This document discusses grant proposal writing and research policy. It provides an overview of various research funding opportunities at the EU, international, and national levels. Some key funding sources discussed include Marie Skłodowska-Curie grants, ERC grants, and NWO grants in the Netherlands. The document offers best practices for grant writing, including structuring the proposal, formulating clear objectives, and emphasizing the scientific problem and how the proposed research will address it. It also discusses developing a competitive CV and gaining early career achievements to strengthen funding applications.

1. 1
Grant proposal writing and research policy
29 August 2014- Maren Pannemann PhD – Advisor Research Funding
University of Amsterdam

2. 2
Structure of the talk
 Why research grants
 Overview research funding possibilities
(EU, other international, national)
 Best practices in grant writing
 CV building and bridging a funding gap

3. 3
Why research grants?
 More focus and time for research
 New research projects/ groups
 Research visits abroad
 Material/conference organisations
 CV improvement
 Publications, invited talks, international network,
(PhD) supervising experience,
 Enter the “funding circuit”

4. 4
The funding circuit
Receive grant
More focus on
and time for
research
CV: improvement

5. 5
Overview research funding possibilities
 EU funding
 Other international
 National

6. 6
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/index.html

7. 7

8. 8
Bottom up:
investigator driven,
subject of own choice

9. 9
Bottom up:
investigator driven,
subject of own choice
Top Down:
Predefined calls in Work Programmes

10. 10
Bottom up:
personal grants/
consortia
Top Down:
consortia

11. 11
Pilar 1 – Excellent Science
Marie Skłodowska-Curie
Individual Fellowships (IF)
Objective:
 Training and diversification of skills
 Support the career development of “Experienced Researchers” (ER)
 ER: at the deadline for the submission of proposals, be in possession
of a doctoral degree or have at least four years of full-time
equivalent research experience
Mobility is a key word:
always cross a border (country/sector) to be eligible
 European Fellowships (EF)
 Global Fellowship (GF)

12. 12
Marie S. Curie European Fellowship (EF)
MSC fellow applies in collaboration with host
 Fellow goes to host organisation in Europe for 12 – 24
months
 Also researchers from non-EU country coming to the EU
 Funding for: full salary of Experienced Researcher +
contribution to host organisation

13. 13
Marie S. Curie Global Fellowships (GF)
 Experienced Researcher applies in collaboration with host
 Outgoing phase: 12-24 months,
mandatory return phase: 12 months
 Fellow goes to host organisation outside Europe, and
comes back to host organisation in Europe (secondment)
 Any nationality, but previously long-term EU resident
(>5 yrs)
 For the GF the partner organisations in TC (Third
Country) must include a letter of commitment

14. 14
Marie S. Curie Secondments
 MSC: partner organisations provide
additional training and host researchers
during secondments

15. 15
Marie S. Curie Structure of Proposal
1. SUMMARY
2. EXCELLENCE 50%
3. IMPACT 30%
4. IMPLEMENTATION 20%
-----------------------------------------------------------------10 pages
5. CV OF THE EXPERIENCED RESEARCHER
6. CAPACITIES OF THE PARTICIPATING ORGANISATIONS
7. ETHICAL ASPECTS
8. LETTERS OF COMMITMENT OF PARTNER ORGANISATIONS

16. 16
Marie S. Curie Evaluation
Excellence 50%
 Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research
 Clarity and quality of transfer of knowledge/training
 Capacity of the researcher
 Quality of the supervision and the hosting arrangements
Impact 30%
 Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills, and
working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and to provide new
career perspectives
 communication and results dissemination
Implementation 20%
 Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan
 Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures
 Appropriateness of the institutional environment
 Competences, experience and complementarity of the participating
organisations and institutional commitment

17. 17
Marie S. Curie Evaluators
 3 experts in the field, not necessarily all of them experts
on your specific topic
 Might be non-native English speakers
 Choice of panel
(strongest/most innovative elements of your proposal)
 Choice of keywords (basis for identifying experts)

18. 18
Valorization – Research Impact
 relevance of the results to current economic, societal, cultural,
policy-related or technological problems
 effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed approach to
knowledge utilisation with respect to meeting the needs of third
parties both within and outside the academic sector;
 the period over which potential knowledge utilisation is expected
to occur;
 what, if anything, the researcher intends to do to bring about
knowledge utilisation
 Who are the ‘stakeholders’? Who is interested in your results?

19. 19
Marie S. Curie: Submit proposal…
 Annual deadline in September
 Next deadline 11 September 2014 at 17:00
 Electronic Proposal Submission System
 Chose your Panel: 8 Panels
Social Sciences and Humanities (SOC)
 Chose keywords
 The choice of panel and keywords will guide the REA in
the selection of experts for proposal evaluation.
 Relevant Documents on the page:
 Guide for Applicants
 Work Programme People 2014

20. 20
Pilar 1 – Excellent Science
ERC- three main types of grants
ERC STARTING 2-7 years after PhD
1,5 Mill. EUR – 5 years PI is starting first research team
Transition to independence
3 February 2015
ERC CONSOLIDATOR 7-12 years after PhD
2 Mill. EUR – 5 years PI is consolidating team
Consolidation of independence
12 March 2015
ERC ADVANCED > 12 years after PhD
2,5 Mill. EUR – 5 years Internationally recognised
research leaders
21 October 2014, 2 June 2015

21. 21
Profile ERC Starting Grant
 A competitive Starting Grant candidate must have potential for
independence and evidence of maturity
 at least one important publication without the participation of
their PhD supervisor
 demonstrate a promising track record of early achievements
appropriate to their research field and career stage, including
significant publications (as main author) in major international peer-reviewed
multidisciplinary scientific journals, or in the leading
international peer-reviewed journals of their respective field.
 They may also demonstrate a record of invited presentations in well-established
international conferences, granted patents, awards,
prizes etc.

22. 22
ERC - Excellence of the Project
 Ground-breaking nature and potential impact
 Methodology (feasible / appropriate)
 High risk / High gain balance
Commitment:
 50% of PI working time on the project

23. 23
ERC - Panel Structure
SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
SH1 Markets, individuals and institutions:
SH2 The social world, diversity and common ground:
SH3 Environment, space and population:
SH4 The human mind and its complexity:
SH5 Cultures and cultural production:
SH6 The study of the human past:

24. 24
Grants at different stages of career
ERC consolidator
7-12 y*
ERC advanced
>12 y*
ERC starting
2-7 y*
Marie Skłodowska Curie
Participation Consortia H2020 Coordinator Consortia H2020

25. 25
Overview research funding possibilities
 EU funding
 Other international
 National

26. 26
EURIAS Fellowships
http://www.2015-2016.eurias-fp.eu/
 humanities - social sciences
 10-month residencies in one of the 14
participating Institutes:
Berlin, Bologna, Budapest, Cambridge,
Delmenhorst, Edinburgh, Freiburg, Helsinki,
Jerusalem, Lyon, Marseille, Paris, Uppsala,
Vienna, Wassenaar, Zürich.

27. 27
Other examples possible funding
 Volkswagenstiftung
http://www.volkswagenstiftung.de
 Fyssen foundation (postdoctoral study grants, Logic)
http://www.fondationfyssen.fr/
 Google research grants (topics among others: Software engineering and
programming languages, Machine learning/translation/perception)
http://research.google.com/university/relations/research_awards.html
 Canon Foundation (all research topics)
https://www.canonfoundation.org/
 AXA Research Fund (risks)
http://www.axa-research.org/

28. 28
Joining a research project
 http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/

29. 29
Overview research funding possibilities
 EU funding
 Other international
 National

30. 30
The Netherlands
NWO Innovational Research Incentive Scheme
in a nutshell:
 promotes innovation in the academic research field
 individual researchers at various stages of their careers
 annual deadlines: VENI: January, VIDI: October, VICI: March
VENI 0-3 years after completion of PhD 250,000 €, duration 3 years
VIDI 3-8 years after completion of PhD 800,000 €, duration 5 years
VICI 8-15 years after completion of PhD 1,500,000 €, duration 5 years
Impact criterion: use of knowledge in society and industry!
http://www.nwo.nl/en/funding/our-funding-instruments/nwo/innovational-research-incentives-
scheme/index.html

31. 31
Germany
Humboldt Research Fellowship for Postdoctoral Researchers
 For candidates who completed doctorate in the last four years
 6-24 months at a research institution in Germany
http://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/humboldt-fellowship-postdoc.
html
German Science Foundation (DFG): Emmy Noether Programme
 Postdocs gain the qualifications required for a university teaching
career
 lasting five years, in which they lead their own research group
http://www.dfg.de/en/research_funding/programmes/individual/emmy_
noether/index.html

32. 32
Other examples
 Max Plank Society Germany
 French National Research Agency
 Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and
Research
 Science Foundation Ireland
 Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation

33. 33
Disclaimer
 The list of grants here is not exhaustive, but is
intended to give you an idea about the possibilities
 Please do also your own research, e.g. local postdoc
grants
 e.g. http://www.scholarships-links.com/category/Postdoc-
Scholarships.html

34. 34
Structure of the talk
 Why research grants
 Overview research funding possibilities
(EU, other international, national)
 Best practices in grant writing
 CV building and bridging a funding gap

35. 35
The proposal (1)
State of mind:
You ask the funding organisation
to fund your research

36. 36
The proposal (1)
State of mind:
You ask the funding organisation
to fund your research
You help the EU/society/science etc
to solve their problems

37. 37
The proposal (2)

38. 38
How to structure your text?
 Stand out from the pile of applications
 Catchy title/ Acronym
 Start with a very short introduction which states the
objectives of the research proposal
 Summary essential part of proposal, sets the tone
Pitch training:
 focus on the essential information,
 preparation for interviews

39. 39
 Make it as easy as possible for the evaluators

 not a detective story: Start directly with the most important thing
 Clear and compact : use figures, bullets, numbers, charts
 Put everything where “they” want it: Follow the subheadings
provided. Start writing in the template provided, including CV
 Add additional subheadings if necessary for emphasis of certain
issues
 Write the proposal for different readers (both expert and non-expert)
 Circulate your draft early among colleagues and non-experts

40. 40
State of the art is a bottle neck
 What is a problem in your field ?
 What is the scientific or technological bottle neck to solve
this problem ?
 How is YOUR project going to solve this bottle neck ?
 What are the opportunities once the bottle neck is solved ?

41. 41
State of the art is a bottle neck
 Example:
“So far, no one has investigated [this topic].
This project will fill this gap by …”
 The fact that something has not been
investigated yet, does not mean that it is
interesting or relevant.

42. 42
State of the art – why?
 Help the evaluator understand the problem
 Help the evaluator understand where the
technological / methodological challenge lies
 Show that you know what other research has been done
(refer to specific publications/ work)
 Show that your research will attempt something new
 (if relevant) show any proof of principle or reason why you
think a particularly challenging approach might succeed

43. 43
Formulating your objectives:
SMART
 Specific – Objectives should specify what they want to
achieve.
 Measurable – You should be able to measure whether
you are meeting the objectives or not.
 Achievable - Are the objectives you set, achievable and
attainable?
 Realistic – Can you realistically achieve the objectives
with the resources you have?
 Time – When do you want to achieve the set objectives?

44. 44
Pitch excercise
 Pair up
 Describe in 1 minute the essence of your
research project to your neighbour
 Include
 the bottle neck in your field
 what, how, why, when
 stakeholders – who is waiting
for your results
 Switch roles

45. 45

46. 46
“Worst practices”
“The proposal as written takes up far too much of
the permitted word count in telling us about the
topic rather than in explaining in detail the
what, how, and why of the actual work to be
carried out. As it stands, the proposal comes
across as a compelling introduction to the topic,
but it lacks any development of exactly what is
going to be done.”

47. 47
“Worst practices”
“No clear research question; much too broad set
of concepts and research themes; serious doubts
about the feasibility of proposed analysis of
historical sources; no clear contribution to the field;
candidate's quality is good but not exceptional;
knowledge utilization is not convincing.”
“The author's hypotheses and objectives are not
always clearly documented and supported.”

48. 48
Structure of the talk
 Why research grants
 Overview research funding possibilities
(EU, other international, national)
 Best practices in grant writing
 CV building and bridging a funding gap

49. 49
CV section of proposal
Do not start filling in the CV section at last, include it in the
draft proposal when you are circulating it.
Quality of the researcher:
 Researchers who have already demonstrated an
outstanding talent for academic research
 Publications and other relevant achievements in the field
 List prizes and awards
 Supervision experience
Have a look at grant criteria and
Start building your CV NOW

50. 50
ERC CV requirements
(ERC guide for applicants stg/cons 2014)
The ‘funding ID’ must specify any current research grants and their subject.
c. Early achievements track-record (max. 2 pages):
The Principal Investigator (PI) must provide a list of achievements reflecting their track
record.
The PI should list his/her activity as regards:
1. 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 five (Starting Grant) or ten (Consolidator Grant) representative
publications, those without the presence as co-author of their PhD supervisor,
and the number of citations (excluding self-citations) they have attracted (if
applicable).
2. Granted patent(s) (if applicable).
3. Invited presentations to peer-reviewed, internationally established conferences
and/or international advanced schools (if applicable).
4. Prizes and Awards (if applicable).

51. 51
Smaller grants – work on your “funding ID”
 Research stays abroad
e.g. USA: Fulbright Grants, annual deadline 1
December, min. 3 months
 Travel grants for conferences
 “Seed money”
 Best paper awards
 http://www.scholarshipportal.eu
 http://www.nuffic.nl/en

52. 52
What to do when rejected
 Read the reviews and any other feedback in a balanced way
 Speak with the funding body if possible
 Stay positive (rethink, revise, resubmit)
 Try to learn as much as possible from the experience
 Remember that most grants don’t get funded first time
 Do not fire off an e-mail that you might regret!
 Did you give yourself the best chance last time?
 Look for a mentor and talk to your Research Officers
(Courtesy of DCU)

53. 53
Final tips and recommendations.
 Give yourself at least four months to write a grant
proposal with the goal to have the grant ready about one
month prior to submission.
 Use the last month to polish the writing and the style of
presentation.
 Circulate the draft proposal among colleagues.
(Courtesy of DCU)

54. 54
Further Support
 Local Grant Officers
 Technology Transfer Office
 National Contact Points H2020
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal
/desktop/en/support/national_contact_points.ht
ml#c,contact=country/sbg/Belgium/1/1/0&+cont
act_name/asc

55. 55
Thank you and good luck!