Research SUPPORT programme at Masaryk University Guidllines for cathegory E – EXCELLENT RESULTS OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES OF THE PROGRAMME The Research support programme aims to enhance the prestige of research work, to increase success rate in obtaining international prestigious grants and to encourage the interdisciplinary innovative research with high added value. Research support includes several funding schemes. The key criterion for selection is scientific excellence of applicants and proposal quality. Financial support will be provided for projects of MU employees[1] who are engaged in research. Projects that are funded from other sources or are simultaneously submitted to another provider will not be supported[2]. FUNDING The source of program funding is the institutional support of long-term conceptual development of the University. The programme budget will be revised annually not to exceed 5 % of the institutional support for the year. In case of unpredictable development of university funding, the rector, in agreement with the deans, may reduce the limit of 5 % or cancel the programme. In such a case the financing of supported projects may be limited or finished. PROGRAMME COUNCIL The Programme is led by Programme Council. The members are Vice-deans for research from all MU faculties, university institute directors, the Vice-rector for research, the Vice-rector for development, the Vice-rector for academic affairs and the Bursar. The Programme Council is chaired by the Vice-rector for research. The Council adopts its decisions by public acclamation and there are protocols taken during the programme Council meetings. On the proposal of the chairman or any other Council member of the board there can be external consultants invited to the meetings without any voting rights. The Research office at MU does the administrative support for the Programme. Programme Council: · Ensures transparency in the project proposal evaluation and supporting due the rules of programme cathegories. · Controls efficiency of use of financial resources. · Approves the annual report of the programme. For selected categories: · Draws final order of supported projects and proposes them for Rector´s approval. · Proposes budget adjustments of submitted project proposals. · Controls the final evaluation of the projects. ADVISORY BODIES Proposals and projects are evaluated by these advisory bodies: Internal Science Advisory Board; SAB SAB is a scientific advisory board of the Vice-Rector for research. The members of SAB are specialists from Masaryk University, who are nominated by Vice-deans for research or by the Vice-rector for research. The SAB members are entitled to financial compensation, which will be covered by institutional support allocated to PPVs. International Science Advisory Board; ISAB ISAB is a Rector’s international science advisory board. The members of ISAB may initiate programme changes according the international best practice. In selectet cathegories the ISAB members have an adivsory voice. They may be part of evaluation process in selected cathegories. External evaluators External evaluators may be invited to the evaluation process for some types of support at the request of the Vice-Rector for Research or a member of the Program Council. From funds allocated to PPV, it will be possible to fund rewards for external evaluation of project proposals and possibly other necessary evaluations during the implementation of projects. TYPES OF SUPPORT The calls are opened by the rector every year. The rector of Masaryk university has the right not to open a call in any cathegory. The rector announces financial limits and other details for actual calls. Programme cathegories: · Category E – Excellent results · Category F – International grants arrangement · Category G – Interdisciplinary research projects · Category H - Individual „high risk/ high gain“ projects · Category I – MUNI Award in Science and Humanities Category H – INDIVIDUAL HIGH RISK / HIGH GAIN PROJECTS OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES The aim of this type of grant support is the widening of scientific basis, which is able to produce excellent, internationally competitive research results and obtain prestigious individual projects. The realization tool is a targeted support for exceptionally talented and motivated researchers and their teams with original, highly innovative and usually high risk projects, with the real potential to influence the research field and become significant at international field. The successful project applicant should have clear potential to be successful in ERC grant competition or similarly prestigious individual grants. An indispensable aspect of this type of grant support is the motivation of MU faculties/workplaces to invest in exceptional scientific talents. SELECTION CRITERIA · Financial support will be awarded to smaller, well defined and compact teams, led by one MU employee engaged in research and awarded with Ph.D. title in period of 2–15 years before this call for proposals.[3] · Evaluation criteria: 1. Originality and quality of the project (50 %; maximum 50 points) 2. Key role and quality of the applicant (50 %; maximum 50 points) · Current ERC project investigators cannot submit their proposals for this programme. · Bonus points will be awarded to the project proposals with previous good evaluation in ERC competition or similarly prestigious grant competitions even though the financial support has not been awarded to them. · Bonus points will be awarded to the project proposals with clearly declared co-financing from the faculty. Financial support can be awarded also to the researchers whose expert history is not linked to MU but will work mainly at MU on the day of start of the project. In this case the competent MU workplace must guarantee the creation of new scientific team and grant conditions for research of successful applicant. FUNDING The maximum amount of financial support from GAMU for 1 project is 1 000 000 CZK per year. The project duration is 2–3 years. Co-financing from the faculties and departments is expected (personal costs, investments etc.). 1 or 2 projects are expected to be awarded in one year. Eligible costs: · Consumables. · Tangible and intangible assets. · Services. · Travel costs. · Publishing costs and costs of putting applied research results into practice. · Overheads. Non-eligible costs: · Personal expenses. · Investments. · Costs, which are not eligible for institutional support (for example refreshments). The financial support for a calendar year will be granted to the faculty economic centre/ workplace of the applicant. The costs will be covered through the faculty economic centre on the basis of the accounting documents. Economic and administrative background of projects will be identical to the economic and administrative background of workplace where the researcher and the team are operating or will be operating and this workplace will bear mutual costs of the project. Transfers between items of budget up to 30 % do not need to be justified. Transfers greater than 30% of the originally scheduled item must be consulted with the Research Office at MU and justified in the final report. APPLICATION PROCEDURE List of the project proposal documents: · Filled in application form, including justified budget and a list of applicant’s 10 best results. · Applicant’s CV. · Project record from ISEP (“průvodka”). All required documents are submitted via ISEP (section Documents) and 1 copy of the project proposal form signed by the applicant and including annexes must be delivered to the Research Office at MU. The project proposal must be in English language. EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF PROJECTS The applicants submit the project proposals electronically up to competition deadline to the Research office at MU. After a formal control and a control of compliance with evaluation criteria the projects will be introduced to an evaluation panel made of members of SAB. The Vice-Rector for Research is responsible for the composition of the SAB panel. The SAB panel evaluates the project proposals with a short verbal assessment and with points according to criteria defined below on scale 0–100 points: Outstanding 91–100 points Excellent 78–90 points Very good 61–77 points Non-competitive < 60 points The evaluation as “Non–competitive” excludes the applicant from submitting a project proposal in next call. The SAB panel sets the order of recommended projects and submittes it to ISAB (International Scientific Board). The final decision about the financial support makes the Programme Council. PROJECT REPORTS AND EVALUATION Project progress reports are not required. The final report containing verbal conclusion of project results and further plans (expert projections) and a complete list of results of the project is evaluated by ISAB. ISAB evaluates the results on the following scale: Outstanding, world competitive results Excellent results in the first quartile of respected field Good results Below standard results Evaluation “Below standard results“ excludes the applicant from further competitions. Detailed presentation of finalized projects will be the content of final public seminar organized by the Research office at MU. Members of the Programme Council will be present at the final seminar and will be able to correct the ISAB final evaluation. In case of correction the verbal justification will be requested and retroactively submitted to ISAB. SCHEDULE · call for proposals: 1. 9. · deadline for project proposals: 31. 10. · evaluation period: 1. 11. – 23. 12. · results announcement: 23. 12. · Realisation: from 1.1. of the following year ________________________________ [1] MU employee who is engaged in research, for the purpose of this document means the academic (according to Act No. 111/1998) or non-academic staff engaged in research activity. His time of work on MU must be higher than 20 hours per week. [2] Any exceptions will be considered by the Program Council. [3] Inspired by ERC categories: Starting a Consolidator Grants (2-12 years after PhD), prolonged by 3 more years, in order to allow an application also to ECR applicants, who had good evaluation but their projects were not supported.