Final results and ranking list of assigned fellowships – UNIPhD Doctoral Programme

Final results and ranking list of assigned fellowships – UNIPhD Doctoral Programme

The final ranking list with the funded candidates and reserve lists for each research topic is available here.

Please note that the following definitions have been used:

  • FUNDED:  candidates that have been selected for the award of a UNIPhD fellowship and are therefore admitted to the UNIPhD Doctoral Programme.

Funded candidates will be invited to confirm the acceptance of their fellowship as to receive detailed information on the UNIPhD enrolment process.

Mandatory time window for enrolment: 12 – 26 July 2022

  • RESERVE LIST: candidates placed on a reserve list.

In case a candidate selected for funding does not accept his/her UNIPhD fellowship, the University of Padua will offer admission to the following applicants on the reserve list, according to their position in the ranking.

Check your e-mail account carefully. In case a vacant place becomes available, the University of Padua will provide candidates on the reserve list with further information on the foreseen enrolment process.

Time window for enrolment in vacant posts: 26 August – 1 September 2022

In accordance with Article 4.1 of the UNIPhD Call for proposals, candidates have 7 working days to submit a request for redress concerning the results of Step 4 of the evaluation process.

Requests must be:

  • Related to the evaluation process as described in the Call for Proposals and in the Guide for Applicants available on the UNIPhD website;
  • Including a clear description of the grounds for complaint;
  • Received within 7 working days after the applicant was notified the evaluation result.

In the redress procedure, the qualified experts’ scientific or technical judgement will not be called into question. A re-evaluation will only be carried out if there is evidence of a shortcoming that affects the final decision on whether the proposal were admitted to the next step or approved for funding. This means, for example, that a problem relating to one evaluation criterion will not lead to a re-evaluation if a proposal has failed on the other criteria. The evaluation score following any re-evaluation will be regarded as definitive. It may be lower than the original score.

What is next? Find out more about the UNIPhD selection process here.