2021 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship (HE-MSCA-PF-2021)

[dw2022]

In my case, I scored 85+ twice with no major weakness in the impact and implementation section and reduced 0.3 marks in each section which reduces the marks in overall value. So we can't expect positive things from the reviewer if they decided to reduce the marks.

Yes maybe. The first phase change was reported on 01.03.3022. I will check the date of phase change for the last year.

Hey, you said you had 85+ in 2019 but remained in Evaluation in 2021.
Did you later change to ranking or remained in evaluation? Would you mind advising whether you scored >80 n 2021

I've seen another (or more) post from last year saying similar things, like "no weakness in the excellence but get 4.8/5.0" which leads to not being main-listed. Wonder who makes the final decision (on the score) because if each proposal gets min. 3 reviewers, would the reviewers all agree with reducing some points even though there is nothing to criticize?

[chemcps]

I don't know about the reviewing process. But the comments made by the reviewer is unacceptable. Because a one-time reviewer claimed that my supervisor has no International collaboration and claim this is the major weakness in the excellence part. So we can't predict it.

In my case, I scored 85+ twice with no major weakness in the impact and implementation section and reduced 0.3 marks in each section which reduces the marks in overall value. So we can't expect positive things from the reviewer if they decided to reduce the marks.

Hey, you said you had 85+ in 2019 but remained in Evaluation in 2021.
Did you later change to ranking or remained in evaluation? Would you mind advising whether you scored >80 n 2021

I've seen another (or more) post from last year saying similar things, like "no weakness in the excellence but get 4.8/5.0" which leads to not being main-listed. Wonder who makes the final decision (on the score) because if each proposal gets min. 3 reviewers, would the reviewers all agree with reducing some points even though there is nothing to criticize?

[ririanna]

Hi guys, hope you're all hanging in there!

I know some are looking for tips on grant-writing and wanted to share that there are a lot of really useful bite-sized information on Twitter. @BettySLai gives great tips frequently and just yesterday @ButlerKaycie gave a neat trick on getting into the Grant Writing Mindset, i.e. thinking of it like a magazine (visually appealing, easy to read, information is easily accessible and comprehensible) rather than a newspaper, which is more intended to better inform/educate the reader.

[dw2022]

Five minutes . You have to fasten your rats for a refresh of the page every second.

I should train my rats to click on the refresh button and reward them with treats. Positive reinforcement. Next MSCA proposal will be about this

Put them in a touch-screen task: 3-min refresh button to obtain 2 pellets or 1-min refresh for 5 pellets.

[chemcps]

Thanks for the valuable information.

Hi guys, hope you're all hanging in there!

I know some are looking for tips on grant-writing and wanted to share that there are a lot of really useful bite-sized information on Twitter. @BettySLai gives great tips frequently and just yesterday @ButlerKaycie gave a neat trick on getting into the Grant Writing Mindset, i.e. thinking of it like a magazine (visually appealing, easy to read, information is easily accessible and comprehensible) rather than a newspaper, which is more intended to better inform/educate the reader.

[chemcps]

Perfect

Five minutes . You have to fasten your rats for a refresh of the page every second.

I should train my rats to click on the refresh button and reward them with treats. Positive reinforcement. Next MSCA proposal will be about this

Put them in a touch-screen task: 3-min refresh button to obtain 2 pellets or 1-min refresh for 5 pellets.

[horizon]

Five minutes . You have to fasten your rats for a refresh of the page every second.

I should train my rats to click on the refresh button and reward them with treats. Positive reinforcement. Next MSCA proposal will be about this

Put them in a touch-screen task: 3-min refresh button to obtain 2 pellets or 1-min refresh for 5 pellets.

[Cr@zyChem]

Thanks for letting me know about my mistake. It was the one submitted in 2019.

???
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Post by chemcps » Wed Feb 03, 2021 5:32 pm

MSCA-IF-CHE Still under EVALUATION

Ture. I see that dreamer also got ranking on 29 Jan in 2019 and he didn't get it.

This year is a bit similar to 2019, phases of some people change to ranking 11 days ahead of the announcement date.

We're results released before the set date in 2019?

[aspil]

In my case, I scored 85+ twice with no major weakness in the impact and implementation section and reduced 0.3 marks in each section which reduces the marks in overall value. So we can't expect positive things from the reviewer if they decided to reduce the marks.

Hey, you said you had 85+ in 2019 but remained in Evaluation in 2021.
Did you later change to ranking or remained in evaluation? Would you mind advising whether you scored >80 n 2021

I've seen another (or more) post from last year saying similar things, like "no weakness in the excellence but get 4.8/5.0" which leads to not being main-listed. Wonder who makes the final decision (on the score) because if each proposal gets min. 3 reviewers, would the reviewers all agree with reducing some points even though there is nothing to criticize?

We have to spare a thought for the evaluators. They are given very little room on a 5-point scale. When they deal with multiple proposals which do not have any weakness, but they collectively feel that one is better than another, they may deduct some points for one of the proposals.

[Cr@zyChem]

Does anyone know from which country were Dreamer and Dreamergirl? Maybe someone from the same country could contact the NCPs to try to get the list?

I was thinking the same...