Development of carbon fixation technologies for biogenic flue gases -

Call update: EVALUATION results

Published: 12/09/2023

Deadline: 16/01/2024

 

Available budget: EUR 246.000.000

The results of the evaluation for each topic are as follows:

 

 

D3-01-01

D3-01-02

D3-01-03

D3-01-04

D3-01-05

D3-01-06

D3-01-07

D3-01-08

D3-01-09

D3-01-10

D3-01-11

D3-01-12

D3-01-13

D3-01-14

D3-01-15

D3-01-16

D3-01-17

Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls)

12

14

13

13

13

12

14

13

2

101

8

19

5

7

10

6

2

Number of inadmissible proposals

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of ineligible proposals

1

 

2

 

 

 

 

1

1

6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of above-threshold proposals

7

10

4

6

2

6

8

4

1

26

5

15

3

5

6

3

2

Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals (EUR/millions)

81.9

29.4

35.5

23.6

7.6

18.0

31.5

74.7

10.0

77.7

26.6

75.3

17.9

20.2

32.4

24.5

11.9

Number of proposals retained for funding

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

1

9

3

2

2

3

3

1

2

Number of proposals in the reserve list

2

2

2

2

0

2

2

2

0

10

2

2

1

2

2

2

0

Funding threshold

13.5

14.0

13.5

14.0

11.0

13.5

13.0

13.0

10.5

13.5

11.5

13.5

14.0

11.0

13.5

13.5

11.0

Ranking distribution for proposals above the evaluation thresholds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14

1

2

1

3

 

0

2

1

0

0

 

5

 

1

1

2

0

1

0

0

Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13

2

1

3

3

1

2

1

3

0

10

1

4

0

1

3

1

0

Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10

4

7

0

0

1

2

6

1

1

11

3

10

1

4

2

2

2

 

Summary of observer report:

"As independent Observer I was able to acquire deep insight into the call and evaluation documentation and accompanying instructions. I took part in a significant fraction of all briefings and panel meetings, had full access to the online evaluation SEP system and could both monitor the evaluation progress as well as having insight in individual evaluation and consensus reports.

I observed a professionally orchestrated, fair, impartial, expertise-driven, and transparent evaluation exercise. The consensus reports, the ultimate outcome, meet high standards and adhere to the guidelines outlined in the guiding documents and applicable rules.

All consensus panels were managed as equitably as possible, with effective quality control measures, inter-panel collaboration, and comprehensive final cross-checks ensuring a consistent evaluation outcome. The core principles of impartiality, fairness, and confidentiality were followed throughout the full evaluation process."

We recently informed the applicants about the evaluation results for their proposals.

For questions, please contact the Research Enquiry Service.