Evaluation criteria
Criteria
The [name scientific evaluation committee] will apply the criteria below to assess the quality of proposals. The [name scientific evaluation committee] will consist of international experts who will be assigned to proposals lying within their area of expertise and asked to provide a peer review of the scientific aspects.
The SEC will apply the criteria below to assess the quality of proposals:
Scientific Aspects
Scientific quality should be leading and undisputed and will be assessed by means of the following criteria:
Scientific quality of the proposed research
Policy relevance and relevance to the call
Novelty, originality and innovation
Clarity of the hypothesis, theories and/or research questions
Quality of applicants and suitability of the consortium
Level of transdisciplinarity
Scientific quality is considered above all other criteria and a high quality is a prerequisite for funding.
Project management and added value:
The following criteria will also be used to evaluate and rank the proposals:
Feasibility and risk
Level of integration and collaboration
European added value
Quality of project governance
Suitability of budget requirements
Networking and dissemination activities
Training opportunities
European added value is the value resulting from the European research project, which is additional to the value that would have resulted from research projects funded at national level. The added value may vary, depending on the type of project, and there can be various answers to this question.
These may include: relevance to EU policy statements, legislative framework or management plans; added value to national research projects across Europe by linking expertise and efforts across national teams; bringing about comparisons at the local level between researchers who are not used to work together; standardization of methods, general increase of common knowledge in biodiversity relative to the three themes of the call, etc.
No additional criteria will be used.
Score
The criteria and proposals are scored according to the following scale:
5 Excellent
4 Very good
3 Good
2 Fair
1 Poor
0 The proposal fails to address the issue under examination or cannot be judged against the criteria due to missing or incomplete information
Page
0 ISLAMIC DEVELOPMENT BANK EVALUATION REPORT FOR THE SELECTION
16 EVALUATION OF HEALTH EDUCATION PROGRAMMES STUDY SESSION 16
18032022 EVALUATION DU COURS EVALUATION DU COURS D’ENSEIGNEMENT SUPÉRIEUR
Tags: criteria criteria, the criteria, criteria, evaluation, [name, scientific, committee]