ApogeeBio 2021

The ApogeeBio post-doctoral fellowship program gives you an opportunity to join a research team at Genopole, a leading French biocluster for academic research and innovation located just south of Paris.

person

Individual
participation

Selection Criteria

All applications meeting the eligibility criteria in full will be sent for review by a three-member, Independent Expert Committee briefed beforehand on the evaluation criteria and selection process.

That committee will assess the applications, taking into consideration a range of criteria designed to evaluate the excellence of the research. They will furthermore assess the researcher's potential for delivering original, independent work with the vision and creativity necessary to develop his/her profile in a context of leadership in international and cross-sectoral research.
The extended CV, the research proposal and the personal statement will serve as the foundation of that assessment.

Evaluation phase 1: Peer review of the application file

The first phase of the evaluation will review the three key elements of the applications: the research project, the applicant's qualifications, and the applicant's career development path. The tables below illustrate respectively the evaluation process and the scoring of the evaluation criteria.
This first evaluation phase will result in a short list of applicants having reached the evaluation criteria scoring threshold (17/25). Those short-listed candidates will then be invited for the interview step.

Evaluated element	Evaluation criterion (scored 1 to 5)	Considerations (sub-criteria)	Weight
Evaluation of the research
Research project	S&T Quality	Scientific and technical merit Clarity of objectives Originality of the proposed research and awareness of current debates and knowledge within the setting of the project	50%
	Feasibility	Comprehensive and appropriate theoretical and methodological framework Feasibility within the given timeframe Budget evaluation	30%
	Impact	Recognition of anticipated impact of work Publication, dissemination and exploitation plan Potential for non-academic / cross-sectoral interactions Openness to interdisciplinary collaboration Openness to international collaboration	20%
Evaluation of the applicant
Applicant qualification	Experience	Quality of the applicant's CV Research track-record Training Awards & Funding Capacity to carry out the research project Letters of recommendation Previous / current partnerships and international collaborations	70%
Career development	Relevance of the proposed actions	Relevance of a fellowship at the applicant's career stage Impact of the project on his/her future professional plans Commitment of the hosting team to the career development plan Engagement in cross-sectoral or interdisciplinary partnerships	30%

Scoring chart
5	Outstanding	The proposal stands out by its exceptional quality and meets all relevant aspects of the criterion
4	Excellent	The proposal is strong and it meets the criterion well. Any shortcomings are minor
3	Good	The proposal addresses the criterion well, although some elements need improvement
2	Satisfactory	The proposal broadly addresses the criterion but it has not been fully developed and shows several weaknesses
1	Below average	The proposal addresses the criterion in an inadequate manner and has serious inherent weaknesses
0	Poor	The proposal has serious weaknesses and fails to address the criterion.

Evaluation phase 2: Short-list applicant interviews

Candidates short-listed in the phase 1 evaluation will be invited for an interview to present and discuss their research proposal. As a reminder, the phase 1 evaluation criteria threshold needed to reach the phase 2 interviews is 17 of a possible 25 points.
At this interview step, the short-listed applicants will be evaluated on their abilities to respond clearly to questions about their projects and to express how they see their careers and the impact of their research in line with their scientific and professional environments. The interviews will comprise a 15-minute presentation period (with up to 10 slides) and a 10-minute discussion period with the panel.

The Interview Panel will assess the retained candidates according to the following interview criteria. From these latter, a score will be generated for each interviewee and a ranked list of candidates will be established.

Interview evaluation criteria
Criterion	Max. Score	Considerations	Weight
Presentation	5	Scientific knowledge Research vision Confident and clear communication	30%
Research capability	5	Experience Technical capability Previous level of responsibility Understanding of ethics implications	50%
Leadership potential	5	Evidence of foresight, e.g. setting up networks, partnerships, seminar groups Recent examples of leadership Motivation	20%

Final selection phase and decision process

The Independent Expert Committee will weigh both the phase 1 (60%) and phase 2 (40%) results to establish a ranked list of the short-listed applicants. The list established by the committee will be final and irrevocable.
Considering the committee's ranked list on one hand and the number of fellowships available on the other, the ApogeeBio governing board will issue its final decisions and the candidates will be informed of them by the call management team.

ApogeeBioo has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 101034259