Marie Curie Actions are a set of major mobility research grants created by the European Union/European Commission to support research in the European Research Area. Established in 1996 as Marie Curie Actions and known since 2014 as Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, the fellowship programme aims to foster the career development and further training of researchers at all career stages.
www.ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/node_en
Baumert, P., Cenni, F., & Antonkine, M. L.. (2022). Ten simple rules for a successful EU Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions Postdoctoral (MSCA) fellowship application. PLoS Computational Biology
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010371
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Bitsios, I., Martone, F., Ricci, R., & Arfi, A.. (2023). The innovative dimension of the research training programmes under H2020-MSCA-ITN1: a methodological approach to track, measure and analyse innovative aspects and provide policy-feedback conclusions.. F1000Research
Plain numerical DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.138482.1
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Background: innovative research training programmes funded by the european union are essential for the forging of highly skilled researchers to tackle, via breakthrough ideas and solutions, the challenges of our society. being able to track, measure and analyse innovative aspects of the marie sklodowska-curie actions, innovative training networks under the horizon2020 funding scheme enables the impact assessment of such programmes, while filtering best practices and the generated knowledge that could ultimately breed and create further innovation. in parallel, it helps the identification of areas for improvement, the understanding of new needs to be accommodated and the co-design and implementation of eu funding policy activities to further promote innovation and excellence for researchers across europe and beyond. methods: in this study, a novel methodological approach is proposed for tracking and analysing innovation, using a representative sample of projects. basic innovation indicators are examined and considered from the existing literature and from the applicable multi-annual framework programme horizon2020. additional ones are defined, complemented by questionnaires/surveys findings, to capture innovative aspects for which the standard indicators do not apply. data mining and data visualization tools are used for the collection and processing of data. innovation radar2 (ir) reports and horizonresultsbooster3 services are also engaged for the cross-validation of the identified innovative aspects. results/conclusions: the study provides first-level input for policy-feedback activities, by identifying scientific domains and eu countries that may potentially require more attention for innovation generation. it highlights domains that are front-runners and can be used as examples or best practices for under-represented domains in terms of innovative outputs. collaboration with organisations, defined as medium/high innovators, can increase innovation generation and success in future projects. best practices are collected to serve as references for designing impactful future training programmes. the excellence of the h2020-msca-itn actions is confirmed via the generated innovations.”
Pina, D. G., Hren, D., & Marušić, A.. (2015). Peer review evaluation process of Marie Curie Actions under EU’s seventh framework programme for research. PLoS ONE
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130753
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“We analysed the peer review of grant proposals under marie curie actions, a major eu research funding instrument, which involves two steps: an independent assessment (individual evaluation report, ier) performed remotely by 3 raters, and a consensus opinion reached during a meeting by the same raters (consensus report, cr). for 24,897 proposals evaluated from 2007 to 2013, the association between average ier and cr scores was very high across different panels, grant calls and years. median average deviation (ad) index, used as a measure of inter-rater agreement, was 5.4 points on a 0-100 scale (interquartile range 3.4-8.3), overall, demonstrating a good general agreement among raters. for proposals where one rater disagreed with the other two raters (n=1424; 5.7%), or where all 3 raters disagreed (n=2075; 8.3%), the average ier and cr scores were still highly associated. disagreement was more frequent for proposals from economics/social sciences and humanities panels. greater disagreement was observed for proposals with lower average ier scores. cr scores for proposals with initial disagreement were also significantly lower. proposals with a large absolute difference between the average ier and cr scores (≥10 points; n=368, 1.5%) generally had lower cr scores. an inter-correlation matrix of individual raters’ scores of evaluation criteria of proposals indicated that these scores were, in general, a reflection of raters’ overall scores. our analysis demonstrated a good internal consistency and general high agreement among raters. consensus meetings appear to be relevant for particular panels and subsets of proposals with large differences among raters’ scores.”
Gibney, E.. (2019). UK universities warn ‘no deal’ Brexit will hit crucial funding streams. Nature
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1038/d41586-019-00023-1
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“UK universities have warned the country’s government that leaving the european union without a deal is ‘one of the biggest threats’ the institutions have ever faced. in an open letter published on 4 january, leaders of groups representing 150 uk institutions urge the government to commit to replacing important eu sources of research funding that would become immediately inaccessible to uk researchers in the event of a ‘no deal’ brexit. britain is scheduled to leave the eu on 29 march, but a deal on the terms of its departure is yet to be fully agreed. members of the uk parliament are expected to vote on a proposed deal later this month. unless an agreement is secured, british scientists will become ineligible for prestigious european research council (erc) grants and some parts of the marie skłodowska-curie actions programme, which promotes researcher mobility. the university groups estimate that together, these sources would be worth €1.3 billion (us1.5 billion) to uk researchers over the next two years. the government has already committed to funding uk participation in proposals made to other parts of the eu’s horizon 2020 research programme submitted after brexit day — because the uk would still be eligible to take part as a ‘third country’. but because third countries cannot usually host erc and marie skłodowska-curie actions grants, these streams are not covered by this pledge. however nature understands that the government will underwrite existing projects funded via these schemes as well as any submitted before the uk’s exit (alongside all other horizon 2020 grants). the letter adds that the threat of a no-deal brexit is already subjecting staff and students to significant uncertainty and may end up compromising research links, supply chains and travel. the russell group of research-focused uk universities also published figures showing that the number of eu postgraduate research students enrolling at their institutions had fallen by 9% in 2018–19, dropping for the second year in a row. uncertainty over the uk’s future relationship with the eu could be a significant factor, said the group.”
Marušić, A., Buljan, I., & Pina, D. G.. (2021). Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals. F1000Research
Plain numerical DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.52965.1
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Background: we assessed the ethics review of proposals selected for funding under the marie skłodowska-curie actions (msca) and the european research council (erc) in horizon 2020, eu’s framework programme for research and innovation, 2014-2020. methods: we analysed anonymized datasets for 3,054 msca individual fellowships (if), 417 msca innovative training networks (itn), and 1,465 erc main-listed proposals with ethics conditional clearance, over four years (2016 to 2019). the datasets included the information on ethics issues identified by applicants in their proposal and ethics issues and requirements identified by ethics experts during the ethics review. results: 42% of proposals received ethical clearance. for proposals with conditional ethics clearance (n=3546), most of the identified ethics issues by both applicants and ethics experts were in the ethics categories related to humans; protection of personal data; environment, health and safety; and non-eu countries. ethics experts identified twice as many ethics issues compared to applicants across funding schemes, years, and from high- and low-research performing countries. erc grants had the highest number of ethics requirements per proposal (median (md)=8, interquartile range (iqr=4-14), compared to itn (md=6, iqr=3-13) and if grants (md=3, iqr=2-6). the majority of requirements had to be fulfilled after grant agreement: 99.4% for if, 99.5% for itn, and 26.0% for erc. for 9% of the proposals, the requirements included the appointment of an independent ethics advisor and 1% of the proposals had to appoint an ethics advisory board. conclusions: many applicants for highly competitive h2020 funding schemes lack awareness of ethics issues raised by their proposed research. there is a need for better training of researchers at all career stages about ethics issues in research, more support to researchers from research organizations to follow the funding agencies requirements, as well as further development and harmonization of the ethics appraisal process during grant assessment.”
Doonan, F., Taylor, L., Branduardi, P., & Morrissey, J. P.. (2018). Innovative training networks: Overview of the Marie Skłodowska-Curie PhD training model. FEMS Microbiology Letters
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1093/femsle/fny207
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Doctoral training has changed in recent years with most phds now performed in structured programmes operated by university graduate schools. these schools generally superimpose a training framework onto the traditional research project to improve the education experience of the students and to prepare them for their careers. many graduates progress to the commercial sector, where there is demand for highly skilled employees. the european union (eu) promotes the development of transnational, training-focused, phd programmes called innovative training networks (itns) through marie sklodowska-curie actions. itns share many features of thematic phd programmes, but they only recruit a single cohort of students, and they align with eu policy goals. these training networks are prestigious and very well regarded within european academia. the authors of this article were participants in a yeast biotechnology itn, yeastcell, which finished in 2017. some interesting insights into the more and less successful aspects of the project arose during discussions at the final project workshop. the views of the participants are distilled here in a discussion of how an itn could be structured to maximise the benefits for the three main stakeholders: students, supervisors and industry partners.”
Skłodowska-Curie, M.. (2015). GUIDE FOR APPLICANTS Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions,. Marie Skłodowska-Curie
Show/hide publication abstract
“Note: national contact points ncps have been set up across europe by the national governments to provide information and personalised support to h2020 applicants in their native language. the mission of the ncps is to raise awareness, inform and advise on h2020 funding opportunities as well as to support potential applicants in the preparation, submission and follow-up of the grant applications. for details on the ncp in your country please consult the website at the marie skłodowska-curie actions aim to support the career development and training of researchers – with a focus on innovation skills – in all scientific disciplines through international and inter-sector mobility. the marie skłodowska-curie actions are expected to finance around 65000 researchers between 2014 and 2020, including 25000 doctoral candidates. the actions will address several objectives of the europe 2020 strategy, including the innovation union flagship initiative. this states that the eu will need at least one million new research jobs if it is to reach the target of spending 3% of eu gdp on research and development by 2020. by funding excellent research and providing attractive working conditions, the marie skłodowska-curie actions offer high-quality professional opportunities open to researchers of any age, nationality or discipline.”
Share on social media:
Facebook
Twitter
Copy
More
Share on social media:
Facebook
0
Twitter
0
Copy
0
Reddit
0
Pinterest
0