Overview of FP7 Rules of Participation, Funding Schemes, Submission, Evaluation and Selection

1
Overview of FP7Rules of Participation, Funding
Schemes,Submission, Evaluation and Selection

• Dina Berzina,
• ICT NCP Latvia

2
Participation

• Calls for proposals always except
• Coordination and support actions where
• the beneficiary has been identified in the SP or
  in the WP where this is foreseen by the SP
• for the purchase of a good or service by the
  Community
• for the appointment of independent experts
• Other actions where provided by the Financial
  Regulation or its implementing rules (monopolies
  etc.)

3
Minimum conditions for participation (1)

• 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
• JRC may participate and is deemed to be from a
  different MS or AC
• Participation of international organisations and
  participants from third countries if in addition
  to minima
• Additional conditions can be established by the
  work programme (WP) or specific programme (SP)

4
Minimum conditions for participation(2)

• Specific
• Frontier research actions (ERC) at least 1
  legal entity established in a MS or AC
• Coordination and support actions and actions in
  favour of training and career development of
  researchers minimum of 1 legal entity (except
  actions to coordinate)
• Collaborative projects addressing the
  participation of international cooperation
  partner countries (ICPC-INCO) minimum is 4
  participants of which 2 in MS or AC and 2 in INCO
  countries
• Participation of international organisations and
  participants from third countries if in addition
  to minima

5
Minimum conditions for participation(3)
6
Co-ordinators (Suggested)

• Article 36 Payment and distribution The
  Community financial contribution shall be paid to
  the participants via the coordinator without
  undue delay
• Article 38 Risk avoidance mechanism The
  Commission shall verify ex-ante only the
  financial capacity of coordinators, and of
  participants ... for a Community financial
  contribution ... in excess of 500 000...
• ANNEX Participant Guarantee Fund The Commission
  may order the depositary bank to directly
  transfer the amount due from the Fund to the
  coordinator of the indirect action if it is still
  on-going ... Amounts transferred from the Fund
  will be regarded as Community financial
  contribution
• Conclusion Choose the coordinator from EU27, or
  AC5, or CC2

7
Consortia

• Consortium agreements obligatory unless exempted
  by call for proposals, Commission published
  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

8
Grant agreement

• Model grant agreement is 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
• grant agreement comes into force upon signature
  by coordinator and Commission and applies to each
  participant that accedes

9
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

10
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

11
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 costs may be used if consistent
  with above and do not differ significantly from
  actual

12
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 management
• Coordination and support actions 100
• Flat rate indirect costs 7
• Receipts are taken into account to determine the
  final Community financial contribution

13
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)
• 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)
• Provided by certified calculation method

14
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

15
European Investment Bank (EIB)

• Risk-sharing Finance Facility (RSFF)
• The Community may award a grant to the EIB to
  cover risk of loans or guarantees in support of
  research objectives set out under the FP7
• The EIB shall provide these loans or guarantees
  in a fair, transparent, impartial and equal way
• The Commission may object to the use of the RSFF
  for certain loans on terms defined in the grant
  agreement in accordance with the work programme

16
Funding schemes (1)

• 3 funding schemes 5 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 (SA)

17
Funding schemes (2)

• Funding schemes are defined in an Annex to the
  Workprogramme and in the Guides for Applicants
• The Commission never changes instruments A
  proposal submitted as an Integrating project is
  evaluated using the IP evaluation criteria, and
  is ranked against the other Integrating project
  proposals submitted in the Call
• Be sure you are using the right instrument for
  your project idea!
• ICT Workprogramme 2007/08
• budget pre-allocation to instruments

18
Collaborative projects

• Research aiming at developing new knowledge, new
  technology, products, demonstration activities or
  common resources for research
• Two types of projects to be financed
• large-scale integrating projects (IP)
• small or medium-scale focused research actions
  (STREP)

19
CP - Integrating Projects (IP) (1)

• Activities in an Integrating Project may cover
• research and technology development activities
• demonstration activities
• technology transfer or take-up activities
• training activities
• dissemination activities
• knowledge management and exploitation
• consortium management activities
• An Integrating Project comprises
• a coherent set of activities
• and an appropriate management structure
• Possibility for competitive calls for enlargement
  of consortium

20
CP - Integrating Projects (IP) (2)

• For IPs in FP7 ICT
• Training in an IP project should be included in
  the cost category Other (The column "Training"
  which has appeared on the form is an error)
• as is indicated in the Guide for applicants and
  in the pop-up note on the A3 form in the EPSS
  system

21
CP - Integrating Projects (IP) (3)

• Experience of IPs in FP6 IST
• Purpose Ambitious objective driven research with
  a programme approach
• Target audience Industry (incl. SMEs), Research
  institutions, Universities, in some cases
  potential end-users
• Typical duration 36-60 months
• Optimum consortium 10-20 participants
• Total EU contribution 4-25m (average around
  10m)
• Flexibility in implementation
• Update of workplan

22
CP - Integrating Projects (IP) (4)

• Experience LV partnership of IPs in FP6 IST

23
CP Focused projects (STREP)(1)

• Targeting a specific objective in a clearly
  defined project approach
• Fixed overall work plan with stable deliverables
  that do not change over the life-time of the
  project
• Two types of activity or combination of the two
• A research and technological development activity
  to generate new knowledge to improve
  competitiveness and/or address major societal
  needs
• A demonstration activity to prove the viability
  of new technologies offering potential economic
  advantages but which can not be commercialised
  directly (e.g. testing of product prototypes)
• as well as
• Project management activities (including
  innovation related activities like protection of
  knowledge dissemination and exploitation)

24
CP Focused projects (STREP)(2)

• Special rules for FET Open ICT Programme
• FET Open scheme
• Initially submission of 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

25
CP Focused projects (STREP)(3)

• Difference between STREPs and IPs in DG Research
  and DG ISM
• RTD All Collaborative research projects carry
  out a wide range of activities under the
  categories RD, Demonstration, Management and
  Other those below a certain level of funding are
  considered to be Focused projects (STREP), those
  above it are Large scale integrating projects
  (IP)
• ISM There is qualitative difference between IPs
  and STREPs, not merely a quantitative one -
  STREPs are well-planned tightly-focused research
  or demonstration projects. In ICT the main
  activities in a STREP can be just three RD,
  Demonstration and Management

26
CP Focused projects (STREP)(4)

• STREPs in ICT have only three permitted cost
  categories
• RD,
• Demonstration
• Management
• Other activities (dissemination) should be under
• Management category
• RD (to bear some of the cost by themselves)
• While the old 7 limit on the amount of costs
  applicable to the fully-funded Management has
  been removed in FP7, if a project goes
  substantially over that figure it will be looked
  at during the grant agreement negotiations

27
CP Focused projects (STREP) (5)

• Experience of STREPs in FP6 IST
• Purpose Objective driven research more limited
  in scope than an IP
• Target audience Industry including SMEs,
  Research institutes, Universities
• Typical duration 18-36 months
• Optimum consortium 6-15 participants
• Total EU contribution 0.8 - 3 m (average around
  1.9m)
• Fixed workplan and fixed partnership for duration

28
CP Focused projects (STREP) (6)

• Experience LV partnership of STREPs in FP6 IST

29
Networks of excellence (NoE) (1)

• NoEs are an instrument to overcome the
  fragmentation of the European research landscape
  in a given area and remove the barriers to
  integration
• NoE purpose is to reach a durable restructuring
  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 field
  has changed due to the project,
• and the extent to which the existing capacities
  become more competitive as a result of this
  change
• Possibility to add participants through
  competitive calls

30
Networks of excellence (NoE) (2)

• The 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 staff
• dissemination and communication activities
• networking activities to transfer knowledge to
  outside of the network and promoting the
  exploitation of the results generated within the
  network
• where appropriate, innovation-related activities
• Management activities

31
Networks of excellence (NoE) (3)
32
Networks of excellence (NoE) (4)

• A big change between FP6 and FP7 has been made in
  the funding of Networks of Excellence
• FP6 the overall maximum budget was calculated as
  a lump sum based on the number of researchers
  involved, but payments were made on the basis of
  claims of eligible costs
• FP7 three categories RD (funded at up to 50 or
  at the special rate of 75), Management (funded
  at 100) and Other (funded at 100)

33
Networks of excellence (NoE) (5)

• Joint Programme of Activities of a NoEs is
• Integrating activities
• Activities to support the networks goals - are
  funded at 50 / 75
• Development of new research tools
• Generating new knowledge
• Activities to spread excellence
• The dissemination and communication actions are
  funded 100 (except demonstration activities
  funded at 50)
• All the rest are "Other activities - the most
  important part of the NoE, which are funded at
  100.
• NoE does not carry out research (STREP or an IP).
  The goal of a NoE is to achieve the permanent
  fusion of the activities of the members of the
  consortium in their research sector, replacing
  the fragmentation which currently exists there.
  So all these "other" activities, such as staff
  mobility and exchanges, reinforced electronic
  communication systems and coordinated programming
  of the partners activities should be the main
  part of the JPA (collaborative research plays
  only a supporting role)

34
Networks of excellence (NoE) (6)

• Experience of NoEs in FP6 IST
• Purpose Durable integration of participants
  research activities
• Target audience research institutions,
  universities, industry trough governing boards
  etc (mainly indirectly)
• Typical duration 48-60 months (but
  indefinite integration!)
• Optimum consortium 6-12 participants
• Total EU contribution 4-15m (average around
  7m)
• Flexibility in implementation
• Update of workplan

35
Networks of excellence (NoE) (7)

• Experience LV partnership of NoEs in FP6 IST

36
Coordination and Support actions (CSA)

• Support to activities aimed at coordinating or
  supporting research activities and policies
  (networking, exchanges, trans-national access to
  research infrastructures, studies, conferences,
  etc).
• Two types of actions
• co-ordination or networking actions
• specific support actions
• These actions may also be implemented by means
  other than calls for proposals
• CSA do not conduct ST research!

37
Coordination or Networking actions (CA) (1)

• Designed to promote and support the ad hoc
  networking and co-ordination of research and
  innovation activities at national, regional and
  European level in order to achieve improved
  cooperation of the European research
• May combine the following two types of activities
  
• Co-ordination activities
• Consortium management activities
• Coordination actions do not conduct ST research!

38
Coordination or Networking actions (CA)(2)

• Each Coordination Action propose a work plan,
  incorporating all or some of the following types
  of mid/long term collaborative activities
• Organisation of events (conferences, 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
• Management of the action

39
Coordination or Networking actions (CA)(3)

• Experience of CAs in FP6 IST
• Purpose Co-ordination of research activities
• Target Audience Research institutions,
  Universities, Industry including SMEs
• Typical duration 18-36 months
• Optimum consortium 13-26 participants
• Total EU contribution 0.5-1.8m (average around
  1m)
• Fixed overall workplan and partnership for the
  duration

40
Coordination or Networking actions (CA) (4)

• Experience LV partnership of CAs in FP6 IST

41
Support actions (SA) (1)

• Designed to help in preparations for future
  Community research and technological development
  policy activities stimulate, encourage and
  facilitate the participation of SMEs, civil
  society organisations, small research teams,
  newly developed and remote research centres, as
  well as setting up research clusters across
  Europe.
• May combine the following two types of activities
  
• Support activities
• Consortium management activities
• Support actions do not conduct ST research

42
Support actions (SA) (2)

• Each Support Action has a work plan, which
  consists of one or more of the following
  activities
• Conferences, seminars, working groups and expert
  groups
• Studies, analysis
• Fact findings and monitoring
• Preparatory technical work, including feasibility
  studies
• Development of research or innovation strategies
• High level scientific awards and competitions
• Operational support, data access and
  dissemination, information and communication
  activities
• SA proposals may be presented by a consortium or
  a single organisation, from any country or
  countries

43
Support actions (SA) (3)

• Experience of SSAs in FP6 IST
• Purpose Support to programme implementation,
  preparation of future actions, dissemination of
  results
• Target audience Research organisations,
  Universities, Industry including SMEs
• Typical duration 9-30 months
• Optimum consortium 1-15 participants
• Total EU contribution 0.03-1m (average around
  0.5m)
• Fixed overall workplan and partnership for the
  duration

44
Support actions (SA) (4)

• Experience LV partnership of SAs in FP6 IST

45
Overview of Submission-Evaluation procedures (1)

• Information for proposers
• Submission of proposal
• Eligibility check
• Evaluation
• Selection

46
Overview of Submission-Evaluation procedures (2)
47
Information for proposers

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

48
Submission

• Fixed deadline calls
• One stage submission (ICT)
• Electronic submission only
• ) ICT - 17h00 Tuesdays
• ) Special rules for FET Open scheme
• pre-proposal checking check for each Call and
  activity separately

49
Electronic Submission

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

50
EPSS (1)

• Pamatinformacija prasibas
• Lauj projektu pieteicejiem sagatavot un iesniegt
  projektu tiesaiste (on-line) un nav nepiecieams
  speciali lejupieladet kadas programmas vai rikus
• Sistemas prasibas
• Interneta pieslegums
• Ekrana izkirtspeja 1024x768
• Internet Explorer 6.0 un augstaks vai
• Netscape Navigator 7.0 un augstaks vai
• Mozilla Firefox 1.0 un augstaks vai
• Opera 6.0 un augstaks vai
• Mac OS X Mozilla Firefox Apple Macintosh
  lietotajiem
• (Mac OS 9 un Safari vairs netiek atbalstiti)

51
EPSS (2)

• Lietotaja ID un Paroles sanemana tikai
  koordinatoram
• Pieslegties http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/epss_en.ht
  ml
• Izveleties atbilstoo projektu konkursu un
  projektu veidu (instrument),
• Aizpildit registracijas veidlapu un iesniegt to
• EPSS nosuta koordinatora un projekta partneru
  lietotaja ID un Paroles pa e-pastu
• Parliecinaties, vai projektu konkurss un veids
  izvelets pareizi. Ja izvele ir nepareiza, bus
  javeic jauna registracija. EPSS sistema nevar
  mainit registracijas informaciju un parvietot
  registraciju no viena projektu konkursa (veida)
  uz citu

52
EPSS (3)

• Sakotneja piekluve tikai koordinatoram
• Pieslegties https//www.epss-fp7.org
• Ievadiet koordinatora lietotaja ID
• Ievadiet koordinatora Paroli
• Izmainiet koordinatora Paroli
• Ievadiet dalibnieku/partneru Paroli
• Izmainiet dalibnieku/partneru Paroli
• Nosutiet dalibnieku/partneru ID un izmainito
  dalibnieku/partneru Paroli projekta partneriem

53
EPSS (4)

• Projekta sastavdalu veidoana tikai
  koordinatoram
• Projekta sakonteja uzbuve (set-up) define
  partnerus un vinu netieo izmaksu aprekinaanas
  modeli
• Dalibnieks Nr.1 vienmer ir koordinators
• Ievaditos datus iespejams ari mainit ar Edit
  Details un Update Participant Information
• Kad partnera informacija ievadita, EPSS sistema
  automatiski izveido A2 (partnera informacija) un
  A3.1(finansu informacija) veidlapas
• Parliecinieties, vai koordinatora e-pasta adrese
  ir pareiza! Uzradito adresi EPSS sistema izmanto,
  lai sazinatos ar projekta pieteiceju projekts
  iesniegts, projekts nodots verteanai, projekts
  vel nav iesniegts, ...

54
EPSS (5)
55
EPSS (6)

• A dala
• Aizpildit visas ailes visas formas
• (Katrs dalibnieks aizpilda savu A2 veidlapu. Pec
  tam tas var lejupladet uz sava datora)
• Nospiest Validate veidlapas apaka
• Notiek formala parbaude ja kludas atrastas
  tiek noraditi labojamie lauki ja kludu nav,
  paradas uzraksts no validation errors
• Saglabajiet ievadito informaciju veiciet to
  biei, neaizmirstiet saglabat veiktas izmainas
• Save Form taustina nospieana ari veic formalo
  parbaudi
• Neaizmirst nospiest Save Form taustinu, preteja
  gadijuma visa ievadita informacija tiks pazaudeta!

56
EPSS (7)

• A dala

57
EPSS (8)

• A dala

58
EPSS (9)

• A dala

59
EPSS (10)

• B dalas sagatavoanai izmanto Projektu konkursam
  atbilstoas projekta pieteiceju vadlinijas (Guide
  for Applicants). Gala versiju var augup-ladet
  tikai PDF formata!
• Failu Nosaukumos izmantot tikai Latinu burtus,
  ciparus vai zimes _, _, .
• Papildus informacija (iestades reklamas izdevums,
  dokumentacija, parskati, audio-video-multimediju,
  utt.) netiks pienemta, ja nav speciali noradits

60
Eligibility checks

• Date and time of receipt of proposal on or before
  deadline
• Firm deadlines - except for Continuously Open ICT
  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)

61
Evaluation procedures

• The evaluation process has developed to the very
  high standard. It compares well with ... other
  prestigious national or international granting
  agencies
• Report of Independent Observes (IST), Des 2005
• No major changes for FP7
• Improved and streamlined, based on experience
• Adapted to the FP7 new features
• Really new
• Eligibility criteria included former Scope
• 3 evaluation criteria instead of former 5

62
Evaluation Process

• On-site evaluation (ICT)
• One step evaluation
• Independent experts

Eligibility Check?
yes
Panel (with optional Hearings?)
Consensus
Individual reading
63
Experts

• Calls for experts for FP7 https//cordis.europa.e
  u/emmfp7/index.cfm?fuseactionwel.welcome
• to individuals
• to organisation
• FP6 experts were invited to transfer to FP7
• with a request to update their information
• (if email address is up-to-date!)

64
Evaluation criteria 1. Scientific and technical
quality

• Soundness of concept, and quality of objectives
  (all)
• Progress beyond the state-of-the-art (CP)
• Contribution to long term integration of high
  quality ST research (NoE)
• Contribution to the coordination of high quality
  research (CSA)
• Quality and effectiveness of the ST methodology
  and associated workplan (CP)
• Quality and effectiveness of the joint programme
  of activities and associated workplan (NoE)
• Quality and effectiveness of the
  coordination/support action mechanisms and
  associated workplan (CSA)

65
Evaluation criteria 2. Implementation - Quality
and efficiency of the implementation and the
management

• Appropriateness of the management structures and
  procedures (all)
• Quality and relevant experience of the individual
  participants (all)
• Quality of the consortium as a whole
• (complementarity, balance) (CP)
• (ability to tackle fragmentation of the research
  field and commitment towards a deep and durable
  institutional integration) (NoE)
• Appropriate allocation and justification of the
  resources (budget, staff, equipment) (CP and CSA)
• Adequacy of resources for successful carrying out
  the joint programme of activities (NoE)
• for Support actions, only if relevant

66
Evaluation criteria 3. Impact - Potential impact
through the development, dissemination and use of
project results

• Contribution at the European or international
  level to the expected impacts listed in the
  workprogramme under the relevant activity (all)
• Appropriateness of measures for the dissemination
  and/or exploitation of project results, and
  management of intellectual property (CP)
• Appropriateness of measures for spreading
  excellence, exploiting results and disseminating
  knowledge through engagement with stakeholders
  and the public at large (NoE and CSA)

67
Evaluation criteria scoring

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

68
Ethical issues

• Post-evaluation review for any selected proposals
  which have ethical issues
• New annex ICT-Ethics in the Guide for
  Applicants

69
Other issues

• Subcontracting
• Justification and integration of any third
  country participation

70
When writing your proposal (1)

• Divide your effort over the evaluation criteria
• Many proposers concentrate on the scientific
  element, but loose 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

71
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

72
Typical Mistakes from FP6ST Quality

• Clearly defined and well focused objectives?
• No quantified specifications for the proposed
  device/component!
• No intermediate targets!
• Key parameters are missing!
• Clear progress beyond the current
  state-of-the-art?
• Cant assess no commitment for some key
  parameters!
• State-of the art is not described!
• It is more development than research!
• Sound ST approach?
• Work plan (linear vsiterative)

73
Typical Mistakes from FP6Implementation

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

74
Typical Mistakes from FP6Potential Impact

• Exploitation and/or dissemination plans adequate
  to ensure optimal use of the project results?
• Strategic (industrial/academic) impact is
  limited!
• Exploitation plans too vague!
• No concrete dissemination plan, besides will
  publish!
• All deliverables are confidential!

75
Getting help with your proposal (1)

• The ICT theme supports
• Proposers days and briefings in Brussels and
  elsewhere http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/
  What's New?
• Partner search facilities http//cordis.europa.eu
  /fp7/ict/participating/partner_en.html
• A supporting website of advice, information and
  documentation http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/par
  ticipating/home_en.html
• A Helpdesk for proposers questions, reachable by
  email or phone (and a Helpdesk for electronic
  proposal submission)
• A network of National Contact Points in Europe
  and beyond http//cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ncp.htm
• Special SSA projects form FP6

76
Getting help with your proposal (2)

• Special SSA projects form FP6
• Idealist www.ideal-ist.net/
• PRO_NMS www.pro-nms.net/
• IST World ist-world.dfki.de/
• IST4BALT www.balticit.com/ist4balt/index_lv.php
• STAR-NET www.project-starnet.com/
• FINANCE NMS www.finance-helpdesk.org
• ATVN-EU-GP http//www.atvn.pl/european-union/good
  practices/