Fellowships

• Home
• Funding
• Fellowships

Guidelines for the Submission and Selection of Proposals in the Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD)

Current guidelines as from June 1st, 2024.

1) Target audience (back to index)

This Scholarship opportunity is intended for DD-MD-PhD students with excellent academic performance/achievement, selected by the MD-PhD Program, without graduation degree, and with a special withdrawal from the medical course after attending the basic cycle. Students must have special enrollment in stricto sensu postgraduate courses, with a CAPES [Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel] grade of five or more, offered by the higher education Institution where they obtained their medical degree, to develop a research project leading to a thesis.

The Advisor must have a PhD or equivalent title (evaluated by curricular summary) and demonstrated experience in the leadership of internationally competitive research projects and student guidance. The Advisor's academic background must demonstrate international experience in research after the doctorate or demonstrate active participation in international networks for research collaboration.

The Advisor has the main responsibility for the project, but the candidate must be actively involved in its elaboration, be able to discuss the project and analyze its results.

The Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD) request may be submitted to FAPESP before the completion of the previous course (graduation), within the deadlines defined by FAPESP and the MD-PhD Program of the higher education Institution. The proof of enrollment in the DD-MD-PhD program of the stricto sensu postgraduate program with a CAPES grade of five or more is essential upon acceptance of the Scholarship.

Considering that the Postgraduate Scholarships are mainly aimed at the training of new personnel for the state's research system, FAPESP, when analyzing the requests, prioritizes candidates with an excellent academic record in graduation studies and, preferably, a successful Scientific Initiation internship.

DD-MD-PhD Scholarships to candidates who have previously received a Scholarship of the same modality from another agency can only be awarded in exceptional circumstances. The duration of this Scholarship will be deducted from the total Scholarship duration.

1.1) Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD) linked to FAPESP's Research Grants

Some Grants modalities allow DD-MD-PhD Scholarships for students on MD-PhD Program to be linked to their projects:

a) Applications for Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD) linked to ongoing Grants in the following modalities: Regular Research Grant; Thematic Project Grant; Research, Innovation and Dissemination Centers (RIDC); Engineering Research Centers/Applied Research Centers (ERC/ARC); São Paulo Excellence Chair Grant (SPEC); Science Centers for Development (SCD); Young Investigator Grant; Research in Public Policies Program; and Public Education Research Program:

a.1) When submitting an application for Scholarship, it is necessary to explicitly request the linkage by referring the Grant process number in the field "Processo Vinculado" when filling out the Scholarship proposal in the SAGe system;

a.2) A document signed by the Principal Investigator regarding the Grant to which the linkage is requested, agreeing to the link and specifying the contribution that the research project presented will make to the project that is being applied for, must be included;

a.3) The Scholarship Advisor must be either the Principal Investigator, one of the Co-Principal Investigators or one of the Associate Researchers of the respective Grant;

a.4) Information on submitting complementary requests are available at www.fapesp.br/1413; and

a.5) The research project to be executed by the DD-MD-PhD Scholarship Recipient must be closely linked to the research project of the Grant funded by FAPESP.

1.2) Research Internship Abroad (RIA)

Research Internship Abroad (RIA) will not be awarded to DD-MD-PhD Scholarship Recipients.

2) Scholarship Components (back to index)

a. Monthly fees: in the amount defined in the FAPESP's Table of Scholarship Values, available at www.fapesp.br/3162 (Table of Scholarship Values in Brazil).

a.1. There are three DD-MD-PhD Scholarship levels for students on MD-PhD Program: DD-I, DD-II, and DD-III, each for a maximum period of one year:

a.1.1. For the first two years of the DD-MD-PhD Scholarship for students on MD-PhD Program awarded by FAPESP, Scholarship Recipients will receive the DD-I/DD-II Scholarship amount.

a.1.2. For the third year of the DD-MD-PhD Scholarship awarded by FAPESP, Scholarship Recipients will receive the DD-III Scholarship amount.

b. Research Overhead: Information at www.fapesp.br/rt.

c. Maternity/Paternity Leave: period of leave of absence without interruption of payment in case of maternity/paternity leave (complete guidelines at www.fapesp.br/8484 ).

3) Duration (back to index)

The duration period of the Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD) is up to 36 months, always starting on the first day of the month. The Scholarship Recipient's performance is evaluated annually. The continuation of the award depends on the analysis of the Scientific Reports submitted each year. Scholarships with a duration period of less than six months will not be awarded. In exceptional cases and upon a justification submitted by the Advisor, the Scholarship may be extended for a maximum of 6 months, at the discretion of FAPESP.

For the purpose of calculating the duration of the Scholarship, the period of time during which the Scholarship Recipient has already benefited from a Scholarship of an equivalent modality will be deducted.

If the thesis defense takes place during the Scholarship period, the Scholarship will end at the end of the month in which the defense takes place.

3.1) Interruption of DD-MD-PhD Scholarship

a. During its term, the DD-MD-PhD Scholarship may be interrupted for a maximum of 12 months for the Scholarship Recipient to participate in a doctorate program abroad, with a Scholarship from another agency or any other type of funding that does not burden FAPESP, upon request for authorization sent to FAPESP by the Advisor, accompanied by a detailed justification. If the interruption is approved, the duration of the internship abroad will not be calculated as part of the total duration of FAPESP's DD-MD-PhD Scholarship.

b. In other exceptional cases, the Scholarship may be interrupted upon request for authorization sent to FAPESP by the Advisor, accompanied by a detailed justification to be analyzed by FAPESP.

c. In both "a" and "b" scenarios, the reactivation request must be made through SAGe system by submitting a Change Request of the type "Process Reactivation", prepared by the Scholarship Recipient and submitted by the Advisor.

NOTE: The reactivation of the DD-MD-PhD Scholarship must be requested through the Scholarship process by indicating the status of the research and its anticipated completion. It is advised that the reactivation request be submitted 30 days before the Scholarship Recipient is scheduled to return to their activities at the Institution. The reactivation request must be made through SAGe system by submitting a Change Request of the type "Reativação de Processo", prepared by the Scholarship Recipient and submitted by the Advisor.

4) Application date (back to index)

Applications may be submitted to FAPESP at any time throughout the year.

5) Requirements for applications (back to index)

5.1) Candidate (back to index)

a. Candidates for the DD-MD-PhD Scholarship must have excellent potential as researchers (as assessed by the Advisor and the MD-PhD Program of the Institution), an excellent academic record and, preferably, a successful Scientific Initiation internship.

a.1. In the event of periods of leave of absence on the part of the applicant due to maternity/paternity leave, disability, temporary disabilities or intensive care for ill, elderly or disabled people, which have had an impact on their research productivity, the applicant may submit a request for an analysis of the deadlines for eligibility, through the channel “Converse com a FAPESP”, under the terms of PR Ordinance no. 171/2024 .

a.2. Information on each period of leave of absence should be included in the applicant's curricular summary, sent as part of submitting the proposal for a Grant or Scholarship.

b. Candidates must have no pending responsibilities with FAPESP (i.e., delivery of Scientific Report and Financial Report). Proposals whose Beneficiary or Advisor have unfulfilled responsibilities with FAPESP overdue by more than 60 (sixty) days will not be reviewed.

c. When submitting the application for a Scholarship, candidates must be aware of the rules, forms and procedures available at www.fapesp.br and www.fapesp.br/sage.

d. For the development of the activities, foreign candidates are responsible for verifying and obtaining the necessary documents for their entry and permanence in Brazil alongside the Brazilian Consulate closest to their residence.

e. Candidates should inform whether are applying for or receiving a grant or scholarship from other sources for the same purpose as the research proposal submitted.

5.2) Advisor (back to index)

a. Have no pending responsibilities with FAPESP (i.e., issuance of reviews and return process, delivery of Scientific Report and Financial Report). Proposals whose Beneficiary or Advisor have unfulfilled responsibilities with FAPESP overdue by more than 60 (sixty) days will not be reviewed.

b. Have a PhD or equivalent title, as well as competence and productivity in research in the field of the project presented, assessed by their curricular summary, as well as availability, measured by their work regime and current number of advisees.

b.1. The Advisor's academic background, expressed in their curricular summary, must demonstrate international experience in research after the doctorate or demonstrate active participation in international networks for research collaboration.

b.2. In the event of periods of leave of absence on the part of the applicant due to maternity/paternity leave, disability, temporary disabilities or intensive care for ill, elderly or disabled people, which have had an impact on their research productivity, the applicant may submit a request for an analysis of the deadlines for eligibility, through the channel “Converse com a FAPESP”, under the terms of PR Ordinance no. 171/2024 .

b.3. Information on each period of leave of absence should be included in the applicant's curricular summary, sent as part of submitting the proposal for a Grant or Scholarship.

c. The Advisor must demonstrate having the necessary support and material conditions for the full execution of the proposed project, whether it is a financial support from FAPESP or from other source(s). If the Advisor's research funding is from FAPESP, the process number must be provided. If the Advisor's research funding is not from FAPESP, the following must be provided: the name of the agency, the duration, the amount contracted and a summary of the funded project. It is advised that such support be described in the introduction to the research project, in a section with the title: "Existing support for the implementation of the proposed project".

d. The Advisor must be a formal employee of a Research Institution in the state of São Paulo.

d.1. Accreditation on a postgraduate program at the Institution does not configure employee status nor does it waive this requirement.

d.2. FAPESP might accept, under certain conditions, an affiliation that does not configure employee status. This association, however, must be robust in terms of commitment to the academic activities of the Research Institution of the state of São Paulo. In such cases, prior to the submission of the proposal, an inquiry must be submitted to FAPESP's Scientific Directorate, through the channel “Converse com a FAPESP”, informing:

d.2.1. the nature of the institutional association;

d.2.2. the number of hours per week dedicated to research involved with the association;

d.2.3. the associated source of funding;

d.2.4. the duration of such association.

d.3. Retired Teachers associated with an Institution in the state of São Paulo, whether public or private, proposed to host the project, must inform that they are retired teachers and present, at the time of the submission, a document demonstrating the nature of the institutional association.

e. FAPESP does not award Scholarships of any kind in situations where the Advisor is closely related to the candidate. Close relatedness is considered a potential conflict of interest that compromises the essential perception of impartiality in evaluating the Scholarship Recipient's qualifications and performance.

6) Required conditions and obligations (back to index)

6.1) Scholarship Recipient (back to index)

During the term of the Scholarship, the Scholarship Recipient must comply with the following conditions and obligations:

a. Be enrolled as a special student in a stricto sensu postgraduate program, with a CAPES grade of five or more, in a public or private higher education Institution in the state of São Paulo, where they are currently pursuing graduation studies.

b. Have made the special withdrawal from the medical course after attending the basic cycle.

c. Have their own Individual Taxpayer Registration Number (CPF) to enable the release of the Grant Contract.

d. Be aware of the obligations specified in the Grant Contract in Brazil, signed jointly with the Advisor.

d.1. Noncompliance with the rules and the terms specified in the Grant Contract may imply the cancellation of the Scholarship and the obligation to return funds already disbursed by FAPESP, in updated amounts.

e. The Scholarship requires exclusive dedication to the course and research. In exceptional and justified circumstances, as defined in PR Ordinance no. 05/2012 (www.fapesp.br/7090), FAPESP may grant permission to carry out activities that contribute to the development of the research project.

f. Throughout the term of their Scholarship, Scholarship Recipients are not allowed to be formal employees or receive a scholarship from any other entity, salary, or remuneration for performing activities of any kind.

g. Have no pending responsibilities with FAPESP (i.e., delivery of Scientific Report and Financial Report). Noncompliance will lead to blocking resource clearance.

h. Consult FAPESP before accepting any financial support from any other funding entity, whether public or private, for the execution of the research project related to the Scholarship awarded.

i. Do not modify the project (initial plan, dates, etc.) without the prior consent of FAPESP.

j. Submit Scientific Reports, reports on the use of funds from the Research Overhead and Financial Report within the deadlines specified in the Grant Contract, accompanied by the required documentation.

k. Demonstrate a high degree of academic interaction with the Advisor and with the academic community of the Host Institution of your research project (located in the state of São Paulo), establishing a solid academic relationship with that Institution.

l. Do not leave the Institution where the research project is being developed without previous and express permission of FAPESP, upon the justified request of the Advisor.

l.1. This restriction does not apply in the following cases:

l.1.1. fulfillment of a field research as foreseen in the research project on which the Scholarship is based;

l.1.2. research internship with a duration of less than one month;

l.1.3. participation in Scientific or Technological Meeting Award, whether conducting presentations or not;

l.1.4. participation in a course of interest to the research project on which the Scholarship is based, for a period of less than one month.

l.2. In all instances:

l.2.1. there is the requirement of a written endorsement from the Advisor, which must be kept on file by the Advisor and the Scholarship Recipient to be presented to FAPESP upon request.

l.2.2. the leave of absence must be reported and justified by the Advisor on the next Scientific Report submission form, so that its relevance to the research project is understood by the reviewers.

l.2.3. the possibility of a leave of absence does not imply an automatic authorization to use the funds of the Research Overhead for this purpose. To use the funds of the Research Overhead, please consult the specific rules at www.fapesp.br/rt .

m. Refer to FAPESP's support in theses, papers, books, conference abstracts and any other publication or form of dissemination of activities resulting, completely or partially, from Scholarships from the Foundation, as foreseen in Clause 7 of the Grant Contract and described at www.fapesp.br/11789.

n. In the event that the research project funded by FAPESP has also been awarded financial support from any other public or private source, the researcher is obligated to inform and refer to the support, with clear indication of its source, in all forms of dissemination mentioned in the previous item.

o. Take the necessary steps to ensure that, through the service offered by the Host Institution, the full texts of the papers or other types of scientific communication resulting (in whole or in part) from the project funded by FAPESP and published in international journals are made available in an institutional repository of scientific works, in accordance with the open access policy of each journal, as soon as the manuscripts are approved for publication, or in the shortest time compatible with the restrictions of each journal, and in any case no later than 12 months from the date of publication. FAPESP Policy for Open Access to Publications Resulting from Grants and Scholarships is available at www.fapesp.br/12632.

p. Immediately inform FAPESP, through the Advisor, of any contract, appointment to fill a position or to perform a function (whether remunerated or not), change of residence, as well as any interruption of research activities.

q. Verify, in a timely manner, whether the execution of the project produces or could potentially produce results, in whole or in part, which might be the object of protection by Patent of Invention, Utility Model, Industrial Design, Software or any other form of protection of Intellectual Property rights, subject to FAPESP's Intellectual Property Policy, available at www.fapesp.br/pi .

r. Be aware of and respect the guidelines contained in FAPESP's Code of Good Scientific Practices, available at www.fapesp.br/boaspraticas .

s. Work with the Advisor to ensure that the data generated during the project is properly managed according to the Data Management Plan associated with the Scholarship project.

t. Always use the updated versions of the rules, forms and procedures available at www.fapesp.br and www.fapesp.br/sage .

6.2) Advisor (back to index)

During the term of the Scholarship, the Advisor must comply with the following conditions and obligations:

a. Be aware of the obligations specified in the Grant Contract in Brazil, signed jointly with the Scholarship Recipient.

b. All communications with FAPESP regarding the Scholarship must be made by the Advisor.

c. Provide, free of charge, Grant/Scholarship reviews in their field of knowledge and within the deadlines stipulated, when requested by FAPESP.

d. Request FAPESP to change the responsibility of the Scholarship before committing to activities that will require their absence from the Host Institution for more than 90 days, as described in CTA Ordinance no. 74/2023, available at www.fapesp.br/16110 .

d.1) In the event of an exceptional situation that requires the Principal Investigator to be away from the Host Institution for more than 90 days while maintaining responsibility for the Scholarship, FAPESP may consider requests on an exceptional and duly justified basis.

e. Make all arrangements to ensure the success of the proposed research project.

f. Consult FAPESP before accepting any financial support from any other funding entity, whether public or private, for the execution of the same research project being supported by FAPESP.

g. Refer to FAPESP's support in theses, papers, books, conference abstracts and any other publication or form of dissemination of activities resulting, completely or partially, from Scholarships from the Foundation, as foreseen in Clause 7 of the Grant Contract and described at www.fapesp.br/11789.

h. In the event that the research project funded by FAPESP has also been awarded financial support from any other public or private source, the researcher is obligated to inform and refer to the support, with clear indication of its source, in all forms of dissemination mentioned in the previous item.

i. Take the necessary steps to ensure that, through the service offered by the Host Institution, the full texts of the papers or other types of scientific communication resulting (in whole or in part) from the project funded by FAPESP and published in international journals are made available in an institutional repository of scientific works, in accordance with the open access policy of each journal, as soon as the manuscripts are approved for publication, or in the shortest time compatible with the restrictions of each journal, and in any case no later than 12 months from the date of publication. FAPESP Policy for Open Access to Publications Resulting from Grants and Scholarships is available at www.fapesp.br/12632.

j. Verify, in a timely manner, whether the execution of the project produces or could potentially produce results, in whole or in part, which might be the object of protection by Patent of Invention, Utility Model, Industrial Design, Software or any other form of protection of Intellectual Property rights, subject to FAPESP's Intellectual Property Policy, available at www.fapesp.br/pi .

k. Be aware of and respect the guidelines contained in FAPESP's Code of Good Scientific Practices, available at www.fapesp.br/boaspraticas , and committing to include, among the Scholarship Recipient's mandatory activities, participation in education and training programs relating to the ethical integrity of research.

l. Work with the Scholarship Recipient to ensure that the data generated during the project is properly managed according to the Data Management Plan associated with the Scholarship project.

m. Always use the updated versions of the rules, forms and procedures available at www.fapesp.br and www.fapesp.br/sage .

7) Required documents (back to index)

The electronic forms are available on SAGe ("Sistema de Apoio à Gestão"), at www.fapesp.br/sage. Candidate and Advisor must have an up-to-date registration in the SAGe system and containing a copy of their ID card.

The following documents are required to apply for a DD-MD-PhD Scholarship:

a. Research Project .

b. Curricular summary of the Advisor.

c. Curricular summary of the candidate.

d. Complete graduate transcript until the candidate's special withdrawal from the course, issued as an official document (with stamp and signature or authenticity code). The transcript must contain: the full names of the subjects; any failures or withdrawals of the candidate; the passing criteria (minimum grade) or, alternatively, a statement from the University stating the criteria.

e. Where applicable, proof of Scientific Initiation internship and a summary of the results obtained and/or publications relating to these results.

f. Proof of selection/approval by the MD-PhD Program issued as an official document (with stamp and signature or authenticity code) from the competent body of the higher education Institution.

g. In the case of a complementary request which is linked to a Regular Research Grant; Thematic Project Grant; Research, Innovation and Dissemination Centers (RIDC); Engineering Research Centers/Applied Research Centers (ERC/ARC); São Paulo Excellence Chair Grant (SPEC); Science Centers for Development (SCD); Young Investigator Grant; Research in Public Policies Program; or Public Education Research Program, a document signed by the Principal Investigator of the linked Grant must be submitted, stating agreement to the linkage and specifying the contribution the research project presented will make to the project that is being applied for.

h. Manifestation of the Head of the Host Institution, according to the model available for download at SAGe.

i. Institutional infrastructure information approved by the Host Institution, according to the model in Annex II available for download at SAGe.

j. Results of previous grants: if the Advisor has participated as Principal Investigator, or Co-Principal Investigator, or as a beneficiary of other Awards or Scholarships granted by FAPESP, submit a document containing its results, project titles and process numbers for the last 5 years. If the Advisor has not participated in FAPESP Grants or Scholarships, submit a document containing the following sentence: "The Advisor has not received support from FAPESP in the last 5 years under the conditions defined in the guidelines".

k. Document describing the Data Management Plan (up to two pages), prepared according to the guidelines available at www.fapesp.br/gestaodedados .

l. Statement from the Institution indicating the expected date of completion of the medical degree course (with stamp and signature or authenticity code from the competent body of the higher education Institution).

m. Proof of special Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) enrollment in a stricto sensu Postgraduate MD-PhD program with a CAPES grade of five or more (with stamp and signature or authenticity code from the competent body of the higher education Institution). May be submitted later, up to the date of acceptance of the award, if the Scholarship is awarded.

n. Proof of leave of absence or resignation for candidates who are formal employees (may be submitted later, up to the date of acceptance of the award, if the Scholarship is awarded).

n.1. At the discretion of FAPESP, situations may be considered in which the candidate is a formal employee and has a leave of absence from the home institution, with or without salary, that allows for exclusive dedication to research, as specified in item 6.1.

n.2. If the Scholarship Recipient is not a formal employee, a signed statement providing this information must be submitted.

8) Authorizations required by Law to perform the research (back to index)

It is the responsibility of the Principal Investigator and the Host Institution to request, obtain and hold all legal and required authorizations for the proper execution of the project, which must be issued by the control and inspection bodies relating to the nature of the research, when so required.

If the proposal is approved, the Grant Contract will contain a clause requiring that the Principal Investigator and the Host Institution have such authorizations and demonstrate them to FAPESP whenever requested.

9) Intellectual Property (back to index)

FAPESP's rules regarding the intellectual property of the results of projects supported by the Foundation are described at www.fapesp.br/pi.

10) Review of applications (back to index)

10.1) Review process (back to index)

Applications sent to FAPESP for different types of support opportunities are reviewed using the peer review system (www.fapesp.br/analise).

The maximum number of Scholarships that can be approved must comply with the limits defined in FAPESP's annual budget proposal, approved by the Board of Trustees.

The review of the DD MD-PhD Scholarship, done by Area Coordinators and Associate Coordinators, based on the reviewers' opinions, intends to identify those proposals that are considered excellent in three components: a) Research Project; b) Candidate's School and Academic Background; and c) Advisor's Research Background.

The review process is carried out in five stages and involves the participation of ad hoc reviewers, Area Coordinators and Associate Coordinators.

The five steps of the review process are listed and described below:

a. Eligibility of the proposals by the Area Coordinators.

b. Analysis and issue of reviews by the ad hoc reviewers.

c. Analysis and issue of reviews and recommendation by the Area Coordinators.

d. Analysis and recommendation by the Associate Coordinators.

e. Scientific Director's decision and analysis by the Executive Board and the Board of Trustees.

10.1.1. Eligibility of the proposals by the Area Coordinators

In this phase, the Area Coordinators (www.fapesp.br/1479) verify that the requirements specified in sections 5.1 and 5.2 of these guidelines are totally met. For requests considered eligible, the Area Coordinators indicate two ad hoc reviewers to consult for issuing a review. Requests that are considered ineligible are sent to the Associate Coordinators for analysis and final decision. If the Associate Coordinators agree that the proposal is ineligible, it returns to the Principal Investigator with a review clarifying the reasons for the decision.

10.1.2. Analysis and issue of review by the ad hoc reviewers

The ad hoc reviewers indicated, specialists in the field of the projects being proposed, analyze the proposals and issue reviews that contemplate each of the criteria mentioned in section 10.1.6. Their detailed reviews form the basis for the subsequent steps of the analysis.

10.1.3. Analysis and recommendation by the Area Coordinators

Applications for Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD) are jointly discussed at periodic collegiate meetings attended by all Area Coordinators and Associate Coordinators. This procedure favors the homogeneous application of the benchmarks of excellence established by FAPESP based on the experience of analyzing a large number of applications.

In order to prioritize, it is necessary to analyze the set of proposals and their respective reviewers' opinions. This analysis is essential because different reviewers may use criteria with different levels of demand, so it is not possible to simply compare the concepts assigned by reviewers. To prioritize proposals rated as excellent, the panel will use the criteria described in section 10.1.7.

10.1.4. Analysis and recommendation by the Associate Coordinators

The Associate Coordinators examine the proposals and compare the Area Coordinators' recommendations with the reviews issued by the ad hoc reviewers. Particularly, they verify consistency with FAPESP's excellence benchmarks and whether all the criteria in section 10.1.6 and, if necessary, those in sections 10.1.7 and 10.1.8 were properly considered during the analysis. If there are any discrepancies, they are sent to the Area Coordinators for discussion. Finally, recommendations are conducted to the Scientific Director.

Evaluations by the Associate Coordinators take place separately for different major fields of knowledge.

10.1.5. Scientific Director's decision and analysis by the Executive Board and the Board of Trustees

Based on the analysis of the Area Coordinators and Associate Coordinators, the Scientific Director makes the final decision. When there are doubts or there is a mismatch between the Coordinators' recommendations, the proposals are discussed with the Associate Coordinators before the final decision is taken. The Scientific Director's decision is submitted for analysis by the Executive Board, which will deliberate ad‑referendum of the Board of Trustees.

10.1.6. Review criteria

In the analysis by the ad hoc reviewers, Area Coordinators (section 10.1.3) and Associate Coordinators (section 10.1.4), the criteria used to classify the proposals are listed below and included in the reviewers' opinion form.

Each request is analyzed considering three components: a) Research Project; b) Candidate's School and Academic Background; and c) Advisor's Research Background.

a. Criteria for analyzing the Research Project

1. The definition, relevance, originality of the objectives and the significance of the intended contribution to the field of knowledge in which the proposed project is inserted.

2. Scientific foundation and the methods used.

3. Suitability of the project for a Doctorate program and feasibility of carrying it out within the expected timeframe.

4. Adequacy of the Data Management Plan for the proposed project, considering all ethical, confidentiality, security, and other applicable restrictions, according to the practices of the discipline(s) involved in the project, as specified at www.fapesp.br/gestaodedados .

b. Criteria for analyzing the candidate's School and Academic Background

Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD) are awarded to support students with excellent academic performance, assessed mainly by their graduation and academic transcripts, with an emphasis on the completion and achievement of the Scientific Initiation.

The analysis criteria are the following:

1. Schoolar excellence, according to the candidate's transcript submitted until the special withdrawal.

2. Academic excellence, according to the candidate's curricular summary (participation in research projects, previous scholarships, scientific publications, rewards).

2.a. In the event of periods of leave of absence on the part of the applicant due to maternity/paternity leave, disability, temporary disabilities or intensive care for ill, elderly or disabled people, which have had an impact on their research productivity, the applicant may submit a request for an analysis of the deadlines for eligibility, through the channel “Converse com a FAPESP”, under the terms of PR Ordinance no. 171/2024 .

2.b. Information on each period of leave of absence should be included in the applicant's curricular summary, sent as part of submitting the proposal for a Grant or Scholarship.

3. Other items that make up the candidate's curricular summary.

c. Criteria for analyzing the Advisor's Research Background

1. Quality, regularity and significance of scientific and/or technological output, with emphasis on recent output. Important elements for this analysis are: list of publications in journals with a selective editorial policy and the scientific impact of these publications; published books or book chapters; registered or licensed patents in which they appear as inventor; other forms of intellectual property; research results effectively transferred and adopted by companies or the government; and any other information that may be relevant.

1.a. The fundamental document to be considered for the analysis of this item is the curricular summary (www.fapesp.br/5266) presented with the proposal.

1.b. In the event of periods of leave of absence on the part of the applicant due to maternity/paternity leave, disability, temporary disabilities or intensive care for ill, elderly or disabled people, which have had an impact on their research productivity, the applicant may submit a request for an analysis of the deadlines for eligibility, through the channel “Converse com a FAPESP”, under the terms of PR Ordinance no. 171/2024 .

1.c. Information on each period of leave of absence should be included in the applicant's curricular summary, sent as part of submitting the proposal for a Grant or Scholarship.

2. Experience and demonstrated skill in the leadership of research projects with internationally competitive results related to the issue of the proposal under analysis.

3. International experience in research after the doctorate or demonstrate active participation in international networks for research collaboration.

4. Demonstrated ability to train researchers, with an emphasis on recent activity in student guidance.

5. Results obtained by the Advisor with previous funding from FAPESP.

6. Availability for guidance considering the work regime and the total number of students under their guidance.

7. Other remarks about the Advisor's scientific, technological and academic output, which are relevant to the analysis of the viability and scientific quality of the proposal.

10.1.7. Procedure for the prioritization of cases that are considered to be of equal scientific merit

Depending on budget availability and when there are proposals of equal scientific merit, the following criteria will be used to prioritize proposals:

a. Candidates with excellent results from previous FAPESP Scholarships.

b. Proposals linked to Young Investigator Grant (YIG); Thematic Project Grant; Special Project Grant; Research, Innovation and Dissemination Centers (RIDC); Engineering Research Centers/Applied Research Centers (ERC/ARC) and Science Centers for Development (SCD), in which the Advisor is the Co-Principal Investigator of the Grant to which the Scholarship is linked.

c. Candidates with excellent results from previous Scholarships from other agencies.

d. Candidates who have recently started the Doctorate program, except under the conditions provided for in PR Ordinance no. 171/2024.

10.1.8. The most common deficiencies observed in applications for Doctorate (applicant without MSc degree) Scholarship for MD-PhD Program Students (DD-MD-PhD)

These are the most common deficiencies observed in the analysis of applications for DD-MD-PhD Scholarships:

a. Regarding the project, as indicated on the reviewers' opinion form:

1. Project with poorly defined, excessive or incongruous objectives.

2. Project with excessively limited objectives.

3. Unoriginal project.

4. Minor contribution to the field of knowledge.

5. Insufficient scientific basis / inadequate methodology.

6. Inadequate project for a Doctorate program.

7. Questionable feasibility of the execution.

8. The progress of the project is inadequate, compromising the feasibility of its execution.

9. Inadequate Data Management Plan.

b. Regarding the Candidate's School and Academic Background, as indicated on the reviewers' opinion form:

1. Poor academic record, except under the conditions provided for in PR Ordinance no. 171/2024 .

2. Candidate with unclear potential.

c. Regarding the Advisor's Research Background, as indicated on the reviewers' opinion form:

1. Scientific or technological output that does not attest to significant achievement as a result of their research activity, except under the conditions provided for in PR Ordinance no. 171/2024 .

2. Insufficient experience in the research area in which the research project is inserted, which may compromise its viability.

3. Unclear guidance ability.

4. The scientific or technological output from previous grants is unsatisfactory.

d. Other deficiencies:

1. Doctorate started over one year ago.

10.2) Analysis deadlines (back to index)

The expected average duration of the FAPESP review process for this support opportunity is approximately 75 days, assuming there are no incidents such as due diligence or return without a reviewers' opinion.

a) This number represents an average. Therefore, this does not mean that applications that are submitted 75 days prior to the estimated start of the grant will necessarily be evaluated within this period. Since the expected average period is 75 days, there will certainly be cases in which the period for a decision will be longer than that.

b) Requests with a Grant/Scholarship review from ad hoc reviewers are submitted to Analysis Panels.

c) Considering that the specialists who participate in the review process of the proposals submitted to FAPESP ( ad hoc reviewers, area coordinators and associate coordinators) are mostly members of the academic community, and that in the period from December to January the Universities and Research Institutions in the state of São Paulo go on break and academic vacation, the Proposals submitted from October to January may suffer additional delays.

d) For each modality of funding, it is estimated a typical period necessary to complete the review process. FAPESP takes responsibility for making every effort to observe this limit. However, the Foundation cannot, guarantee that this condition will be always fulfilled, since FAPESP's top priority is to ensure the quality of the review and selection process.

e) In fact, the most important part of the review process cannot be fully controlled by FAPESP: all applications are sent out to ad hoc reviewers for their opinion, and it is not always possible, despite FAPESP's efforts, to obtain a return process within the regular review deadline.

f) Furthermore, reviewers frequently ask for clarifications before submitting their final review and occasionally FAPESP itself may decide to send the application to additional reviewers if it considers that the submitted reviews are insufficient to make a well-founded final decision.

g) However, experience shows that in most cases the expected average deadlines are met, as can be seen from "Estudo Tempos/FAPESP", available at www.fapesp.br/estatisticas/analise .

10.3) Appeals for Reconsideration (back to index)

Requests for reconsideration must be made in accordance with the guidelines described at www.fapesp.br/1485 .

11) Scientific Report (back to index)

a. Scientific Reports must be presented annually, on the dates specified in the Grant Contract.

a.1. In the case of a Scholarship renewal application, the last Scientific Report must be submitted two months earlier. Failure to meet this deadline may result in the discontinuation of Scholarship payments, should the Scholarship be renewed.

b. It is advised that the partial and final Scientific Reports follow the instructions available at www.fapesp.br/14453 .

b.1. Scholarship Recipients are required to submit follow-up reports, which must be reviewed and commented on by the Advisor, along with the Scientific Report Submission Form . The form, duly completed and signed, must be attached to the system when submitting the Scientific Report in SAGe. Mandatory for Partial, Final and Reformulated Reports. The reports are sent by FAPESP to its reviewers for analysis and recommendations.

b.2. Each Scientific Report must include a section describing how the Data Management Plan is being followed and any changes that might have been made. At the time of submission of the Final Scientific Report, the Scholarship Recipient must provide a link to a web page describing how the data generated by the project may be accessed, as described in the current Data Management Plan. This information can be provided since the first Scientific Report and it is mandatory for submission of the Final Scientific Report.

b.3. When the Scientific Report is submitted, the form "Justificativas de Aplicação dos Recursos da Reserva Técnica de Bolsas", properly completed, with justification for expenses incurred with funds from the Scholarship's Research Overhead during the period, must also be attached.

c. If a report is not approved or submitted by the deadline, the Scholarship is suspended until it is submitted or satisfactorily rewritten, as determined by the reviewers and/or the Area Coordinators and Associate Coordinators. This situation makes it impossible to sign new Grant Contracts. It also blocks any existing balances in other processes.

d. If this failure persists, and three months have elapsed from the date set for this submission or rewrite, the Scholarship is canceled retroactively, as of the date it was suspended.

e. After the expiration date of the Scholarship and upon graduation and thesis defense the following must be sent to FAPESP:

e.1. Copy of the Graduation Certificate;

e.2. Copy of the Thesis Defense Minutes;

e.2.1. the Defense Minutes must prove before FAPESP that the Principal Investigator of the Scholarship was the Advisor of the thesis.

e.3. Copy of the page of the thesis that mentions FAPESP support.

e.4. The documents described in items e.2 and e.3 do not replace the final Scientific Report, which may be submitted as the final version of the thesis.

e.5. Instructions for submitting these documents through the SAGe system are described in Manual SAGe - Submissão de Ata de Defesa.

f. The thesis title need not be identical to that of the research project that formed the basis for the award or continuation of the Scholarship.

f.1. The thesis must explicitly and prominently mention FAPESP support and the Scholarship's process number, as specified in its respective Grant Contract.

f.2. FAPESP does not require and will not change the title of the research project because it differs from the thesis title, as the title is an integral part of the project analyzed by the reviewers, which formed the basis for the award or continuation of the Scholarship.

12) Financial Report – Scholarship Research Overhead (back to index)

a. The Guidelines for the Use of Funds and Financial Reports are available at www.fapesp.br/normaspc .

b. Financial Reports on the use of funds from the Scholarship Research Overhead must be submitted on the dates specified in the Grant Contract. Guidance on submitting the Financial Report is available at www.fapesp.br/prestacaodecontas .

13) Changes to the award (back to index)

a) By signing the Grant Contract, the Advisor and the Scholarship Recipient acknowledge that the conditions are sufficient to enable the execution of the approved project, barring unpredictable circumstances.

b) For this reason, the Advisor and the Scholarship Recipient are advised to sign the Grant Contract only after having assured themselves that the conditions approved by FAPESP are, under normal circumstances, enough to fully guarantee the successful execution of the project in question.

c) In the case of uncertainty, as accepting the Scholarship, solicitants are advised to tick the box "Solicito Mudanças" and immediately submit a well-founded change request, which will be analyzed by FAPESP.

d) Recognizing that in certain cases, after the initial award, there may be circumstances that affect the development of the project and require changes to the agreed conditions, FAPESP accepts that requests may be made to amend the Grant Contract, under the conditions detailed at www.fapesp.br/565.

---