Rompre avec le pass

1
FP6 Integrated Projects
A provisional description of integrated projects
as an instrument for implementing the priority
themes of the Sixth Framework Programme (as of
October 2002) europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/net
works-ip.html
2
A wider range of better differentiated instruments

• New instruments
• Integrated projects (IP)
• Networks of excellence (NoE)
• Article 169 (joint implementation of national
  programmes)
• Traditional instruments
• Specific targeted research projects
• Co-ordination actions
• Specific support actions

3
Principles guiding their design

• Simplification and streamlining
• to minimise the overheads for all concerned
  whether applicant, contractor or the Commission
• to speed up procedures, especially
  time-to-contract
• Flexibility and adaptability
• to enable instruments to be applicable throughout
  the priority themes
• to enable projects to evolve
• Increased management autonomy
• to eliminate unnecessary micro-management
• While preserving public accountability and
  protecting interests of the Community

4
Classification of the instruments
5
Instruments to be used in priority

• Calls for proposals will identify which
  instruments are to be used, which have priority,
  and for what
• From the outset, IPs and NoE will be the priority
  means
• for implementing those themes where it is already
  deemed appropriate
• while maintaining the use of specific targeted
  research projects and coordination actions
• In 2004, the Commission will arrange an
  independent evaluation of the use of the
  instruments
• may lead to an adjustment of their relative
  weightings

6
Purpose of IPs

• Designed to generate the knowledge required to
  implement the priority thematic areas of FP6
• by integrating the critical mass of activities
  and resources needed
• to achieve ambitious, clearly defined scientific
  and technological objectives of a European
  dimension

7
Activities

• Activities integrated by a project may cover the
  full research spectrum
• should contain objective-driven research
• technological development and demonstration
  components as appropriate
• may contain a training component
• the effective management of knowledge will also
  be an essential feature
• the whole carried out in a coherent management
  framework

8
What is the scale of critical mass (I)?

• Concerning resources each IP must assemble the
  critical mass of resources needed to achieve its
  ambitious objectives
• activities integrated may range up to several
  tens of millions
• but no minimum threshold, provided necessary
  ambition and critical mass is achieved

9
What is the scale of critical mass (II)?

• Concerning its partnership minimum of three
  participants from three different Member States
  or Associated States, of which at least two
  should be Member States or Associated candidate
  countries
• but in practice likely to be substantially more
• SME participation is strongly encouraged
• Third country participants may be included,
  with a possibility of Community financial support
  for certain groups of countries
• Concerning its duration typically three to five
  years
• but more if necessary to deliver the objectives

10
Financial regime

• Community support will be in the form of a grant
  to the budget
• Paid as a contribution to actual costs
• that are necessary and economic for the project
• that are recorded in the accounts of the
  participants
• or, when provided for in the contract, in the
  accounts of third parties
• that exclude indirect taxes, duties, interest
• Annually, each participant to provide a summary
  cost statement supported by
• certification of total costs by an independent
  auditor
• management-level justification of costs

11
Cost models

• A single family of three closely related cost
  models
• FC all actual direct and indirect costs
• FCFall actual direct costs plus 20 of these
  direct costs (excluding subcontracting) to cover
  related indirect costs and
• ACF additional actual direct costs plus 20 of
  these direct costs (excluding subcontracting) to
  cover related indirect costs
• Each organisation may use only one of the models
  for all its FP6 participations, where they are
  relevant
• The same cost methodologies will be used for all
  instruments implemented through grant to the
  budget

12
Rates of Community support

• Maximum rates of support for FC and FCF
  participants
• 50 for RTD and innovation-related components
• 35 for any demonstration component
• 100 for any training activities
• 100 for consortium management
• AC participants supported at up to 100 for all
  components of the project (except for consortium
  management which will be supported as under FCF)
• For IPs, no more than 7 of the Community
  contribution can be used to support consortium
  management costs reimbursed at up to 100

13
Proposal submission

• Through calls for proposals
• may be preceded by expressions of interest to
  help focus calls and assist in consortium
  building
• Simplified proposal-making
• reflecting evolutionary nature of the project
• summary description of activities for entire
  duration
• detailed implementation plan only for first 18
  months

14
Evaluation process

• Evaluation by a strengthened peer-review system
• possibly in stages, involving individual reviews,
  panel sessions, perhaps hearings of applicants
• Key issues to be addressed during evaluation
• relevance to the objectives of the specific
  programme
• scale of ambition and potential impact
• ST excellence
• quality of the consortium
• quality of the project and knowledge management
• critical mass in terms of activities and resources

15
Initial contract and advance payment (I)

• The contract will specify the maximum Community
  contribution, but not its distribution among
  participants
• consortium autonomy
• elimination of major source of micro-management
• An annex contains
• overall description of the project
• detailed implementation plan only for first 18
  months
• Advance payment equal to 85 of the Community
  contribution anticipated for the first 18 months

16
Initial contract and advance payment (II)

• Simplified signature procedure
• faster entry into effect
• the consortium designates a coordinator
• liaison with Commission,
• receives and distributes the grant
• Consortium agreement is a prerequisite

17
Reporting and payments schedule

• The consortium submits annual report containing
• an outline of previous 12 months activities
• financial documents on the costs incurred
  (including cost certificates and management-level
  justification)
• a detailed implementation plan and associated
  financial plan for the following 18 months
• Upon acceptance of above by the Commission
• final settlement of payment for period concerned
  (subject to any ex-post audit)
• outstanding advance supplemented up to 85 of the
  anticipated Community contribution for following
  18 months

18
Payments and reporting schedule(example of a 4
year contract)
Activity report
Reported costs
Activity report
Detailed work plan
Reported costs
Adjusted advance
Activity report
Detailed work plan
Reported costs
Adjusted advance
Activity report
Detailed work plan
Reported costs
Adjusted advance
Detailed work plan
Initial advance
0 6 12
18 24 30
36 42 48

Months
19
Flexibility and autonomy of implementation

• For the implementation plan, each year, the
  consortium
• proposes a detailed plan for the coming 18 months
• and may propose to update the overall plan
• both need approval of the Commission to enter
  into force
• For changes in the consortium
• the consortium may itself decide to take in new
  participants (though without additional funding)
• the contract will specify when this must involve
  a competitive call
• the Commission may decide to launch calls to add
  activities and participants (with additional
  funding)
• e.g. to enhance SME participation

20
Monitoring and audits

• Robust output monitoring by the Commission,
  involving external experts at all stages
• annual review
• mid-term or milestone review,and
• final review
• Commission may also carry out audits
• financial (at least one per IP)
• technical
• technological
• ethical

21
More Information on the instrumennts

• Regularly updated website on the instruments
• europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/networks-ip.html
  
• Brochures and leaflets on the new instruments
• Available at Heysel Conference and on Europa as
  above
• Presentation slides
• on Europa as above