SRC: Rating scale and review criteria for scientific quality of the application

6

outstanding

demonstrates exceptional novelty and   innovation; has potential to substantially advance science at a global level;   includes high-gain projects that can include risks

5

excellent

extremely good in international comparison –   no significant elements to be improved

4

very good

in general sound, but contains a few   elements that could be improved

3

good

in general sound, but contains important   elements that should be improved

2

fair

contains flaws; is in need of substantial   modification or improvement

1

poor

contains severe flaws that are intrinsic to   the proposed project or the application

1 Research plan

1.1 Scientific quality and the framing of the phenomena

Guiding questions:

How does the project show high scientific quality and   potential for innovative outcomes across disciplinary boundaries? How are the problem framing and the choice of disciplinary perspectives   and methodologies justified? Is there a unifying principle, frame or concept that provides   coherence? Does the proposal indicate synergistic or   innovative outcomes from the interaction between disciplines in a   solution-oriented way?

1.2 Research Plan

Guiding questions:

Are the objectives sound and well-presented and is   the research plan realistic? Have relevant approaches, methods, materials and research partners   been identified and appropriately incorporated into the research plan? Do you   consider the application multidisciplinary, and are multiple organisations   and research fields included in the work packages? Is the management plan appropriate and will it support leadership,   coordination, interaction and exchange of information between work packages?   Does the research environment support the project, such as with appropriate   research and/or technology infrastructures?

1.3 Good Scientific   Practices

Guiding questions:

Are there any   ethical issues involved and, if so, how are they taken into account? Does the   publication plan support open access? Does the data management plan responsibly   support the reuse of research data after the project has been completed?

2 Competence of applicants, quality of research   collaboration

Guiding   questions:

What are the merits and scientific expertise of the   consortium in both discipline-based research and multidisciplinary research? Are   they appropriate and sufficient for the proposed project? How does the   collaboration (incl. international collaboration) contribute to the research   activities and knowledge?

3 Scientific impact

Guiding question:

What is the project’s level of expected scientific   impact? Is there potential for generating impact on multiple disciplines or   for advancing further learning and collaboration across disciplinary divides?

4 Overall assessment

List of main strengths and weaknesses of the   project; additional comments and recommendations