The European Research Council Jose Manuel Fernandez de

The European Research Council Jose Manuel Fernandez de Labastida Head Scientific Department Valencia, 28 -3 -2019 │1

The European Research Council Outline: Ø Ø Ø Ø ERC basics ERC funding schemes Evaluation ERC achievements Work Programme 2019 Horizon Europe ERC and Physics ERC and Spain │2

ERC basics │3

ERC basics Main features Ø The ERC supports frontier research pan-European competition Ø Support for individual or small groups of principal investigators Ø No predetermined subjects (bottom-up) Ø Support of frontier research in all fields of knowledge Ø Scientific quality as the only criterion aiming for excellence Ø Global peer-review │4

ERC basics ERC Governance The European Commission • • Provides financing through the EU framework programmes Guarantees autonomy of the ERC Assures the integrity and accountability of the ERC Adopts annual work programmes as established by the Scientific Council The ERC Scientific Council • 22 prominent researchers proposed by an identification committee • President appointed following recommendation of a search committee • Appointed by the Commission (4 years, renewable once) • Establishes overall scientific strategy and annual work programmes • Identifies evaluators • Controls quality of operations and management • Ensures communication with the scientific community The ERC Executive Agency • • • Executes annual work programme Implements calls for proposals Organises peer review evaluation Signs and monitors grant agreements Carries out communications activities Provides support to the Scientific Council │5

ERC basics Key figures Ø The ERC is a key component of Horizon 2020, the EU programme for Research and Innovation Ø € 13 billion budget for 2014 -2020, i. e. 17% of the Horizon 2020 budget Ø Over 80, 000 applications received and around 9, 000 projects funded Ø Highly competitive calls: overall success rate is 11. 4 % │6

ERC funding schemes │7

ERC funding schemes Starting Grants Consolidator Grants 1 Principal Investigator (2 -7 years after Ph. D) up to € 2. 0 Mio for 5 years 1 Principal Investigator (7 -12 years after Ph. D) up to € 2. 75 Mio for 5 years Synergy Grants 2 – 4 Principal Investigators up to € 14. 0 Mio for 6 years Advanced Grants 1 Principal Investigator up to € 3. 5 Mio for 5 years Proof-of-Concept Inquiring on the innovation potential up to € 150, 000 for ERC grant holders │8

ERC funding schemes Principal investigator and commitment PI Profile: Any current place of work but working or moving to work in Europe (EU member state or H 2020 Associated Country) Any nationality or age St. G: 2 and up to 7; Co. G: 7 and up to 12 years of experience after Ph. D; Ad. G: no constraints Potential (St. G) or evidence (Co. G) for independence and maturity; strong leadership (Ad. G) Good track-record appropriate to their research field and career stage PI Commitment: Minimum 50% (St. G), 40% (Co. G), 30% (Ad. G) of PI working time on ERC project Minimum 50% of PI working time in a EU Member Sate or Associated Country │9 │9

ERC funding schemes Funding Starting Grant (St. G): Up to 1. 5 million € for a period of 5 years (pro rata for projects of shorter duration). Up to 0. 5 million € additional Consolidator Grant (Co. G): Up to 2. 0 million € for a period of 5 years (pro rata for projects of shorter duration). Up to 0. 75 million € additional Advanced Grant (Ad. G): Up to 2. 5 million € for a period of 5 years (pro rata for projects of shorter duration). Up to 1. 0 million € additional to cover (a) eligible "start-up" costs for Principal Investigators moving from a another country to the EU or an Associated Country as a consequence of receiving the ERC grant and/or (b) the purchase of major equipment and/or (c) access to large facilities. │ 10

ERC funding schemes Role of host institution • Is located in an EU Member State or an Associated Country • Hosts the PI for the duration of the project • Is a legal entity: university, research center, business research unit, etc. • Is committed to ensure that the PI may: o Apply for funding independently o Manage research and funding project o Publish independently as senior author o Have access to reasonable space and facilities • Signs Grant Agreement • Overhead: 25% │ 11

ERC funding schemes Features of the ERC grants • No constraints on eligible costs as long as they are for the execution of the project • Rules of the HI apply • High flexibility: aims of the project can be modified through amendments to the grant agreement • Grants have a light reporting along the project life-time: financial report every 18 months, scientific report at mid-term and end of the project • Grants have 25 -40% pre-financing • PI is empowered to manage the research activity and the funds of the project • Grants are portable │ 12

ERC funding schemes Synergy grants: principles • • • For small groups of 2 to 4 Principal Investigators (PIs) with complementary skills, knowledge and resources. Appropriate configuration of PIs to jointly identify and tackle research objectives aiming at breakthrough discoveries. Excellence is the sole criterion of evaluation. Good track-record appropriate to their research field and career stage. ‘Bottom-up’ - research priorities and the configuration of the group determined by the individual investigators. Projects expected to cover more than one discipline or research field, but not obligatory. │ 13

ERC funding schemes Synergy grants: commitment and funding • • • PIs must be strongly committed to the project and engage in a genuine collaboration. One of the PIs will act as ‘Corresponding PI’ PIs may apply from any country, institution worldwide. PIs must devote at least 30% of their working time on the project All but at most one PI (who cannot be the corresponding PI) is expected to devote 50% of their working time in an EU Member State or Associated Country. Attractive, long-term funding - maximum grant of 10 million € for a period of up to six years. Up to 4 million € additional to cover (a) eligible "start-up" costs for Principal Investigators moving from a another country to the EU or an Associated Country as a consequence of receiving the ERC grant and/or (b) the purchase of major equipment and/or (c) access to large facilities. │ 14

Evaluation │ 15

Evaluation Proposal structure PART A – online forms Info on Proposal, PI, HI and overall budget Annexes – submitted as. pdf • • Statement of support of HI If applicable: explanatory information on ethical issues; copy of Ph. D (St. G, Co. G); document for extension of eligibility window (St. G, Co. G) PART B 1 – submitted as. pdf • • • Extended Synopsis CV Track Record 5 p. 2 p. Funding ID beyond the 2 page limit for the CV Explanatory comment if interdisciplinary Optional template for the CV PART B 2 – submitted as. pdf • Scientific Proposal 15 p. Template for the budget Read the Information to Applicants │ 16

Evaluation panels Physical Sciences & Engineering Life Sciences PE 1 Mathematics PE 2 Fundamental Constituents of Matter PE 3 Condensed Matter Physics PE 4 Physical & Analytical Chemical Sciences PE 5 Synthetic Chemistry and Materials PE 6 Computer Science & Informatics PE 7 Systems & Communication Engineering PE 8 Products & Process Engineering PE 9 Universe Sciences PE 10 Earth System Science LS 1 Molecular Biology, Biochemistry, Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics LS 2 Genetics, ‘Omics’, Bioinformatics and Systems Biology LS 3 Cellular and Developmental Biology LS 4 Physiology, Pathophysiology and Endocrinology LS 5 Neurosciences and Neural Disorders LS 6 Immunity and Infection LS 7 Applied Medical Technologies, Diagnostics, Therapies and Public Health LS 8 Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Biology LS 9 Applied Life Sciences, Biotechnology and Molecular and Biosystems Engineering Social Sciences and Humanities SH 1 Individuals, Markets and Organizations SH 2 Institutions, Values, Environment and Space SH 3 The Social World, Diversity and Population SH 4 The Human Mind and Its Complexity SH 5 Cultures and Cultural Production SH 6 The Study of the Human Past │ 17

Evaluation Main features Ø Ø Goal of the evaluation: select the best frontier research proposals Only evaluation criteria: excellence Method: peer review Structure: 25 panels distributed in 3 scientific domains (10 Physical Sciences, 9 Life sciences and 6 Social Sciences and Humanities) Ø Each panel consists of 1 panel chair and 12 -16 panel members What makes ERC evaluation successful? Peers Review procedure │ 18

Evaluation Peers Ø Panel members: typically 375 / call High-level scientists Recruited by Sc. C from all over the world: ~14% from outside Europe About 12 -16 members plus a chair person Other US (7%) Ø Referees: typically 2000 / call Evaluate only a small number of proposals Similar to normal practise in peer-reviewed journals EU and Associated Countries (86%) │ 19

Evaluation Review procedure (St. G, Co. G and Ad. G) STEP 1 STEP 2 Remote assessment by Panel members of section 1 – PI and synopsis Remote assessment by Panel members and reviewers of full proposals Panel meeting + interview (St. G and Co. G) Panel meeting Proposals retained for step 2 Ranked list of proposals Feedback to applicants • • • Right balance between generalist + specialized review Appropriate treatment of interdisciplinary proposals Good cost-benefit ratio │ 20

Evaluation Review procedure (Sy. G) STEP 1 Remote assessment by Panel members of PI and synopsis STEP 2 STEP 3 Remote assessment by Panel members and reviewers of full proposals Re-assessment by Panel members Panel meetings (dynamically arranged) Panel chair meeting Interviews Proposals retained for step 2 Ranked list of proposals Proposals retained for step 3 Feedback to applicants * Dynamically arranged Feedback to applicants • • • Right balance between generalist + specialized review Appropriate treatment of interdisciplinary proposals Good cost-benefit ratio │ 21

Evaluation Ranking and scoring in Step 1 In Step 1 proposals are ranked by the panels on the basis of the individual reviews and the panels' overall appreciation of their strengths and weaknesses. Proposals will be retained for Step 2 based on the ranked list and the determined budgetary cut-off level. Applicants will be informed on the score attained by their proposal: o o o A: is of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation, . B: is of high quality but not sufficient to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation. C: is not of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation. In addition, applicants will be told the ranking range of their proposal out of the proposals evaluated by the panel. │ 22

Evaluation Ranking and scoring in Step 2 (and Step 3 for Sy. G) In step 2 (and Step 3 for Sy. G) proposals are ranked by the panels on the basis of the individual reviews and an overall appreciation of their strengths and weaknesses. Proposals will be recommended for funding based on the ranked list and the funds available. Applicants will be informed on the score attained by their proposal: o o A: fully meets the ERC's excellence criterion and is recommended for funding if sufficient funds are available. B: meets some but not all elements of the ERC's excellence criterion and will not be funded. In addition, applicants will be told the ranking range of their proposal out of the proposals evaluated by the panel. │ 23

Evaluation Resubmission restrictions St. G, Co. G and Ad. G funding schemes: • Those who receive B in Step 1 have to wait out one year to apply again to the St. G, Co. G or Ad. G calls • Those who receive a C will have to wait out two years to apply again to the St. G, Co. G or Ad. G calls Sy. G funding scheme: • Those who receive B (Step 1 or Step 2) have to wait out one year to apply again to the Sy. G call • Those who receive a C will have to wait out two years to apply again to the Sy. G call, and one year to apply to the St. G, Co. G or Ad. G calls │ 24

ERC achievements │ 25

ERC achievements Narrowing the EU-USA gap The first reported ERC publications began to appear in 2008 and since then publications acknowledging ERC funding have gone from contributing less than 0. 1% of EU top 1% more cited publications in 2008 (2) to nearly 7% in 2014 (973). In 2014, for the first time authors based in the EU appeared on more top 1% more cited publications (14, 172) than authors based in US (14, 093) in absolute numbers. 1% most cited Publications Elsevier Scopus abstract and citation database, accessed January 2016 │ 26

ERC achievements Clarivate Analytics worldwide ranking of research funders 2007 -16 Research funder Papers Category Percentage top normalized citation 1% papers impact Percentage of international collaborations European Research Council (ERC) 40. 422 2, 46 4, 84% 59, 24% Wellcome Trust 41. 040 2, 10 3, 60% 55, 62% 123. 864 2, 09 3, 92% 39, 39% UK Medical Research Council 38. 442 2, 08 3, 76% 48, 81% Swiss National Science Foundation 50. 598 1, 90 3, 01% 59, 03% US National Institutes of Health (NIH) 617. 950 1, 73 2, 61% 28, 37% US National Science Foundation (NSF) 380. 893 1, 73 2, 76% 36, 36% 41. 385 1, 62 2, 04% 47, 65% 171. 959 1, 55 1, 92% 48, 56% US Department of Energy (DOE) French National Research Agency German Research Foundation (DFG) │ 27

ERC achievements Ex-post peer review evaluation Qualitative evaluation of completed ERC projects Overall results for 2015, 2016 and 2017 2015 21% 2016 50% 25% 2017 48% 19% 0% 10% 25% 26% 60% 20% 30% 4% 1% 20% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% A - Scientific breakthrough B - Major scientific advance C - Incremental scientific contribution D - No appreciable scientific contribution 1% 100% │ 28

ERC achievements Priority to young scientists + 40 000 Ph. D and post-doc researchers working in ERC teams. Two-thirds of ERC grants to early-stage Principal Investigators. │ 29

Work Programme 2019 │ 30

Work Programme 2019 Indicative summary of WP 2019 calls Starting Grant Consolidator Grant Advanced Grant Synergy Grant Proof of Concept Grant Call identifier ERC-2019 -St. G ERC-2019 -Co. G ERC-2019 -Ad. G ERC-2019 -Sy. G ERC-2019 -Po. C January 2019 Call closes (cut-off dates for Po. C) October 2018 Budget million EUR (estimated number of grants) 580 (390) February 2019 August 2019 November 2018 April 2019 September 2019 602 (314) 390 (166) 400 (48) 25 (167) │ 31

Work Programme 2019 Main novelties • Synergy Grant: budget increase and possibility to include up to one Principal Investigator based in a third country • ERC Proof-of-Concept: lump sum pilot and budget increase • Adjustment for the extensions of eligibility windows in St. G and Co. G │ 32

Horizon Europe │ 33

Horizon Europe Objectives and structure Specific objectives of the Programme Support the creation and diffusion of high-quality knowledge Strengthen the impact of R&I in supporting EU policies Foster all forms of innovation and strengthen market deployment Optimise the Programme’s delivery for impact in a strengthened ERA Pillar 1 European Research Council Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions Research Infrastructures Clusters Open Science • • • Pillar 2 Pillar 3 Global Challenges and Industrial Competitiveness Open Innovation Health Inclusive and Secure Society Digital and Industry Climate, Energy and Mobility Food and natural resources Joint Research Centre European Innovation Council European innovation ecosystems European Institute of Innovation and Technology Strengthening the European Research Area Sharing excellence Reforming and Enhancing the European R&I system │ 34

Horizon Europe Budget: € 100 billion* (2021 -2027) € billion In current prices € 2. 1 € 2. 4 Open Science € 13. 5 € 25. 8 Global Challenges & Ind. Competitiveness Open Innovation Strengthening ERA € 52. 7 Euratom * This envelope includes EUR 3. 5 billion allocated under the Invest. EU Fund. │ 35

Horizon Europe Pillar 1, Open Science: reinforcing and extending the excellence of the Union's science base European Research Council Marie Skłodowska. Curie Actions Research Infrastructures Frontier research by the best researchers and their teams Equipping researches with new knowledge and skills through mobility and training Integrated and inter-connected world-class research infrastructures € 16. 6 billion € 6. 8 billion € 2. 4 billion * This envelope includes EUR 3. 5 billion allocated under the Invest. EU Fund. │ 36

ERC and Physics │ 37

ERC and Physics Funding allocated Three of the 25 ERC evaluation panels contain Physics-related areas: PE 2 – Fundamental Constituents of Matter PE 3 – Condensed Matter Physics PE 9 – Universe Siences Million € FP 7 EU+AC H 2020 ES % EU+AC ES TOTAL % All panels 7. 449 371 5, 0% 8. 797 474 Physics panels 1. 018 50 5, 0% 1. 212 PE 2 391 22 5, 6% PE 3 376 22 PE 9 251 7 EU+AC ES % 5, 4% 16. 246 845 5, 2% 63 5, 2% 2. 230 113 5, 1% 437 20 4, 5% 828 42 5, 0% 5, 8% 426 31 7, 2% 802 53 6, 6% 2, 7% 349 12 3, 4% 600 19 3, 1% │ 38

ERC and Physics PE 2 - Fundamental Constituents of Matter The 10 more relevant topics in PE 2 (243 projects funded in H 2020) │ 39

ERC and Physics PE 3 - Condense Matter Physics The 10 more relevant topics in PE 3 (237 projects funded in H 2020) │ 40

ERC and Physics PE 9 - Universe Sciences The 10 more relevant topics in PE 9 (194 projects funded in H 2020) │ 41

ERC and Physics Geographical distribution │ 42

ERC and Spain │ 43

Spain at ERC funded projects by country HI │ 44

Spain at ERC Top HIs in Spain │ 45

Spain at ERC Grantees at home and abroad 117 foreign grantees in ES from 29 countries 362 PIs with Spanish nationality in Spain 128 Spanish PIs abroad in UK(42), FR(26), DE(18), CH(14). . . │ 46

Spain at ERC Proof of Concept 2011 -18 Overall Po. C share 12% │ 47

Spain at ERC Success rates by country of HI Overall success rate 11, 4% │ 48

Spain at ERC grants versus GERD Overall success rate 11, 4% │ 49

Spain at ERC panel member by country of HI and gender │ 50

Spain at ERC Evolution of the number of grants with Spanish HI Total: 483 grants 80 70 67 60 54 57 47 50 38 37 40 42 30 25 23 20 19 14 13 12 27 26 15 15 St. G+Co. G 35 34 31 46 42 41 53 34 30 Ad. G Total 18 13 13 12 11 10 18 20 17 20 16 20 15 20 14 20 13 20 12 20 11 20 10 20 09 20 20 07 -2 0 08 0 2013: 14 St. G and 20 Co. G 2014: 22 St. G and 32 Co. G 2015: 12 St. G and 18 Co. G 2016: 23 St. G and 23 Co. G 2017: 22 St. G and 13 Co. G 2018: 17 St. G and 17 C 0 G │ 51

Spain at ERC Evolution of the % of grants with Spanish HI 14% 12% 10% 7. 7% 8% 7. 7% 5. 7% 6% 6. 5% 5. 6% 4. 6% 5. 0% 4% 4. 9% 4. 8% 5. 0% 4. 7% 6. 8% 4. 6% 4. 3% St. G+Co. G 6. 7% 4. 9% Ad. G 4. 8% 2% 18 20 17 20 16 20 15 20 14 20 13 20 12 20 11 20 10 20 09 20 20 07 -2 00 8 0% 2013: 4, 7% in St. G and 6, 4% in Co. G 2014: 6, 7% in St. G and 8, 6% in Co. G 2015: 3, 4% in St. G and 6, 0% in Co. G 2016: 5, 9% in St. G and 7, 3% in Co. G 2017: 5, 4% in St. G and 4, 0% in Co. G 2018: 4, 2% in St. G and 5, 8% in Co. G │ 52

Spain at ERC Evolution of the % of applications with Spanish HI 14% 12. 2% 10% 9. 6% 9. 1% 8. 1% 11. 4% 10. 0% 8. 6% 9. 4% 8% 6. 2% 6. 1% 8. 0% 8. 1% 7. 5% 7. 2% 8. 3% 8. 2% 8. 8% 6. 2% 6% 9. 0% 6. 5% 7. 7% 7. 4% St. G+Co. G Ad. G 5. 6% 4% 2% 20 19 20 18 20 17 20 16 20 15 20 14 20 13 20 12 20 11 20 10 20 09 20 07 -2 00 8 0% 2013: 10, 7% in St. G and 12, 4% in Co. G 2014: 8, 6% in St. G and 11, 8% in Co. G 2015: 6, 9% in St. G and 8, 3% in Co. G 2016: 7, 7% in St. G and 8, 7% in Co. G 2017: 7, 4% in St. G and 9, 3% in Co. G 2018: 6, 9% in St. G and 8, 1% in Co. G 2019: 7, 6% in St. G and 8, 8% in Co. G │ 53

Spain at ERC Evolution of the number of applications with Spanish HI 1200 1093 1000 799 800 701 670 581 567 600 479 400 323 227 134 200 771 96 364 130 454 374 350 234 531 600 426 631 464 596 412 St. G+Co. G 454 Total 294 216 190 129 157 Ad. G 174 167 184 19 20 18 20 17 20 16 20 15 20 14 20 13 20 12 20 11 20 10 20 09 20 20 07 -2 00 8 0 2013: 354 St. G + 445 Co. G 2014: 283 St. G + 298 Co. G 2015: 203 St. G + 171 Co. G 2016: 226 St. G + 200 Co. G 2017: 228 St. G + 236 Co. G 2018: 218 St. G + 194 Co. G 2019: 237 St. G + 217 Co. G │ 54

Some final messages For the researcher: • Do not exclude your-self from participating in ERC calls. • If you have an idea that make a significant change in your field of research, or in some other field, consider writing it down an apply to ERC. • Take risks, explain the high scientific impact of your project if you reach your aims, and provide evidence that you can do it. For the institution: • Provide support to researchers to work on the proposal. • Offer benefits to grantees. • Play strategically. │ 55

Thank you for your attention ERC is dedicated to selecting and funding the excellent ideas that have not happened yet and the scientists that are dreaming them up. │ 56