Presentation by Hélène Pinaud from Erasmus Mundus National Structure France and Annika Sundbäck-Lindroos from Erasmus Mundus National Structure Finland. Presentation was held at the EMAP training seminar in Ljubljana for future Erasmus Mundus Master Courses consortia (1-4 February 2012). For video see http://vimeo.com/36829480 and http://vimeo.com/37363514.

1. APPLICATION PROCEDURE
STEP BY STEP
Hélène Pinaud
French National Structure
helene.pinaud@2e2f.fr
Annika Sundbäck-Lindroos
Finnish National Structure
annika.sundback-lindroos@cimo.fi
ERASMUS MUNDUS ACTIVE PARTICIPATION Vol.2
Training seminar / 1-4 fébruary 2012 / Ljubljana/ Slovenia

2. Application form: General Remarks
• Read carefully all relevant documents:
- Programme Guide
- Instructions manual, incl e-form instructions
- Application Form
- FAQ
- Expert Assessment Manual
http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus_mundus/fu
nding/2012/call_eacea_42_11_en.php

3. Application form: General remarks
• Respect the eligibility criteria related to:
- consortia partnership: status of
institution, min number of partners...
- degree delivered
- mandatory documents: e-form,
endorsement letter and «other relevant
annexes»
- deadline: 30 April 2012

4. Application form: general remarks
• All the partners must be involved from the begining
of the project and must be « active » ( no sleeping
partners)
Include administrative staff right from the
beginning (in all partner institutions)
• Be clear, concise and coherent when you write the
proposal

5. And Remember
Your goal is not to make a good application,
but
To make an excellent one!
It takes time and energy and a lot of
compromise !!!

6. In addition
• The Erasmus Mundus web page gives links to
all existing projects, their web sites etc..+
example of good practices
• other resources well worth checking out:
JOIMAN : www.joiman.eu
• EMQA, www.emqa.eu

7. The evaluation procedure
The independent experts are:
- Academics
- Previously or currently involved in European projects
- More or less specialised in the field
- At least one from the same discipline
- The other one from the same domain (hard sciences, life
sciences, social sciences & humanities)
- Who are paid ½ day of work per proposal

8. The evaluation procedure
The evaluation is organised in several phases:
- Registration and eligibility check
- Briefing
- Individual and remote phase (2 weeks)
- Consensus discussion and consolidation and remote
phase (2 weeks)
- Final consolidation panel, ranking and debriefing (3
days)
- Selection board decision

9. Some formalities
• Application deadline: 30. April 2012 1200 CET
• Online submission: no paper copy
(max 8MB)
+ Copy by e-mail to all relevant National Structures
• (No summary sheet this time, no need to send e-mail version to Agency)
• Electronic form only. (test it as soon as possible)
-> Estimated availability of the E-form: March 2012

10. The application form
• Two main parts:
- Technical details (name of project, partner
information etc: Parts A-E) = e-form
- Narrative part – ”Award criteria”: EMMC: A1-A5
• NB! A maximum limit (approx 15-20 A4 pages)

11. The application
Mandatory documents:
• DOCUMENT 1. The Application form
• DOCUMENT 2. The "Declaration on Honour by the
Legal Representative of the Applicant Organisation"
(to be attached to the application form)
• DOCUMENT 3. The "Consortium answers to the
Award criteria" (to be attached to the application
form
• DOCUMENT 4: Proof of recognition
• DOCUMENT(S) 5: Letters of endorsements

12. The e-form
Five elements:
• Part A: Identification of the applicant and other
organisations participating in the project
• Part B: Organisation and activities
• Part C: Summary description of the project
• Part D: Technical Capacity
• Part E: Degree(s) awarded

13. E-form: first page
• Project title: Comprehensive and understandable
• Acronym: communicative
-> Think of the above as important marketing
elements!
• Language: the working language of the consortium
AND the in communication with the Agency and
Commission (EN, FR or DE)

14. Part A: identification of the
partners
Must be fill by all partners separately ( including
associate partners)
Legal representative: Normally rector/director
Contact person: The ”real” project coordinator. Should
in most cases belong to the administrative staff

15. Part B - Organisation
• To be completed for each participating institution,
incl Associate Partners
• Status: Public/private ( cf: drop down menu)
• Aims and activities of the organisation: -> Relevant
info, experience in European projects, key activities..
• Role of organisation in the project: should be related
to a specific tasks in the project and particularly well
described: who is doing what ?
• Other community grants: Only for the coordinator
i.e : Erasmus IP, Tempus...

16. Part C – description of the project
• C.1 Statitistical data
General information on the project:
- ECTS delivered (60 or 120)
- EMMC title
- Duration and mobility ( min 2 EU countries)
- course language
- Participation costs per semester: ( incl fees,
insurance, other costs)
- number of students ( with and without grants)

17. C.2 thematic field
main+ second area ( drop down menu)
C.3 summary of the project
Summary = 1st impression of your project ( positive or negative
one!)
Will be published on internet: good way to attract students and
to communicate = marketing tool
Should include: description of the partnership, objectives,
contents, mobility tracks, selection requirements, language...etc
Be concise and clear : only 3000 characters ( no copy/paste of
selected sentences of the proposal)

18. Part D – Technical capacity
You should demonstrate your capacity to manage an EMMC.
Title partly misleading – includes also academic skills
D.1 consortium experience
 expertise in the field, in joint programmes management, in
different scientific networks...
D.2 Skills and expertise
 Max 3Cvs per partner. main aspects relevant to the project /
same presentation: recent/relevant publications, international
activity, contacts to society (editorial boards of academic
journals, networks etc), link to top research
NB! should include a CV of administrative staff

19. Part E – Degrees awarded
• What kind of degree(s) are you going to award? ->
Name, Double/Joint etc.? In a consortium, there may
be several options based on the mobility tracks of
the students and legal framework of the partners.
• ”Proof of recognition”: Does your institution have
the right to issue this kind of diploma?

20. Document 2: Declaration of Honour
Document 3: Award Criteria

21. Narrative part: Award criteria
Academic quality – course content 30%
Course integration 25%
Management,visibility, sustainability 20%
Student’s services, facilities 15%
Quality assurance and evaluation 10%
Expert assessment manual very relevant,
includes concrete tips, must be read

22. Academic quality 30%
• Socio-economic needs analysis (European and worldwide),
objectives
– relevant EU strategies: ie Europe 2020, Bologna (but avoid «buzz»)
– based on objective facts; logical, scientific approach
– multi-disciplinarity, newly emerging fields
– objective requiring a joint approach (national not sufficient)
• Added value of this programme compared to existing
programmes, European and international
– Position of Europe compared to other parts of the world
– Focus on European expertise and innovation potential within the field
– Intra-European perspective: awareness of other similar programmes is
vital

23. Academic quality 30%
• Structure and contents
– learning objectives linked to the needs defined 
main teaching topics/content, partner roles
– relevance of the mobility tracks (in academic terms), bringing added
value, internship/placement/field work/study
• Learning outcomes
– Justify the relevance of LO in terms of employability and academic
opportunities, assessed in comparison with the proposed content
• Consortium composition, academic staff
– Cross-check with B.2, B.3, D.2, complementary expertise
– Academic added value of 3. country partners, info on scholars
• Interaction with professional sector
– Assessed according to objectives and needs, cross-check with B.2
– Endorsement documents will be checked to see concrete commitment

24. Course integration 25% ”jointness
one of the most important elements”
• Integrated organisation
• balanced academic contribution, coherence
• Recognition
• no non-degree-awarding partners
• Joint application/selection/admission
• Common criteria and weight, common procedure
• Equity, special needs: concrete info
• Joint student examination methods (transparent)
• ECTS grading scale used (ref to 3.countries involved), conversion table
• Joint Diploma Supplement, thesis co-supervision, joint external
examinator?
• Justify participation costs
• Show calculations, same costs regardless of mobility track

25. Management, visibility,
sustainability 20%
• Cooperation mechanisms
– consortium agreement essential, commitment (endors letters)
– concrete student and non-academic partner involvement
– For each governing body; composition, responsibility and tasks, timing
of meetings
• Financial contributions and financial management
– Relates to A.2.5, presents the co-financing part of the budget
– Institutional commitment, additional funding for students
• Development and sustainability plan
– Ensuring content relevance, building an attractive programme
– Enrolment projections, prospects for securing additional scholarships
• Course promotion measures
– Variety of measures, website crucial (incl info on selection and
admission), past performance, common PR strategy +

26. Student services and facilities -
15%
• Information provided prior to enrolment
– Partners, course, selection criteria, online application, personal
contact, assistance with visa
• Student agreement
– Rights and obligations: academic, administrative and financial aspects
• Services
– Focus on: academic counselling, guaranteed accommodation, families
and special needs, particularly 3. country students (religious networks,
health/psychology etc)
• Language policy (courses should be free and ECTS recognised)
• Networking
– Common meetings intra-EM, local EM alumni/tutoring, contacts prior
to arrival

27. Quality assurance - 10%
• Internal evaluation (involving beneficiaries)
– ensure presentation of the whole cycle
– student involvement in QA board
– common discussion on Quality: how is it percieved?
– teacher meetings, prof.development
• External quality assurance (professional bodies)
– role of QA agencies, methodology used
– accreditation of joint programmes JOQAR:
• http://www.ecaconsortium.net/main/projects/joqar
– concrete evidence shown on external evaluation
– Involvement of non-academic partners, alumni, internship tutors
Consortia should aim at coherence, common mechanisms

28. What makes the difference ?
• A convincing needs analysis, clear European added value
• Distinctive academic quality; involved academics dynamic,
internationally active with links to society and research. Clear
area of expertise and complementing role of each partner.
• Active dialogue with the employers/surrounding society, and
concrete information of their involvement.
• Constructive approach to past performance (renewals!)
• A well written proposal (links between the different parts of
the proposal) and a well explained project (activities and
content are clear)
• Evidence of a common will to build an integrated programme
• The opportunity for students to live a unique experience

29. Expert’s expectations
• To read something new, interesting and challenging
• To find the right information at the right place
• Not to have to search on the internet what is missing
• To understand what will happen during the project
• To feel intelligent while reading the proposal
• Language check important

30. Annexes
• 3 mandatory:
– The award criteria
– Letters of endorsement – Not just standard, identical
letters, but ”true” signs of institutional involvement
– Proofs of recognition – From the National Structures, if
applicable.
– Anything else may not be read!
• =>Everything essential must be in the application form or in the
Award criteria annex.

31. What to do if your project is not
selected – is there a plan B?
• Start/continue the program without the support
• Apply for an Erasmus curriculum reform project, or an
Intensive Course
• Use the work as basis for a new application
– NB! The 2012 Call is the last in this edition of EM! There will be a
continuation within the proposed Erasmus for All Programme.

32. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
http://emap-project.webnode.cz
ERASMUS MUNDUS ACTIVE PARTICIPATION Vol.2
Training seminar / 1-4 february 2012 / Ljubljana/ Slovenia