Community Research and Development Information Service - CORDIS

  • European Commission
  • CORDIS
  • Publications
  • Handbook on Evaluation and Selection of Proposals 7th Framework Programme for Research and Development, Information and Communication Technologies, [...] ICT Call 4, FP7-ICT-2009-4, Joint call with Energy Theme, FP7-ICT-ENERGY-2009-1
FP7

Handbook on Evaluation and Selection of Proposals 7th Framework Programme for Research and Development, Information and Communication Technologies, [...] ICT Call 4, FP7-ICT-2009-4, Joint call with Energy Theme, FP7-ICT-ENERGY-2009-1

Funded under: FP7-ICT

Abstract

Handbook on Evaluation and Selection of Proposals 7th Framework Programme for Research and Development, Information and Communication Technologies, Fixed deadline calls, ICT Call 4, FP7-ICT-2009-4, Joint call with Energy Theme, FP7-ICT-ENERGY-2009-1
This handbook specifies in detail how the general procedures for evaluation and selection of proposals in the 7th Framework programme set out in the Commissions' document: "Rules for submission of proposals, and the related evaluation, selection and award procedures" (Quality, Transparency, Equality of treatment, Impartiality, Efficiency and Speed) are implemented in the evaluation and selection of proposals submitted to the ICT theme in calls with a fixed deadline.
The evaluation of proposals is one of the most critical elements within FP7. The large numbers of proposals received in each call, the uncertainty as to how many proposals will be received for each area of the theme until the day of call close, and the responsibility of the Commission services to provide to proposers the result of the evaluation of their proposals in the shortest possible time, means that the process for the receipt and allocation of proposals to evaluators must be clearly defined to be as efficient as possible.
To ensure the equal treatment of all proposals, the procedure of the evaluation itself must also be as standardized as possible - the evaluators indeed use their own expert judgement, but within the framework of predefined evaluation criteria and a fixed scale of scoring. Because more proposals pass the evaluation thresholds than there is budget to pay for, they must then be prioritized, but the priority is simply based on their quality as reflected in their overall scores. Additional evaluator judgement at panel level is called for to solve cases of proposals with tied scores.

Download application/zip (291539)

Record Number: 9725 / Last updated on: 2009-01-05
Category: SUPP