Final Project Report Survey

In the final project reports, the FWF asks principal investigators for feedback on their cooperation with the FWF during the various project phases. This information provides the FWF with important feedback which helps us improve our processes and shows us where further improvements still need to be made.

This feedback covers four main categories and 13 subcategories:

  • •    Application guidelines: Document length – clarity – understandability
    •    Decision-making process: Advice & support – duration – transparency
    •    Project support: Availability – level of detail – intelligibility – financial transactions
    •    Reporting: Effort – transparency – PR support and results

The evaluation is based on the following scale: 2 (very satisfactory), 1 (satisfactory), 0 (appropriate), -1 (unsatisfactory), and -2 (very unsatisfactory).

For the period from 20143-20232, we received feedback from a total of 4.,63228 final project reports, . tThe average results of the longitudinal evaluation according to the four main categories are as follows:

Application guidelines

Graphical representation of the annual average of the scores of the application guidelines
Annual average of the scores of the application guidelines

Decision-making process

Graphical representation of the annual average of the scores for the decision-making process
Annual average of the scores for the decision-making process

Project support

Graphical representation of the annual average of the scores for project support
Annual average of the scores for project support

Reporting

Graphical representation of the annual average of the scores for reporting
Annual average of the scores for reporting

Only feedback from researchers who were successful in receiving funding from thesuccessfully acquired FWF funding FWF for their research projects is included in the evaluation.

In the summer of 2012, the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) commissioned the Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ) to carry out a survey of academic staff at universities and non-university research institutes institutions in Austria. In detail, the focus was on application behaviour; application success; the level of awareness of funding institutions, in particular, familiarity with the FWF and its funding provision (funding) programs; and the academics’ and researchers’ opinions of the FWF’s aims and principles and its selection procedures.

 

Inquiries and contact

Mag. Martina Kunzmann
martina.kunzmann(at)fwf.ac.at
+43 676 834 87 8608