Http:// WP-O Coordination and Management WP-O Coordination and Management First Review Meeting Brussels, 23-24 May 2007 Enrica Conrotto

http://www.e-photon-one.org

WP-O Coordination and WP-O Coordination and Management Management

First Review MeetingBrussels, 23-24 May 2007

Enrica ConrottoPolitecnico di Torino

First Review Meeting – Brussels, 23-24 May 20072

WPO: Coordination and Management

WP leader: Laura Fulci

Structure: Project Office + WP leaders + Local Administrative Contacts

Partner involved: WP-O-M: PoliTO – Project OfficeWP-O-C: PoliTO, DEIS-UniBO, UGent, UEssex,

UoPelop, UPC, GET


WP-O activities

WP-O-C Coordination: Intermediary between contractors and EC Reporting on mobility actions Dissemination activities Governing bodies meetings organization Interactions with Collaborating Institutions Teleconference tools and website management Gender Action Plan supervision

WP-O-M Management: Operational NoE management Financial monitoring and reporting

WP-O has been conceived so as to distinguish between two levels: WP-O-C: overall network coordination activities WP-O-M: operational management


WPO-C: Deliverables and Milestones

Milestones• M.O-C.1 [T0+1] Organization of the kick-off plenary meeting• M.O-C.2 [T0+2] Set up of governing bodies• M.O-C.3 [T0+6] Deployment of teleconference tools and web-based data

repository tools for all partners• M.O-C.4 [T0+11] Organization of the first e-Photon/ONe+ annual meeting• M.O-C.5 [T0+12] Final update on Collaborating Institutions involvement• M.O-C.6 [T0+23] Organization of the final e-Photon/ONe+ plenary meetingDeliverables• D.O-C.1 [T0+6] Project presentation document• D.O-C.2 [T0+12] Report on mobility actions in the first year• D.O-C.3 [T0+13] Report on Collaborating Institutions• D.O-C.4 [T0+24] Report on mobility actions in the second year

ALL MILESTONES AND DEIVERABLES OF THE FIRST YEAR COMPLETED


WPO-M: Deliverables and Milestones

Milestones• M.O-M.1 [T0+2] Financial plan for the first year and budget allocation• M.O-M.2 [T0+3] Collaborating Institution agreement• M.O-M.3 [T0+12] Update on involved researchers and students and on

budget allocation• M.O-M.4 [T0+18] Final update on involved researchers and studentsDeliverables• D.O-M.1 [T0+3] Management hand-book, with communication protocol,

reporting procedures,• financial guidelines, and financial monitoring criteria• D.O-M.2 [T0+13] Periodic Management Report, and Report on the

distribution of the EC contribution among contractors according to EC rules• D.O-M.3 [T0+15] Financial plan for the second period of activities• D.O-M.4 [T0+24] Final report

ALL MILESTONES AND DEIVERABLES OF THE FIRST YEAR COMPLETED


WP-O Main Achievements

Distributed documents Management Handbook Amendments to Consortium Agreement n.1 and n.2 Collaborating Institution Agreement Biannual Management Report Amendment to the EC contract Agenda and Minutes of the governing bodies meetings

Meetings Kick-off meeting: Paris, 29-30 May 2006 JPAC tele-meeting: 18 December 2006 First Plenary meeting: Barcelona, 27-28 February 2007

Actual effort/budget spent Effort:

WP-O-C: 17 m/m (total effort foreseen: 42 m/m) 41% WP-O-M: 32 m/m (total effort foreseen: 48 m/m) 67%

Budget: WP-O-C: 61 K€ (total budget foreseen: 201 K€) 30% WP-O-M: 91 K€ (total budget foreseen: 261 K€) 35%


Main Activities

Summary

General management and Reporting Contractual and legal management Financial management


General ManagementMain Tasks:• establishing infrastructure for the NoE administration • handling overall legal, contractual, financial and administrative issues

(helpdesk for NoE partners) • centralising information and project outputs• NoE reporting and financial monitoring towards the governing bodies

and the EC• fulfilling the JPAC decisions, in particular with reference to the financial

issues• handling the enlargement of the Noe (e.g. in the form of Collaborating

Institutions)• preparing all management documents such as the management hand-

book, templates for reporting etc.• consortium agreement maintenance • organizing and running all the coordination meetings (agenda, minutes,

dissemination of documents, etc.)


Efficient NoE coordination and a prompt risk management

Intermediary between EC and NoE partners

MAIN GOALS

METHODS

&

TOOLS

Synergy between administrative and scientific coordination

Continuous monitoring on activities and expenditures

Standard guidelines for reporting, communication and dissemination

Helpdesk for NoE partners and flexibility to understand their different methods and legislation

Administrative coordination


Monitoring and Reporting

Monitoring is a fundamental task of the project management

The PO is in charge of monitoring partners activities and expenditures in order to provide to governing bodies NoE financial status and update on activities progresses

To reach this objective, some rules and a set of documents and guidelines have been defined: the consortium agreement, which defines management rules and responsibilities for each partnerthe Management handbook, which includes instructions on procedures related to reporting, communication protocol and results disseminationthe Biannual Management Report (BMR)the First Periodic Management Report


Management Handbook

Main goal:improving the efficiency of the management process

Content:Project organization Communication procedure Rules for meetings Reporting and deliverables Financial guidelinesNoE results evaluation (integration indicators)Risk assessment


Periodic Management Report

Introduction – Participants involvement and budget/effort allocation

SECTION 1 – Justification of major cost items and resources 1.1 Overview on NoE Effort employed in Y11.2 Overview on budget spent in Y11.3 Explanatory note on major cost items1.4 Planned and actual costs by contractor and by cost item

1.4.1 Global estimate of total costs 1.5 Planned and actual effort by contractor and by WP

1.5.1 For AC contractors, overview of the effort of permanent staff working on the project

1.6 Brief description of the work performed by each contractor 1.7 Explaination of major deviations

SECTION 2 – Form C

SECTION 3 – Summary Financial Report


Main Activities

Summary



Contract

An amendment to the contract was requested by Politecnico di Torino on behalf of the consortium and approved by the EC

Termination of INTEL's participation Addition of UCAM-DENG as new e1+

contractor (partner n. 41) Addition of ISCOM as third party of FUB


Consortium Agreement

• The Consortium Agreement was signed by all partners except Intel (that finally withdrew)

• Two Amendments were proposed: Amendment n.1 : modifications on Confidentiality

and Publications sections according to KTH requests

Amendment n.2 : modifications on IPR section, mainly requested by Intel

Only Only Amendment n. 1 was signed by all partners, Amendment n. 1 was signed by all partners,

while Amendment n. 2 is null and voidwhile Amendment n. 2 is null and void..


Collaborating Institutions Agreement

• At the kickoff meeting it was decided not to enlarge the consortium, but to establish the role of “Collaborating Institution” (CI), with– no budget allocation – full participation to the project

• The PO prepared the Collaborating Institution Agreement (included in the CA)

RULES FOR ADMISSIONRequest for participation shall be submitted by the JPAC, or by the Coordinator, or by at least 3 partners in written form defining the plan of activitiesThe decision on the inclusion of the CI shall be taken by the JPACThe CI shall participate in the Project activities and/or take part of results according to the proposed plan of activitiesThe CI will not be refunded for the expenses incurred


Collaborating Institutions• Current CIs:

– Campinas State University, Brazil – Beijing University of Posts & Telegraphs, China – CTTC: Telecommunications Technological Center of

Catalonia, Spain – University of Vigo, Spain – Polytechnic University of Cartagena, Spain– Poznan University of Technology, Poland

• Applications approved in the second year:– University of Roma "La Sapienza", Italy – HUAWEI Sweden


Main Activities

Summary



Financial Management

Definition of common financial rules for budget allocation and reporting

Internal progress reports where each partner declares its effort and costs

WP leaders monitor the involvement of partners in their WP

In case of inactive partners, the JPAC could take appropriate decisions

The PO is in charge of periodical financial reviews in order to provide the JPAC with the NoE financial status for decisions on budget re-allocation and financial monitoring


Initial e1+ budget allocation criteria

• 50 K€ to each partner (70 K€ to GET)• 20 K€ to each WP leader (10 K€ for co-leadership)• 70 K€ per WP to be distributed to active partners• 70 K€ for implementing and running the project

website• 80 K€ for supporting international collaborations

(upon pressure of former EC project officers)• 300 K€ for the project office and as project

reservoir


Pre-financing: 1.500 K€

No budget was transferred to Intel-IRC (according to a JPAC decision)

Any change on WP leadership occurred after the CA signature will be taken into account in the second EC payment transfer

60% of the fixed budget was distributed (blue part in previous slide)

according to art. 5.2 and Annex C of the CA


1st EC payment transfers

Part. No.

Part. nameFixed Budget

(keuro)

1st EC payment

transferred

1 PoliTO 370 1622 ALCATEL 50 303 DEIS-UNIBO 70 424 FUB 50 305 PoliMI 50 306 SSSUP 50 307 TID 50 308 UAM 70 429 UC3M 50 3010 UPC 50 3011 UPVLC 50 3012 IT 70 4213 GET 70 4214 FT 50 3015 FPMs 50 3016 IBBT 60 3617 MULT 50 3018 TU/e 70 4219 FLE 50 3020 IRC 60 0

Part. No.

Part. nameFixed Budget

(keuro)

1st EC payment

transferred21 ORC-CC2 50 3022 UCL 70 4223 UEssex 80 4824 DTU 70 4225 KTH 50 3026 TELENOR 70 4227 Fraunhofer 50 3028 TUB 50 3029 UDE 70 4230 UST-IKR 50 3031 TUW 50 3032 AGH 50 3033 BME 50 3034 TELFER 70 4235 AIT 70 4236 CTI 50 3037 ICCS/NTUA 50 3038 UoA 50 3039 UoPelop 60 3640 BILKENT 50 30


Budget re-allocation• At the end of the first year, an internal financial review was

carried out by the PO with the WP leaders• The financial review included an assessment of:

the criteria defined by the WP leaders for allocating the budget available to each WP (70K€) according to the planned activities;

the budget already spent and the budget necessary to carry out some specific tasks and objectives.

The final budget allocation was approved during the plenary meeting held in Barcelona and has been included in the Revised

Technical Annex.


Current budget allocation

Part. No. Partner name TOTAL (K€)

1 PoliTO 482,0062 ALCATEL 51,6003 DEIS-UNIBO 153,9754 FUB 74,3335 PoliMI 108,1236 SSSUP 81,4367 TID 59,6948 UAM 84,1259 UC3M 82,296

10 UPC 154,91111 UPV 85,76312 IT 120,55913 GET 119,63614 FT 65,54615 FPMs 67,62816 IBBT 95,18417 MULT 54,96418 TU/e 74,68119 FLE 55,41520 IRC 0,00021 ORC-CC2 64,743

FINAL BUDGET ALLOCATION

PARTICIPANT BUDGET

100

100

100

KE

UR

Part. No. Partner name TOTAL (K€)

22 UCL 91,54323 UEssex 128,70724 DTU 77,20025 KTH 64,66826 TELENOR 84,58427 Fraunhofer 57,58128 TUB 53,75029 UDE 82,00030 UST-IKR 56,08131 TUW 68,18832 AGH 76,52333 BME 59,73334 TELFER 89,47735 AIT 125,75636 CTI 95,18637 ICCS/NTUA 61,00038 UoA 83,33039 UoPelop 148,32740 BILKENT 59,74841 UCAM-DENG 50,000

3.750,000TOTAL

FINAL BUDGET ALLOCATION

PARTICIPANT BUDGET

100

100

100

KE

UR

WP budget

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

WP1 WP3 WP5 WP7 WP9 WP11 WP13 WP15

KE

UR


Financial monitoring

In order to ensure the financial monitoring, the Project Office, as a method of control of the partners expenditure, will apply to the EC payment transfers of the second year the Art. 5.2(c) of the CA

“Contractors who spend less than their respective share of the Budget will be funded only in respect of the actual amount spent. Contractors who spend more than their respective share of the Budget will be funded only up to the funding as allocated under this Consortium Agreement, unless otherwise agrees by the JPA Committee according to Art.3.2.4.”

In case of under-spending partnersthe amount transferred will be proportionally reduced


WP Manpower in Y1

Permanent staff (AC): 116 m/m

WP NUMBERTOTAL

FORESEENFIRST YEAR REMAINING PERCENTAGE

WP-O-C 42,05 17,03 25,02 40,50%WP-O-M 48,00 32,34 15,66 67,37%WP-VD-C 107,97 76,94 31,04 71,26%WP-VD-M 56,99 53,75 3,23 94,32%WP-VD-A 61,53 49,06 12,47 79,73%WP-VD-H 27,38 28,06 -0,68 102,48%WP-VD-S 56,58 50,42 6,17 89,10%WP-VD-T 41,48 38,33 3,16 92,39%WP-JP-G 57,60 25,62 31,99 44,47%WP-JP-B 67,88 60,32 7,56 88,87%WP-JP-T 31,88 27,85 4,03 87,35%WP-JP-E 23,83 21,38 2,45 89,72%WP-JP-S 48,48 27,22 21,26 56,15%

WP-T 44,08 21,14 22,94 47,95%WP-L 27,58 17,26 10,32 62,58%WP-D 59,23 19,09 40,14 32,23%

TOTAL 802,57 565,80 236,77 70,50%

NETWORK EFFORT (MM)


Network budget in Y1

WP NUMBER TOTAL FORESEEN FIRST YEAR REMAINING PERCENTAGE

WP-O-C 201.328,40 61.014,49 140.313,91 30,31%WP-O-M 260.660,00 90.769,67 169.890,33 34,82%WP-VD-C 431.190,03 334.463,42 96.726,62 77,57%WP-VD-M 274.247,93 237.882,82 36.365,11 86,74%WP-VD-A 272.879,73 331.614,70 -58.734,97 121,52%WP-VD-H 183.493,33 84.524,32 98.969,02 46,06%WP-VD-S 256.230,13 276.136,78 -19.906,65 107,77%WP-VD-T 207.684,33 236.552,08 -28.867,75 113,90%WP-JP-G 217.507,90 78.413,17 139.094,73 36,05%WP-JP-B 257.619,90 187.087,27 70.532,63 72,62%WP-JP-T 175.879,90 130.803,27 45.076,63 74,37%WP-JP-E 152.508,29 131.687,09 20.821,20 86,35%WP-JP-S 201.083,13 71.346,44 129.736,69 35,48%

WP-T 201.833,20 127.443,58 74.389,62 63,14%WP-L 125.932,80 85.711,16 40.221,64 68,06%WP-D 329.920,98 85.554,44 244.366,54 25,93%

TOTAL 3.750.000,00 2.551.004,70 1.198.995,29 68,03%

NETWORK BUDGET (EURO)


Global estimate of Total Costs

WP NUMBER TOTAL FORESEENCLAIMED FIRST

YEARCOSTS NOT CHARGED

TOTAL COSTS

WP-O-C 201.328,40 61.014,49 13.329,12 74.343,60WP-O-M 260.660,00 90.769,67 38.964,43 129.734,10WP-VD-C 431.190,03 334.463,42 85.458,33 419.921,74WP-VD-M 274.247,93 237.882,82 43.001,08 280.883,90WP-VD-A 272.879,73 331.614,70 69.824,73 401.439,43WP-VD-H 183.493,33 84.524,32 43.766,73 128.291,04WP-VD-S 256.230,13 276.136,78 31.628,10 307.764,89WP-VD-T 207.684,33 236.552,08 56.071,51 292.623,59WP-JP-G 217.507,90 78.413,17 30.611,42 109.024,60WP-JP-B 257.619,90 187.087,27 41.030,93 228.118,20WP-JP-T 175.879,90 130.803,27 58.158,17 188.961,44WP-JP-E 152.508,29 131.687,09 6.821,94 138.509,03WP-JP-S 201.083,13 71.346,44 48.376,38 119.722,82

WP-T 201.833,20 127.443,58 27.415,01 154.858,60WP-L 125.932,80 85.711,16 27.483,51 113.194,67WP-D 329.920,98 85.554,44 56.031,61 141.586,05

TOTAL 3.750.000,00 2.551.004,70 677.973,01 3.228.977,72

TOTAL COSTS


Resources employed

AC cost reporting model implies a discrepancy between

effort spent and cost claimed WP-O expenditure less than 50% as the main

management costs related to the audit certificates will be claimed in the second year (special clause n.39).

WP-D costs and effort only apparently lower than expected. According to a decision of the JPAC, the effort spent for dissemination has been split among the relevant technical WPs (WP-D effort reduced while effort declared in other WPs increased).


Expenditures

The partners expenditures are mostly related to:

• Personnel Costs – Researchers, PhD – students, other staff for activities

carried out by each WP• Travel Costs

– management and coordination meetings – implementation of NoE activities (e.g. joint

experiments, summer school, e1+ events etc)– participation to conferences and dissemination

events – Mobility actions


Manpower employed per activity

EFFORT PER ACTIVITIES

SPREADING OF EXCELLENCE ACTIVITIES

20%

JOINTLY EXECUTED RESEARCH ACTIVITIES

26%

INTEGRATING ACTIVITIES

48%

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

6%


Costs incurred per activity

COSTS PER ACTIVITIES

SPREADING OF EXCELLENCE ACTIVITIES

21%

INTEGRATING ACTIVITIES

54%

JOINTLY EXECUTED RESEARCH ACTIVITIES

21%

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

4%


Effort and cost per activity

• Activities progressed as planned and the related claimed costs are in line with the budget foreseen for the total project duration (exceeding 50% of total EC contribution requested)

• In the previous slides, WPs are grouped as follows:– Integrating activities: 50% WP-O-C + 80% VDs + WP-L + 50% WP-T– Joint research activities: 90% JPs– Spreading of excellence activities: 50% WP-O-C + 20% VDs + 10% JPs +

50% WP-T +WP-D– Management activities: WP-O-M

Half of both expenditure and effort is devoted to the Integrating activities, key objective of the NoE


Conclusions

Critical issues different level of

involvement due also to the different cost reporting model

very high effort for coordination

different partner approach due to national legislation and internal practices

Achievements

expenditure in line with the expectation (70,5% of total effort, 68% of the total budget)

total actual costs > EC requested contribution

all key deliverables completed

management risk under control

progressive harmonization of administrative and legal practices


Documents

Http:// WP-O Coordination and Management WP-O Coordination and Management First Review Meeting Brussels, 23-24 May 2007 Enrica Conrotto