Participating in FP7 (ICT)

1
Participating in FP7 (ICT)

• Stephen OReilly - ICT National Contact Point

2
Participating in FP7 (ICT)

• Funding Schemes
• Evaluation Criteria
• Rules of Participation
• Submission and Selection of proposals

3
Funding schemes Instruments

• Collaborative Projects (CP)
• Large Scale Integrating Projects (IP)
• Small or medium scale focused research actions
  (STREP)
• Networks of Excellence (NoE)
• Coordination and Support Actions (CSA)
• Coordinating or networking actions (CA)
• Support Actions (SSA)

4
Large Scale Integrated Projects IPs

• IPs are designed to generate the knowledge
  required to respond to the Challenges of ICT in
  FP7
• by integrating the critical mass of activities
  and resources needed to achieve ambitious,
  clearly defined scientific and technological
  objectives of a European dimension
• Each IP should
• integrate the types of activities needed to
  obtain the goals
• integrate the critical mass of resources needed
  to obtain the goals
• integrate elements of the development chain to
  attain high-impact goals
• support industry-academia collaboration including
  SMEs

5
Integrated Project Activities

• research and technology development activities
• demonstration activities
• technology transfer or take-up activities
• training activities
• dissemination activities
• knowledge management and exploitation
• consortium management activities
• cooperation with other programmes (e.g. Eureka)
• project management

6
Small and medium scale focussed projects STREPS

• STREPs are designed to generate the knowledge
  required to improve European competitiveness and
  to meet the needs of society or Community
  policies
• by improving existing or developing new products,
  processes or services and/or
• by proving the viability of new technologies
  offering potential economic advantage

7
STREP activities

• STREPs combine any of the following types of
  activities
• targeted, well defined and precisely focused
  research and technological development
• demonstration component(s) as appropriate
• project management
• Dissemination and IPR protection activities are
  classified under project management, STREPs do
  not do training or coordination

8
Networks of Excellence

• NoEs are an instrument to overcome the
  fragmentation of the European research landscape
  in a given area
• Their purpose is to reach a durable
  restructuring/shaping and integration of efforts
  and institutions or parts of institutions
• The success of an NoE is not measured in terms of
  scientific results but by the extent to which the
  social fabric for researchers and research
  institutions in a given field has changed due to
  the project, and the extent to which the existing
  capacities become more competitive as a result of
  this change

9
Networks of Excellence Activities

• The main activities of an NoE are integrating
  activities and activities to spread excellence
• coordinated programming of the partners
  activities
• sharing of research platforms/tools/facilities
• joint management of the knowledge portfolio
• staff mobility and exchanges
• relocation of staff, teams, equipment
• reinforced electronic communication systems
• training researchers and other key staff
• dissemination and communication activities
• networking activities to help transfer knowledge
• where appropriate, promoting the exploitation of
  the results generated within the network
• where appropriate, innovation-related activities
• (project management)
• An NoE may also carry out joint research
  activities to support its goals

10
Networks of Excellence Activities

• The Joint Programme of Activities (JPA) contains
  a range of additional to normal business
  activities
• Integrating activities
• coordinated programming of the partners
  activities
• sharing of research platforms/tools/facilities
• joint management of the knowledge portfolio
• staff mobility and exchanges
• relocation of staff, teams, equipment
• reinforced electronic communication systems
• Activities to support the networks goals
• Development of new research tools and platforms
  for common use
• Generating new knowledge to fill gaps in or
  extend the collective knowledge portfolio
• Activities to spread excellence
• training researchers and other key staf
• dissemination and communication activities
• networking activities to help transfer knowledge
  to outside of the network
• where appropriate, promoting the exploitation of
  the results generated within the network
• where appropriate, innovation-related activities
• Management Activities

11
Coordination Action

• Coordination actions are designed to promote and
  support the networking and co-ordination of
  research and innovation activities at national,
  regional and European level over a fixed period
• by establishing in a coherent way coordinated
  initiatives of a range of research and innovation
  operators, in order to achieve improved
  integration of the European research

12
Coordination Action Activities

• organisation of conferences, of meetings
• performance of studies, analysis
• exchanges of personnel
• exchange and dissemination of good practice
• setting up of common information systems
• setting up of expert groups
• definition, organisation, management of joint or
  common initiatives project management
• Coordination actions do not conduct ST research!

13
Support Action

• Support actions are designed to
• underpin the implementation of the programme
• complement the other instruments,
• help in preparations for future Community
  research and technological development policy
  activities and
• stimulate, encourage and facilitate the
  participation of SMEs, small research teams,
  newly developed and remote research centres, as
  well as organisations from International
  Cooperation Partner Countries in the activities
  of the ICT theme
• Support action proposal may be presented by a
  consortium or a single organisation, from any
  country or countries

14
Support Action Activities

• Conferences, seminars, working groups and expert
  groups
• Studies, analysis
• Fact findings and monitoring
• Trans-national technology transfer and take-up
  related services
• Development of research or innovation strategies
• High level scientific awards and competitions
• Operational support and dissemination,
  information and communication activities
• (project management)
• Support Actions do not conduct ST research !

15
Evaluation Criteria

• Three evaluation criteria are used
• Scientific and technical quality
• Implementation
• Impact
• All proposal coordinators receive an Evaluation
  Summary Report
• Funding follows successful evaluation, selection
  and detailed contract negotiations

16
Evaluation Criteria Integrated Projects \ STREPs

• Scientific and technical quality
• Soundness of concept, and quality of objectives
• Progress beyond the state-of-the-art
• Quality and effectiveness of the S/T methodology
  and associated work plan

17
Evaluation Criteria Integrated Projects \ STREPs

• 2. Implementation
• Appropriateness of the management structure and
  procedures
• Quality and relevant experience of the individual
  participants
• Quality of the consortium as a whole (including
  complementarity, balance)
• Appropriateness of the allocation and
  justification of the resources to be committed
  (budget, staff, equipment)

18
Evaluation Criteria Integrated Projects \ STREPs

• 3. Impact
• Contribution, at the European and/or
  international level, to the expected impacts
  listed in the work programme under relevant
  topic/activity
• Appropriateness of measures for the dissemination
  and/or exploitation of project results, and
  management of intellectual property.

19
Evaluation Criteria NoE

• Scientific and technical quality
• Soundness of concept, and quality of objectives
• Contribution to long-term integration of high
  quality S/T research
• Quality and effectiveness of the joint programme
  of activities and associated work plan

20
Evaluation Criteria NoE

• 2. Implementation
• Appropriateness of the management structure and
  procedures
• Quality and relevant experience of the individual
  participants
• Quality of the consortium as a whole (including
  ability to tackle fragmentation of the research
  field and commitment towards a deep and durable
  institutional integration
• Adequacy of resources for successfully carrying
  out the joint programme of activities

21
Evaluation Criteria NoE

• 3. Impact
• Contribution, at the European and/or
  international level, to the expected impacts
  listed in the work programme under relevant
  topic/activity
• Appropriateness of measures for spreading
  excellence, exploiting results and disseminating
  knowledge through engagement with stakeholders
  and the public at large

22
Evaluation Criteria CSA

• Scientific and technical quality
• Soundness of concept, and quality of objectives
• Contribution to the coordination of high quality
  research
• Quality and effectiveness of the coordination
  mechanisms and associated work plan

23
Evaluation Criteria CSA

• 2. Implementation
• Appropriateness of the management structure and
  procedures
• Quality and relevant experience of the individual
  participants
• Quality of the consortium as a whole (including
  complementarity, balance)
• Appropriateness of the allocation and
  justification of the resources to be committed
  (budget, staff, equipment)

24
Evaluation Criteria CSA

• 3. Impact
• Contribution, at the European and/or
  international level, to the expected impacts
  listed in the work programme under relevant
  topic/activity
• Appropriateness of measures for spreading
  excellence, exploiting results and disseminating
  knowledge through engagement with stakeholders
  and the public at large

25
ICT Work Programme approach and structure

• A limited set of Challenges that
• respond to well-identified industry and
  technology needs
• and/or
• target specific socio-economic goals
• A Challenge is addressed through a limited set of
  Objectives that form the basis of Calls for
  Proposals
• An Objective is described in terms of
• target outcome - in terms of characteristics
• expected impact - in terms of industrial
  competitiveness, societal goal, technology
  progress
• A total of 25 Objectives expressed within 7
  Challenges

26
ICT Work Programme Challenges
Socio-economic goals
4. Digital libraries and content
5. ICT for health
6. ICT for mobility sustainable growth
7. ICT for independent living and
inclusion
1. Network and service infrastructures
2. Cognitive systems, interaction, robotics
Future and Emerging Technologies (FET)
Industry/Tech needs
3. Components, systems, engineering
27
Budget split per objective

• For each Work Programme objective
• A reserved amount for CSAs
• support activities wont need to compete against
  research projects for funding
• A reserved amount for NoE
• Will not fund multiple NoEs to compete with each
  other
• Remaining (main) part of budget committed to
  Collaborative Projects
• minimum percent Integrating Projects,
• minimum percent Focused Research Actions,
• the remainder distributed by quality of the
  proposals

28
Rules of Participation

• Minimum conditions for participation
• Consortia
• Grant agreement
• Community financial contribution
• Forms of grants
• Reimbursement of eligible costs
• Indirect costs
• Maximum funding rates
• Guarantee mechanism
• Certificates on financial statements

29
Minimum conditions for participation

• General
• 3 independent legal entities from 3 different
  Member States (MS) or Associated countries (Ac)
• Natural persons may participate
• Sole participants composed of members that meet
  the criteria above can participate
• Collaborative projects for specific cooperation
  actions (SICA) dedicated to international
  cooperation partner countries (ICPC) identified
  in WP minimum 4 participants of which 2 in
  different MS or Ac and 2 in different ICPC
  countries unless otherwise specified in work
  programme
• Participation of international organisations and
  participants from third countries if in addition
  to minima

30
Consortia

• Consortium agreements obligatory unless exempted
  by call for proposals, Commission to publish
  guidelines
• Coordinator acts as efficient interface between
  consortium and Commission (verifies accession,
  monitors compliance, receives and distributes EC
  contribution, keeps financial records and ensures
  timely delivery of reports)
• Tacit approval for changes in consortium
  membership, except if associated with other
  changes
• Written approval for change of coordinator

31
Grant agreement

• Model grant agreement to be drawn up
• to establish rights and obligations of
  participants (including submission of reports,
  termination, access rights)
• to identify whether and what part of EC financial
  contribution is based on reimbursement of
  eligible costs, lump sums or flat rates
• to identify which changes in the consortium
  require prior publication of competitive call
• shall reflect general principles of the European
  Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct
  for the Recruitment of Researchers
• specific provisions for certain types of actions
  (IPR particularly)
• grant agreement comes into force upon signature
  by coordinator and Commission and applies to each
  participant that accedes

32
Community financial contribution

• Eligibility for Funding
• Legal entities from MS and AC or created under
  Community law (and the JRC)
• International European interest organisations
• Legal entities established in international
  cooperation partner countries (ICPC-INCO)
• And
• International organisations
• Legal entities established in 3rd countries other
  than ICPC-INCO, if provided for in SP or WP or
  essential for carrying out action if or
  provision for funding is provided for in a
  bilateral agreement between Community and that
  country

33
Forms of grant

• Reimbursement of eligible costs
• Flat rates a percentage for indirect costs or
  scales of unit costs
• Lump sum amounts
• Combination of the above
• Scholarships or prizes
• Forms of grants to be used are specified in
  WP/calls for proposals
• ICPC participants may opt for lump sum financing.

34
Reimbursement of eligible costs

• Co-financing, no profit.
• Cost reporting models eliminated
• Participants charge direct and indirect eligible
  costs
• Eligible costs
• Actual
• Incurred during the project
• Determined according to usual accounting and
  management principles/practices
• Used solely to achieve project objectives
• Consistent with principles of economy, efficiency
  and effectiveness
• Recorded in accounts (or the accounts of third
  parties)
• Exclusive of non-eligible costs
• Average personnel may be used if consistent with
  above and do not differ significantly from actual

35
Indirect costs

• All participants
• Actual indirect costs (participants may use a
  simplified method of calculation) or
• Flat-rate of direct eligible costs excluding
  subcontracts and reimbursement of third parties
  costs (to be established by the Commission)
  currently 20
• Non-profit public bodies, secondary and higher
  education establishments, research organisations
  and SMEs unable to identify real indirect costs
• Flat-rate of 60 of total direct eligible costs
  (until end 2009)
• Flat rate of minimum 40, to be established by
  the Commission (as of 2010)

36
Maximum funding rates

• Research and technological development
  activities 50 of eligible costs except for
• - Public bodies (non-profit) 75
• - Secondary and higher education establishments
  75
• - Research organisations (non-profit) 75
• - Small and Medium sized Enterprises - SMEs
  75
• Demonstration activities 50 of eligible costs
  
• Other activities 100 including e.g.
  consortium mgmt
• Coordination and support actions 100
• Flat rate indirect costs 7
• Receipts are taken into account to determine the
  final Community financial contribution

37
Guarantee mechanism

• Replaces financial collective responsibility
• Commission establishes and operates a participant
  guarantee fund
• Contribution to guarantee fund of max. 5 of the
  EC contribution by each participant, to be
  returned at the end of the project
• If interests generated not sufficient to cover
  sums due to EC, retention of max. 1 of EC
  contribution
• Exemption of retention for public bodies, higher
  and secondary education establishments, legal
  entities guaranteed by a MS/Ac
• Ex-ante financial viability checks limited to
  coordinators and participants requesting
• gt EUR 500.000 (unless exceptional
  circumstances)
• Guarantee fund replaces financial guarantees

38
Certificates on financial statements

• Mandatory whenever cumulative amount of interim
  and balance payments equal to or more than EUR
  375 000
• For projects of a duration of max. 2 years only
  one certificate at the end of the project
• No certificates for actions entirely financed by
  lump sums or flat rates

39
Submission and Selection

• Information for proposers
• Submission of proposals
• Eligibility checks
• Evaluation process
• Specific rules for FET Open
• Writing your proposal
• Experts
• Getting help

40
Information for proposers

• Workprogramme 2007-2008
• Guide for Applicants
• now including the Guidance notes for evaluators
  and the Background note on the funding schemes
• Evaluation forms with notes
• EPSS manual
• Model grant agreement
• Rules on submission of proposals, and the related
  evaluation, selection and award procedures

41
Submission of proposals

• Fixed deadline calls
• 17h00 Tuesdays
• One stage submission
• Electronic submission only
• (Special rules for FET Open scheme)

42
Electronic Submission

• EPSS - Electronic Proposal Submission System
• Online preparation only!
• Improved validation checks before submission is
  accepted
• FP6 Failure rate 1
• Main reason for failure - waiting till the last
  minute
• Submit early, submit often!

43
Proposal Part A (online)

• A1
• Title, acronym, objective etc.
• free keywords
• 2000 character proposal abstract
• previous/current submission (in FP7)
• A2 (per participant)
• Legal address/administrator address/RD address
• Clear identification as SME/Public body/Research
  centre/ Educ. establishment
• Proposer identification code PIC (later calls)
• A3
• More cost details (direct/indirect costs
  distinguished)

44
Proposal Part B (pdf format only)

• Part B format directly linked to evaluation
  criteria
• Summary
• ST quality (bullet points sections)
• Implementation (idem)
• Impact (idem)
• Ethics
• Section lengths recommended

45
Eligibility checks

• Date and time of receipt of proposal on or before
  deadline
• Firm deadlines - except for Continuously Open
  Calls
• Minimum number of eligible, independent partners
• As set out in work programme/call
• Completeness of proposal
• Presence of all requested administrative forms
  (Part A) and the content description (Part B)

46
Evaluation Process

• On-site evaluation
• One step evaluation
• Independent experts

Eligibility Check?
yes
Panel (with optional Hearings?)
Consensus
Individual reading
47
Evaluation criteria scoring

• Scale of 1-5 (and 0)
• No weighting
• except FET Open
• Criterion threshold 3/5
• Overall threshold 10/15

48
Special rules for FET Open Scheme

• For Collaborative research actions in the FET
  Open Scheme
• Initially prepare a short (five page) outline
  proposal
• Submission at any time
• Short proposals are evaluated in batches (three
  or four times per year)
• Successful short proposals develop their idea and
  submit a full proposal at a later date
• Specific weighting of the evaluation criteria

49
When writing your proposal.1

• Divide your effort over the evaluation criteria
• Many proposers concentrate on the scientific
  element, but lose marks on project implementation
  or impact description
• Think of the finishing touches which signal
  quality work
• clear language
• well-organised contents, following the Part B
  structure
• useful and understandable diagrams
• no typos, no inconsistencies, no obvious
  paste-ins, no numbers which dont add up, no
  missing pages

50
When writing your proposal.2

• Make it easy for the evaluators to give you high
  marks. Dont make it hard for them!
• Dont write too little cover what is requested
• Dont write too much
• Dont leave them to figure out why its good,
  tell them why its good
• Leave nothing to the imagination

51
Experts

• Register as an expert \ evaluator
• https//cordis.europa.eu/emmfp7/

52
Getting help with your proposal

• Proposers days and briefings
• Partner search facilities
• http//cordis.europa.eu/ist/partners/partner.htm
  
• www.ideal-ist.net
• A supporting website of advice, information and
  documentation http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict
• Pre-proposal check
• Network of National Contact Point
• http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ncp.htm

53
Enterprise Ireland support funding

• For Academics
• Travel Grant
• Proposal Preparation Support (Co-ordinators)
• For Companies
• Feasibility Grant Scheme
• http//www.enterprise-ireland.com/FP7/FinancialSu
  pport.htm

54
Useful websites etc

• Cordis FP7
• http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html
• ICT on Cordis
• http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/
• Hyperion
• http//www.hyperion.ie/
• EPF
• http//www.efpconsulting.com/front/ShowCategory.as
  px?CatID30

55
ICT National Contact Points

• Stephen OReilly
• EI Cork
• 021 4800217
• 087 9281449
• stephen.oreilly_at_enterprise-ireland.com

Gerard Kennedy EI Limerick 061 408869 087
6967478 gerard.kennedy_at_enterprise-ireland.com