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

[AdinaBabesh]

We've been told the same during the MSCA workshop organised by the host institutions, that 40% successful application are actually resubmissions ...

A while ago, I found some MSCA IF statistics (official document) and there they stated that resubmissions have a higher success rate on average than first submissions.

Heard this as well from a reviewer.

Regarding inexperience of reviewers: anyone can become a reviewer. So many do it, without adequate experience and with little guidance (honesty, I don't think many reviewers will have watched guidance videos for the pay they get to do the reviews).

[MSCA_SOC_2019]

I know, but they have access to previous scores once they have scored the current application. Apparently this is to see consistency in the review process between years. Clearly not working

so it doesnt matter for the scoring itself right?
i mean every fellowship application i did and know has this clause that new applications are favored and resubmissions are not. to be honest, this makes sense to me, even if it might seem unfair. msca doesnt even state this, but i am convinced that (even if they are told to not take this into account, which i doubt they are) most reviewers will be biased and tend to grade resubmissions lower in comparison to new ones.

A while ago, I found some MSCA IF statistics (official document) and there they stated that resubmissions have a higher success rate on average than first submissions.

I have found this. Resubmissions MSCA IF 2018 success rate was 22.74%
https://www.ikerbasque.net/sites/defaul ... 202019.pdf

[waqar.ameer]

Wait and keep calm until we have the official results. Last year happened that some people in EVALUATION got the MSCA. I'm very confident about my application and would be very surprised if I'm below 70%. If I'm under, I won't have any hope about the review process of MSCA as my resubmitted application got 92.6% (reserve list in 2017), 76% (2018) and would drop below 70% this year. That considering that every year I addressed the criticism and even in 2019 application, we've had an external company that audited my application. Will make no sense and will be crystal clear to me that MSCA review is a complete lottery.

But what were the reasons for second rejection? Can you share some comments?

It was crazy. Basically, Strong points from one year were weaknesses the next year (you can look for my posts last year, you have specific comments there). Such level of contradiction was shocking. So this year the host decided to hire this company that reviewed the two rejected applications, made recommendations and reviewed the 2019 application that should be clear and have all comments addressed. But who knows...

You are also in Evaluation.I believe your comments and confidence level.By your profile and confidence, i believe that you deserve MSCA and hope that you will get it.We should wait patiently.Hope for the best

[AdinaBabesh]

Everyone can register as expert in the EC portal, but I don't think that all will be invited to perform evaluations. I think the Call administrators do a selection. It is true that the EC needs to rotate the experts up to a certain % every year (I don't remember it now, but I don't think is more than 20%), but there are also experience evaluators involved, and the vice-chairs aren't for sure newcomers. Regarding the payment, I have read an intermediate audit for Horizon 2020 saying that the payment hasn't been improved since 2007 and that the time allocated for evaluations is not sufficient (evaluators complained about this). I don't know about them, but I watched the videos, answered to some questions I had

A while ago, I found some MSCA IF statistics (official document) and there they stated that resubmissions have a higher success rate on average than first submissions.

Heard this as well from a reviewer.

Regarding inexperience of reviewers: anyone can become a reviewer. So many do it, without adequate experience and with little guidance (honesty, I don't think many reviewers will have watched guidance videos for the pay they get to do the reviews).

[MIA_ENV]

I submitted my first application in 2016. My score was 89.6% and I submitted the same proposal with a different host addressing all weaknesses and got 73%. Even though hosts were different, both of them were excellent.. I scored 4.8 each in impact and implementation in 2016 which later reduced to 3.2 and 3.4 in 2017. So, even if we address everything and have a very good proposal, what if we get a reviewer who doesn't like the topic..
Also for those who are still in EVALUATION, there is still time to change the status until results declares.. So please don't loose hope..

[AnnaMC]

so it doesnt matter for the scoring itself right?
i mean every fellowship application i did and know has this clause that new applications are favored and resubmissions are not. to be honest, this makes sense to me, even if it might seem unfair. msca doesnt even state this, but i am convinced that (even if they are told to not take this into account, which i doubt they are) most reviewers will be biased and tend to grade resubmissions lower in comparison to new ones.

A while ago, I found some MSCA IF statistics (official document) and there they stated that resubmissions have a higher success rate on average than first submissions.

I have found this. Resubmissions MSCA IF 2018 success rate was 22.74%
https://www.ikerbasque.net/sites/defaul ... 202019.pdf

So 2x chances if it's a resubmission. Makes sense. I mean the proposal is normally improved. This is the general trend. It doesn't mean that the luck factor/reviewer factor vanishes for each indivindual application... It's a roulette, in this respect. Russian roulette!

[nexus]

Getting evaluated for this grant is like writing poetry. Some critics will say that you are a genius some will call it the worst piece of crap ever written on the face of the Earth. Of course with very loud and clear arguments.
So, I am looking at this grant asa lottery ticket.

I got it once, 9 years ago, is worth another shot.

If I wont's succeed I will resubmit once and ..bugger off !

Take it easy !

[Wiggo]

I submitted my first application in 2016. My score was 89.6% and I submitted the same proposal with a different host addressing all weaknesses and got 73%. Even though hosts were different, both of them were excellent.. I scored 4.8 each in impact and implementation in 2016 which later reduced to 3.2 and 3.4 in 2017. So, even if we address everything and have a very good proposal, what if we get a reviewer who doesn't like the topic..
Also for those who are still in EVALUATION, there is still time to change the status until results declares.. So please don't loose hope..

+1

[Kenniz]

so it doesnt matter for the scoring itself right?
i mean every fellowship application i did and know has this clause that new applications are favored and resubmissions are not. to be honest, this makes sense to me, even if it might seem unfair. msca doesnt even state this, but i am convinced that (even if they are told to not take this into account, which i doubt they are) most reviewers will be biased and tend to grade resubmissions lower in comparison to new ones.

A while ago, I found some MSCA IF statistics (official document) and there they stated that resubmissions have a higher success rate on average than first submissions.

I have found this. Resubmissions MSCA IF 2018 success rate was 22.74%
https://www.ikerbasque.net/sites/defaul ... 202019.pdf

yeah this proves my point, because you have way less resubmissions than new submissions, due to several factors. obviously, resubmissions are most likely always an improvement to the previous submission (as objectively as you can judge this). additionally, resubmissions are most likely of projects that previously scored high and the host etc see potential for improvement etc. this resulting in only 22% success rate of resubmissions is pretty low if you compare this to 12-13% success rate for overall proposals whith potentially several really bad ones.....

and lets be honest. most people reporting about resubmission, say they get lower scores with improved proposals.... sadly

[IF ST LIF]

But what were the reasons for second rejection? Can you share some comments?

It was crazy. Basically, Strong points from one year were weaknesses the next year (you can look for my posts last year, you have specific comments there). Such level of contradiction was shocking. So this year the host decided to hire this company that reviewed the two rejected applications, made recommendations and reviewed the 2019 application that should be clear and have all comments addressed. But who knows...

You are also in Evaluation.I believe your comments and confidence level.By your profile and confidence, i believe that you deserve MSCA and hope that you will get it.We should wait patiently.Hope for the best

Thanks, but I remain very skeptical, success rate is very low.