2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)

[pafi]

Hi everybody!

Just want to share news about the SOC panel.

Got the grant in SOC (ST-EF) with 94.80.
Did not receive an email yet. The info was uploaded in the portal at exactly 8 am UK time.

Wish you all good luck . In case you don't get it, do not give up, this was my second atempt (same proposal, improved based on the comments). Got 86 last year.

[trina_80]

I know someone last year in PHY who didn't hear until 5pm and got the grant with high 90s as their score. So I'm not sure about the theory that they send the emails by score

I am in PHY and I received it around lunchtime in the past two years, rejected, so my theory is that they send them randomly

I like your theories more than emails by score because I'm still waiting
but I don't see any rejection emails reported here in the chat - people seem to receive good news first
btw I am in physics too but apply for CAR panel. Good luck, colleagues!

Or it's just that people are more likely to share if they get it than if they don't.

[Dino20]

I know someone last year in PHY who didn't hear until 5pm and got the grant with high 90s as their score. So I'm not sure about the theory that they send the emails by score

I am in PHY and I received it around lunchtime in the past two years, rejected, so my theory is that they send them randomly

I like your theories more than emails by score because I'm still waiting
but I don't see any rejection emails reported here in the chat - people seem to receive good news first
btw I am in physics too but apply for CAR panel. Good luck, colleagues!

Maybe people that got rejection will eed more time to process it.

[marialima]

Thanks for the thread, PetetheCat! Good luck everyone!

UPDATE

2020 Statistics:

A total of 11,573 proposals were submitted in response to this call. The number of proposals for each type of action is shown below:
- Standard European Fellowships (MSCA-IF-EF-ST): 8,927 proposals
- Reintegration Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-RI): 739 proposals
- Career Restart Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-CAR): 669 proposals
- Society & Enterprise Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-SE): 241 proposals
- Global Fellowships (MSCA-IF-GF): 997 proposals

2019 Statistics:

A total of 9,875 proposals were submitted in response to this call. The number of proposals for each type of action is shown below:
- Standard European Fellowships (MSCA-IF-EF-ST): 7,673 proposals
- Reintegration Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-RI): 667 proposals
- Career Restart Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-CAR): 470 proposals
- Society & Enterprise Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-SE): 210 proposals
- Global Fellowships (MSCA-IF-GF): 855 proposals

2018 Statistics:

A total of 9,830 proposals were submitted in response to this call. The number of proposals for each type of action is shown below:
- Standard European Fellowships (MSCA-IF-EF-ST): 7,565 proposals
- Reintegration Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-RI): 610 proposals
- Career Restart Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-CAR): 471 proposals
- Society & Enterprise Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-SE): 327 proposals
- Global Fellowships (MSCA-IF-GF): 857 proposals

2017 Statistics:

A total of 9,089 proposals were submitted in response to this call. The number of proposals for each type of action is shown below:
- Standard European Fellowships (MSCA-IF-EF-ST): 7,145 proposals
- Reintegration Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-RI): 561 proposals
- Career Restart Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-CAR): 352 proposals
- Society & Enterprise Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-SE): 173 proposals
- Global Fellowships (MSCA-IF-GF): 858 proposals

2016 Statistics:

A total of 8,946 proposals were submitted in response to this call. The number of proposals for each type of action is shown below:
- Standard European Fellowships (MSCA-IF-EF-ST): 7,140 proposals
- Reintegration Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-RI): 528 proposals
- Career Restart Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-CAR): 251 proposals
- Society & Enterprise Panel (MSCA-IF-EF-SE): 111 proposals
- Global Fellowships (MSCA-IF-GF): 916 proposals

UPDATE 2

The increase in applications this year are:
All panels: 17%
ST 16%
RI 11%
CAR 42%
SE 15%
GF 13%

what is the statistics of how many got funded in each category

[Little_Venice]

Hi guys,

For those who are waiting for your results in the SOC (ST-IF) panel - I just got mine, proposal number 10102xxxxx. I submitted about a day before the deadline.
I won the fellowship, but I already knew that from the DreamTeam and celebrated heavily over the week-end .

For the record, I went from evaluation to ranking in about hour. According to DreamTeam, and I am at the bottom of the awardees' list, in the 200s. On the anecdotal evidence that we have, I support the theory that successful applications with higher scores go into ranking first .

I already shared my story a few (dozens of) pages back, but just a recap - I got this on my 4th time. Scores in the range of 89-92 each time, three SoE, one reserve list (last year). I was not going to re-apply this year but I had an idea of how to improve my proposal in terms of state-of-the-art data management and dissemination and I believe that's what worked in the end (as in, resulted in the couple of extra points that I was missing). The core idea/research design has stayed exactly the same all four times.

My two cents for future applicants. 1. Don't incorporate reviewer comments unless you agree with them. Reviewers change every year and it's not uncommon to see conflicting advice from reviewers. I was absolutely devastated the second time around because I was convinced that revisions on the basis of reviewer feedback would do the job, and the new reviews ignored the revisions and picked on exactly the aspects that were praised the first submission . It's your research and this scheme is for experienced researchers, and you always know better. 2. Those who frame your outcome as a 'failure' - all this means is that you didn't cut the treshold this year around. I passed with 93,60 and I saw someone who has been placed on reserve list with 93 on my panel, so I barely cut it. If you scored high, your proposal is probably brilliant, but there were other equally brilliant applicants who got just a little bit luckier than you. That's all that is and is not a reflection of the quality of your research. Break a leg, everyone!

[HSK00]

Congratulations little_venice.
What is your score?

Hi guys,

For those who are waiting for your results in the SOC panel - I just got mine, proposal number 10102xxxxx. I submitted about a day before the deadline.
I won the fellowship, but I already knew that from the DreamTeam and celebrated heavily over the week-end .

For the record, I went from evaluation to ranking in about hour. According to DreamTeam, and I am at the bottom of the awardees' list, in the 200s. On the anecdotal evidence that we have, I support the theory that successful applications with higher scores go into ranking first .

I already shared my story a few (dozens of) pages back, but just a recap - I got this on my 4th time. Scores in the range of 89-92 each time, three SoE, one reserve list (last year). I was not going to re-apply this year but I had an idea of how to improve my proposal in terms of state-of-the-art data management and dissemination and I believe that's what worked in the end (as in, resulted in the couple of extra points that I was missing). The core idea/research design has stayed exactly the same all four times.

My two cents for future applicants. 1. Don't incorporate reviewer comments unless you agree with them. Reviewers change every year and it's not uncommon to see conflicting advice from reviewers. I was absolutely devastated the second time around because I was convinced that revisions on the basis of reviewer feedback would do the job, and the new reviews ignored the revisions and picked on exactly the aspects that were praised the first submission . It's your research and this scheme is for experienced researchers, and you always know better. 2. Those who frame your outcome as a 'failure' - all this means is that you didn't cut the treshold this year around. I passed with 93,60 and I saw someone who has been placed on reserve list with 93 on my panel, so I barely cut it. If you scored high, your proposal is probably brilliant, but there were other equally brilliant applicants who got just a little bit luckier than you. That's all that is and is not a reflection of the quality of your research. Break a leg, everyone!

[omari]

go to your proposal, click on Actions, then follow up and you will end up in a page where you can see a folded called process documents: there you should find your proposal in pdf and the evaluation letter and so on.

I did, but I can't find it, there are only the submitted files.
Maybe this process will take time to upload files and emails to the 11000+ applicants.
Finger crossed!

Yes, I think only the high scores have been updated so far.
Anyway, it's clearly not by project ID.

I found mine when I checked. I received the 3 emails around 3 hours ago.
I also thought it goes in sequence by proposal number but now I guess it goes by the score.

EDIT: I am in the S&E panel this year which is smaller. I also remember last year it was by proposal ID because I was more towards the end.

[Shathlia]

Hi everybody!

Just want to share news about the SOC panel.

Got the grant in SOC (ST-EF) with 94.80.
Did not receive an email yet. The info was uploaded in the portal at exactly 8 am UK time.

Wish you all good luck . In case you don't get it, do not give up, this was my second atempt (same proposal, improved based on the comments). Got 86 last year.

Well, this is good then. I haven't heard anything and haven't been processed further, but it said on the evaluation 96.00. So I should been getting a letter/offer soon. Also in SOC.

This is my second attempt as well. I did poorly on my first attempt too, I got 67.20. But I listened carefully to all the criticisms and got lots of feedback from other researchers and made all the improvements!

[NoPanic42]

Hi guys,

For those who are waiting for your results in the SOC (ST-IF) panel - I just got mine, proposal number 10102xxxxx. I submitted about a day before the deadline.
I won the fellowship, but I already knew that from the DreamTeam and celebrated heavily over the week-end .

For the record, I went from evaluation to ranking in about hour. According to DreamTeam, and I am at the bottom of the awardees' list, in the 200s. On the anecdotal evidence that we have, I support the theory that successful applications with higher scores go into ranking first .

I already shared my story a few (dozens of) pages back, but just a recap - I got this on my 4th time. Scores in the range of 89-92 each time, three SoE, one reserve list (last year). I was not going to re-apply this year but I had an idea of how to improve my proposal in terms of state-of-the-art data management and dissemination and I believe that's what worked in the end (as in, resulted in the couple of extra points that I was missing). The core idea/research design has stayed exactly the same all four times.

My two cents for future applicants. 1. Don't incorporate reviewer comments unless you agree with them. Reviewers change every year and it's not uncommon to see conflicting advice from reviewers. I was absolutely devastated the second time around because I was convinced that revisions on the basis of reviewer feedback would do the job, and the new reviews ignored the revisions and picked on exactly the aspects that were praised the first submission . It's your research and this scheme is for experienced researchers, and you always know better. 2. Those who frame your outcome as a 'failure' - all this means is that you didn't cut the treshold this year around. I passed with 93,60 and I saw someone who has been placed on reserve list with 93 on my panel, so I barely cut it. If you scored high, your proposal is probably brilliant, but there were other equally brilliant applicants who got just a little bit luckier than you. That's all that is and is not a reflection of the quality of your research. Break a leg, everyone!

So it matches with DreamTeam??!! I am still waiting for the email and nothing is in the portal

[robust_and_resilient]

I am in PHY and I received it around lunchtime in the past two years, rejected, so my theory is that they send them randomly

I like your theories more than emails by score because I'm still waiting
but I don't see any rejection emails reported here in the chat - people seem to receive good news first
btw I am in physics too but apply for CAR panel. Good luck, colleagues!

Or it's just that people are more likely to share if they get it than if they don't.

perhaps you're right
but last year a lot of rejected people wanted to complain in the chat about unfair reviewers' comments... this year, nobody so far