2023 Reserve list (HE-MSCA-PF-2023)

[ella_]

Here are my little calculations.

If we deduct the UK-based ML proposals from the list, each panel will have;

_________Proposal___Percentage_______Distribution of 300 projects
EF-CHE____1034 _____15.1% _______________ 45.3
EF-ECO ____120 _____1.7% ________________5.2
EF-ENG ____969_____14.1% ________________42.5
EF-ENV ____729_____10.6% ________________31.9
EF-LIF ____1523_____22.2% ________________66.7
EF-MAT_____144_____2.1% ________________6.3
EF-PHY ____ 785_____11.4% _______________34.4
EF-SOC____1544_____22.5% _______________67.6

Waiting until June will be stressful, but this gives some idea of what we can expect. Of course, those are all approximate calculations according to the numbers we have at the moment.

This is in the right direction, but (1) it's more like 250 UK proposals rather than 300; (2) to calculate the % per panel we need to remove all UK proposals, not only ML, and we don't have the info about all RL (although we can maybe assume that is somehow homogeneous); (3) remember that it's not about distributing number of projects, but funds (depending on country and length of projects in RL, the same amount of money can fund more or less projects)

You are absolutely right. Those calculations are just for a rough approximation. As you mentioned that we do not have exact numbers to make a close prediction.

For your concern about #3, I think UK has one of the highest country coefficient, therefore the UK-based projects budgets will be cover more projects. I agree about the lengths will matter, however, as I have seen the majority of the proposals are close to 24 months.

Why the assumption that rejected UK ML projects will be treated differently than other rejected projects? I think that the helpdesk response sounds like they will treat UK rejected projects similar to other rejected projects, which would result in a minimal redistribution of funds across panels, which would be in line with the 2022 reserve list posts where CHEM e.g. had a bunch of UK projects in the ML and many projects from the reserve list were funded.

[glycoglyco]

This is in the right direction, but (1) it's more like 250 UK proposals rather than 300; (2) to calculate the % per panel we need to remove all UK proposals, not only ML, and we don't have the info about all RL (although we can maybe assume that is somehow homogeneous); (3) remember that it's not about distributing number of projects, but funds (depending on country and length of projects in RL, the same amount of money can fund more or less projects)

You are absolutely right. Those calculations are just for a rough approximation. As you mentioned that we do not have exact numbers to make a close prediction.

For your concern about #3, I think UK has one of the highest country coefficient, therefore the UK-based projects budgets will be cover more projects. I agree about the lengths will matter, however, as I have seen the majority of the proposals are close to 24 months.

Why the assumption that rejected UK ML projects will be treated differently than other rejected projects? I think that the helpdesk response sounds like they will treat UK rejected projects similar to other rejected projects, which would result in a minimal redistribution of funds across panels, which would be in line with the 2022 reserve list posts where CHEM e.g. had a bunch of UK projects in the ML and many projects from the reserve list were funded.

In theory, all withdrawn projects from ML are treated equally. The thing is, in normal circumstances, the number of withdrawals at this stage is minimal (<10) and doesn't impact success rates per panel. These years, the number of withdrawals is comparatively huge (>200) because of the UK applicants. So in theory, after the deadline for GAP, the REA gathers all money from UK and non-UK withdrawals, and redistributes it. Virtually, I don't think the math changes much assuming that the UK applicants are homogeneously distributed among panels (so all panels have a similar percentage loss of elegible candidates).

[ella_]

You are absolutely right. Those calculations are just for a rough approximation. As you mentioned that we do not have exact numbers to make a close prediction.

For your concern about #3, I think UK has one of the highest country coefficient, therefore the UK-based projects budgets will be cover more projects. I agree about the lengths will matter, however, as I have seen the majority of the proposals are close to 24 months.

Why the assumption that rejected UK ML projects will be treated differently than other rejected projects? I think that the helpdesk response sounds like they will treat UK rejected projects similar to other rejected projects, which would result in a minimal redistribution of funds across panels, which would be in line with the 2022 reserve list posts where CHEM e.g. had a bunch of UK projects in the ML and many projects from the reserve list were funded.

In theory, all withdrawn projects from ML are treated equally. The thing is, in normal circumstances, the number of withdrawals at this stage is minimal (<10) and doesn't impact success rates per panel. These years, the number of withdrawals is comparatively huge (>200) because of the UK applicants. So in theory, after the deadline for GAP, the REA gathers all money from UK and non-UK withdrawals, and redistributes it. Virtually, I don't think the math changes much assuming that the UK applicants are homogeneously distributed among panels (so all panels have a similar percentage loss of elegible candidates).

ok clear, thanks! I thought the divider might stay the same (i.e. the total amount of projects that were considered eligible, and that the 'rejected' UK projects may join the rest of the rejected projects). It is a little confusing to think about it anyways because it seems that they won't do anything with UK projects that were rejected even though these should not have been eligible for funding. And if they indeed would move funding around just in proportion to UK projects in main list (and reserve list?), then this would be impacting 2 or 3 projects at maximum.

[Pangolino]

Hi everyone,
A question about ERA fellowships and the counting on reserve list.

Those selected for the ERA postdoc scholarship with host institutions in developing countries are on the reserve list. Are those spots later freed up to distribute the funds to those who remain on the reserve list? I saw in a post that someone who was awarded the ERA scholarship was later offered a place for MSCA and chose to switch to MSCA (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1208&p=20800&hilit=ERA#p20800) , meaning that the ERA scholarship in that case did not go to those who were staying on the reserve list skipping the ERA winner. However, the website states that the ERA scholarship contracts are signed in May (https://rea.ec.europa.eu/funding-and-gr ... owships_en) .
Does anyone know how this works? Should additional grants provided by the ERA fellowships be calculated as an extra spot on the reserve list?

Best!

[glycoglyco]

Why the assumption that rejected UK ML projects will be treated differently than other rejected projects? I think that the helpdesk response sounds like they will treat UK rejected projects similar to other rejected projects, which would result in a minimal redistribution of funds across panels, which would be in line with the 2022 reserve list posts where CHEM e.g. had a bunch of UK projects in the ML and many projects from the reserve list were funded.

In theory, all withdrawn projects from ML are treated equally. The thing is, in normal circumstances, the number of withdrawals at this stage is minimal (<10) and doesn't impact success rates per panel. These years, the number of withdrawals is comparatively huge (>200) because of the UK applicants. So in theory, after the deadline for GAP, the REA gathers all money from UK and non-UK withdrawals, and redistributes it. Virtually, I don't think the math changes much assuming that the UK applicants are homogeneously distributed among panels (so all panels have a similar percentage loss of elegible candidates).

ok clear, thanks! I thought the divider might stay the same (i.e. the total amount of projects that were considered eligible, and that the 'rejected' UK projects may join the rest of the rejected projects). It is a little confusing to think about it anyways because it seems that they won't do anything with UK projects that were rejected even though these should not have been eligible for funding. And if they indeed would move funding around just in proportion to UK projects in main list (and reserve list?), then this would be impacting 2 or 3 projects at maximum.

How only 2-3 projects at maximum? UK proposals are about a 20% of the main list. With the info that other users have been sharing here, it looks like +200 UK proposals from the main list will release funding for quite some people from the reserve list..

[ella_]

In theory, all withdrawn projects from ML are treated equally. The thing is, in normal circumstances, the number of withdrawals at this stage is minimal (<10) and doesn't impact success rates per panel. These years, the number of withdrawals is comparatively huge (>200) because of the UK applicants. So in theory, after the deadline for GAP, the REA gathers all money from UK and non-UK withdrawals, and redistributes it. Virtually, I don't think the math changes much assuming that the UK applicants are homogeneously distributed among panels (so all panels have a similar percentage loss of elegible candidates).

ok clear, thanks! I thought the divider might stay the same (i.e. the total amount of projects that were considered eligible, and that the 'rejected' UK projects may join the rest of the rejected projects). It is a little confusing to think about it anyways because it seems that they won't do anything with UK projects that were rejected even though these should not have been eligible for funding. And if they indeed would move funding around just in proportion to UK projects in main list (and reserve list?), then this would be impacting 2 or 3 projects at maximum.

How only 2-3 projects at maximum? UK proposals are about a 20% of the main list. With the info that other users have been sharing here, it looks like +200 UK proposals from the main list will release funding for quite some people from the reserve list..

sorry, the way I put it was confusing. The question if they will reallocate funds based on all previously eligible proposals (i.e. including UK), or based on the new number of eligible proposals (i.e. minus UK main list & UK reserve list proposals) will not impact that many projects on the reserve list.

[glycoglyco]

ok clear, thanks! I thought the divider might stay the same (i.e. the total amount of projects that were considered eligible, and that the 'rejected' UK projects may join the rest of the rejected projects). It is a little confusing to think about it anyways because it seems that they won't do anything with UK projects that were rejected even though these should not have been eligible for funding. And if they indeed would move funding around just in proportion to UK projects in main list (and reserve list?), then this would be impacting 2 or 3 projects at maximum.

How only 2-3 projects at maximum? UK proposals are about a 20% of the main list. With the info that other users have been sharing here, it looks like +200 UK proposals from the main list will release funding for quite some people from the reserve list..

sorry, the way I put it was confusing. The question if they will reallocate funds based on all previously eligible proposals (i.e. including UK), or based on the new number of eligible proposals (i.e. minus UK main list & UK reserve list proposals) will not impact that many projects on the reserve list.

Yes, you are totally right about that. They didn't specify (to me) if they will recalculate based on original or new number of elegible proposals, although to me it makes more sense to use the latter.

[RE1355]

The EU (REA) is going to delete UK-based proposals from the reserve list of MSCA-2023. we (UK-based proposals on the reserve list) should be in one place and thinking and acting about the problem. Please join and share this group for better communication. https://chat.whatsapp.com/CxVnVYHw3ZIDoSsb9TYJXp

[gincidentallyinquiry]

Hi all,

Just to let you all know, the projects are already starting. You can find them here: [https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tende ... 3-pf-01-01](https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tende ... ePageState)

Hope this can give us an indication of the time frame the REA is operating in.

[emmi]

Hi all,

Just to let you all know, the projects are already starting. You can find them here: [https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tende ... 3-pf-01-01](https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tende ... ePageState)

Hope this can give us an indication of the time frame the REA is operating in.

Thank you for letting us know.

As I can see, just one project is in the list.

My question is the projects,will be listed in there, mean they already started or all grant agreements done and waiting for starting?