@Francisca_Chiedu, well, this application is already rejected, you can’t ruin it even further, right?
If pointing assessor to innovative parts of the existing evidences won’t be enough, expert should know somehow that applicant is ok to be endorsed under Promise route, since only single evidence for OC1 is accepted, where 3 are required.
@J11, about same evidence for both criteria, the the Guide says:
If these are your chosen criteria then your evidence should clearly demonstrate this differentiation. Submitting the same evidence for both criteria may not be sufficient if it does not meet these different requirements.
As you can see it says may not be. I read it as it may be, but have to highlight OC1 innovation and OC3 impact clearly and separately. But I don’t know how to do it exactly, I even created a topic here: Multiple criteria, single evidence