The Marie Curie fellowship, officially the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA), is the European Union’s principal funding instrument for researcher mobility. In 2024, the call for MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships alone received 10,360 proposals from across the world, with a budget allocated to approximately 1,700 projects: fewer than one in six applicants succeed.
These figures are a starting point, not a deterrent. Knowing what the European Commission evaluates, how to build a competitive project, and which mistakes to avoid is what separates a generic application from one with a genuine chance of winning. Elena Brivio, Valeria Iannone, Gabriele Ordazzo and Mattia Zaghi know this well. Four Alumni of Vita-Salute San Raffaele University (UniSR), all graduates in Biotechnology from the same cohort, they are now postdoctoral researchers at the IGBMC in Strasbourg, the University of Eastern Finland, the Institut de Myologie in Paris, and the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm respectively. All four have won the Marie Curie fellowship.
The Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) are funded under the Horizon Europe programme and support researchers at different career stages, from doctoral to postdoctoral level. There is no single “Marie Curie fellowship”: the scheme comprises several instruments, each with distinct requirements, durations and logics.
The MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships (MSCA-PF) - the best-known individual grant - target researchers who have already completed a doctorate. They fund research periods of one to two years at a host institution in a European country other than the one in which the applicant has lived for more than 12 months in the three years preceding the application deadline. This is the grant for which Brivio, Iannone, Ordazzo and Zaghi all applied. A Global variant also exists, allowing a research period outside Europe followed by a return to a European institution.
The MSCA Doctoral Networks (DN) is the structured doctoral programme: it brings together networks of European universities and research centres to train doctoral candidates on shared themes. It was within this format that Valeria Iannone built her doctoral pathway, as part of a network of 15 candidates distributed across several European countries. «Every six months we moved for ten days to a different host institution, collaborated on joint papers, and conducted research together», Iannone recalls.
The MSCA Staff Exchanges scheme, by contrast, supports the mobility of staff between academic and non-academic organisations, including private companies. The first place to explore all open calls is EURAXESS (euraxess.ec.europa.eu), the European platform for researcher mobility. Dr Brivio adds: «EURAXESS was an invaluable resource for me. It’s where I found my doctoral school».
There are two essential requirements for the postdoctoral Marie Curie fellowship. The first concerns the qualification: applicants must have been awarded a doctorate or be on the verge of obtaining one by the application deadline. The second concerns mobility: the fellowship cannot be held in the country where the applicant has lived for more than 12 months in the three years prior to the call’s closing date.
There is also a time-based constraint worth checking carefully: some MSCA calls require that no more than eight years have elapsed since the doctorate was awarded. As Mattia Zaghi underlines, «Timing is crucial. In some countries, a postdoc cannot be started beyond a certain number of years from the PhD, or specific grants cannot be applied for once that window has closed. That’s why it’s essential to research the eligibility rules in advance».
When evaluating applications, the Commission applies three weighted criteria: Excellence (50%), Impact (30%), and Quality and efficiency of the implementation (20%). Drawing on the direct experience of the four UniSR Alumni, here are five practical tips that make the difference in real applications, from writing the proposal to choosing the host laboratory.
1. Find the intersection between your background and the host laboratory
The proposal must show clearly how the applicant’s expertise fits with the research group’s work. «The project should bring together the individual’s own experience and that of the host laboratory. The key is finding the point where the two meet — that intersection is the heart of the proposal,» explains Gabriele Ordazzo, now a postdoctoral researcher at the Institut de Myologie in Paris.
2. Emphasise your specific contribution, not just the laboratory’s work
The Commission wants to understand why that particular researcher, with their specific competencies, could make a difference. «The contribution must be described in concrete detail. What does this researcher bring through their expertise? Generalisations should be avoided: the Commission wants to know precisely what the new recruit would bring to the laboratory and what the laboratory would offer the researcher — in specific terms, not theoretical ones,» Ordazzo adds.
3. Be realistic about the work plan, and do not overlook FAIR principles and the gender dimension
Including innovative techniques strengthens a proposal’s competitiveness, but the MSCA-PF runs for two years: an over-ambitious or overloaded plan risks rejection. Two sections candidates frequently underestimate are the gender dimension and the FAIR principles. The former requires applicants to explain whether and how sex and gender variables are relevant to the proposed research; where they are not, this must be explicitly justified. The FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) concern data management: the proposal must describe how the data produced will be made findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable. These are not formalities: the Commission evaluates them under the Excellence criterion.
4. Choose the host laboratory carefully and visit before committing
For the MSCA-PF, the project is developed in collaboration with the host supervisor, who co-signs the application and shares responsibility for it. Elena Brivio changed her scientific field between her master’s degree and her doctorate - moving from research on Rett syndrome to the neurobiology of stress - and describes how she navigated the selection process from that position of uncertainty: «I wasn’t sure which direction to take. I decided to focus on the doctoral school rather than on any individual laboratory. I was looking for a setting with a strong focus on neurobiology and psychiatry, one that would offer stability: funding for the entire duration of the project, a present and engaged Principal Investigator, a group of colleagues to talk to.» For this reason, she advises visiting the laboratory before accepting any offer, speaking with the other doctoral candidates or postdocs in the supervisor’s absence, and honestly assessing whether the city is somewhere one is genuinely willing to live. «I liked Munich as a city. I had already imagined it. When I said ‘I’m going to Munich’, I was already living there in my head», Brivio recalls.
5. Plan the secondments carefully and have the proposal reviewed from multiple perspectives
Secondments — research periods at partner institutions other than the primary host — must be included in the work plan with a clear rationale. The Commission evaluates the quality of the partnerships, not merely the fact that they are listed. Valeria Iannone experienced them both during her ITN (Innovative Training Network) doctorate and during her postdoc, through an Erasmus Plus mobility grant. Once the project is structured, it is always worth submitting it to multiple critical readers: «Having the proposal read by people with different perspectives always brings valuable input. An outside perspective is worth as much as technical expertise,» concludes Ordazzo.
One of the most valuable contributions the four Alumni made at the seminar concerned failure rather than winning strategies. In a field where CVs show only results, hearing rejections discussed openly is itself instructive. Elena Brivio applied to several doctoral programmes before receiving an offer. Valeria Iannone describes a similar experience: «I applied twice for the FRM, the postdoctoral fellowship of the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale, one of the main independent funding sources for researchers in France. The first time I reached the interview stage; the second I didn’t even pass the initial screening. Then I won the Marie Curie fellowship. There are many factors that lie outside a researcher’s control».
All four Marie Curie grant holders stress the role played by timing and circumstance. «That year there were 17,000 applications for the Marie Curie (it was 2023). I couldn’t believe it when I found out I’d got it» Dr Iannone recalls. The perseverance that runs through all four stories is among the most important factors for success. Continuing to apply, even after rejections, and recognising one’s strengths even when a specific project does not succeed are essential. It is worth asking whether there is something to improve in the proposal, or whether the rejection reflects circumstances beyond one’s control.
For those completing or who have recently completed a doctorate, the path follows the six official MSCA steps. The EURAXESS platform is the first port of call: it brings together both open calls and the hosting offers of institutions actively seeking researchers. Once laboratories with genuine scientific compatibility have been identified, the next step is to build a relationship with the prospective supervisor, before writing a single line of the project: the quality of that collaboration will be visible in the proposal itself.
When writing, the section on knowledge transfer (what the researcher brings to the laboratory, and what they will have the opportunity to learn and acquire) is the one that most frequently distinguishes weaker applications from stronger ones. It is worth having drafts read by people with different backgrounds, including the institution’s grants office and the national MSCA contact points. One final point not to leave until last: checking eligibility requirements well in advance.