2023 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2023)

[fmpStanford]

Hey all!

EF-ENG, first-time applicant here. Not funded with a score of 84.4% . Quite the bummer to be so close to the SOE and not get it.

Question in case anyone can help. I only got an email saying I have a message in the portal (no rejection mentioned or anything), and only from the documents in the system I could see the grade and so on. There are there the three categores, together with grades and the short descriptions on what was good/bad in each category etc.

The question is: is this all the feedback we get? The sentences describing weaknesses are very very short on words. Stuff like " The exploitation measures are not sufficiently developed". I sort of understand what they mean, but of course it is not like I did not cover this in the proposal, but probably they want something more/something was unclear. Is this all we are going to get? Basicaly something like "work more on subsection 3.5" ? Others here are posting the feedback is very usefull, but also are mentioning a rejection email, so I am a bit confused. Am I gonna get some more info?

Any help is very apreciated! Thanks and congrats to everyone!

First, the SOE does not mean anything. Sorry to be this direct.
I got 91% and is exactly the same, nothing change.

Second; I am afraid that is all you will get. One of my reviewers got confused in my Gantt chart and fucked upo all my percentage; we cannot even complain.

[diescientist_]

Where can we find the position in the waiting list?

EF-LIF: 92.4% - waiting list

[glycoglyco]

If we do think that a "weakness" was overestinated in the report, is the redress option even worth trying? Just a +0.1 in the Excellence section would push the proposal through the cutoff...
Thank you in advance for the support and stay strong!

[l0e42]

Hey all!

EF-ENG, first-time applicant here. Not funded with a score of 84.4% . Quite the bummer to be so close to the SOE and not get it.

Question in case anyone can help. I only got an email saying I have a message in the portal (no rejection mentioned or anything), and only from the documents in the system I could see the grade and so on. There are there the three categores, together with grades and the short descriptions on what was good/bad in each category etc.

The question is: is this all the feedback we get? The sentences describing weaknesses are very very short on words. Stuff like " The exploitation measures are not sufficiently developed". I sort of understand what they mean, but of course it is not like I did not cover this in the proposal, but probably they want something more/something was unclear. Is this all we are going to get? Basicaly something like "work more on subsection 3.5" ? Others here are posting the feedback is very usefull, but also are mentioning a rejection email, so I am a bit confused. Am I gonna get some more info?

Any help is very apreciated! Thanks and congrats to everyone!

First, the SOE does not mean anything. Sorry to be this direct.
I got 91% and is exactly the same, nothing change.

Second; I am afraid that is all you will get. One of my reviewers got confused in my Gantt chart and fucked upo all my percentage; we cannot even complain.

How do you know if/which reviewer got confused?

[fmpStanford]

Hey all!

EF-ENG, first-time applicant here. Not funded with a score of 84.4% . Quite the bummer to be so close to the SOE and not get it.

Question in case anyone can help. I only got an email saying I have a message in the portal (no rejection mentioned or anything), and only from the documents in the system I could see the grade and so on. There are there the three categores, together with grades and the short descriptions on what was good/bad in each category etc.

The question is: is this all the feedback we get? The sentences describing weaknesses are very very short on words. Stuff like " The exploitation measures are not sufficiently developed". I sort of understand what they mean, but of course it is not like I did not cover this in the proposal, but probably they want something more/something was unclear. Is this all we are going to get? Basicaly something like "work more on subsection 3.5" ? Others here are posting the feedback is very usefull, but also are mentioning a rejection email, so I am a bit confused. Am I gonna get some more info?

Any help is very apreciated! Thanks and congrats to everyone!

First, the SOE does not mean anything. Sorry to be this direct.
I got 91% and is exactly the same, nothing change.

Second; I am afraid that is all you will get. One of my reviewers got confused in my Gantt chart and fucked upo all my percentage; we cannot even complain.

How do you know if/which reviewer got confused?

got 4.8 / 5 / 3.8

They got confused with the timeline, they said the Gantt chart did not align with the workplan but it did.
They said there was a total mismatch with months and years
and it is correct.

[canb_esp]

First of all, congratulations to all the candidates that were awarded.

I'm wondering if somebody knows how the evaluation review works. I mean, could we ask for a review of our proposal if we have found mistakes on the ESR from the external evaluators?

Thanks

[l0e42]

First, the SOE does not mean anything. Sorry to be this direct.
I got 91% and is exactly the same, nothing change.

Second; I am afraid that is all you will get. One of my reviewers got confused in my Gantt chart and fucked upo all my percentage; we cannot even complain.

How do you know if/which reviewer got confused?

got 4.8 / 5 / 3.8

They got confused with the timeline, they said the Gantt chart did not align with the workplan but it did.
They said there was a total mismatch with months and years
and it is correct.

That sucks, I also got comments here and there in topics I (believe I) covered. Nothing very specific just "not sufficient".

[zisschaa]

EF-PHY 91% not funded 4.3/4.8/4.8

There is essentially a single weakness listed in excellence, yet only 4.3 score. Any experiences whether it is worth to appeal?

[fmpStanford]

EF-PHY 91% not funded 4.3/4.8/4.8

There is essentially a single weakness listed in excellence, yet only 4.3 score. Any experiences whether it is worth to appeal?

My case is also one that I am debating if I should complain or not; 3.9 in the implementation fucked up all my application, almost perfect in excellence and 5 in impact. This is so unfair, I have read my application 10 times and I still don't see the problem in my workplan+GanttChart

[Syd87]

This lottery system is very biased at one point ... how can somebody score 100%.
It is all known evaluation and favouritism..