Evaluation criteria

All applications will be screened for eligibility by the Programme Office. Proposals that fail to meet the programme mobility criteria will be rejected.

Eligible proposals will be marked by three impartial Evaluators according to the criteria below. There will then be a consensus meeting chaired by a fourth impartial party who will compile the final Evaluation Report on the proposal.







How consistent is the project with the programme objectives and how effectively does it contribute to the desired impacts of career development and strengthened trans-national partnerships?

Is the individual researcher’s CV sufficiently well aligned to the relevance and quality of additional scientific training and complementary skills?

Is there a potential for acquiring competencies during the project to improve the prospects of reaching and/or reinforcing a position of professional maturity, diversity and independence at a high level, in particular through exposure to complementary skills training?

Do the planned collaboration and mobility activities support the programme’s objective of strengthened international and/or academia/industry/public partnerships?


Research & innovation quality:

Is the research and innovation internationally competitive? Does it conduct needs-driven research?

Is the research methodology original and innovative, and does it go sufficiently beyond the state of the art?

Do the goals, strategy and content of the research project include sufficient interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary aspects?




What is the capacity and credibility concerning implementation of the proposed project?

Is the research project feasible in the proposed time period?

Does the host have sufficient supervisory staff and infrastructure to support the applicant?

Have alternative plans been considered in cases of unforeseen failures?



Does the project have the capacity to convert the collaboration into social benefits and/or commercial exploitation?

Does the career development plan lead to broader skills and enhanced career perspectives?

Does the research plan foresee appropriate dissemination activities, including publications and presenting at conference?

Does the applicant have opportunities to implement new knowledge and/or technology into appropriate market areas?







NB a minimum funding threshold of 10 points will apply. In addition, in each of the four scoring criteria above, graduated scoring will occur after two points are scored (i.e. 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, etc). The Guide for Evaluators can be seen in the Downloads section of this site.

Proposals which meet the minimum threshold will be shortlisted for consideration by the Scientific Panel, who will meet to draw up a final ranking list and make formal recommendations for funding. All ethical issues which arise in proposals recommended for funding MUST be reviewed and cleared before a formal offer can be made.

Fellowships will be awarded according to the selection ranking and the final budget. The Programme Office will inform applicants of results. The Scientific Panel decision is final: there will be no mechanism for negotiation. However 'near miss' applicants will be encouraged to rework and resubmit their proposal in a future Call.