7th Framework Programme
Marie Curie International Reintegration Grant (IRG)
COGSENSE: Cognitive and Cooperative Signal
Processing Technologies for Remote Sensing
Applications
Dr. Sevgi Zübeyde Gürbüz
Senior Researcher
TUBITAK Space Technologies Research Institute
[email protected]
What are IRGs?
• Research funds for researchers returning to an
EU nation after having spent at least three
years in a third country.
• Grant duration is 2 – 4 years.
• Fixed 25,000 Euro / year funding level.
• Eligibility:
– Experience: at least 4-years full-time postgraduate
– Nationality: Citizen of EU member or assoc. state
– Mobility: at time of cutoff date, no more than 12
months in a member state or assoc. state in the
previous 3 years
Note: Program replaced with Career Integration Grant.
Types of Projects Desired
• Beyond the state-of-the art
– Cutting edge
– Key contribution to European excellence
• Collaborative
– Foster long-term research ties within EU and
researchers in a third country
– Contributes to education of younger researchers
• Well-matched to researcher’s background and host’s
expertise
• Facilitate career development and re-integration of
researcher
Before you start writing…
• Research topics of current EU interest:
– Look at FP7 calls
• Research main groups/organizations conducting
research in your proposed area
– What will your project contribute?
– Possibilities for finding EU collaborators
– Help you establish definition of “state of the art”
• Look at examples of successful IRG proposals
Evaluation Criteria
• Weights:
– Scientific and Technological Quality – 30%
– Researcher – 30%
– Implementation – 20%
– Impact – 20%
• Points:
– Each section graded between 0 - 5 points
• Threshold:
– 70/100 overall, and each section > 3.0/50
• Ethics:
– Be sure to address any issues in proposal (human
testing, defense apps, etc.)
IRG Proposal Part B.1
B1. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL QUALITY
• B.1. Scientific and technological quality, including any
interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary aspects of proposal
– Outline research objects against state-of-the-art
– Describe state-of-the-art in your research area
– Give scientific, technological, or socio-economic reasons for why
your project is important
– Highlight interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary aspects of proposal
• B.2 Research methodology
– Describe your research approach
– Mention any novel techniques, advantages and disadvantages
IRG Proposal Part B.1 (cont)
• B.1.3 Originality and innovative nature of the project,
and relationship to the ‘state of the art’ of research in the
field
– Explain key contribution, novel concepts, expected advancement
• B.1.4 Timeliness and relevance of the project
– Outline benefit to the EU community
– Advances relative to state-of-the-art
– How project will contribute to EU excellence and importance of
reintegration of researcher
IRG Proposal Part B.1 – STRENGTHS/WEAKNESSES
Mark: 4.10 / 5.00
Lessons Learned:
- More detail on technical approach
- Include references when describing state of the art
- Project should be well-focused, with relationships emphasized
IRG Proposal Part B.2
B.2. RESEARCHER
• B.2.1 Research experience
Don’t just list your jobs or summarize CV
Emphasize projects / experience relevant to proposal topic
Highlight key publications, accomplishments, collaborators
“Over the years, I have conducted research in a variety of areas, range
from … to …. My educational background similarly reflects
multidisciplinary experiences, as I ….During that time I published
my first conference paper …”
“During this time I gained vital experience in project management via
my oversight of several university projects…”
“I had the opportunity to work hand-in-hand with world class
researchers in this area…”
“This represented a break-through in detector designs…”
IRG Proposal Part B.2 (cont)
• B.2.2 Scientific and technological quality of previous
research
– Major achievements (awards, projects, pubs, patents, etc)
– Advisable to write a description of three major accomplishments
• B.2.3 Independent thinking and leadership qualities
– Activities that reflect independent thinking, project management,
and leadership
– Outline potential for future development of the applicant
The way you write, tone, and word selection should reflect selfconfidence, creativity, and enthusiasm. Don’t just describe
activities, write so as to make the reader believe it!
Example of action sentences:
• “I have maintained an active interest in a variety of engineering
topics, driven by a curiosity to learn new techniques.”
• “I found that the key to my success was my persistence in finding
a solution”
• “This attitude enabled me to quickly learn new topics and achieve
a leadership position within my research group.”
• “I have also demonstrated leadership in areas other than research
but equally important to the organizations I worked for.”
• “I volunteered to organize and orientation program for … leading
to my earning a …. award.”
• “Another example is my establishment of the first engineering
internship program at…”
• “This organizational experience was augmented by my experience
as a program manager….”
• Typically passive voice is recommended, however, in THIS
SECTION ONLY, I used active voice.
IRG Proposal Part B.2 (cont)
• B.2.4 Match between the fellow’s profile and project
– Re-summarize experience relevant to project:
• Coursework
• Work, internship, project experience
• Relevant professional education (seminars, short courses)
• Contacts / potential collaborators
• B.2.5 Benefit to the career of the researcher from the
period of integration
– You can state that a motivating factor for returning to Europe
was opportunities such as the Marie Curie IRG
– State your aspirations, ideals, vision
– Include how you intend to contribute to your community
– State how this grant can help you achieve those goals
– State administrative advantages: job security, employment,
earning docent status, support of collaboration…etc…
IRG Proposal Part B.2 – STRENGTHS/WEAKNESSES
Mark: 4.30 / 5.00
IRG Proposal Part B.3
• B.3.1 Quality of host organization, including adequacy of
infrastructures/facilities
Don’t just provide raw
statistics, mention qualitative
– Host experience in relevant areas
advantages
– Any past international collaborations
– Capability to provide support to project (labs, personnel,
equipment, facilities)
• B.3.2 Practical arrangements for the implementation
and management of the project
–
–
–
–
–
Details on how collaborations will be pursued
Contribution to any European professional networks
Attendance of key European conferences
Details about host support to project (including financial)
Academic qualifications of host personnel who can provide
support [I provided short CVs, and support letter from supervisor]
– Don’t forget to explicitly state who your supervisor(s) are!
IRG Proposal Part B.3 (cont)
• B.3.3 Feasability and credibility of project
IRG Proposal Part B.3 (cont)
• Example Budget:
IRG Proposal Part B.3 – STRENGTHS/WEAKNESSES
Mark: 4.10 / 5.00
IRG Proposal Part B.4
B.4 IMPACT
• B.4.1 Potential of transferring knowledge to host
– Describe contacts with researchers in country and in EU
– Ties to variety of types of institutions (universities, labs, etc)
– Positive impact on research at host institution
• B.4.2 Capacity to develop last co-operation with the
third country
– Describe personal and professional ties to third country and
these are important in ensuring long relationship
– Describe collaborative research visits and how IRG is critical to
fund such collaboration
IRG Proposal Part B.4 (cont)
• B.4.3 Contribution to scientific excellence by attracting a
first class researcher
– State benefits of IRG to employment status of applicant
– State benefits to EU research excellence
“IRG played a pivotal role in decision to return to Europe…”
“IRG critical to employment status and career development…”
“Dr. Gurbuz is a valuable asset to European research in general …”
• B.4.4 Contribution to European excellence and
European competitiveness
– You can use the results of research on EU opens calls here
– Describe your contribution above current state in Europe
– You can emphasize European collaborators and mechanisms for
technology transfer
IRG Proposal Part B.4 (cont)
• B.4.5 Potential and quality of lasting professional
integration
– Prospects for professional integration and long-term stability for
the researcher
“The funding provided will replace support left behind in the USA,
result in the employment of personnel, and hence ensure the
continuation of the primary researcher’s productivity without
interruption.”
“Without the support from this grant, the primary researcher would
lack the personnel needed for executing parts of her research
agenda and have limited funds for reaching out and establishing
new collaborations within Europe.”
IRG Proposal Part B.4 – STRENGTHS/WEAKNESSES
Mark: 4.30 / 5.00
Overall Proposal Mark: 84.00 / 100.00
Some final thoughts and tips…
• When writing, remember that you are like a
salesman…
– You must sell the project idea, host institution, and
yourself!
– You must convince the judges that the project is
worth funding.
– SO: Don’t just give facts, write enthusiastic, with selfconfidence and be convincing!
• Include support letters from your collaborators,
both in-country, in-Europe, in third country and
at host institution
– These support letters are optional and in addition to the
required 3 recommendations letters from colleagues overseas
Some final thoughts and tips…(cont)
• Do not emphasize Turkey, but EUROPE
• Check your English, have someone else read /
double check it
• Clearly indicate objectives, deliverables, and
project structure via work packages
• Remember that all recommendations must be
uploaded by the cutoff date (giving names not
enough)
GOOD LUCK!