Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the methodology and terms of reference to be used for the review to be carried out by independent experts concerning the European Research Council structures and mechanisms
Date: 2008-08-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU action, EU office or agency, EU programme, management, research programme, scientific research

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 26.8.2008 
COM(2008) 526 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

on the Methodology and Terms of Reference to be used for the Review to be carried out 
by independent experts concerning the European Research Council Structures and 
Mechanisms 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO COUNCIL AND EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

on the Methodology and Terms of Reference to be used for the Review to be carried out 
by independent experts concerning the European Research Council Structures and 
Mechanisms 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The  European  Research  Council  (ERC),  established  under  the  Specific  Programme  "Ideas", 
defines  a  new  scientific  component  of  the  7th  research  Framework  Programme  and  a  far-
reaching  departure  from  earlier  Community  research  activities.  Supporting  frontier  research 
carried out by individual teams, on the basis of open competition across Europe on the sole 
criterion  of  excellence,  it  aims  to  make  a  substantial  contribution  to  the  development  of 
Europe's research capabilities at the very highest level. 

The  ERC  reflects,  as  well,  a  pattern  of  novel  institutional  design  introduced  under  the  7th 
Framework  Programme,  which  encompasses  also,  for  example,  the  Joint  Technology 
Initiatives (JTIs) established under Article 171 of the Treaty. It brings important innovations 
to  implementation  methods,  through  an  independent  Scientific  Council  and  autonomous 
programme  execution  by  a  dedicated  implementation  structure  in  the  form  of  an  Executive 
Agency of the Commission. 

The  new  objectives  and  implementation  methods  introduced  by  the  ERC  are  motivated,  on 
one hand, by  the  political and economic imperative of the European Research Area and the 
Lisbon  process,  Europe's  capabilities  in  frontier  research  being  considered  core  to  its  future 
prospects  in  a  globalised  world;  and,  on  the  other,  by  the  EU's  concern  to  improve  the 
institutional  basis  of  policy  execution,  while  assuring  efficiency  and  probity  in  the  use  of 
Union funds. 

The  Commission’s  responsibility  for  implementing  the  Specific  Programme  “Ideas”  is 
combined with a duty to assure the ERC’s full autonomy and integrity. To the extent that the 
ERC  is  successful  as  a  new  model  for  EU  research  funding,  it  has  the  capacity  to  inspire 
further  progress  towards  more  effective,  externalised  management  across  the  Framework 
Programme.  

This is the context of the present Communication, which sets out the Commission’s proposal 
on the methodology and terms of reference to be used for the review of ERC structures and 
mechanisms (referred to in what follows as "the review"), as set out in the legislation on the 
7th  Framework  Programme.  It  fulfils  the  Commission’s  commitment  to  come  forward  with 
such a Communication by mid-20081. 

1 

"In the context of the progress report referred to in Article 7(2) and preceding the interim evaluation, 
the  Commission  will  present  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  by  mid-2008  a 
Communication on the methodology and terms of reference to be used for the review to be carried out 
by independent experts concerning the ERC's structures and mechanisms. If necessary the Commission 
will present a proposal for the adaptation of the Framework Programme" (OJ L 412; 30 12 06) 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

OBJECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL 

The  key  principles  on  which  the  ERC  should  operate  -  scientific  excellence,  autonomy, 
efficiency  and  transparency  -  were  established  and  confirmed  during  the  political  debate 
leading  up  to  the  Commission  proposal  for  the  Specific  Programme  "Ideas".  During  the 
subsequent  negotiations,  in  which  the  European  Parliament  and  Member  States  expressed 
broad  support  for  the  concept  of  the  ERC,  the  nature  of  its  implementing  structure  was 
intensively  discussed.  The  Commission's  proposal  that  the  body  should  be  an  Executive 
Agency was substantially debated and accepted, subject to a later review of performance, to 
ensure that the ERC is able to operate in the longer term under the most optimal conditions:  

The implementation and management of the activity will be reviewed and evaluated 
on an ongoing basis to assess its achievements and to adjust and improve procedures 
on  the  basis  of  experience.  In  the  context  of  the  interim  evaluation  referred  to  in 
Article  7(2)  of  the  Framework  Programme,  an  independent  review  will  also  be 
carried out of the ERC's structures and mechanisms, against the criteria of scientific 
excellence,  autonomy,  efficiency  and  transparency  and  with  the  full  involvement  of 
the Scientific Council. This will include the process and criteria for the selection of 
the  members  of  the  Scientific  Council.  The  review  will  explicitly  look  at  the 
advantages and disadvantages of a structure based  on an Executive Agency,  and a 
structure  based  on  Article  171  of  the  Treaty.  On  the  basis  of  this  review,  these 
structures and mechanisms should be modified as appropriate. The Commission will 
ensure that all the necessary preparatory work, including any legislative proposals 
which  it  considers  necessary,  is  undertaken  and  presented  to  the  European 
Parliament and the Council, as required by the Treaty, with a view to a transition to 
any  modified  structure  required,  as  soon  as  possible.  To  this  end  the  Framework 
Programme  will  be  adapted  or  supplemented  in  co-decision  pursuant  to  Article 
166(2)  of  the  Treaty.  The  progress  report  referred  to  in  Article  7(2)  of  the 
Framework  Programme,  preceding  the  interim  evaluation,  will  give  initial  findings 
on the functioning of the ERC2. 

The  Commission  is  committed  to  conducting  the  review  on  the  basis  of  evidence  and  in  a 
fully  independent  and  transparent  manner,  to  assure  the  trust  and  confidence  of  the 
stakeholders3,  and  to  take  the  necessary  steps,  consistent  with  due  process  and  sound 
management, to put its conclusions into effect. It is essential, therefore, that the review should 
conclude  with  the  identification  of  improvements  that  can  be  implemented  within  the 
framework of EU legislation and administrative practice. 

3. 

CURRENT STATE OF PLAY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ERC 

Rapid progress has been made in establishing the ERC and setting up its funding operations, 
and  much  has  already  been  learnt  regarding  the  effectiveness  of  structures  and  mechanisms 
and interfaces with the internal and external environment.  

2 

3 

Council  Decision  concerning  the  specific  programme  "Ideas"  implementing  the  Seventh  Framework 
Programme  of  the  European  Community  for  research,  technological  development  and  demonstration 
activities (2007 to 2013). (2006/972/EC) OJ L 54, p.88, 22.2.2007 
The  review  will  be  conducted  in  line  with  the  evaluation  standards  established  by  the  Commission: 
"Responding to strategic needs: reinforcing the use of evaluation" SEC(2007)213 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  co-operation  with  the  Commission,  the  Scientific  Council  has  worked  with  commitment 
and energy since October 2005 to develop the ERC’s scientific strategy, including the grant 
schemes and peer review methodology, and to identify peer reviewers of the necessary quality 
and experience.  

It is now important to move forward to a stable and predictable longer term structure as soon 
as  possible.  For  this  reason,  the  Commission  proposes  to  organise  the  mid-term  review  as 
early  as  possible,  according  to  a  timetable  that  will  enable  it  to  be  conducted  substantially 
within  the  term  of  the  present  European  Parliament  and  completed  within  the  term  of  the 
current Commission. 

As set out in the Commission's Annual Report4, the ERC came officially into existence on 2 
February  2007,  by  a  Decision  of  the  Commission5,  in  accordance  with  the  Decisions  of 
Council and Parliament on the 7th Framework Programme6 and Rules for Participation7, and 
the  Decision  of  the  Council  on  the  Specific  Programme  "Ideas"8.  The  Specific  Programme 
“Ideas” defines the overall governance structure of the ERC, setting out the roles of Scientific 
Council, dedicated implementation structure and Commission, stating that the Commission is 
responsible for the implementation of the “Ideas” programme and for guaranteeing the ERC’s 
full autonomy and integrity. Detailed design and implementation has been characterised by a 
highly creative and productive interaction between the Scientific Council and the Commission 
services, particularly in view of the need to adjust procedures which were not designed with 
the ERC in mind. 

The  first  year  of  operation  (2007)  was  associated  with  the  implementation  of  the  "Starting 
Grant"  scheme  for  investigators  in  the  process  of  establishing  their  independence.  The  call 
was  perceived  as  a  major  success  by  external  stakeholders  in  terms  of  the  large  number  of 
applications processed (more than 9000) resulting in approximately 300 grants. Moreover, a 
number  of  Member  States  have  announced  that  they  will  use  the  outcome  of  the  ERC 
evaluation to finance young researchers who were not supported by the ERC due to budgetary 
constraints.  The  second  year  has  seen  a  reinforcement  of  the  scientific  agenda  with  the 
addition of a second "Advanced Grant" scheme for established, independent investigators, as 
well as substantial developments towards the creation of the Executive Agency. 

The  ERC  Executive  Agency  is  at  the  preparatory  stage.  The  Commission  Decision 
establishing  the  ERC  Executive  Agency  was  adopted  on  14  December  20079,  following  a 
positive  opinion  on  the  draft  proposal  by  the  Member  States'  Regulatory  Committee  on 
Executive  Agencies  and  a  positive  vote  by  the  Budgetary  Committee  of  the  European 
Parliament  in  November  2007.  The  Delegation  Act  is  expected  to  be  adopted  by  the 
Commission  in  September  2008  as  will  the  Decision  nominating  members  of  the  Steering 
Committee.  Pending  appointment  of  the  Director,  a  major  recruitment  exercise  for  agency 
staff  is  currently  being  conducted,  alongside  further  development  of  the  executive  agency's 

4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

Annual  Report  on  the  European  Research  Council  operations  and  realisation  of  the  objectives  in  the 
Specific Programme "Ideas" in 2007, COM(2008)473 
2007/134/EC; OJ L 57, 24.02.2007, p.14 
1982/2006/EC of 18.12.06, OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p.1 
1906/2006/EC of 18.12.06, OJ L 391, 30.12.2006, p.1 
2006/972/EC of 19.12.06, OJ L 400, 30.12.2006, p.243 and corrigendum OJ L 54, 22.02.2007, p.81 
Commission  Decision  of  14  December  2007  setting  up  the  "European  Research  Council  Executive 
Agency"  for  the  management  of  the  specific  Community  programme  "Ideas"  in  the  field  of  frontier 
research in application of Council Regulation (EC) n° 58/2003. OJ L 9 p.15 12.1.2008 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
operations and infrastructure, under the authority of DG Research. Recruitment for the ERC is 
being carried out with the specific requirements of scientific excellence in mind; the Director 
and  senior  management  will  be  appointed  taking  into  account  the  views  of  the  Scientific 
Council, as specified in the Specific Programme “Ideas”. 

Independent  of  the  review  of  structures  and  mechanisms,  the  ERC  is  designed  to  be  a 
"learning  organisation"10,  developing  and  adapting  to  ensure  it  delivers  its  objectives  in  an 
efficient and effective manner. In this spirit, the Commission has already taken steps to adjust 
some  aspects  of  implementation  on  the  basis  of  early  experience,  in  consultation  with  the 
Scientific Council. In addition, and without prejudice to the conduct and outcome of the mid-
term  review,  the  Commission  is  investigating  the  possibility  of  taking  a  number  of  further 
steps  to  improve  substantially  the  ERC’s  operations  via  technical  adjustments  within  the 
provisions  of  the  existing  legislation  of  Council  and  Parliament.  The  areas  in  which  such 
improvements may be envisaged are set out in the annex. 

4. 

ORGANISATION AND CONDUCT OF THE REVIEW 

4.1 Selection of independent experts 

The credibility of the review and its outcomes will depend primarily on the integrity, breadth 
of  understanding  and  reputation  of  the  experts  selected  to  conduct  it.  The  Commission 
proposes  to  appoint  a  Panel  comprising  a  Chair  and  four  further  members,  as  well  as  a 
rapporteur, and will keep the key stakeholders informed. . The Panel would be established to 
meet, overall, the following main criteria:  

•  Expert  knowledge  of  research  policy  and  management  at  a  national,  European  and/or 

international level;  

•  Breadth  of  competence  to  assess  the  European  Research  Council  from  scientific, 

administrative11, legal and other appropriate perspectives. 

Other criteria that will be taken into consideration in the choice of members are:  

•  Appropriate  balance  between  academia  and  other  stakeholders  (including 
European  Research  Foundations)  to  ensure  both  institutional  understanding  and 
technical competence ;  

•  Appropriate gender balance;  

•  Breadth and diversity of experience across the European Research Area.  

The  Panel  may  be  assisted  by  additional  experts  who,  on  its  request,  provide  specialised 
independent information and analysis. 

10 

11 

In line with the provisions of the Specific Programme: "… [..] The implementation and management of 
the activity will be reviewed and evaluated on an ongoing basis to assess its achievements and to adjust 
and improve procedure on the basis of experience" 
Including for example organisational financial control or internal audit etc.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
4.2 Scope 

The  review  will  have  a  decisive  influence  on  the  future  of  the  ERC;  it  must  be  sufficiently 
broad-ranging  to  provide  definitive  conclusions.  The  review  also  needs  to  take  into  account 
the various different levels of legislation and administrative practice which, in addition to the 
legal framework of the Executive Agency as the dedicated implementation structure, define or 
condition  the  ERC’s  modes  of  operation.  This  will  be  of  particular  importance  when 
identifying where and how improvements are needed, including by means of changes to the 
legislation, and when examining the advantages and disadvantages of possible structures (e.g. 
an  Executive  Agency,  a  structure  based  on  Article  171  of  the  Treaty,  or  any  other  option), 
since the operation of any structure will be affected by the broader context. Of interest here 
will be, for example: 

•  The Specific Programme "Ideas", which establishes the essential structure of the 
ERC12, inter alia the rights and obligations of the Scientific Council and dedicated 
implementations structure as well as other implementation arrangements, and the 
legislation on the 7th Framework Programme, including the Rules of Participation. 

•  The various structures which operate for decision making, liaison and programme 
implementation  (notably  the  Scientific  Council,  its  Secretary  General,  and  the 
Commission),  including  those  defined  in  subordinate  legal  acts  to  the  primary 
legislation, in particular the Commission's Decision establishing the ERC. 

•  The  more  general  context  of  the  administration  in  a  Community  Institution  or 
Community bodies, in particular the Financial regulation and the applicable Staff 
regulations  as  well  as  various 
regulations,  guidelines  and  established 
administrative practices for implementing these acts.13 

The  ERC  being  a  new  entity,  involving  different  principles  and  methods  from  earlier 
Framework Programmes, it inevitably raises many implementation challenges in the start-up 
phase. The review must, therefore, differentiate between these challenges which are transitory 
and to which solutions have been or are being found, and issues that, on the other hand, can be 
attributed to enduring structural aspects of the ERC and will have an impact on its functioning 
over a longer term perspective. 

The review must accommodate the ongoing developments in the ERC (for example, the steps 
towards  the  Executive  Agency's  administrative  autonomy  and  the  process  to  appoint  future 
members of the Scientific Council), drawing on all the quantitative and qualitative evidence 
and experience that have accumulated, dating back to the start of the Scientific Council's work 
in October 2005. It should also, as stated in the legislation, consider the process and criteria 
for the selection of the members of the Scientific Council. 

12 

13 

"  […]  independent  Scientific  Council  composed  of  scientists,  engineers  and  scholars  of  the  highest 
repute representing the European research community in all its breadth and depth, supported by a lean 
and  cost-effective  dedicated  implementation  structures  which  would  be  set  up  as  an  Executive 
Agency…), 
ERC personnel policy and recruitment fall within the provisions of the Conditions for other servants of 
the  European  Union  (OJ  L  056,  04/03/1968  P.  0001-0007).  These  conditions,  which  have  been 
reaffirmed  on  multiple  occasions  by  the  legislator,  are  the  basis  for  any  EU  instrument  for  research 
support, including the JTIs, whether this is done via executive agencies or a structure under Article 171. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Given  the  stakes  for  European  research  policy  and  its  institutional  development,  it  is 
imperative to assess the performance of the ERC against benchmarks which reflect the very 
highest  standards  worldwide,  in  particular  as  regards  comparable  agencies  in  the  Member 
States  and  other  advanced  countries  of  the  world,  as  well  as  the  EU's  research  programmes 
managed  by  the  Commission.  In  this  context,  experience  of  other  external  structures  set  up 
under  the  7th  Framework  Programme,  such  as  the  JTIs,  or  in  adjacent  areas,  such  as  the 
European  Institute  for  Innovation  and  Technology  (EIT)  will  also  be  relevant.  The  review 
should also take note of the Commission’s broader review of external structures, such as the 
evaluation  reports  that  are  prepared  on  the  first  three  years  of  operation  of  each  Executive 
Agency, as well as the audit on the performance of all the Executive Agencies, including the 
ERC,  that  the  Court  of  Auditors  will  launch  during  2008  with  a  report  on  their  findings  by 
December 2008. 

4.3 Working methods 

To  ensure  the  necessary  breadth  and  depth  of  evidence,  the  Commission  proposes  a 
"Commission  of  Inquiry"  format  involving  examination,  in  confidence,  of  documentary  and 
oral  evidence,  which  may  derive  from  a  wide  range  of  key  stakeholders'  perspectives, 
including  for  example,  the  ERC  Scientific  Council;  the  research  community  (academia, 
research institutes, research foundations, industry); Member States; EU Institutions; DG RTD 
and other Commission services. 

Detailed working methods will be for the Panel itself to determine, however it is expected that 
the Panel may: 

•  solicit oral and written evidence from stakeholders;  

•  analyse  existing  evidence  including  monitoring  and  evaluation  studies  on  the 

"Ideas" Specific Programme;  

•  conduct ad hoc analyses, for example of statistical information and relevant policy 

documents and reviews.  

The Commission will provide the Panel with all necessary information and the Commission 
services may, at the request of the Panel, convene ad hoc expert meetings on particular issues. 
Consistent  with  the  above  provision  for  its  full  involvement,  the  Scientific  Council  has 
indicated  that  it  intends  to  submit  a  summary  of  its  experience  to  date  and  suggestions  for 
improvements, also considering international best practice of Research Councils.  

4.4 Criteria 

The  criteria  for  the  mid-term  review  –  scientific  excellence,  autonomy,  efficiency  and 
transparency  -  reflect  key  principles  on  which  the  ERC  is  founded.  The  following  sections 
analyse and provide commentary on each criterion in turn. It should be stressed however that 
these  criteria  must  also  be  considered  in  a  holistic  way,  since  they  involve  interacting 
requirements;  for  example  the  quality  of  scientific  management  cannot  be  divorced  from 
considerations of efficiency. The criteria should also be applied taking account of appropriate 
benchmarks,  for  example  the  arrangements  in  research  agencies  in  the  EU  or  in  other 
advanced countries. Furthermore, the fundamental requirement for irreproachable integrity in 
the ERC’s operations must underpin the analysis against each and all criteria. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
4.4.1 Scientific Excellence  

Scientific  and  scholarly  excellence  is  both  an  objective  to  be  achieved  by  the  ERC  and  a 
motivation underlying all aspects of its operation. Essential questions to be considered in the 
review should include: 

•  To what extent is the ERC succeeding in promoting scientific excellence within the 

European research area? 

•  To  what  extent  do  the  ERC’s  strategy,  administrative  implementation  and 

programme execution work in the interests of scientific excellence? 

•  Is the principle of scientific excellence embedded in the culture and processes of 

the ERC? 

4.4.2. Autonomy 

Autonomy involves the following facets which should be considered by the review: 

•  Do  the  conditions  of  operation  of  the  ERC  enable  the  scientific  strategy  to  be 
determined effectively and independently according to scientific requirements? 

•  Is the scientific strategy independently devised by the Scientific Council respected 

as the basis for implementation by the dedicated implementation structure? 

•  Do  the  conditions  of  operation  of  the  dedicated  implementation  structure  allow 
the  latter  to  follow  strictly,  efficiently  and  with  the  necessary  flexibility,  the 
scientific  strategy  established  by  the  Scientific  Council  and  requirements  of  the 
Specific Programme “Ideas”? 

•  To  what  extent  are  the  structures  and  procedures  that  the  Commission  has 
established for the ERC adequate to guarantee its full autonomy in the long term? 

4.4.3 Efficiency 

The  ERC  operates  not  as  an  isolated  entity  but  as  a  component  of  the  European  system  of 
research. Efficiency therefore involves considerations not only of the proportion of its overall 
use  of  resources  but  also  on  its  ability  to  use  these  resources  effectively,  for  example 
attracting the best applicants and peer reviewers. Assessing its efficiency therefore raises the 
following types of questions: 

•  Are  the  ERC’s  overall  expenditures  on  administration  within  the  parameters  set 

for it and consistent with best practice in research agencies worldwide? 

•  To  what  extent  does  the  separation  of  tasks  between  Commission  and  ERC 
efficiently avoid duplication of activities and to what extent does it permit efficient 
operation of the ERC? 

•  Are the roles of the actors in the ERC's governance structure (Scientific Council, 
Secretary  General,  Dedicated  Implementation  Structure,  Commission)  and  the 
relationships  between  them  sufficiently  well  defined,  distinct  and  appropriately 
coupled to achieve highly efficient organisation and management? 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
•  Do  the  systems  and  procedures  adopted  by  the  ERC  allow  objectives  to  be 
achieved  in  a  manner  that  is  economical  in  the  use  of  resources  (personnel  and 
financial)? 

•  Are the ERC’s operations (calls, proposals, evaluation, granting etc.) sufficiently 
simple,  flexible  and  user-friendly  to  attract  the  best  applicants  and  peer 
reviewers? 

4.4.4 Transparency 

The ERC is intended to operate with a high level of autonomy and to the highest standards of 
integrity.  In  this  context,  the  concept  of  transparency  is  rather  straightforward.  The  key 
questions to be addressed are: 

•  Does  the  ERC  communicate  information  to  citizens  and  other  stakeholders  of 
sufficient  substance  and  quality  for  them  to  understand  its  operations  and  have 
confidence in the use and effective control of its budget?  

•  Does  the  ERC  provide  information  to  the  EU  Institutions  of  sufficient  substance 

and quality for them to exercise their responsibilities for oversight? 

4.5 Timetable and Deliverables  

Consistent  with  the  objective  of  conducting  the  review  as  soon  as  possible,  an  indicative 
timetable is as follows: 

•  Nomination of experts - February 2009  

•  First meeting of the expert panel - February 2009 

•  Submission of oral and written evidence: February – May 2009 

•  Final report - July 2009 

•  Initial Commission response - September 2009 

The  Panel  will  prepare  a  final  report  in  which  it  will  provide  recommendations  and 
conclusions. This should include an analysis and evaluation of the adequacy or deficiencies of 
the existing structures and mechanisms and whether any changes needed can be regarded as 
"technical fixes" (for example, adjustments to the Executive Agency model) or are regarded 
as substantive organisational and /or legal issues. 

The  outcome  of  the  review  should  provide  the  justifications  for  the  Commission,  in 
consultation  with  the  Scientific  Council,  to  initiate  any  legislative  proposals  that  are 
considered necessary. 

5. 

CONCLUSION 

The  review  of  ERC  structures  and  mechanisms  will  have  a  decisive  influence  on  the  future 
structure of the ERC and as such will be a point of reference for the future development of EU 
research funding. It is, therefore, vital that the review is carried out properly and effectively, 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
with  the  full  support  of  the  stakeholders,  including  the  EU  institutions  and  the  Scientific 
Council. 

This  Communication  sets  out  the  proposed  basis  and  timing  for  a  review  which  is  well-
informed,  wide-ranging  and  impartial,  thus  providing  firm  foundations  on  which  the  ERC's 
longer  term  future  can  be  built.  It  also  identifies  a  number  of  possible  areas  in  which 
adjustments  to  improve  the  ERC’s  performance  may  be  possible  without  prejudice  to  the 
conduct or outcome of the review. 

The  European  Parliament  and  Council  are  invited  to  provide  their  observations  on  the 
methodology set out here, by December 2008, in order for the Commission to take them into 
account in establishing the mandate for the independent review.  

Following  the  outcome  of  the  review,  the  Commission  will  take  appropriate  steps  to  put  its 
conclusions  into  practice,  taking  account  of  the  need  to  ensure  continuity  of  the  ERC’s 
operations through any adjustment. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
ANNEX 

POSSIBLE MEANS TO ENHANCE THE ERC’S PERFORMANCE WITHOUT 
PREJUDICE TO THE REVIEW OF STRUCTURES AND MECHANISMS 

As  indicated  in  Section  3  above,  without  prejudice  to  the  conduct  and  outcome  of  the  mid-
term review, based on initial experience, the Commission is already considering a number of 
areas in which it may be possible to improve substantially the ERC’s operations via technical 
adjustments  to  the  terms  of  its  implementation  and  the  operating  environment  within  the 
provisions of the existing legislation of Council and Parliament. These areas include: 

•  The  functionality  and  clarity  of  the  interface  between  the  Scientific  Council  and  the 
dedicated  implementation  structure.  Improvements  may  be  possible  regarding  the 
specification  of  arrangements  to  assure  liaison  between  the  Scientific  Council,  the 
Commission  and  the  dedicated  implementation  structure.  This  could  include  further 
refinement of the role of the  ERC  Secretary  General  in  relation to the Scientific Council 
Chair and Vice-Chairs and the role of the Board set up by the Scientific Council in which 
the  Chair,  Vice-Chairs  and  Secretary  General  meet,  inviting  also  the  Director  of  the 
dedicated implementation structure. In this context, provisions in the Commission Decision 
establishing the ERC may be reviewed to recognise the time the Chair and Vice-Chairs of 
the  Scientific  Council  devote  to  ERC  business.  In  doing  so,  risks  of  conflict  of  interest, 
which may for example arise from an effective subsidy of the ERC by the Chair and the 
Vice-Chairs'  host  organisations  should  be  considered,  as  well  as  the  provisions  for 
accountability  of  the  Scientific  Council,  including  the  code  of  conduct  and  reporting 
obligations 

•  Selection and appointment of peer reviewers. In view of the broad scientific scope of the 
ERC’s  activities  and  the  necessity  for  a  high  number  of  reviewers,  the  sound  use  of 
resources requires these procedures to be as simple and flexible as possible, consistent with 
good administrative practice and financial management. Simplifications may be possible as 
regards both the selection of experts, where there are ambiguities in the role of Scientific 
Council  and  Commission  regarding  the  selection  of  experts  for  peer  review  of  research 
proposals  and  the  need  for  the  Executive  Agency  to  prepare  a  Commission  decision  for 
every expert appointed and in the processes for appointment and payment. 

•  Grant  processing.  For  frontier  research  proposals,  where  the  outcome  of  the  work  is 
inherently uncertain, it is the principle of the ERC to avoid "negotiation" on grants, which 
are  offered  on  the  basis  of  approval  of  the  proposal,  and  specification  of  the  appropriate 
budget, by the peer review panel (following selection decision). It may be appropriate to 
review  the  performance  obligations  on  the  Principal  Investigator,  to  ensure  that,  in 
circumstances  where  the  peer  review  panel  reduces  the  budget,  there  is  no  necessary 
requirement to adapt the description of work.  

•  Tailoring  of  FP7  IT  tools  to  the  specific  needs  of  the  ERC.  In  the  early  stages  of 
implementation of the 7th Framework Programme, which coincided with the start-up of the 
ERC, the latter has inevitably relied upon the use of standard tools and configurations of 
these tools for the 7th Framework Programme as a whole. Progressively, the Commission 
will  consider  how  these  tools  -  for  example  the  electronic  proposal  submission  system 
(EPSS) – can be configured specifically for ERC activities, to improve both efficiency and 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
autonomy,  in  a  way  that  is  consistent  with  economy  and  efficiency  across  the  7th 
Framework Programme as a whole. 

EN 

12 

   EN