Talk Academia

Hi all,

I am one of the many failing applicants for the 2022 MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowship (it was my second time submitting the MSCA lottery). I submitted a redress case through the online application system since February 25 this year and so far there has been no reply from the system.

I submitted a redress case because the reviewers argued that “The proposal does not sufficiently clarify how the researcher’s background covers field research techniques which are necessary for the execution of the proposal” despite the fact that I thoroughly explained my methodological skills and past research experience in both the B1 and B2 sections.

I did this because for whatever reasons my proposal's score was below 70 despite the fact that I improved it significantly compared to my 2021 proposal. I was hoping that by submitting a redress case I can work with the same supervisor and host institution/university (not necessarily for the sake of resubmitting the same proposal, but mostly because I think the supervisor and university are a great fit for my research project).

Does anyone have any experienced with the redress mechanism? Any advice on this matter? As of now, I lean more towards submitting my proposal with another host at another university (which is also a great fit for my research)...

Thanks!

Hi there,

I have experience with redress, in a situation more or less like yours so here are my hints:
it takes about three months to have a feedback and unless your claim is something obviously wrong, they will not accept it. What i heard is that they need to make a real evident error, like mentioning aspects that simply don't exist in you application suggesting they were actually reading a different project, not yours. Any other criticism they can argue that the evaluation was impartial and objective and what you see as contradiction is in reality your point of view. I asked for redress because while my first application received a score of 89, the second and improved one scored 56. They however argued that nothing was wrong with the process which is fair and objective. So, as I said, unless you have an obvious error to point out, it will certainly end up in nothing.
And just for the record, my third application, same project that scored 56 but improved again and with different hosts scored 92.2 this year.
Sorry to discourage you, but as we all agree, this is a real lottery.

Hi Liukank!

Thank you for your kind reply. I figured. I guess my hunch is right about the redress process. In that case, I can quickly inform my last year's host that I will need to change my host supervisor and university for this year's lottery-I mean application. Again, thanks a lot!

Hi Hanami,
Greetings. Did you get the answer for your redress from EU commission? Could you please tell me?
I have also applied for redress. But I did not hear anything from them so far. It is now more than four months over from the date of submission.
Thanks for your kind understanding.
Have a nice day.
Thanks

Hi Rajaji,

Sorry for the late reply. No answer at all, so I decided to submit my proposal with another institution...

Best,

liukank wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 11:48 am

Hi there,

I have experience with redress, in a situation more or less like yours so here are my hints:
it takes about three months to have a feedback and unless your claim is something obviously wrong, they will not accept it. What i heard is that they need to make a real evident error, like mentioning aspects that simply don't exist in you application suggesting they were actually reading a different project, not yours. Any other criticism they can argue that the evaluation was impartial and objective and what you see as contradiction is in reality your point of view. I asked for redress because while my first application received a score of 89, the second and improved one scored 56. They however argued that nothing was wrong with the process which is fair and objective. So, as I said, unless you have an obvious error to point out, it will certainly end up in nothing.
And just for the record, my third application, same project that scored 56 but improved again and with different hosts scored 92.2 this year.
Sorry to discourage you, but as we all agree, this is a real lottery.

Hi there,

My case is like your case last year I got 87% reserve list (for UK) but this year I got 66.2% so much less than previous year even I have done all improvement following their comments.

Would I be possible if I change my host university for the 3rd application eventhough my score is less than 70%?.

Asmar wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 13, 2024 2:39 am

liukank wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 11:48 am

Hi there,

I have experience with redress, in a situation more or less like yours so here are my hints:
it takes about three months to have a feedback and unless your claim is something obviously wrong, they will not accept it. What i heard is that they need to make a real evident error, like mentioning aspects that simply don't exist in you application suggesting they were actually reading a different project, not yours. Any other criticism they can argue that the evaluation was impartial and objective and what you see as contradiction is in reality your point of view. I asked for redress because while my first application received a score of 89, the second and improved one scored 56. They however argued that nothing was wrong with the process which is fair and objective. So, as I said, unless you have an obvious error to point out, it will certainly end up in nothing.
And just for the record, my third application, same project that scored 56 but improved again and with different hosts scored 92.2 this year.
Sorry to discourage you, but as we all agree, this is a real lottery.

Hi there,

My case is like your case last year I got 87% reserve list (for UK) but this year I got 66.2% so much less than previous year even I have done all improvement following their comments.

Would I be possible if I change my host university for the 3rd application even though my score is less than 70%?.

If you change the host then OK, you can submit the same proposal, but of course edit it thoroughly. and see the definition of 'resubmission' make sure you do not fall under the category of resubmission that is not allowed.

All said and done. the 'redress' trying is USELESS 100000 %. Though i haven't tried. My host strongly suggested its FUTILE and USELESS. So don't think about it at all, whatever may be the reason, unless its REALLY A BLUNDER... i repeat 'A BLUNDER' you identified that was done during the evaluation. In any other case, never think of REDRESS applying.

Hi all

I will also request for redress.
My case

1st attempt got 91.2 CHE, and the cut-off was 91.8, left out with 0.6,and U.K didn't joined horizon as well in 2023.
2nd attempt, addressed the comments only 2-3, and submitted again, got below 60,

I have no idea, which hater checked my proposal, and he was hating which member of my grant..
will apply for redress lets see..

Syd87 wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 13, 2024 4:33 am

Hi all

I will also request for redress.
My case

1st attempt got 91.2 CHE, and the cut-off was 91.8, left out with 0.6,and U.K didn't joined horizon as well in 2023.
2nd attempt, addressed the comments only 2-3, and submitted again, got below 60,

I have no idea, which hater checked my proposal, and he was hating which member of my grant..
will apply for redress lets see..

I just sent a redress message saying we probably think there is a confusions with the Workplan and Gantt chart, with NO blaming the reviewers but saying that probably there was a cross of information.
Let's see what they say

liukank wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 11:48 am

Hi there,

I have experience with redress, in a situation more or less like yours so here are my hints:
it takes about three months to have a feedback and unless your claim is something obviously wrong, they will not accept it. What i heard is that they need to make a real evident error, like mentioning aspects that simply don't exist in you application suggesting they were actually reading a different project, not yours. Any other criticism they can argue that the evaluation was impartial and objective and what you see as contradiction is in reality your point of view. I asked for redress because while my first application received a score of 89, the second and improved one scored 56. They however argued that nothing was wrong with the process which is fair and objective. So, as I said, unless you have an obvious error to point out, it will certainly end up in nothing.
And just for the record, my third application, same project that scored 56 but improved again and with different hosts scored 92.2 this year.
Sorry to discourage you, but as we all agree, this is a real lottery.

Congrats on the 92.2!!! did you get funded?