Over the years, we’ve had the pleasure of working with countless researchers, Research Managers & Funding Advisors, and National Contact Points (NCPs). Click the titles below to read what some of our past customers had to say about our services.

ERC Online Courses

*Some testimonials are anonymous by the customers’ wish to remain private.

Nuno Bicho

“Everything was very clear and informative. To me, it really helped to clarify many aspects of the official information given by ERC and in many instances helped me to think in different manners that were not clear in the ERC documents.”

Alessandro Morbidelli

“Yes, I appreciated the course. The central part on how to structure the proposal, insisting on putting forward a hypothesis supported by some preliminary results was very useful.”

Dieuwertje Schrijvers

“The videos were excellent and touched upon all aspects that I could expect to be relevant in the project submission process.”

Aurelien Viterisi

“The videos were clear and relatively concise. They emphasised on some important aspects of the application, which are often unknown or not straightforward to the applicant (e.g. unwritten rules, panel selection).”

“Very clear. Extremely useful information.”

“I felt that everything was very clear, and I liked to browse through the associated webpages at the same time to go a bit further. At times, I thought the pace was too slow but I can totally see why it was made that way.
The video format makes it much easier for me to go through the material than on-site, as my teaching duties can prevent me from attending such in-person training.”

Nathanael Fijalkow

“Everything was clear and well done!”

Aritina Haliuc

“The video were clear enough and the information was beyond what is available in the program!”

Kerstin Carlson

“The videos were VERY GOOD. They really helped explain not just the process but the paradigm, and this was very useful. They were so good, I watched them twice.”

” The videos were very clear and enjoyed being able to watch them more than once. I would have liked to be able to also watch them later in the writing process, but my notes and the extra reading material provided will still be helpful.

This was a very good way to have the course, and it may, in fact, have been even better than an on-site course because the information was so clear and because one could watch the videos more than once – it certainly saved some time not to have to travel for the course.

There was a lack of research-field specific information, but I doubt that this would be included in any course.”

Jane Lykke Boll

“The videos were very clear and the content very relevant. It would, however, had been nice with more examples from actual proposals.”

David Gregory

“The videos were very clear and I particularly liked the voice over and subtitles. It was great to be able to stop and rewind as I took notes or sometimes just stop to think and digest what was being said. The links to the knowledge database were great as again I could jump to those and read them and then go back to the videos.
I thought the length of the videos was perfect too as even though it seemed duaniting at the start it was great to be able to break the material up into small sessions where I could just think and refer to the knowledge base. A brilliant concept and I think gave me a fra better insight into the ERC process than just the work program. This will be the thrid time of trying for an AdG grant and I really feel that I understand the “hidden language” of the grants far better after attending this course. Thank you!”

Lars Boje Mortensen

“The course was very helpful and obviously builds on a lot of experience. I was surprised how useful the generic advice for all fields were, also for the humanities.”

Line Ugelvig

“The pre-recorded presentations were short and concise, yet very informative. Well done!”

Hanna Honkanen

“Great figures to outline the processes of ERC application. The speaker had a nice voice and fluently spoken which made it easy to follow.”

“The videos were very clear and informative. It was nice that you were able to watch them whenever it fitted your schedule. The videos also provided information in greater detail compared to the work program.”

Eleonora Macchia

“The videos were clear and informative. All the crucial aspects were discussed in deep details. A huge number of information beyond the one available in the work program were offered.”

“The videos were very clear, informative, and easy to follow.”

ERC Workshop

*Some testimonials are anonymous by the customers’ wish to remain private.

Carmela Lutmar

“It was very detailed, very clear, extremely informative, and very helpful.”

“I found the workshop very useful and at the right pace – in terms of understanding the overall structure, and then gradually getting into the nitty-gritty.”

“I was very pleased with the workshop. The presentation was clear and well structured. The presentor answered all the questions and also remained very focused on the content so that the questions contributed to everyone. An important workshop for anyone who is interested in writing grant proposals.”

“The workshop was very informative including tips and information that can not be obtained elsewhere.”

“I did not know anything about the ERC process and the workshop has taught me a lot.”

Elisabeth Tauber

“Yes very satisfied. Beyond, in defining the “risk” concept and in introducing the “structural logic” of an ERC application. It helped a lot in thinking how to structure the research idea. That as good as a proposal can be, there are the risk factors of human reviewers liking or not the proposal.

That it is not necessary to have already published about the research which is presented, but rather introduce it as something new. Also for the advanced and consolidator grant. Very helpful info!”

“Yes, definitely satisfied. Difficult issues were explained in an easy yet comprehensive way.”

Raffaella Di Cagno

“In general I am quite satisfied with the event. Certainly for those who have no knowledge of this type of call the meeting goal has been centered, vice versa for those who are already familiar with or for those who have already applied (with failure), the expectation is higher. The ERC call’s mission was very well defined. Another well developed point is that of collaborations to be involved in the proposal. Very useful was the suggestion of some terminologies to be adopted or avoided.”

Erwin Rauch

“Very clear and structured presentation, competence of consultant. Experience with proposals that cannot be found in the internet.”

Francesco

“It went beyond the already available information that is out there by modeling the scientific method that should be followed by a successful research project proposal.”

Madan K Suwal

“It was a very detailed training.”

Martin Miles

“Great seminar. Very satisfied. Definitely insightful. Beyond – and different from – the information that is already out there.

Well-organized, comprehensive, and well-paced presentation. Useful and insightful information. Both representatives are are very knowledgeable, excellent communicators and interact well when questioned. It was also very good to receive a copy of the presentation before and after the seminar.”

“The presentation was very good in helping me to see how I should structure my application to fit in ERC.”

Standard Review Service (for all EU grants we support)

*Some testimonials are anonymous by the customers’ wish to remain private.

David Henry

“Concise, well-directed advise. Incredibly efficient review turn-around!”

Andrew Parnell

“Very thorough dissection of the proposal.”

“First, receiving the comments for my first draft, I realized that my message was not clear. I restructured my proposal according to these comments and to my surprise it became much clearer. Second, I delivered my proposal drafts quite late, but they helped me even on the submission deadline date. Thank you!”

“It was prompt and to the point. I had all my questions answered in enough detail.”

“Yoram was my focal point for Enspire, and I found Yoram to be very professional, very pleasant to deal with, incredibly responsive @ such a busy time for Enspire, and most importantly for me, Yoram was very straight forward and direct with the comments on my proposal. Which I feel is needed at such a critical point in the submission process.”

“I liked the format of the feedback document – point by point and directly related to each of the grant review criteria.
Other consultants I have used in the past, had annotated the word doc, rephrased sentences.. this feedback was also good but a little more tedious to review and overwhelming.
I found the comments and suggestions very helpful, and constructive. They were received within a few days.”

Zbynek Heger

“Preparation of my ERC together with Enspire was a joyful experience. Our communication was fast and efficient, and helped me to markedly improve my project application (and importantly – to polish my research ideas). You guys are doing a great job – highly recommended!”

“The review was very helpful. The experience of the Enspire Team in European grant writing was clear and i truly think that their suggestions helped to improve the quality of my proposal.”

“The feedback helped me understand what the funding application should focus on, what the important elements were and the key aspects to highlight and bring out. I don’t think I would have had this realisation without the review even though I had attended the training day – it was really helpful to hear the advice again in relation to my own project.”

Ozcan Arslan

“The service was fast, comments are very valuable.”

“The external vision provided by Enspire has been very valuable to open my mind on important aspects, like the perception of what is a challenge (in the ERC mind), what is the perception of visibility, leadership….
The review is very detailed and I encourage everyone to benefit from this help. This is very complimentary from referee reports or the reading by other colleagues and it brings a substantial addition.”

Deep Dive Review Service (for all EU grants we support)

*Some testimonials are anonymous by the customers’ wish to remain private.

Theodossis Theodossiou

“The services of Enspire were of very high quality. The advisors are very experienced, and they were really attentive to detail. They provided me with great guidance in a grant scheme which I had no prior experience with. This helped my application become focused and to the point. The communication was good and frequent and they were there to answer all my questions. I fully recomend Enspire’s “deep dive” experience, I feel it has significantly enhanced my chances of success.”

Josep Redon

“The contribution was realy good not only in formal issues but also in scientific and technical aspects.”

Andreas Bikfalvi

“Very good interaction, strong criticism (which is good), helped me to shape my ideas about the project, very nice and helpful staff.”

Ulf-Peter Apfel

“I received very critical feedback trying to disintegrate my entire proposal. Thanks for that. Only such a feedback is really valuable and helps to improve a proposal.”

Daniel Aguirre de Carcer

“Very helpful indeed, I was not expecting so much.”

“My consultant provided extremely helpful suggestions to sharpen my proposal, focus on the key contributions, identify the main strengths and present them in a suitable manner for the call.”

Xabier Cid Vidal

“I think the quality of the proposal significantly improved thanks to the review. I think the review certainly helped to address some of ERC’s key points. Looking forward to seeing the results to certify if this feeling of improvement becomes a reality or not!”

Melanie Vauclair

“I found it extremely helpful to have an extra pair of eyes going through the application and double-checking that everything is fine, e.g. in terms of the formatting and also the budget calculations. There is so much that can be missed at the last minute and it gave me a great deal of peace of mind to know that someone else is going through the application thoroughly. Beyond that, I think the most valuable to me was the guidance I received when it came to fitting my project into the ERC framework. ERC projects are very different in regard to what is expected and it took me some time to understand how to convey, for example, the “high risk – high gain” requirement. I also received important feedback about crucial aspects of the project, such as my hypotheses and research questions, which enabled me to make my research proposal much clearer. Overall, my project has become much stronger and more competitive than it would have been without an Enspire Deep Dive review. Last not least, I highly appreciated the swiftness in responding – literally until the last minute! Thanks Sharon!”

“I immensely benefitted from working with Sharon Alon. She was extremely helpful throughout the whole process. She was both very professional and kind. She managed to bring me to develop my project and formulate my ideas without ever putting pressure on me, which I truly appreciated. She always made relevant and thorough comments on both parts B1 and B2 of my project. Her review of the administrative part of my application (Part A) was also extremely useful, especially towards the end of the process when pressure started to be very high. She was always available to help me to revise and improve my application until the very last minute and she always communicated in a composed and non-stressful way, which is precious for any researcher in the early steps of a research project.”

“To me the most valuable aspect of the whole process was having someone asking the right questions and evidencing unclear passages of the proposal. It is so easy to take things for granted and omit important explanations when you are so deep into the research. A fresh but expert opinion is always welcome. Also the gentle but constant reminder of partial deadlines was very helpful.”

“I was extremely satisfied with the deep dive service provided by Enspire, and by Sharon Alon, who was my consultant for the application. Her feedback was detailed and helpful, and based on a thorough understanding of the requirements of the grant program.”

“The important details are clearly emphasized which can have dramatic effect on the success of the proposal.”

“The customisation of the feedback to my proposal and the availability of the adviser was very good.”

Francesco Ravazzolo

“Let me think about the research idea in a very critical way.”

Smadar Ben Tabou de Leon

“Really helpful in many aspects such as understanding the expectations and requirements for a successful ERC grant,  pushing me forward to explore new directions for quantitative analyses which I think really improved the grant, emphasizing how important it is for me to be the most suitable person to do the research and advising me on many issues, including strategic issues regarding how the grant would be met with my competitors, which was very helpful.”

Tamer Abu-Alam

“Very responsive. Helped me in writing step by step. I can ask for Skype meetings for discussions at any time. answered my email within maximum 30 minutes. Positive discussions.”

Søren Frank

“The consultant had a deep knowledge about ERC priorities and what the reviewers value and don’t value. As an applicant, one learns what is important, what is less important and what is not important.”

Patrick Steinmetz

“The feedback was constructive and concise. Also, the consultant’s scientific background was excellent, so that there was also very good feedback on how to improve the proposal on the scientific level.”

Elif Uysal-Biyikoglu

“Very intelligent and to the point. I felt like the team understood not only the document but the work itself and helped me present its significance much better than I would otherwise have done.”

Mattia Pelizzola

“I was impressed on how I was assisted at all levels, ranging from the details of text formatting, till the definition of the core idea and overall proposal structure. I was feeling as I had somebody very experienced in my Institute constantly available for feedback on all points. Eventually, I could really see the proposal improving week by week.”

Arthur Leblois

“The consultant was very available and always able to discuss any point or question I had.”

Sara Cohen Shabot

“The team was incredibly helpful: always available to answer my questions with great kindness and professionalism. Writing the project was rather counter intuitive for me, and they provided me with all the necessary tools for succeeding in formulating the project the way I envisioned it. They both respected my proposal and my idea – heard my voice – and were implacable regarding the formal issues. They seemed to know exactly what are the rules for writing the proposal as it should be written for the ERC reviewers to at least give it a fair chance. I definitely want to thank them for the hard and engaged work.”

Tomer Shlomi

“Thank you for the great feedback on my ERC proposal! Your comments were extremely helpful in focusing and structuring the proposal.”

Ofer Fabian

“Initiating and managing a Horizon 2020 collaborative project is an extremely complex task. The team worked hand-in-hand with us throughout the proposal preparation and team building. Their experience was indispensable for building the consortium and writing the proposal.”

Josue Sznitman

“I just wanted to say thank you once again, for the support in getting through this (very) challenging and intense hurdle or preparing an ERC grant application.”

Moran Bercovici

“I wish to highlight your valuable contribution in shaping up my project proposal. It is highly appreciated.”

Yael Hanein

“ERC writing was very different than the kind of writing I was used to. Your helpful input on my proposal was critical and clearly helped me to successfully convey my research to the ERC.”

Muli Sagiv

“Applying to ERC is highly challenging, more than any other grant. Working with you was very fruitful, as your contribution to the process was essential to my success.”

Guy Bar Oz

“Your guidance and assistance was instrumental for my success in the ERC Interview in Brussels.”

Anja Hegen

“We have heard only positive feedback from our researchers about your ERC training session. They mentioned several times that they like how professional you come across and that you de-mystify the ERC and gave them the hope that they can also win one.”

Jacob Goldenberg

“Your valuable inputs have helped me to crystallize my research hypothesis and adapt it to ERC requirements… You gave me real-time advice and supported the entire writing process. The scientific idea was positioned much better thanks to your involvement. You also helped me a lot by taking care of all parts allowing me to focus on the scientific part.”

Tali Mass

“Thank you for you support and guiding during the preparation and writing of my ERC proposal. It is helpful to have someone who had so much experience with European grant system to offer guidance and direction. I sincerely appreciate your efforts and availability during the holidays to answer any question I had and to help me tie up the proposal as best as possible.”

Luca Longo

“Your team was great in helping me align my research idea to the ERC criteria and to shape a robust scientific proposal. Through the several revisions, I was able to turn my initial draft to a consistent hypothesis-driven project, strictly conforming to the rules of science.”

Antonia Baraggia

“As a social scientist, I found your guidance and assistance in shaping my ERC hypothesis and application focus to be very helpful and valuable, especially in the field of Constitutional Law. The assistance was absolutely timely, the given suggestions sharp and consistence. They gave me an invaluable help in framing my project.”

Hadas Okon-Singer

“I have been working with Enspire Science on an ERC application.The team was helpful, professional, organized and knowledgeable, while keeping a pleasant and friendly attitude. I am confident that the help enhanced my application.”

Liana Chua

“Your advice was invaluable in strengthening my ERC application – not only in improving the way it was framed but also in pushing me to develop and refine some of its core research questions.”

Fern Wickson

“I was extremely grateful to have this assistance during the writing of my application. They were always available and provided regular support and detailed feedback on my draft documents. Their advice really helped me to not only understand the unique requirements of the ERC, but also pushed me towards developing a much stronger application than I would have delivered if I was left to work on my own.”

ERC Interview Training

*Some testimonials are anonymous by the customers’ wish to remain private.

“Feedback on texts and PP were precious.”

“The brainstorming session was excellent.”

“Interview preparation was very useful.”

“The help related to the presentation was excellent and so were the answers to my questions related to potential comments of the panel.”

 

“It was helpful, always on time, constructive and tailored to my needs.”

“Precision of the feedback, tailored to my needs.”

“Good suggestions about the structure of the presentation and about managing of time, your availability and professionalism.”

“Good feedback on the general expectations for an ERC project in relation to structure of presentation.”

“It was very helpful to know what to expect at the interview and to have advice on how to sell my cv and project and how to structure my presentation. I very much appreciated that the training comes is multiple sessions, as this forced me to set time apart to work on my presentation for the interview over multiple weeks.”

“The service was good because of the preparation of the presentation, the structure and how to tell the story.”