13:10
Scientific-technical follow-up of postdoctoral contracts (R2 and R3)
Postdoctoral calls - ULPGC program
Scientific follow-up
The postdoctoral researchers who are hired must complete a scientific and technical monitoring report at the conclusion of each of the initial three years of their employment, as well as a final report covering the entire four-year period. The reports will include a description of the activities carried out, the results obtained, and the objectives achieved. They will also include documentary accreditation of each of the merits, which will be done in the same way established in section 9.2 for the accreditation of merits in the initial participation application phase (see details in the Call).
Alongside the annual reports, the researcher will attach their updated curriculum vitae.
Simultaneously with the submission of the report by the researcher, the coordinator of the research group will send to the Vice-Rectorate for Research and Transfer their proposal to renew or terminate the contract, duly motivated.
Contracts may be extended at the end of the first year if there is a favorable report from the coordinator of the research group. At the end of the second year of the contract, in order to be eligible for an extension, it will be necessary, in addition to the favorable report from the coordinator, for the researcher to demonstrate in their report that they meet a minimum score according to their field of study, according to the scale contained in Annex
2 of this resolution, which will be verified by the Vice-Rectorate for Research and Transfer. In the transition from the third to the fourth year, only the favorable report from the coordinator of the group will be required.
The monitoring reports of the contracted researcher, as well as the reports from the Group Coordinator, shall be submitted to the Vice-Rectorate for Research and Transfer with a minimum of two months prior to the end of the respective year, with the counting of said period starting from the day the contract begins. The final report shall be submitted within three months after the contract ends.
Postdoctoral researchers shall use the standardized report templated defined by ULPGC and available on the website of the Vice-Rectorate for Research, Innovation and Transfer.
The scientific-technical reports of the contracted researcher, as well as the reports from the Group Coordinator, shall be submitted through the Registry of the ULPGC's Electronic Headquarters, indicating in the field and addressed to the Research Service.
Postdoctoral Call Viera y Clavijo
Scientific follow-up
The hired researchers must prepare two scientific-technical monitoring reports, one referring to the first two years of the contract and another relating to the first four years of the contract, using the available models on the website of the Vice-Rectorate for Research and Transfer.
Researchers must submit these reports to ULPGC four months before the completion of the second and fourth year of the contract, during the twentieth and forty-fourth month of the contract, respectively, starting from the day the contract begins.
The evaluation of the scientific-technical monitoring reports will be carried out by the State Research Agency, and the evaluation result will determine the continuity of the contracts.
The evaluation for the first two years will have the following assessment:
- a) Favorable, if it is considered that the execution during the evaluation period will allow achieving the objectives set out in Annex II of the Resolution of July 20, 2005, of the State Secretariat for Universities and Research, which establishes the evaluation criteria in the Program of Incentivation for the Incorporation and Intensification of Research Activity (Program I3*). In this case, the contract will be extended for two more years. * This program will be replaced in December 2022 by the R3 program.
- b) Unfavorable, if the conditions mentioned in the previous section are not met. In this case, the contract will not be extended.
The evaluation for the first four years will have the following assessment:
- a) Favorable, if the conditions set out in Annex II of the Resolution of July 20, 2005, of the State Secretariat for Universities and Research, which establishes the evaluation criteria in the Program of Incentivation for the Incorporation and Intensification of Research Activity (Program I3*), are met. In this case, the contract will be extended for one more year. * This program will be replaced in December 2022 by the R3 program.
- b) Unfavorable, if the conditions mentioned in the previous section are not met. In this case, the contract will not be extended.
The scientific-technical reports of the contracted researcher will be submitted through the electronic headquarters of ULPGC.
Postdoctoral Call Ramón y Cajal/Juan de la Cierva
Scientific follow-up
Individuals hired under these grants must prepare two scientific-technical progress reports: one interim report covering the first three years of the contract, and a final report covering the five years of the contract or the period actually enjoyed in the event of early termination of the grant. These reports should be prepared using the available templates on the agency's website.
Beneficiary R&D centers must submit these reports to the granting authority four months before the end of the third year, or during the thirty-second month of the contract, and within the three months following the end of the fifth year, respectively. The countdown begins on the effective date of the individuals' incorporation into the R&D center, through Justiweb.
Additional progress reports may be required or their content may be modified, for which corresponding templates will be made available on the agency's website. Additionally, at any time, even after completion of the project, the submission of any necessary data for the elaboration of the required indicators may be requested.
The scientific-technical monitoring of the grant is the responsibility of the granting authority, through the Subdivision of Transversal Scientific-Technical Programs, Strengthening and Excellence, which will collect the evaluation of the scientific-technical monitoring reports from the agency's scientific-technical collaborators. It may also designate the bodies, commissions, or expert individuals it deems necessary to carry out the appropriate follow-up and verification actions of the grant's implementation, as well as request the submission of additional information it deems appropriate, including the possibility of conducting interviews with all or some of the hired individuals, with the assessment of these interviews being included in the monitoring result. The assessment result of the interim scientific-technical monitoring report will be decisive for the continuity of the grant.
The evaluation that allows access to the second phase will be carried out taking into account the criteria to be an R3 researcher - established researcher - as outlined in the Human Resources Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) of the European Union, the descriptors of which are included in the annex of the call's terms and conditions. Researchers may apply for evaluation during the third and fourth years of the grant. For this purpose, beneficiary R&D centers must submit a dedicated report to the granting authority, preferably using the available template on the agency's website, through Justiweb.
If the evaluation is negative, a new evaluation cannot be requested until six months have elapsed from the day following the communication of the evaluation result. If the evaluation is positive, beneficiary R&D centers must submit an addendum to the contract to the granting authority within twenty business days from the day following the communication of the evaluation result. This addendum should specify the established remuneration for the second phase. The addendum should take effect from the start date of the fourth year of the grant if the communication of the evaluation result occurred prior to that date, or during the established period for the formalization of the addendum if the communication of the evaluation result occurred after the start of the fourth year. In any case, the addendum should extend until the end of the grant.