2019 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2019)

[eero]

Could someone post how to find your ranking on the reserve list? I can't seem to figure out how to find that information. Bonus if anyone has any stats on how many people get off it/at what rank we should give up hope? Thanks in advance!!

[ritab_2020]

For whoever was asking for this year's cutoff scores:

https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tende ... X9gWKTbtnE

hi,

thanks!
But this is last year's?

[ritab_2020]

Could someone post how to find your ranking on the reserve list? I can't seem to figure out how to find that information. Bonus if anyone has any stats on how many people get off it/at what rank we should give up hope? Thanks in advance!!

Someone told me to contact your Country Contact Point

[AdinaBabesh]

They are called National Contact Point, I specify this because by Country Contact Point you might not find them.

Could someone post how to find your ranking on the reserve list? I can't seem to figure out how to find that information. Bonus if anyone has any stats on how many people get off it/at what rank we should give up hope? Thanks in advance!!

Someone told me to contact your Country Contact Point

[FestivusShadow]

The potential of the researcher to reach professional independence during the fellowship is not fully evident taking into account the moderate track record and personal achievements.


5 yr PhD and 2 yr post doc experience, 4 patents, 8 first author papers (2 JACS) and a total of 17 papers with a global average impact of 8. If this this qualified as moderate track record then were they planning to award the fellowship to Nobel laureates or what.


Pissed!!!!

[Anais]

The potential of the researcher to reach professional independence during the fellowship is not fully evident taking into account the moderate track record and personal achievements.


5 yr PhD and 2 yr post doc experience, 4 patents, 8 first author papers (2 JACS) and a total of 17 papers with a global average impact of 8. If this this qualified as moderate track record then were they planning to award the fellowship to Nobel laureates or what.


Pissed!!!!

That's insane, man. I've seen a couple dozen of reports but never this "personal".

[Shapovalov]

The potential of the researcher to reach professional independence during the fellowship is not fully evident taking into account the moderate track record and personal achievements.


5 yr PhD and 2 yr post doc experience, 4 patents, 8 first author papers (2 JACS) and a total of 17 papers with a global average impact of 8. If this this qualified as moderate track record then were they planning to award the fellowship to Nobel laureates or what.


Pissed!!!!

Pretty insane.

I do have a follow up question. Did you highlight your publication record in Part B1? Iirc, reviewers are not obliged to see Part B2(where the CV is) while evaluating Part B1.

[Anais]

The potential of the researcher to reach professional independence during the fellowship is not fully evident taking into account the moderate track record and personal achievements.


5 yr PhD and 2 yr post doc experience, 4 patents, 8 first author papers (2 JACS) and a total of 17 papers with a global average impact of 8. If this this qualified as moderate track record then were they planning to award the fellowship to Nobel laureates or what.


Pissed!!!!

Pretty insane.

I do have a follow up question. Did you highlight your publication record in Part B1? Iirc, reviewers are not obliged to see Part B2(where the CV is) while evaluating Part B1.

So they deemed it "moderate" without knowing anything about it?

[AdinaBabesh]

They do look into the CVs, in my case they said " The researcher has an impressive CV in view to their career stage.". I won't say they are wrong

The potential of the researcher to reach professional independence during the fellowship is not fully evident taking into account the moderate track record and personal achievements.


5 yr PhD and 2 yr post doc experience, 4 patents, 8 first author papers (2 JACS) and a total of 17 papers with a global average impact of 8. If this this qualified as moderate track record then were they planning to award the fellowship to Nobel laureates or what.


Pissed!!!!

Pretty insane.

I do have a follow up question. Did you highlight your publication record in Part B1? Iirc, reviewers are not obliged to see Part B2(where the CV is) while evaluating Part B1.

So they deemed it "moderate" without knowing anything about it?

[Shapovalov]

I do have a follow up question. Did you highlight your publication record in Part B1? Iirc, reviewers are not obliged to see Part B2(where the CV is) while evaluating Part B1.

So they deemed it "moderate" without knowing anything about it?

I'm not commenting specifically on Festivus' case, because, of course, I do not know exactly what his/her situation is. Maybe (s)he just got a terrible reviewer(s).

That said, yes, I'm pretty sure that I read that the reviewers are not obliged to look through your CV while judging part B1.
If you are referring to something in your CV, especially with the reaching or reinforcing professional maturity subsection, you have to do it explicitly in that section. Each section (and subsection) is often judged independently. And one can not assume that the reviewers will read some part of the proposal to get information to judge another part. Whether you agree with this or not is not so relevant here, since they officially make it so to make the reviewers job easier. So that the reviewers don't need to keep cross referencing.

This is true in a variety of other things. Just having some information somewhere is not enough. It should be there exactly where the reviewers are told to expect it to be. I do recall putting a few things in multiple places, so that every subsection can be read in itself.

That's not to say that some reviewers aren't terrible. There definitely are bad reviewers, and luck plays a big role.