Building a Europe of Knowledge

1

FP7 Cooperation Rules of the Game

Stefano PuppinEuropean Commission, DG
ResearchEnergy Conversion and Distribution
Systems
2
Whats new in FP7

• Frontier research, JTIs ERANET
• Increased funding rates
• Flexible funding schemes
• Rationalisation of Audit Certificates
• The Unique Registration Facility
• The Joint Guarantee Fund
• The Risk Sharing Financial Facility
• Logistics and administrative tasks -gt external
  structures
• Work Programmes Call for Proposals adopted at
  the same time each year

3
The legislative package
Framework Programme (EC)
Rules for Participation (EC)



4 Specific Programmes
4
Where do RP come from
State Aid Framework for RDI
Financial Regulations
FP7 Rules for Participation
FP7 Needs
5
Rules for Participation

• The Rules for Participation cover
• Partner eligibility
• Proposal submission, evaluation and negotiation
• Legal financial rules
• Community financial contribution
• Maximum funding rates
• Implementation and grant agreements
• Cost Reporting
• Intellectual Property Rights
• Procedures for appointment of external experts

6
Terminology changesFP6 ? FP7
Contract ? Grant Agreement
Proposer ? Applicant
Instrument ? Funding scheme
Financial Guidelines ? Financial Rules
INCO ? ICPC
Audit Certificates ? Certificate on the financial statements
7
Important definitions

• Public body means any legal entity established as
  such by national law, and international
  organisations
• Research organisation means a legal entity
  established as a non profit organisation which
  carries out research or technological development
  as one of its main objectives
• Higher and secondary education establishments
  -Term used by Financial Regulation / Implementing
  Rules, includes universities, schools for applied
  sciences and similar
• SMEs mean micro, small and medium-sized
  enterprises within the meaning of Recommendation
  2003/361/EC in the version of 6 May 2003 (OJ L
  124, 20.5.2003, p. 36)
• International cooperation partner countries
  (ICPC) FP6 INCO countries

8
Who can participate?

• Type of participants
• Undertakings
• Universities
• Research Centres
• International Organisations
• Any Other legal entity
• Natural Persons

• Place of Establishment
• Member States
• Associated Countries
• Third Countries

Additional Conditions may be included in the Work
Programme
Normally, non IPCP third countries are not
eligible for funding
9
Eligibility for Funding

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

10
Third Countries

• Industrialised countries (US, Japan, Canada,
  Australia, New Zealand, Korea)
• Associated countries
• International Cooperation Partner Countries
  (ICPC)
• Mediterranean partner Countries,
• Western Balkans,
• Eastern European and Central Asian countries
  (inc. Russia)
• ACP, ASIA, Latin America
• Emerging economies (e.g. China, India, Brazil,
  Russia, South Africa, Mexico)

11
Minimum conditions for participation

• General rule
• 3 independent participants from 3 different MS or
  AC (Associated Countries)
• Specific International Cooperation Actions
• 2 participants MS or AC and 2 participants ICPC
  (International Cooperation Partner Countries)
• Coordination and support actions, Training of
  Researchers, Frontier research projects
• 1 participant

? Sole participants composed of members that meet
the criteria above can participate ? Work
Programme or Specific Programme can add
conditions on number or type of participant,
place of establishment, etc
12
FP7 Funding Schemes

• Collaborative Projects (small to medium / large /
  targeted to specific groups)
• Networks of Excellence
• Coordination and Support Actions
• Support for Frontier Research (ERC)
• Research for the Benefit of Specific Groups
• Support for Training and Career Development of
  Researchers (Marie Curie)
• Joint Technology Initiatives
• Joint implementation of national research
  programmes (Article 169)

13
Collaborative Projects (CP)

• Purpose objective driven research projects,
  developing new knowledge, new technology,
  products, including scientific coordination
  and/or demonstration activities or common
  resources for research
• Size Resources the number of participants and
  volume of resources should be compatible with
  overall objective and manageability
• Indicative average duration 24-60 months
• Activities Research, Demonstration, Management
  of the consortium, Other activities (such as
  dissemination, training)

14
Coordination Actions (CA)
Research, technological development or
demonstration activities cannot be supported
within this scheme

• Purpose coordinating research activities and
  policies
• Size Resources the size, scope and internal
  organisation of coordination actions can vary
  from research theme to research theme and from
  topic to topic
• Indicative average duration 12-48 months
• Activities organisation of events - including
  conferences, meetings, workshops or seminars -,
  related studies, exchanges of personnel, exchange
  and dissemination of good practices, and, if
  necessary, the definition, organisation and
  management of joint or common initiatives,
  together with management of the action.

15
Maximum funding rates

• Research activities 50 of eligible costs,
  except for
• SMEs 75
• Non-profit public bodies 75
• Secondary and higher education establishments
  75
• Research organisations (non-profit) 75
• Demonstration activities 50 of eligible costs
• Frontier research actions 100
• Coordination and support actions 100
• Training and career development of researchers
  actions 100
• Other activities (management, training, etc)
  100
• Receipts to be taken into account

16
Upper funding limits
17
Forms of Grants

• Three forms of grants
• reimbursement of eligible costs (vast majority)
• lump sums financing (eg NoEs)
• flat-rate financing, including scale of unit
  costs (eg. indirect costs, Marie Curie).
• Different forms of grants may be used in
  combination.
• Lump sums and flat rates will not require
  justification of eligible costs
• Gradual introduction of lump sums and flat rates
• ? FR fundamental principle a grant cannot
  generate a profit

18
Eligible Costs

• Eligible
• actual
• during duration of project
• in accordance with its usual accounting and
  management principles
• recorded in the accounts of beneficiary
• used for the sole purpose of achieving the
  objectives of the project (in FP6 necessary for
  the project)
• Non-eligible (identifiable indirect taxes
  including VAT) - same as in FP6

19
Cost Reporting Modes

• Cost reporting models (FC, AC, etc) have been
  eliminated
• Participants charge direct (and indirect) costs
• For indirect costs, a flat rate is an option
• Average personnel costs may be used if they do
  not differ significantly from actual costs
• Audit certificates continued, but rationalised
• Now called Certificate on the financial
  statements
• No Certificate required for participants
  receiving lt 375,000
• For projects of 2 years, if required, maximum one
  Certificate per partner at the end of the project

20
Indirect costs

• Eligible costs direct costs indirect costs
• Preferred solution real indirect costs.
• Flat rate always an option. 20
• For non-profit public-bodies, universities,
  research centres and SMEs. Grant awarded
• before 1st January 2010 ? 60
• after 1st January 2010 ? tbd but gt 40
• Coordination Support Actions ? 7

21
Certification

• Certificate on financial statements (Form D)
• Mandatory when requested funding reaches 375,000
  Euro (except for project of 2 years or less -
  submitted at the end)
• If above the threshold, mandatory for every
  beneficiary and every period, except if a
  certification on the methodology (Form E) is
  provided

22
Grant Agreement signature procedure

• Signature by Commission coordinator only
• Accession of beneficiaries via Form A
• Later accession of new beneficiaries via Form B
• Entry into force upon signature by coordinator
  Commission

23
Guarantee fund mechanism

• Replaces FP6 concept of Collective financial
  responsibility
• Participants contribute 5 of their EC grant to
  the fund to insure against losses of a defaulting
  partner
• Does not apply to
• public bodies, secondary and higher education and
  entities guaranteed by MS or AC
• participants in certain types of funding schemes
  (training, frontier research, actions for benefit
  of specific groups except SMEs)

Consequence -gt Ex-ante financial viability check
only for coordinators and participants receiving
more than 500,000
24
Payment modalities

• Only one pre-financing for the whole duration
  up to 150 of the EC contribution of the average
  funding per period (for projects with more than 2
  periods) to be agreed during negotiations
• Interim payments based on financial statements
  (EC contribution amounts justified accepted
  funding rate)
• Retention (at least 10)
• Final payment

25
Reporting

• Periodic reports to be submitted by coordinator
  60 days after end of period
• - progress of the work
• - use of the resources and
• - Financial Statement (Form C)
• Final reports to be submitted by coordinator 60
  days after end of project
• - publishable summary report, conclusions and
  socioeconomic impact
• - covering wider societal implications and a plan
  on use and dissemination of results

26
Consortium Agreement

• Compulsory, unless explicitly excluded in the
  text of the call.
• Commission will publish Guidelines on the
  Consortium Agreement
• Consortium Agreement must cover
• Internal organisation of the consortium
• The distribution of EC financial contribution
• Specific rules of dissemination and IPR
• Rules for settlements of dispute
• Liability, indemnification and confidentiality
  arrangements

27
The Project Life Cycle
28
Proposals

• Call for proposals
• Evaluation criteria established in RP and WP.
• 1 Specific Programme ? 1 Annual Work Programme ?
  1 publication date of the calls.
• Work Programme will specify
• Topics with associated Type of funding scheme
  (Collaborative projects, Networks of Excellence,
  Coordination and support actions)
• Indicative budgets
• Type of evaluation procedure (one / two stage /
  hearings)
• Particular requirements (criteria, minimum
  conditions, etc)
• EPSS Electronic Submission Only

29
Evaluation. General Principles

• Same principles than in FP6,
• Quality, Transparency, Impartiality, Equal
  treatment
• peer review - independent evaluators hearings
• but
• More use of two-stage submission procedure
• More use of remote evaluation
• New set of evaluation criteria

30
The experts

• The Commission draws on a wide pool of evaluators
  
• applications from individuals and from
  institutions
• Applications via CORDIS
• Commission invites individuals, call-by-call
• Expertise, and experience are paramount
• Geography, gender and rotation also considered
• Typically, an individual will review about 10
  proposals remotely.
• then spend a few days in Brussels for consensus
  stage
• Some will participate in hearings with the
  consortia
• Experts sign confidentiality and conflict of
  interest declaration

31
The criteria

• Criteria adapted to each funding scheme
• specified in the work programme
• Divided into three main criteria
• ST Quality (relevant to the topic of the call)
• Concept, objective, work-plan
• Implementation
• Individual participants and consortium as a whole
• Allocation of resources
• Impact
• Contribution to expected impacts listed in work
  programme
• Plans for dissemination/exploitation

New for FP7

32
Evaluation Process

• Process
• Eligibility checks (time of receipt,
  completeness, partnership)
• Individual reading and marking (3-5 experts)
• Consensus discussion and final marking
• Evaluation Summary Report
• (Panel Hearings)
• Commission decision on ranking (Selected,
  Reserve, Rejected)
• Start of negotiation for the selected proposals

33
For each proposal
May be remote
Proposal X copy 1
IAR expert 1
Consensus meeting
Proposal X copy 2
CR 3 experts
IAR expert 2
Proposal X copy 3
IAR expert 3
Note There may be more than 3 evaluators IARIndi
vidual assessment report CRConsensus Report
34
Proposal
Evaluation in FP7
Eligibility
Individual evaluation
Security Scrutiny (if needed)
Consensus
Thresholds
Applicants informed of results of expert
evaluation
Panel review
with hearing (optional)
Ethical Review (if needed)
Commission ranking

• invitation to submit second-stage
• proposal, when applicable

Negotiation
Commission rejection decision
Consultation of programme committee (if required)
Applicants informed of Commission decision
Commission funding and/or rejection decision
35
Consensus

• Built on the basis of the individual assessments
  of all the evaluators
• Usually involves a discussion
• Moderated by a commission staff-member
• One expert acts as rapporteur
• Agreement on consensus marks and comments for
  each of the criteria

36
Panel review

• Optional Hearings with proposers may be convened
• Questions to the invited proposal coordinators
• Small number of proposal representatives
• Panel Meeting
• Compare consensus reports
• Examines proposals with same consensus score (if
  needed)
• Final marks and comments for each proposal
• Suggestions on order of priority, clustering,
  amendments, etc.

37
Commission Follow-up

• Evaluation summary reports sent to applicants
• Draw up final ranked lists
• Information to the Programme Committee
• Commission decisions on rejected proposals
• Formal consultation of Programme Committee (when
  required)
• Contract negotiation
• Proposals selected for funding

New for FP7