Rules on the Procedures for the (Co)financing and Assessment of Research Activities and on Monitoring the Implementation of Research Activities (Unofficial Consolidated Text, No.2)
1.GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 1
(Contents of the Rules)
(1) The Rules lay down the procedure for selecting the recipients of budget
funding who carry out research and for monitoring the obligations thereof.
(2) The Rules lay down the procedures for public calls and invitations and
for the assessment of applications for the financing and cofinancing
(hereinafter: (co)financing) of research and activities supporting research.
(3) The (co)financing of research encompasses the following research
activities:
- research programmes;
- basic, applied and postdoctoral research projects;
- the training of young researchers in research organisations;
- international scientific cooperation;
- established researchers from abroad.
(4) The (co)financing of supporting activities encompasses:
- research infrastructure, comprising the following:
- infrastructure programmes;
- the purchase of research equipment;
- the purchase of international scientific literature and bibliographic
databases, and the operation of central specialised information centres for
research (hereinafter: CSITC);
- publishing activities, comprising the following:
- the publication of domestic scientific and popular scientific
periodicals;
- the publication of scientific monographs;
- activities related to promoting and linking science, comprising the
following:
- promotional activities;
- scientific meetings.
(5) The Rules also lay down the reporting obligations of the recipients of
funds from the national budget.
(6) The Rules lay down the operation and organisation of expert bodies as
regards their role as advisory bodies to the Scientific Council of the Agency
(hereinafter: the SCA), the conditions for their appointment and the reasons for
the dismissal of members of expert bodies, as well as the procedure for
preventing a conflict of interest regarding the members of the SCA and its
expert bodies (standing and temporary expert bodies), members of committees for
the assessment of applications for cofinancing the subject of research, and
reviewers (hereinafter: persons who may be subject to a conflict of interest).
Article 2
(Other public calls)
Any public call made by the Public Research Agency of the Republic of
Slovenia (hereinafter: the Agency) not referred to herein or in the Rules on
targeted research programmes shall be implemented in accordance with the
procedures laid down herein (Sections 1-6), whereas the indicators and
yardsticks shall be specified in the call documents.
Article 3
(Purpose of the Rules)
The purpose of these Rules is to ensure transparent procedures for the
selection and (co)financing of the activities referred to in Article 1 hereof,
in accordance with the internationally established principles for implementing
such procedures and with a focus on the Agency’s assessment procedures being
based on external evaluators or reviewers to the maximum extent possible.
Article 4
(General definitions)
(1) A research programme entails a comprehensive area of research work that
can be expected to be relevant and usable over a long period of time and which
is of such importance to the Republic of Slovenia that it is in the national
interest as defined in the Research and Innovation Strategy (hereinafter: the
Research Strategy).
(2) A basic research project (hereinafter: basic project) is original
experimental or theoretical research aimed at gaining new knowledge of the basis
of phenomena and perceptible facts.
(3) An applied research project (hereinafter: applied project) is original
research carried out in order to gain new knowledge and is directed primarily
towards a practical goal or purpose. An applied project is not industrial
research or an experimental development project.
(4) A postdoctoral research project (hereinafter: postdoctoral project) is a
basic or applied project carried out by a single postdoctoral researcher.
(5) A postdoctoral researcher is a researcher who has completed his or her
first doctoral dissertation no more than three years ago.
(6) A bilateral project is a collaborative scientific activity between two
countries that is carried out on the basis of international agreements,
programmes, memorandums and protocols between the Republic of Slovenia and third
countries (hereinafter: international agreement), and that primarily refers to
international exchanges of researchers. The purpose of a bilateral project is
supplementation and international expansion of research activities and is,
therefore, not considered an independent research project.
(7) A bilateral research project is a collaborative scientific project
between two countries that is carried out on the basis of an international
agreement and that, in addition to exchanges of researchers, also includes
research.
(8) A mobility research project is original research carried out over one or
two years of being hosted by a foreign research organisation where such period
of hosting lasts more than half of the project period.
(9) An infrastructural programme entails the maintenance of infrastructure as
support for research in a public research organisation (hereinafter: PRO) or a
research organisation with a concession (hereinafter: CRO) in the form of
instrumental support, support for scientific literature collections, the
popularisation of science and support for research programmes containing
elements of an instrumental centre or scientific literature collection.
(10) A scientific meeting is a meeting aimed at the exchange and verification
of findings and knowledge resulting from scientists own research work. A
scientific meeting is also a meeting aimed at applying and technologically
developing basic scientific findings.
(11) An international scientific meeting is a meeting that takes place in
Slovene (as the first language) and at least one world language (the second
language), has an international programme committee and where at least a third
of the active participants presenting papers and lectures by invitation are from
abroad.
(12) Applicants are the research organisations (hereinafter: the ROs) listed
in the database of implementers of research and development (hereinafter: the
Register of ROs), private researchers and other eligible applicants, legal
entities or natural persons that operate in the field of research or implement
activities related to research and comply with the conditions of these rules. If
several research implementers participate in the research application, the
applicant shall be the home RO.
(13) A public call(hereinafter: call) is the procedure for granting funding
that is implemented by the Agency if possible applicants to public calls are not
known, whereas a public invitation(hereinafter: invitation) is the procedure for
granting funding that is implemented by the Agency if the applicants are known.
(14) A home RO is the RO that submits an application for a research programme
or project (hereinafter: project), is listed first on the application form and
employs the leader of the research programme or project upon signing the
contract on implementation and (co)financing.
(15) A group of researchers is a programme group, project group or any other
group of researchers that an applicant states in an application to a call or
invitation.
(16) A criterion is a general element of assessment used in application
assessment. The criteria used in individual calls are determined herein. A set
of indicators is determined for each criterion.
(17) An indicator is an element of assessment within the framework of
individual criteria used in application assessment. A set of yardsticks is
determined for each indicator.
(18) A yardstick is an element of assessment within the framework of
individual indicators used in application assessment.
(19) Research infrastructure entails the contents laid down in the fourth
paragraph of Article 1 hereof and are financed by the Agency from the national
budget (hereinafter: the Agency finances) and are important as support for
research.
(20) Research equipment is hardware or software necessary for implementing
research according to the standards of the field.
(21) The limit value determines the number of points that represents the
maximum score. It is used in certain quantitative scores in order to convert
values of quantitative scores (e.g. the number of points in the information
system on research in the Republic of Slovenia (hereinafter: SICRIS) and the
number of citations) into points used in scoring.
(22) The minimum score is the minimum number of points required for the
application to be eligible for (co)financing. The minimum score can be set as an
entry condition, for individual criteria or the overall score.
(23) The assessment methodology that the SCA adopts for individual assessment
procedures laid down herein in accordance with the Decision on Establishing the
Public Research Agency determines the limit value, minimum scores, yardsticks
with the pertaining number of points, and, if necessary, a more detailed
assessment procedure.
(24) An operations act is a general act of the Agency adopted by the Director
of the Agency for internal use that regulates issues that are important for the
work and operation of the Agency (hereinafter: Rules of the Agency).
(25) A research field is a field stated by an applicant as the primary
research field in accordance with the list of research fields. The list of
research fields is an integral part of the methodology and is enclosed as an
appendix therewith.
(26) Full-time employment is determined in terms of a full time equivalent
(hereinafter: FTE) and encompasses 1,700 effective hours of research work
annually.
Article 5
(Definitions for quantitative evaluation of research)
(1) SICRIS is the information system for research activities in the Republic
of Slovenia (SI is the abbreviation for the Republic of Slovenia and CRIS is an
acronym for the established English expression Current Research Information
System) developed and maintained by the Information Science Institute
(hereinafter: the ISI) and the Agency. SICRIS includes databases on ROs,
research groups, researchers, research programmes and projects, and quantitative
aspects of research, which are used exclusively in the assessment of entry
conditions for participation in calls and invitations, except in cases
specifically laid down herein. SICRIS data is linked to the COBISS.SI system.
(2) COBISS.SI is a bibliographic information system and represents the
organisational model for linking libraries into a national library IT system
with common cataloguing, a common bibliographic catalogue database (COBIB) and
the local databases of the participating libraries, the database on libraries
(COLIB), the normative database (CONOR), etc. COBISS.SI, inter alia,
also includes a centralised and standardised system of bibliographies of
Slovenian researchers.
(3) In the SICRIS system, scientific success is expressed quantitatively by
attributing points to scientific works (scientific papers, scientific monographs
and other documented achievements, independent scientific papers, chapters in
monographs and scientific contributions at conferences published in reviewed
collections of scientific contributions). The set of quantitative bibliographic
yardsticks of scientific and professional success is determined in Appendix 1
attached hereto and is an integral part hereof.
(4) In the SICRIS system, professional success is expressed quantitatively by
attributing points to professional works (papers, monographs and other
comprehensive work, events and secondary authorship). The set of quantitative
bibliographic yardsticks of professional success is determined in Appendix 1
hereof.
(5) The points taken into account in the SICRIS system are the sum of the
points calculated for scientific and professional success in accordance
herewith.
(6) The number of pure citations (hereinafter: CI) is the number of citations
without self-citations. A CI is a citation that does not involve a self-citation
by any of the authors. CIs are found in the common bibliographic database
COBIB.SI and are linked to records in the Web of Science (hereinafter: WoS) or
Scopus databases, whereby the identification numbers of authors in the CONOR.SI
normative database of personal names are taken into account.
(7) The typology of documents or part thereof for keeping bibliographies in
the COBISS.SI system (the COBISS Typology) is a document used as a basis for the
classification of bibliographic units of researchers in the COBISS.SI system and
published on the ISI website.
Article 6
(Conditions for initiating the procedure for
(co)financing)
The Agency may initiate the procedure for granting funds if:
- the required amount of funds is provided for in the adopted action plan
and budget of the Agency; and
- other conditions for assuming liabilities laid down by legislation and
secondary legislation are complied with.
Article 7
(Official)
The Director of the Agency (hereinafter: the Director) shall authorise a
civil servant competent for individual fields at the Agency (hereinafter: the
Official) to coordinate and organise the assessment procedure and the procedure
for selecting applications for the (co)financing of research or the procedure
for selecting candidates who will receive funding.
Article 8
(Terms and conditions)
(1) The terms and conditions for granting funds shall be determined herein
and explained in a call or invitation.
(2) Funds are granted in accordance herewith on the basis of an implemented
call or invitation.
(3) A researcher applying within the framework of an applicant to a call or
invitation as the leader of a research or infrastructure programme or project, a
mentor, a head of a scientific meeting or leader of a group of researchers of
the applicant, or as the host of an established researcher from abroad
(hereinafter: leader of research), may only apply with one proposal for the
(co)financing of research (hereinafter: application) for individual calls or
invitations.
2.(CO)FINANCING PROCEDURE
2.1. Calls and invitations
Article 9
(Preparing draft calls and invitations)
(1) When preparing a draft call or invitation, the Research Strategy, any
guidelines of the competent ministry and available funds shall be taken into
account. The Director may establish a committee to prepare the draft call or
invitation.
(2) The SCA shall discuss the draft call or invitation and propose any
amendments or supplements thereto.
Article 10
(Announcing calls and invitations)
The Agency shall announce the plan for all calls and invitations for the
current year on its website. The announcement shall include the estimated
publication date (month and year), the name of the call or invitation, the legal
basis for the publication of the call or invitation, the deadline for submitting
applications, the deadline for informing applicants of results, the method of
submitting applications (in electronic or printed form or both) and contact
persons.
Article 11
(Publication of calls and invitations)
(1) The decision to publish a call or invitation shall be adopted by the
Director. Calls shall be published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of
Slovenia and on the Agency’s website. Invitations for applicants may be
published only on the Agency's website.
(2) When publishing calls and invitations, the Agency shall publish on its
website the schedule of the call or invitation, which shall also include an
up-to-date presentation of the phases of the call or invitation.
Article 12
(Contents of the publication of calls and invitations)
(1) The publication of a call or invitation shall contain in particular:
- the title and registered office of the Agency;
- the legal basis for implementing the call or invitation, specifying also
the application assessment methodology for the (co)financing of research;
- the subject matter of the call or invitation;
- the conditions for applying to the call or invitation and the assessment
criteria;
- the approximate amount of funds available for the subject matter of the
call or invitation;
- the period in which the allocated funds shall be spent;
- the call or invitation documents specifying the type of evidence
required for compliance with the conditions;
- the method, form and deadline for submitting applications;
- the location, date and time of opening applications;
- the deadline by which applicants will be informed of the results of the
call or invitation;
- the location and time at which any interested party can obtain the call
or invitation documents and the website where the call or invitation
documents are available.
(2) In calls or invitations, the Agency may, in addition to the information
specified in the preceding paragraph hereof, also publish other information
regarding the type of subject matter of the call or invitation if necessary.
Article 13
(Call and invitation documents)
(1) In call and invitation documents, the Agency shall specify all the
conditions the applicant must comply with in order to be included in the
selection for funding or candidate selection and all the data that is to be
included in the application to render it formally complete. The call and
invitation documents shall contain the methodology for assessing the application
for the (co)financing of research, the secondary regulations of the Agency, the
prescribed application form, a sample contract and, if necessary, other forms
and various Rules of the Agency.
(2) The Agency shall make call and invitation documents available to
applicants on its website.
(3) An applicant shall apply to a call or invitation by submitting an
application and the required evidence. In the assessment procedure, the Agency
shall disregard any additional documents enclosed with the application documents
by applicants on their own initiative.
Article 14
(Application)
Data on the subject matter of the call or invitation to be included in the
application are determined herein in the section on the special characteristics
of individual call sand invitations.
Article 15
(Form of applications)
(1) Applications to a call or invitation shall be submitted in electronic
form with a qualified digital certificate in the electronic application system.
An applicant may on justified grounds submit an application in printed form,
whereby the printed version shall be the same as the non-digitally signed
electronic version. In the case of calls or invitations where an electronic
application system with a qualified digital signature is not in place, the
application shall be in printed form. If the case of a printed application, it
may be specified in the call or invitation that an electronic application shall
also be submitted to the specified e-mail address. The application form shall be
submitted in Slovene and English or solely in Slovene if so required by the call
or invitation.
(2) The application shall be signed by the persons specified in the call or
invitation.
(3) If an application to a call or invitation is submitted directly at the
head office, the head office shall acknowledge the receipt of an application in
printed form with a special receipt of application form and issue such to the
applicant.
Article 16
(Deadline for submitting applications)
(1) Applications shall be submitted by the deadline determined in the
publication of the call or invitation.
(2) A printed application shall be submitted in a closed envelope. The words
“Do not open – Application”, the name of the call or invitation to which the
application is being submitted, and the title and address of the applicant shall
be written on the envelope.
2.2. Conducting the procedure for opening applications
Article 17
(Committee for opening applications)
(1) The procedure for opening call and invitation applications shall be
handled by the committee for opening applications (hereinafter: the committee),
which is to be appointed by a written resolution of the Director.
(2) The Director shall determine the number of the committee members. The
committee shall consist of the chair and at least two members. The chair and at
least half of the committee members shall be employees of the Agency.
Article 18
(Opening of applications)
(1) Received applications shall be opened by the deadline set in the call or
invitation, whereas such deadline shall not exceed eight days from the expiry of
the deadline for submitting applications.
(2) As a general rule, applications shall be opened publicly. When the public
opening of invitations is envisaged, the opening procedure shall be carried out
within three working days of the deadline for submitting applications at the
latest. The committee may opt for non-public opening when the number of
applications is great.
(3) At a meeting convened by the chair, the committee shall only open
envelopes that are correctly marked and submitted on time, and record evidence
of applications sent too late or incorrectly marked. In the case of electronic
applications, the opening shall constitute recording a list of applications
received in the electronic application system. Any applications that are not
submitted on time or that are incorrectly marked shall be returned unopened to
the applicant with a letter, except when it is not possible to identify the
applicant by reading the envelope, in which case the application shall be
opened. Evidence of applications submitted late or incorrectly marked shall form
an integral part of the documentary material. In the case of electronically
received applications, the committee shall record evidence of the late
submission of applications.
Article 19
(Minutes of the committee)
(1) The committee shall keep minutes on the opening of applications, which
shall contain in particular:
- the location and time of the opening and formal examination of
applications;
- the subject matter of the call or invitation;
- the names of the committee members present;
- the names of the applicants submitting applications;
- the findings on timely or untimely applications and correctly or
incorrectly marked envelopes; and
- the findings on the formal completeness of applications.
(2) The minutes shall be signed by the chair and members of the committee. If
the opening of applications is public, the list of applicants’ representatives
present at the opening shall be enclosed with the minutes.
Article 20
(Incomplete documents – supplementing applications)
(1) Within eight working days of the completion of the opening of
applications, the committee shall in writing call upon the applicants with
formally incomplete applications to supplement them within the set deadline. The
deadline for supplementation shall not exceed eight working days from the
receipt of the committee's call. Applications shall be formally incomplete in
the case of minor deviations from the requirements of the call or invitation
documents that do not affect the contents of the application and the assessment
and classification of individual applications in accordance with the criteria
for the selection of applications.
(2) Incomplete applications not supplemented by the applicant within the
deadline referred to in the preceding paragraph hereof shall be rejected by a
decision of the Director or of a person authorised by the Director. An objection
against the decision may be submitted within 15 days of service. The applicant
shall clearly state in the objection the reasons for submitting it. An objection
may be submitted only due to a violation of the selection procedure or an
evident mistake.
(3) The objections committee shall be appointed by a resolution in writing
issued by the Director. The Director shall determine the number of members of
the objections committee. The objections committee shall consist of the chair
and at least two members. The chair and at least half of the committee members
shall be employees of the Agency.
(4) The objections committee shall prepare the draft decision on the
objection. The Director shall forward the draft decision on the objection to the
management board for adoption.
(5) The management board shall decide on the objection within 30 days of
receipt of the objection. The management board shall substantiate its decision.
(6) An appeal against the decision of the management board may not be lodged,
whereas an administrative dispute is possible.
Article 21
(Administrative verification of compliance with the
conditions)
(1) For each formally complete application, the Agency shall verify if the
applicant is eligible and if all the call or invitation conditions have been
complied with.
(2) The application of an ineligible applicant or an application that does
not comply with all of the call or invitation conditions shall be rejected by a
decision of the Director or by a decision of a person authorised by the
Director. An objection against the decision may be submitted within 15 days of
service. The applicant shall clearly state in the objection the reasons for
submitting it. An objection may be submitted only due to a violation of the
selection procedure or an evident mistake.
(3) The objections committee shall be appointed by a resolution in writing
issued by the Director. The Director shall determine the number of members of
the objections committee. The objections committee shall consist of the chair
and at least two members. The chair and at least half of the committee members
shall be employees of the Agency.
(4) The objections committee shall prepare the draft decision on the
objection. The Director shall forward the draft decision on the objection to the
management board for adoption.
(5) The management board shall decide on the objection within 30 days of
receipt of the objection. The management board shall substantiate its decision.
(6) An appeal against the decision of the management board may not be lodged,
whereas an administrative dispute is possible.
Article 22
(Considering applications)
In the application selection procedure, applications that comply with the
conditions determined in the call and call documents or in the invitation and
invitation documents shall be considered. In the case of unclear contents, the
Agency may call upon an applicant to further clarify or supplement the contents.
Article 23
(Materials for internal use)
The documents and data contained in applications shall be used as materials
for internal use during the selection period for (co)financing research.
2.3. Decision-making acts in the assessment procedure
Article 24
(Reviewers and the draft priority list)
(1) Applications shall be assessed by domestic reviewers, foreign reviewers,
panels, temporary expert bodies (hereinafter: expert bodies) or expert
committees.
(2) When applications are assessed by an expert committee, the Director shall
appoint its chair and members. The Director shall determine the number of
members of the committee. The committee shall consist of the chair and at least
two members. The chair and at least half of the committee members shall be
employees of the Agency. An expert committee shall assess applications in the
cases determined herein.
(3) Reviewers shall be appointed by the expert body. If during the assessment
procedure individual reviewers decline to cooperate or an insufficient number of
reviewers is found in a research field given the contents of the applications,
and no new reviewers can be appointed from the list of reviewers previously
annually approved by the SCA, the expert body may appoint additional reviewers
for implementing the assessment procedure. In the application, the applicant may
specify the reviewers whom he or she does not want to assess his or her
application.
(4) The task of reviewers shall be to prepare an assessment of individual
applications submitted to the call or invitation and to cooperate in preparing a
consolidated assessment in accordance with the Rules, the methodology and the
call.
(5) The results of work of the expert body, expert committee or panel in the
framework of the assessment procedure shall be the draft priority list of
applications considered in the assessment procedure, including a proposal for
the amount of funds to be allocated (hereinafter: the Draft Applications
Priority List), unless specified otherwise herein.
Article 25
(Decision on selection)
(1) The SCA shall discuss the Draft Applications Priority List and based
thereon adopt by a decision the draft decision on the selection of applications
for the (co)financing of research with the Draft Applications Priority List
(hereinafter: the Draft Decision of the SCA on the Selection of Applications)
unless specified otherwise herein.
(2) By its Draft Decision on the Selection of Applications, the SCA may
partly change the Draft Applications Priority List, but not more than in 5% of
applications among all the applications selected, whereby it shall act in
accordance with the provisions of the call or invitation documents and with
regard to the amount of the available budgetary funds. If the considered
applications include applications by members of the SCA or Agency’s management
board, no changes with regard to applications by members of the SCA or Agency’s
management board shall be made. The order in the Draft Applications Priority
List adopted by the SCA after the change is made shall be such that the approved
applications are sorted by score. All changes shall be substantiated.
(3) Due to a possible conflict of interest referred to in Article 229 hereof,
the voting may be carried out by sorting the applications voted on into groups
according to individual scientific disciplines.
(4) Based on the Draft Decision of the SCA on the Selection of Applications,
the Director shall adopt a substantiated decision on the selection of
applications for the (co)financing of research with the application selection
list (hereinafter: the Decision of the Director on the Selection of
Applications).
Article 26
(Notice of selection)
(1) Based on the Decision of the Director on the Selection of Applications,
the Agency shall issue individual notices on the results of the application
selection to the applicants (hereinafter: the Notice).
(2) The Notice shall contain data on the application and the amount of
(co)financing if the application was selected for (co)financing, unless
specified otherwise herein.
(3) In the explanation of the Notice, data on the overall number of points
and a separate number of points calculated according to the individual
assessment elements shall be stated and the decision shall be substantiated. A
notice on the available legal remedy shall also be stated in the Notice.
Article 27
(Publication of application selection results)
(1) The Agency shall publish on its website the adopted list of selected and
unselected applications at the latest within five days of sending the Notices.
The Agency shall publish on its website the list of selected and unselected
applications for the financing of research programmes implemented by the CRO or
PRO and CRO at the latest within five days of the finality of the decision of
the minister responsible for science.
(2) The list referred to in the preceding paragraph hereof shall include
results presented by assessment groups (by scientific discipline or field,
project type, etc.) and by overall number of points, unless specified otherwise
herein.
(3) The applications selected for the (co)financing of research shall be
stated in the list together with the researchers and the leaders of research.
(4) The applications not selected for the (co)financing of research shall be
stated in the list only with their consecutive numbers so that it is not
possible to establish the identities of individual applications.
2.4. Legal remedies
Article 28
(Objection following the assessment procedure)
(1) An applicant may submit an objection within 15 days of receiving the
Notice. The objection shall clearly state the reasons for submitting it. The
conditions, criteria and yardsticks for assessing applications may not be the
subject of an objection. An objection may not be made with regard to scientific
evaluation (assessment) of the reviewer. The subject of an objection may only be
a violation of the selection procedure or an evident mistake. The score may
indirectly be the subject of an objection only if in the objection the applicant
refers to an actual violation of the selection procedure or an evident mistake.
(2) A submitted objection shall not delay the signing of contracts with the
selected applicants.
(3) During the assessment procedure the applicant has the right to be
informed of the written assessment of his or her proposal, whereby information
on reviewers shall be omitted.
Article 29
(Decision on an objection)
(1) The objections committee shall be appointed by a resolution in writing
issued by the Director. The Director shall determine the number of members of
the objections committee. The objections committee shall consist of the chair
and at least two members. The chair and at least half of the committee members
shall be employees of the Agency.
(2) The objections committee shall prepare the draft decision on the
objection. The Director shall forward the draft decision on the objection to the
Agency's management board for adoption.
(3) The Agency's management board shall decide on the objection within
30 days of receiving the objection and substantiate its decision.
(4) An appeal against the decision of the Agency's management board may not
be lodged, whereas an administrative dispute is possible.
Article 30
(Publication of final selection results)
(1) The Agency shall publish on its website the list of finally selected and
unselected applications within five days of the adoption of the decision on
objections by the management board.
(2) The list referred to in the preceding paragraph hereof shall include
results presented by assessment groups (by scientific discipline or field,
project type, etc.) and by overall number of points, and the granted funds shall
also be stated.
(3) The applications finally selected for the (co)financing of research shall
be stated in the list together with the applicants and the leaders of research.
(4) The unselected applications for the (co)financing of research shall be
stated in the list only with their consecutive numbers so that it is not
possible to establish the identities of individual applications.
Article 31
(Request for the verification of a decision in the
implementation procedure)
With regard to the decision of the Director or a person authorised by the
Director that regulates the rights and obligations of individuals or legal
entities in the procedure for implementing research selected for (co)financing,
a request for the verification of a decision may be made and must be submitted
within eight days of the service of the decision. A committee appointed by the
Director and consisting of at least three members shall decide on a request for
the verification of a decision. The decision of the committee shall be final.
3. ASSESSING APPLICATIONS
Article 32
(Assessment elements)
(1) The following elements shall be used to assess applications to calls and
invitations: criteria, indicators and yardsticks.
(2) A number of indicators may apply for each criterion. One or several
yardsticks may be applied for the evaluation of indicators. Individual
indicators or yardsticks are represented by a quantitative assessment or a
reviewer's assessment. In their assessment, the reviewers may also provide a
short descriptive assessment or comment presented according to individual
assessment elements.
(3) The maximum number of points granted to an application for individual
criteria and indicator set is determined herein. The maximum number of points
granted to an application for individual yardsticks is specified in the
methodology.
Article 33
(Criteria and the general assessment thereof)
(1) The following criteria shall apply to the assessment of a researcher or
group of researchers:
- the scientific excellence of the researchers;
- the relevance of the achievements of the researchers; and
- the research ability and vitality of the group of researchers.
(2) The following criteria shall apply to the assessment of the contents of
applications:
- scientific, technological or innovation excellence;
- the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the expected results of the research; and
- the quality and efficiency of implementation and management.
(3) The following criteria shall apply to the assessment of the impacts of
supporting activities:
- the quality of the provided support; and
- the relevance of the support.
(4) The following criteria shall apply to the assessment of the contents of
applications for the (co)financing of supporting activities:
- the quality of the application of the supporting activities;
- the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the expected results of the research; and
- the quality and efficiency of implementation and management.
(5) With regard to criteria evaluated with a score from 0 to 5, the scores
shall mean the following unless specified otherwise herein:
- 0 (fail): the application does not comply with the criterion at all or
it is not possible to determine the score due to insufficient information;
- 1 (fail): the application does not comply with the criterion or contains
serious weaknesses;
- 2 (insufficient): the application complies with the criterion but
contains serious weaknesses;
- 3 (good): the application complies with the criterion but contains
considerable weaknesses;
- 4 (very good): the application largely complies with the criterion but
contains minor weaknesses;
- 5 (excellent): the application fully complies with the criterion and any
weaknesses are insignificant.
(6) The accuracy of the score is specified according to the type of call or
invitation in the methodology.
Article 34
(Comprehensive indicator set)
A comprehensive indicator set for the individual criteria referred to in
Article 33 hereof is specified in Appendix 2 attached hereto and is an integral
part hereof.
Article 35
(Quantitative scores)
(1) Quantitative scores measure the following indicators referred to in
Appendix 2 hereof:
- The quality of published work (A1 score, including A", A' and A½ scores
for separate consideration of above-average scientific success)
(indicator 1.1.);
- impact factor: the number of CIs (indicator 1.2.);
- funding from other sources (A3 score) (indicator 2.1.).
(2) The evaluation of bibliographic yardsticks of scientific and professional
success according to the Agency’s criteria shall be carried out in the SICRIS
system, which contains data on researchers or groups of researchers that are
calculated and extracted in accordance with the provisions hereof.
Article 36
(A1 score)
(1) The A1 quantitative score shall be determined on the basis of the number
of points taken into account in the SICRIS system for published research work in
the last five-year period and the period until the conclusion of the call or
invitation in the current year, and on the basis of A", A' and A½ points. The
number of points taken into account in the SICRIS system shall be determined on
the basis of yardsticks for quantitative evaluation of scientific and
professional success referred to in Appendix 1 hereof and shall be calculated
for all scientific disciplines by adding the number of points for professional
success to the number of points for scientific success, but only to the extent
that their share does not exceed 15% of the overall number of points taken into
account. If a researcher is absent for a minimum of three months due to
parental, sick or injury leave or other types of absence provided for in the
regulations on health insurance or due to employment outside research, the
calculation of the A1 score for purposes of verifying the conditions for
position of leader of research shall take into account the relevant extended
period. The calculation of the 2.E points (patents, new varieties) shall take
into account the last ten-year period. The method of calculation of the A1 score
is determined in the methodology.
(2) The bibliographic yardsticks for quantitative evaluation of scientific
and professional success shall be specified in Appendix 1 hereof.
(3) Scientific and professional work (bibliographic units) shall be
catalogued in the COBISS.SI system. The CSITC shall verify if the classification
of bibliographic units is appropriate.
(4) Scientific and professional work shall be evaluated with points. The
subject of an evaluation shall be scientific success and the successful transfer
and application of knowledge (hereinafter: professional success). The number of
points shall be divided by the number of authors of a paper if the number is
equal to or less than ten. If there are more than ten authors, the points shall
be divided by the expression 10*log10N where N is the number of authors
(e.g. 10*log10N has the value of 10 in the case of ten authors, 20 in the case
of a hundred authors, and 30 in the case of a thousand authors). The points for
professional success shall not be used independently but only to supplement the
scoring of scientific success. When, in addition to the authors, members of the
project or programme group (i.e. study group) are also listed in a published
work, 80% of the points shall be allocated to the authors of the published work,
whereas 20% of the points shall be allocated to the project or programme group
members.
Article 37
(Number of pure citations)
The number of pure citations shall take into account the last ten-year period
and the period until the conclusion of the call or invitation in the current
year (works cited in these periods may also have been published earlier). The
citations in the SICRIS system are from the WoS or Scopus databases, where
citations from scientific papers with a full bibliographic record are taken into
account. Due to the difference in the number of citations from the WoS and
Scopus databases, the higher number of CIs shall be taken into account.
Article 38
(A3 score –normalisation factors)
(1) The A3 quantitative score shall be determined with regard to research
funds for the last five-year period that the researcher receives from contract
partners. Agency funds from the national budget shall not be taken into account.
In individual calls or invitations, funds in their nominal value may be taken
into account according to their source.
(2) The structure of the A3 score and normalisation factors the funds are
multiplied by according to their source shall be:
- factor 1.5: funds from projects for the economy– ECON;
- factor 1: funds from EU projects and other international projects – INT;
- factor 0.75: funds acquired from the national budget, municipal budgets,
or other national public sources – NAT;
- factor 0.5: funds – OTHER/ECON;
- factor 0.5: funds – OTHER/OTHER.
EU cohesion policy funds acquired in the framework of the European Regional
Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) and the corresponding
national participation shall be taken into account, with the exception of funds
received for the purchase of equipment and construction or the reconstruction of
real estate (investment funds). Funds acquired in the framework of the Cohesion
Fund shall not be taken into account.
(3) ECON funds shall be funds for a quality research connection of a
group/individual with a domestic or foreign company, which is demonstrated, for
example, by:
- the development or introduction of new products, technologies, services
or concepts with innovation potential in domestic or foreign companies;
- the submission of international patent applications and the acquisition
of patents;
- the publication of scientific work.
(4) ECON funds shall also be funds for royalties and other funds acquired
from the sale of technology or patents, samples or a specialised, one-of-a-kind
product/system and technological demonstrations.
(5) OTHER/ECON funds and OTHER/OTHER funds shall be funds acquired from less
challenging cooperation with the commercial and non-commercial sectors and funds
for minor services in research and innovation, such as:
- minor services carried out with research or other equipment, such as:
measurements, calibrations, standard analyses of substances, standard
analyses of sample properties, standard treatment of samples, etc.;
- studies and analyses that are not justifiably related to research or
development, judicial and expert opinions, arbitration opinions, course
implementation, etc.;
- the manufacture of devices and programme packages that do not constitute
an original solution and do not contain a research contribution or do not
contribute to developing a new technology;
- design, unless it involves new approaches or solutions that can be
demonstrated in patents or published scientific works.
(6) For researchers in full-time employment (100%) at a company, ECON funds
and OTHER/ECON funds shall be taken into account up to the amount necessary to
comply with the condition of the A3 score for the management of an applied
project.
Article 39
(A3 score– calculation)
(1) The A3 score shall be the sum of all acquired realised funds, with the
exception of Agency funds and taking into account the factors determined in
Article 38 hereof. The overall score may add up to ten points, in which case
acquired assets in the amount of 15 FTE of the C-programme price category must
be demonstrated.
(2) The A3 score shall be entered in the SICRIS system. In the SICRIS system,
in addition to the A3 score specified according to the source, the share of all
acquired funds sorted by individual sources, and without taking into account the
factors and limit value, shall be presented and expressed as a percentage.
(3) The funds are attributed to the project leader or the researcher who is
responsible for implementing the research. The funds must be recorded in the
RO’s account. The researcher must be employed at the RO, in the framework of
which he or she claims funds for calculating the A3 score, in the year for which
he or she claims the funds for the A3 score. The employment relationship must be
recorded in the Register of ROs. With regard to researchers with less than 80%
full-time employment in research, the A3 score shall take into account an
additional normalisation factor: total funds shall be multiplied by a factor of
1.5, which accounts for teaching and clinical practice. The calculation shall
take into account the average percentage of employment at the annual level.
(4) For funds taken into account in the A3 score, the leader of a programme
group may, upon the proposal of the leader of a project group, specify the share
(in %) of the participating members of the programme group for individual
projects, which reflects their role in the acquisition of these funds. The share
of project group members for individual projects shall be specified once for the
entire duration of the project.
(5) The Agency shall acquire data for calculating the A3 score directly from
the RO for researchers who are involved in the Agency’s assessment procedures:
- for researchers who were members of research programmes in the last
completed calendar year, the Agency shall acquire data directly from the RO
on the basis of an annual invitation;
- for researchers who are not research programme members and who apply as
leaders of research to an Agency call or invitation that takes into account
the A3 score, the applicant shall submit to the Agency data for the call or
invitation in accordance with the provisions of the individual call or
invitation.
The Agency shall publish data on the A3 score as determined in the second
paragraph of this Article.
(6) In individual calls or invitations, the period of the last calculated
A3 score on the date of the publication of the call or invitation shall be taken
into account.
(7) The RO shall enter the data on funds in the form prescribed by the
Agency, whereby it shall state data on the document (contract, order form) and
partner (tax number, name) for every financially evaluated parameter. The RO
shall fill out the form in accordance with the Rules of the Agency. The RO shall
guarantee the accuracy of the data in the form by means of the signature of the
competent persons.
Article 40
(Maximum number of points in a score and the
acquisition of data)
(1) The maximum number of points in a quantitative score is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: The number of points for individual quantitative scores.
Type of quantitative score |
Source |
Max. number of points |
A1 |
SICRIS* |
7 |
A3 |
Agency** |
10 |
* Extracted from the COBISS.SI system.
** Calculated on the basis of data on applicants received in accordance
herewith.
(2) Quantitative scores for individual assessment elements and scientific
disciplines shall be obtained by the Agency. For the calculation of quantitative
scores, the Agency shall use the data entered in the SICRIS system on the date
of expiry of the deadline for submitting applications to the call or invitation,
unless specified otherwise in these Rules or in a call or invitation.
(3) Quantitative data shall be used individually for a five-year or ten-year
period in the case of evidencing citations, or they may also be used for a
one-year period if a group of researchers is assessed. The scoring of scientific
success shall take into account the differences in the manner of publication
between scientific disciplines. The nature of publishing scientific works, which
is closely linked to professional work in many aspects, shall also be taken into
account.
(4) Unless specified otherwise in the call or invitation, the Agency shall
assess researchers with regard to their scientific and research fields stated by
the applicant in the application.
Article 41
(A1 and A3 limit values)
(1) The score for the A1 and A3 indicators is determined below the limit
value in a linear manner between 0 and 7 or 10. The limit values are defined in
the methodology. The limit value for A1 is defined for each scientific
discipline separately.
(2) Researchers whose A1 score exceeds the limit value shall receive a
score of 7 and researchers whose A3 score exceeds the limit value shall receive
a score of 10.
(3) The limit values for A1 and A3 have been defined in such a manner that
they are close to the highest values of Slovenian researchers.
Article 42
(Above-average scientific success)
(1) The A'' quantitative score (exceptional achievements in the five-year
assessment period) shall be equal to the SICRIS points, which are based on the
following assessment elements specified in Appendix 1 hereof:
- a patent (European, American or Japanese), or new variety (in Appendix 1
hereof in the framework of the 2.E yardstick);
- the publication of a scientific monograph by a publishing house on the
Agency’s list (in the framework of the 2.A yardstick);
- a paper in the first or second journal in the JCR database from the
SCI-Expanded categories (in the framework of the 1.A1 yardstick);
- a paper in a journal with an impact factor greater than eight in the JCR
database (in the framework of the 1.A1 yardstick);
- a paper in a journal with an impact factor three times greater than the
lower limit of the highest 25% of journals in the JCR database (from the
SCI-Expanded categories) (approximately the highest 5%) (in the framework of
the 1.A1 yardstick) – papers in journals with an impact factor of less than
three are not taken into account;
- a paper in a journal with an impact factor 1.5-times greater than the
lower limit of the highest 25% of journals in the JCR database (from the
SSCI categories) (approximately the highest 10%) (in the framework of the
1.A1 yardstick);
- a paper in the highest 25% of journals in the SNIP database from the
Scopus (d) categories (in the framework of the 1.A1 yardstick);
- a paper in the highest 25% of journals in the SNIP database from the
Scopus (h) categories (in the framework of the 1.A1 yardstick).
(2) The A' quantitative score(high-quality achievements in the five-year
assessment period) shall be equal to the SICRIS points, which are based on the
following assessment elements:
- a patent (European, American or Japanese), or new variety (in the
framework of the 2.E yardstick);
- a paper in the highest 25% of journals in the JCR database from the
SCI-Expanded categories (in the framework of the 1.A1 yardstick);
- a paper in the highest 50% of journals in the JCR database from the SSCI
categories (in the framework of the 1.A1 and 1.A2 yardsticks);
- a paper in the highest 75% of journals in the SNIP database from the
Scopus (d) or Scopus (h) categories (in the framework of the 1.A1, 1.A2 and
1.A3 yardsticks);
- a paper in A&HCI (in the framework of the 1.B yardstick);
- the publication of a scientific monograph or a scientific chapter or
contribution in a scientific monograph by a publishing house on the Agency’s
list; a scientific monograph published by a domestic or foreign publishing
house when the scientific monograph pertains to the field of arts or the
social sciences (according to the UDC classification) and evaluation for the
field of arts or the social sciences is carried out(in the framework of the
2.A and 3.A yardsticks);
- editor of a source publication related to scientific review (in the
framework of the 2.A yardstick).
(3) The A½ quantitative score (important achievements in the five-year
assessment period) shall be equal to the SICRIS points, which is based on the
following assessment elements:
- a patent or new variety (in the framework of the 2.E yardstick);
- a paper in the highest 50% of journals in the JCR database from the
SCI-Expanded or SSCI categories (in the framework of the 1.A1 and
1.A2 yardsticks);
- a paper in the highest 75% of journals in the SNIP database from the
Scopus (d) or Scopus (h) categories (in the framework of the 1.A1, 1.A2 and
1.A3 yardsticks);
- a paper in A&HCI (in the framework of the 1.B yardstick);
- publication of a scientific monograph or a scientific chapter or
contribution in a scientific monograph by a publishing house on the Agency’s
list; a scientific monograph or a scientific chapter or contribution in a
scientific monograph when the scientific monograph pertains to the field of
arts or the social sciences (according to the UDC classification) and
evaluation for the field of arts or the social sciences is carried out (in
the framework of the 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B yardsticks);
- editor of a source publication related to scientific review (in the
framework of the 2.A yardstick).
(4) The Agency shall specify the method of accounting for above-average
scientific success (A', A" and A½) in the framework of the methodology.
(5) The method of quantitative assessment (scoring) for A'', A' and A scores
is specified in Appendix 1 hereof.
(6) In the SCI-Expanded and SSCI collections the JCR database shall be used
with regard to the impact factor, whereas in the Scopus collection the SNIP
database shall be used. Scopus (d) represents the categories of the social
sciences in the SNIP database, whereas Scopus (h) represents the categories of
the arts.
Article 43
(Most important achievements)
(1) The applicant shall state at his or her own discretion up to five of the
most important achievements in the field of research for a project and from five
to ten of the most important achievements in the fields of economics and social
and cultural activities in the last ten years.
(2) For projects and research programmes (co)financed from the national
budget, the Agency shall publish in the SICRIS system the basic data on the
application, a summary of the application contents and its importance for the
development of science and the Republic of Slovenia as stated by the applicant
in the application.
(3) With regard to exceptional research achievements, the applicant may state
in the application any bibliographic units with a greater number of citations
that have an incomplete bibliographic record in the WoS.
Article 44
(Assessment by reviewers)
The method of assessing applications by reviewers is laid down in the
sections hereof that further specify individual types of applications.
2. CONTRACT
Article 45
(Concluding a contract)
In order to implement the subject matter of the call or invitation accepted
for (co)financing, the Agency shall conclude a contract on implementation and
(co)financing with the applicant. The contract shall be signed at the latest
within three months from the adoption of the decision of the Director referred
to in Article 25 hereof, unless specified otherwise herein.
Article 46
(Signing a contract)
(1) The Agency shall prepare the contract on the implementation and
(co)financing of research activities referred to in Article 1 hereof
(hereinafter: the research) and send it to the applicant (hereinafter: the Other
Party) for signing.
(2) Other Parties shall return signed contracts and enclose the completed
forms of contractual documents by the deadline set by the Agency.
Article 47
(Deficiencies in contractual documents)
(1) If the Official determines that any of the contractual documents must be
supplemented, he or she shall inform the Other Party of the deficiencies in the
contractual documents and call upon the Other Party to supplement them.
(2) If the Other Party fails to respond within the deadline for supplementing
the contractual documents, which shall not be less than 14 days from being
called upon to do so, it shall be deemed that the application for funding has
been withdrawn.
Article 48
(Contractual elements)
(1) Mandatory contractual elements shall include:
- the names or titles and addresses, and the identification, tax and bank
account numbers of the Agency and the Other Party;
- the purpose of the allocated funds;
- the amount of the allocated funds;
- the payment schedule regarding the allocated funds;
- the method of supervision over the intended expenditure of the funds,
for example:
- the Agency’s right to examine the intended expenditure of funds at any
time;
- progress reports and reports on the results of the expenditure of funds
in accordance herewith;
- the Agency’s obligation to monitor and supervise the implementation of
the contract and the intended expenditure of funds;
- a provision determining that in the event of the unintended expenditure
of funds, the Other Party shall reimburse the funds to the budget
inclusive of legal default interest;
- a provision that the Other Party shall explain and substantiate any
extension of the deadline for the expenditure of funds with regard to
theestimated payment schedule;
- a provision that the Other Party shall notify the Agency of any changes
occurring during the research activity, such as changes related to quality,
scope, schedule and changed circumstances, non-compliance with which shall
be considered as misuse of funds, as well as of any change of data, listed
in the Register of ROs and related to the research activity, and that the
Agency may temporarily suspend financing of the research activity due to the
default of obligations stipulated in this paragraph;
- a provision concerning intellectual property rights;
- any other matter arising from the secondary regulations of the Agency
with regard to the mandatory contents of the contract.
(2) In the contract, the Director shall designate an Agency employee to
monitor the implementation of the provisions of the contract.
5. MONITORING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF RESEARCH
Article 49
(Monitoring and supervision)
(1) Together with the expert bodies, the Agency shall monitor and supervise
the implementation of research according to the procedure laid down in the Rules
and in the contract on the implementation and (co)financing of research.
(2) Monitoring and supervision shall be carried out primarily by means of
interim and final reports (final reports on the work implemented with regard to
research and reports on the expenditure of funds) in accordance herewith. The
Agency may also supervise research by means of on-site visits to research
implementers. For supervision of research implementers, the Agency may appoint
certified auditors to examine the expenditure of funds on behalf of the Agency.
Article 50
(Reports)
(1) The leader of research and the legal representative or the competent
person (hereinafter: legal representative) of the Other Party shall be
responsible for reporting regularly on the implementation and (co)financing of
research in accordance with the contract.
(2) Interim reports and the final report on the work implemented with regard
to research shall include substantive reports and evidence on compliance with
the assumed contractual obligations.
(3) Reports on the annual distribution of effective hours of research work
shall be submitted on standardised forms and shall include the workloads of the
programme or project group members.
(4) The contents of such reports are further specified in subsequent sections
hereof.
(5) The leaders of research programmes and basic, applied and postdoctoral
projects, and mentors of young researchers who fail to submit the required
reports within the set deadlines shall be ineligible to participate in the next
call or invitation as leaders or mentors.
Article 51
(Financial report)
The Other Parties shall submit a financial report for every year of
performing research, which shall, in accordance with regulations, contain an
overview of the expenditure of funds according to the cost groups of such
research.
Article 52
(Signing reports)
(1) The substantive report shall be signed by the legal representative of the
Other Party and the leader of research. The financial report shall be signed by
the legal representative of the Other Party and the responsible accountant.
(2) The reports shall be submitted electronically. The reports may only be
submitted in electronic form if signed with a qualified digital certificate by
the leader of research and the legal representative of the Other Party. Reports
not signed with a qualified digital certificate shall be signed and submitted in
printed form.
(3) Financial reports in electronic form shall be signed with a qualified
digital certificate by the legal representative of the Other Party and the
responsible accountant.
(4) The financial report shall be submitted together with the interim or
final report referred to in Article 50 hereof or, if so determined by the
Agency, separately.
Article 53
(Suspension of (co)financing)
Within the deadline set in the contract, the Other Party must inform the
Agency of all circumstances affecting the successful implementation of the
research. If the Official finds that altered circumstances prevent the further
unhindered progress of the implementation of the research, he or she shall
propose that the Director suspend the (co)financing of the research.
Article 54
(Termination of research)
(1) If it is ascertained that it is not possible to successfully complete the
research due to objective circumstances, further research shall be discontinued
and the Other Party shall be under no obligation to return the funds already
disbursed.
(2) If it is ascertained that the Other Party will not successfully complete
the research due to the default of contractual obligations, the Agency shall
terminate the contract and require the repayment of all disbursed funds,
inclusive of legal default interest, unless specified otherwise herein.
(3) If during the performance of research it is ascertained that the funds
were not used for the intended purpose or not used in their entirety and that
the unused share has not been allocated in accordance with the regulations of
the government governing norms and standards for allocating resources for the
implementation of research financed from the national budget (hereinafter: the
Regulation on Norms and Standards), the Agency shall reduce the amount of
(co)financing for the unused share or the share not used for the intended
purpose.
(4) If after the conclusion of research it is ascertained that the funds were
not used for the intended purpose or not used in their entirety and the unused
share has not been allocated in accordance with the Regulation on Norms and
Standards, the Agency shall require the repayment of the unused share or the
share not used for the intended purpose, inclusive of legal default interest
from the date of receipt of the funds in the recipient’s current account until
the date of the reimbursement of the funds.
(5) If during or after the implementation of research the RO does not provide
access to the requested documents, it shall be deemed that the funds were not
used for the intended purpose and the Agency shall act in accordance with the
third or fourth paragraph of this Article.
6. INFORMING THE PUBLIC AND USERS
Article 55
(Method of informing the public)
The Agency shall inform the public and the users of (co)financed research
through its website, internal publications, the media and at public panels and
conferences organised or co-organised by the Agency.
Article 56
(The White Paper of the Agency – online publication of
the Agency’s data on (co)financing)
The Agency shall publish on its website all data on the (co)financing of
research from the national budget in the form of an online White Paper. In the
online White Paper, the data shall be classified by programme content,
individual scientific discipline, and the research implementers (ROs and private
researchers) that are recipients of public funding within the framework of calls
and invitations, types of research implementers (state, higher education,
business, private non-profit, foreign and other) and the leaders of research.
The online data on the (co)financing of research shall be updated at least
monthly. The export of data in a computer-readable form shall be enabled.
Article 57
(Online publication of research results)
(1) Researchers shall be obliged to ensure the up-to-date entry of data on
bibliographic results in the COBISS system, which shall be carried out by
competent librarians.
(2) In cooperation with the ISI, the Agency shall be obliged to provide
systemic links between data or databases on ROs, research groups, researchers,
research programmes and research projects, and the SICRIS system, when the
necessary linkable data on the subjects referred to above are available and
sorted according to the rules for managing Register of ROs.
(3) The reports on research programmes and projects shall be published in the
prescribed format in the Digital Library of Slovenia – dLib.si (the National and
University Library), the contents of which are linked to the SICRIS and other
online systems.
Article 58
(Publication of implementers’ research results)
(1) When publishing the results of their work and in any other form of public
presentation, implementers (ROs) shall be obliged to state that the research
results were achieved within the framework of tasks (co)financed from the
national budget in accordance with contracts concluded between the Agency and
the implementer, and upon the Agency’s request they shall be obliged to
participate in informing the public as organised by the Agency. Implementers
shall follow the principles of open access to scientific information in
accordance with the National Strategy of Open Access to Scientific Publications
and Research Data in Slovenia.
(2) The leader of research shall be responsible for accurate reporting of the
research results achieved within the framework of activities (co)financed by the
Agency.
7. SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF INDIVIDUAL CALLS
7.1. Research and infrastructure programmes
Article 59
(Public service)
The Agency shall finance public service in the field of research in
accordance with contracts concluded between the Agency and the PRO or CRO. The
PRO or CRO shall provide public service in the field of research in the form of
research programmes by programme groups and in the form of infrastructure
programmes by infrastructure groups.
Article 60
(Composition of programme groups)
(1) Research programmes shall be implemented by programme groups at PROs
(i.e. public research institutes, and universities and independent higher
education institutions established by the Republic of Slovenia), and at CROs.
Programme groups shall operate within the framework of at least one PRO or one
CRO.
(2) A programme group shall be led by the leader of the group, who may lead
only one group. A programme group shall consist of the leader of the group, at
least three researchers with a doctoral degree, and expert and technical
assistants from one or several PROs or CROs. If the programme is implemented at
several PROs or CROs, each PRO or CRO shall have at least one researcher with a
doctoral degree in its programme group.
(3) Programme group members may be involved in only one research programme.
Researchers and technical assistants shall be employed at the PRO or CRO
implementing the research programme. The number or share of expert and technical
assistants participating in the implementation of a research programme shall
comply with the Regulation on Norms and Standards. Young researchers, doctoral
students, leaders of postdoctoral projects who are financed from other sources
and are employed at the RO, and retired researchers may participate in the
programme group.
(4) The programme group implementing the research programme must comply with
at least one of the following quantitative conditions, which applies to all
scientific disciplines:
- two thirds of the researchers (including the leader of the research
programme) must comply with the condition A'≥25 or A''>0;
- three thirds of the researchers (including the leader of the research
programme) must comply with the condition A1/2≥25.
(5) The programme group’s compliance with the conditions referred to in the
preceding paragraph shall be verified when signing the contract for a new period
of research programme funding, whereby the composition of the programme group
stated in the application shall be taken into account, and every year after the
submission of the report on the annual distribution of effective hours of
research work. When examining the condition regarding the composition of the
programme group, expert and technical assistants, young researchers and doctoral
students who participate in the research programme shall not be considered to be
part of the quota.
Article 61
(Conditions for programme group members)
(1) Researchers must have a doctoral degree, evidence of research and
development results in the last five years and titles in accordance with the
applicable regulations.
(2) The values of quantitative scores referred to in Article 35 hereof and
that must be met by the leader of a programme group and researchers are
specified in the methodology.
(3) (Deleted).
(4) (Deleted).
Article 62
(Composition of infrastructure groups)
(1) Each PRO or CRO may have only one infrastructure programme, which must be
structurally (in terms of organisation, activities and human resources) and
financially divided if implemented in more than one organisational unit of the
PRO or CRO. In such case, the PRO or CRO shall submit the structure to the
Agency on an annual basis or upon changing it.
(2) The infrastructure programme shall be implemented by the infrastructure
group, consisting of the leader of the infrastructure group, researchers and
expert and technical assistants from the PRO or CRO at which they are employed.
Article 63
(Changes in the composition of groups and changes in
the price category of a research or infrastructure programme)
(1) During the implementation of a research or infrastructure programme, the
RO may change, increase or reduce the group's composition, whereby financing
remains the same, by submitting a substantiated request to the Agency. The
request shall be signed by the leader of the research or infrastructure
programme and the legal representative of the RO. The reason for changing,
increasing or reducing the programme or research group’s composition shall also
be substantiated in the interim report.
(2) Before the leader of a research programme retires, the home RO may, in
agreement with other research programme implementers and the leader of the
research programme, propose a replacement for the leader of the research
programme. The home RO may, in agreement with the other research programme
implementers, propose a replacement for the leader of the research programme
also due to the termination of his or her employment or other reasons
substantiated in writing. In the case of replacement due to other substantiated
reasons, the leader of the research programme must agree with the replacement.
The Director shall, upon the proposal of the SCA, decide on the replacement of
the leader of the research programme by adopting a decision. The proposed new
leader of the research programme must comply with the requirements for the
leader of the research programme in accordance with the regulations applicable
at the time of such replacement.
(3) Before the leader of an infrastructure programme retires, the RO may, in
agreement with the leader of the infrastructure programme propose a replacement
for the leader of the infrastructure programme. The RO may propose a replacement
for the leader of the infrastructure programme also due to the termination of
his or her employment or for other reasons substantiated in writing. In the case
of replacement due to other substantiated reasons, the leader of the
infrastructure programme must agree with the replacement. The Director shall,
upon the proposal of the SCA, decide on the replacement of the leader of the
infrastructure programme by adopting a decision. The proposed new leader of the
infrastructure programme must comply with the requirements for the leader of an
infrastructure programme in accordance with the regulations applicable at the
time of such replacement.
(4) The home RO may, in agreement with other research programme implementers,
request that the Agency change the price category of a research programme. The
Director shall, upon the proposal of the SCA, decide on the change of the price
category in accordance with the Regulation on Norms and Standards by adopting a
decision.
Article 64
(Responsibilities and powers of the leader of a
programme group or an infrastructure group)
The leader of a programme group or an infrastructure group, in cooperation
with the legal representative of the PRO or CRO and the expert body of the PRO,
shall be responsible for preparing the content of and implementing the research
and infrastructure programme. The leader of a programme group or an
infrastructure group shall also be responsible for and competent to:
- manage, organise and coordinate work;
- assign researchers, and expert and technical assistants to individual
tasks;
- implement and achieve the objectives;
- use the funds for the intended purpose and economically, in accordance
with the Regulation on Norms and Standards;
- prepare the interim report;
- prepare the final report, if an application for the research programme
is not submitted to a call or invitation or if the application receives a
negative assessment and the programme is thus cancelled, or the report which
is an integral part of the application to the call or invitation and is
deemed to be the final report.
Article 65
(Eligibility for financing)
The PRO or CRO shall prove eligibility for budgetary funds for financing a
research or infrastructure programme with regard to the actual and intended use
of funds, in accordance with the Regulation on Norms and Standards.
Article 66
(The period and minimum amount of financing)
(1) The Agency shall finance research and infrastructure programmes for a
period of six years.
(2) The minimum annual amount of financing for a programme group operating at
only the PRO level shall be 2.5 FTE of price category A for effective hours of
research work, whereas in other PROs or CROs it shall be 1 FTE of price category
A for effective hours of research work.
(3) The minimum annual amount of financing for an infrastructure group shall
be 1 salary share of the FTE.
(4) When several PROs or CROs participate in the implementation of a research
programme, the minimum amount of annual financing for individual PROs or CROs
shall be 170 effective hours of research work annually.
(5) The amount of financing for an infrastructure group shall be determined
in the salary share of the FTE for the entire period of implementation of the
infrastructure programme, whereas the amount of (co)financing for the direct
costs of materials and services and depreciation and amortisation (hereinafter:
the MSA) shall be determined at the annual level, i.e. on the basis of the
submitted annual budgets of the PROs or CROs. When calculating the MSA, the
expert committee appointed by the Director shall take into account the amount of
the MSA in the previous year (for new infrastructure programmes, not more than
the average value of the MSA with regard to the amount of the salary share of
all infrastructure programmes in the previous year), participation in ESFRI
international structures, additional needs due to extraordinary events, the
assessment of the interim or final report and the available amount of funds,
whereas the detailed calculation method is specified in the methodology. The
Agency may, on the basis of a substantiated proposal by the PRO or CRO, allocate
a part of funds intended for the material costs of the infrastructure programme
to the salary share during the period pending the completion of the entire
financing period.
(6) Payment of the salary share of the FTE is linked with the employment of
researchers or expert and technical assistants at the PRO or CRO.
Article 67
(Promotion of excellence)
(1) In accordance with budgetary capabilities, the Agency may increase the
financing of research programmes on the basis of an invitation.
(2) The increase in the financing of research programmes shall be based on an
evaluation of the programme groups. Two criteria referred to in Article 33
hereof shall be used for the evaluation of programme groups, i.e.:
- the scientific excellence of the researchers (hereinafter: the
scientific criterion);
- the relevance of the achievements of the researchers (hereinafter: the
relevance criterion).
(3) Evaluation according to the scientific criterion shall apply the
following indicators specified in Appendix 2 hereof:
- the overall score of the research programme (indicator 1.9.);
- the funds acquired from the Agency to implement research projects
(indicator 1.10.).
(4) Evaluation according to the relevance criterion shall apply the following
indicator specified in Appendix 2 hereof:
- funding from other sources (A3 score) (indicator 2.1.).
(5) The indicator evaluation period is specified in the methodology.
(6) Funds that are monitored with indicators 1.10. and 2.1. shall be
evaluated relative to the funds for the financing of individual programme
groups. Funds from other sources, in their nominal value, shall be evaluated by
three yardsticks according to the source, i.e.:
- funds from projects for the economy– ECON;
- funds from EU projects and other international projects – INT;
- funds acquired from the national budget or municipal budgets and other
public sources – NAT.
(7) The Agency shall calculate the average values of yardsticks for every
scientific discipline in the Republic of Slovenia. Only programme groups that
rank above average in the Republic of Slovenia in relation to the scientific
discipline in which they operate shall be eligible for an increase in funds. A
research programme shall be assigned an A, B or C score for each individual
yardstick. The range of yardstick values is specified in the methodology.
Programme groups assigned the A score according to at least one scientific
criterion and at least one relevance criterion shall be eligible for financing
in accordance with this Article during the period pending the expiry of the
research programme financing. If the programme group is assigned an A score
according to the yardstick for the evaluation of indicator 1.10. referred to in
the third paragraph of this Article, the funds may be increased up to the
average value of this indicator, but not by more than 50% of the contractual
value in the current year. On the basis of the yardstick for the evaluation of
indicator 1.9.referred to in the third paragraph of this Article, the funds may
be increased by up to 10% of the contractual value in the current year. If the
programme group is assigned the A score for both yardsticks of the scientific
criterion, the calculation for the increase of funds shall apply the most
favourable method for the group.
(8) An infrastructure group may receive additional funds if funds are
provided within the framework of an international research infrastructure.
(9) The Agency shall prepare a proposal of scores for the research programme
for the SCA. The decision on the amount of additional financing for individual
research programmes of the PRO shall be adopted by the Director upon the
proposal of the SCA. The decision on additional funding for the CRO shall be
adopted by the minister responsible for science upon the proposal of the SCA, in
accordance with the provisions of the secondary legislation governing
concessions for implementing a public service in the field of research. The
allocated funds shall be deemed to be funds for the financing of research
programmes.
(10) If increased financing on the basis of an invitation begins on 1 January
of the next year, the data gained in applications for research programmes with a
financing period that expires at the end of the current year shall be used in
the procedure referred to in Article 69 hereof. In such case, a decision on the
scope of the research programme in the new financing period shall be adopted,
whereas a decision on increasing funds in accordance with this Article shall not
be adopted.
Article 67.a
(Thematic invitation)
(1) In accordance with budgetary
capabilities, the Agency may increase the financing of research programmes based
on a thematic invitation, whereas the duration of increase in the financing is
determined in the invitation and may not be longer than the duration of the
research programme. Invitation themes, determined by the expert committee, shall
be taken into account in the application assessment procedure, where it is
assessed if the contents of an application is related to the selected theme or
themes of the public invitation.
(2) The increase in financing of research programmes is based on application
assessment taking into account invitation themes, where criteria from the second
paragraph of Article 33 hereof are used, specifically:
- scientific, technological or innovation excellence;
- potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application
of the anticipated research results;
- quality and efficiency of implementation and management.
(3) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of applications
according to the Scientific, technological or innovation excellence criterion
referred to in Annex 2:
- appropriate consideration of important research challenges (criterion
4.1.);
- clarity of concept, including the interdisciplinary aspect, and the
appropriateness of the objectives (criterion 4.3.);
- the originality of the idea (criterion 4.4.).
(4) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment according to
the Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application of
the anticipated research results criterion referred to in Annex 2:
- potential impact on development in the fields of economics and social
and cultural activities (criterion 5.1.);
- significance for the development of science or another profession
(indicator 5.4).
(5) The following indicator shall be used for the assessment according to the
Quality and efficiency of implementation and management criterion referred to in
Annex 2:
- the feasibility of the scientific approach (criterion 6.3.).
(6) The assessment procedure shall be conducted by the temporary expert body
appointed by the SCA and the panel. The panel, appointed by the Director of the
Agency, shall consist of temporary expert body members and foreign members of
the panel from the list of agency reviewers, proposed by the temporary expert
body. If there are not enough appropriate or available candidates for the
members of the panel based on the contents of an application for an individual
theme, the temporary expert body may propose additional foreign members of the
panel outside the list of Agency reviewers.
(7) Each application for a research programme is assessed by at leasttwo
members of thepanel, whereas each application shall be assessed by minimum one
foreign member of the panel. The members of the panel shall assess the
application according to individual criteria for the assessment of applications,
listed in the second paragraph of this Article, by filling in the assessment
form with numerical scores. In addition to a numerical score (for individual
criteria for the assessment of applications the score is assigned with the
accuracy of half a point), the member of the panel shall provide a descriptive
score for each criterion, in which he or she shall state reasons for the
assigned score. At the plenary meeting, the panel harmonises the assessments of
individual applications for research programmes. The panel shall harmonise the
application assessment by providing harmonised numerical scores and descriptive
scores for each criterion and the sum of these scores shall comprise the overall
score of the application. An observer, appointed by the SCA, shall also be
present at the plenary meeting of the panel.
(8) At the plenary meeting, the panel prepares a draft priority list of
applications, including a proposal on the amount of financial means. The panel
ranks the applications according to their scores in descending order, taking
into account the invitation themes. The process of ranking the applications when
preparing the priority list of applications is specified in detail in the
methodology and invitation. When preparing the draft priority list of
applications, the panel at the same time takes into account that an application
for a research programme that receives minimum 3.0 points for each evaluation
criterion may be included into the procedure for determining the amount of
financing or selecting the applications. An application that does not receive
minimum 3.0 points for any of the evaluation criteria in the application
assessment procedure shall, upon the proposal of the SCA, be rejected by a
decision of the Director or, in the case of the CRO, by a decision of the
minister responsible for science.
(9) The temporary expert body shall send the draft priority list of
applications, prepared by the panel, to the SCA, which shall discuss it and
adopt a draft decision on the selection of applications. The decision on the
amount of additional financing for individual research programmes of the PRO
shall be adopted by the Director upon the proposal of the SCA. The decision on
additional funding for the CRO shall be adopted by the minister responsible for
science upon the proposal of the SCA, in accordance with the provisions of the
secondary legislation governing concessions for the provision of public services
in the field of research. The allocated funds shall be deemed to be funds for
the financing of research programmes.
(10) After the application assessments have been harmonized at the plenary
meeting of the panel, the individual assessments of applications shall gain the
status of a "working version" document and shall not be a subject of
consideration in the further application selection procedure nor a subject of
objection procedures in accordance with the Rules on Procedures nor judicial
proceedings.
(11) If the research programme is carried out by several ROs, the increased
funds may not be reassigned from one RO to another by the research programme
implementers.
Article 68
(Calls and invitations)
(1) Calls and invitations for the submission of applications for the
financing of research and infrastructure programmes shall be published on the
basis of the decision referred to in Article 11 hereof in the year when
financing expires.
(2) The decision referred to in the preceding paragraph shall specify the
number of research programmes that individual applicants may apply for. The
decision adopted by the minister responsible for science regarding calls for the
granting of a concession, which shall also determine the number of research
programmes that individual CROs may apply for, shall also be taken into account.
(3) In an invitation or call for the assessment of research programmes, the
applicant may propose the redesign (merging, demerging or other methods of
redesign) of research programmes, whereby a redesigned research programme shall
not be deemed to be a new research programme in accordance herewith. Redesign
methods are further specified in the methodology.
(4) An RO that does not yet have a research or infrastructure programme may
apply for a new research or infrastructure programme only if the Agency is
cofinancing at least one research project of this RO at the time of the
application. The bilateral project referred to in the sixth paragraph of
Article 4 hereof shall not be taken into account.
(5) In the five years prior to the publication of the invitation or call, the
proposed members of the programme group for the new research programme must have
acquired the minimum amount of funds for the implementation of research projects
financed by the Agency. The application of a new research programme shall be
included in the assessment only if in the last five years (five calendar years
before the publication of the invitation or call shall be taken into account)
the members of the new programme group operating only at the PRO level have
acquired the minimum amount of funds, which on average is equal to at least 1.25
FTE annually, converted into funds of category A, whereas the members of the new
programme group operating in other ROs have acquired on average at least 0.5 FTE
annually, converted into funds of price category A. Funds acquired in the
framework of the applicant and implementers of the new research programme shall
be deemed to be funds acquired within the framework of the Agency's calls for
research projects. The application that does not meet the condition from this
paragraph, is rejected in accordance with Article 21 hereof. The composition of
the programme group may not change in the first year of financing of a research
programme for which an application has been newly submitted.
(6) If in an individual year the financing for less than ten research
programmes expires, the Agency shall carry out an invitation or call and the
application assessment procedure in the year before the financing expires,
whereas the decision on the selection of applications shall be adopted in the
year when the financing expires.
Article 69
(Expert assessment body and reviewers)
(1) In order to carry out the assessment of applications, the SCA shall
appoint an expert body for the assessment of research programmes. If a great
number of applications are submitted for individual scientific disciplines, the
SCA may appoint a subdivision of the expert body. The members of the subdivision
comprise members of the temporary expert body for the scientific discipline that
the subdivision is appointed for as well as additional members appointed by the
SCA from among researchers.
(2) If the RO or the CRO submits an application for a new research programme,
the achievements of the members stated in the application by the applicant shall
be assessed.
(3) Each research programme application shall be assessed by at least two
foreign reviewers. The reviewer shall assess the application according to
individual assessment criteria by filling out the assessment form containing
numerical scores sorted by the individual criteria referred to in Article 76
hereof. In addition to a numerical score, the reviewer shall provide a
descriptive assessment for each criterion, in which he or she shall state the
reasons for the assigned score. Reviewers shall reach a consensus regarding the
assessment of individual research programme applications. They shall harmonise
the application assessment by providing harmonised numerical scores and
descriptive assessments for each criterion and the sum of these scores shall
represent the overall score of the application.
(4) If the Agency does not acquire the reviewers’ consensus report within the
set deadline, the expert body shall designate a third reviewer. The overall
score of the application shall be the average of the two closest scores of
reviewers. If one of the three scores is equal to the average of all three
scores, that score shall constitute the overall score of the application.
(5) In order to assess research programmes on the basis of the reviewers’
assessments, the expert body shall adopt a Draft Applications Priority List of
research programmes to be considered by the SCA.
Article 70
(Minimum overall score of an application)
A research programme application that receives an overall score higher than
14.0 points in the application evaluation procedure may be included in the
procedure for determining the amount of financing that is carried out by the
SCA. An application that does not receive an overall score higher than
14.0 points in the application assessment procedure shall, upon the proposal of
the SCA, be rejected by a decision of the Director or, in the case of the CRI,
by a decision of the minister responsible for science.
Article 71
(Evaluating research programmes)
(1) The aim of evaluation shall be to assign scores (A, B and C) for research
programmes according to the criteria and indicators referred to in Article 67
hereof for the purpose of determining the annual amount of financing.
(2) Evaluation shall be carried out for all research programmes of all ROs,
regardless of whether the ROs participate in an invitation or call, except
regarding applications for new research programmes.
(3) The results of an evaluation shall be the scores of research programmes
(A, B and C) and information on the possible annual amount of funds or an
increase or decrease in the scope of a research programme. The method of
determining the annual scope of a research programme is further specified in the
methodology.
Article 72
(Developing a common scale)
(1) In accordance with the second paragraph of Article 25 hereof and on the
basis of the proposal of the expert body for the assessment of research
programmes and the results of the evaluation of research programmes for each
PRO, the SCA shall prepare a common scale of research programme applications, in
the framework of which it shall sort research programme applications into at
most four groups, i.e.:
- the first group shall consist of research programmes with at least one
A score for the scientific criteria and at least one A score for the
relevance criteria;
- the second group shall consist of research programmes with at least one
A score for the scientific criteria or at least one A score for the
relevance criteria;
- the third group shall consist of research programmes that did not
receive any A scores for the scientific or relevance criteria;
- the fourth group shall consist of new research programmes.
(2) As determined in the preceding paragraph of this Article, the CSA shall
consider the research programmes of the CROs that submitted an application for
more than one research programme.
(3) The SCA shall sort the research programmes of the CROs that submitted an
application for one research programme according to scientific discipline, by
the points of the overall application score.
(4) The applications of new research programmes in the fourth group shall be
ranked according to the overall score in descending order.
Article 73
(Determining the scope of research programmes – Step1)
(1) As a general rule, the overall financing of the PRO or CRO for all
research programmes in the framework of individual ROs or CROs shall not change.
(2) In the procedure for determining the amount of financing for research
programmes of individual ROs, the SCA shall first determine the amount of funds
of research programmes in the assessment procedure (available funds).
(3) The amount of financing of research programmes in the third group
according to the overall scale shall be reduced by at least 3% and up to 20%. If
the difference with regard to the average value of the yardstick for
indicator 1.10.referred to in Article 67 hereof is smaller, the scope of the
research programme shall be reduced by this difference. If this would reduce the
scope of the research programme below the minimum amount of financing referred
to in Article 66 hereof, the SCA shall propose the minimum amount of financing.
(4) Research programmes in the fourth group according to the common scale
shall be considered with regard to the number of research hours stated in the
application, which shall not be less than the minimum amount determined in the
second paragraph of Article 66 hereof.
(5) When a research programme application is rejected on the basis of
Article 70 hereof or the amount of financing of one of the research programmes
is reduced, the SCA shall determine if these funds could be allocated to the
research programmes of the ROs in the fourth group according to the overall
scale. The SCA shall then adopt a draft decision on the selection of
applications (hereinafter: The SCA Decision after Step 1), which shall also
include the annual amount of financing in effective hours of research work for
all individual research programmes proposed to be included in the selection for
financing.
(6) (Deleted).
(7) (Deleted).
Article 74
(Determining the scope of research programmes – Step2)
(1) If, on the basis of the SCA Decision after Step 1 referred to in
Article 73 hereof, the RO has unallocated funds and more than one research
programme, the Agency shall inform thereof the applicant and other implementers
of rejected programmes or programmes with a reduced scope. The Agency shall call
upon the RO to propose other research programmes of the RO, the scope of which
could be increased, in order to reallocate funds. In addition to the Call, the
Agency shall also send to the RO a list of its research programmes whose scope
could be increased, and the maximum scope of increase for individual research
programmes calculated according to the criteria and indicators referred to in
Article 67 hereof. The Agency shall not inform the ROs that do not have a
research programme whose scope could be increased, or that have only one
research programme whose scope could be increased, of the unallocated funds.
(2) If the RO cannot reallocate the funds referred to in the fifth paragraph
of this Article or if the programme with a reduced scope is the only programme
of the RO, the funds of the RO shall be decreased regardless of the provision of
the first paragraph of Article 73 hereof.
(3) The Agency shall set the deadline for submitting a proposal for the
reallocation of funds, which shall not be less than ten working days from the
date of issuing the call. If the RO does not submit the proposal for the
reallocation of funds in time, it shall no longer be eligible for such funds.
(4) The SCA shall consider the timely proposals of the ROs on the
reallocation of funds due to a reduced amount of financing or rejected research
programme applications referred to in Article 70 hereof and adopt a draft
decision on the reallocation of funds (hereinafter: a SCA Decision after
Step 2).
(5) Based upon an SCA Decision after Step 1 and an SCA Decision after Step 2,
the Director shall adopt a decision on the selection of applications for
research programmes implemented by PROs. Based upon the SCA Decision after
Step 1 and the SCA Decision after Step 2, the minister responsible for science
shall adopt decisions on granting concessions for implementing a public service
in the field of research to CROs, in accordance with the provisions of the
secondary legislation governing concessions for implementing a public service in
the field of research. With regard to applications for research programmes
implemented by PROs and CROs, the Director shall adopt a decision selecting
research programme applications following the service of a decision granting a
concession for implementing a public service in the field of research.
(6) If a research programme is implemented by several ROs, the allocated
funds referred to in the preceding paragraph shall be valid for the entire
period of research programme implementation and the research programme
implementers may not reallocate them from one RO to another.
Article 75
(Conducting the procedure for infrastructure
programmes)
(1) In order to carry out an assessment of infrastructure programme
applications submitted to an invitation or call, the SCA shall appoint an expert
body for the assessment of infrastructure programmes. The leader of an
infrastructure programme may not be a member of the expert body.
(2) Each infrastructure programme application shall be assessed by at least
two reviewers. The reviewer shall assess applications according to individual
assessment criteria by filling out the assessment form, which contains numerical
scores sorted by the individual criteria referred to in Article 77 hereof. In
addition to a numerical score, the reviewer shall provide a descriptive score
for each criterion, in which he or she shall state reasons for the assigned
score. The reviewers shall reach a consensus regarding the assessment of
individual infrastructure programme applications. They shall harmonise the
application assessment by providing harmonised numerical scores and descriptive
scores for each criterion and the sum of these scores shall represent the
overall score of the application.
(3) If the Agency does not acquire the reviewers’ consensus report within the
set deadline, the expert body shall designate an additional reviewer. The
overall score of application shall be the average of the two closest scores of
the reviewers. If one of three scores is equal to the average of all three
scores, that score shall constitute the overall score of the application.
(4) The expert body shall sort individual infrastructure programmes according
to their quality in three groups (A, B and C), where an A programme represents
the programme of highest quality, for every form of support for research
referred to in the seventh paragraph of Article 4 hereof. The result of
consideration by the expert body for the assessment of infrastructure programmes
shall be the Draft Applications Priority List of infrastructure programmes,
including the annual scope of effective hours of research work sorted by the
forms of support referred to in the seventh paragraph of Article 4 hereof.
(5) The SCA shall consider the Draft Applications Priority List referred to
in the preceding paragraph of this Article and adopt a draft priority list of
infrastructure programmes to be financed and a draft list of rejected
infrastructure programmes.
(6) The financing period of newly adopted infrastructure programmes within
the financing cycle of existing programmes shall be adapted to the financing
cycle of existing infrastructure programmes, where the first period shall be
correspondingly shorter.
(7) As a general rule, the overall financing of the RO or CRO with regard to
infrastructure programmes shall not change.
Article 76
(Assessment elements of research programmes)
(1) The criteria determined in Table 7.1.1 shall be used for the assessment
of research programme applications.
Table 7.1.1: Criteria for the assessment of research programmes and the
maximum number of points for individual criteria.
Criterion No.
in Appendix2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers |
5 |
2 |
Relevance of the achievements of the researchers |
5 |
3 |
Research ability and vitality of the group of researchers |
5 |
4 |
Scientific, technological or innovation excellence |
5 |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the expected results of research |
5 |
|
Total |
25 |
(2) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of programme
groups according to the criterion of the scientific excellence of the
researchers:
- exceptional achievements (criterion 1.3.);
- status and international excellence (criterion 1.6.);
- participation in international projects or parts thereof
(criterion 1.8.).
(3) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of programme
groups according to the criterion of the relevance of the achievements of the
researchers:
- proven achievements in the fields of economics and social and cultural
activities (criterion 2.2.);
- the flow of young doctors of science (criterion 2.3.);
- the dissemination of the results of research and the protection of
intellectual property rights (criterion 2.4.).
(4) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of programme
groups according to the criterion of the research ability and vitality of the
group of researchers:
- the structure of a research group (the leader of the group, experienced
and younger researchers) (criterion 3.1.);
- the availability of equipment (criterion 3.2.);
- inclusion in projects (criterion 3.3.).
(5) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of application
quality according to the criterion of scientific, technological or innovation
excellence:
- appropriate consideration of important research challenges
(criterion 4.1.);
- clarity of concept, including the interdisciplinary aspect, and the
appropriateness of the objectives (criterion 4.3.);
- originality of the idea (criterion 4.4.).
(6) The following indicators shall be used for assessment according to the
criterion of potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the expected results of the research:
- potential impact on development in the fields of economics and social
and cultural activities(criterion 5.1.);
- importance for the development of the scientific discipline or field
(criterion 5.4.).
Article 77
(Assessment elements of infrastructure programmes)
(1) Members of the expert body shall apply the criteria specified in Table
7.1.2 for the assessment of infrastructure programmes.
Table 7.1.2: Criteria for the assessment of infrastructure programmes and the
maximum number of points for individual criteria.
Criterion No. in Appendix2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
7 |
Quality of the supporting activity implemented |
25 |
9 |
Quality of the application regarding supporting activity |
20 |
6 |
Quality and efficiency of implementation and management |
5 |
|
Total |
50 |
(2) If a PRO or CRO that has not yet implemented an infrastructure project
submits an application for a new infrastructure programme, the application shall
be assessed according to criteria 9 and 6 in Table 7.1.2 referred to in the
preceding paragraph.
(3) The following indicators shall be used for assessment according to the
criterion of the quality of the supporting activity implemented:
- the main results and achievement of the infrastructure programme
objectives (criterion 7.1.);
- the significance of the infrastructure as support for research and other
users (criterion 7.2.);
- the research and infrastructure equipment and other infrastructure with
the rate of capacity utilisation, technological complexity and contribution
to the utilisation of the RO’s infrastructure (criterion 7.3.);
- cooperation with users, other infrastructure programmes and
infrastructure networks in Slovenia (criterion 7.4.);
- the significance of the infrastructure programme as support for
participation in international infrastructure projects (criterion 7.5.).
(4) The following indicators are used for assessment according to the
criterion of the quality of the application regarding supporting activities:
- the significance of the infrastructure as support for research and other
users (criterion 9.1.);
- research and infrastructure equipment and other infrastructure with the
rate of capacity utilisation, technological complexity and contribution to
the utilisation of the RO’s infrastructure (criterion 9.2.);
- cooperation with users, other infrastructure programmes and
infrastructure networks in Slovenia (criterion 9.3.);
- the significance of the infrastructure programme as support for
participation in international infrastructure projects (criterion 9.4.).
(5) The following indicator shall be used for assessment according to the
criterion of the quality and efficiency of implementation and management:
- the infrastructure group and the costs of materials, goods and services,
and depreciation and amortisation (criterion 6.10.).
Article 78
(Granting a concession)
The Agency shall submit the SCA Decision after Step 1 referred to in
Article 73 hereof, the SCA Decision after Step 2 referred to in Article 74
hereof, or the decision on the selection of infrastructure programmes referred
to in Article 75 hereof, which is implemented by the CRO, for adoption to the
minister responsible for science, who shall then issue a relevant decision.
Article 79
(Monitoring and supervision)
(1) The Agency shall supervise research and infrastructure programmes in
accordance with the applicable legislation and these Rules.
(2) Together with the science and research councils (hereinafter: SRC), the
Agency shall monitor and supervise all phases of implementation of research and
infrastructure programmes on the basis of assessment of interim and final
reports. When called upon to do so by the Agency, research programme
implementers shall submit an interim report in the third year of research
programme implementation, whereas infrastructure programme implementers shall
submit an interim report every year. The Agency shall monitor and supervise the
implementation of research and infrastructure programmes by means of annual
reports on the expenditure of funds and the distribution of effective hours of
research work.
(3) The PRO or CRO shall submit reports on the forms and by the deadlines set
by the Agency.
(4) The SRC shall consider the interim reports of research and infrastructure
programmes on the basis of rules for the monitoring of research or
infrastructure programme implementation adopted by the Director.
(5) The SRC shall assess interim reports and may provide its own
recommendations for improving the implementation of a research programme. The
Agency shall inform the PRO or CRO and the leader of the research programme
thereof. The RO may submit a reply report to the Agency within 60 days from
receiving the recommendations of the SCR. The assessments of interim reports,
the recommendations of the SCR and the reply report shall be an integral part of
the materials for the assessment of research programmes by the expert body.
(6) If during consideration of the appropriate composition of programme
groups the SCR finds that the composition does not comply with the fourth
paragraph of Article 60 hereof, the Agency shall inform the PRO or CRO and the
leader of the research programme thereof. If in the following year the SCR again
finds that the composition of the programme group is not appropriate, it shall
propose a reduction in the scope of the research programme by 5%, whereby the
funds may not be reduced below the minimum amount determined by Article 66
hereof. The decision on the reduction in financing for the PRO shall be adopted
by the Director upon the proposal of the SCA. The decision on the reduction in
financing for the CRO shall be adopted by the minister responsible for science
upon the proposal of the SCA, in accordance with the provisions of the secondary
legislation governing concessions for implementing a public service in the field
of research.
(7) In accordance with the criteria and indicators referred to in Article 77
hereof, the SCR shall assess the operation of an infrastructure programme in two
parts, whereby, on the basis of interim reports on infrastructure programmes, it
shall:
- assess if the infrastructure programme is being implemented in
accordance with the infrastructure programme objectives stated in the
application, and provide either a positive or negative assessment; and
- provide a written content-based assessment, in which it shall also
specify if the amount of cofinancing for the MSA of the infrastructure
programme of the individual RO is appropriate, too low or too high.
(8) If the SRC negatively assesses an interim report on an infrastructure
programme, it may provide its own recommendations for improving implementation
of the infrastructure programme. The Agency shall inform the PRO or CRO and the
leader of the infrastructure programme thereof. The RO may submit a reply report
to the Agency within 30 days of receiving the recommendations of the SCR.
(9) If the SRC assesses that the MSA amount of an infrastructure programme is
too high, it shall substantiate its assessment and may propose a reduction in
the financing of the infrastructure programme. The funds shall be reduced by up
to 20%, whereby the FTE funds may not be reduced below the minimum amount
determined in Article 66 hereof. The Agency shall inform the PRO or CRO and the
leader of the infrastructure programme thereof. The decision on the reduction in
financing for the MSA shall be adopted by the Director upon the proposal of the
SCA. For a PRO, the decision on the reduction of financing for the FTE shall be
adopted by the Director upon the proposal of the SCA, whereas for a CRO the
decision shall be adopted upon the proposal of the SCA by the minister
responsible for science, in accordance with the provisions of the secondary
legislation governing concessions for implementing a public service in the field
of research.
(10) The report on the results of a research or infrastructure programme,
which is an integral part of an application to an invitation or call referred to
in Article 68 hereof, shall be deemed to be a submitted final report. The SCR
shall not assess the report on the results of a research programme because it is
the subject of an assessment procedure for the next financing period.
Article 80
(Workload of researchers)
(1) By means of the report referred to in Article 79 hereof or following a
written call to do so, the Agency shall obtain from the legal representative of
the PRO or CRO also the data and report on the state of the financial engagement
and workload of individual researchers and expert and technical assistants with
regard to the national budget within the framework of the programme and
infrastructure group for the current and following years of financing.
(2) In order to implement a research programme, the leader of a research
programme and members of a project group must have available capacity with
regard to effective hours of research work (the maximum permitted capacity for
full-time employment is 1,700 effective research hours annually or 1 FTE) and
shall be employed at the RO implementing the research programme, except for
retired researchers. Both conditions shall be verified when signing the contract
on the implementation and financing of a research programme and in the report on
the annual distribution of effective hours of research work. The leader of a
programme shall have at least 0.1 FTE annually. Each member of a programme group
(except for young researchers, doctoral students financed from other sources,
retired researchers, leaders of postdoctoral projects and directors of the PRO,
who may participate in the programme with just 0 FTE) shall have at least
0.01 FTE annually.
Article 81
(Establishing a new programme)
In accordance with budgetary capabilities, the Agency may call upon the PRO
every year to propose new research or infrastructure programmes that constitute
public service in the field of research. For such purpose, the Agency shall
carry out an assessment procedure in accordance herewith.
Article 82
(Publication of research programme results)
In their reports, the publication of results or all other public
presentations of research achievements, the members of a programme group must
state their affiliation with the RO, the number of the programme and the title
of the cofinancing institution, i.e. the Slovenian Research Agency.
7.2. Basic, applied and postdoctoral research projects
Article 83
(Types of projects)
(1) The Agency shall publish calls for (co)financing basic and applied
projects. The Agency may (co)finance the following projects from the national
budget:
- postdoctoral projects (basic or applied);
- small projects (€100,000 annually). The applicant may also submit an
application for a project in the reduced amount of €50,000 annually. The
number of such projects approved may not exceed 10% for all scientific
disciplines combined (mainly in clinical medicine, mathematics and the
social sciences);
- large projects (€200,000 annually);
- big-scale projects (€500,000 annually).
(2) Applications for large projects or basic projects may be submitted.
Applied projects must include at least three ROs of a different type (with
regard to their status, i.e. research institution, university or independent
higher education institution, and company) and shall provide evidence of
(co)financing. Basic projects must include at least two Slovenian ROs of a
different type (with regard to their status, i.e. research institution,
university or independent higher education institution, or company).
(3) Big-scale projects are basic interdisciplinary projects including at
least two disciplines.
(4) Basic, applied and postdoctoral projects may be thematically focused on
research topics specified in the call.
(5) A postdoctoral project may be a basic or applied project carried out in
order for the researcher to obtain additional research experience and knowledge
after receiving a doctoral degree, and shall also enable additional training of
researchers. The scope of a basic postdoctoral project shall be 1,700 annual
effective research hours (1 FTE), whereas the scope of an applied postdoctoral
project shall be 1,275 annual effective research hours (0.75 FTE) of price
category B. The call may also envisage a smaller scope of postdoctoral projects
for applicants with teaching obligations.
(6) The duration of projects shall be determined in the call. The call may
specify that projects or a part thereof shall be implemented as mobility
projects.
(7) If a candidate for a postdoctoral project has used his or her parental
leave, where one year per child shall be taken into account, the period from
defending the doctoral thesis shall be extended beyond three years. The same
applies to documented absences due to sick or injury leave, other types of
absence provided for in the regulations on health insurance, and employment
outside research longer than three months.
Article 84
(Composition of a project group)
(1) A project is implemented by a project group consisting of the project
leader, researchers and expert and technical assistants. The leader of a project
must be employed in at least a 40% full-time capacity at an RO in the Republic
of Slovenia that is implementing a research project. For young researchers and
doctoral students who are financed from other sources, zero effective hours of
research work shall be recorded within the framework of a project.
(2) A project may only be managed by a researcher who complies with the
conditions laid down in the Research and Development Activity Act and in the
Rules on the criteria for establishing compliance with the conditions for being
the leader of a research project (hereinafter: the Rules on the Conditions for
the Leader of a Project). The values of quantitative assessments referred to in
Article 35 hereof that the leader of a programme group must achieve are
specified in the methodology. The call may also lay down more detailed criteria
on the basis of the criteria referred to in Article 33 hereof that the leader of
a project group must comply with, and the method of demonstrating compliance
with these criteria.
Article 85
(Changing the composition of a project group,
including other research organisations and changing the price category of a
research project)
(1) During the implementation of a project, the applicant or implementer may,
in agreement with the leader of the project, change, increase or reduce the
composition of a project group, whereby the objective and (co)financing shall
remain the same, by submitting a substantiated request to the Agency. The reason
for the change shall also be substantiated in the interim report, whereas in the
final report it shall only be substantiated if the change occurred after the
submission of the interim report.
(2) Other research organisations may be included on the basis of a request by
an existing research organisation only if one of the existing participating
research organisations cannot carry out its tasks in accordance with the
objectives laid down in the project documents after the approval of the project
due to objective reasons. Possible objective reasons include the cessation of
operations, considerable changes in the organisational structure or the
termination of the employment of key researchers from the participating RO. The
inclusion of other ROs shall be decided on by the Director upon the proposal of
the SCA, whereby the inclusion shall be possible from the date of the submission
of the application.
(3) Before the leader of a project retires, the applicant may, in agreement
with the leader of the project, propose a replacement for the leader of the
project. The applicant may propose a replacement for the leader of a project
also due to the termination of his or her employment or for other reasons
substantiated in writing. In the case of replacement due to other substantiated
reasons, the leader of the research project must agree with the replacement. The
Director shall, upon the proposal of the SCA, decide on the replacement of the
leader of a project by adopting a decision. The new leader of the project must
comply with the conditions for the leader of a project laid down in the Rules on
the Conditions for the Leader of a Project.
(4) If during the implementation of a project the employment of the leader of
a project with the applicant terminates, an RO that the leader of the project
signs a new employment contract with and that is listed in the Register of ROs
shall become, upon the proposal of the leader of the project, the new
participating RO in the implementation of the project, with the number of
effective research hours of the leader of the project and the number of
effective research hours of the members of the project group who concluded an
employment contract in the participating organisation.
(5) If after submitting an application to the call, the employment of the
leader of a project as a researcher at the applicant terminates, the RO that the
leader of a project concluded a new employment contract with and that is listed
in the Register of ROs shall become, upon the proposal of the leader of the
project, the participating RO in the implementation of the project, with up to
half the number of effective research hours for the entire project. The home RO
shall remain the applicant.
(6) The Director shall, upon the proposal of the SCA, decide on the proposal
for the leader of a project of a new organisation participating in the
implementation of a project referred to in the third and fourth paragraphs of
this Article by adopting a decision. The leader of a project must enclose a
document (contract) with the proposal, in which the applicant and the
participating organisation agree on the division of work and resources and the
rights, obligations and responsibilities of both parties and the leader of the
project within the framework of the project. Before the SCA adopts a draft
decision, it shall verify if the new participating organisation complies with
the conditions regarding the access to research infrastructure required to
implement the project.
In agreement with other implementers of the research programme, the home RO
may request that the Agency change the price category of the research programme.
The Director shall, upon the proposal of the SCA, decide on the change of price
category in accordance with the Regulation on Norms and Standards by adopting a
decision.
Article 86
(Available research capacities)
In order to implement projects, the leader of a project and members of a
project group must have available capacities with regard to effective hours of
research work (the maximum permitted capacity for full-time employment is
1,700 effective research hours annually or 1 FTE) and shall be employed at the
RO implementing the project or have the status of a private researcher. The
leader of a project shall have at least 170 research hours (0.1 FTE) available
annually upon signing the contract. A member of a project group (except for
young researchers, doctoral students financed from other sources, retired
researchers and directors of the PRO, who may participate in the programme with
just 0 FTE) shall participate with at least 17 effective research hours
(0.01 FTE) available annually upon signing the contract.
Article 87
((Co)financing)
(1) The Agency shall finance up to 100% of the substantiated project costs of
basic projects.
(2) The Agency shall (co)finance up to 75% of the substantiated project costs
of applied projects. The applicant of an applied project shall ensure that at
least 25% of the substantiated project costs are financed by other interested
users. Before signing the contract with the Agency, the applicant of an applied
project shall submit evidence on the (co)financing of the project (contract) for
the entire period of project implementation with regard to the value of the
price of the effective research hours at the beginning of financing.
(3) If a company submits an application for an applied project, it shall not
need evidence of the (co)financing of the project by other interested users, it
shall, however, state its envisaged share of (co)financing upon submitting an
application for the project and demonstrate it in a manner determined by the
Agency.
(4) When other interested users reduce the (co)financing of a project during
its implementation, the Director shall, upon the proposal of the SCA, decide if
the Agency will continue to (co)finance the project.
(5) Projects may not be (co)financed by the ROs listed in the Register of
ROs, except for companies.
Article 88
(Substantiated project costs)
The basis for determining the amount of funds for implementing projects is
defined in the Regulation on Norms and Standards, taking into account the
limitations referred to in Article 87 hereof.
Article 89
(Call conditions)
(1) A legal entity or natural person listed in the Register of ROs that
complies with the conditions laid down in the Act regulating research and
development activities, these Rules and the Rules on the Conditions for the
Leader of a Project may apply to the call. In an individual call, a researcher
may compete with only one project proposal in the role of the leader of a
project.
(2) Only researchers who, a year after the date for submitting an application
for the first phase of a call or after the date for submitting the application
in a one-phase procedure, are the leader of not more than one project may apply
to a call as the leader of a project. The projects with an extended deadline for
completing project implementation from Article 104 hereof are also taken into
consideration regarding this limitation. Target research programmes, projects
referred to in Articles 139 and 146 hereof, and new projects shall not be taken
into consideration, and also projects referred to in Article 145 hereof
(co)financed in an amount that equals less than €50,000 annually shall not be
taken into consideration regarding the limitation from the previous paragraph.
(3) A researcher whose project, of which he or she was a leader, was given a
lower number of points than the amount defined as the overall threshold for the
sum of all scores, as specified in Article 99 or 100 hereof, in the first phase
of assessment or, in the case of a on-phase procedure, at the end of assessment
in a previous call may not apply to a call as the leader of a project. The
threshold is specified in the methodology and the call.
(4) A researcher who received a negative assessment of the final report of a
project, of which he or she was a leader, in the last three years before the
beginning of the call may not apply to the call as the leader of a project.
(5) A researcher who has already carried out a postdoctoral project may not
submit an application for another postdoctoral project.
(6) A candidate for young doctor shall be a researcher who completed his or
her first doctoral dissertation no more than ten years before the date of the
deadline for submitting applications to an invitation. A researcher who has
already carried out a project as a young doctor may not submit an application
for another project as a young doctor.
Article 90
(Application assessment procedure)
(1) The application assessment procedure is carried out as a one-phase
procedure or a two-phase procedure with the first and second phase, which is
determined in the call by the Agency.
(2) If the assessment procedure is carried out as a one-phase procedure, the
evaluation is carried out in accordance with the provisions of these Rules that
apply to the assessment of applications in phase two.
(3) If it is determined in the call by the Agency that the evaluation
procedure is carried out as a two-phase procedure, the applicants submit a short
application upon applying to the call. When the number of applications with
regard to the available funds and number of reviewers required for the
assessment of extended applications allows for a one-phase assessment procedure,
the Director may, notwithstanding the first paragraph of this Article, adopt a
decision that the assessment procedure shall be carried out in one phase, in
accordance with the provisions of these Rules that apply to the assessment of
applications in the second phase. In such case, the Agency shall call upon all
the applicants to submit an extended application within a deadline that may not
be less than 45 days from being called upon to do so.
(4) The types of projects for which an application may be submitted shall be
defined in the call. Applicants shall state in the application which type of
project referred to in Article 83 hereof they are submitting an application for.
Article 91
(Conditions for submitting an application for projects
of the members of programme in case of two-phase procedure)
(1) Before the publication of a call for (co)financing projects, the Agency
shall inform the leaders of research programmes of the possibility of submitting
an application for a limited number of project proposals to the call. A limited
number of applications may be submitted by the leaders of research projects who
are leaders or members of programme groups with one or several projects (basic
or applied) whose (co)financing ends within a year from a completed previous
call for projects. The period of an extended deadline to implement a project,
without additional (co)financing for the purpose of extending the period in
which substantiated project costs will be incurred, shall be deemed to be the
period of implementation.
(2) If members of a research programme as the leaders of projects submit an
application to a call for up to one more project compared to the number of basic
or applied projects (without taking into account postdoctoral projects)
whose(co)financings completed, their applications shall be directly included in
the second phase of the two-phase call implementation. The leader and
implementers of a research programme shall jointly decide on the applicant and
leader of a research project.
(3) If the members of a research programme submit a higher number of project
applications than specified in the preceding paragraph of this Article and if
the call is implemented in two phases, all these applications shall first be
assessed in the first phase as applies to all other applications that comply
with the call conditions.
Article 92
(Expert Body)
(1) The assessment shall be conducted by a temporary expert body competent to
assess projects and consisting of at least two members for each scientific
discipline (hereinafter: the expert body). The expert body shall carry out the
function of a reporting entity during the entire assessment phase, in the
framework of which it shall carry out the following tasks:
- review consensus reports or reviewers' individual reports when these are
inconsistent regarding possible evident mistakes and replies of the
applicants;
- report to the panel on consensus reports or on reviewers' individual
reports when these are inconsistent with regard to individual project
proposals.
(2) The expert body shall appoint reviewers for the assessment of
applications. When appointing reviewers, it shall, additionally to the criteria
and conditions from Article 226 hereof, ensure balance as regards appointing
reviewers from individual scientific disciplines with regard to the
specificities of research within a scientific discipline.
Article 93
(Assessment and consensus reports of reviewers)
(1) An application with the required call documents shall be submitted to a
reviewer for assessment. The minimum score defined with the threshold of the sum
of scores that the project must receive is specified in the methodology and the
call. Reviewers shall be informed of the threshold when they receive the
application.
(2) Reviewers shall assess individual assessment elements by filling in the
assessment forms containing numerical and descriptive scores according to
individual indicators, i.e. individual reports.
(3) A reviewer, i.e. a reporter, coordinates the drawing up of a consensus
report. An information system combines individual reports and enables reviewers
access to a consolidated working report. A reviewer, i.e. a reporter, shall edit
the style and content of the consolidated working report and harmonise the
overall score for each criterion. If reviewers reach a consensus, they shall
sign a consolidated working report, which shall then become a consensus report.
(4) A report shall be deemed a consensus report if consensus is reached by at
least two reviewers.
(5) If the reviewers do not reach a consensus, the individual reports of the
reviewers shall be considered in further procedures.
(6) After a consensus report is confirmed, the individual reports of the
reviewers shall gain the status of a “working version” document and shall not be
a subject of consideration in the further selection procedure in accordance
herewith and shall not be a subject of objection procedures in accordance
herewith nor judicial proceedings.
Article 94
(Panels)
(1) In a two-phase procedure, panels for the first and second phase of the
assessment procedure shall be established.
(2) The panel shall consist of members of the expert body and at least the
same number of foreign reviewers. Members of the panel who are foreign reviewers
shall be selected according to their qualifications in order to assess
applications pertaining to research fields. Members of the panel who are
reviewers shall be appointed by the Director upon the proposal of the expert
body. A representative of the relevant SCR shall also participate in the panel
as an observer and shall be appointed by members of the same council.
(3) The operation of the panel shall be regulated by the Agency’s rules.
Article 95
(Deleted)
Article 96
(Assessing applications – first phase)
(1) In the first phase of a two-phase procedure, minimum two foreign
reviewers shall assess short applications according to the procedure referred to
in Article 93 hereof. The number of reviewers for individual types of projects
shall be determined in the call. The expert body shall sort applications for
assessment into groups according to the content of the proposal.
(2) When appointing reviewers for an interdisciplinary field, the expert body
shall take into account that minimum one reviewer shall cover the primary
interdisciplinary field related to the contents of a project proposal, whereas
one reviewer shall cover the secondary field stated in the application.
(3) The result of a panel discussion shall be the classification of projects
according to the individual types of projects and fields.
(4) On the basis of the application review, the reviewers' consensus report
or individual reports in the case of a non-harmonised report, and the
discussion, the panel shall decide whether an application is to be included in
the second phase of the assessment procedure by sorting applications into two
groups: A (the application complies with the criteria for being included in the
second phase) and B (the application does not comply with the criteria for being
included in the second phase of the assessment). The applications classified
into group A shall be included in the second phase of the assessment procedure,
whereas the applications classified into group B shall be rejected with a short
expert substantiation of the panel.
(5) When classifying applications into groups A and B, the panel shall take
into account the reviewers' harmonised score or the panel's score in the case of
a non-harmonised report ofreviewers, the financial capacities of the field, and
other priorities and mandatory shares of the individual types of projects
defined in the call.
(6) If the reviewers do not harmonise their scores, the panel shall define
the average score as the project's score. The panel shall specifically discuss
project proposals with significantly different scores of reviewers and decide
whether the average score actually reflects the quality of the proposed project.
If the average score does not reflect the quality of the project, the panel may
eliminate one score. The panel shall discuss project proposals with one score
differing by more than two points compared to the average score.
(7) It is envisaged that, compared to the financial capacities of the field,
twice the number of applications pertaining to individual fields shall be
included in the second phase of the assessment procedure. In addition to
applicants that are directly included in the second phase of a call in
accordance with Article 91 hereof, at least another half of the assessed
projects pertaining to an individual research field shall be included in the
second phase, compared to projects that were directly included in the second
phase, and among them there shall be at least one basic and one applied project
per field.
(8) The SCA shall consider the list of A-group applications proposed by the
panel and may supplement it on the basis of criteria and yardsticks defined in
the call, taking into account the panel's recommendations, the ratio of project
types pertaining to individual scientific disciplines on the basis of the
criteria and yardsticks defined in the call, and the available financial
capacities of the field. The SCA shall adopt a decision on the classification of
applications for assessment and prepare a list of applications.
Article 97
(Assessing applications – second phase)
(1) After the completion of the first phase of the procedure, the Agency
shall call upon the A-group applicants to submit an extended application within
a deadline that may not be less than three weeks from being called upon to do
so.
(2) In the second phase, the application shall be assessed by at least two
foreign reviewers according to the procedure referred to in Article 93 hereof.
The number of reviewers for individual types of projects shall be determined in
the call.
(3) The expert body shall sort applications for assessment into groups
according to the content of the proposal.
(4) When appointing reviewers for an interdisciplinary field, the expert body
shall take into account that minimum one reviewer shall cover the primary
interdisciplinary field related to the contents of a project proposal, whereas
one reviewer shall cover the secondary field stated in the application.
Article 98
(Selection of projects by the panel – second phase)
(1) The Agency shall submit the reviewers' consensus report, or their
individual reports in the case of a non-harmonised report, to the applicants.
The applicants may submit a reply to the report.
(2) The panel shall consider the reviewers' consensus report, or their
individual reports in the case of a non-harmonised report, and the replies of
the applicants.
(3) If the project is evaluated by two reviewers in the second phase and
their report is not harmonized, the expert body shall determine a third
reviewer. The panel shall specifically discuss project proposals with
significantly different scores of reviewers and decide whether the average of
the three scores actually reflects the quality of the proposed project. If the
average of three scores does not reflect the quality of the project, the panel
may eliminate one score. The panel shall discuss project proposals with one
score differing by more than two points compared to the average score.
(4) If the project is evaluated by three or more reviewers in the second
phase and their report is not harmonized, the panel shall define the average
score as the project's score. The panel shall specifically discuss project
proposals with significantly different scores of reviewers and decide whether
the average of the all scores actually reflects the quality of the proposed
project. If the average of all scores does not reflect the quality of the
project, the panel can eliminate up to one score and calculate a new average
without the eliminated score. The panel shall discuss project proposals with one
score differing by more than two points compared to the average score.
(5) When sorting projects, the panel shall take into account the reviewers'
harmonised score, or the panel's score in the case of a changed score with
harmonized reports, or the panel's score in the case of a non-harmonized report
by reviewers. The panel shall take into account the financial capacities of the
field and other priorities and mandatory shares defined in the call. The
mandatory shares of selected projects according to scientific disciplines, types
of projects and projects for which young researchers submit an application (up
to 10 active years after obtaining a doctoral degree) shall be determined by the
SCA in the methodology. In the case of an equal number of points of two or more
applications, the panel shall adopt a decision on the selection of applications
by taking into account the scores, project applications and the replies of the
applicants.
(6) A proposal for the classification of applications for the (co)financing
of projects shall be adopted on the basis of a majority decision and shall
include a written substantiation of the assessments.
(7) With regard to the funds estimated in the call and the priorities
determined in the call, the panel shall propose applications to be financed as
small projects (€100,000 annually), large projects (€200,000 annually),
big-scale projects (€500,000 annually), or reduced-amount projects (€50,000
annually).
(8) The result of a panel discussion shall be a draft classification of
applications for the (co)financing of projects (hereinafter: the Draft
Applications Priority List), which shall be prepared according to scores for
every scientific discipline and for projects in the field of interdisciplinary
research, sorted by field for each scientific discipline.
(9) The panel shall adopt the Draft Applications Priority List on the basis
of a majority decision and prepare a report.
(10) The SCA shall consider the Draft Applications Priority List adopted by
the panel and may supplement it on the basis of criteria and yardsticks defined
in the call, taking into account the panel's recommendations, the ratio of
project types pertaining to individual scientific disciplines on the basis of
the criteria and yardsticks defined in the call, and the available financial
capacities of the field. In the case of large projects, the SCA shall define the
minimum permitted score for selection. The SCA shall adopt a draft decision on
the selection of applications.
Article 99
(Assessment elements of research projects)
(1) Reviewers shall apply the criteria specified in Table 7.2.1for the
assessment of basic projects.
Table 7.2.1: Criteria for the assessment of basic projects and the maximum
number of points for individual criteria.
Criterion No. in Appendix2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers |
5 |
4 |
Scientific, technological or innovation excellence |
5 |
6 |
Quality and efficiency of implementation and management |
5 |
|
Total |
15 |
(2) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of the leader
of a project and the project group according to the criterion of the scientific
excellence of the researchers:
- exceptional achievements (criterion 1.3.);
- demonstrated ability regarding independent and creative thinking
(criterion 1.7.);
- ability to prepare a research proposal and to manage research
(criterion 1.11.).
(3) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of the
scientific quality of the application according to the criterion of scientific,
technological or innovation excellence:
- appropriate consideration of important research challenges
(criterion 4.1.);
- ambitious and exceptional goals (e.g. new methods and approaches to the
development of fields) (criterion 4.2.);
- clarity of concept, including the interdisciplinary aspect, and the
appropriateness of the objectives (criterion 4.3.);
- the originality of the idea (criterion 4.4.);
- the suitability of the proposed research methodology for achieving the
objectives (criterion 4.5.).
(4) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of the
application according to the criterion of the quality and efficiency of
implementation and management:
- the suitability and effectiveness of the work plan, including the
appropriate allocation of tasks and distribution of funds (criterion 6.2.);
- the feasibility of the scientific approach (criterion 6.3.).
(5) If an individual application does not reach the threshold, which for the
individual criteria referred to in the first paragraph of this Article equals
three points, or the overall threshold of the sum of all three scores, which
equals ten points, it may not be included in the second phase of the call or in
selection for (co)financing.
Article 100
(Assessment elements of applied projects)
(1) Reviewers shall apply the criteria specified in Table 7.2.2 for the
assessment of applied projects.
Table 7.2.2: Criteria for the assessment of applied projects and the maximum
number of points for individual criteria.
Criterion No. in Appendix2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers |
5 |
4 |
Scientific, technological or innovation excellence |
5 |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the expected results of the research |
5 |
6 |
Quality and efficiency of implementation and management |
5 |
|
Total |
20 |
(2) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of a project
leader and the project group according to the criterion of the scientific
excellence of the researchers:
- exceptional achievements (criterion 1.3.);
- demonstrated ability regarding independent and creative thinking
(criterion 1.7.);
- ability to prepare a research proposal and to manage research
(criterion 1.11.).
(3) The following indicators shall be used for the assessment of the research
quality of an application according to the criterion of scientific,
technological or innovation excellence:
- clarity of concept, including the interdisciplinary aspect, and the
appropriateness of the objectives (criterion 4.3.);
- the suitability of the proposed research methodology for achieving the
objectives (criterion 4.5.);
- the ambitious and exceptional nature of the project and its innovation
potential (e.g. exceeding current knowledge, new concepts and approaches)
(criterion 4.8.).
(4) The following indicators shall be used for assessment of the potential
impact of the application according to the criterion of potential impact due to
the development, dissemination and application of the expected results of the
research:
- strengthening the competitiveness and growth of companies by developing
innovations that meet the needs of the European and world markets
(criterion 5.2.);
- all other environmental and socially important impacts, including
impacts on cultural development (which are not included in the other
criteria) (criterion 5.3.);
- the effectiveness of the proposed measures for applying and
disseminating project results (including managing intellectual property
rights), public presentations (popularisation) of the project and managing
the research data (criterion 5.5.);
- expected project results (criterion 5.6.);
- strengthening innovativeness and including new knowledge
(criterion 5.8.).
(5) The following indicators shall be used for assessment of the application
according to the criterion of the quality and effectiveness of implementation
and management:
- the suitability and effectiveness of the work plan, including the
appropriate allocation of tasks and distribution of funds (criterion 6.2.);
- the appropriateness of the project partners and the project group
(criterion 6.4.);
- the appropriateness of the management in taking into account risks or
when exceeding current knowledge (criterion 6.12.).
(6) If an individual application does not reach the threshold, which equals
three points for the individual criteria referred to in the first paragraph of
this Article, or the overall threshold for the sum of all four scores, which
equals 12 points, it may not be included in the second phase of the call or in
the selection for (co)financing.
Article 101
(Monitoring and supervision)
(1) The Agency and the SCR shall monitor and supervise all phases of project
implementation on the basis of interim and final reports on the work and reports
on the expenditure of funds. The Agency may also supervise project
implementation by on-site visits to ROs implementing a project.
(2) If the SCR negatively assesses the interim report of a project (basic,
applied or postdoctoral), it shall substantiate its assessment. The Agency shall
inform the home RO and the project leader thereof. If the SCR negatively
assesses the final report of a project and the negative assessment is confirmed
by the SCA, the RO shall return 10% of all funds disbursed. The SCA may submit
the negatively assessed report to the SCR for re-assessment. The Director shall
adopt a substantiated decision on the draft proposal of the SCA.
(3) For applied projects, the home RO shall, in the interim and final
reports, fill in or copy an appropriate section in accordance with the form to
be filled in by the cofinancer. The home RO shall acquire and save the signed
form called "Cofinancer's statement". The Agency may request that the home RO
that submitted an application for an applied project submit a (co)financer's
report on the economic and other impacts of the application of the results for
five years after the project is completed.
Article 102
(Contents of interim reports)
The interim report on the results of an implemented research project shall,
in addition to the title of the project, the name or title of the applicant and
the name and surname of the project leader, also include a brief substantive
report and evidence of compliance with the assumed obligations. The report shall
include:
- the objectives of the project;
- achievement of the proposed action plan or the objectives;
- the application of the obtained results;
- substantiation of any changes in the action plan of the project;
- substantiation of any changes in the project groups;
- international cooperation;
- research and other results;
- self-evaluation of the impacts of the publicly accessible, reviewed,
scientific publications that refer to the research results.
Article 103
(Contents of a final report)
(1) The final report on the results of an implemented research project shall,
in addition to the title of the project, the name or title of the applicant and
the name and surname of the project leader, also include:
- the objectives of the project;
- achievement of the proposed action plan or the objectives;
- substantiation of any changes in the project groups if they
occurred in the final year of project implementation;
- application of the obtained results;
- international cooperation;
- research and other results;
- self-evaluation of the impacts of the publicly accessible,
reviewed, scientific publications that refer to the research results.
(2) (Deleted).
Article 104
(Extension of the deadline for completing project
implementation)
An RO may seek an extension of the deadline for completing project
implementation and provide reasons for the delay. The allocated funds for
eligible expenditures of project implementation may be used until the end of the
extended project implementation period. The RO is not eligible for additional
(co)financing in the extended period of project implementation. A decision shall
be issued by the Director upon the proposal of the SCA.
Article 105
(Publication of project results)
In their reports, the publication of results, or in any public presentation
of the research results, the project group members shall state their RO
affiliation, the project number and the title of the cofinancer, the Public
Research Agency of the Republic of Slovenia.
7.3 Young researchers
Article 106
(Purpose)
(1) The Agency shall finance the training of young researchers at an RO in
order to:
- renew the research and research and teaching staff of the RO;
- increase the research capacity of groups implementing research
programmes and basic and applied projects;
- enhance human resource potentials for the needs of other users in the
public and private sectors.
(2) The Agency shall carry out the training of young researchers by selecting
programme groups, which shall be autonomous in their choice of mentors and young
researcher candidates.
7.3.1 Mentors
Article 107
(Applications to an invitation)
The Agency shall publish an invitation for the allocation of mentoring
positions to research programmes. Only the base RO of the research programme
with the legal form of an institute can apply to such invitation. One
application is permitted for one programme group.
Article 108
(Number of mentoring positions per programme group)
(1) The number of mentoring positions per programme group shall be set with
regard to the programme quality assessment, the size of the programme group
(annual FTE volume) and the type of RO implementing the research programme, as
well as the number of available places per scientific discipline.
(2) The research programme quality assessment shall be determined by the
overall score of the last research programme assessment. In terms of their
quality on the basis of the overall score, research programmes shall be
classified into four groups: A, B, C and D. Group A comprises research
programmes with the highest overall score. The range of points of the overall
score for a group shall be defined in the methodology.
(3) For the purpose of assigning mentoring positions, base ROs implementing
research programmes shall be classified into two groups, namely:
- higher education institutions or universities and ROs that are clinical
hospitals providing a tertiary level of health care, and
- other ROs.
(4) The number of available mentoring positions per discipline shall be
established by the SCA with regard to the extent of the available budgetary
funds.
(5) The manner of determining the number of mentoring positions per research
programme shall be defined in the methodology. A calculation shall be carried
out for all research programmes whose base RO has the legal form of an
institute. In determining the mentoring positions for the year in question, the
temporary expert body shall take into account the rounding up of the number of
positions in research areas and the decisions on allocating mentoring positions
in programme groups in past years. In considering decisions on allocated
mentoring positions to programme groups, research programmes that in past years
applied to an invitation and were not allocated a mentoring position, and
research programmes that did not apply to an invitation shall be given equal
consideration. The temporary expert body shall draw up a proposal as to the
number of mentoring positions per programme group for submission to the SCA.
(6) The SCA may increase the number of mentoring positions by up to five
percent if it has been established in the procedure for allocating mentoring
positions to research programmes by research field that the research programmes
are equivalent on the basis of the criteria stipulated by these Rules, but the
quota per research field does not allow for the allocation of mentoring
positions to all the research programmes. Additionally, allocated mentoring
positions per research field shall be subtracted from the quota of mentoring
positions per research field in the next year.
(7) If the research field was granted more mentoring positions than can be
allocated to research programmes (due to insufficient applications per research
field), a mentoring position or positions shall be allocated to the research
fields with the largest rounding down of the number of positions per research
field in descending order.
(8) The decision on the number of mentoring positions shall be issued by the
Director upon the proposal of the SCA.
Article 109
(Designation of mentors)
(1) On the basis of the determined number of mentoring positions per
programme group, the Agency shall call on an RO to submit, in cooperation with
the leaders of programmes and by the date set in the invitation, the names of
mentor candidates who meet the following conditions:
- he or she has at least the lowest permissible score determined in the
methodology based on the quantitative assessments referred to in Article 35
hereof;
- he or she is in an employment relationship with an RO with the legal
form of an institute that cooperates in the implementation of a research
programme and is a member of a programme group;
- at least four years have passed since he or she defended his or her
doctoral thesis (taking into account the year in which it was defended);
- he or she meets the conditions for the leader of a basic or applied
project;
(2) If an RO fails to submit the names of mentor candidates to the Agency by
the date stipulated in the first paragraph of this Article, the programme group
shall lose the possibility of financing for the training of young researchers.
Article 110
(Other conditions)
(1) A mentor shall not train more than three young researchers at a time. The
quota of young researchers shall not include those persons whose young
researcher status has been suspended due to leave arising from parental
protection insurance or who while having the status of a young researcher have
used leave exceeding six months. The quota of young researchers trained by a
mentor shall be verified by the Agency when signing a contract.
(2) A researcher shall become a mentor once every second year at most. The
share of younger mentors among the mentors in an RO shall not be lower than 25%.
(3) A candidate for younger mentor shall be a researcher regarding whom, as
of the closing date for the submission of applications to an invitation, no more
than ten years have passed since the completion of his or her first doctoral
dissertation and no more than fifteen years have passed since his or her
graduation from a study programme approved in the Republic of Slovenia prior to
11 June 2004, or since obtaining his or her master’s degree.
(4) If a candidate for younger mentor has used leave arising from parental
protection insurance exceeding six months, the period after the year of
completing his or her first doctoral dissertation or the period after the year
of his or her graduation from a study programme approved in the Republic of
Slovenia prior to 11 June 2004, or the year after obtaining his or her master’s
degree, as stipulated by paragraph 3 of this Article, shall be extended by one
year.
(5) If an RO cannot propose an adequate number of younger mentors, the
decision on the approval of the selected mentors shall be issued by the Director
upon the proposal of the SCA.
(6) If the programme is carried out by more than one RO, the distribution of
mentors in the period of the financing of the research programme for an RO must
be commensurate with the funds of the programme at the ROs at issue or in
accordance with a written agreement signed by the leader of the research
programme and the legal representatives of all ROs participating in the
implementation of the research programme and that have the legal form of an
institute.
Article 111
(Transfer of mentoring positions)
An RO may, by no later than 30 June of the year in which the mentoring
position was allocated, propose the transfer of allocated mentoring positions to
research programmes within the scientific discipline. The transfer of mentoring
positions may be carried out within an RO or among two ROs. The proposal shall
be signed by both the leaders of the research programmes and the legal
representative of the RO, or, in the case of a transfer between two ROs, by the
legal representatives of both ROs. The decision on the proposal shall be issued
by the Director. The Agency shall take the change into consideration at the
level of programme groups and research fields at the time of the next invitation
in the manner specified in the methodology.
7.3.2 Training of young researchers
Article 112
(Calls for young researcher candidates)
An RO shall select young researcher candidates in accordance with the
regulations governing public sector employment, its internal general acts, the
conditions stipulated by these Rules and in agreement with the selected mentors.
Article 113
(Conditions for young researcher candidates)
(1) Young researcher candidates must fulfil the following conditions:
- he or she has at least a bachelor’s degree in a relevant field obtained
in a study programme approved in the Republic of Slovenia prior to 11 June
2004 and his or her average grade for all examinations and coursework
(excluding the degree examination) is at least 8.00, and he or she meets all
the conditions for third-cycle postgraduate studies; or
- he or she has an education obtained in a second-cycle study programme in
a relevant field approved in the Republic of Slovenia after 11 June 2004 and
his or her average grade for all examinations and coursework in the first-
and second-cycle study programmes is at least 8.00 (including thesis
grades); or
- he or she has a master's degree obtained in a master's degree study
programme approved in the Republic of Slovenia before 11 June 2004; or
- he or she has an education comparable to that referred to in the first,
second and third indents hereunder acquired at a foreign university; and
- he or she is not older than28 years of age(on the basis of the year of
birth); the age limit shall exceed 28 years if the young researcher has
already completed one or two years of third-cycle postgraduate study without
financial support, with one year added for each completed year of study.
(2) If at the time of concluding a contract the young researcher candidate is
enrolling in the second or third year of a third-cycle study programme, the
average grade of graduate studies in a study programme approved in the Republic
of Slovenia before 11 June 2004 or the average grade of all examinations and
coursework of the first-cycle and second-cycle study programmes shall not be
deemed relevant. If a candidate holds a master's degree obtained in a master's
degree study programme approved in the Republic of Slovenia before 11 June 2004,
the average grade of his or her graduate studies shall not be deemed relevant.
(3) If a young researcher candidate uses leave arising from parental
protection insurance exceeding six months, taking into account one year for one
child, the age limit shall be raised to 28 years. The same applies to documented
sick leave exceeding six months.
(4) The Agency shall not finance young researcher candidates who at the time
of signing a contract are enrolled in an additional year of a third-cycle study
programme or who have already used such status, candidates who have already
received funding from the Agency in the framework of the young researchers
programme and candidates who already hold a doctoral degree.
Article 114
(Assessment of young researcher candidates)
(1) The assessment criteria and indicators referred to in Article 33 hereof
and Appendix 2 shall not apply to the assessment of young researchers. The
assessment criteria for young researcher candidates shall be as follows:
- the average grade of all examinations and coursework (without thesis) in
a university study programme approved in the Republic of Slovenia before 11
June 2004, or in first-cycle and second-cycle study programmes; at least
80%of all examinations and coursework must be completed;
- a master’s degree obtained in a master's degree study programme approved
in the Republic of Slovenia before 11 June 2004:
- enrolment in a third-cycle study programme;
- awards and prizes received;
- published articles;
- participation in research work;
- assessment of an interview with the candidate.
(2) Valuation of the criteria shall be determined by the RO.
Article 115
(Selection of young researcher candidates)
(1) ROs shall carry out the selection of young researcher candidates by the
end of August of the current year and report to the Agency the names of the
selected young researchers by 1 September. The ROs shall submit to the Agency
statements confirming that the candidates were selected in accordance with the
provision of Article 112 of these Rules.
(2) If the ROs fail to report to the Agency the names of the young researcher
candidates by 1 September, the mentors shall lose the possibility of the
financing of the training of young researchers obtained on the basis of an
invitation.
(3) If an RO reports to the Agency the name of a young researcher candidate
on time but such candidate withdraws from the position of young researcher prior
to the beginning of the training, the RO may subsequently, but no later than by
the end of the year in which the mentoring position was allocated, submit the
name of anew candidate selected in accordance with the provisions of Article 112
hereof.
Article 116
(Financing of training)
(1) The Agency shall finance the training of young researchers up to a
doctoral degree, for a maximum of four years.
(2) The category of the price of an effective hour of research work for a
young researcher shall be set on the basis of the category of the price of an
effective hour of research work of the mentor’s programme group. The category of
the price of an effective hour of research work set in such manner shall apply
for the entire training period.
(3) If, during the period of training, a young researcher from the field of
medicine – doctor starts internship or specialization at the organization
conducting the training, during the time of internship or specialization, the
Agency finances only material costs and costs from the category of the price of
an effective hour of research work, into which the young researcher is
categorized, and a mentoring allowance, but only until the end of the approved
financing period for the young researcher's training.
(4) The Agency shall reduce the financing period specified in the first
paragraph hereunder by one year if, at the time of signing the contract, the
young researcher is enrolled in the second year of a third-cycle study programme
or by two years if the young researcher is enrolled in the third year of a
third-cycle study programme.
(5) The RO shall send evidence of the successful completion of training
within one year of the end of the financing of a young researcher.
Article 117
(Training documents)
(1) Prior to the signing of the contract, and no later than by 20 September,
an RO shall submit to the Agency the following documents:
- a framework programme of the research training;
- a diploma obtained in a study programme approved in the Republic of
Slovenia before 11 June 2004 or certificates of completed first-cycle and
second-cycle study programmes or a certificate of a master’s degree obtained
in a master’s degree study programme approved in the Republic of Slovenia
before 11 June 2004; and
- an annex to the diploma if the young researcher candidate is enrolling
in the first year of a third-cycle study programme, or a certificate of
completed coursework examinations if the young researcher has not yet been
awarded his or her diploma.
(2) If a young researcher candidate has not completed a first-cycle or
second-cycle study programme or a master's degree study programme in the
Republic of Slovenia, the RO shall submit the following before the signing of
the contract:
- the decision of a higher education institution on the recognition of
foreign education for the purpose of education in the Republic of Slovenia;
and
- the conversion of the average grade of all the examinations and
coursework of the first-cycle or second-cycle study programme with regard to
the grading system used in higher education institutions in the Republic of
Slovenia prepared by the RO where the training is taking place, taking into
consideration the grading system in the foreign education institution where
the education was obtained.
Article 118
(Training programme)
(1) The framework research training programme for a young researcher
candidate shall consist of the research programme and the study programme. The
research programme shall comprise:
- the basis of the young researcher’s research task and its placement in
the research programme;
- the working hypothesis and work methods;
- the research objectives and anticipated results, with an emphasis on the
original contribution to science.
(2) The study programme shall comprise:
- the programme of the doctoral degree and the schedule thereof;
- the title of the university and faculty awarding the doctoral degree.
(3) The framework training programme of the group of researchers shall be
signed by the research mentor, the legal representative of the RO and the young
researcher.
Article 119
(Concluding the contract)
(1) The Agency and the RO shall determine the mutual rights and obligations
arising from the implementation and financing of the training in a contract. The
contract may specify that the RO shall cover certain expenses in the training of
the young researcher.
(2) The RO shall return a signed contract no later than 15 days after its
receipt.
(3) Before the beginning of the financing of training, the RO is required to
send to the Agency the employment contract of the young researcher, which shall
grant the young researcher at least the rights in accordance with the law
governing the public sector salary system, and proof of enrolment in a
third-cycle study programme.
Article 120
(Short-term training abroad)
(1) Young researchers shall be provided short-term training abroad in the
form of study projects at foreign universities or research institutes or
enabling the performance of the experimental part of the doctoral thesis, for
the purpose of improving the quality of training and postgraduate studies in
Slovenia, for a period not exceeding one and a half years.
(2) During the period of the short-term training of a young researcher
abroad, the RO shall be entitled to the full payment of the funds that the
Agency has allocated in accordance with the contract for the training of young
researchers even if the young researcher has obtained a foreign scholarship for
the period of staying abroad.
(3) The RO shall describe the course of the training of the young researcher
abroad in the annual report.
(4) The contractual period for implementing the programme shall not be
extended due to short-term training abroad. The doctoral thesis shall be
defended in the Republic of Slovenia. In exception, the doctoral thesis can be
defended abroad if a foreign co-mentor participated in its preparation and the
decision to do so was adopted with the agreement of all participants.
Article 121
(Reporting on training)
(1) The RO shall report on the training of the young researcher within the
deadlines specified in the contract and submit to the Agency for such purpose
the annual report and final report on the forms drawn up by the Agency.
(2) If the reports are not submitted by the deadlines specified in the
contract, the Agency may suspend payments to the RO under the contract for the
period of default.
Article 122
(Reporting on changes)
(1) The RO shall report to the Agency any change related to the training of
the young researcher regarding a change in or the termination of his or her
employment at the RO and excused absence exceeding 30 consecutive working days,
such as leave arising from parental protection insurance or prolonged sick
leave, by the deadline stipulated in the contract. In the case of an excused
absence exceeding 30 working days, the Agency shall suspend the status by
issuing a decision temporarily terminating the financing and prolonging the
training.
(2) For a young researcher from the field of medicine, the RO must notify the
Agency of the date of commencement of the internship or specialization at least
15 days prior to the commencement of the internship or specialization. The
Agency shall issue a decision to regulate the financing of a young researcher
from the field of medicine during their internship or specialization.
(3) The Agency shall issue a decision discontinuing payments if the
employment of the young researcher is changed or terminated. In the case of
changes to the employment of ayoung researcher, further funding of his or her
training shall depend on the positive opinion of the SCA.
Article 123
(Replacing a mentor and programme or research group)
(1) An RO shall propose the replacement of a mentor due to the termination of
employment, retirement, death or the one-year documented absence of the mentor.
If the replacement of the mentor does not impact other contractual provisions
and the RO guarantees that the proposed mentor is active in the same research
field as the initial mentor, the decision on the replacement shall be issued by
the Director.
(2) If the replacement of the mentor is due to other justified reasons or if
the replacement is not regulated in the preceding paragraph of this Article, the
decision shall be issued by the Director on the proposal of the SCA.
(3) The mentor shall meet the conditions referred to in Article 109 and in
first, third and fourth paragraphs of Article 110 hereof.
(4) An RO shall propose a change in the programme group or transfer to a
research group for a young researcher as a consequence of mentor replacement,
changes to organisation units, termination of the implementation of the research
programme, etc. The RO shall submit to the Agency a statement ensuring adequate
conditions for successful continuation of the work of the young researcher. The
decision on the change shall be issued by the Director upon the proposal of the
SCA.
Article 124
(Ensuring the intended use of funds)
(1) Agency funds from the national budget may only be used for the purposes
and in relationships stipulated by the decree on norms and standards and a
contract.
(2) The RO shall enable the Agency to inspect the records on the expenditure
of funds received on the basis of the contract.
Article 125
(Default on a contract)
(1) If the training of a young researcher deviates from the training
programme, the RO shall immediately notify the Agency. The Agency may
temporarily suspend or discontinue financing and terminate the contract.
(2) Discontinuing training at the request of the implementer or the young
researcher in the first three months of financing shall have no financial effect
for the parties to the contract, unless the Agency establishes the misuse of
funds.
(3) If the Agency terminates the contract for misuse of funds, the RO shall
repay the misused funds, including legal default interest, within the deadline
set by the Agency.
(4) The RO shall be obligated to repay 10% of remitted funds, or 20% of
remitted funds if the young researcher has supplementary employment, if:
- the discontinuation occurs at the request of the implementer or the
young researcher after three months of financing; or
- the purpose and aim of the training programme (defence of a doctoral
thesis) are not attained within the period under contract or the young
researcher fails to complete the training in the twelve months after the
expiration of the approved period of financing (in the event of sick leave
exceeding 30 working days of leave arising from parental protection
insurance exceeding 30 working days occurring within twelve months of the
expiration of the approved period of financing referred to in the first
paragraph of Article 116 hereof, the mentioned period shall be extended in
accordance with the provision of the first paragraph of Article 122).
Article 126
(Bonus payment)
If a young researcher successfully concludes the training (with the defence
of his or her doctoral thesis) before the expiration of the approved period of
financing stipulated in Article 116 hereof, he or she shall be eligible for a
bonus payment of 30% of the funds the Agency has allocated for the young
researcher's gross salary, for each month remaining before the end of the
contractual deadline, up to a maximum of twelve months, provided that the time
remaining until the expiration of the approved period of financing is not
shorter than one month.
7.4 Research equipment
Article 127
(Subject matter of a call)
(1) Cofinancing of the purchase of research equipment shall include purchases
of research equipment with a preliminary purchase value of at least €50,000 for
the natural sciences, at least €20,000 for technical sciences, biotechnology and
medicine, and at least €15,000 for the humanities and social sciences.
(2) The share of cofinancing by the Agency for the purchase of research
equipment shall be set by the call.
Article 128
(Application to a call)
(1) PROs, universities and other public institutes (hereinafter: applicants)
performing public service in research in the form of research programmes or
infrastructure programmes on the basis of a concession may apply to a call.
(2) Applicants shall enclose the following evidence with the application to a
call: provisional invoices for the research equipment that the applicant intends
to purchase, letters of intent, and a preliminary contract or contract on
cofinancing signed by the cofinancer, which shall specify the amount of
cofinancing or a statement on own funding.
(3) With regard to the purchase of research equipment, an applicant must
adhere to the contractual provisions and the application documentation. The
purpose and technological specifications of the acquired research equipment that
the applicant stated in the application must be maintained. Due to technological
progress, the applicant may purchase newer equipment that does not change the
cofinancing of the research equipment provided by the Agency.
Article 129
(Exclusioncondition)
The expert body may apply as an exclusion condition research equipment of
higher value already in place in the Republic of Slovenia (at least €140,000 for
the natural sciences, technical sciences, biotechnology and medicine, and at
least €40,000 for the humanities and social sciences. The expert body shall use
as an aid the list of existing research equipment available in the SICRIS
system. The expert body may call upon applicants to additionally substantiate
the application with regard to the existing equipment.
Article 130
(Assessment of applications)
(1) The assessment of applications shall be handled by the expert body.
(2) The expert body shall score applications for research equipment on the
basis of the criteria set in Table 7.4.
Table 7.4: Criteria for assessment of research equipment and the maximum
number of points by criterion.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers |
6 |
9 |
Quality of the application regarding support |
5 |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the anticipated research results |
6 |
|
Total |
17 |
(3) The following criteria shall be used for the quality assessment of the
programme or infrastructure group submitting an application for research
equipment, under the criterion of the scientific excellence of the researchers
specified in the application:
- overall score of the research programme (indicator 1.9);
- overall score of the infrastructure programme (indicator 1.12).
(4) The following indicator shall be used for the assessment of the
application under the criterion of the quality of the application regarding
support:
- purchase amount for the equipment. (Indicator 9.8).
(5) The following indicator shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application of
the anticipated research results:
- share of funds from other sources (indicator 5.7).
(6) The manner of assessment shall be specified in the methodology.
Article 131
(Decision-making by the SCA and adopting decisions)
(1) Based on the scoring in accordance with the set criteria, the expert body
shall prepare the draft priority list of applications for cofinancing the
purchase of research equipment and submit it for discussion to the SCA.
(2) If several applications have the same number of points, the decision on
the selection of these applications for cofinancing the purchase of research
equipment shall be made by the SCA on the basis of a discussion on the
significance of the research equipment in supporting the research of the
applicant and others included in the research and infrastructure programmes and
projects. In its decision, the SCA shall take into consideration the starting
points of the research strategy.
(3) The selection of applications for cofinancing the purchase of research
equipment shall be made by the Director by a decision on the selection of
applications upon the proposal of the decision on the selection of applications
by the SCA.
Article 132
(Disposal of equipment and ensuring the availability
thereof)
(1) An applicant with whom the Agency concludes a contract on cofinancing the
purchase of research equipment (hereinafter: the Other Party) shall ensure the
uninterrupted operation of the research equipment and handle the equipment with
due diligence. The disposal of the equipment shall be subject to the approval of
the founder in accordance with the procedure laid down by the regulations on the
acquisition and management of real property of the state and the disposal
thereof.
(2) The Other Party shall offer the capacity of the research equipment and
the related services to all interested ROs under the most favourable conditions
if the capacity and services are needed to implement research programmes or
projects (co)financed from the national budget. The Other Party shall elaborate
and publish tariffs for using the capacity of the research equipment.
(3) In determining the price for using research equipment cofinanced by the
Agency from the national budget, applicants shall take into account the
depreciation cost of the research equipment, the costs of materials and services
for the maintenance of the equipment and the pertaining labour costs in
accordance with the regulations on the public sector salary system.
(4) Applicants shall report to the Agency the price for using the research
equipment and the structure of the price for using the research equipment.
(5) Applicants shall regularly report to the Agency on the actual use and
utilisation of the research equipment and inform the public of the availability
of the equipment on their website.
(6) The Agency shall adopt regulations on the method of calculating the price
for using research equipment capacity for users and on the manner of applicants
issuing notice of equipment availability and reporting on the actual use of
research equipment and publish these regulations on its website. The regulation
shall apply for equipment with a purchase value of at least €50,000 for the
natural sciences, at least €20,000 for technical sciences, biotechnology and
medicine, and at least €15,000 for the humanities and social sciences. In
determining the price for using the research equipment, the applicant shall take
into account the depreciation cost of the research equipment, the costs of
materials and services for the maintenance of the equipment and the pertaining
labour costs in accordance with the regulations on the public sector salary
system. Applicants shall present the research equipment on their website and
notify the public of its availability (access conditions) and the price for
using such.
Article 133
(Public records of research equipment)
Records of research equipment cofinanced by the Agency from the national
budget shall be publicly available in the SICRIS system. Applicants shall submit
any data needed for the records in the form and manner determined by the Agency.
Article 134
(Contract on cofinancing the purchase of research
equipment)
(1) A contract on cofinancing the purchase of research equipment may be
concluded individually for the purchase of research equipment or for several
purchases by an RO with regard to the time of the relevant purchase.
(2) The contract on cofinancing the purchase of research equipment shall
regulate, in addition to the obligatory contractual elements specified herein,
other mutual substantive rights and obligations, such as: utilisation of the
research equipment, conditions for the use of the research equipment, reporting
on its operation, usefulness and utilisation, and the criteria and elements for
determining the price of services using the research equipment.
(3) The Other Party shall ensure the inclusion of the research equipment in
the implementation of programmes and projects and ensure that research equipment
cofinanced in accordance herewith is recorded in bookkeeping entries as a fixed
asset of the Other Party.
7.5 International scientific cooperation
Article 135
(Subject matter of cofinancing)
The Agency may (co)finance the following in the field of international
scientific cooperation:
- contracted obligations in the framework of bilateral projects or
bilateral research projects;
- the membership of Slovenian associations and
federations of associations(hereinafter: associations) in international
non-profit scientific associations (hereinafter: international scientific
associations);
- the work of Slovenian representatives elected chairs, vice-chairs,
secretaries general or members of the management bodies of international
scientific associations;
- the work of foreign researchers coming to the Republic of Slovenia on
the basis of an international agreement if such agreement includes a
reciprocal provision for Slovenian researchers;
- the promotion of applications to the public calls of framework
programmes for research and the technological development of the European
Union (hereinafter: EU Framework Programmes);
- the participation of Slovenian institutions in international research
and development projects adopted by the government, the ministry responsible
for science or the Agency and for which a specific contract or other
international agreement has been concluded.
Article 136
(Eligible entities and conditions)
(1) The Agency shall (co)finance the international cooperation referred to
Article 135 hereof on the basis of a call. The supporting documents that
applicants must submit with the application shall be determined in the call.
(2) A call for bilateral projects under the first indent of Article 135
hereof may be applied to by ROs and private researchers included in the Register
of ROs or the Register of Private Researchers kept by the Agency, and who meet
the conditions prescribed by the Act regulating research and development and the
Agency's regulations, and implement research programmes or basic or applied
projects (co)financed by the Agency or approved international projects (e.g.
participation in EU Framework Programmes in the field of research and
development) that provide the basic resources of the research.
(3) A call for bilateral research projects under first indent of Article 135
hereof may be applied to by ROs and private researchers included in the Register
of ROs or the Register of Private Researchers kept by the Agency who meet the
conditions prescribed by the Act regulating research and development and the
regulations of the Agency.
(4) A call referred to in the second indent of Article 135 hereof may be
applied to by associations included in the database of associations that operate
in the public interest in the field of research.
(5) A call referred to in the third indent of Article 135 hereof may be
applied to by associations included in the database of associations that operate
in the public interest in the field of research and ROs and private researchers
included in the Register of ROs or the Register of Private Researchers kept by
the Agency and who meet the conditions prescribed by the Act regulating research
and development and the regulations of the Agency.
(6) A call referred to in the fourth, fifth and sixth indents of Article 135
hereof may be applied to by ROs and private researchers included in the Register
of ROs or the Register of Private Researchers kept by the Agency who meet the
conditions prescribed by the Act regulating research and development and the
regulations of the Agency.
(7) The leader of a project for applications referred to in the first, fifth
and sixth indents of Article 135 hereof must meet the conditions for a research
project leader in accordance with regulations.
(8) Applications to calls for bilateral projects referred to in the first
indent of Article 135 hereof must, among other participating researchers in the
Republic of Slovenia, also include doctoral students or researchers who have
defended their first doctoral thesis less than five years ago (taking into
consideration the year of defending the doctoral thesis).
Article 136.a
(Share of selected bilateral projects)
(1) For non-reciprocal calls for bilateral projects referred to in the first
indent of Article 135 hereof, in the methodology the SCA shall determine the
obligatory share of selected bilateral projects whose implementers are
researchers who have defended their first doctoral thesis less than five years
ago (taking into consideration the year of defending the doctoral thesis), if
such have applied.
(2) For reciprocal calls for bilateral projects under the first indent of
Article 135 hereof, the draft priority list of applications drawn up by the
expert committee of the Agency on the basis of assessments must include the
obligatory share of bilateral projects whose implementers are researchers who
defended their first doctoral thesis less than five years ago (taking into
consideration the year of defending the doctoral thesis), if such have applied.
The obligatory share of such projects shall be determined by the SCA in the
methodology.
Article 136.b
(Replacement of the leader and members of a project
group)
(1) Before the retirement of the leader of a project, the applicant or the
implementer referred to in the first, fifth and sixth indents of Article 135
hereof may, in agreement with the project leader, propose a replacement for the
project leader. The replacement of the project leader may also be proposed upon
the termination of the employment of the leader or other written justification.
Replacement due to other justifiable reason shall require the agreement of the
project leader. The application for the replacement of a project leader referred
to in first indent of Article 135 hereof must include the agreement of the
leader of a bilateral project of the implementer of the partner state. The
decision on the replacement of the project leader for bilateral projects
referred to in the first indent selected on the basis of a non-reciprocal call,
and the projects referred to in the fifth and sixth indents of Article 135
hereof, shall be issued by the Director upon the proposal of the SCA, whereas
the decision for other projects referred to in the first indent of Article 135
hereof shall be issued by the Director in agreement with the ministry
responsible for science. The new leader must meet the requirements for project
leaders stipulated in the Rules governing the conditions for project managers.
(2) During the implementation of a project referred to in the first, fifth
and sixth indents of Article 135 hereof, the applicant or the implementer shall,
in agreement with the project leader, submit to the Agency a substantiated
request for a change, increase or decrease in the project group composition,
with the aim and (co)financing remaining unchanged.
Article 137
(Reciprocal and non-reciprocal calls)
If an international agreement specifies no obligation of the foreign party to
(co)finance international cooperation, the (co)financing of scientific and
research cooperation under first indent of Article 135 hereof shall be performed
under a unilateral call and otherwise under a bilateral call.
Article 138
(Assessment of applications)
(1) Applications shall be assessed by an expert committee in accordance with
the call, these Rules and the methodology.
(2) The assessment of an application to a call referred to in the first
indent of Article 135 hereof shall be a quantitative assessment under the
criterion “assessment of a researcher or a group of researchers” referred to in
Article 33 hereof, namely the quantitative assessment of the scientific success
of the project leader of the applicant, which is determined on the basis of the
A1 score referred to in Article 35 hereof. The call may stipulate that
scientific success is ascertained according to individual scientific discipline.
Article 139
(Draft priority list of applications)
(1) For calls for bilateral projects that are implemented as non-reciprocal
calls, the expert committee shall prepare a draft priority list of applications
on the basis of the scores of the applications. The draft priority list of
applications shall be reviewed by the SCA. The decision on the selection of
applications for cofinancing shall be taken by the Director by issuing a
decision on the selection of applications upon the proposal of the SCA on the
selection of applications, on the basis of which the applicants shall be issued
notification thereof.
(2) For calls for bilateral projects that are implemented as reciprocal
calls, the expert committee of the Agency shall submit the list of applications
with the pertaining assessments referred to in Article 138 hereof to the
Slovenian part of the authorised international body for scientific and
technological cooperation (the international committee or board for bilateral
scientific and technological cooperation). The transnational committee for
scientific and technological cooperation shall, during a session, independently
review the received and assessed applications of bilateral projects from both
countries and, pursuant to the powers conferred upon it and by a joint decision,
select an application and determine the rate of cofinancing. On the basis of the
decision of the transnational committee for scientific and technological
cooperation, the Director of the Agency shall issue a decision on the
cofinancing of the applications, which shall serve as the basis for issuing a
notification to the applicants.
Article 140
(Deleted)
Article 141
(Deleted)
Article 142
(Deleted)
Article 143
(Cofinancing)
(1) The international cooperation of foreign researchers visiting the
Republic of Slovenia referred to in the first and fourth indents of Article 135
hereof shall be cofinanced by the Agency in the amount of the costs of
accommodation and daily allowance set by the applicable regulation on the
reimbursement of work-related costs and other income excluded from the tax base,
unless stipulated otherwise in the call. Accommodation costs shall be cofinanced
in an amount not exceeding the costs of an overnight stay of up to €100 (for
stays of up to 14 days) or up to €1,250 a month, unless stipulated otherwise in
the call.
(2) For non-reciprocal calls for bilateral projects referred to in Article
137 hereof or for reciprocal calls for bilateral projects where the call so
provides, the Agency may finance the costs of accommodation and the daily
allowance of researchers during their stay abroad as determinedly the regulation
governing the reimbursement of costs for work-related travel abroad
(hereinafter: the regulation on costs).
(3) The Agency shall finance the international cooperation of Slovenian
researchers in the bilateral projects referred to in the first indent of Article
135 hereof in the amount of international transportation costs as economically
as possible, taking into consideration the cost and time spent, unless
stipulated otherwise in the call.
(4) For the cofinancing of bilateral research projects, the manner of
implementation of cofinancing shall be the same as for all research projects.
Article 144
(Framework programme projects)
(1) Applicants included in the Register of ROs who entered a project as a
coordinator or who participate as a partner in a project for which an
application was submitted to the European Commission by a foreign or Slovenian
RO and who in the assessment procedure conducted by the European Commission
achieved the threshold percentage of the maximum number of points shall be
eligible to receive a one-time financial contribution to the costs of the
preparation and application of framework programme projects for EU research and
innovation. The threshold percentage of the maximum number of points and the
amount of the one-time financial contribution shall be determined in the
methodology, whereby the amount of the financial contribution shall not exceed
€4,000 for applications by applicants who have the role of an international
consortium coordinator or €1,000 for applications by applicants included in the
project as a participating organisation.
(2) If the review of a project application involving an applicant from
Slovenia included in the Register of ROs exceeds the threshold for possible
cofinancing in an international call, the Agency may cofinance the Slovenian
part to the extent decided by the Director on the basis of a proposal by the
SCA, in accordance with the available funds in the budget of the Agency. For the
cofinancing of the Slovenian part of the research project, the manner of
implementation of such cofinancing shall be subject to the same conditions as
apply for research projects.
Article 145
(Assumption of cofinancing following the lead agency)
If a project application involving an applicant included in the Register of
ROs in the call of another country or the research funding agency thereof
(hereinafter: the lead agency) is proposed for funding, the Agency may cofinance
the Slovenian part to the extent decided by the Director on the basis of a
proposal by the SCA in accordance with the available funds in the budget of the
Agency. For the cofinancing of the Slovenian part of the research project, the
manner of implementation of cofinancing shall be subject to the same conditions
as apply for research projects.
Article 146
(European Research Area Net (ERA-net), Joint
Programming Initiatives (JPI) and other ERA instruments)
(1) When the Agency cooperates in the European Research Area Net, (ERA-net),
Joint Programming Initiatives, (JPI) or other ERA instruments (hereinafter:
international cooperation consortia), it shall contribute funds for the
cofinancing of selected projects of ROs from the Republic of Slovenia.
Cofinancing shall be implemented under the virtual common pot principle.
(2) The Agency shall cooperate in international cooperation consortia when a
quality assessment procedure with an international panel and reviewers is
ensured.
(3) If an international call at the level of an international cooperation
consortium envisions national eligibility conditions, the Agency shall adopt the
mentioned conditions for an RO from the Republic of Slovenian in accordance with
the regulations. Within the framework of the national eligibility conditions,
the Agency may limit the size of the applied work of the selected project from
the Republic of Slovenia. On the basis of notification by the international
cooperation consortium regarding the results of the conducted selection
procedure and the material for discussion by the competent body of the
international cooperation consortium, the Agency shall draw up the material for
discussion at the SCA. The decision on the cofinancing of the selected projects
of ROs from the Republic of Slovenia shall be made by the Director upon the
proposal of the SCA.
(4) The Agency shall carry out the cofinancing of selected projects on the
basis of a concluded contract on cofinancing with an RO from the Republic of
Slovenia.
(5) The Agency shall monitor and supervise the implementation of the selected
projects on the basis of annual financial reports on the funds spent and interim
and final reports on the work performed.
(6) The RO shall submit financial reports on the funds spent on the forms
adopted by the Director. The use of funds shall be subject to regulations equal
to those that apply to projects under these Rules. Interim and final reports on
the work performed shall be obtained by the Agency from the international
cooperation consortium coordinator. If the assessment of projects is conducted
within the international cooperation consortium, the SCS shall not assess these
reports.
(7) If a member of an international cooperation consortium is an RO and
requires the Agency’s consent for its cooperation, the RO and the Agency shall
settle their mutual rights and obligations by agreement. The RO may participate
in the international cooperation consortium on the condition that the
cofinancing shall be carried out under the virtual common pot principle. The
agreement shall primarily stipulate the following:
- the funds with which the RO participates in the cofinancing of projects
financed by the international cooperation consortium;
- the funds with which the RO cofinances the operation of the
international cooperation consortium, which includes meetings of the bodies
of the international cooperation consortium, the costs of assessment
procedures and other administrative costs of the international cooperation
consortium;
- the purpose of the use of funds which the RO obtains through the Agency
and uses as its contribution to ensure the intended use of the funds.
Article 147
(Cofinancing the cost of officials in international
scientific associations)
(1) Slovenian researchers elected chairs, vice-chairs or members of the
management bodies or secretaries general of the international scientific
associations referred to in the third indent of Article 135 may be (co)financed
by the Agency in the amount of the cost of the most economic international
transportation and daily allowances as laid down by the regulation on costs, for
participation at meetings of management bodies of international scientific
associations, but not more than twice a year. The Agency shall not (co)finance
participation in meetings of working groups and other ad hoc bodies.
(2) For Slovenian researchers, the Agency may (co)finance the fees for
professional tasks related to performance of the office of chairs and
secretaries general of international scientific associations of up to €900
annually, however an individual Slovenian scientific association cannot receive
more than a one-time fee for its officials in international scientific
associations each year.
Article 148
(Cofinancing of international scientific association
membership fees)
(1) The Agency may (co)finance international scientific association
membership fees in an amount between €200 and €800 annually. The Agency shall
provide funding for membership fees on the basis of claims for payment with an
enclosed copy of the invoice.
(2) The Agency shall not (co)finance the international scientific association
membership fees of sections of societies, businesses, institutes or other public
legal entities and individuals.
Article 149
(Financing the cost of visits by foreign delegations)
(1) The Agency shall (co)finance costs incurred in implementing the
international scientific cooperation programmes of the Republic of Slovenia by
visits of foreign delegations in the Republic of Slovenia or Slovenian
delegations abroad. The principle of reciprocity shall apply in ensuring funds.
(2) The participation of the Agency’s delegates in intergovernmental bodies
and committees of international organisations in which the Republic of Slovenia
is a partner shall be financed in full, in the amount laid down by the
regulation on costs.
Article 149.a
(Payment)
(1) (Co)financing shall occur on the basis of individual notification, a
decision issued by the Director or a contract between the Agency and the
applicant.
(2) All applicants regarding whom the Agency previously approved funds for
international cooperation must within 30 days of the completion of the activity,
and by 10 January of the next calendar year for activities completed in
December, submit to the Agency a payment claim for the payment of funds, cost
accounts and a substantive report on the activities implemented within an
activity. The Agency may use the report for promotional purposes.
(3) The Agency shall not be obliged to consider payment claims received after
the expiration of the deadline stipulated in the preceding paragraph.
(4) If a contract has been concluded between the Agency and an applicant, the
method of (co)financing shall be stipulated therein.
Article 149.b
(Supervision)
If the Agency establishes the misuse of funds, it shall terminate the payment
of funds and request a refund of all funds paid in the actual amount, including
legal default interest from the day of the receipt of funds in the current
account of the recipient until the day of the refund.
7.6 Established researchers from abroad
Article 150
(Purpose)
The Agency shall cofinance the cooperation of foreign researchers with ROs in
the Republic of Slovenia (hereinafter: foreign researchers) for the purpose of
their joint research work yielding quality research results publishable with the
Slovenian co-authors in at least one international scientific journal in the
upper quarter by impact factor in the field.
Article 151
(Cofinancing)
(1) The Agency shall cofinance the work of foreign researchers on the basis
of a call. The decree referred to in Article 11 hereof stipulates the deadline
for the submission of applications as an open deadline, which starts on the day
of the publication of the call and lasts until the funds envisioned for the year
are exhausted, but no later than the date stipulated by the call.
(2) If the allocated funds are exhausted before the end of the year, the
Agency shall publish the notification for potential applicants on its website.
In the same manner, potential applicants shall be notified of the beginning of
the deadline for applications in the next year.
(3) In addition to the provisions referred to in Article 12 hereof, the call
shall also include the minimum score required for inclusion in cofinancing.
Regardless of the provision of Article 12 regarding the estimated amount of
funds, the call shall specify the amount of funds available for the subject
matter of the call.
(4) The cofinancing of the cooperation of foreign researchers shall last no
less than a month and not more than one year by providing funds for the payment
of their research work, reimbursement of the costs of travel from the foreign
researcher’s country of residence to the Republic of Slovenia and back, and the
costs of staying in the Republic of Slovenia.
Article 152
(Applicant)
(1) An RO with a proposal of a foreign researcher who would cooperate in
research with the group of researchers working within the RO (hereinafter: the
applicant's research group) may submit an application to a call. Foreign
researchers are foreign citizens living and working abroad or Slovenian citizens
living and working abroad for at least five years.
(2) The applicant shall, inter alia, submit the following with the
application:
- a framework programme regarding the participation of the foreign
researcher in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 153 hereof;
- the list of names of Slovenian researchers with whom the foreign
researcher will cooperate in research; and
- the title of the scientific journal in which the publication of the
joint results of the applicant's research group is planned.
Article 153
(Conditions for cofinancing)
(1) Cofinancing the participation of foreign researchers in an RO shall be
subject to two conditions at the time of submitting the application:
- the foreign researcher must have at least three publications in
international scientific journals in the upper quarter by impact factor in
the field, or at least one publication in an international scientific
journal within A" or at least one patent granted by the office that performs
substantive examinations of patent applications (the patent condition does
not apply for the humanities);
- the Agency shall cofinance at least one current project or programme of
the applicant’s research group.
(2) In the application the applicant shall undertake that:
- during the research in the Republic of Slovenia, the foreign researcher
shall deliver at least two lectures on the topic of the performed research;
- the foreign researcher shall perform research in the applicant’s
research group in the Republic of Slovenia for at least one month without
interruption, whereby the participation of the foreign researcher in
conferences or scientific meetings shall not be deemed to constitute an
interruption.
(3) A foreign researcher and applicant’s research group selected in a call
for (co)financing established foreign researchers within the last five years
shall not be eligible for selection in a call.
Article 154
(Opening of applications)
The opening of received applications shall be conducted in the order of their
receipt. The applications shall be opened in the time intervals specified in the
call. An individual opening shall include the applications that have been
received by the day of the opening.
Article 155
(Incomplete documentation – supplementing
applications)
(1) Within eight working days of the completion of the opening of
applications, the committee shall in writing call upon the applicants with
formally incomplete applications to supplement them within the set deadline.
Calls for supplementing applications shall be sent in the order in which the
applications were received.
Article 156
(Assessment of applications)
The assessment of applications shall be conducted at the same time for all
applications opened on a given date and shall commence each time following the
final decisions of the committee referred to in Articles 20 and 21 hereof.
Article 157
(Expert body)
The assessment of applications meeting the conditions shall be conducted by
establishing the minimum score for their inclusion in cofinancing and led by the
expert body responsible for the assessment of foreign researchers appointed by
the SCA. The expert body shall be composed of the chair and two members.
Article 158
(Assessment of researchers)
(1) Applications may be assessed by individual members of the expert body as
reviewers or external reviewers appointed by the expert body (hereinafter:
reviewers). Each reviewer shall if possible assess at least two applications
from the same scientific field or discipline.
(2) Reviewers shall assess individual assessment elements by filling in the
assessment sheet forms with numerical scores for individual indicators and
yardsticks. Reviewers shall apply the criteria specified in Table 7.6 for
assessment.
Table 7.6: Criteria for the assessment of foreign researchers, the maximum
number of points by criterion and the minimum score.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
Min. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers |
30 |
16 |
2 |
Relevance of the achievements of the researchers |
10 |
6 |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the anticipated research results |
10 |
6 |
|
Total |
50 |
38 |
(3) The following indicators shall apply to the assessment under the
criterion of scientific excellence:
- achievements in publications (qualitative) (indicator 1.4);
- achievements in citations (qualitative) (indicator 1.5);
- status and international excellence (indicator 1.6).
(4) The following indicators shall apply to the assessment under the
criterion of the relevance of the achievements of the researchers:
- demonstrable ties with industry or social and cultural activities
(indicator 2.5);
- (co)author of patents, standards, licences, new products, technologies
and technological solutions, or innovations (indicator 2.6);
- (co)founder of a spin-off company (indicator 2.7).
(5) The following indicators shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application of
the anticipated research results:
- significance for the RO (indicator 5.13);
- significance for the group of researchers (indicator 5.14);
- significance for Slovenia (indicator 5.15).
(6) If the applied foreign researcher is the recipient of a Noble Prize or
Fields Medal or the leader of an ongoing ERC project, he or she shall be
included in cofinancing without prior assessment.
(7) Yardsticks (points) for indicators shall be set in the methodology.
Article 159
(Assessment procedure)
(1) The assessment of applications shall be conducted in the order of the
submission of complete applications. After the scoring and the receipt of the
reviewers’ assessment, the expert body shall examine the assessment and may call
on the reviewers to provide additional substantiations for the assessment.
(2) On the basis of the number of points received, the expert body shall
establish the minimum score for cofinancing. As a condition for cofinancing, an
application must achieve the threshold for each criterion referred to in the
second paragraph of Article 158 hereof.
(3) The expert body shall draw up a proposal for the cofinancing of
applications by foreign researchers meeting the minimum score for cofinancing,
taking into consideration the order of the submitted complete applications and
the submission of applications that do not meet the minimum score for
cofinancing, and submit them both to the SCA for review.
(4) The cofinancing shall include applications by foreign researchers meeting
the minimum score for cofinancing and the applications referred to in the sixth
paragraph of Article 158 hereof, in the order of the submission of complete
applications with regard to the date and hour of submission of a complete
application until the annual amount of the call budget is exhausted.
(5) Regardless of the amount of the call budget, an application by a foreign
researcher approved in the objection proceedings referred to in Article 28
hereof shall be included for cofinancing.
(6) The decision on the acceptance of applications for cofinancing by foreign
researchers or the rejection of applications shall be issued by the Director
upon the proposal of the SCA.
(7) Applications received after the funds for the final year of a call have
been exhausted and before the expiration of the open deadline shall be rejected
by a decision issued by the Director.
Article 160
(Contract)
The Agency shall regulate the cofinancing of the selected foreign researchers
by a contract.
7.7 Scientific meetings
Article 161
(Purpose)
The Agency shall cofinance meetings for the purpose of enabling the
acquisition of new knowledge, the transfer of know-how from abroad, the
international exchange of knowledge and the transfer of research results into
practice.
Article 162
(Subject matter of cofinancing)
The Agency shall cofinance the costs of the organisation of scientific
meetings, namely the administrative costs of the programme and organisational
board, the printing and sending of invitations and correspondence and the
printing of abstracts in book or electronic form, an allowance per presenter,
the costs of renting the hall and the costs of accommodation for no more than
ten invited foreign lecturers or five percent of the active participants
(invited lecturers from abroad and persons giving presentations). The Agency
shall also cofinance preparatory works for the organisation of large meetings,
namely the administrative costs of the programme and organisational board, the
printing and sending of invitations and correspondence and the printing of
abstracts in book or electronic form.
Article 163
(Programme committee)
A programme committee shall be set up and shall be responsible for providing
quality organisation of the scientific meeting. The head of the scientific
meeting must be listed in the Register of ROs as a researcher.
Article 164
(Collecting applications)
(1) The Agency shall collect applications for the organisation of meetings on
the basis of a call.
(2) The call shall be open to ROs entered in the Register of ROs and
societies of public interest in the field of research. Legal entities of
Slovenians from the areas of the Slovenian national minorities in the
neighbouring countries and legal entities of Slovenian emigrants (hereinafter:
applicants) may also apply.
Article 165
(Assessment of applications)
(1) The application assessment shall be conducted by the expert body
responsible for assessing scientific meeting applications, which shall be
appointed by the SCA.
(2) Each application shall be assessed by two reviewers. The expert body for
scientific meetings (hereinafter: the expert body) shall appoint 14 reviewers,
two for each scientific discipline. Within 30 days of receiving the
documentation, the expert body shall prepare a financially evaluated draft
priority list for cofinancing scientific meetings (hereinafter: the draft). The
draft shall be signed by the chair of the expert body.
(3) The criteria specified in Table 7.7 shall be used for the assessment of
applications.
Table 7.7: Criteria for assessing applications for scientific meetings and
the maximum number of points by criterion.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers |
40 |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the anticipated research results |
60 |
6 |
Quality and efficiency of implementation and management |
15 |
|
Total |
115 |
(4) The following indicators shall apply for assessment under the criterion
of scientific excellence:
- achievements in publications (qualitative) (indicator 1.4);
- achievements in citations (qualitative) (indicator 1.5).
(5) The following indicators shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application of
the anticipated research results:
- significance for the development of science or another profession
(indicator 5.4);
- share of funds from other sources (indicator 5.7);
- share of foreign participants in the scientific meeting (indicator 5.9);
- periodicity of the scientific meeting (indicator 5.10);
- anticipated response within the scientific and expert public (indicator
5.11);
- joining of several scientific disciplines (indicators 5.12).
(6) The following indicator shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the quality and efficiency of implementation and management:
- harmonisation of the proposed scope of activities with the planned
budget and ensuring the economical use of funds (indicator 6.7).
(7) The assessment elements shall be specified in detail in the methodology.
(8) After the scoring, the expert body shall determine four categories: I,
II, III and IV. Only meetings classified under categories I, II and III may be
cofinanced. A meeting shall be categorised on the basis of the sum of all scores
based on points, separately by field.
Article 166
(Minimum number of presentations)
The Agency shall cofinance meetings at which at least ten people are
anticipated to give presentations for a one-day meeting and at least 20 people
giving presentations for a two or multi-day meeting.
Article 167
(Norms for calculating funds for cofinancing the cost
of organising scientific meetings)
The calculation of funds for cofinancing the cost of organising scientific
meetings shall take into account the number of participants, the number of
persons giving presentations, the number of days, the number of invited
lecturers from abroad, and administration, depending on the number of persons
giving presentations. The calculation method and financially determined elements
are specified in the methodology.
7.8 Promotion and integration of scientific
achievements
Article 168
(Purpose)
The Agency shall cofinance activities related to the promotion and
integration of science on the basis of a call for the purpose of:
- providing support for active cooperation by invitations to events
organised (co-organisation is not sufficient) by recognised international
associations, international organisations or the European Commission.
Cooperation may take the form of an inaugural lecture, invited lecture or
invited participation in a discussion (i.e. a panel). Slovenian researchers
from the areas of the Slovenian national minorities in the neighbouring
countries and Slovenian emigrants may participate under the same conditions;
- providing support for Slovenian institutions or associations which in
the field of research integrate the activities of Slovenian experts in the
humanities and natural scientists and other experts in the areas of
Slovenian national minorities, cooperating with foreign research
institutions and societies, and supplying their scientific publications to
libraries and Slovenian lectureships abroad;
- providing support for associations that provide information on policies
and European legislation on research and innovation, higher education at the
EU level and current EU calls for applications and ensuring integration with
European partners in the formation of project consortia for research and
developmental-technological networks;
- encouraging development and establishing innovative communication
activities for the promotion of Slovenian research to improve public
understanding of science, with innovative communication activities being
defined as those representing a novelty in the way of promoting science in
Slovenia and at the same time cumulatively meeting the following conditions:
guaranteed inclusion of all scientific disciplines, ensured communication
with the foreign public, integrating the scientific excellence of the
participating researchers with the media and communication skills of the
applicant.
Article 169
(Applicants)
The following can apply to a call of the Agency for cofinancing activities
related to the promotion and integration of science for the purpose stipulated
in Article 168 hereof:
- the first and fourth indents: applications may be submitted by ROs and
private researchers included in the Register of ROs or the Register of
Private Researchers kept by the Agency who meet the conditions prescribed by
the Act regulating research and development and the regulations of the
Agency. The call may be applied to by other institutes, companies,
associations of societies and institutions from the Republic of Slovenia,
societies entered in the database of societies at the ministry responsible
for science that operate in the public interest in research and legal
persons from the areas of the Slovenian national minorities in the
neighbouring countries and Slovenian emigrants;
- the second indent: societies, associations of societies, institutions
from the Republic of Slovenia;
- the third indent: societies, associations of societies.
Article 170
(Assessment of applications)
(1) Applications shall be assessed by an expert committee appointed by a
decision of the Director. The Director shall determine the number of members of
the committee. The members may be external or employed by the Agency. The
committee shall consist of the chair and at least two members. If needed, the
expert committee may obtain the opinion of members of the expert bodies of the
Agency or reviewers in adopting a decision.
(2) The expert committee shall assess the applications on the basis of the
criteria stipulated in Table 7.8.
Table 7.8: Criteria for assessing applications for the promotion and
integration of knowledge and the maximum number of points by criterion.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers |
10 |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the anticipated research results |
70 |
6 |
Quality and efficiency of implementation and management |
20 |
|
Total |
100 |
The following indicator shall apply for assessment under the criterion of the
scientific excellence of the researchers:
- quality of published work (score A1, including a scores A", A' and A½
for separate consideration of above-average scientific success) for the
implementer of the promotional activity (indicator 1.1.);
(4) The following indicators shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application of
the anticipated research results:
- anticipated response within the scientific and expert public (indicator
5.11);
- anticipated public visibility (indicator 5.17);
- compliance of the draft proposal with the topics of the call (indicator
5.23).
(5) The following indicators shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the quality and efficiency of implementation and management:
- compliance of the proposed scope of activities with the planned budget
and ensuring the economical use of funds (indicator 6.7).
- the references of the applicant in promotional and integration
activities (indicator 6.11).
(6) In assessing the applications under second or third indent of Article 168
hereof, the expert committee shall take into consideration the notable work of
the applicant over the past several years.
Article 171
(Cofinancing)
(1) In the framework of activities for the promotion and integration of
scientific achievements under the criteria referred to in Article 170 hereof,
the Agency shall cofinance:
- costs related to promotional activities conducted by Slovenia
researchers, including those living in the areas of Slovenian national
minorities in the neighbouring countries and Slovenian emigrants.
Participation fees for a congress, a meeting or a symposium shall not be
financed;
- the operating costs of institutions and associations applying for the
purpose referred to in the second or third indent of Article 168 hereof;
- the operating costs of associations;
- the costs of establishing and operating innovative systems for the
promotion of Slovenian science.
(2) Applicants shall sign a statement that they do not receive (co)funding
from other budgetary funds for the same purpose.
Article 172
(Decision-making by the SCA and adopting decisions)
Based on scoring in accordance with the set criteria, the expert body shall
prepare the draft priority list of applications for the cofinancing of promotion
and submit it to the SCA for review. On the basis of the proposal of the SCA on
the selection of applications for the cofinancing of promotion, the Director
shall issue a reasoned decision on the selection of applications.
7.9 Scientific publication
7.9.1 Domestic scientific periodicals
Article 173
(Purpose)
(1) Through cofinancing, the Agency shall support the publication of domestic
scientific periodicals in printed or electronic form, (hereinafter: scientific
publications) on the basis of a call, to enable and promote publications that
are:
- relevant and fundamental to the development of a scientific area or
sub-area;
- important for the development of Slovenian scientific terminology;
- important for presenting Slovenian scientific achievements locally and
internationally;
- important for the dissemination of new scientific findings.
(2) Scientific publications must comply with all the applicable international
bibliographic and technical standards for scientific publications and
periodicals.
Article 174
(Applicants)
A call for the cofinancing of the publication of domestic scientific
publications may be applied to by research organisations entered in the Register
of ROs, societies entered in the database of societies operating in the public
interest in research, and publishers. Legal entities of Slovenians from the
areas of the Slovenian national minorities in the neighbouring countries and
legal entities of Slovenian emigrants (hereinafter: applicants) may also apply.
An applicant may submit only one application for a single scientific publication
to a call.
Article 175
(Conditions for applicants)
Applicants must meet the following conditions:
- the scientific publication has been published for at least one year
prior to the call;
- the scientific publication was published in accordance with the annual
plan in the year before the publication of the call;
- the scientific publication has an on-line address (with at least a table
of contents of each issue and an abstract);
- the scientific publication has an appropriate ISSN number;
- If the scientific publication publishes articles in a foreign language,
at least the abstracts of the articles must be in Slovenian;
- if the scientific publication publishes articles in Slovenian, at least
the abstracts of the articles must be in English (or another global
language, in exception);
- the applicant shall be obliged to keep written reviews of scientific
articles for the period of the past four years, which must be made available
to the Agency at all times, or for the period of the publishing of the
scientific publication if the mentioned period is shorter than four years;
- the applicant shall be obliged to provide a part of the applicant’s own
funds:
- the applicant shall not be cofinanced for the same purpose and with the
same publication programme from other public calls and the cofinancing shall
not exceed the permissible amount of aid under the “de minimis” rule;
- the applicant shall not be in a compulsory settlement, bankruptcy or
compulsory winding up procedure;
- a scientific publication whose publication is cofinanced by the Agency
must be presented in an on-line form. It is compulsory to submit
publications in the prescribed electronic form to the National and
University Library for publication on the publicly available portal The
Digital Library of Slovenia –dLib.si at the time of its publication or no
later than by the publication of the next issue.
- the applicant has complied with all potential contractual obligations to
the Agency from the previous year;
- The scientific publication is included in international bibliographic
databases that are consulted in the categorisation of scientific
publications (BIBLO-A), or in the list of scientific publications that are
not included in international bibliographic databases but are consulted in
the categorisation of scientific publications (BIBLO-B), which are
accessible on the website of the Agency.
Article 176
(Assessment of applications)
Applications shall be assessed by an expert committee appointed by a decision
of the Director. The Director shall determine the number of members of the
committee. The members may be external or employed by the Agency. The committee
shall consist of the chair and at least two members. If needed, the expert
committee may obtain the opinion of members of the expert bodies of the Agency
or reviewers in adopting decision.
(2) The expert committee shall assess the applications on the basis of the
criteria stipulated in Table 7.9.1.
Table 7.9.1: Criterion for assessing applications for domestic scientific
periodicals and the maximum number of points by criterion.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
9 |
Quality of the application regarding support |
100 |
|
Total |
100 |
(3) The following indicators shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the quality of the application regarding support:
- the quality of the scientific publication – the publication is included
in the international bibliographic databases SCOPUS or WoS (indicator 9.11);
- the quality of the scientific publication – the publication is included
in other international bibliographic databases consulted in the
categorisation of scientific publications (indicator 9.12);
- the quality of the scientific publication – the publication is included
in the list of international publications which are not included in
international bibliographic databases but are consulted in the
categorisation of scientific publications (indicator 9.13).
(4) The expert committee shall verify the eligibility of the applicants and
fulfilment of the terms of the call for participating in the call under Articles
174 and 175 hereof.
Article 177
(Cofinancing)
(1) The amount of annual cofinancing per publication shall be calculated
proportionally to the extent of publishing scientific content and the assessment
under the provisions of Article 176 hereof. A more detailed method of
calculating the highest possible amount of cofinancing per scientific
publication and the largest annual extent of scientific content publishing
cofinanced by the Agency shall be determined by the methodology or the call. The
amount of cofinancing cannot exceed the requested funds. If the amount of
calculated funds for cofinancing exceeds the available financial means, the
calculated amounts of cofinancing shall be proportionally harmonised with the
extent of the available financial means.
(2) In publishing the publication the Agency shall cofinance printing costs,
the costs of pre-press activities (the costs of design and typesetting), the
costs of dispatching, the preparation of on-line issues, editorial work and
proofreading. The Agency shall not cofinance authors’ fees.
(3) If the scope of the publication decreases in a year by over 20% of the
annual number of16 typed double-spaced pages or 30,000-character sheets,
hereinafter: “author folio” submitted by an application, the Agency shall
appropriately adjust the cofinancing by recalculating the amount of cofinancing
per year in the manner stipulated in the first paragraph of this Article.
Article 178
(Decision-making by the SCA and adopting decisions)
Based on the scoring in accordance with the set criteria, the expert body
shall prepare a draft priority list of applications for the cofinancing of
domestic scientific periodicals and submit it to the SCA for consideration and
approval. Upon the proposal by the SCA on the selection of applications for the
cofinancing of domestic scientific periodicals, the Director shall issue a
reasoned decision on the selection of applications.
7.9.2 Domestic popular science periodicals
Article 179
(Purpose)
(1) The Agency shall cofinance the publication of domestic popular science
periodicals in printed or electronic form, (hereinafter: popular science
publications) on the basis of a call, in order to enable and promote popular
science publications that are:
- important for increasing the interest in science and technology among
youth and the general public and for the promotion of the overall scientific
and technical culture;
- important for formal education (especially in primary and secondary
education);
- important for the development of Slovenian popular science terminology;
- available on the internet and largely created by Slovenian authors.
Article 180
(Applicants)
A call may be applied to by organisations entered in the Register of ROs,
societies entered in the database of societies operating in the public interest
in research, and publishers. Legal entities of Slovenians from the areas of the
Slovenian national minorities in the neighbouring countries and legal entities
of Slovenian emigrants may also apply.
Article 181
(Conditions for applicants)
Applicants must meet the following conditions:
- the popular science publication has been published for at least one year
prior to the call;
- the popular science publication was published in accordance with the
annual plan in the year before the publication of the call;
- the popular science publication has an on-line address (with at least a
table of contents of each issue and an abstract);
- the popular science publication has a suitable ISSN number;
- the applicant is obliged to provide a part of the applicant’s own
resources;
- only one application for a popular science publication may be submitted
to the call.
- the applicant shall not receive co-funding for the same purpose and with
the same publication programme from other public calls and it shall not
exceed the permissible amount of aid under the “de minimis” rule;
- the applicant shall not be in a compulsory settlement, bankruptcy or
compulsory winding up procedure;
- the popular science publication must be presented in an on-line form. It
is compulsory to submit publications in the prescribed electronic form to
the National and University Library for publication on the publicly
available portal The Digital Library of Slovenia –dLib.si at the time of its
publication or no later than by the publication of the next issue.
Article 182
(Assessment of applications)
(1) Applications shall be assessed by a temporary expert body appointed by
the SCA.
(2) The temporary expert body shall assess the applications on the basis of
the criterion stipulated in Table 7.9.2.
Table 7.9.2: Criterion for assessing applications for domestic popular
science publications and the maximum number of points by criterion.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the anticipated research results |
100 |
|
Total |
100 |
(3) The following indicators shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application of
the anticipated research results:
- popular science periodicals: connection with formal education
(especially with primary and secondary education) (indicator 5.18);
- popular science periodicals: importance for increasing public interest
in the natural sciences and technology and for promoting the overall
scientific and technical culture (indicator 5.19);
- popular science periodicals: importance for the development of Slovenian
popular science terminology (indicator 5.20);
- popular science periodicals: representation (share) of Slovenian authors
(indicator 5.21);
- popular science periodicals: availability on the internet (indicator
5.22).
(4) The maximum score for a publication shall be 100 points. On the basis of
the number of points received, the application shall be classified into one of
the three categories, namely:
- category I shall comprise applications whose score is between 91 and 100
points;
- category II shall comprise applications whose score is between 60 and 90
points;
- category III shall comprise applications whose score is lower than 60
points.
(5) The calculation of the amount of cofinancing of a popular science
publication shall proportionally take into consideration the number of author
foliosper volume, the circulation, the number of volumes per year, the
recognised costs per author folioand the category referred to in the
preceding paragraph. The specific manner of calculating the cofinancing for a
popular science publication shall be stipulated in the methodology. If the
amount of calculated funds for cofinancing exceeds the available financial
means, the calculated amount of cofinancing shall be proportionally harmonised
with the extent of the available financial means.
Article 183
(Cofinancing)
The Agency shall cofinance printing costs and the costs of pre-press
activities, the preparation of on-line issues, proofreading, typesetting and
dispatching, while it shall not cofinance authors’ fees. If the scope of the
publication decreases in a year by over 20% of the annual number of author
folios submitted by an application, the Agency shall appropriately adjust
the cofinancing by recalculating the amount of cofinancing per year in
accordance with the calculation stipulated in fifth paragraph of Article 182.
Article 184
(Decision-making by the SCA and adopting decisions)
Based on the scoring in accordance with the set criteria, the temporary
expert body shall prepare a draft priority list of applications for the
cofinancing of popular science periodicals and submit it to the SCA for
consideration and approval. Upon the proposal of the SCA on the selection of
applications for the cofinancing of popular science periodicals, the Director
shall issue a reasoned decision on the selection of applications.
7.9.3 Scientific monographs
Article 185
(Purpose)
By cofinancing, the Agency shall support the issuance of scientific
monographs in the fields of the humanities, the social sciences, medicine,
biotechnology, technology and the natural science in printed and electronic form
on the basis of a call to enable and promote the publication of scientific
monographs that are:
- relevant and fundamental to the development of a scientific area;
- important for the development of Slovenian scientific terminology;
- important for presenting Slovenian scientific achievements locally and
internationally;
- important for the dissemination of new scientific findings and
scientific culture.
Article 186
(Subject matter of cofinancing)
(1) In the publication of scientific monographs, the Agency shall cofinance:
- scientific monographs and critical editions of sources with an
introductory study and a commentary: printing costs, technical preparation
of the manuscript for print or digital publication (the costs of design and
typesetting)and proofreading costs;
- the translation of scientific monographs by foreign authors in
Slovenian: translation costs;
- the translation of scientific monographs by Slovenian authors in a
foreign language: translation costs or proofreading costs if the monograph
is written in a foreign language;
- digital publication of a monograph: the costs of preparing the
manuscript for digital publication, proofreading costs.
(2) The Agency shall not cofinance:
- reprinted editions of scientific monographs;
- reprinted doctoral or master’s theses;
- proceedings of scientific papers at conferences, congresses, symposiums
and colloquiums;
- final and other reports on research results;
- textbooks, manuals and catalogues.
(3) If the calculation of the cofinanced amount exceeds the amount applied
for, the amount applied for shall be used.
(4) The number of scientific monographs by an author eligible for cofinancing
by the Agency shall be stipulated in the call.
(5) In the case of the translation of a scientific monograph by the same
author in several foreign languages, the Agency shall cofinance a translation
into only one foreign language. If the applied translation of the scientific
monograph by a Slovenian author was originally written in the foreign language,
only the costs of proofreading the translation shall be considered.
(6) The Agency shall not cofinance the authors’ fees of authors of scientific
monographs.
(7) The Agency shall cofinance the publishing costs or the costs of
scientific monograph translation incurred by the deadline for the submission of
supporting materials.
Article 187
(Applicants)
(1) A call for cofinancing the publication of scientific monographs may be
applied to by:
- research organisations entered in the Register of ROs;
- societies entered in the database of societies that operate in the
public interest in the field of research;
- publishers in the Republic of Slovenia and in the areas of Slovenian
national minorities.
An applicant may submit only one application for a scientific monograph to a
call.
Article 188
(Conditions for applicants)
(1) Applicants must meet the following conditions:
- scientific monographs must be reviewed by at least two scientific
reviewers;
- the scientific review must be published in a cofinanced scientific
monograph together with the name of the reviewer;
- the scientific monograph must be arranged and equipped in accordance
with international bibliographic standards and the standards for scientific
publications applicable in the Republic of Slovenia (the scientific
monograph must have an appropriate CIP and ISBN number or all the necessary
elements required for obtaining one);
- the scientific monograph and the translation of the scientific monograph
must be delivered to the Agency by 31 March of the following year;
- the financial structure of the scientific monograph must be financially
balanced in such a manner so as to ensure that the scientific monograph has
equal income and expenditure;
- the applicant shall strive to ensure the publication of scientific
monographs within a business model that allows for open access to cofinanced
digital scientific monographs, in accordance with the applicable strategy of
open access;
- the applicant shall not receive co-funding for the same purpose and for
the same scientific monograph from the state budget on the basis of other
public calls and it shall not exceed the permissible amount of aid under the
“de minimis” rule;
- the applicant must not be in a compulsory settlement, bankruptcy or
compulsory winding up procedure;
- the applicant shall be obliged to ensure a part of the applicant’s own
funds or funding from other sources.
(2) In the translation of a scientific monograph by a foreign author into
Slovenian, published reviews of the work shall be taken into consideration. If a
foreign scientific monograph translated into Slovenian does not have published
reviews, the applicant shall include at least two scientific reviews.
Article 189
(Conditions for scientific monograph reviewers)
(1) A scientific monograph reviewer may be a Slovenian or foreign citizen
holding a doctoral degree in the scientific discipline of the scientific
monograph that an application has been submitted for and habilitation to the
title of a lecturer (assistant professor, associate professor or full professor)
or a suitable research title (research fellow, senior research fellow or
research counsellor).
(2) A scientific monograph reviewer shall ascertain if the monograph is a
scientific work.
(3) The scientific monograph reviewer must not have a conflict of interest
with the author of the scientific monograph.
(4) The name of the scientific monograph reviewer shall be published.
Article 190
(Application)
(1) In addition to the application form and the obligatory appendices
testifying to fulfilment of the conditions, the application must also include a
digital version of the scientific monograph (with all pertaining appendices) in
the prescribed medium and format.
(2) In scientific translations of foreign authors into Slovenian, the
original work by the foreign author and the draft translation together with the
data and references of the translator must also be enclosed. If the original
work by the foreign author cannot be enclosed, the applicant shall state in the
application the personal data of the author, the title and language of the
original that is being translated, the year and place of publication and the
title of the publisher.
(3) In the case of published scientific monographs by Slovenian authors, a
copy of the original must be enclosed. For the translation of a Slovenian author
into a foreign language, the contract of the author with the foreign publisher
or written evidence that the scientific monograph has been accepted in a
programme by a foreign publisher (if the work is to be published abroad) must be
enclosed.
Article 191
(Assessment of applications)
Applications shall be assessed by an expert committee appointed by a decision
of the Director. The Director shall determine the number of members of the
committee. The members may be external or employed by the Agency. The committee
shall consist of the chair and at least two members. If needed, the expert
committee may obtain the opinion of members of the expert bodies of the Agency
or reviewers in adopting a decision.
(2) The expert committee shall assess applications on the basis of the
criteria stipulated in Table 7.9.3.
Table 7.9.3: Criteria for assessing applications for scientific monographs
and the maximum number of points by criterion.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
1 |
Scientific excellence of the researchers (authors) |
30 |
9 |
Scientific excellence of the scientific monograph reviewer |
30 |
|
Total |
60 |
The following indicator shall apply for the assessment of scientific
monographs under the criterion of the scientific excellence of the researchers
(authors):
- the quality of the published work (A1 score, including A", A' and
A½ scores for separate consideration of above-average scientific success)
(indicator 1.1.).
(4) The following indicator shall apply for the assessment of scientific
monographs under the criterion of the scientific excellence of the reviewers:
- scientific excellence of the scientific monograph reviewer (indicator
9.14).
(5) The references of the scientific excellence of the author on the date of
the completion of the call shall be taken into consideration.
(6) For foreign authors of scientific monographs translated into Slovenian,
the expert committee shall issue its assessment of the scientific excellence of
the author and the scientific translation into Slovenian on the basis of the
enclosed original by the foreign author, enclosed reviews, the draft translation
and three listed scientific works by the author in the field of the stated
scientific discipline, except when time, distance or other circumstances make it
impossible to obtain other works by the author.
(7) Assessment of the scientific excellence of Slovenian authors of
scientific monographs who are not included in the Register of ROs shall be
issued by the expert committee on the basis of the author's bibliography.
(8) Assessment of the scientific excellence of a foreign reviewer of a
scientific monograph shall be issued by the expert committee on the basis of the
three best scientific works of the reviewer.
(9) If the scientific monograph has several authors, the assessment shall
take into consideration only the points of the first author demonstrating
bibliographic indicators in the SICRIS system.
(10) If the scientific monograph is reviewed by several reviewers, assessment
of the scientific excellence of the reviewers shall be established by
calculating the average number of points of two reviewers demonstrating
bibliographic indicators in the SICRIS system.
(11) The maximum score for a publication shall be 60 points. Based on its
score, the application shall be classified into one of three categories, namely:
- category I for applications whose score is between 30 and 60 points;
- category II for applications whose score is between 21 and 30 points;
- category III for applications whose score is lower than 21 points.
Article 192
(Cofinancing)
The amount of cofinancing for a scientific monograph shall be calculated on
the basis of its circulation, the scope of the scientific monograph (in terms
of author folios) and its categorisation under Article 191 hereof. A
detailed calculation of the cofinancing of a scientific monograph shall be
stipulated in the methodology. If the amount of calculated funds for cofinancing
exceeds the available financial means, the calculated amount of cofinancing
shall be proportionally harmonised with the extent of the available financial
means.
Article 193
(Decision-making by the SCA and adopting decisions)
Based on the scoring in accordance with the set criteria, the expert body
shall prepare a draft priority list of applications for the cofinancing of
scientific monographs and submit it to the SCA for consideration and approval.
Upon the proposal of the SCA on the selection of applications for the
cofinancing of scientific monographs, the Director shall issue a reasoned
decision on the selection of applications.
7.10 Purchase of international scientific literature
Article 194
(Purpose)
The Agency shall cofinance the purchase of international scientific
literature in accordance with these Rules for the purpose of ensuring the flow
and availability of international scientific and expert information for the
needs of research, education and development in the Republic of Slovenia.
Article 195
(Expert body)
The assessment of applications shall be conducted by the expert body
responsible for assessing applications regarding international scientific
literature.
Article 196
(Applicants)
(1) Libraries that are legal entities of public law and institutes entered in
the Register of ROs with their own or joint libraries may apply to a call.
(2) Libraries and institutes applying to a call must perform information
services for a wide range of users in research, education and development.
Libraries (the national library, university and higher education libraries and
specialised libraries) and institutions may apply individually or as a
consortium.
Article 197
(Contents of an application)
(1) An application must be based on the publisher’s price lists or obtained
offers. The anticipated prices of orders must be recorded in the COBISS.SI
system. The list for ordering international scientific literature, extracted
from the COBISS.SI system, shall be annexed to the application.
(2) An applicant may be granted funds up to the amount of the offers referred
to in the submitted list.
(3) If an applicant negotiates with suppliers lower prices than those
submitted in the application and some funds remain unused, the applicant may
propose to the Agency the purchase of additional international literature for
which the applicant applied in the call but for which it did not receive (full)
cofinancing.
(4) The proposal referred to in the third paragraph shall be drawn up on the
basis of offers enclosed with the proposal. The Director shall issue a decision
on the proposal.
Article 198
(Assessment of applications)
(1) The criteria specified in Table 7.10 shall be used for the assessment of
applications.
Table 7.10: Criteria for assessing applications for the purchase of
international scientific literature and the maximum number of points by
criterion.
Criterion No.
in Appendix2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
8 |
Relevance of the support |
16 |
9 |
Quality of the application regarding support |
15 |
5 |
Potential impact due to the development, dissemination and
application of the anticipated research results |
3 |
6 |
Quality and efficiency of implementation of management |
6 |
|
Total |
40 |
(2) The following indicators shall apply for assessment under the criterion
of the relevance of the support:
- accessibility (indicator 8.1);
- frequency of use (indicator 8.2).
(3) The following indicator shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the quality of the application regarding support:
- quality and significance of the ordered international scientific
literature (indicator 9.6).
(4) The following indicator shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the potential impact due to the development, dissemination and application of
the anticipated research results:
- share of funds from other sources (indicator 5.7).
(5) The following indicator shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the quality and efficiency of the implementation of management:
- harmonisation of the proposed scope of activities with the planned
budget and ensuring the economical use of funds (indicator 6.7).
(6) The assessment elements shall be specified in detail in the methodology.
Article 199
(Priority in cofinancing)
(1) Priority in cofinancing the purchase of international scientific
literature shall be given to those applicants whose expedited development is in
the public interest of the Republic of Slovenia. Such a method shall enable the
expedited development of scientific fields that are in the public interest of
the Republic of Slovenia and are an integral part of a young organisation that
should be further developed in the public interest or of an established
organisation that is rapidly developing a new R&D field.
(2) The expert body may grant an applicant referred to in the preceding
paragraph priority treatment if increasing the accessibility of international
scientific literature represents an integral part of the comprehensive
developmental project of an R&D field. The expert body must substantiate its
decision.
Article 200
(Scope of cofinancing)
The expert body shall take into account the following in preparing a proposal
for the funding of an applicant:
- the scope of the applicant’s funds approved for such purpose in the
previous year;
- an increase or decrease in the funds referred to above with regard to
the classification of the applicant according to the scale of points on the
basis of the criteria; and
- the total funds allocated for this purpose.
Article 201
(Distribution of applications)
(1) Applications for the cofinancing of international periodicals shall be
assessed by the expert body for international literature by scientific
discipline. If a member of the expert body has a conflict of interest, he or she
shall be removed from the assessment procedure in accordance with the provision
of Article 230 hereof.
(2) On the basis a score expressed in points, the expert body shall prepare
the order of applications for international periodicals by scientific
discipline.
(3) In determining the amount funds for cofinancing, the expert body shall
take as the starting point the available funds, the funds paid to the applicant
in the past year and the placement of the applicant within the order of
applications.
(4) In the priority treatment of an applicant on the basis of the second
paragraph of Article 199 hereof, the expert body may disregard the provisions of
the preceding paragraph. Such proposal must be additionally substantiated.
(5) If the Agency has not yet cofinanced an applicant, the expert body shall
draw up a proposal for cofinancing the purchase of international scientific
literature in such a manner so as to take into consideration the available
funds. The minimum scope of funds for cofinancing must not be less than the
funds granted to an applicant receiving the minimum funds in the past year.
(6) The expert body shall separately propose the cofinancing of a purchasing
consortia of special significance. The consortium shall be considered of special
significance if it comprises at least four universities and at least four PROs
or the entire scientific field covered by the consortium. Consortia shall have
the cost of electronic access to full-text contents cofinanced. The starting
point for allocating such funds shall be the available funds and the funds paid
to the consortium in the previous year.
(7) The expert body shall separately propose the cofinancing of international
databases. In addition to basic bibliographic data, the proposed databases shall
comprise analytical data that provide additional information about the quality
of research findings. The starting point for the proposal on the scope of funds
to be allocated shall be the available funds and the funds paid in the previous
year.
(8) Within 30 days of receiving the documentation, the expert body shall draw
up a draft priority list of applications for the cofinancing of international
scientific literature. The expert body may request that the SRC provide an
opinion on the expert assessment.
(9) The selection of applications for the cofinancing of applications shall
be made by the Director by issuing a decision on the selection of applications
upon the proposal of the decision on the selection of applications by the SCA.
7.11 Central specialised information centres for
research (CSIC)
Article 202
(Purpose)
The purpose of the CSIC shall be to provide operational and advisory work to
ensure the quality of the management of bibliographic records of researchers in
the COBISS.SI system.
Article 203
(Tasks of the CSIC)
(1) The CSIC shall carry out the tasks in accordance with Appendix 1 of these
Rules. The tasks shall comprise: the processing, organising, evaluating,
archiving and forwarding of specialised information and information sources,
monitoring and supervising the appropriate classification of the bibliographic
records of researchers in the COBISS.SI system. The implementation of the tasks
of the CSIC with regard to the records of researchers in the COBISS.SI system
shall be coordinated by the ISI.
(2) The tasks of the CSIC shall include reviewing possible irregularities
with regard to publications and submitting expert opinions to the SRC.
Article 204
(Harmonisation)
The CSIC shall cooperate with the Agency in the resolution of substantive
issues related to Article 203 hereof.
Article 205
(Contents of a call)
The Agency shall publish in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia
a call for cofinancing the tasks referred to in Article 203 hereof for a period
of three years according to the following scientific disciplines: the natural
sciences, technology, biotechnology, medicine, the social sciences and the
humanities.
Article 206
(Applicants)
Applicants may perform the tasks of the CSIC referred to in Article 203
hereof as an independent legal entity or as organisational units of an applicant
if they are engaged in library or other information activities, in application
of the COBISS.SI system, in communication established between ROs in the
Republic of Slovenia and the international sphere and have performed library and
information activities for at least five years. The head of the CSIC or an
expert for monitoring, supervision and classification of bibliographic records
shall have suitable references.
Article 207
(Assessment procedure)
The assessment procedure shall be conducted by the expert body appointed by
the SCA. The expert body shall prepare a draft priority list of financially
evaluated applications and submit it to the SCA for discussion. By a resolution,
the SCA shall adopt a proposal on the selection of applications, on the basis of
which the Director shall issue a decision on the selection of applications for
the cofinancing of the CSIC.
Article 208
(Assessment of applications)
(1) The expert body shall apply the criteria specified in Table 7.11 for the
assessment of applications.
Table 7.11: Criterion for assessing applications for the CSIC and the maximum
number of points by criterion.
Criterion No. in Appendix 2 |
Criterion |
Max. number of points |
6 |
Quality and efficiency of implementation and management |
10 |
|
Total |
10 |
(2) The following indicators shall be used for assessment under the criterion
of the quality and efficiency of implementation and management:
- professional competence of the personnel (indicator 6.8);
- appropriate organisation of the CSIC for successfully performing tasks
(indicator 6.9).
(3) The qualifications of the personnel for performing tasks in accordance
with Article 204 hereof shall be proven by enclosed references and the
educational structure of the personnel of the CSIC.
Article 209
(Priority in cofinancing)
Priority in cofinancing shall be given to the CSIC with better qualifications
for performing the relevant tasks and suitable organisation for performing the
relevant tasks.
Article 210
(Subject matter of cofinancing)
For the period of cofinancing, labour costs and the costs of materials and
services regarding the anticipated costs of performing the tasks of the CSIC
shall be taken into consideration.
7.11.1 Databases and bibliographic units
Article 211
(Lists of bibliographic databases)
(1) The Agency shall maintain four types of lists of bibliographic databases:
- BIBLIO-A: a list of international bibliographic databases (IDB);
- BIBLIO-B: a list of journals not included in the IDB but taken into
consideration in the categorisation of scientific publications;
- BIBLIO-C: scientific publishers from the Agency’s list;
- BIBLIO-D: a list of closed scientific databases.
The lists shall be amended upon the proposal of the CSIC and following the
approval of the SRC and SCA in accordance with Article 212 hereof.
(3) The lists IBLIO-A, BIBLIO-B, BIBLIO-C and BIBLIO-D shall be kept by the
ISI and shall be available on the websites of the ISI and the Agency.
(3) In assessing published scientific works (hereinafter: publications), the
ISI shall take into consideration the mentioned lists.
Article 212
(Updating and amending the lists and the verification
and re-categorisation of publications)
(1) An initiative to amend the lists (i.e. including or removing an IDB from
the BIBLIO-A list, including or removing a journal from the BIBLIO-B list,
including or removing a publisher from the BIBLIO-C list, including or removing
a corpus from the BIBLIO-D list) may be submitted by the CSIC, an RO or a
library. The initiative shall be discussed and evaluated by the responsible
CSIC. Within the consideration procedure, the CSIC shall seek the opinion of an
SRC member from the appropriate field as well as any additional information
necessary. On the basis of the discussion, the CSIC shall draw up a proposal on
updating or amending a list and submit it to the responsible SRC for
consideration. A representative of the CSIC shall substantiate the CSIC proposal
at a meeting of the responsible SRC. If the SRC does not agree with the CSIC
proposal, it may request additional clarification by the CSIC or obtain an
additional assessment by one or more experts, if needed. The SRC shall draw up a
proposal for the discussion by the SCA, which shall adopt a substantiated
decision on updating or amending the list. The Agency shall notify the
initiator, all CSICs and the ISI of the decision. The revaluation of a
publication due to changes in the BIBLIO-A, BIBLIO-B, BIBLIO-C and BIBLIO-D
lists shall be carried out by the ISI on the basis of a decision of the SCA for
the period starting with the year stipulated in the decision.
(2) The CSIC shall be responsible for the annual lists of periodicals for its
field within an IDB in the framework of BIBLIO-A, which it shall obtain from
foreign providers. If it is established during the year that a periodical was
listed in an IDB, the ISS shall immediately place it on the list on the proposal
of the CSIC.
(3) The CSIC shall monitor and supervise the appropriateness of the
categorisation of the bibliographic units of researchers in accordance with the
document entitledTypology of documents/works for managing bibliographies in
the COBISS.SI system(verification of typology).
(4) A change in type or verification of the type of bibliographic units (i.e.
changing the type of a work in accordance with the applicable typology) shall be
carried out promptly and at the discretion of the CSIC. For typologies of
contested content or exceptions regarding any other types, the procedure to be
performed shall be the same as for amending the lists stipulated in the first
paragraph of this Article. The CSIC shall immediately carry out a revaluation of
publications due to re-categorisation on the basis of a decision of the SCA.
Article 213
(Reclassification of publications by field)
An RO may propose that the Agency reclassify a publication into a different
research discipline. The proposal shall be considered by the CSIC in which the
publication is currently classified and the CSIC in which the initiator wishes
to reclassify the publication. Both bodies shall draw up a joint proposal for
discussion at the SRC. Thereafter, the procedure stipulated in the first
paragraph of Article 212 shall be carried out.
8 OPERATION OF THE EXPERT BODIES OF THE AGENCY
Article 214
(Purpose of expert bodies)
(1) Expert bodies of the Agency shall enable expert and independent
assessment of applications for the (co)financing of research and the assessment
of reports.
(2) The following shall also be important tasks of such expert bodies:
- comprehensive promotion of the development of disciplines and research
fields, as ensured by the SCA and the expert bodies of the Agency;
- preservation of the special features of scientific disciplines and
research fields, as enabled by the competences of the SCA and its expert
bodies.
(3) By harmonised operation, the expert bodies of the Agency shall enable
expert evaluation of the subject matters of assessment.
8.1 Expert bodies
Article 215
(Types of expert bodies)
(1) In order to perform tasks arising from its competences determined in the
Articles of Association of the Agency and the regulations and statute of the
Agency, the SCA shall appoint expert bodies. The SCA shall be autonomous in
appointing members of expert bodies.
(2) The expert bodies of the SCA may be permanent or temporary.
(3) Panels, expert committees and individuals (reviewers) shall participate
in procedures for the assessment of applications for the (co)financing of the
subject matter of research activities.
8.1.1 Permanent and temporary expert bodies
Article 216
(Permanent expert bodies)
(1) SRCs shall be permanent expert bodies, namely the following:
- the SRC for the natural sciences;
- the SRC for technology;
- the SRC for medicine;
- the SRC for biotechnology;
- the SRC for the social sciences;
- the SRC for the humanities;
- the SRC for interdisciplinary research.
(2) SRC members shall be appointed by the SCA for five years in such a manner
so as to ensure that their number and scientific expertise cover all
classification fields of the Agency. The definition of fields shall be in
accordance with the international Fields of Science and Technology
Classification (FOS 2007). An SRC shall have from six to twelve members,
including the chair.
Article 217
(Tasks of SRCs)
(1) The tasks of an SRC shall comprise:
- monitoring and supervision of the implementation of programmes, projects
and other forms of research activity from the field of an SRC accepted for
(co)financing in all phases of their progression on the basis of interim and
final progress reports and reports on the funds used (hereinafter: report
assessment), including the administrative-expert aspect performed by the
Agency;
- at the request of a temporary expert body, issuing its opinion on the
expert assessment regarding the cofinancing of international scientific
literature or additional explanation of the draft priority list of the CSIC
regarding its expert assessment;
- drawing up reports on the results and impacts of research programmes and
projects and other forms of research activity;
- preparing proposals for improving Agency regulations and the assessment
methodology after the completion of assessment procedures;
- giving initiatives for the development of research in its field;
- proposing significant achievements of Slovenian science from the SRC
field that the Agency may use for the promotion of science;
- at the request of the ministry responsible for science, issuing expert
assessment regarding the applications for extraordinary naturalisation upon
the researcher demonstrating exceptional internationally comparable research
or technological development results in the past five years and expert
assessment of the researcher’s publication of scientific research work in
scientific or expert journals with an above-average impact factor in
accordance with possible policies adopted by the SCA.
Performing other tasks to ensure the harmonious development of scientific
disciplines within the competences of the SRC.
(2) In performing the tasks of the SRC, its members shall assess interim and
final reports and cooperate with the CSIC in reviewing the appropriateness of
the classification of scientific works in accordance with the COBISS typology.
The SRC shall establish the set of international databases (IDB) in the
framework of the BIBLIO-A list, update (add or remove) the list of scientific
journals not included in the IDB but taken into consideration in the
classification of scientific publications (BIBLIO-B), international publishers
(BIBLIO-C) and closed scientific databases (BIBLIO-D) taken into consideration
in the categorisation of scientific publications. The ISI shall implement the
changes to the BIBLIO-A, B, C and D lists on the basis of decisions adopted by
the SRC.
Article 218
(Tasks of the SRC chair)
The operation of the SRC shall be managed by its chair or deputy chair. The
tasks of the chair or deputy chair shall comprise:
- preparing, calling and managing expert body meetings, to which he or she
may invite leaders of research groups, leaders of research programmes and
projects, and researchers;
- coordinating the work of expert bodies with the regulations of the
Agency;
- providing expert guidance for the operation of the SRC;
- drawing up progress reports arising from the competences of the SRC;
- performing other tasks in accordance with the SRC policies.
Article 219
(Temporary expert body)
(1) The following shall be the temporary expert bodies:
- the expert body for research programme assessment;
- the expert body for infrastructure programme assessment;
- the expert body for research project assessment;
- the expert body for allocating mentoring positions to programme groups;
- the expert body for equipment:
- the expert body for established researchers from abroad;
- the expert body for international projects that have received a positive
assessment but were not selected for (co)financing;
- the expert body for scientific meetings;
- the expert body for international scientific literature;
- the expert body for central specialised information centres (CSIC);
- other expert bodies appointed by the SCA.
(2) A temporary expert body shall be appointed by the SCA for assessing
applications to an invitation or call or for implementing other tasks in
accordance with its competences and it shall determine its period of operation
and scope of work.
Article 220
(Tasks of temporary expert bodies)
The tasks of temporary expert bodies shall comprise the following:
- appointing reviewers for application assessment on the basis of the
criteria adopted by the SCA;
- performing assessment procedures for an invitation or call or other
assessment procedure and assessing applications to an invitation or call;
- drawing up a draft priority list of applications and submitting it to
the SCA for consideration, together with a proposal on the amount of
financial means, unless otherwise specified in these Rules;
- cooperating in formulating and discussing the material under its
competences;
- drawing up reports on its expert field for the SCA;
- having the function of a rapporteur in the overall project assessment;
- performing other tasks in accordance with its expert field.
Article 221
(Tasks of the chair of a temporary expert body)
A temporary expert body shall be led by its chair or deputy chair. The tasks
of the chair or deputy chair of a temporary expert body shall comprise:
- calling and leading the meetings of the expert body;
- coordinating the work of the expert body with the regulations of the
Agency;
- providing expert guidelines for the work of the expert body;
- drawing up reports on work arising from the competences of the expert
body;
- performing other tasks in accordance with the decisions of the SRC and
SCA policies.
Article 222
(Appointment of members of permanent and temporary
expert bodies)
(1) The Agency shall invite researchers in individual disciplines or research
fields to submit and coordinate proposals of SRC members by scientific
discipline or research field.
(2) SRC members shall be appointed by the SCA from among the candidates by
scientific discipline. The SRC chair shall be appointed by the SCA upon the
proposal of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, which shall submit its
proposal within two months of being called upon to do so, otherwise the SCA
shall appoint the SRC chair from among the candidates. The SCA shall appoint a
deputy chair from among SRC members. The SRC chair cannot be appointed the SRC
chair twice consecutively, while an SRC member may be appointed to the SRC twice
consecutively.
(3) The chair, deputy chair and members of temporary expert bodies shall be
appointed by the SCA before the beginning of each assessment procedure or at the
beginning of the term following the proposal of the SRC or at its own
discretion.
(4) The list of the members of permanent and temporary expert bodies shall be
published on the website of the Agency after the appointment thereof.
Article 223
(Criteria and conditions for the appointment of the
members of permanent and temporary expert bodies)
(1) Candidates for appointment to the position of chair, deputy chair and
member of an expert body must demonstrate scientific or professional excellence
by meeting the conditions for basic or applied project leaders, which does not
apply to the chair, deputy chair and members of the temporary expert body for
international scientific literature and the expert body for the CSIC. For
members of permanent and temporary expert bodies, evidence of scientific or
professional excellence shall be evaluated under the entry condition specified
in the methodology.
(2) The chair, deputy chair or a member of a permanent or temporary expert
body may not be chancellor or vice-chancellor of a university, a dean of an
independent higher education institute or a member of the university, a legal
representative of an RO or a member of the administrative board of the Agency or
the SCA. The composition of permanent expert bodies shall cover research fields
within disciplines and ensure institutional balance and appropriate thematic
representation.
(3) The composition of a temporary expert body shall cover all the
disciplines or scientific fields from which the assessment subject originates,
including interdisciplinary subjects.
(4) The composition of permanent expert bodies shall ensure the
representation of both genders in such a manner so as to ensure at least
one-third representation of each gender in all scientific disciplines, except
for technical disciplines, where representation shall include at least one fifth
of each gender. The composition of temporary expert bodies shall ensure the
representation of both genders in such a manner so as to ensure at least
one-third representation of each gender.
(5) The expert body for international scientific literature shall consist of
a chair, deputy chair and one member for each discipline, one ISI representative
and one representative of the National and University Library.
(6) The SCA shall issue a decision appointing the chair, deputy chair and
members of permanent and temporary expert bodies, their tasks, and the duration
of their term.
Article 224
(Dismissal of members of permanent and temporary
expert bodies)
(1) The chair, deputy chair and members of permanent or temporary expert
bodies may be dismissed prior to the end of their term. The SCA shall issue a
decision dismissing a chair, deputy chair or expert body member if:
- he or she requests dismissal;
- his or her work deviates from the regulations or if he or she fails to
perform the tasks stipulated by the decision on appointment or the Rules
without valid justification;
- his or her negligence or professional misconduct causes major damage or
if he or she is neglectful or careless in performing tasks so as to cause a
research field to experience or be exposed to the possibility of serious
disturbance;
- he or she has been appointed chancellor or vice-chancellor of a
university, dean of an independent higher education institution, a
university member, or a member of the administrative board of the Agency or
the SCA, or has become a legal representative of an RO.
(2) Prior to adopting a decision on dismissal, the SCA shall inform the
chair, deputy chair or member of a permanent or temporary expert body of the
reasons for his or her dismissal and enable him or her to state his or her
position thereon.
(3) The decision on the dismissal of the chair, deputy chair or member of the
permanent or temporary expert body shall be adopted by the SCA together with the
decision on the appointment of the new chair, deputy chair or member of the
permanent or temporary expert body.
8.1.2 Reviewers, panels and expert committees
Article 225
(List and tasks of reviewers)
(1) Reviewers may be Slovenian or foreign citizens.
(2) The Agency shall acquire a list of reviewers from internationally
available collections of exceptional reviewers, on the basis of contracts with
foreign research agencies, on the basis of intergovernmental agreements, upon
the proposal of ROs, on whom the Agency shall call on behalf of the SCA and on
the proposal of researchers. The SRC shall amend the list of reviewers by a
proposal annually. Reviewers are typically experts with the title of university
professor or are project implementers in their respective ROs.
(3) The Agency shall keep the list of reviewers assessing applications by
scientific discipline. The SCA shall approve the list once a year.
(4) Project applicants shall have the possibility to propose reviewers. A
temporary expert body may appoint reviewers for application assessment from the
list of proposed reviewers whose references enable them to assess applications
in several research fields or disciplines. If the reviewer proposed by the
project applicant is selected for the application assessment and it is
established during the invitation or call that the project leader or a member of
the project group has a conflict of interest with the proposed reviewer during
the phase of project assessment, the project application shall be rejected.
(5) The list of reviewers participating in assessment in concluded assessment
procedures shall be published on the website of the Agency by discipline in
alphabetical order. If for any disciplines the number of reviewers is below
fifteen, a joint list shall be published. A reviewer’s scope of work shall be
confidential.
(6) The task of reviewers shall be to elaborate assessment for each
assessment subject in accordance with the Agency’s regulations, an invitation or
call, and the assessment methodology.
Article 226
(Criteria and conditions for appointing
reviewers)
(1) A candidate for reviewer must demonstrate his or her scientific or
professional excellence by meeting the conditions for the leader of a basic or
applied project.
(2) A foreign reviewer’s compliance with the conditions shall be established
qualitatively. In appointing a reviewer, a temporary expert body shall take into
consideration the SCA guidelines regarding internationally comparable data, such
as: publications in reputable international periodicals; the H-index; citations;
the institution in which the reviewer is employed; and the institutions that
proposed him or her.
(3) A reviewer may not be chancellor or vice-chancellor of a Slovenian
university, dean of an independent higher education institute or a university
member in the Republic of Slovenia, a legal representative of an RO based in the
Republic of Slovenia, or a member of the administrative board of the Agency or
the SCA.
Article 227
(Replacement of a reviewer)
A reviewer selected by a temporary expert body may be replaced if:
- he or she so requests (due to a conflict of interest, the subject of
assessment not being from his or her research field, other unanticipated
circumstances);
- his or her work deviates from the regulations or if he or she fails to
perform the tasks stipulated by the Rules;
- it is established during the assessment procedure that the selection of
the reviewer was not appropriate with regard to the subject of assessment.
Article 228
(Panel and expert committees)
(1) A panel may be formed in a call for the assessment of valid applications
submitted to a call. The panel shall consist of the members of the temporary
expert body and foreign reviewers, who shall be at least the same in number as
the members of the expert body. Panel members from the list of reviewers
proposed by the temporary expert body shall be appointed by the Director. A
representative of the relevant SRC appointed from among the members of such
council shall participate in the panel as an observer.
(2) For the purpose of the assessment of applications for (co)financing the
subject of research, the Director shall appoint expert committees in the cases
specified herein.
8.2 Conflict of interest and statement of impartiality
Article 229
(Conflict of interest)
(1) Under these Rules, conflict of interest occurs when there are
circumstances arising from the direct family relationship, employment
relationship or research cooperation of a person who may be subject to a
conflict of interest with the researcher participating through a subject being
assessed in an assessment procedure, as well as in other circumstances which
cast doubt on impartiality and objectivity. Persons who may be subject to a
conflict of interest shall be a member, chair and deputy chair of the SCA,
permanent and temporary expert bodies, expert committees, panel members and
reviewers.
(2) Spouses, children, adoptees, parents, adoptive parents, siblings and
persons living in the same household or in extra-marital partnership with a
chair, deputy chair, expert body member, reviewer or a member of a panel or
expert committee shall constitute a direct family relationship.
(3) Membership in the same research, project or programme group shall
constitute a direct employment relationship.
(4) A joint scientific product in the past three years shall constitute
direct research cooperation, whereby editorship shall not be deemed to
constitute a conflict of interest.
(5) A person who may be subject to a conflict of interest shall be deemed to
have a conflict of interest if he or she is in a direct family relationship with
the leader or a member of a research, programme or project group or if he or she
is in an employment relationship or cooperates in research with the leader of a
research, programme or project group.
Article 230
(Conflict of interest regarding members of the SCA,
temporary expert bodies, panels, expert committees, and reviewers)
(1) If a person who may be subject to a conflict of interest is in a direct
family or employment relationship with the leader or a member of a research,
programme or project group or cooperates with such in research or if he or she
participates in the subject of assessment in the assessment project as the
leader of a research activity, he or she must exclude him- or herself from the
assessment procedure and notify thereof the Director of the Agency in writing.
(2) If the Agency establishes that the connections referred to in the first
paragraph of this Article cannot significantly impact the impartiality of the
work of the chair, deputy chair, or member of the temporary expert body, panel,
expert committee or a reviewer in the assessment procedure, the Agency shall
notify the person in writing within five working days. If the Agency establishes
that the connections could impact the impartiality of the person’s work, it
shall submit a proposal for his or her replacement to the relevant body.
(39 If a member of an expert committee appointed by the Director for the
assessment of applications for (co)financing subject of research is an employee
of the Agency, he or she may not participate in the consideration of or
decision-making on the (co)financing of a subject of research relating to the
research organisation in which he or she performs supplementary work.
Article 231
(Conflict of interest regarding SRC members)
(1) If, in the procedure for assessing reports, the chair, deputy chair or
member of a permanent expert body is in a direct family or employment
relationship with the leader or members of a research, programme or project
group or cooperates with such in research or if he or she participates in the
subject of assessment in the assessment procedure as the leader of a research
activity, he or she must notify thereof the Director of the Agency in writing.
(2) If the SRC or a public employee authorised by the Director establishes a
conflict of interest referred to in the first paragraph of this Article, the SRC
shall decide that the chair, deputy chair or SRC member with a conflict of
interest is to be replaced by the SRC member whose research field is the closest
to that of the member replaced due to the conflict of interest. If there is no
SRC member for the relevant field, the SRC may authorise for this task a
researcher who is not an SRC member but who meets the criteria for SRC
membership, is an expert in the field and does not have a conflict of interest.
The SRC may establish a list of researchers who are not SRC members for the
entire duration of its term.
Article 232
(Internal control of conflicts of interest)
(1) The Agency shall check for the existence of a conflict of interest by
means of an internal audit by establishing a committee for determining conflicts
of interest (hereinafter: the committee), which shall be appointed by the
Director by a written decision.
(2) The Director shall determine the number of members of the committee. The
committee shall consist of a chair and at least two members. The chair and at
least half of the committee members shall be employees of the Agency. Minutes of
committee meetings shall be kept.
(3) The committee shall hold meetings as needed given the reports (internal,
external, anonymous, etc.) or in the event of the suspicion of a conflict of
interest. In the cases it reviews, the committee shall establish the possible
existence of a conflict of interest and the consequences for violating the
provisions of these Rules.
Article 233
(Statement on handing documentation and impartiality)
(1) After their appointment, the chair and members of the SCA, the chair,
deputy chair and members of the permanent and temporary expert bodies and
reviewers shall sign a statement on handling documentation and a statement on
impartiality (hereinafter: the statement), which for members of temporary expert
bodies is included in Appendix 3 as an integral part hereof. For the chair and
members of the SCA, permanent expert bodies, reviewers, members of the panel and
expert committees, the statement shall be suitably amended with regard to
conflicts of interest regulated in Articles 230, 231 and 232 hereof.
(2) Reviewers shall sign the statement upon each call or invitation in which
they assess applications.
(3) In the statement, the signatories shall undertake to handle the documents
submitted for assessment (applications, reports, etc.) as data whose
confidentiality is classified as INTERNAL, for which reproduction or any other
dissemination of documentation is prohibited.
8.3 Remuneration and administrative and expert work
Article 234
(Remuneration)
(1) Performance of tasks under these Rules shall make chairs, their deputies,
expert body members and reviewers eligible for appropriate remuneration in the
form of attendance fees, travelling expenses and payments under work contracts
and contracts for copyrighted work.
(2) The amount of remuneration referred to in the preceding paragraph shall
be determined on the basis of the internal instrument of the Agency governing
remuneration for expert work by reviewers and members of the expert bodies of
the Agency. The decision on remuneration shall be issued by the Director.
Article 235
(Administrative and expert work)
Administrative and expert work for the needs of expert bodies and reviewers
shall be provided by the Agency.
Rules on the Procedures for the (Co)financing and Assessment of
Research Activities and on Monitoring the Implementation of Research Activities
(Official Gazette of the RS, No.
52/16)
contains the following transitional and final provisions:
9 TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS
Article 236
(Annual reports for research programmes)
Regardless of the provisions of Article 79 hereof, an RO shall issue annual
reports for programmes approved for financing for a period of three or four year
by the expiry of the period of financing.
Article 237
(Extension of financing for young researchers)
(1) The provisions under the second and third indents of the fourth paragraph
of Article 125 hereof shall not apply for young researchers whose training the
Agency began to fund prior to the implementation of these Rules and who have
already made use of the option of an extension.
(2) Young researchers whose training the Agency began to fund prior to the
implementation of these Rules and who have not yet made use of the extension
option shall not be subject to the sanctions referred to in Article 125 hereof
if:
- the young researcher finishes his or her training within one year of the
expiration of the approved period of financing;
- a young researcher in the field of medicine who obtains the status of a
trainee specialist after the end of the approved period of financing
concludes his or her training within two years of the expiration of the
approved period of financing.
Article 238
(Completion of calls and invitations)
Calls and invitations that have not concluded by the time of the
implementation of these Rules shall be concluded under the Rules on the
Procedures for the (Co)financing and Assessment and Monitoring of Research
Activity Implementation (Official Gazette of the RS, No. 4/11, 72/11, 45/12,
96/13, 100/13 and 92/14).
10 FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 239
(Expiration of the validity of the previous Rules)
On the day these Rules enter into force, the Rules on the Procedures for the
(Co)financing and Assessment of Research Activities and on Monitoring the
Implementation of Research Activities (Official Gazette of the RS, No. 4/11,
72/11, 45/12, 96/13, 100/13 and 92/14) shall cease to be valid.
Article 240
(Entry into force of the Rules)
These Rules shall enter into force on the day following their publication in
the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia.
The Rules Amending the Rules on the Procedures for the (Co)financing and
Assessment of Research Activities and on Monitoring the Implementation of
Research Activities (Official Gazette of the RS, No. 79/17 contains
the following transitional and final provisions:
“TRANSITIONAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 97
Calls and invitations that have not concluded by the time of the
implementation of these Rules shall be concluded under the Rules on the
Procedures for the (Co)financing and Assessment of Research Activities and on
Monitoring the Implementation of Research Activities (Official Gazette of the
RS, No. 52/16).
Article 98
The reports on the annual distribution of research work hours for bilateral
research projects under the new seventh paragraph of Article 4 hereof shall
start to be submitted for calls published after the implementation of these
Rules and shall from their submission thereafter be taken into account in the
funds acquired from the Agency for the implementation of research projects
(indicator 1.10).
Article 99
These Rules shall enter into force on the day following their publication in
the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia.”
The Rules Amending the Rules on the Procedures for the (Co)financing and
Assessment of Research Activities and on Monitoring the Implementation of
Research Activities (Official Gazette of the RS, No.
65/19 contains the following transitional and final provisions:
“TRANSITIONAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 21
Calls and invitations that have not concluded by the time of the
implementation of these Rules shall be concluded under the Rules on the
Procedures for the (Co)financing and Assessment of Research Activities and on
Monitoring the Implementation of Research Activities (Official Gazette of the
RS, No. 52/16 in 79/17).
Article 22
These Rules shall enter into force on the fifteenth day after their
publication in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia.”
The Rules Amending the Rules on the Procedures for the (Co)financing and
Assessment of Research Activities and on Monitoring the Implementation of
Research Activities (Official Gazette of the RS, No.
78/20 contains the following final provision.
“FINAL PROVISION
Article 2
These Rules shall enter into force on the day following their publication in
the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia.”
The Rules Amending the Rules on the Procedures for the (Co)financing and
Assessment of Research Activities and on Monitoring the Implementation of
Research Activities (Official Gazette of the RS, No. 145/20
contains the following transitional and final provision:
“TRANSITIONAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 5
Young researchers in the field of medicine - doctors who have acquired the
status of a specialist before the entry into force of these rules, shall
continue the young researcher's training without funding.
Article 6
These Rules shall enter into force on the day following their publication in
the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia.”
Disclaimer: English is not an official language of Slovenia. This
translation is provided for information purposes only and has no legal force.
|