In 2018, when I moved from Purdue University in the US to EPFL in Switzerland, I
had the opportunity to apply for an ERC H2020 starting grant in computer
science. ERC starting grants are similar to the NSF Career award and can be
submitted up to 7 years after completing the PhD, i.e., your clock starts
ticking with the date you passed your PhD defense. Given the timing of my move
back, I had one single shot and had to make it the best possible shot.
The ERC Starting Grant (StG) is the most prestigious single PI award available
in Europe and the competition is fierce. Only about 10% of applications actually
win the award, most applicants can only apply a total of 2-3 times. While the
Career comes with roughly $500,000 in funding, the StG comes with 1,500,000 Eur
which suffices for roughly 3 PhD students plus one post doc over the 5 year
lifetime of the award in Switzerland.
The evaluation of the submissions happens in two stages. Applicants submit a 5
page abstract and a 15 page proposal. In the first stage, the abstract along
with the applicant's CV is evaluated with roughly 20-25% of candidates
progressing to the second stage. The first stage is primarily a selection based
on the candidate's background and the rough idea of the project. While having a
solid abstract is necessary, sufficient background is a must. Candidates that
don't have the right standing regarding prior published papers are unlikely to
make it.
In the second stage, both parts (i.e., abstract and main proposal) are sent out
for review and the candidate is then invited to present their project in front
of a broad committee using a short presentation. The questioning in the
committee is fierce as all the different areas are covered at the same time with
competition between areas and in the area.
In my opinion, the main reasons why my proposal was successful was that a) I got
friendly feedback from peers and b) I dedicated sufficient amount of time into
writing.
Writing such a highly competitive proposal is not a weekend rush job but
requires careful planning. I started about 5 months before the deadline and
spent a good 3 months in writing and getting feedback. Without the feedback,
discussions, dry-runs, and interactions of my peers, it would have been
impossible to win this award.
To those asking for tips on their proposals, I suggest the following four key
tips:
- Plan at least 3 months of full time writing and preparation with 5 months
overall.
- Ask colleagues in your area (and at your school) for proposals. Be specific
to look at both successful and unsuccessful proposals.
- Brainstorm ideas with colleagues, friends, and successful peers. Work on your
5min pitch and make it solid.
- Get iterative feedback from colleagues during your 3 months of writing. Ask
for feedback on your drafts and discuss them in detail.
Most universities (or countries) also offer general training and information
about the ERC StG. I took part in two such seminars: one for Switzerland and the
other local to EPFL. The seminar for all researchers in Switzerland was rather
broad but contained a lot of baseline information that was valid across all
fields (i.e., from physics over biology to computer science). As practices vary
across these fields, the information is rather general but still useful to get a
good overview. Similarly talking to other awardees and candidates allows you to
get into the mood of writing proposals. The EPFL seminar was very tailored
towards technical universities and I got good information from our research
office how to customize and specialize. Still, the information was rather broad
but gave me a good perspective. What helped me most though was the feedback from
my peers and friends in security and my colleagues at the CS department.
I spent the first two months simply asking my colleagues and friends for copies
of their proposals, studied the outlines/structures, and asked for what they
thought made their proposal successful. This gave me a great overview and idea
of what to focus on (and what not). This initial setup phase was incredibly
useful to set the scene of my proposal and to understand about the trade-offs
between different aspects.
After two months of distillation and some pitching to these peers, I was in the
right mindset to start teasing out an outline and draft that I continuously
checked with my peers. Every couple of weeks I asked for feedback from someone
else. I pre-aligned the timeline to make sure to get timely feedback and to not
annoy my friends too much with my requests. This continuous feedback helped me
stay focused and allowed me to tailor the proposal to current trends.
Don't underestimate the amount of time it takes to write the proposal. And don't
be shy to scrap text and rewrite sections. I dropped whole work packages and
rewrote them, or replaced them with (hopefully better) ideas. Text is volatile,
adjust, adapt, and massage it to make it better.
Looking back, while I had the necessary background to pass the first stage, I
was extremely lucky to pass the interview and second stage. Being at EPFL was
certainly a boost for the first stage and I also had PhD students that already
graduated from my time at Purdue with excellent publications, so my initial
setup was good. My proposal was reasonable and I got a lot of feedback. A couple
of years later, I would clarify some aspects and better cater to the diverse
committee but overall it was evidently good enough.
Submitting an ERC StG proposal is a huge time commitment. Assess yourself if
you've got the necessary resources. If you do, don't be shy to ask for proposals
(I got about 5 different proposals from successful colleagues) and ask for
rounds of feedback and brainstorming sessions.
If you win an ERC StG: congratulations, well done! If you don't, it's not the
end of the world either. With only a 10% acceptance rate, the results are random
in a way that many great proposals that deserve to be accepted are rejected due
to minor hickups or random factors. Try again if you can, or submit somewhere
else. In the end, submitting to proposals as faculty is similar to submitting
papers as a student. Sometimes you win, sometimes you have to try again!
If you plan to submit an StG grant, reach out and ask me questions. I'm happy to
help!