Division 3.1.8 Feedback

Following the peer review evaluation, the ERCEA provides feedback to the PI and the applicant legal entity. All communication and feedback from the ERCEA to the PI and the applicant legal entity will be done via an ERCEA secured web-mail account. The Guide for Applicants will indicate the expected date of feedback.

1. (a)

   Following the peer review evaluation of first-step in a two-step peer review evaluation:

   • Those whose proposals are found to be ineligible will be informed of the grounds for such a decision. Ineligible proposals are not evaluated.

   • Those whose proposals which are not retained for the next step will receive feedback on the peer review evaluation in the form of an ER.

   • Finally, those whose proposals are retained for the next step will receive a notification, and may be invited to attend an interview.

2. (b)

   Following the peer review evaluation of first stage in a two-stage submission procedure:

   • Those whose proposals are found to be ineligible will be informed of the grounds for such a decision. Ineligible proposals are not evaluated.

   • Those whose proposals are not retained for the next stage will receive feedback on the peer review evaluation in the form of an ER.

   • Finally, those whose proposals are retained for the next stage will receive an invitation to submit a proposal to the second stage, and may be invited to attend an interview.

3. (c)

   Following the second peer review evaluation under the cases (a) and (b) above, and following the single peer review evaluation in the case of a single submission and single step evaluation:

   • Those whose proposals are found to be ineligible will be informed of the grounds for such a decision. Ineligible proposals are not evaluated.

   • Both the proposals above and below the quality threshold will receive feedback on the peer review evaluation in the form of an ER.

   • The ER provides the outcome of the peer review evaluation and contains, as appropriate, comments and scores overall and/or for individual criteria. For proposals on the retained list, where appropriate, the ER indicates any recommendation made on the maximum amount of funding to be awarded, and any other appropriate recommendations on the conduct of the project, and/or suggestions for improvements to the methodology and programme of the work.

   • For those proposals rejected after failing a quality threshold, the comments contained in the ER may only be complete for those criteria examined up to the point when the threshold was failed.

   • Those whose proposals are rejected because of ethical and security considerations will be informed of the grounds for such a decision.