You are here : Home > Evaluation > How is my project reviewed?

How is my project reviewed?

​​The main review criteria are the excellence of the applicant profile and his/her research project. The review also assesses the extent to which the chosen research environment will enable the researcher to carry out his project in the best possible conditions. 

Published on 3 June 2016

Applicant Profile

  1. Qualification of the applicant. Your ability to conduct your project is evaluated on the basis of the quality of your previous research output. Reviewers evaluate your published results in peer review journals as well as other elements of your resume.
  2. Your previous research results including patents, publications, teaching, advanced courses, etc. Your level of experience is taken into account to analyze your compliance to this criterion.
  3. Independent thinking and leadership qualities.
  4. Other personal ​​​commitments such as associative life involvement or personal development activities.

​​Research Project

  1. ​Scientific  and  technological  quality,  including  any  interdisciplinary  and  multidisciplinary aspects of the proposal,
  2. Originality and innovative nature of the project and relationship to the 'state of the art' of research in the field,
  3. Schedule and relevance of the project,
  4. Research methodology,
  5. Adapted use of human and material resources offered by CEA.

​​Evaluation scores

Each criterion for both your profile and your research project​ is scored out of 5. Scores correspond to the following:

0 - The proposal fails to address the criterion under examination or cannot be judged due to missing or incomplete information.
1 - Very poor. The criterion is addressed in a cursory and unsatisfactory manner.
2 - Poor. There are serious inherent weaknesses in relation to the criterion in question.
3 - Fair. While the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses that would need correcting.
4 - Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, although certain improvements are possible.
5 - Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion in question. Any shortcomings are minor.​