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

[Little_Venice]

I don't know for sure but it sounds like you WILL lose points if you don't address that aspect. It is sad that such an important aspect of research and social life is being reduced to a technicality (the paragraph has to be there). It's perfectly fine to encourage people to consider the gender angle but deducting points when you have clearly considered it and taken the space to explain why it's not relevant in your particular research sounds unreasonable.

Then next time I will include a couple more paragraphs about gender issues (even if they are not relevant in my case)... something like we will evaluate and test whether difference exist between genders, in our analysis. That should do, you think?

I lost some points in my first application because I failed to address the gender aspect. The user guidelines clearly instructed to address gender issues IF those are relevant, and for me they were not. The second time around I briefly mentioned that the gender aspects are not relevant - in fact, my entire research idea was to unpack collective cultural beliefs irrespective of gender/age/etc. Again, I got a critical comment about the research "potentially benefitting from having a gender dimension" and points were deducted. In the winning proposal I included the gender dimension into the research design and included two paragraphs about it. I don't think the gender dimension is crucial for my research, but at the end of the day, it may benefit it. It's another complexity which, I, personally, would rather not add as my focus lies elsewhere, but now I have to do it.

I also got some comments regarding gender issues... But my proposal is about bone regeneration. I actually mentioned that women suffer some bone related diseases more often than men and i gave a couple of statistics. What else could I have writen?
Also, did you use any successful SE proposal that you could share? I'm thinking of applying to SE panel next year!

[marialima]

Any info on the H2020-MSCA-IF-2020 cut-off statistics yet?

https://twitter.com/MSCActions/status/1 ... 71776?s=20

[Little_Venice]

I don't know for sure but it sounds like you WILL lose points if you don't address that aspect. It is sad that such an important aspect of research and social life is being reduced to a technicality (the paragraph has to be there). It's perfectly fine to encourage people to consider the gender angle but deducting points when you have clearly considered it and taken the space to explain why it's not relevant in your particular research sounds unreasonable. If it's a mandatory aspect of a research design, it should be clearly spelled out in the applicant guide.

Then next time I will include a couple more paragraphs about gender issues (even if they are not relevant in my case)... something like we will evaluate and test whether difference exist between genders, in our analysis. That should do, you think?

I lost some points in my first application because I failed to address the gender aspect. The user guidelines clearly instructed to address gender issues IF those are relevant, and for me they were not. The second time around I briefly mentioned that the gender aspects are not relevant - in fact, my entire research idea was to unpack collective cultural beliefs irrespective of gender/age/etc. Again, I got a critical comment about the research "potentially benefitting from having a gender dimension" and points were deducted. In the winning proposal I included the gender dimension into the research design and included two paragraphs about it. I don't think the gender dimension is crucial for my research, but at the end of the day, it may benefit it. It's another complexity which, I, personally, would rather not add as my focus lies elsewhere, but now I have to do it.

[MSCA-IF-RI-LIF-2020]

I am in Reserve list of RI with score=92.2 but cutoff=92.4
Please, suggest me if any chance of funding

You need to know where you are on the reserve list to have an idea. Ask your NCP.

[sunset]

Hi everybody and congratulations to all winners!
Unfortunately I did not get the funding, although I got the threshold score for MAT
I wanted to ask if anyone of you knows if the ranking in the reserve list is unique for all the panels or not.

Your need to contact your NCP and they will tell you your place on the waitlist. If you are first or second, you will probably be offered a place, even though it may take a few months. 5-10 is a grey zone, you may or may not get lucky this particular year. I was once 40th and the NCP told me right away that I have no chance.

In particular this information is relative to a specific panel or to a "global" list?
Thank you and good luck to everybody!

[Capone]

Ok, thanks! I guess just general courses about the whole fellowship, right? Or something specific for this panel? Do you know, btw, if it's possible to do part of the experimental part in a university even though your main location is the company? Or in that case you would be considered already to be in a 'regular' ST panel? (ST-LIF in my case)

I did not use any successful SE template.
But I attended courses for proposal submission.
My first attempt, ex novo

Do the appeal or re-evaluation really work?
I was in SE and got 75.2, exactly as Dreamer said.

Impact and Implementation were pretty good (4.4 and 4.2); Excellence was only 3.2.

The reviewer(s) found many strength points and few weaknesses, most of which I disagree with. One was about gender related aspects, but my proposed work was mostly on biochemistry so I even pointed out in the proposal that gender aspects were not relevant.
The other is the level of novelty, saying that I'm going to apply a technique that is broadly used by many labs, which 1) is not true, 2) the novelty should be on the question addressed and how you address, together.

I know it is hard to swallow the bitter pill, but I found the reviewer comments quite unfair.

I also got some comments regarding gender issues... But my proposal is about bone regeneration. I actually mentioned that women suffer some bone related diseases more often than men and i gave a couple of statistics. What else could I have writen?
Also, did you use any successful SE proposal that you could share? I'm thinking of applying to SE panel next year!

[nino]

I am reading the "instructions to reviewer" now... I'm looking for that paragraph where it is stipulated that "the reviewers are allowed to openly lie and ignore what is written in a proposal"... I mean, there must be a rule like that

[Tidus]

Hi guys,
I don't know if this has been discussed already, but how does it work with the seal of excellence?

[Torello]

General course on MSCA fellowships.

For your second question, I'm not entirely sure. If your main affiliation is a company, then there shouldn't be any problem, as I assume you would be considered as some sort of visiting researcher performing part of your proposal in a University.
But again I'm not really sure...

Ok, thanks! I guess just general courses about the whole fellowship, right? Or something specific for this panel? Do you know, btw, if it's possible to do part of the experimental part in a university even though your main location is the company? Or in that case you would be considered already to be in a 'regular' ST panel? (ST-LIF in my case)

I did not use any successful SE template.
But I attended courses for proposal submission.
My first attempt, ex novo

I also got some comments regarding gender issues... But my proposal is about bone regeneration. I actually mentioned that women suffer some bone related diseases more often than men and i gave a couple of statistics. What else could I have writen?
Also, did you use any successful SE proposal that you could share? I'm thinking of applying to SE panel next year!

[chkin]

In SOC IF reserve list Excellence 4.9/5 ; impact 4.6/5 ; implementation 4/5 overall 92.6, less than one mark off the cut-off point. The weakness on the part 'implementation' look absurd too me (they said it's not enough and that's not sufficient for somethings bla bla but in fact all of that have been clearly discussed in the proposal) so I'm thinking of making an appeal case - but yeah, it seems the chance for them to revise the score is low as it's extremely difficult to prove they have made arbitrary judgements - even they did).

Can anyone share experience of applying for appeal, if any?