scientific Approach

To what extent is the outlined scientific approach feasible bearing in mind the extent that the
proposed research is high risk/high gain (based on the Extended Synopsis)?

To what extent does the proposal go beyond what the individual Principal Investigators could
achieve alone (for Synergy Grants based on the Extended Synopsis)?

To what extent does the proposal require and demonstrate significant synergies,
complementarities and scientific added-value to enable it to achieve its objectives (for
Synergy Grants based on the Extended Synopsis)?

To what extent are the proposed research methodology and working arrangements
appropriate to achieve the goals of the project (based on the full Scientific Proposal)?

To what extent does the proposal involve the development of novel methodology (based on
the full Scientific Proposal)?

To what extent are the proposed timescales and resources necessary and properly justified
(based on the full Scientific Proposal)?

37 | P a g e
2. Principal Investigator

Intellectual capacity, creativity and commitment

Starting and Consolidator

Intellectual capacity and creativity

To what extent has the PI demonstrated the ability to propose and conduct ground-breaking
research?

To what extent does the PI provide evidence of creative independent thinking?

To what extent have the achievements of the PI typically gone beyond the state of the art?

Commitment

To what extent does the PI demonstrate the level of commitment to the project necessary for
its execution and the willingness to devote a significant amount of time to the project
(minimum 50% for Starting and 40% for Consolidator of the total working time) (based on
the full Scientific Proposal)?

Advanced and Synergy

Intellectual capacity and creativity

To what extent has/have the PI(s) demonstrated the ability to propose and conduct ground-
breaking research?

To what extent does/do the PI(s) provide evidence of creative independent thinking?

To what extent have the achievements of the PI(s) typically gone beyond the state of the art?

To what extent has the PI demonstrated sound leadership in the training and advancement
of young scientists (for Advanced Grant applicants)?

Commitment

To what extent does the PI demonstrate the level of commitment to the project necessary for
its execution and the willingness to devote a significant amount of time to the project
(minimum 30% for Advanced and Synergy of the total working time) (based on the full
Scientific Proposal)?

38 | P a g e
Outcome of evaluation B. meets some but not all elements of
the ERC's excellence criterion and
For Starting, Consolidator and Advanced will not be funded.
Grants
For Synergy Grants
At each evaluation step, each proposal will
be evaluated and marked for each of the At the end of step 1 of the evaluation
two main elements of the proposal: the applicants will be informed that their
ground-breaking nature, ambition and proposal:
feasibility of the research project; and the
A. is of sufficient quality to pass to
intellectual capacity, creativity and
step 2 of the evaluation;
commitment of the Principal Investigator.
B. is of high quality but not sufficient
At the end of each evaluation step, the
to pass to step 2 of the evaluation;
proposals will be ranked by the panels on
the basis of the panels' overall C. is not of sufficient quality to pass
appreciation of their strengths and to step 2 of the evaluation.
weaknesses taking into account the marks
At the end of step 2 of the evaluation
they have received.
applicants will be informed that their
At the end of step 1 of the evaluation proposal:
applicants will be informed that their
A. is of sufficient quality to pass to
proposal:
step 3 of the evaluation;
A. is of sufficient quality to pass to
B. is of high quality but not sufficient
step 2 of the evaluation;
to pass to step 3 of the evaluation;
B. is of high quality but not sufficient
At the end of step 3 of the evaluation
to pass to step 2 of the evaluation;
applicants will be informed that their
C. is not of sufficient quality to pass proposal:
to step 2 of the evaluation.
A. fully meets the ERC's excellence
At the end of step 2 of the evaluation criterion and is recommended for
applicants will be informed that their funding if sufficient funds are
proposal: available;

A. fully meets the ERC's excellence B. meets some but not all elements of
criterion and is recommended for the ERC's excellence criterion and
funding if sufficient funds are will not be funded.
available;

39 | P a g e
In addition, once the evaluation of their Applicants may also be subject to
proposal has been completed, applicants restrictions on submitting proposals to
to all schemes will receive an evaluation future ERC calls based on the outcome of
report which will include the ranking the evaluation. Applicants will need to
range of their proposal among the check the restrictions in place for each
proposals evaluated by the panel. call (for 2018 calls see restrictions on
submission of proposals under “Eligibility
Projects recommended for funding will be
criteria” above).
funded by the ERC if sufficient funds are
available. Proposals will be funded in
priority order based on their rank.

40 | P a g e
Proof of Concept
Grant
for Principal Investigators of
ERC frontier research grants

41 | P a g e
Objectives 2018. If multiple submissions are made at
different cut-off dates under the Work
Frontier research often generates Programme 2018 only the first eligible
unexpected or new opportunities for proposal will be considered.
commercial or societal application. The
ERC Proof of Concept Grants aim to A Principal Investigator whose proposal
maximise the value of the excellent was rejected on the grounds of a breach of
research that the ERC funds, by funding research integrity in the calls for proposals
further work (i.e. activities which were not under Work Programmes 2016 or 2017
scheduled to be funded by the original may not submit a proposal to the calls for
ERC frontier research grant) to verify the proposals made under Work Programme
innovation potential of ideas arising from 2018.
ERC funded projects. Proof of Concept
Eligible projects
Grants are therefore on offer only to
Principal Investigators whose proposals All proposals must be complete and be
draw substantially on their ERC funded submitted before the relevant call
research. deadline. Incomplete proposals may be
declared ineligible (See ERC Proof of
Ethical Principles Concept Grant proposal submission and
description below).
All proposals will be subject to ethics
review as with proposals for the ERC's The content of the proposal must relate to
frontier research grants. the objectives and to the grant type set
out in the call, as defined in this work
Eligibility Criteria programme. A proposal will only be
deemed ineligible on grounds of ‘scope’ in
Eligible Principal Investigator
clear-cut cases.
All Principal Investigators in an ERC
Where there is a doubt on the eligibility of
frontier research project, that is either
a proposal, the evaluation may proceed
ongoing or has ended36 less than 12
pending a decision following an eligibility
months before 1 January 2018, are eligible
review committee. If it becomes clear
to participate and apply for an ERC Proof
before, during or after the evaluation
of Concept Grant.
phase, that one or more of the eligibility
Principal Investigators may submit only criteria has not been met, the proposal
one proposal under Work Programme will be declared ineligible and not
considered any further.
36
Where the duration of the project fixed in the
ERC Grant Agreement has ended. Applicants will need to demonstrate the
relation between the idea to be taken to

42 | P a g e
proof of concept and the ERC frontier Maximum size of grant and grant
research project (Starting, Consolidator, assessment
Advanced or Synergy) in question.
The financial contribution will be up to a
More than one Proof of Concept Grant maximum of EUR 150 000 for a period of
may be awarded per ERC funded frontier 18 months. The ERC expects that
research project but only one Proof of normally, proof of concept projects should
Concept project may be running at any be completed within 12 months. However,
one time for the same ERC frontier to allow for those projects that require
research project37. more preparation time, projects will be
Eligible Host Institution signed for 18 months. Given this initial
flexibility, extensions of the duration of
The host institution (Applicant Legal proof of concept projects may be granted
Entity38) must engage the Principal only exceptionally.
Investigator for at least the duration of the
proof of concept project as defined in the The overall level of the funding offered
grant agreement and must be established will be assessed during the evaluation. The
in a Member State or an Associated funding requested by the applicant will be
Country as a legal entity created under judged against the needs of the proposed
national law 39. activity before award. The funding
requested by the Principal Investigator
Please also refer to Annex 3 - Countries must be fully justified by an estimation of
Associated to Horizon 2020 and the actual costs for the proposed
Restrictions Applying to Some Legal activities.
Entities Established in Certain Third
Countries. The Union financial contribution will take
the form of the reimbursement of up to
100% of the total eligible and approved
direct costs and of flat-rate financing of
indirect costs on the basis of 25% of the
37
This limit also applies to Synergy projects. total eligible direct costs40. The level of the
38
awarded grant represents a maximum
Please see important information on possible
registration of economic operators in the overall figure – the final amount to be paid
Commission's Early Detection and Exclusion must be justified on the basis of the costs
System (EDES) on final page. actually incurred for the project.
39
It may also be an International European Interest
Organisation (such as CERN, EMBL, etc.), the
European Commission's Joint Research Centre
(JRC), or an entity created under EU law. Any type
40
of legal entity, public or private, including Excluding the direct costs for subcontracting and
universities, research organisations as well as the costs of resources made available by third
undertakings can host the Principal Investigator parties which are not used on the premises of the
and their team. host institution.

43 | P a g e
The indicative budget for this call for 2018 The proposal will provide detailed
is EUR 20 000 000 (approximately one- descriptions of the project, its objectives,
third of which will be for each of the three planning, execution, and required
evaluation rounds following three specific resources. It will comprise the following
cut-off dates - proposals submitted required elements:
before each cut-off date will be evaluated
 A short description of the idea to
with the proposals submitted before the
be taken to proof of concept. This
same cut-off date).
should include an indication of the
ERC Proof of Concept Grant ERC-funded project from which the
proposal submission and idea is substantially drawn and
briefly demonstrate the relation
description
between the idea and the ERC-
Proposal Submission funded project in question.

Funding for the Proof of Concept Grant  Outline the innovation potential of
will be awarded through a call for the idea to be taken to proof of
proposals. Proposals are submitted by a concept. This should include a clear
single Principal Investigator, who has description of how the proof of
responsibility for the proposed activities, concept activities will lead to a
on behalf of the host institution which is commercial or social innovation.
the applicant legal entity.
 Outline the economic and/or
Applications can be submitted at any time societal impact expected from the
from the opening date of the call until the project, including the identification
final deadline and will be evaluated and of customer and societal benefits;
selected in three rounds, based on three definition of the process to be
specific cut-off dates. A Principal followed leading to concrete
Investigator may submit only one application; initial steps of analysis
application per call. Ineligible or of the advantages of the project’s
withdrawn proposals do not count against outcomes over existing products,
this limit. policies, or processes; and, where
applicable, brief explanation of the
Proposal submission is made activities to be undertaken in
electronically. Early registration terms of clarification of IPR
and submission is strongly position and strategy, testing in
recommended and should be
real world contexts, plans for
done as early as possible in
contacts with commercial and/or
advance of the call deadline.
societal partners.

 Outline a reasonable and plausible

Proposal description
plan of the activities proposed for
establishing the feasibility of the

44 | P a g e
 project, including a list of ERC Proof of Concept Grant
requested resources necessary for evaluation
the implementation of the
proposed project and a full A single-stage submission and single-step
estimation of the real project cost. evaluation procedure will be used. The
evaluation will be conducted by
 Host Institution Binding independent experts. These experts may
Statement of Support. work remotely and may if necessary meet
 Ethics Review table. as an evaluation panel as set out below on
the application of the evaluation criteria.
The host institution must confirm
Evaluation criteria
its association with and its support
to the project and the Principal Proof of Concept Grants are awarded in
Investigator. As part of the relation to an existing ERC-funded project.
application, the institution must
provide a binding statement that The activities to be funded shall draw
the conditions of independence are substantially on this scientifically excellent
already fulfilled or will be provided ERC-funded research. However the
to the Principal Investigator if the additional funding is not aimed at
application is successful, according extending the original research.
to the template provided in the
Information for Applicants. The funding will cover activities at the very
Proposals that do not include this early stage of turning research outputs
institutional statement may be into a commercial or socially valuable
declared ineligible. proposition, i.e. the initial steps of pre-
competitive development.

In fairness to all applicants a strict The evaluation criteria for selection of

limit of seven pages will be applied proposals for Proof of Concept Grants are
to the length of proposals. Only the excellence in innovation potential, impact
material that is presented within and quality and efficiency of the
this limit will be evaluated implementation as below:
(reviewers will only be asked to
evaluate, and will be under no
obligation to read beyond, the
material presented within the page
limit).

45 | P a g e
1. Excellence in Innovation potential
Does the proposed proof of concept activity greatly help move the output of research
towards the initial steps of a process leading to a commercial or social innovation?

The proposal should include plans for an analysis of whether the project’s expected outcomes
are innovative or distinctive compared to existing solutions.

2. Impact
2.1 Is the project to be taken to proof of concept expected to generate any effect or
benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services and are these appropriately
identified in the proposal?

2.2 Does the proposal provide a suitable outline of how the commercialisation or the
generation of the above listed benefits will be achieved?

The proposal should include:

- plans to asses and validate the effectiveness of the project’s outcomes;
- plans to clarify the IPR position and strategy41 or knowledge transfer strategy;
- plans for setting up contacts with industry partners, societal or cultural organisations,
policymakers or any other potential ‘end users’ of the projects’ results.

3. Quality and efficiency of the implementation (Quality of the proof of

concept plan)
Does the proposal provide a reasonable and acceptable plan of activities against clearly
identified objectives and towards establishing the feasibility of the project?

This should include:

- a sound project-management plan, including appropriate risk and contingency planning;
- demonstration that the activities will be conducted by persons well qualified for the
purpose;
-demonstration that the budget requested is necessary for the implementation of the project
and properly justified.

41
Any application for funding of IPR activities under the ERC Proof of Concept will not discharge beneficiaries
from their prior obligations under their pre-existing ERC Grant Agreement in respect of protecting IPR capable
of industrial or commercial application. If any foreground was potentially protectable in the pre-existing ERC
project, beneficiaries had the legal obligation to seek for adequate and effective protection according to the
Rules for Participation and the ERC Model Grant Agreement.

46 | P a g e
Outcome of evaluation If there is not enough budget to fund all
the proposals which pass all three
Reviewers will evaluate independently
evaluation criteria, those proposals which
each eligible proposal on each of the three
pass all three evaluation criteria will be
evaluation criteria above on a "pass/fail"
ranked according to the marks which they
basis.
received from reviewers sorted by the
In order to be considered for funding, order in which the evaluation criteria
proposals will have to be awarded a pass appear above. Proposals will be funded in
mark by a majority of reviewers on each of order of this ranking.
the three evaluation criteria. A proposal
If necessary, the reviewers will meet as an
which fails one or more of the criteria will
evaluation panel in order to determine a
not be ranked and will not be funded.
priority order for proposals which have
the same ranking.

47 | P a g e
Other Actions

48 | P a g e
The different actions described in this Indicative budget: EUR 14 710 291 from
chapter aim to allow the Scientific Council the 2018 budget.
of the ERC to carry out its duties and
mandate, including its obligations to Support to open access
establish the ERC's overall strategy and to 3. Support to the OAPEN initiative
monitor and quality control the
programme’s implementation from the The ERC supports the principle of open
scientific perspective. access to the published output of research
as a fundamental part of its mission. This
Support to call and programme requirement includes monographs, book
monitoring, and evaluation chapters and other long-text publications
which are particularly important in the
1. Qualitative evaluation of frontier
Humanities and Social Sciences. The ERC
nature of ERC funded research
Scientific Council recommends the use of
The ERC will continue the work carried out the OAPEN Library as repository for this
under Work Programmes 2015 - 2017 to kind of publications, as indicated in its
analyse the scientific output of its funded 'Open Access Guidelines for research
projects with a particular focus on the results funded by the ERC'42.
frontier nature of the research, and any
In February 2016, the ERC and the OAPEN
potential research breakthroughs and
Foundation announced their cooperation
discoveries. During this analysis the ERC
in furthering open access to academic
will be assisted by experts.
books and book chapters. With the help of
Type of action: Experts. a low-value grant from the ERC funded
under the Work Programme 2015, OAPEN
Indicative budget: EUR 500 000 from the has developed a tailor-made deposit
2018 budget. service for long-text publications based on
ERC funded research. OAPEN also provides
2. Evaluation of proposals and
hands-on support to ERC grantees and
project monitoring
their team members who want to use the
The ERC uses appointed independent OAPEN Library to provide open access to
experts during the evaluation of proposals their publications.
and the preparation of the ERC calls, for
The ERC intends to continue its
ethics review and for the monitoring of
ongoing projects. The ERC also reimburses cooperation with the OAPEN Foundation
the costs of Principal Investigators invited
42
to attend interviews during the evaluation For the revised version of February 2016 see:
https://erc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documen
of their proposals. t/file/ERC_Open_Access_Guidelines-
revised_feb_2016.pdf
Type of action: Experts.

49 | P a g e
beyond the duration of the current representing the ERC and organising its
funding. OAPEN open books library is a work. For this purpose, the ERC Executive
unique open access repository specifically Agency will provide a grant to an
for books and book chapters. For this identified beneficiary.
reason the ERC will provide a low value
Type of action: Grant to an identified
grant of EUR 60 000 to the OAPEN
beneficiary.
Foundation to support the further
development of the OAPEN initiative. Legal entity: University of Copenhagen,
Building on the work that has been Universitetsparken 1, DK – 2100
achieved since the cooperation was Copenhagen, Denmark44.
launched, the new grant will contribute to
the further enlargement of the quality Indicative budget: EUR 300 000 from the
controlled collection of open access books 2018 budget.
already hosted by the OAPEN Library, and
5. Honoraria and meeting expenses
to the development of additional services
for Scientific Council members
for publishers, libraries and research
funders in the areas of dissemination, In recognition of their personal
quality assurance and digital preservation. commitment, the Scientific Council
members shall be compensated for the
The maximum duration of this project will
tasks they perform by means of an
be 24 months.
honorarium for their attendance at
Type of action: Low value grant to an Scientific Council plenary meetings,
identified beneficiary43. reflecting their responsibilities and
benchmarked against similar provisions in
Legal entity: Stichting OAPEN (OAPEN similar entities and Member States. The
Foundation), Prins Willem-Alexanderhof 5, honoraria and those travel and
2595 BE The Hague, The Netherlands. subsistence expenses related to the
performance of tasks of the Scientific
Indicative budget: EUR 60 000 from the
Council shall be charged to the operational
2018 budget.
budget allocated to the ERC.
Support to the ERC Scientific Council
Type of action: Experts.
4. Support to the Vice-Chairs
Indicative budget: EUR 555 000 from the
Support will be provided to the three Vice- 2018 budget.
Chairs of the Scientific Council to ensure
Union Contribution
adequate local administrative assistance
at their home institutes for their tasks of The Union financial contribution will take
assisting the President of the ERC in the form of the reimbursement of up to
43 44
In accordance with Article 11(2) of the Horizon In accordance with Article 11(2) of the Horizon
2020 Rules for Participation. 2020 Rules for Participation.

50 | P a g e
100% of the total eligible and approved Please also refer to Annex 3 - Countries
direct costs and of flat-rate financing of Associated to Horizon 2020 and
indirect costs on the basis of 25% of the Restrictions Applying to Some Legal
total eligible direct costs45. The level of the Entities Established in Certain Third
awarded grant represents a maximum Countries.
overall figure – the final amount to be paid
All proposals must be complete and be
must be justified on the basis of the costs
submitted before the relevant deadline. A
actually incurred for the project.
complete proposal entails all requested
Proposal Evaluation elements. Incomplete proposals may be
declared ineligible.
Proposals for grants under this part will be
evaluated as follows. The content of the proposal must relate to
the objectives of the grant and/or call for
Eligibility Criteria proposals, as defined in this work
programme and/or call. A proposal will
Proposals under this part must be focused
only be deemed ineligible on grounds of
on requirements specified in the work
programme and/or call for proposals. ‘scope’ in clear-cut cases.

Actions under this part are open to legal Where there is a doubt on the eligibility of
a proposal, the evaluation may proceed
entities46 established in a Member State
pending a decision following an eligibility
or an Associated Country as a legal entity
created under national law, International review committee. If it becomes clear
before, during or after the evaluation
European Interest Organisations (such as
phase, that one or more of the eligibility
CERN, EMBL, etc.), the European
Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) criteria has not been met, the proposal
will be declared ineligible and not
or an entity created under EU law. Legal
entities established in countries outside considered any further.
the EU or Associated Countries and
international organisations are also
eligible.

45
Excluding the direct costs for subcontracting, the
costs for financial support to third parties and the
costs of resources made available by third parties
which are not used on the premises of the host
institution. Exceptionally, the low value grant to
the OAPEN Foundation will take the form of a
lump-sum (covering direct and indirect costs).
46
Please see important information on possible
registration of economic operators in the
Commission's Early Detection and Exclusion
System (EDES) on final page.

51 | P a g e
Evaluation Criteria

1. Excellence related to the objectives of the grant and/or call for proposals
Are the objectives of the proposed project consistent with the requirements specified in the
work programme and/or call for proposals? Do they, where appropriate, correspond to, or
go beyond, best current practice?

2. Impact
Will the project have a substantial impact in the context of the ERC objectives?

3. Quality and efficiency of the implementation

Is the proposed methodology and work plan effective in reaching the goals of the project?
Do they ensure the highest quality and/or utility of results?

Application of Evaluation Criteria

Each evaluation criterion will be marked

on a scale of 0 to 5 and an overall quality
threshold of 80% will be used to establish
the retained list of proposals which will be
ranked in order of priority for funding.

52 | P a g e
 Budget
2018 budget in EUR million
(rounded)
Main Calls

ERC-2018-StG 581

ERC-2018-CoG 550

ERC-2018-AdG 450

ERC-2018-SyG 250

ERC-2018-PoC 20

Other Actions

Experts 15.7747

Grants to identified beneficiaries 0.36

Other calls for proposals -

Public procurements -

Estimated total budget 1867.13

47
EUR 14.71 million of this amount corresponds to the cost of experts involved in the evaluation of proposals
and project monitoring.

53 | P a g e
The budget amounts for 2018 are subject  Any repartition of the call budget
to the availability of the appropriations within a call, up to 20% of the total
provided for in the draft budget for 2018 expenditure of the call;
after the adoption of the budget for 2018
by the budgetary authority or if the  Evaluation and monitoring, up to
budget is not adopted as provided for in 20% of the total expenditure for all
the system of provisional twelfths. these activities;

Budgetary figures given in this work  Each other individual action not
programme are indicative. Unless implemented through calls for
otherwise stated, final budgets may vary proposals.
following the evaluation of proposals. The If additional credits become available the
final figures may vary by up to 20% with Scientific Council shall set the rules by
respect to those indicated in this work which they will be allocated to the calls
programme for the following budgeted based on a judgement of the scientific
activities: need, number of applications and
 Total expenditure for each call for predicted success rates of the calls.
proposals; The budget figures given in this table are
rounded to two decimal points.

54 | P a g e
Annexes

55 | P a g e
 Annex 1
Primary panel structure and description
Physical Sciences & Engineering

PE1 Mathematics
All areas of mathematics, pure and applied, plus mathematical foundations of computer
science, mathematical physics and statistics.

PE2 Fundamental Constituents of Matter

Particle, nuclear, plasma, atomic, molecular, gas, and optical physics.

PE3 Condensed Matter Physics

Structure, electronic properties, fluids, nanosciences, biological physics.

PE4 Physical and Analytical Chemical Sciences

Analytical chemistry, chemical theory, physical chemistry/chemical physics.

PE5 Synthetic Chemistry and Materials

Materials synthesis, structure-properties relations, functional and advanced materials,
molecular architecture, organic chemistry.

PE6 Computer Science and Informatics

Informatics and information systems, computer science, scientific computing, intelligent
systems.

PE7 Systems and Communication Engineering

Electrical, electronic, communication, optical and systems engineering.

PE8 Products and Processes Engineering

Product design, process design and control, construction methods, civil engineering, energy
processes, material engineering.

PE9 Universe Sciences

Astro-physics/chemistry/biology; solar system; stellar, galactic and extragalactic astronomy,
planetary systems, cosmology, space science, instrumentation.

PE10 Earth System Science

Physical geography, geology, geophysics, atmospheric sciences, oceanography, climatology,
cryology, ecology, global environmental change, biogeochemical cycles, natural resources
management.

56 | P a g e
Life Sciences

LS1 Molecular Biology, Biochemistry, Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics

Molecular synthesis, modification, mechanisms and interactions; biochemistry; structural
biology, molecular biophysics; metabolism; signalling pathways.

LS2 Genetics, ‘Omics’, Bioinformatics and Systems Biology

Molecular genetics, quantitative genetics, genetic epidemiology, epigenetics, genomics,
metagenomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, glycomics, bioinformatics,
computational biology, biostatistics, systems biology.

LS3 Cellular and Developmental Biology

Cell biology, cell physiology, signal transduction, organogenesis, developmental genetics,
pattern formation, stem cell biology, in plants and animals and where appropriate in
microorganisms.

LS4 Physiology, Pathophysiology and Endocrinology

Organ physiology, pathophysiology, endocrinology, metabolism, ageing, tumorigenesis,
cardiovascular diseases, metabolic syndromes.

LS5 Neurosciences and Neural Disorders

Neural cell function and signalling, systems neuroscience, neural bases of cognitive and
behavioural processes, neurological and psychiatric disorders.

LS6 Immunity and Infection

The immune system and related disorders, biology of infectious agents and infection,
biological basis of prevention and treatment of infectious diseases

LS7 Applied Medical Technologies, Diagnostics, Therapies and Public Health

Development of tools for diagnosis, monitoring and treatment of diseases, pharmacology,
clinical medicine, regenerative medicine, epidemiology and public health.

LS8 Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Biology

Population, community and ecosystem ecology, evolutionary biology, behavioural ecology,
microbial ecology.

LS9 Applied Life Sciences, Biotechnology and Molecular and Biosystems Engineering
Applied plant and animal sciences; food sciences; forestry; applied biotechnology;
environmental and marine biotechnology; applied bioengineering; biomass; biofuels;
biohazards.

57 | P a g e
Social Sciences & Humanities
SH1 Individuals, Markets and Organisations
Economics, finance and management.

SH2 Institutions, Values, Environment and Space

Political science, law, sustainability science, geography, regional studies and planning.

SH3 The Social World, Diversity, Population

Sociology, social psychology, social anthropology, demography, education, communication.

SH4 The Human Mind and Its Complexity

Cognitive science, psychology, linguistics, philosophy of mind.

SH5 Cultures and Cultural Production

Literature, philology, cultural studies, study of the arts, philosophy.

SH6 The Study of the Human Past

Archaeology and history.

58 | P a g e
 Annex 2
ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees

1. The necessity of ascertaining PhD 3. Independent research

equivalence
Conducting the research and writing the
In order to be eligible to apply to the ERC dissertation usually requires one to
Starting or Consolidator Grant a Principal several years depending upon the topic
Investigator must have been awarded a selected and the research work necessary
PhD or equivalent doctoral degree. First- to prepare the dissertation. In defending
professional degrees will not be his or her thesis, the PhD candidate must
considered in themselves as PhD- establish mastery of the subject matter,
equivalent, even if recipients carry the explain and justify his or her research
title "Doctor". See below for further findings, and answer all questions put by
guidelines on PhD degree equivalency. the committee. A successful defence
results in the award of the PhD degree.
2. PhD Degrees
4. Degrees equivalent to the PhD:
The research doctorate is the highest
earned academic degree. It is always It is recognised that there are some other
awarded for independent research at a doctoral titles that enjoy the same status
professional level in either academic and represent variants of the PhD in
disciplines or professional fields. certain fields. All of them have similar
Regardless of the entry point, doctoral content requirements. Potential
studies involve several stages of academic applicants are invited to consult the
work. These may include the completion following for useful references on degrees
of preliminary course, seminar, and that will be considered equivalent to the
laboratory studies and/or the passing of a PhD:
battery of written examinations. The PhD
 EURYDICE: "Examinations,
candidate selects an academic adviser and
qualifications and titles - Second
a subject for the dissertation, is assigned a
edition, Volume 1, European
dissertation committee, and designs his or
glossary on education" published
her research (some educators call the
in 200448. Please note that some
doctoral thesis a dissertation to
titles that belong to the same
distinguish it from lesser theses). The
dissertation committee consists usually of
48
http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/european-
3-5 faculty members in the candidate's
glossary-on-education-pbEC3212292/
research field, including the adviser.

59 | P a g e
 category with doctoral degrees equivalent to a PhD award. To be
(ISCED 6 – 1997 classification or considered an eligible Principal
ISCED 8 – 2011 classification49) Investigator, medical doctors (or
may correspond to the applicants holding a degree in medicine)
intermediate steps towards the need to provide the certificates of both a
completion of doctoral education medical doctor degree and a PhD or proof
and they should not be therefore of an appointment that requires doctoral
considered as PhD-equivalent. equivalency (e.g. post-doctoral fellowship,
professorship appointment). Additionally,
 List of research doctorate titles
candidates must also provide information
awarded in the United States that
on their research experience (including
enjoy the same status and
peer reviewed publications) in order to
represent variants of the PhD
further substantiate the equivalence of
within certain fields. These
their overall training to a PhD. In these
doctorate titles are also
cases, the certified date of the medical
recognised as PhD-equivalent by
doctor degree completion plus two years
the U.S. National Science
is the time reference for calculation of the
Foundation (NSF)50.
eligibility time-window (i.e. 4 - 9 years past
5. First Professional Degrees (for the medical doctor degree for Starters,
and over 9 - 14 years past the medical
medical doctors please see below):
doctor degree for Consolidators).
It is important to recognise that the initial
For medical doctors who have been
professional degrees in various fields are
awarded both an MD and a PhD, the date
first degrees, not graduate research
of the earliest degree that makes the
degrees. Several degree titles in such
applicant eligible takes precedence in the
fields include the term "Doctor", but they
calculation of the eligibility time-window
are neither research doctorates nor
(2 - 7 years after PhD or 4 - 9 years past
equivalent to the PhD.
the medical doctor degree for Starters,
6. Medical Doctors (or applicants and over 7 - 12 years after PhD or 9 - 14
years past the medical doctor degree for
holding a degree in medicine):
Consolidators)
For medical doctors (or applicants holding
a degree in medicine), a medical doctor
degree will not be accepted by itself as

49

http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Documents/
isced-2011-en.pdf
50

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/intern
ational/usnei/us/edlite-structure-us.html

60 | P a g e
 Annex 3
Countries associated to Horizon 2020 and restrictions
applying to some legal entities established in certain third
countries
Please check the online manual for up-to- participate in any capacity. This criterion
date information on the current position also applies in cases where the respective
for Associated Countries51. action involves financial support given by
grant beneficiaries to third parties
The eligibility criteria formulated in
established in the Autonomous Republic
Commission Notice Nr. 2013/C- 205/05
of Crimea or the city of Sevastopol in
(OJEU C-205 of 19.07.2013) shall apply for
accordance with Article 137 of the EU's
all actions under this Work Programme,
Financial Regulation. Should the illegal
including with respect to third parties
annexation of the Autonomous Republic
receiving financial support in the cases
of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol end,
where the respective action involves
this Work Programme shall be revised.
financial support to third parties by grant
beneficiaries in accordance with article
137 of the EU's Financial Regulation.

Some entities from third countries are

covered by the Council sanctions in place
and are not eligible to participate in Union
programmes. Please see: the consolidated
list of persons, groups and entities subject
to EU financial sanctions52.

Given that the EU does not recognise the

illegal annexation of Crimea and
Sevastopol, legal persons established in
the Autonomous Republic of Crimea or
the city of Sevastopol are not eligible to

51

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/docs/h2
020-funding-guide/cross-cutting-
issues/international-cooperation_en.htm
52

http://eeas.europa.eu/cfsp/sanctions/consol-
list_en.htm.

61 | P a g e
Prior Information of Candidates, Tenderers, Grant Applicants and
remunerated experts - registration of information in the Early
Detection and Exclusion System (EDES).
The Commission operates the EDES, a system which has been established under Articles
105(a) and 108 of the Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/1929 of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 28 October 2015 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 on the
financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union53 (‘the Financial Regulation’).
The EDES is used for the early detection of risks related to candidates, tenderers, grant
applicants, beneficiaries of contracts and grants and linked third parties, as well as
remunerated external experts, with a view to protecting the EU's financial interests.

Candidates, tenderers, grant applicants, remunerated external experts and, if they are legal
entities, persons who have powers of representation, decision or control over them, are
informed that, should they be in one of the situations mentioned in Article 106(1) of the
Financial Regulation, their personal details (name, given name if natural person, address,
legal form and name and given name of the persons with powers of representation,
decision-making or control, if legal person) may be registered in the EDES, and
communicated to the persons and entities referred to in Article 108 (1), (2), (4) and (12) of
the Financial Regulation, in relation to the award or the execution of a procurement
contract, a grant agreement or an expert contract.

NB: The EDES has replaced the Early Warning System (EWS) and the Central Exclusion
Database (CED) as of 1 January 2016.

53
OJ L 286, 30.10.2015, p. 1–29

62 | P a g e