Full Grant evaluation

2 referees( international scientists) to address a full report, with a funding recommendation in 3 grades of priority: ‘high’, ‘middle’ and ‘low’, or  ‘no funding suggested’. Their anonymity will be guaranteed by the SAB . 2 SAB members to review the project and present it SAB meeting to grade the applications ’A’ (high priority), ‘B’ (acceptable for funding), or ‘C’ (not suitable for funding). If the external referees all advise not to fund the project, it will be ranked as Group C with no further discussion.  If two referees consider a project as “high” priority ,it should be ranked A or B by the SAB. Group A to be further ranked in order of priority by each SAB Member, anonymously Feed back will be given by the research director with the anonymous referees’ reports. Unsuccessful applicants may decide (but will not be invited) to change their application according to the referees’ reports. They may submit an amended version of the application to the Foundation during the following call. If the application is once again unsuccessful, no further submission of the relevant application will be considered by the Scientific Advisory Board.