Evaluation and selection

Applications will be submitted electronically and subsequently be subjected to international peer review.

Applicants will be judged on professional merits, scientific and technological quality of the proposed project, feasibility of implementation and the potential impact of the proposed project. To see the complete list of evaluation criteria, please download the full call text from the section Download full call text and templates.

Each application will be reviewed by an international panel of experts within the scientific area covered by the specific programme area. The panel experts will be external to DTU. Each applicant will receive the panel's evaluation report and an overall score. Only applicants with scores 5-6 will be considered for a position.

The final hiring decision will lie with the Selection Committee Board. Each scientific programme area will be represented on the Selection Committee Board. The hiring decision will be based on the evaluation and score given by the international peer review panels.

Successful applicants will receive an offer of hire in the middle of June 2017 by email. The offer must be accepted within 14 days of receipt. It is therefore important that all applicants have access to their email during this period.

A reserve list will be established. If applicants decline or fail to accept an offer of hire within the specified time limit, fellowships will be offered to applicants on the reserve list.

Evaluation criteria used by the peer review panels:

 Criteria Sub-criteria 

Excellence
Weight: 50%

Scientific & technological quality of proposal

Weight: 25%
Quality and relevance of proposed research plan
Clear and relevant methodology
Interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary aspects, including inter- sectorial relevance and/or secondment
Originality/innovative nature of the project (in relation to relevant state-of-the-art)
 

Applicant

Weight: 25%

Qualification and background of applicant (incl. non-academic work and career breaks)
Research experience and results (patents, publications, teaching and other results)
Collaboration with business partners (if relevant)
Independent thinking, creativity, leadership and mentoring abilities
Match between applicant and proposal

Impact
Weight: 30%

 

           
Contribution of proposal or applicant to European excellence and competitiveness through transfer of knowledge and innovation
Potential impact on fellow’s career
Potential to create long-term mutually beneficial collaborations in public and private sectors in- and outside of Europe
Appropriateness of dissemination activities
Transfer of knowledge in and outside Europe through conferences, publications, teaching, public outreach activities, and potential for exploitation
Gendered innovation

 Implementation
 Weight: 25%

 

           
Overall coherence, effectiveness and appropriateness of the work plan (including realistic plans and contingency plans, milestones and expected results)

  

Scale used by the peer review panels to score each application:

Score
 6 Outstanding  The proposal stands out with exceptional quality and meets all relevant aspects of the criteria.
 5  Excellent The proposal is strong and meets the criteria well. Any shortcomings are minor.
 4  Good The proposal addresses the criteria well, although improvements in some elements are called for.
 3  Satisfactory The proposal broadly addresses the criteria. It has not been fully elaborated and there are several weaknesses.
 2  Below average The proposal addresses the criteria in an inadequate manner and has serious inherent weaknesses.
 1  Poor The proposal has serious weaknesses and fails to address the criteria
  This project has received Funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme and Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions grant no. 609405 (FP7) and 713683 (H2020)