ESR (Evaluation Summary Report)

The evaluation summary report is what you get instead of an explanation. For each of the three criteria it carries the experts' comments, the score and the stated threshold; then the total out of 15; then a block of other questions (whether the proposal is in scope, exceptional funding for third-country participants, ethics issues); and overall comments.

What is not in it: the consensus group and panel minutes. Those are marked internal and are not sent to applicants. You see the agreed position, not how it was reached.

When it arrives

Around five months after the submission deadline; grant signature around eight months. For two-stage calls, about three months after stage one and five after stage two.

These are not merely indicative: the programme regulation sets maximum periods – five months to inform applicants and eight to sign agreements. They may be exceeded for the ERC, for missions, and where a proposal undergoes ethics assessment or security scrutiny.

Redress covers procedure only

This is the central limit, stated in the regulation directly: only the procedural aspects of an evaluation may be reviewed. The evaluation of the merits of a proposal may not.

So "the expert did not understand our methodology" is not a ground. The grounds are procedural irregularities, factual errors, manifest errors of assessment or abuse of powers.

The review committee is chaired by and composed of staff who were not involved in the evaluation. It may recommend only one of two things: re-evaluation primarily by new experts, or confirmation of the original result. A review does not delay the selection of other proposals.

The deadline that is easy to miss

You have 30 days, counted not from sending but from accessing the notification in the portal. But there is a trap: a notification not opened within 10 days is deemed accessed. Delaying your login eats your own deadline.

The request is capped at 7,000 characters and submitted by the coordinator.

Two more limits that are easy to overlook. Only one request per proposal is considered – there is no second attempt. And re-evaluation is carried out on the proposal as originally submitted: no additional information is admitted.

And something to warn management about: a score after re-evaluation may be lower than the original. This is not an appeal with a guarantee against making things worse.

Three separate routes, not one

Evaluation review is only the first. There is also a review of legality of an executive agency's decision – one month; and an action for annulment before the EU courts – two months. Separately, you may complain to the European Ombudsman.

A practical detail: where an executive agency took the decision, both the review request and any action are directed at that agency, not at the European Commission. The recommended order is administrative review first – deadlines for later steps then run from receipt of the final reply.