ECARE European Communities Aeronautics Research AN INCENTIVE TO SME PARTNERING IN FP6

1
ECAREEuropean Communities Aeronautics
ResearchAN INCENTIVE TO SME PARTNERING IN FP6
2
CONTENT
INTRO The ECARE project Background Concept Work
programme PART I Integrated Projects SME
definition Role in IPs Expected effort Project
structure Sub-projects and tasks Consortium
Agreement Intellectual Property Rights
PART II Preparing participation Visibility Organis
ation Promotion PART III Participation Call I
results Call II topics Next steps ECARE contact
point
3
IntroducingTHE ECARE PROJECTDeveloping SME
attractiveness towards EC-funded Integrated
Projects
4
INSTITUTIONAL BACKGROUND ORIGIN OF THE PROJECT
ECARE bridges FP5 funding and FP6 action
FP5 AERONAUTICS
FP6 AERONAUTICS

• Global financing 655 M euros
• SME participation reached an average of 5.3
  (without CRAFT)
• Better results in CT project (7) SME-led
  projects
• Around 120 SMEs involved
• Better than FP4 specific measures AeroSME and
  SCRATCH

• Thematic Priority 4 1075 M euros
• New instruments IP/NoE
• 15 earmarked for SMEs in all Thematic Priorities
• Not a reasonable target for SMEs in Aeronautics
  Integrated Projects, but a strong objective
• EC has decided to add a third support measure
  ECARE

5
INSTITUTIONAL BACKGROUND GEOGRAPHICAL COVERAGE OF
EU INITIATIVES
INSTITUTIONAL BACKGROUND GEOGRAPHICAL COVERAGE OF
EU INITIATIVES
European Level
AeroSME umbrella project
National Level
Regional Level
ECARE support to Ips
A
B
CZ
DK
FI
F
D
GR
IS
IRL
IL
I
L
NL
N
PT
E
SE
CH
UK
SCRATCH support to STREPS
SME Level
New Accession States

• support to STREPs

• support to STREPs

NAS Countries Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia,
Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland,
Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia
NAS Countries Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia,
Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland,
Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia
6
ECARE CONCEPT THE HUB
Competence mapping
Technological Hub Aeronautics SMEs
Matching SME consortia and IP sub-projects
Information seminars
Best practices

• Structuring SME offers to deliver the most
  accurate information to IP co-ordinators
• Displaying interesting technological features to
  get interest from large project representatives
• Avoiding  coastal trade  individual entities
  (SME or cluster) contacting an IP in private

7
ECARE CONCEPT A ROADMAP FOR SMEs
SME 1
ICE
I M G 3
IP1
SME 2
ECARE HUB
SME 3
SME 4
CR
SME 5
SME 6
IP2
SME 7
HANSE
SME 8
SME 9
AeroSME IP leader expectations
SME10
IP3
SME11
FAC
SME12
SME13
SME14
HEGAN
SME15
IP4
SME16
SME17
SME18
TPOLI
SME19
IP5
SME20
8
ECARE WORK PROGRAMME 3 main steps
1 The members Mobilisation and training of a
group of Regional Associations
2 The map Audit and mapping of 200 SMEs
3 The match Information watch and liaison with
the IP co-ordinators
The message Information, dissemination of the
best practices and lessons learnt
9
ECARE WORK PROGRAMME STEP 1 THE MEMBERS
Project initiators Hitech Federation (B) ANRT (F)
Founding partners ICE (I) Comité Richelieu
(F) Hanse Aerospace (G) FAC (UK) HEGAN
(E) Technapoli (I)
Members (batch 1) EWA (B) Berlin Brandenburg
(G) BAIE (E) Bordeaux Technowest (F) Aerospace
Wales (UK) Enterprise Ireland (IRL)
Members (batch 2) Up to 15
Associated members Above 15
Main tool

• Three Training Sessions organised in Paris by
  ANRT
• (FP6 benefits, compliance with business plan, IPR
  issues)

10
ECARE WORK PROGRAMME STEP 2 THE MAP
SMEs go through a 3 phase process
1 Regional Sessions
2 Assessment process

• 22 RS organised throughout the project
• 2 per partner / 1 per member
• Opened to SMEs outside the cluster
• Based on an homogenous set of documents
• Half a day, /- 15 SMEs involved

• SME visits by the Regional Expert
• Following the Mapping Questionnaire
• Quality control
• Database of 200 European SMEs

3 Mapping

• SOTA European SMEs
• Opportunities and complementarities

11
ECARE WORK PROGRAMME STEP 3 THE MATCH
ECARE is a reciprocal relationship model
1 Information watch on IPs
2 Structuration of SMEs offer

• Liaison with AeroSME
• Information via National Contact Points
• Results from Call 1
• Top-down approach

• Making the competencies visible
• Organising the competencies
• Promoting the SME attractiveness
• Bottom-up approach

3 Matching

• Organizing meetings between the IP co-ordinator
  and a coherent group of SMEs

12
ECARE WORK PROGRAMME THE MESSAGE
ECAREs communication tools
Presentation document
Website www.ecare-sme.org
Final brochure
Conference
13
Part I INTEGRATED PROJECTSA new technology
based business model
14
ECARE BACKGROUND SME EC DEFINITION

• Employees lt 250 people
• Turnover lt 40 M euros or total balance sheet lt
  27 M euros
• Independent 25 or more of capital or voting
  rights cant be held by one or several non SMEs
  (special case for risk capital and public sector
  held companies independence of management to be
  assessed).

Neither a consulting company nor a RTO
15
SME ROLES IN IPs SEVERAL BUSINESS MODELS
MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING DOCUMENTATION
RTD PARTNERSHIP CREATIVE FACTOR DESIGN IP
TECHNOLOGYNICHE DEVELOPER IP
TECHNOLOGY VALIDATION TESTING SIMULATION IP
SME or Task based SME grouping
PROTOTYPING IP
TRAINING FOR ENTREPRENEURS
FIRST STEP OF TT EARLY END USER
TECHNOLOGY SUPPLIER SUBCONTRACTOR IP or CRAFT
16
INTEGRATED PROJECTS BASICS

• INTEGRATED PROJECTS
• Large umbrella projects managed by system houses.
• Validating results previously found in previous
  EU and national RTD projects.
• The IPs main task is to deliver knowledge for new
  products, processes or services.
• The research activities have to be
  objective-driven.
• Coordinated by a large industrial enterprise
  with typically 20 to 50 participants.
• 3 to 5 years but no maximum time limit.

17
STREPs BASICS

• SPECIFIC TARGETED RESEARCH PROJECTS
• Aimed at the development of new technologies
  together with partners.
• RTD project designed to improve existing
  products, processes or services, with measurable
  outcomes.
• Demonstration project designed to prove the
  viability of new technologies which cannot be
  commercialized directly.
• Typically 2 to 3 years.

18
INTEGRATED PROJECTS STREPS FUNDING

• INTEGRATED PROJECTS
• gt tens of millions but no minimum threshold
• grants as a percentage of the cost of the
  projects
• 50 of research activities
• 35 of demonstration activities
• 100 of training activities
• 100 of management costs (up to 7)
• SPECIFIC TARGETED RESEARCH PROJECTS
• Grants with a ceiling for EC contribution

19
INTEGRATED PROJECT STRUCTURE
20
General Assembly or Board Council All participants
Executive Board or Steering Committee Chaired by
the Co-ordinator Sub-project leaders / Initiators
Scientific Committee or technical Panel
(optional) Scientific experts in the project Or
external experts (if duly justified)
Exploitation Committee (optional)
Project Management Team Managed by
co-ordinator   Specific internal assistance
Sub-project 1 to 8 (indicative) Leader
agreed between concerned SP participants
SP Management Team  SP leader other SP
participants   Day to day SP Management
Art. 5Organisationof the Project
Optional according to Project size
Work package 1 to 8 per SP (indicative) Leader
agreed between concerned WP participants
WP Management team (Optional)  WP leader other
WP participants  Day to day WP Management Close
to scientific concerns
Tasks Not limited
21
INTEGRATED PROJECTS CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT
The Consortium Agreement is mandatory in IP and
highly recommended in STREPs.It is
complementary to the contract and must be
consistent with it.It settles relationships
between participants.
22
INTEGRATED PROJECTS CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT
The Consortium Agreement is ruling

• Internal organization and management of the
  Consortium
• Management
• Decision-making
• Rights and obligations of the Contractors
• Liability
• Indemnification
• Additional rules to the contract
• Access rights
• Other rights and obligations for the participants

23
INTEGRATED PROJECTS CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT
Model Consortium Agreements elaborated in Europe

• INDUSTRY, NO ACADEMICS OR RESEARCH
• EICTA / NTIC
• EUCAR / Automotive
• IMG3 / Aeronautics
• ACADEMICS OR RESEARCH, NO INDUSTRY
• French Public Organisations (F)
• HELMHOLTZ KOWI (G)
• EARTO UNITE

The ANRT model is the only one to mix both
approaches at the European level.
24
INTEGRATED PROJECTS CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT
ANRT Model Consortium Agreement basic principles

• Openness and fairness between Participants.
• Information diffusing and alerting processes.
• To get rid of unfair behaviours due to a
  predominant position.
• To favour proximity cooperation organized by
  sub-projects.
• To protect the efforts and investments of each
  participant.

25
INTEGRATED PROJECTS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT
Access rights to knowledge
Access rights to Pre-existing know-how
FP6 IPR rules System of Access Rights
To perform its share of the project
If a participant needs them for carrying out its
own work under the project.
To use its own results arising from the
project (carry out other research)
If a participant needs them for using its own
knowledge.
Can not predict all cases but sets principles
which, to be legal, must be agreed upon and
signed before the signature of the contract.
Consortium agreement
26
Part II PREPARING PARTICIPATIONVisibility and
attractiveness
27
PREPARATION STEP 1 MAKING SME COMPETENCIES
VISIBLE

• SMEs competencies will be made visible by the
  ASSESSMENT process
• Template elaborated in co-ordination with
  AeroSME and SCRATCH
• Database of 200 SMEs

A. Contact details
MAPPING QUEST.
B. Company dimension
C. RT profile
D. Willingness to participate
28
PREPARATION STEP 2 ORGANISING THE COMPETENCIES

• SMEs competencies will be organised by the
  MAPPING process
• Mapping made public (two versions, each
  anticipating one IP call

MAPPING 1 Nov 03 CALL 2 Dec 03
MAPPING 2 Dec 04 CALL 3 May 05

• Building of an SME pre-consortium
• companies with complementary technologies
• from different European regions
• proposing an adding value participation
• to a particular sub-project within an IP

29
PREPARATION STEP 3 PROMOTING THE COMPETENCIES

• ECARE will actively promote the identified
  consortia
• Towards new IPs (Sept/Dec 2003)
• Towards already existing IPs from Call 1
• (complementing tasks or sub-projects, specially
  in Y2)
• As opportunities for STREPs (new external work
  package)

30
Part III PARTICIPATING IN IPsResults and
perspectives
31
PARTICIPATION CALL 1 RESULTS Overview
32
PARTICIPATION CALL 1 RESULTS SME participation in
Aeronautics proposals

• The average participation of SMEs in retained
  aeronautics proposals is
• 17 in number of participation
• 8 in funding.
• The success rate of SMEs is around 1/3, close to
  the average.

33
PARTICIPATION CALL 1 RESULTS Detail per
instruments
34
PARTICIPATION CALL 1 RESULTS Participation in
Aeronautics IPs
All 8.3
Retained 5.1
In most of the IPs, the participation of SMEs is
below 5.
35
PARTICIPATION CALL 1 RESULTS Participation in
Aeronautics STREPs

• Many STREP proposals have been submitted by SMEs
  (26/116).
• These proposals are real SME proposals with an
  average SME participation of 33.
• They represent a volume of 63 M requested EU
  funding and cover many different activity fields
  (manufacturing, maintenance, materials, noise,
  airports, ATM, safety, ).
• Half of the proposals have been supported by an
  Accompanying Measure.
• These proposals have been evaluated in a
  dedicated panel, and 13 proposals (50) have been
  recommended for a volume of 27 M EU funding
  (43).
• The SME participation in the other STREPs is
  similar to their participation in the IPs.

36
PARTICIPATION CALL 1 RESULTS Conclusion

• The average participation (in funding) of SMEs in
  retained proposal (8) has increased compared to
  FP5 (5.3).
• 40 of the SMEs funding share is achieved through
  the SME led STREP proposals (9 M / 22 M).
• For the 2d call, effort should concentrate on
• maintaining the high number of SMEs led STREP
  proposals
• increasing the participation of SMEs in IPs.

Other STREPs
IPs
NoEs
SME STREPs
37
PARTICIPATION CALL II IP TOPICS
Tentative list of Ips presented by the big
industry on Call 2 Information available on
October 29
38
PARTICIPATION CALL II STREP TOPICS
STREP technical areas for Call 2 Information
available on October 29
Technical area I Virtual Product and Development
Process Technical area II Product architecture
integration including propulsion
integration Technical area III Structures,
materials manufacturing processes Technical
area IV Flight physics Technical area V Aircraft
systems, avionics ATM (airborne), safety and
security Technical area VI Technologies for
Rotorcraft
39
PARTICIPATION NEXT STEPS
PRESENTATION OF CALL II IP PROPOSALS
(BRUSSELS) OCTOBER 29, 2003
COMMISSION WORK PROGRAMME NOVEMBER 2003
CALL II LAUNCH DECEMBER 2003
40
PARTICIPATION NEXT ECARE STEPS
ASSESSMENT PROCESS 150 SMEs ON OCTOBER 30
MAPPING 1.0 NOVEMBER 2003
TRAINING III DECEMBER 2004
41
PARTICIPATION YOUR ECARE CONTACT POINTS
YOUR REGIONAL EXPERT TO BE CONFIRMED PROJECT
MANAGEMENT EUROPEAN FEDERATION OF HIGH TECH
SMEs Eric Jourdain jourdain_at_hitech-sme.com www.hit
ech-sme.com