2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)

[AdinaBabesh]

I really cannot get how experts can read so differently the same project. It means that the evaluation criteria is not good enough.

Congratulations to those who succeeded!

I have not been founded and I'm quite disappointed since mine was the resubmission of last year's project scored 90% ( I got the seal of excellence too). I resubmitted exactly the same project with only minor changes according to the weakenesses raised. The result is REJECTED and scored 71 %. I cant believe it, it sounds quite weird.

Same happened to me, last year I was on the reserve list (92.6%). I addressed the weaknesses and resubmitted. This year I got 77%. I'm strikingly shocked. I know that the score might change, but I wasn't expecting such a huge drop!

[kassiek]

It’s in rejected 79.4. Very disappointing because I had at least hoped 80, but it was done quickly...so not much of a surprise. Congrats everyone that got it!

[Giu83]

Congratulations to those who succeeded!

I have not been founded and I'm quite disappointed since mine was the resubmission of last year's project scored 90% ( I got the seal of excellence too). I resubmitted exactly the same project with only minor changes according to the weakenesses raised. The result is REJECTED and scored 71 %. I cant believe it, it sounds quite weird.

Same happened to me, last year I was on the reserve list (92.6%). I addressed the weaknesses and resubmitted. This year I got 77%. I'm strikingly shocked. I know that the score might change, but I wasn't expecting such a huge drop!

yes, It's a quite huge drop! now I'm really disillusioned , It's better if I quit research

[Dajm]

Sorry to hear that. Lets regroup and try again.

It’s in rejected 79.4. Very disappointing because I had at least hoped 80, but it was done quickly...so not much of a surprise. Congrats everyone that got it!

[IF ST LIF]

I really cannot get how experts can read so differently the same project. It means that the evaluation criteria is not good enough.

Congratulations to those who succeeded!

I have not been founded and I'm quite disappointed since mine was the resubmission of last year's project scored 90% ( I got the seal of excellence too). I resubmitted exactly the same project with only minor changes according to the weakenesses raised. The result is REJECTED and scored 71 %. I cant believe it, it sounds quite weird.

Same happened to me, last year I was on the reserve list (92.6%). I addressed the weaknesses and resubmitted. This year I got 77%. I'm strikingly shocked. I know that the score might change, but I wasn't expecting such a huge drop!

In resubmission cases it's easy to detect the flaws of the evaluation system. It clearly reflects that the process is highly subjective rather than objective and fair; in other words, a total lottery.

This was my last chance for MSCA. However, I have secured another funding source so it's not the end of academia for me.

[keep_chr]

I just checked carefully my report, and only one impression, evaluators just do not want to give it high scores as it is risky for them.
all W - is just bla bla bla, and for eva maybe better do not take responsibility
craziness

but I will go again next year funny action

[kassiek]

Funny enough the comments weren’t actually bad. So that was confusing for such a low score. But 4.1 for the first part hasn’t too bad I would say...so the project definitely has legs!

[Dajm]

This sounds extremely unprofessional.

I know there is no appeal process but I at least would like to provide some feedback on unprofessional reviews back to the grant administrators. Please, let me know if you think we could put together a collective complaint of sorts (presumably, a more efficient way than individual feedback).

Didn't get it - 82% - down from 93% preciously.
If that's not crazy in itself - the report contradicts itself, AND one of the sections only scored 4.5 but has no weaknesses listed to explain the missing 0.5 points. Another great job done by the European Commission.

[AdinaBabesh]

I also have this issue of contradiction. Posted earlier messages with examples. I really don't get how is it possible. Nobody reads the evaluation reports, and the consensus report?

Didn't get it - 82% - down from 93% preciously.
If that's not crazy in itself - the report contradicts itself, AND one of the sections only scored 4.5 but has no weaknesses listed to explain the missing 0.5 points. Another great job done by the European Commission.

[Frydendahl]

I’m in reserve 93.0. And there is another guy who scored 91.8. Do you know how many people do usually go to reserve?

Hi SBM thanks for the information.
Generally in chemistry they put 15-20 candidates in the reserved list. but in an average first 2-3 candidates get offer. I dont have any idea in LIF. It should be more, but you are almost near the cut off till now as we knew (93.6).

Hi, just let me know if you have more info about this reserve list...I don't know whether to take it as a complete rejection or not..I think chances are very low...but mainly, do you know when people in reserve list get to know something? I mean, do we have to wait for a certain day to know or it is completely random?

I can't say I have a ton of information. This was the most in-depth I could find: https://mariecurieactions.blogspot.com/ ... -what.html

I.e., it might take them almost a full year to report back to you that you didn't get it, and usually only about ~5 people in each panel's reserve list actually get awarded a grant. So it's looking like pretty slim odds, unless a lot of people going the UK decide to drop out due to Brexit fears, or maybe an actual no-deal Brexit comes to pass.