You only have three pages to capture your Horizon Europe evaluators' attention: what are you going to do with them?
How many times, while revising my clients’ projects, I thought “Uhm, I am already at page 3 and I am not yet clear on what this project is about.” And when this happens, it's really frustrating as I know that it becomes mandatory to take a step back and start over again (and find a polite way to inform my client).
And most of the times the problem is not my background, and it's not also because the project is not scientifically sound, but it’s about the way the project is communicated. Simply what in the head of the researcher appears as a clear vision and a valuable project, becomes completely inaccessible on paper (or better on screen).
Behind the scenes of the Horizon Europe evaluation process
Before we dive into the specifics of how to capture the evaluator's attention and positively influence their evaluation, it is essential to understand the evaluation process.
For the Horizon Europe programme, the evaluation committee is composed of outside experts for all stages of the evaluation process.
As a first step, proposals go through an individual evaluation by at least three different reviewers. Each evaluator gives a score for each award criterion, with explanatory comments, and prepares an individual evaluation report.
Reviewers are selected for assignments from the database of experts who candidated for this role based on their CV and expertise in the relevant area. The expert panel will be formed, trying to reach a balanced composition in terms of skills, experience, knowledge, geographical diversity, gender, and sector.
Even if experts are regularly rotated, reviewers with more experience in evaluation and a background in specific fields could have several assignments in parallel.
Although the evaluators must ensure objectivity and consistently maintain a high level of attention towards all assigned projects, it goes without saying that the perception of a project being difficult to read, unclear, or boring may potentially impact the assessment in a negative manner.
Imagine being a reviewer tasked with evaluating multiple projects simultaneously, each spanning at least 45 pages.
As you delve into one of the applications, you find yourself confronted with a challenge. By page 3, it becomes evident that you need to start over and re-read the application from the beginning. The project's purpose is unclear, and critical logical connections are seemingly absent in the narrative. As a result, you find yourself facing difficulties in comprehending the content.
Put yourself in the shoes of a reviewer: would you have the patience to read again that first three “obscure” pages over and over again, trying to deciphering what the consortium is proposing or, instead, the feeling of frustration would negatively impact on your first impression on the project (even unconsciously)?
It is therefore very important to make the evaluator's task easier by providing a well-written project that is easy to understand and read (even when your project is the last in a row for the day).
The human factor in evaluation
Evaluators are not always in the ideal position to understand and appreciate your Horizon Europe project, and there can be many reasons.
The first one is related to differences in knowledge, experience and perspective.
Despite being knowledgeable in their respective fields, it is essential to understand that they might not be experts in the precise field your project addresses.
They may also come from a different sector (e.g. they may come from a pharmaceutical company or a research centre and lack the clinical experience needed to appreciate your project, or vice versa).
It's important to keep these factors in mind and understand that, beyond focusing on its scientific merit, the project should be presented and communicated in a way that can be easily understood and valued by a diverse audience.
Secondly, the evaluation process, although is an objective one, is always subject to the human variable.
The reviewer's mood, energy levels, and even their personal biases can influence the way they evaluate a proposal. The evaluator may have had little sleep, had a family argument, got nervous about traffic or a car problem.
Or even they may have a negative opinion on certain research methods or techniques or not fully understand the difficulties and burden associated with a pathology just because they had no direct experience with a patient suffering from that condition.
A good start sets the whole reading
The key is to make the first part of the writing intriguing and interesting to make the reader want to continue reading.
In this sense, the first three pages of your Horizon Europe proposal are the most important.
They are the window through which the reviewer will first view your project, and they will determine the mood and the predisposition with which they will continue reading.
So, start with a strong introduction, that provides a clear and concise overview of your research.
In the first few pages of the proposal, the evaluator must be perfectly clear why the project should be funded, what problem it solves, what it achieves, and how it manages to solve the problem in an innovative way.
Even if anticipating some information in the initial pages of the project may appear repetitive, the aim of this introductory section is to guide the evaluators systematically through the project, providing them with an overview of what to expect from the outset. Thanks to this overview, they will be able to delve into the underlying concepts more comprehensively as they progress.
The feeling that the reviewer is left with is of someone "who cares" and who tries to remove all barriers to understanding.
You see the difference this approach may have on the reviewer's perception?
Three suggestions for capturing the evaluator's attention
When I read a health research proposal, these are the three elements that I am looking forward to see in the first three pages of the application, as they will be key to capture the evaluators’ attention, favour their understanding of the project and therefore positively affect their perception.
1. Clear and concise problem statement
The opening paragraph of your proposal must explicitly state the problem you aim to solve.
Make it relatable, impactful, and easily comprehensible even to an evaluator unfamiliar with the subject matter. Present compelling evidence that illustrates the significance and urgency of the problem and its relevance to society.
2. Concise and jargon-free narrative
Avoid overwhelming the evaluator with unnecessary technical terms and convoluted sentences, especially in the first pages, as these can hinder comprehension and the progression of their reading. Balance the scientific content with an appealing narrative that allows the evaluator to become invested in your project.
3. Clear outputs and indicators
The workplan, including deliverables, is in the last section of the application template. Please refrain from keeping the reader in suspense until that point. In this situation, it is acceptable to reveal key information beforehand.
Add a list of concrete outputs resulting from the project. They will represent the project's legacy in your sector and they should be valorised since the start of the application.
Add numbers, percentages or any other indicator that will make the evaluator understand how ambitious the project is.
Conclusion
In the highly competitive realm of Horizon Europe funding proposals, effectively capturing the evaluator's attention within the first few pages is paramount to succeed.
The first three pages of your health research proposal are your chance to make a good first impression.
By following the tips provided in this blog post, you can increase your chances of capturing the reviewer's attention and predisposing them to a positive evaluation.