Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ProposalSubmission,Evalua2on,ProjectStart
LeonardoPiccine,
2
OutlineofPresenta/on
• Introduc/on–se4ngthescene
• Overviewofprocess• Evalua/on• ProjectProposalPrepara/on
Introduc/on
• Thesubmissionofcomprehensiveandcompe//vehighqualityproposalsinFP7ismorethaneveranecessityforbeingselectedforagrantagreement
• Wri/ngaproposalforanFP7projectisaserioustask– Methodologyforprojectdesignandproposalwri/ngisneeded
Project timeline
Idea! Desarrollo Propuesta
Término
Evaluacion Negociacion
Contrato
Monitorar actividades
Desarrollo actividades,
gestion e informes
Revision final
El Consorcio
Aprox 3 meses 2-3 meses 2-3 meses
Apertura convocatoria
5
SummaryofKeyPhases
5. Roll-Out & Implementation
Establish contacts & agreements
Partner search
Admin. & Legal Mgt
Payments & Financ. Mgt
Auditing
Reporting
IPR Mgt.
Technical Work
EC templates & submission forms
Agree on overall budget & partner shares
Role in proposal & target budget
Proposal idea & proposal summary
Explore initial contacts
Action Plan for proposal development
Final proposal submission
Allocation of proposal parts among partners
Negotiation & re-costing
Final contract signature = effective start of project
Consortium Agreement
4. Contract Negotiation
3. Proposal Development
2. Consortium Formation 1. Feasibility
1—FeasibilityFromIdeastoProposals
LAND OF IDEAS
CHECK
PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT
• (B) Work Programme
• (A) Call Text
• (C) State-of-the-Art
• (D) Possible Partners
• (E) Possible Instrument(s)
• (F) Possible End-Users
1—FeasibilityEndPhaseChecklist
• Bytheendofthisstageonemusthaveaclearapprecia/onof– Owncapabili/esandresources
– Capabili/esandresourcesneededfrompartners
– Possiblepartners–onemusthavealreadymadeini/alcontacts
– Size–roughbudget,numberofpartners,likelydura/on
– Risks– Roles–esp.whocouldbetheco‐ordinator?
– Who might fund the project? EU and who?
8
FromtheproposaltotheProject
FromSubmissiontoProjectWhatwewilldiscussnow
Submission
Selection
Evaluation
Eligible?
Proposal
Project
Callsandcallinforma/onProposaldevelopment
– Partners– Proposalstructure
9
Timeframe for FP7 projects
2012 2006 2007 2014 2008 2009 2010 2015 2011 2013 2016
Official duration of FP7 2007-2013
Projects resulting from FP7 calls operating
Results from FP7 projects in use
Last projects start First projects start First calls Last projects end
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Calls
• Each part of FP& is opened to proposals by publishing a Call • Published in the EU Official Journal • Also published on CORDIS website (
http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/dc/index.cfm) and in CORDIS Focus magazine
• Might get advance notice of topics – in previous work programmes, EOIs, friends
• Indicative Call dates given in work programmes • Identify opportunities • Read published Calls and work programmes • Brainstorm • Look at what has been done before (CORDIS project database) • Talk with possible end users or beneficiaries about their problems and
what they need
Fuentes de información
CORDIS - FP7 http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html
Find a call
Callabstract
SUSTAINABLE SURFACE TRANSPORT • Call title: FP7- SUSTAINABLE SURFACE TRANSPORT (SST) – 2007 – TREN–1 • Call identifier: FP7- SST – 2007 – TREN–1 • Date of publication44: 22 December 2006 • Deadline: 3 May 2007 at 17.00h (Brussels local time)
• Total Indicative budget46: 60 M € • Topics called:
13
Submission• Fixeddeadlinecalls
17h00Brussels/me
• Onestagesubmission
• Electronicsubmissiononly– EPSS‐ElectronicProposalSubmissionSystem
hUp://www.esp‐fp7.org
– ButnotallProgrammesuseit!
14
15
Youshouldallbefamiliarwith…
• CallforProposals• Officialdocumenta/on(workprog.)
• Rulesforpar/cipa/on• Interna/onalconsor/um
• Fundingschemes
• Eligiblecostsandfundingcriteria
16
Sourcesofinforma/on
• Workprogramme
• Guideforapplicants+proposalstructure
• Guidelinesforevaluators
• (Financialguidelines)
• +Othersourcesontopic
17
MatchtheprojectideawithCallsandInstruments
– ThespecifictopicsdescribedintheWork‐Programme+checkotherThemes,too!
– Theinstrumentstobeused:STREPvs.IPConsiderthattoimplementandtomanagesmallormedium‐scalefocusedresearchac?onsisdifferentfromlarge‐scaleintegra?ngprojects
– ThecallwhentheproposalcanbesubmiUed
Whatisneededforsucessfulproposal?
• Excellentidea– ClearlyinthescopeofapublishedObjec2ve– Clearlywithinthescopeofrequiredinstrument– Workthatadvancesthestateoftheart/Cleartechnologicalrisk
• Excellentteam– Bestpartners,thatarewellknowninEurope– Partnerswhofitperfectlytoaccomplishthetasks– Clearneedforcollabora2on
• GreatImpact– Projectwithlargepoten2alimpact(CurrentGenera/on
Technologyplustwo)– ClearbenefitsforcertainEuropeancons/tuencies
• Well‐wriUenproposal– Clearlanguage– Well‐organisedcontent
19
Innova/veness
Innova/venessoftheprojectideashouldbeconsideredworldwide.
Inves/ga/onshouldbecarriedoutatthefollowinglevels:– StateoftheartatEuropeanLevel– StateoftheartoutsideEurope(mainlyinUS,Japan,Canada)
– FP5/FP6projects– CORDISwebsite
PcM:Proposalcrea/onMethodology(forresearchprojects)
‐attheglance‐
Process Collabora2on
Iniciator
Coreteam
EuropeanCommission(e.g.clustermee/ngs)
ECwebpage(e.g.services,
officialdocuments)
Collabora/vetools(e.g.Wiki)
PROPOSAL
IDEA
Ownresearch(results)
Industryneeds Marketanalyses(e.g.Gartner)
Consor2umCoordinator
Incuba?onphase
Wri?ngphase
Nego?a?onphase
Checkingphase
Submissionphase
21
OutlineofModule• Introduc/on–se4ngthescene• Overviewofprocess• ProjectPar/cipa/on• Evalua/on
22
Proposal
Individual evaluation
Consensus
Panel review
Consultation of programme committee (if required)
Commission funding and/or rejection decision
with hearing (optional)
Thresholds
Eligibility
Negotiation Commission ranking
Commission rejection decision
Ethical Review
(if needed)
Security Scrutiny
(if needed)
Applicants informed of results of expert evaluation*
• invitation to submit second-stage
proposal, when applicable
Submission and evaluation
in FP7
Applicants informed of Commission decision
23
Panel (with
Hearings) Consensus Individual
reading
Eligibility Check?
Evalua/onProcess
• On‐siteevalua/on• Independentexperts• Onestepevalua/on
24
Evalua/on• IndividualEvalua/on
– IndependentAssessmentby2or3evaluators;5forIPsandNoEs
– Result:IndividualEvalua/onReport– Time:2or3hoursperproposal
• ConsensusMee/ng– Mee/ngbetweentheevaluators,arapporteurandachairpersonfromtheEuropeanCommission
– Result:ConsensusReport– Normally1hour
• PanelMee/ng– Allevaluatorsofthecallobjec/ve– Priorityorderforallproposalsofthecallobjec/ve
25
Selec/on• Evalua/onSummaryReport(ESR)
• Evalua/onresult:MarkingandPriorityorderofproposalsbyexperts
• CommissionDecisiononselectedproposalsforfunding• Dependsonbudgetavailable• Assuccessfulproposal–theCommissionwillinviteyoufornego/a/ons
• Amersuccessfulnego/a/on‐youwillsignthegrantagreementandstarttheproject
26
Howtobecomeanevaluator• TheCommissioncallforindependentexpertsasreviewersorevaluatorso toindividualso toorganisa/onso Registerat:hUps://cordis.europa.eu/emmfp7/
• Noconflictofinterestisallowed• Butaddi/onallobbyingorrecommenda/onisnecessary
RoleofCommissionstaff• Commissionstaffmayadviseon:
Backgroundonpreviouslysupportedoron‐goingprojects Relevantsupplementaryinforma/on(direc/ves,regula/ons,policies,etc)
Evalua/onrules KeypointswithintheWorkProgramme,e.g.issuesrelatedto“Relevance”
• Commissionstaffmaynotintroduce: Newelements(cannotfillin“gaps”inproposals) Interpreta/ons
Torecap…..
Write your proposal in clear and concise English Constantly communicate with your partners and organise work Draw a realistic structured plan of action and corresponding
resources Have clear and measurable objectives, results and delivs. Stress impact and methodology Plan a structured and efficient management Have convincing technological background and state-of-the-art Stress on dissemination and exploitation of results (i.e. users!) Realistic costs that lay within the budget of the Call Strong & complementary consortium (roles, qualifications) Keep it clear and simple without loosing quality CLARITY AND CONSISTENCY (do not leave anything to the
imagination of the evaluators)
20/02/07 30
Plaesereadmoreandwriteless!!!
20/02/07 31
Good luck!!!!
