I would like that MCAA...

1 min read Nov 10, 2015
I would like that MCAA proposes to EU that some of the Marie Curie fundings can be used AFTER the M.C completion. In fact,it is at the end of the Fellowship, when all results are coming out, that it is extremely important to show them to the scientific community, i.e., going to conferences. In many cases the Fellows do not have any more funding at that stage, which is when they would need it most.

16 Comments

Profile Default Image
Marco Masia

Dear Alessandra,

I fully agree with your point. Last year the Association proposed a policy along these lines to the EC officers. They said they'd look into ways of implementing something, but it's going to take some time. Nonetheless, the silverlining is that they have already started to fund open access publication for articles published after the fellowship. Please, have a look at this webpage for more information: https://www.openaire.eu/postgrantoapilot

best wishes

marco

Profile Default Image
Alessandra Conversi

HI Marco, hopefully this proposed policy will progress! I did also write this suggestion to my EU proposal manager about it and I am waiting for an answer (they are busy with the proposals right now). Will inform MCAA if I get an answer. Yes, I received the Open access offer and it is a great idea, I did not know that it was derived from MCAA actions (was it?, if so, thanks). However, the real crucial part is the funding for conference participation. Some of the conferences are really platforms for lunching one's career and it is really important to be there at that moment. (PS, as an example, a similar policy, if active, could allow me to participate to the conference workshop I have been invited to convene).

Cheers, Alessandra

Profile Default Image
Brian Cahill

After my fellowship ended, I remained at the same institute and was still "involved" in the project. I could not use funding of the project to present the work I contributed. At that time there was a "reintegration grant", that I got without moving institute (don't ask) and I used this to fund such activities. It is important that the hard work of the fellow actually benefits their career.

Profile Default Image
Alessandra Conversi

Yes, that was my next question:  what happended to the MC reintegration grants? These were actually a real career boost.

One would not go back home as a beggar. Especially in some countries (no comments please). Good for you, by the way

Profile Default Image
Brian Cahill

This grant was discontinued shortly after I got one. I attended a meeting around that time and a representative from the Commission said that it was too expensive to administer in comparison with the small amount of money being granted (45k€ over three years). I would guess that it was replaced by the Career Integration Grant that was much better funded and more attractive for any potential employer.

Profile Default Image
Marco Masia

Ciao Alessandra, the open access initiative started many years ago, long before the MCAA was born. UNfortunately it usually takes quite a long before new policies are implemented. I fully understand your concern about the abrupt end of the funding for diffusion and networking initiatives. As for the reintegration grants, my understanding is that in H2020 there is something similar within the IFs...I don't know the details though. Maybe it's worth having a look at that. Good luck!

Profile Default Image
Shikhar Aggarwal

I am suffering with the same problem. My marie curie 3 year contract finished 6 months before the actual PhD ceremony (due to university rule, PhD registration was delayed). However, my supervisor was smart enough and she arranged money for these 6 months already during the MC contract for later periods and it was transfered to the university account. So I used the left over money as a salary even after my MC contract was finished.

I also completely agree that conferences are very important as career launcher. I just had an interview with one professor during conference last week and now I have got position in his lab at Harvard University. If I could not able to attend that conference, I could not have met him personally and it was almost impossible to secure position as most of my publications are still under preparation or submission. Conferences really give a chance to meet people face to face and talk them personally. Its my personal experience, may be useful for some, for some NOT.

Shikhar

 

Profile Default Image
Brian Cahill

Hi Shikhar,

I looked into how tax and pension issues are dealt with in the Netherlands during negotiations with the German NCP. The details are here: Finances and Marie Curie allowances FP7 november 2012.pdf

PhD students in the Netherlands don't get a "Marie Curie" contract, they get the standard PhD student contract for the Netherlands that lasts 4 years. They get paid less than a MC contract in the first year and more after that. To me it seems a very good solution to the issue of PhD student ESRs. I would be interested in completion rates and if this is a problem.

Congratulations on your job offer! That's very good news.

All the Best,

Brian

Profile Default Image
Marco Masia

Just for completeness, the association periodically micro-grants for fellows. You may apply for one of them to go to a conference and present your results!

Profile Default Image
Alessandra Conversi

I did apply. I do not know why I did not get it. Actually, I was informed, not enough funding. Which really means nothing. I would like now to know who got it. It may be these microgrants are reserved for young scientists? I was invited to convene a workshop in a conference, what better than that? The whole process, including the lack of feedback, was certainly VERY disappointing.

Profile Default Image

Please see page https://www.mariecuriealumni.eu/micro-grants - in the right-hand column there is (readily available to all members) a series of files listing, for each call, the numbers of grant applications, the number of grants awarded, and the beneficiaries. As you can see, the number of requests well exceeded the funds avalable. This meant that the (old) MCAA board faced the difficult task of deciding who would get a grant and who would not; a great deal of time was spent discussing the fairest system, involving aspects such as a fair geographic spread, the apparent 'value' to MCAA of the actions proposed, etc. There is no perfect way of doing this, and the inevitable outcome was more disappointed members than happy members, simply because there was way not enough money available to satisfy demand. Each applicant received an individual reply through the in-site personal messaging system (yours are still in your inbox), but it was not possible to provide detailed resoning for each individual case.

Under the next contract with the EC (which should be in place some time this summer), there will be much more money available to support members through such micro-grants, although there is also a growing number of members. If you have suggestions as to how the new board could manage the distribution of micro-grants differently, please share these with the board or executive committee. Neither the contractor nor the EC has direct influence on this decision-making process - our role is restricted to providing advice and technical assistance to help the board to reach and implement a workable solution.

Best regards,

Simon

Profile Default Image
Alessandra Conversi

Hi Simon,

thank you for your detailed answer. This is more satisfying that a simple denial ("we regret to inform that your application was not selected"). This generic message is indeed still in my mailbox, as well to my response in which I was asking for more details...which was never answered to. I suggest that in the next denials MCAA also provides the criteria and the link to the table you have mentioned here.

It is obvious that many requests are denied. But still one should have enough feedback to be able, in theory, to make a better application in a subsequent call.

I will look at the table later, and if I have suggestions on the criteria I will provide them. One that comes immediately to my mind is (of course, since we are talking about this application) that Workshop or Session conveners at an international conference should rank high (obviously, if the conference does not pay for their travel). It is quite more work and quite more visibility than just giving a talk or a poster. It would also provide good visibility for MCAA itself.

Alessandra

Profile Default Image

It is good that this comment is posted here so that it can be seen by the next contractor (whoever that turns out to be) and taken into account. Hopefully, there will be more resources available for the contractor under the next contract (starting sometime this summer) meaning more staff/time to handle this kind of thing.

Best regards,

Simon

Profile Default Image
Shikhar Aggarwal

Indeed, micro grants are great support to travel for conference and it has helped many fellows. There is another working group 'events and network' which has provided some travel grants to its members for representation at International conferences in the past. In addition to main MCAA micro grants, various chapters (benelux, NI, South asia) depending on their budget have token small micro grants for fellows to travel for meetings or attending GA.

 

Profile Default Image
Riccardo Biondi

Dear all,

did you receive the email from EC regarding the FP7 post-grant open access publishing funds?

This is some funding available for publishing open access papers, not exactly what you are discussing here, but at least some support after the MC grant.

And yes also the MCAA WG and chapter can award micro-grants, with the Austrian Chapter last year we have done it.

Riccardo