Selection Process

The selection process is based on a two-step evaluation procedure with a rebuttal phase.


 Principles 

Independance, Impartiality, Objectivity, Accuracy, Consistency.

 Eligibility check 

Only the application files having passed the eligibility check will access the evaluation phase.

 First stage

  • Each application will be evaluated by remote reviewers.
  • The remote reviewers are non-Belgian high-level experts working outside Belgium (applicants can identify up to 3 experts they do not wish to see acting as evaluator of their application).
  • Each expert will sign a non-disclosure agreement and a non-conflict of interest form.
  • The breakdown of evaluation criteria is the following :
    • 40% Principal Investigator (CV and publications, international recognition, main research achievements),
    • 40% Research Project (feasibility, originality, methodology, design of the study, data treatment and management, potential impact),
    • 20% Research Environment.
  • The scores range from 0 to 5 :
    • 0 = The proposal fails to address the criterion.
    • 1 = Poor. The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses.
    • 2 = Fair. The proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses.
    • 3 = Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present.
    • 4 = Very Good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, but a small number of shortcomings are present.
    • 5 = Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion. Any shortcomings are minor.

 Rebuttal Phase

Each applicant will access the first stage reviews (anonymised) of his/her application and have the opportunity to further comment on these assesments before the file passes on to the second stage.

 Second stage

  • All applications will be evaluated by an international and independent jury.
  • The jury members are non-Belgian high-level experts working outside Belgium and will be selected for their expertise in the fields of the applications.
  • Each jury member will sign a non-disclosure agreement and a non-conflict of interest form.
  • The jury will dedicate a one-day meeting to assess the applications.
  • Each file will be introduced by one rapporteur and 2 co-rapporteurs.
  • Each file will be composed of the application, its associated remote reviews and the researcher’s comment.
  • The breakdown of evaluation criteria is the following :
    • 40% Principal Investigator (CV and publications, international recognition, main research achievements),
    • 40% Research Project (feasibility, originality, methodology, design of the study, data treatment and management, potential impact),
    • 20% Research Environment.
  • The scores range from 0 to 5 :
    • 0 = The proposal fails to address the criterion.
    • 1 = Poor. The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses.
    • 2 = Fair. The proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses.
    • 3 = Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present.
    • 4 = Very Good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, but a small number of shortcomings are present.
    • 5 = Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion. Any shortcomings are minor.

 Final Decision 

The Award will be granted by the Steering Committee of the Fund Generet on basis of the recommendation of the Jury

 Feedback to applicants

  • All applicants will receive a general feedback on their application.
  • No redress procedure is foreseen.