course presenter hyperie n dr. sean mccarthy...sme instrument the sme instrument will cover all...

COURSE PRESENTER

Dr. Sean McCarthy

HYPERION LTD. Training Courses

Main St. , Watergrasshill, Co. Cork, Ireland. Phone: +353-21-4889461 Fax: +353-21-4889465

E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.hyperion.ie

HYPERie N

How to Write a Competitive Proposal for Horizon 2020

A Handbook for European Research Managers

Order details on www.hyperion.ie


(c) Hyperion Ltd. July 2014 www.hyperion.ie

1

COURSE PRESENTER

How to Write a Competitive Proposalfor Horizon 2020

Dr. Seán McCarthy Hyperion [email protected]

Hyperion Websitewww.hyperion.ie/h2020-proposalwebsites.htm

(Version 7)

2

The One Page Proposal

COURSE CONTENTS

Structure and Terminology of Horizon 2020

Module 6

Module 1

How Proposals are Evaluated

Module 7

Streamlining the Writing of the Proposal

Module 4 p jHow to Write the ‘Impact’ of the Project

Module 5

Research Support Services for Horizon 2020

Module 3

How Research Priorities are Selected (Lobby)Module 2

ANNEXESAnnex 1 Rules: From Framework 7 to Horizon 2020Annex 2 Where to find the ‘Best’ PartnersAnnex 3 How to Write the ‘Implementation’ Plan



3

Who attended a previous Hyperion training course?

Coordinator/Partner ?

National Contact Points ?

Experience of Participants

Beginners ?

SME(Small and Medium Sized Enterprise)

Research Support Office?

Financial/Legal Advisors?

Companies? (Large/SME?) Regional Body?

ERC Proposal Writers?

Trainers (our competitors) ?Private Consultants?

Evaluators of FP7 Proposals?

Worked in Commission ?

ERC (European Research Council)

4

Participant Portalhttp://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/home

Sources of Information on Horizon 2020

Official Website of Horizon 2020http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/

National Contact Points(See Participant Portal above)

National Offices based in Brusselswww.iglortd.org

All on www.hyperion.ie/h2020-proposalwebsites.htm



5

Copyright © Hyperion 2014

This material is copyright of Hyperion Limited February 2014. No part of this manual may be copied, photocopied or reproduced in any form or by any means without the permission in writing from Hyperion Ltd. Violation of these laws will lead to prosecution. All trademarks, service marks, products or services are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective

holders and are acknowledged by the author.

Every effort has been made to ensure complete and accurate information concerning the material presented in this manual. However Hyperion Ltd cannot be held legally responsible for any mistakes in printing or faulty instructions contained within the manual. The authors appreciate receiving notice of any errors or misprints.There are no warranties, expressed or implied, including warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, made with respect to the materials or any information provided to the user herein. Neither the author nor publisher shall be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the use or inability to use the contents of this manual

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY

6

Horiozon 2020 Handbook



7

The Terminology of Horizon 2020

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Horizon 2020

Project

3-5 Years

Evaluationof

Proposals

5 Months

Finalising?Negotiation?

3 Months

Callfor

Proposals

4 Months

FinancialAudits

5 Years

DifferentGrants

Work Programmes

Call 1 Call 2

Work Programmes

Call 3 Call 4

Work Programmes

Call 5 Call 6 Call 7

FP7 H2027?

This Course

8

How the Proposal is Compiled

Participant Portal

CompleteProposal

g

ScientificCoordinator

+ResearchManager

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Input

Input

InputWP2 Text

Workpackage 1Leader

Workpackage 2Leader

Workpackage nLeader

NATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICESNational Contact Points (NCPs)

National Office (Brussels)National Delegates*



9

Rules

Focus of this Course

Content

H2020 Rules- Legal Rules- Financial Rules- Procedures

Own Rules

Guidelines

The scientific ideaImpact (results)Implementation (plan)

‘Filling in the forms’ ‘Competitive Proposals’

Complying with the Rules-Working within rules-Streamlining the Procedures-Minimising ‘risks’-Supporting own strategy

1. Selling the ScienceEducating, Convincing, Persuading the Evaluators

2. Selecting ‘Best’ Partners3. High ‘Impact’ score

Focus of this Course

10

Success Criteria for Horizon 2020

From Telling to Selling (to Evaluators)

Coordinator (Key issue)

From Policy to Programmes to Projects

Scientists undertake researchManagers manage

Administrators administer

Best Ideas+ Excellence

Best Partners

Impact

ProfessionalSupportServices

Success in Horizon 2020 is about winning individual proposals



11

PhD in Electrical/Electronic Engineering (Cork, Ireland)

Involved in Framework 1,2,3,4,5,6 and now 7

Four Financial Audits

Written over 150 proposal for Framework programmes

Background: Sean McCarthy

Evaluator in 10 different Framework programmes

Partner in over 60 Framework contracts (Coordinated 16)

Today only trains. Does not participate in Horizon 2020

www.hyperion.ie/seanmccarthy.htm

12Research Centres where

Hyperion’s courses were presented.

AlbaniaAustriaTU ViennaGraz/LinzSalzburgBelgiumBrussels (>60)Antwerp (5)MolCzech RepublicPragueLiberecPardubiceCroatiaZagrebOsijekSplitRiejaCyprusDenmarkCopenhagenAalborgAahrusOdenseEgyptFinlandHelsinkiOuluTampereTurkuKajaaniaJoensuuJyvaskylaJokionienRovaneimiHungaryBudapest

FranceParisLilleGrenobleRenneCaenMontpellier

GermanyBerlinMunichBonnStuttgartHeidelbergHeidelbergStuttgartGottingenSpeyerBielefeldKarlsruheHamburgLeipzigRostock

LatviaLithuaniaEstoniaMacedoniaSerbiaBosnia-HerzgovniaRomaniaRussiaSloveniaMalta

IrelandDublinCorkGalwayLimerickWaterfordThurlesBelfast

ItalyBolognaBolzanoTrentoPotenzaSardiniaIspra

PolandWarsawCracowPoznanPortugalOportoLisbonFaro

SpainMadridValenciaBarcelonaBilbaoGironaPamplonaSan Sabastian

SwedenStockholmUpsalaLinkopingGoteburgUmeaLulea

SwitzerlandBernGenevaLausanneZurichNuchatelFriborgBaselLugano

NetherlandsAmsterdamUtrechtLeidenDelftEindhovenWageningenEnschedePettenNijmegen

UKLondonPlymouthWarwickSheffieldNottinghamManchesterCambridgeBrighton

WalesBangorAberswyth

TurkeyIstanbulAnkara

NorwayOsloBergenTromsoBodoTrondheimStravanger

Iceland

Moscow

Cyprus

Rovaniemi



13

Policies and Funding Programmes

Horizon 2020 (€80bn)

COSME

Erasmus PlusMarie Curie Fellowships

EUTREATIES

EU (European Union)

y

Research and Innovation

Policy

Enterprise Policy

Education Policy

Regional Policy

(2014-2020)

European Structuraland Investment Funds

Joint Programming(National Funding)

14

From Policy to Programmes to Projects

Politicians

EuropeanCommission

Researchers

2Programme

PlanningPhase(2013)



15

EU Policies and Horizon 2020

The Citizen

EU

Sector

International

USA

BRICSThe

Region

Pillar III

SocietalChallenges

“SmartSpecialisation”

(StructuralFunds)

InnovationDivide

European Research

atGlobal Level

SocialChallenge

RegionalChallenge

EconomicChallenge

ScientificChallenge

EU

Science

Pillar I

ExcellentScience

Pillar II

IndustrialLeadership

16


The Citizen

Pillar III

SocietalChallenges

ChallengeSocial

Challenge Climate Action, Resource Efficiency and Raw Materials

Food Security, Sustainable Agriculture, Marine andMaritime Research and Bio-based Economy Challenge

Secure, Clean and Efficient Energy Challenge

Health, Demographic Change and Well-being

Smart, Green and Integrated Transport Challenge

Inclusive, Innovative and Reflective Societies

Pillar III: Societal Challenges

Secure Societies



17


EU

Sector

EconomicChallenge

Pillar II


Innovation in SMEs

Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies (LEIT):

Information and communication technologies (ICT),

Nanotechnology, Advanced Materials, BiotechnologyAdvanced Manufacturing and Processing (NMBP)

Space

Access to Risk Finance

Pillar II: Industrial Leadership

18

Photonics

Nanotechnology

Micro- and Nanoelectronics

Key Enabling Technologies

Advanced Materials

Industrial Biotechnology

H2020 Proposal (30th November 2011) €6.7 billion for KETsEGT (Emerging and Generic Technologies)

Advanced Manufacturing Systems

www.hyperion.ie/ket.htm



19

Specific SupportSupport for Research Intensive SMEs (Eurostars)Enhancing the innovation capacity of SMEsSupporting market driven innovation

Support for the SME InstrumentPhase 1: Concept and feasibility assessmentPhase 2: R&D, demonstration, market replicationPhase 3: Commercialisation (only support)

Innovation in SMEs

Modelled on SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research)

20

SME Instrument

The SME instrument will cover all fields of science, technology and innovation in a bottom upapproach within a given societal challenge or enabling technology so as to leave sufficientroom for all kinds of promising ideas, notably cross-sector and inter-disciplinary projects, tobe funded.– Phase 1: Concept and feasibility assessment:SMEs will receive funding to explore the scientific or technical feasibility and the commercial potential of a new idea (proof of concept) in order to develop an innovation project. A positive outcome of this assessment will allow for funding under the following phase(s).– Phase 2: R&D, demonstration, market replication:Research and development will be supported with a particular focus on demonstration activities (testing, prototype, scale-up studies, design, piloting innovative processes, products and services, performance verification etc.) and market replication.– Phase 3: Commercialisation:This phase will not provide direct funding other than support activities, but aims to facilitate access to private capital and innovation enabling environments. Links to the financial instrumentsare foreseen, for example by giving SMEs that have successfully completed phases 1 and/or 2 priority within a ring-fenced volume of financial resources. SMEs will also benefit from support measures like networking, training, coaching and advice. In addition this part may connect to measures promoting pre-commercial procurement and procurement of innovative solutions.



21

100 Proposals with expected budget of €200 million

Fast Track to Innovation

Pilot in 2015– Pillar II of Horizon 2020

Open Call (no deadline) with 3 cut off dates

EASME (Executive Agency for SMEs)

Consortium: Min 3 Max 5?

Not focussed on SMEs (operated by EASME)

Bottom Up – no predefined topics

Focus on TRL 6 + (Technology Readiness Level)

22

Notes



23

ScientificChallenge


EU

Science

Pillar I

ExcellentScience

Research Infrastructures

Future and Emerging Technologies (FET)

Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions on skills, training andcareer development

European Research Council

Pillar I: Excellent Science

“Although the EU remains the largest producer of scientific publications in the world, the US produces twice as many of the most influential papers (the top 1% by citation count). Similarly, international university ranking exercises show that US universities dominate the top places. And 70% of the world's Nobel Prize winners are located in the US. “

24

ERC Grants in Horizon 2020

ERC Starting Grant (StG)( 2-7 years) 5 Years up to €1.5+.5* m

ERC Advanced Grants (AdG) 5 Years up to €2.5 + 1.0* m

ERC Synergy Group of Scientists

Proof of Concept Scheme

Life Sciences

* Start up costs Age limit from PhD (at date of ‘Publication date of call’)

Physical SciencesSocial Science and

Humanities

ERC Consolidator Grant (CoG)(7-12 y) 5 years up to €2+.75*m)



25

Marie-Sklodowska-Curie

Horizon 2020

Innovative Training Networks- European Training Networks (ETN)- European Industrial Doctorates (EID)- Joint Doctorates (JD)

ConsortiumRequired

RISE (Research Innovation Exchanges)

Inter-sectorInter-national

Individual Fellowships (IF)- European or Reintegration Fellowships- Global Fellowships

Individuals Only(no consortium)

Co-funding of programmes (fellowship + doctoral programmes)

Combining Regional, National, and EU funds

Researcher’s Night (NIGHT) Promotion of Science

26

Marie-Sklodowska-Curie

Framework 7 Horizon 2020

Initial Training Networks Innovative Training Networks- European Training Networks (ETN)- European Industrial Doctorates (EID)- Joint Doctorates (JD)

IRSESIAPP


Individual FellowshipsIEF, IOF, IIF, CIG

Individual Fellowships (IF)- European or Reintegration Fellowships- Global Fellowships

Co-funding Co-funding of programmes (fellowship + doctoral programmes)

Researcher’s Night Researcher’s Night (NIGHT)



27

( p )Marie Curie (Involvement of Enterprises)

Funding for People Companies

EURAXESS Database – vacancies

Innovative Training Networks- European Training Networks (ETN)- European Industrial Doctorates (EID)- Joint Doctorates (JD)

- Enterprise Partner- Enterprise Partner


Transfer knowledge toCompany

Co-funding of programmes (fellowship + doctoral programmes)

Supports Regional Smart Specialisation Strategy

28

Notes



29

FET (Future and Emerging Technologies)

FETOpen

FETProactive

FETFlagships

Large ScaleInitiatives

CommonResearchAgendas

GrapheneHuman Brain

Developing Topics and

Communities

Clusters ofProjects in

Selected Areas

ExploringNovel ideas

EarlyRadical Ideas

IndividualProjects

Open Calls --------------------------- Road Maps for Research

www.hyperion.ie/fet.htm

30

Time for time

FET Proactive

Ecological technologies6

1

Nanoscale Opto-mechanical devices7

3

4

5

Adaptive bottom-up construction

Constructive symbiosis2

New possibilities at the nano-bio-chemistry interface

Knowing, doing, being

Quantum Simulation8

Global Systems Science (GSS)9



31

p j ( )Examples of FET Projects (FP7)

Novel design principles and technologies for a new generation of high dexterity soft-bodied robots inspired by the morphology and behaviour of the octopus (ICT)

The Body-on-a-Chip (BoC) (ICT)

The Listening Talker (ICT)

PLants Employed As SEnsor Devices (ICT)

Forecasting Financial Crises (ICT)

Synthetic pathways to bio-inspired information processing (ICT)

Reverse Electrodialysis Alternative Power Production (Energy)

PlantPower - living plants in microbial fuel cells for clean, renewable, sustainable, efficient, in-situ bioenergy production (Energy)

32

Notes



33

Structure of Horizon 2020

Pillar II

Industrial Leadership

Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies (LEIT): (Information and communication technologies (ICT), Nanotechnology, Advanced Materials, BiotechnologyAdvanced Manufacturing and Processing (NMBP)Space)

Innovation in SMEsAccess to Risk Finance

Pillar III

Societal Challenges

Health, demographic change and wellbeingFood security, sustainable agriculture and the bio-economySecure, clean and efficient energySmart, green and integrated transportClimate action and resource efficiency + raw materialsInnovative, Inclusive, Reflective Societies Secure Europe

Pillar I

Excellent Science

European Research CouncilFuture and Emerging TechnologiesMarie Curie ActionsResearch Infrastructures

EIT

Euratom

JRC

34


Pillar II


Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies (LEIT): (Information and communication technologies (ICT), Nanotechnology, Advanced Materials, BiotechnologyAdvanced Manufacturing and Processing (NMBP)Space)

Innovation in SMEsAccess to Risk Finance

Pillar III

Societal Challenges

Health, demographic change and wellbeingFood security, sustainable agriculture and the bio-economySecure, clean and efficient energySmart, green and integrated transportClimate action and resource efficiency + raw materialsInnovative, Inclusive, Reflective Societies Secure Europe

Pillar I

Excellent Science


EIT

Euratom

JRC

Top Down*

Bottom UpBottom UpBottom Up

Bottom Up

Top Down*



35

EIT Climate KIC (2010)

EIT Inno Energy (2010)

European Institute of Innovation and Technology

EIT ICT Labs (2010)

www.hyperion.ie/eit.htm

KnowledgeTriangle

Innovation

Research Education

Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KIC)

36

Future Knowledge and Innovation Communities

3. Food 4 Future-sustainable supply chain from resources to consumers

4. Added-value manufacturing

1. Innovation for healthy living and active ageing

5. Urban mobility

p g, y g2. Raw materials- sustainable exploration, extraction,

processing, recycling and substitution

Source: EIT Strategic Innovation Agenda (2011)

2014

2016

2018



37

p ( )Public Private Partnerships (PPP)

Framework 7 Horizon 2020

Institutional PPP (JTI’s)

IMIARTEMISENIACClean SkyHydrogen Fuel Cells

Institutional PPP (JTI’s)

IMI (Innovative Medicines Initiative)ESCEL (ARTEMIS/ENIAC)Clean SkyHydrogen Fuel CellsBio-based industries (2014+)Shift2Rail ?

Contractual PPP

Energy Efficient BuildingsGreen CarsFactory of the FutureFuture Internet

Contractual PPP

Energy Efficient BuildingsGreen Cars Advanced 5G NetworksFactory of the FutureSustainable Processes (SPIRE)Photonics RoboticsHigh Performance Computing (HPC)JTI (Joint Technology Initiative)

38

Teaming: Creating/Upgrading Centres of Excellence

Spreading Excellence + Widening Participation

Twinning: Linking to 2 International Research Centres

ERAchairs: Attract high quality people to research groups

Policy Support: Improve National/Regional Innovation Policies



39

Technology Readiness Level (TRL)

Source: Annex G (TRL) of the General Annexes of Horizon 2020

TRL Description

TRL9 Actual system proven in an operational environment

TRL8 System completed and qualified

TRL7 System prototype demonstrated in an operational environment

TRL6 Technology demonstrated in a relevant environment

TRL5 Technology validated in a relevant environment

TRL4 Technology validated in the laboratory

TRL3 Experimental Proof of Concept

TRL2 Technology concept formulated

TRL1 Basic Principles Observed

40


CommercialScience

Technology Readiness Level

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

BasicResearch

LaboratoryResearch

Technology Development

Technology Demonstration

ProductDevelopment

ProductComplete



41


CommercialScience


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

‘Valley of Death’

BasicResearch

LaboratoryResearch

Technology Development

Technology Demonstration

ProductDevelopment

ProductComplete

BasicResearch

TargetIdentification

CandidatesSelected

Phase ITrials

Phase IITrials

ApprovalPhase IIITrials

Biotechnology

Competition LawState Aid Rules

Horizon 2020Pre-competitive Research

Horizon 2020Pre-competitive Research

42

WhiH2020 Funding for Research and Innovation


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

ERC (European Research Council)EIT(European Institute of Innovation and Technology)IPO (Initial Public Offering)FET (Future and Emerging Technologies)JPI (Joint Programming Initiatives)PPP (Public Private Partnerships)

ERC

Access Finance

Pillar II and Pillar III

EIT

© Sean McCarthy Hyperion Ltd, May 2011 www.hyperion.ie

FET

National Funding (ERAnet) Eurostars

PPP

Marie Curie Actions



Pre-competitive Research



43

Different Types of Grants


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

ERC( )

Research and Innovation Action (100%)

Public Procurement

*100% for public organisations ** Phase 1 is 100% funded

( )Innovation

Action (70%)*

SME Instrument(70%)**

Coordination and Support Action (CSA) for Studies, Networks..



Pre-competitive Research

44

Types of GrantsType of Grant Minimum

PartnersTypical

ConsortiumFunding

Research and Innovation Actions

3 8-15? 100%

Innovation Actions 3 8-15? 70%*

Coordination and Support Actions

1(Study)

Networks(>20?)

100%

SME Instrument 1 (SME only) ? 70% (II)

ERC Grants 1 Synergy (3) 100%

Marie Curie Grants 1 (individual) ETN (10?) 100%

* 100% for public non-profit organisations



45

Research and Innovation Actions: Basic and applied research, technology development and integration, testing and validation of a small scale prototype in a laboratory or simulated environment. Projects may contain limited demonstration or pilot activities to show technical feasibility.

Innovation ActionsPrototyping, testing, demonstrating, piloting, large-scale product validation and market replication. Projects may include limited research and development activities

Coordination and Support Actions (CSA)This type of grant does not fund research. It funds actions such as “standardization, dissemination, awareness-raising and communication, networking, coordination or support services, policy dialogues and mutual learning exercises and studies.

SME Instrument Phase 1: funds a feasibility study to verify the viability of the concept. SME Instrument Phase 2: funds demonstration, testing, prototyping, piloting, scaling-up, miniaturization, design and market replication. Phase 3: facilitates access to public and private risk capital.

Types of Grants

46

Marie Curie FellowshipsGrants used in the Marie Curie Programme (ETN, RISE, Cofund)

ERC GrantsGrants used in the ERC programme (Starting Grant, Consolidator Grant, Advanced Grant)

ERAnet CofundThis is designed to bring national and regional funding agencies together to fund joint calls for proposals.

Public Procurement Cofund Actions(PCP) Pre-commercial public procurement which encourages public procurement bodies to fund research, development and valorization of new solutions;(PPI) Public procurement of innovative solutions where the procurer acts as an early adopter of innovative solutions.

PrizesActions may be funded in the form of a prize.

Types of Grants



47

From Framework 7 to Horizon 2020

Framework 7Actual

Horizon 2020(Proposed)

Technology ReadinessLevel

TRL 1 to TRL 4 TRL 1 to TRL 7

Top Down Programmes

Very Specifice.g. Renewable Energy- PV (Thin film)

Very Generale.g. Renewable Energy

Structure Thematic-ICT

- Energy- Food etc

Challenge Driven- Factory of Future- Active Ageing- Resource Efficiency

Impact Potential Impact Impact

48

Notes



49


COURSE CONTENTS




p jHow to Write the ‘Impact’ of the Project


How Research Priorities are Selected (Lobby)Module 2

50

Workprogramme Design in Horizon 2020

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

gWork

Programme

gWork

Programme

gWork

Programme

Calls for Proposals

Lobby

Lobby

Lobby

Horizon 2020



51

How ‘Top Down’ Priorities are Selected (Lobby)

ERIAB

Politicians

EuropeanCommission

Researchers

Key Enabling Technologies (KET)European Technology PlatformsKICs and PPPsEuropean Innovation PartnershipsCOST Actions/ConferencesJoint Programming / ERAnetsEU R&D Associations/Networks‘Expert’ Advisory GroupsTender Studies/Foresight StudiesFP7/H2020 Projects (CSAs)

ERIAB (European Research Innovation Area Board) CSA (Coordination and Support Actions)

ERAC

52

ICT Research in Horizon 2020ERAnets

CHIST-ERA IIDC-NetECO-INNOVERAERASynBioLEAD ERASEERA-EI

ERAnet +

PIANO+BioPhotonics+OLAE+

Technology Platforms

ARTEMISIAAENEASEPoSSEUROPISINEMNESSINet!WorksPhotonics21

Joint ProgrammingInitiatives

MYBL - More Years, Better Lives

EUREKA

ITEA 2CATRENECELTIC PlusEURIPIDES

EIT- KIC

EIT ICT Labs

EIP

Smart Cities

FET Flagships

FuturICTGrapheneGuardian AngelsHBP-PSITFoM

Source: ERAnet Learn

Article 185

AAL JPBONUS-169

Joint TechnologyInitiatives

ECSEL (ENIAC/ARTEMIS)

PPP

HPC PhotonicsFuture Internet Robotics



53


http://cordis.europa.eu/technology-platforms/

Aeronautics Platform (ACARE) High Performance Computing (HPC)Nanomedicine Technology PlatformNetworked and Electronic Media (NEM)InitiativeNetworked European Services and Software Initiative (NESSI)Optical Technology PlatformPhotonics21 Technology PlatformPhotovoltaics Technology PlatformPlant Geneomics PlatformRail Transport Platform (ERRAC) Road Transport Platform (ERTRAC)Robotics Platform (EUROP)Smart Grids Technology PlatformSolar Ther h mal Technology Platform (ESTTP)Steel Technology Platform (ESTEP)Textiles and Clothing Platform (ETP-FTC)Water Supply and Sanitation Technology Platform (WSSTP)

54


http://cordis.europa.eu/technology-platforms/

Biofuels Technology PlatformChemistry Technology PlatformConstruction Technology Platform (ECTP)Embedded Systems Technology Platform (ARTEMISIA)EuMAT (Advanced Materials and Technologies)Food for Life Technology Platform (Food)Forestry Technology PlatformGlobal Animal Health (GAH)Grid ResearchHydrogen and Fuel Cells Technology PlatformIndustrial Safety PlatformInnovative Medicines PlatformIntegral Satcom Initiative (ISI)Manufacturing Technology Platform (MANUFUTURE)Maritime Transport Platform (WATERBORNE)Mobile Communications and Wireless Technology Platform (Networks)Nanoelectronics Platform (ENIAC)



55

pExamples of COST Actions

Field Example of COST Action

ICT Optical Wireless communications

ESSEM Harmonizing global biodiversity modelling

BMBS Next generation sequencing data analysis network

CMST New drugs for neglected diseases

FA Feed for Health

FPS Forest Management Decision Support System

TUD Smart Low Carbon Regions

MPNS Towards functional sub-wavelength photonics structures

ISCH The role of the EU in UN Human Rights Reform

ESSEM (Earth Systems Science and Environmental Management)BMBS (Biomedicine and Molecular Biosciences)CMST (Chemistry and Molecular Sciences and Technologies FA (Food and Agriculture) FPS (Forests, their Products and Services TUD (Transport and Urban Development)MPNS (Materials, Physics and NanoSciences ISCH (Individuals, Societies, Cultures and Health

40 000 researchers are involved in over 200 COST Actions

56

COST ActionsCOST does not itself fund research, but supports networking activities such as meetings, conferences, short-term scientific exchanges and outreach activities. It receives financial support for its coordinating activities.Proposals playing a precursor role for other European programmes and/or initiated by early-stage researchers are especially welcome.

COST (European Cooperation in the field of Scientific and Technical Research) is organised in nine broad domains (biomedicine and molecular biosciences; chemistry and molecular sciences and technologies; earth system science and environmental management; food and agriculture; forests, their products and services; individuals, society, culture and health; information and communication technologies; materials, physical and nanosciences; transport and urban development).

Proposers are invited to locate their topic within one domain. However, inter-disciplinary proposals not fitting readily into a single domain are particularly welcome and will be assessed separately.

COST funds 60 Actions per year that run for 4 years. Average contribution = €100,000



57

Water

Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability

Raw Materials

European Innovation Partnerships (EIP)

Active Health and Ageing (AHA)

Smart Cities and Communities

EIPs bring together public and private stakeholders across borders and sectors to address bottlenecks in the European research and innovation system that prevent good ideas from being developed and getting to market. This can be due to under-investment, outdated regulation, lack of standards, or market fragmentation. Source: Cordis News March 2012

www.hyperion.ie/eip.htm

58

ERAnet Cofund

ERA-Net (FP7) Collaboration of Programmes

ERA-Net Plus(Article 182)*

(FP7)

“Virtual Common Pot”(Money does not cross borders)

(Single Call for Proposals)

Article 169(Article 185)*

(FP7)

“Real Common Pot”(Money crosses borders)

Integration of National Programmes

* Lisbon Treaty Calls may cover subjects beyond Framework 7 themes



59

ERAnet Cofund (ERA Net/ERA Net Plus)http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/coordination/eranet_en.html

The objective of the ERA-NET scheme is to develop and strengthen the coordination of national and regional research programmes through two specific actions:'ERA-NET actions' - providing a framework for actors implementing public research programmes to coordinate their activities e.g. by developing joint activities or by mutually supporting joint calls for trans-national proposals.

'ERA-NET Plus actions'- providing, in a limited number of cases with high European added value, additional EU financial support to facilitate joint calls for proposals between national and/or regional programmes.

Under the ERA-NET scheme, national and regional authorities identify research programmes they wish to coordinate or open up mutually. The participants in these actions are therefore programme 'owners' (typically ministries or regional authorities defining research programmes) or programme 'managers' (such as research councils or other research funding agencies managing research programmes).

60

Article 185 (formerly 169) Initiatives

Bonus 185 Baltic Sea Research

EMRP Metrology

AAL Ambient Assisted Living

Eurostars Eureka programme for SMEshttp://cordis.europa.eu/coordination/art169.htmTFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union)

EDCTP European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership

Framework 6 (Article 169 Nice Treaty)

Framework 7 (Article 185 TFEU)



61

High Level Group on Joint Programming

FACCE Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change

A healthy diet for a Healthy Life

Cultural Heritage and Global Change

http://www.earto.eu/hidden-pages/joint-programming-initiatives/

www.hyperion.ie/jointprogramming.htm

JPND Combat neurodegenerative Diseases and Alzheimers

62

Joint Programming Initiatives

Topic Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions

Topic Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe

Topic The microbial challenge – an emerging threat

Topic More Years, Better Lives – Potential and Challenges

Topic Water Challenges for a Changing World

Topic Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans

www.hyperion.ie/jointprogramming.htm



63

European and National Organisations

Politicians

EuropeanCommission

Researchers

BrusselsOffices

National R&D OfficesSector AssociationsNational R&D OfficesSector Associations

NationalBodies

National Delegates*National Contact PointsNational Delegates*National Contact Points

H2020 AdvisorsResearchers

H2020 Advisory Groups

* Programme Committee

64

Energy Research in Horizon 2020

ERAnets

BESTBIOENERGY CAPITAECO-INNOVERAECORDERA-CAPSERA-CHEMISTRYFENCO-NETGeothermal ERA NETLEAD ERAM-ERA.NETPV-ERANET 2SmartGrids

ERAnet +

Bonus+

Article 185

BONUS-169

TechnologyPlatforms

BiofuelsPhotovoltaicsRHCSmartGridsSNETPTPWindZEP


JTI FCH JTI BBI/BRIDGEEUREKA

EUROGIA+PF+

Public Private Partnerships

BbG - Biobased for GrowthEeB - Energy-efficient BuildingsEFFRA - Factories of the Future

EIT- KIC

KIC InnoEnergy

EIP

Smart Cities

FET Flagships

None




65

Environment Research in Horizon 2020ERAnets

BiodivERsA2BIOENERGY CIRCLE2CRUEECO-INNOVERAECORDERA-CAPSERA-CHEMISTRYERA-ENVHEALTHERNESTLEAD ERANET-HERITAGEPV-ERANET 2RURAGRISEAS-ERASKEPSNOWMAN

Article 185

BONUS-169


JTI FCH

EUREKA

ACQUEAU


EeB - Energy-efficient BuildingsGC - Green CarsSPIRE

EIT- KIC

Climate KICRaw Materials KIC

EIP

Smart CitiesWater Efficient EuropeRaw Materials

FET Flagships

None


Joint Programme Initiatives

CH - Cultural Heritage and Global ChangeCLIMATE (CliK’EU) - Climate Knowledge for EuropeHealthy & productive seas and oceansUE - Urban EuropeWater Challenges

66

Food, Agriculture, Fisheries Research in H2020

ERAnets

ANIHWAARIMNetCOFASPCORE Organic IIERA-ARD-IIERA-CAPSERA-IB-2ERASynBioEUPHRESCO IIEUROTRANSBIO (ETB-PRO)FORESTERRAICT-AGRIMariFishRURAGRIRURAGRISNOWMANSUSFOOD

ERAnet +

ERASysBio+


FABRE TPFoodGAHPlants


FACCE - Agriculture, food security and climate changeHealthy & productive seas and oceans

EUREKA

EUROAGRI FOOD CHAIN


BbG - Biobased for Growth

EIT- KIC

food4future (2014)

EIP

Agriculture

FET Flagships

None


Article 185

BONUS-169



67

Health Research in Horizon 2020

ERAnets

EMIDAERA-AgeERA-NET NEURON IIE-Rare-2EUROCOURSEEUROTRANSBIO (ETB-PRO)HIVERALEAD ERAPathoGenoMicsTRANSCAN

ERAnet +

ERASysBio+


NanoMedicine


AMR - Antimicrobial resistanceHDHL - A Healthy Diet for a Healthy LivingJPND - Neurodegenerative Disease Research / Alzheimer

EUREKA

EUROAGRI FOOD CHAIN


BbG - Biobased for GrowthEeB - Energy-efficient Buildings

EIT- KIC

Innovation for healthy living and activeageing (2014)

EIP

Active and Healthy Aging

FET Flagships

HBP-PSGuardian AngelsITFoM


Article 185

EDCTP


JTI IMI

68

Industrial Production Research in Horizon 2020

ERAnets

CAPITAECO-INNOVERAERASynBioEUROTRANSBIO (ETB-PRO)LEAD ERAMANUNET IIM-ERA.NETPV-ERANET 2


ECTPESTEPETP SMREuMaTForest-basedFTCIndustrialSafetyManufutureSusChemWSSTP

EUREKA

E! SURFMF.INDPF+

EIT- KIC

added value manufacturing (2016)



sEFFRA - Factories of the Future



69


COURSE CONTENTS






Module 3

How Research Priorities are Selected (Lobby)

70

1. Excellence2. Impact3. Quality and Efficiency of the Implementation4. Members of the Consortium5. Ethics and Security Issues

Part B

Official Forms (A1,A2,A3)Partner’s details, Proposal Summary, Costs

Part A

Structure of a Horizon 2020 Proposal*

* ERC has its own format. Layout may change during the programme



71

“Two Stage” SubmissionEuropean

Commission*Research

CommunityCall for Proposals

Stage 1: Short Proposal

Successful Evaluation

Evaluate Short Proposal(< X pages)

Stage 2: Full Proposal EvaluateFull Proposal

Proposal Accepted

Registration ResearchParticipantPortal

OneStage

Proposal

Request for Review*or External Agency

72

“Two Step” Evaluation (e.g. ERC)European

Commission*Research

CommunityCall for Proposals

Full Proposal Submitted

Rejected Proposals

Successful Proposals

Registration ResearchParticipantPortal

ERC(European Research Council)

Step 1Short

Evaluation

Step 2Detailed

Evaluation

Rejected Proposals

Request for ReviewRequest for Review*or External Agency



73


Pillar II


- Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies: (Information and communication technologies, Nanotechnology, Advanced Materials, Advanced Manufacturing Processes Biotechnology, Space)

-Innovation in SMEs- Access to Risk Finance

Pillar III

Societal Challenges

Health, demographic change and wellbeingFood security, sustainable agriculture and the bio-economySecure, clean and efficient energySmart, green and integrated transportClimate action and resource efficiency + raw materials(Europe in a Changing World) ?+ (Secure Europe)?

Pillar I

Excellent Science


EIT

Euratom

JRC

Top Down Programmes

Work Programmes divided into‘Topics’

Project Officer responsible for ‘topic’

Project Officer selects evaluators(Using the abstract/keywords)

74

ICT Call 4 (FP7)Proposal per topic (Total 1267)

Topic Topic Proposals Funded

1.1 Network of the Future 145 23

1.5 Networked Media & 3D Internet 139 23

2.1 Cognitive Systems and Robotics 109 19

2.2 Language-Based Interaction 27 9

3.7 Photonics 1 1

8.2 Quantum Information Foundations and Technologies

5 3

8.3 Biochemistry based IT 7 3



75

Evaluation of European Research Proposals

100 Proposals

Excellence (>3/5)Impact (>3/5)Implementation (>3/5)Maximum 15Threshold 10

50 Eliminated

40 Proposals

External Evaluators

Panel 20 EliminatedCommission+

Experts

Threshold

* Eligibility Criteria (deadline, number of partners, Form A/B, Grant, Content)

Eligibility* 10 EliminatedCommission

Done by Example only

Lists Published (Rejected, Funded, Reserve)20 Funded

76

Forms used by the External EvaluatorsProposal Proposal Proposal

( )Evaluator No. 1

(Remote) ( )Evaluator No. 2

(Remote) ( )Evaluator No. 3

(Remote)IndividualAssessment

Reports

IndividualAssessment

Reports

IndividualAssessment

Reports

Panel Review (Ranking of Proposals +Rejection List)(Chaired by Commission, involving some expert evaluators)

List of Proposals for Funding+ Evaluation Summary Reports

Consensus Meeting between the 3 Evaluators(Rapporteur: Evaluator or another person)

Consensus Report(Signed by evaluators)

ECModerator

Rec

ord

er

Self-evaluation form

Research and innovation actions

Innovation actions SME instrument

This form is made available to applicants who may themselves wish to arrange an evaluation of their proposal (e.g. by an impartial colleague) prior to final editing, submission and deadline. The aim is to help applicants identify ways to improve their proposals.

The forms used by the experts for their evaluation reports will be broadly similar, although the detail and layout may differ.

These forms are based on the standard criteria, scores and thresholds. Check whether special schemes apply to the topics of interest to you. The definitive evaluation schemes are given in the work programme.

A self-evaluation, if carried out, is not to be submitted to the Commission, and has no bearing whatsoever on the conduct of the evaluation.

Scoring

Scores must be in the range 1-5. Half marks may be given.

Interpretation of the scores

0 — The proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information.

1 — Poor. The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses. 2 — Fair. The proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses. 3 — Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present. 4 — Very Good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, but a small number of shortcomings are present. 5 — Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion.

Any shortcomings are minor.

Thresholds

The threshold for individual criteria is 3. The overall threshold, applying to the sum of the three individual scores, is 10.

Two-stage submission schemes

The scheme below is applicable to a full proposal. For the evaluation of first-stage proposals under a two-stage submission procedure, only the criteria ‘excellence’ and ‘impact’ will be evaluated. Within these criteria, only the aspects in bold will be considered. The threshold for both individual criteria will be 4. Weighting

For Innovation actions and the SME instrument (phases 1 and 2), to determine the ranking, the score for the criterion ‘impact’ will be given a weight of 1.5.

* Experts will also be asked to assess the operational capacity of applicants to carry out the proposed work.

2

1. Excellence

Note: The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the topic description in the work programme:

Clarity and pertinence of the objectives; Credibility of the proposed approach; Soundness of the concept, including trans-disciplinary considerations, where

relevant; Extent that proposed work is ambitious, has innovation potential, and is beyond

the state of the art (e.g. ground-breaking objectives, novel concepts and approaches). Comments:

Score 1: Threshold 3/5

2. Impact

Note: The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent to which the outputs of the project should contribute at the European and/or International level:

The expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic; Enhancing innovation capacity and integration of new knowledge; Strengthening the competitiveness and growth of companies by developing innovations

meeting the needs of European and global markets, and where relevant, by delivering such innovations to the markets;

Any other environmental and socially important impacts; Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results

(including management of IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant. Comments:


3. Quality and efficiency of the implementation*

Note: The following aspects will be taken into account:

Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources;

Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant); Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and

innovation management. Comments:


Total score (1+2+3) Threshold 10/15

Chapter 4: How Horizon 2020 Proposals are Evaluated

109

Table 4.7 Evaluation Criteria: Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions

ITN - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Innovative Training Networks Excellence Impact Implementation Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research programme (including inter/multidisciplinary and intersectoral aspects)

Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills, and working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and to provide new career perspectives

Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources (including awarding of the doctoral degrees for EID and EJD projects)

Quality and innovative aspects of the training programme (including transferable skills, inter/multidisciplinary and intersectoral aspects)

Contribution to structuring doctoral / early-stage research training at the European level and to strengthening European innovation capacity, including the potential for: a) meaningful contribution of the non-academic sector to the doctoral/research training, as appropriate to the implementation mode and research field b) developing sustainable joint doctoral degree structures (for EJD projects only)

Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including quality management and risk management (with a mandatory joint governing structure for EID and EJD projects)

Quality of the supervision (including mandatory joint supervision for EID and EJD projects)

Effectiveness of the proposed measures for communication and dissemination of results

Appropriateness of the infrastructure of the participating organisations

Quality of the proposed interaction between the participating organisations

Competences, experience and complementarity of the participating organisations and their commitment to the programme

50% 30% 20% Weighting

1 2 3 NOTE: These criteria are subject to change during Horizon 2020.


110

Table 4.8 Evaluation Criteria of Marie Curie Individual Fellowships

IF - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action: Individual Fellowships Excellence Impact Implementation Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research programme (including inter/multidisciplinary and intersectoral aspects)

Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills and working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and to provide new career perspectives

Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources

Clarity and quality of transfer of knowledge / training for the development of researcher in light of the research objectives

Effectiveness of the proposed measures for communication and results dissemination

Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including quality management and risk management

Quality of the supervision and the hosting arrangements

Appropriateness of the institutional environment (infrastructure)

Capacity of the researcher to reach or re-enforce a position of professional maturity in research

Competences, experience and complementarity of the participating organisations and institutional commitment


1 2 3

Table 4.9 Evaluation Criteria of Marie Curie RISE proposals

RISE - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action: Research and Innovation Staff Exchange Excellence Impact Implementation Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research (including inter/multidisciplinary aspects)

Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills and working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and to provide new career perspectives

Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources

Clarity and quality of knowledge sharing among the participants in light of the research and innovation objectives.

To develop new and lasting research collaborations, to achieve transfer of knowledge between research institutions and to improve research and innovation potential at the European and global levels

Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including quality management and risk management

Quality of the interaction between the participating organisations

Effectiveness of the proposed measures for communication and results dissemination

Appropriateness of the institutional environment (infrastructure)

Capacity of the researcher to reach or re-enforce a position of professional maturity in research

Competences, experience and complementarity of the participating organisations and institutional commitment


1 2 3

NOTE: These criteria are subject to change during Horizon 2020.


112

Table 4.10 ERC Evaluation Criteria (Starting and Consolidator Grants)

1. Research Project Ground‐breaking nature, ambition and feasibility

Starting, Consolidator and Advanced Ground-breaking nature and potential impact of the research project To what extent does the proposed research address important challenges? To what extent are the objectives ambitious and beyond the state of the art (e.g. novel concepts and approaches or development across disciplines)? How much is the proposed research high risk/high gain? Scientific Approach To what extent is the outlined scientific approach feasible (based on Extended Synopsis)? To what extent is the proposed research methodology appropriate to achieve the goals of the project (based on full Scientific Proposal)? To what extent does the proposal involve the development of novel methodology (based on full Scientific Proposal)? To what extent are the proposed timescales and resources necessary and properly justified (based on full Scientific Proposal)?

2. Principal Investigator Intellectual capacity, creativity and commitment

Starting and Consolidator Fully

agree

Somewhat Agree

Somewhat Disagree

Strongly disagree

The PI has demonstrated the ability to propose and conduct ground-breaking research and his/her achievements have typically gone beyond the state-of-the-art.

The PI provides abundant evidence of creative independent thinking

The ERC Grant would contribute significantly to the establishment or where necessary, the further consolidation of the PI's independence and career.

The PI is strongly committed to the project and demonstrates the willingness to devote a significant amount of time to the project (min 50% of the total working time on it and min 50% in an EU Member State or Associated Country) (based on full Scientific Proposal).



113

Table 4.11 ERC Evaluation Criteria (Advanced Grant)

1. Research Project Ground‐breaking nature, ambition and feasibility

Advanced Ground-breaking nature and potential impact of the research project To what extent does the proposed research address important challenges? To what extent are the objectives ambitious and beyond the state of the art (e.g. novel concepts and approaches or development across disciplines)? How much is the proposed research high risk/high gain? Scientific Approach To what extent is the outlined scientific approach feasible (based on Extended Synopsis)? To what extent is the proposed research methodology appropriate to achieve the goals of the project (based on full Scientific Proposal)? To what extent does the proposal involve the development of novel methodology (based on full Scientific Proposal)? To what extent are the proposed timescales and resources necessary and properly justified (based on full Scientific Proposal)?

2. Principal Investigator Intellectual capacity, creativity and commitment

Starting and Consolidator Fully

agree

Somewhat Agree

Somewhat Disagree

Strongly disagree

The track record of the PI is characterized by ground- breaking research and his/her achievements have typically gone beyond the state-of-the-art.

The track record of the PI contains abundant evidence of creative independent thinking

The PI has demonstrated sound leadership in the training and advancement of young scientists.

The PI demonstrates the level of commitment to the project necessary for its execution and demonstrates the willingness to devote a significant amount of time to the project (min 30% of the total working time on it and min 50% in an EU Member State or Associated Country) (based on full Scientific Proposal).




77

Evaluation of Proposals (Possible Scenario)

15.0

Topic 2

Topic 4

Topic 1

Topic 6

Topic 7

Topic 8

Topic 3

Topic 5

14.5

15.0

14.0

12.5

13.0

9.5

13.5

14.5

14.0

14.5

14.0

12.0

12.0

9.0

12.0

14.0

14.0

14.0

14.0

10.5

11.0

9.0

11.0

“Unfilled Topic”

Recommended for Funding

HighestScore

Extra Criteria(Political Priorities)

‘Unfilled’ Topics* Scientific Excellence

ImpactSME involvement Gender BalanceCountry balance

International Partner

*Topics that did not have successful proposals in previous calls.SME (Small and Medium Enterprise)

78

How Proposals Above Threshold are Selected2.2.8 Prioritise proposalsAll above-threshold proposals are listed in order of total score. Where proposals on the list achieve the same score the experts in the panel will re-examine the proposals with a view to recommending a priority order between them. In doing this they will follow exactly the rules given in the ICT Workprogramme Annex 2; namely:• Priority is first given to proposals covering topics not otherwise covered by more highly-rated proposals; and then within that group proposals are ranked according to score on criterion 1 (Science), then score on criterion 3 (Impact), and then (if identical on both criterion scores) on the basis of other appropriate characteristics;• Remaining proposals, not covering original topics, are then prioritised amongst themselves on the same basis as above.Once the priority list is established, experts will additional identify proposals which substantially overlap each other in terms of the work proposed (if any), with a recommendation as to which might be selected and which might be assigned to a Reserve list.

Other issues of strategic importance, coverage of the work programme in the area, industrialrelevance, SME participation, third country participation etc. if relevant..The scientific judgement of the experts is not to be questioned.

To reinforce applicants’ engagement at proposal level, gender balance in the research team has been included among the ranking factors to prioritise proposals with the same scores.

Source: H2020 Guidelines on Evaluation Process



79

How Pillar II, III Proposals are Evaluated

Bureaucrats

ScientificEvaluators

Excellence (>3/5)Impact (>3/5)Implementation (>3/5)

Eligibility CriteriaDeadlineForms A/BNumber of PartnersBudget / ContentFunding Scheme

Commission(Panel)

Evaluator’s Scores ImpactInvolvement of SMEsCountry balance/Gender

How

Pro

pos

als

are

Eva

luat

ed

80

How to Prepare a Cooperation Proposal

Bureaucrats


Commission(Panel)

How

Pro

pos

als

are

Eva

luat

ed

How

Pro

pos

als

are

Pre

par

ed

One Page Proposal(Lobby Document)

4 Page Proposal Address Evaluator’s Questions

(Abstract + Excellence +Impact+ Implementation)

Full Proposal(Fill in Forms A/B)



81

How Marie Curie Proposals are Evaluated

Bureaucrats


Excellence (>3/5) 50% Impact (on careers) (>3/5) 30%Implementation (>3/5) 20%

Score in % e.g. 93%

Eligibility CriteriaDeadlineForms A/BNumber of Partners (Network)

Panel(Commission)

Evaluator’s Scores

“Training should aim at making them more independent and providing them with the skills to become team leaders in the near future.” Marie Curie Guide for Applicants

82

Evaluation of ERC Grants

Bureaucrats

ScientificReviewers

Read 5 page Synopsis

-Excellence of Principal Investigator (Max 4, Threshold 2)

-Excellence of the Science(Max 4, Threshold 2)

(Graded: A, B, C)

Eligibility Criteria

How

Pro

pos

als

are

Eva

luat

ed

ScientificPanel

Read 15 Pages

Excellence of the ScienceExcellence of PI(Graded: A, B)

Interviewswith PIs

•European Commission not included in Panel•PI (Principal Investigator)

A



83

What the Evaluator Expects

Credibility

Communication

Concrete

Consistency

The idea is convincing and achievable“It has to make sense”

Clear Description of what will be done

Very specific (not general concepts)(Who will do what, when and how?)

High quality documentation (proof read)Written by consortium but edited.

84

Resubmissions?

ERC: Category B – recommend resubmission

Up to 50% of successful ITNs resubmissions (Framework 7)

ESRs of rejected proposal introduced at Consensus Meeting

Resubmission allowed – and even expected

Proposal can be resubmitted as a totally new proposal

ESR (Evaluation Summary Report) ITN (Initial Training Networks)ERC (European Research Council)



85

Recommendations from National Contact Points

The best (known) scientist in the field.

Official Call for Experts (Participant Portal)

Speakers at European Scientific Conferences

Co-ordinators/Partners of Framework Projects

Evaluators selected by ‘Topic’ Project Officer

How to become an ‘External Expert’

“The Commission may .select any individual with the appropriate skills from outside the list.”(A17)

Matching Keywords from ‘Topics’

Expert Evaluators used in FP7 http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/experts_en.html

86

Expert Evaluators

Personal Basis (not representing organisation or country)

Payment for work (daily rate + travel expenses) (7-10 days)

Appointment letter (confidentiality and conflict of interest)

Shortage of Evaluators from Industry

Gender Balance – 40% of panels (only 15% in database)

“A reasonable distribution of geographic origins”

>5000 experts per year. Regular rotation (up to 25%/year)



87


COURSE CONTENTS




Module 4 p jHow to Write the ‘Impact’ of the Project



88

GlossaryUse Direct or indirect utilisation of knowledge in research activities

or for developing, creating and marketing a product or processor for creating and providing a service.

Dissemination: Disclosure of knowledge by any appropriate means other thanthe publication resulting from the formalities for protecting the knowledge.

Deliverable: What is produced during the execution of the contract (be itdocument, guidelines, software code, samples, prototypes, certified material, standard, etc.). A deliverable is usuallyconceived to allow the transition from one workpackage toanother or to be exchanged between partners.

RTD Result: Product, process, service, know-how, methodology, softwareachieved thanks to the RTD project and which arises from the completion of all deliverables.

Source: IPR Helpdesk ( www.iprhelpdesk.eu)



89

Impact (Policy Makers vs. Researchers)

Politicians

EuropeanCommission

Researchers

Impact Assessment?

Impact?

Policy€ billions

Programmes€ hundred millions

Projects€3-5million

90

pImpact in Horizon 2020

The Citizen

EU

Sector

International

USA

BRICThe Region

SocietalChallenges

“SmartSpecialisation”

EU

Science

ExcellentScience


Project

ProjectjProject

Project



91

Impact in Horizon 2020: Proposal Template

2.1 Expected impacts (Research and Innovation Actions)Please be specific, and provide only information that applies to the proposal and its objectives.Wherever possible, use quantified indicators and targets.Describe how your project will contribute to: the expected impacts set out in the work programme, under the relevant topic;improving innovation capacity and the integration of new knowledge (strengthening the competitiveness and growth of companies by developing innovations meeting the needs of European and global markets; and, where relevant, by delivering such innovations to the markets;any other environmental and socially important impacts (if not already covered above).Describe any barriers/obstacles, and any framework conditions (such as regulation and standards), that may determine whether and to what extent the expected impacts will be achieved. (This should not include any risk factors concerning implementation, as covered in section 3.2.)

92

Impact in Horizon 2020: Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation Criteria (Research and Innovation Actions)

The extent to which the outputs of the project should contribute at the European and/or International level to:

The expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic;Enhancing innovation capacity and integration of new knowledge;Strengthening the competitiveness and growth of companies by developing innovations meeting the needs of European and global markets; and, where relevant, by delivering such innovations to the markets; Any other environmental and socially important impacts (not already covered above);

Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results (including management of the IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant.



93

Impact Factors (Horizon 2020)

Specific Programme

ExcellentScience

ERC Share of publications from ERC funded projects which are among the top 1 % highly citedNumber of institutional policy and national/regional policy measures inspired by ERC funding

FET Publications in peer-reviewed high impact journalsPatent applications in Future and Emerging Technologies

MarieCurie

Cross-sector and cross-country circulation of researchers, including PhDcandidates

Infra-structure

Research infrastructures which are made accessible to all researchers in Europe and beyond through Union support

Source: Annex II Proposal for Horizon 2020

94

Impact Factors (Horizon 2020)

Specific Programme


EnablingIndustrial

Patent applications obtained in the different enabling and industrial technologies

Access toRiskFinance

Total investments mobilised via debt financing and Venture Capital investments

Innovation inSMEs

Share of participating SMEs introducing innovations new to the company or the market (covering the period of the project plus three years)

SocietalChallenges

Publications in peer-reviewed high impact journalsPatent applicationsNumber of Union pieces of legislation referring to activities supported in the area of the different Societal Challenges

Source: Annex II Proposal for Horizon 2020



95

The ‘Big Picture’Value Chain or Stakeholder Diagram

TRL9TRL8TRL7TRL6TRL5TRL4TRL3TRL2TRL1

Project

Lead Userfor ProjectResults

End Userfor ProjectResults

Inn

ovat

ion

Ch

ain

B1.3 Concept and approach Describe the positioning of the project e.g. where it is situated in the spectrum from idea to application’, or from ‘lab to market’. Refer to Technology Readiness Levels where relevant.

96


Source: Annex G (TRL) of the General Annexes of Horizon 2020

TRL Description

TRL9 Actual system proven in an operational environment

TRL8 System completed and qualified

TRL7 System prototype demonstrated in an operational environment

TRL6 Technology demonstrated in a relevant environment

TRL5 Technology validated in a relevant environment

TRL4 Technology validated in the laboratory

TRL3 Experimental Proof of Concept

TRL2 Technology concept formulated

TRL1 Basic Principles Observed



97

Value Chain: Biotechnology

NewDrug

FD

A/E

MA

Ap

proval

Ph

ase III: Effectiven

ess

Ph

ase II: Efficacy

Ph

ase I: Tolerab

ility/Toxicity

An

imal V

alidation

Develop

men

t

Iden

tify Target an

d C

omp

oun

dFDA (Federal Drugs Administration) (USA)EMA European Medicines Agency (EU)


Project

98

Value Chain: Photovoltaic System

PVSystem

Energy

Com

mission

ing

Integration

of Com

pon

ents

Inverter

Con

trolP

V A

rray

*

*

*

Mou

ntin

gW

iring

Assem

ble A

rray

PV

Mod

ules

Glass

Cells

Fram

e


Project



99

LargeSystems

Integrator

Value Chain (Wireless Sensor Network)

NetworkProvider

HigherLayerNetworkProvision

CompleteSystems

-Hardware-Software-User Apps

IntegratedSuppliers

-Subsystems-Modules-Routers-Gateways

TechnologySuppliers

-Sensors-Radio-Processors-Power

Technologies Systems Integrators Users

100

Industrial and Social Need Identified

Pathway for Development of New Standards

Source: Georg Hongler Secretary General, CEN IPTS Report No 35

Programming Participation of all interestsRequest

Business Planning + Drafting through planning and consensus

Use ExistingDocument(e.g. ISO)

Transferringto ISO

(Vienna Agreement)OR

Set-up NewTechnical Committee

OR

Availability and National Transportation

Validation through public enquiry and voting



101

Stakeholder Diagram (Physical Education)

School

PE Education

PE TeacherTraining

Universities

Students(School

Age)

PECurricul

umDesigners(National

/Local)

Ministryof

Health

Ministryof

Education

Ministryof

????

School Boards

ResearchProject

102

Stakeholder Diagram (Digital Humanities)

ScanScan

DigitalObjectDigitalObject

LocalRepositoryO

bje

ct

NationalRepository

InternationalRepository

Local UsersStudents

National UsersResearchers?

InternationalUsers

Researchers?

Definition of Standards

Definition of Standards

Semantic Web Semantic Web

TechnicalStandardsCommittee

TC 186

ResearchProject



103

Stakeholder Diagram (e.g. Migration)

Cultural Group

Migrant advocacy groups

Media

Museums

Government departments (Education, Justice, Health, Children)

Parliament

PublicInformation/education

ScientificEvidence +Indicators

Research on Inter-Cultural Communication

ScientificEvidence

104

Partners in Migration Project

Cultural Group


Media

Museums


Parliament




ScientificEvidenceResearch

Partners

Lead Users



105

From Output to Outcome

Outcomes(Short Term)

Outputs(End of Project)

PrototypesIT SystemSoftwareNew MaterialAnimal ModelNew StrainsMolecular CandidatesCell CultureMethodologyAlgorithm etc.

Lead User orLead Stakeholder

106

From Output to Outcome (Social Science)


Lead UserLead Stakeholder

Outcome(Short Term)

Report on MigrationIn Europe

Policy Researcher

Study on Migration Trends in EU

Data

Data

Policy Researcher

Policy Researcher

Scientific Evidenceto Support Policy

Indicators toMonitor Policy

Ideas for furtherResearch

FundingAgency

R&D Roadmap forMigration Research



107

Value Chain for Photonics

Materials and ProcessEquipment

Components ModulesService

ProvidersContent

p

LasersFibreFiltersLEDs

DetectorsConnectors

SwitchesMux/Demux

Optic

LCDsPDP

LED arraysBack Lights

ImagingTelecomsOptical

media headsSolar Cells

•ISP•Telecoms•Cable•Laser Processing•EnergyGeneration

•MedicalTreatment g

TelecomVoIPVideoTVeMaileCommerceSurveillancePicturesSensing

Source: Photonics: A UK Strategy for Success

SiliconGaAsInP

InGaNPolymerMEMSCrystals

Phosphors

ResearchProject

108

Partners for Photonics Research

Materials (GaAs)

Components(LEDs)

Modules(LED array)

Service(EnergySaving)

Energy

Company 1 Company 2 Company 3


Company 2

??????

ResearchPartner

Project



109

Photonics Project

Materials (GaAs)

Components(LEDs)

Modules(LED array)


Energy


Project


Project


Project

110

Identify the ‘Outputs’ – convert to Lead User ‘Outcomes’

Select partners who are ‘Lead Users’

Describe the Stakeholder Diagram or Value Chain

Procedure for Writing ‘Impact’

Ensure ‘Impact’ is written by the Lead Users

Identify the ‘Lead Users’

Define the ‘Big Picture’



111

Routes for Impact (Technology)

PatentsLicencesProtection

PatentsLicencesProtection

ScientificPublications


Further R&D

Further R&D

PublicPoliciesPublic

Policies

TechnicalStandardsTechnicalStandards

ImprovedFacilitiesImprovedFacilities

New AdviceNew

Advice

ProductsProducts

ServicesServices

BusinessModels

BusinessModels

Public Info

Public Info


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

112

Outputs, Outcomes and Impact


Outcomes(Short Term)

Impact(Long Term)

Outputs areknowledge, goods and services directly produced from a project

(publications, patents, licences, prototypes, draft standards, trained scientists etc.)

WP (Work Package)

Source: Court of Auditors Report (2007) Evaluation Framework Programme

Outcomes are the delayed result of the

users processing of the outputs.

Impacts are the long term socio-

economicand political changes the

public interventionbrings about.



113

From Output to Outcome (Basic Research)



Outcome(Short Term)

New Knowledge ScientificCommunity


Reports

New Ideas forResearch

ScientificCommunity

FundingAgency

PhD ThesesBooks/ Handbooks

R&D Roadmaps

114




Outcome(Short Term)

Instrument DataInstrument

Designer Calibration Curve

Engine Data

Results of Tests

Database

DesignEngineer

MedicalResearcher

Researcher

Performance Data

Screening Criteria

Portal



115




Outcome(Short Term)

Polymer Membrane

MedicalResearcher

Non-InflammatoryMesh

Fuel CellDesigner

DesalinationDesigner

?

Proton Conductor

Separator

?

Polymer Membrane

Polymer Membrane

Polymer Membrane

116

From Output to Outcome (Software)



Outcome(Short Term)

Software Programmer Algorithm, CodeObjects

Software

Software

Software

Integrator

Vendor

StandardsCommittee

Tool

Application (or App)

Validating theStandard



117


COURSE CONTENTS





Module 5



118

Role of the One Page Proposal

Discuss idea with Research Support Services

Help select appropriate evaluators

Attracting potential partners (e.g. Brokerage)(While being careful they are not competitors)

The One Page Proposal leads to the Abstract

Brainstorming

Project Officer

Partners/Competitors

Abstract

NCP (National Contact Point) PO (Project Officer)

Does idea fit into the call?Advisor/NCP

Used to decide on which projects funded !Panel Meeting

Get topic into next Call for ProposalsDelegate



119

Structure: One Page ProposalOfficial Number of the Proposal

Topic Number: e.g. 4.3.1

Title (Slogan) ACRONYM (Brand name)

Results ? + Who wants the results?(Impact)

How the work will be done (Science)

Who will do the work (Consortium)

How much it will cost and duration

it (5 Key Questions)Why we are doing it (5 Key Questions)

What is the Research Question?

Number

Topic/Grant

Title

Results

Phases

Consortium

Cost/Duration

Background

Objective

120

Official Number (if available)

Work Programme + Funding Scheme

Title of Proposal + ACRONYM

Structure of the ‘One Page Proposal’

Impact (Expected Results + Lead Users)

Phases of the Work

Organisations involved and their roles

Expected Cost+Duration

Background

Objective of the Proposal

How to Prepare

1

3

2

4

5

6

7

8

How

Su

mm

ary is Written

Convenience Food Enriched with Marine based Raw Materials (EnrichMar)

Coordinator, Matís: Dr. Kolbrún Sveinsdóttir

FP7-SME-2013: Research for the benefit of SMEs The aim of this project is to convert marine based low value by-products and underutilised raw materials into highly valuable products. The focus will be placed on ingredients such as powder of fish oil and seaweed extracts which may positively enhance positive health effects, salt reduction, flavour and stability of the products to meet market demand. The functional properties of the enriched products will be studied via dietary intervention. The aim is to strengthen the competiveness and increase market share of the companies involved and create business opportunities in national and European markets. Background to the project: Generally, seafood industries are largely placed far back in the value chain. The challenges facing the seafood industry is identifying added value processes for their raw materials. Commonly after processing, 40-50% of whole white fish can be utilised as edible fi sh. (FAO Corporate Document Repository, http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/T0219E/T0219E01.htm). The rest or 50 -60% are by-products of different lower or no values “waste”. Only a few natural food antioxidants are commercially available on the market and the use of synthetic antioxidants has declined due to consumer awareness and demand for natural protection. Rosemary extracts have been the most successful natural plant based antioxidants commercialized so far. Due to the strong market demand and very positive preliminary tests it is believed that seaweed food antioxidant extracts can be highly competitive on the market and find various uses in food. Recent process improvements have created new possibilities for the use of marine based ingredients in functional foods. Consumers tend to favour functional foods over supplementary pills according to Euromonitor International (2010) as means to prevent diseases. With increased knowledge about the effects of functional ingredients consumers increasingly choose foods that fit their specific health conditions. The market for these types of products is one of the fastest growing markets in the world. Expected Results, Lead Users and Exploitation/Dissemination Plan, Upscaled process of seaweed extract. Lead User would be Seaweed extract producer New product categories of enriched seafood, convenience, dairy and cereal products Lead User: SME´s food processors Information on stability and bioactivity of foods and ingredients Lead User would be SME food processors and food ingredients producers Verification of physiological effect of consuming enriched convenience food End users would be consumers Phases of Work: 1) Upscaling of the seaweed powders. 2) Product development of (oven ready) seafood dishes, dairy and cereal products with bioactive compounds; 3) A web-based concept testing among selected European consumers to measure consumer responses 4) Marketing strategy. Information about regulations and legislations in different markets will be gathered. 5) Physiological effect of consuming enriched convenience food will be tested. Consortium Matís, Iceland, VTT in Finland, TNO in the Netherlands, University of Milan, GK-Grímur kokkur Icelandic seafood producer, Marinox , BioActive Foods AS, BioActive Foods Europe BV, Finnish cereal producer Ruislandia/ Ruisvoima , Dutch dairy producer Expected Contribution €1.3 million Duration: 24months



121

Examples of Titles and Acronyms

Title ACRONYM

Social Platform on Research for Families and Family Policies

FAMILYPLATFORM

Gross Inequality Impacts GINI

Work Organisation and Restructuring in the Knowledge Society

WORKS

A Micro-Level Analysis of Violent Conflict MICROCON

Debates about Female Muslim Headscarves in Europe VEIL

Platform of Local Authorities and Cities Engaged in Sciences PLACES

Code of Conduct for Responsible Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies Research

NANOCODE

Science Teacher Education Advanced Methods S-TEAM

Learning, Teaching, Research and Policy in Inquiry-Based Science Education

Mind the Gap

122

ACRONYM: Must make sense e.g. Hydrocarbex Sensor

Title could be used in a sentence + self explanatory

The TITLE is usually written last

The title should be based on the impact

TITLE

Development of a Sensor to Measure Hydrocarbons in Water

Title= Slogan for the Project Acronym = Brand



123

The Objective of the Proposal

What is the Research Question?

The aim of this proposal is to develop a technical prototype of an infrared sensor that will measure hydrocarbons in water. The sensor will use a fibre-optic cable, coated with a polymer and the level of the hydrocarbons will be determined by measuring the changes in refractive index. The key research challenges will be: assessing the use of infrared to measure the level of hydrocarbon in water; identifying a range of polymers that could be used in the sensor and finally assessing the accuracy of the sensor.

This should be the last paragraph written !!

124

How do you plan to tell the ‘Lead Users’ about the results?

Who wants these results?(‘Lead Users’ or ‘Lead Stakeholder’)

Why do they (Lead User) want the results?

Questions to Assess ‘Impact’

What will come out of your project (‘Expected Results’)

What further development (steps) will be needed?



125

5 Key Questions (Panel Meeting)

Questions must be answered in the first 15 seconds of the proposal!PESTLE Analysis (next slide)

Educate the Evaluator with ‘Facts’ and ‘Figures’

Why bother? (what problem are you trying to solve?)

Is it a European priority? Could it be solved at National level?

Is the solution already available (product, service, transfer)?

Why now? (What would happen if we did not do this now?)

Why you? (Are you the best people to do this work?)

126

All above + Education and Demographics

Impact Analysis or Scenario Planning

Political, Economic, Social, Technology, Legal, Environmental

PESTLE*

STEEPLED

*Sometimes appears as: TELES, STEP, STEEP, PESTEL, PESTLE or LEPEST.

Above + Value based issuesSTEEPV

Other version of Analysis



127

5 Key Questions (ERC and B1 Excellence)

Questions must be answered in the first 15 seconds of the proposal!

Educate the Evaluator with ‘Facts’ and ‘Figures’

Why bother? (what new knowledge are you generating?)

Will this establish Europe as International leader?

Is the knowledge already available (state-of-the art)?

Why now? (Why was this not done before now?)

Why you? (Are you the best people to do this work?)

128

George Heilmeier’s Cathechism

Heilmeier's CatechismA set of questions credited to Heilmeier that anyone proposing a research project or product development effort should be able to answer.

What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely no jargon.How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?What's new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?Who cares?If you're successful, what difference will it make?What are the risks and the payoffs?How much will it cost?How long will it take?What are the midterm and final "exams" to check for success?

George Harry Heilmeier pioneering contributor to liquid crystal displays.



129

5 Questions (Example 1)

Solar Disinfection of Drinking Water (SODIS)

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), over 1 billion people around the world have no access to any kind of treated drinking water. Every year 1.6 million people, most of them young children, die of diseases such as cholera which are attributable to a lack of access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. Millions more are infected with water borne parasites. The United Nations Millennium Development Goals call for the proportion of people without access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation to be halved by 2015.Harnessing the power of the sun to disinfect water is nothing new; the technique was used in India 4000 years ago. In recent years solar water disinfection has undergone something of a revival, as its ease of use and low costs make it ideal for use in poor, developing countries. The only equipment used in this projects is a water bottle and a steady supply of sunlight. This work has been approved by the WHO. In this project research will be undertaken on the use of catalysts to speed up the process of disinfection and to provide the WHO with scientific data to support their guidelines.

Source: CORDIS Focus No 272 November 2006

130

5 Questions (Example 2)

Development of an Infrared Sensor to Measure Hydrocarbons in Water

In 1999 the European Commission published the ‘Water Framework Directive (COM 2000/60). Annex 1 of this legislation lists 11 parameters that must be continuously monitored to meet the legislation. One of these parameters is hydrocarbon. The sensors that are used today to monitor hydrocarbons in water are laboratory based, they require regular calibration and are operated by specialist personnel. The sensors cost over €3000 each and can measure to an accuracy of 2000 parts per billion (ppb). If the legislation is enforced it will cost water companies throughout Europe hundreds of missions of euros to monitor this one parameter.

The aim of this proposal is to develop a low cost infrared sensor that can monitor hydrocarbons to meet the legislation. The proposed sensor will be located in the water system and will provide continuous signals to a central control unit. The estimated cost of the sensor will be less than 50 euro per sensor and it will measure to an accuracy of 1000 ppb.



131

How the One Page Proposal is Prepared

Own Colleagues/Support Service

Presentation (15 minutes)

Audience

Own Colleagues/Support Service

Presentation (8 Slides) Audience

National Contact PointProject Officer

Potential Partners

OnePage

ProposalAudience

g y

Project Officer – to select evaluatorsEvaluators: selling the idea

Panel Meeting: Key Document

Proposal Abstract

Audience

132

Notes



133


COURSE CONTENTS


Module 6






134

Distribution of Effort in Proposal Writing

Horizon 2020 Proposals

Coordinator

Work PackageLeadersPartners (not WPleaders)Administration

Work PackageLeaders

Scientific Coordinator

Project Manager



135

Effort Needed to Write and Manage EU Projects

Project life Cycle Average time spent by Coordinator

(hours)

Average time spent by Workpackage

leaders (hours)

Writing the proposal 365 80

Negotiation of Grant Agreement

197 42

Project management(during the projects)

392 255

Ex-post audits 103 57

Total 1057 434

Source: 2011 Annual Monitoring Report (Page 20) (Deloitte 2011)

136

Profile ofCoordinator ?(Organisation)

How to Judge a Winning Proposal?

Number of previous projects coordinated?

Support services + Financial Administration?

Evaluator or Expert with EC ?

The Idea? Source of the Idea? (idea-funds? or fund – idea?)

Project Officer Opinion? Competing Proposal?

The Plan? Resources? Funding for Proposal Writing?

Skills Needed? Best Partners?

EC (European Commission)

Partners?



137

How to Prepare a Horizon 2020 Proposal

Bureaucrats


Panel(Political)

How

Pro

pos

als

are

Eva

luat

ed

How

Pro

pos

als

are

Pre

par

ed

One Page Proposal(Lobby Document)

4 Page Proposal Address Evaluator’s Questions

(Abstract + Excellence +Impact + Implementation)

Full Proposal(Fill in Forms A/B)

138

Writing: From the Call to the Deadline

-12 -11 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0

ConsortiumMeeting

Distribution of work

All Inputsto

Writer

PrepareFull Draft

PartnersWriting

Input to Writer

Full ProposalEdit

Proof ReadReviewRefinePolish

Core GroupMeeting

TheFourPage

Proposal

Call DeadlineWeeks

Summaryto NCP

EC (European Commission) NCP (National Contact Point)

SelectTopic

One PageProposal

ConfirmPartners

Meet NCP



139

Agenda for Consortium Meeting

Proposal Writing Team (Science + Management)Item 4

Agree Proposal Manager (compiling the proposal)

Refine Idea (Brain Storming)Item 2

How to address Evaluators Questions (B2-B1-B3)

Plan for Writing the Proposal (Template)Item 3

Prepare Proposal Review plan.Item 5

Agree the Aim of Project (One Page Proposal)Item 1

Agree Topic in the Work programme

140

Division of Work Template (Part A&B)

Job to be Done Person Responsible Deadline

PART A

A1 Summary Coordinator

A2 Partner Details All Partners

A3 Summary Cost Coordinator

PART B

1 Excellence

2 Impact

3 Implementation

Template on www.hyperion.ie/divisionofwork.doc



141

Division of Scientific Work

Work

Package

Title of Workpage Writer Contributors

WP1

WP2

WP3

WP4

WP5

WP6

WP7

WP8

Template on www.hyperion.ie/divisionofwork.doc

142

Reviewing and Refining the Proposal

Document Reviewed by: Name Responsible

Proposal Summary NCP Coordinator

Pre-screening (IAF) Consultant

Scientific Part (B1) Scientific Expert

Implementation (B3) Management Expert

Impact (B2) Lead User

Financial Part (A) Finance Department

Legal Issues Legal Expert

Edit/Proof Read Science Writer

IAF (Individual Assessment Forms)Template on www.hyperion.ie/proposalreviewers.htm



143

Proposal not relevant to Organisation’s direction (Approval)

Resources not available for proposed work (Approval by boss)

A partner may be in a competing proposal (Letter of Intent)

A partner may leave consortium (Letter of Intent)

Potential Problems during Proposal Writing

Confidentiality of Idea (Copyright Idea)

Budget does not match the work (Budget/work Ratio)

ERA (European Research Area)

Solution

144

No budget included/ Budget exceeds limit/ Number of partners

Unclear relationship between work packages

Proposal not edited. Proposal not proof read.

Does not address the text of the call

General or Vague idea

Common Mistakes in Proposals

Excellent Science – poor Consortium, Implementation, Impact

It appears that proposal written by people who never met



145


COURSE CONTENTS



Module 7





146

Scores Needed to Win Projects

Threshold

101112

13

14

15

Good Idea, Good ConsortiumConvincing Plan, Forms in order

14.5

Excellent Idea (+Selling to Evaluators)Best Partners, Excellent CoordinatorConvincing ImpactPlan and Administration Perfect

13.5

Role ofSupportOffice



147

Research Support Services Provided

Months -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 Deadline

Pre-Proposal Call for Proposals

Check Text of Draft ProgrammeContact ‘Core’ Partners

Analyse Potential CompetitionMeet Project Officer?

Meet NCPOpinion of experienced evaluators

NCP (National Contact Point)

148


Months -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 Deadline

Pre-proposal Call for Proposals

Funding for Proposal WritingReview One Page Proposal

Review 4 Page ProposalMeet with NCP

Check ConsortiumCheck Implementation

Check ImpactCheck Forms



149


Months -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 Deadline


Check ConsortiumCheck Implementation

Check Forms

150


Months -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 Deadline


CheckForms

CheckBudget



151

What was the key point you got from the Workshop?

Linkedin: Sean McCarthy Hyperion

152

Notes



153


COURSE CONTENTS



Annex 1



Rules: From Framework 7 to Horizon 2020

Where to find the ‘Best’ Partners

How to Write the ‘Implementation’ Plan


ANNEXES

154

p gRules of Participation / Grant Agreement

Politicians

EuropeanCommission

Researchers

gModel GrantAgreement *

*Separate Model Grants for:- Frontier Research (ERC)- Marie Curie Actions

EU Financial Regulation



155

Administration of H2020 Programmes

The Politicians

EuropeanCommission

Researchers

ERC

EIT

REA JTIs

A185

Externalisation

REA (Research Executive Agency)

156

Croatia member No 28 1st July 2013

Which Countries can Participate in H2020?

Details on http://cordis.europa.eu/inco2/src/participation.htm

Member States

List in General Annex of Horizon 2020Eligible ThirdCountries

WHO, CERN, EMBL …International Organisations

Countries that put money intoHorizon 2020

Associated Countries

Joint Research Centre (JRC) Ispra, Geel, Petten, Karlsruhe, Seville



157

Industrialised and Emerging Countries

Australia, Canada, New Zealand, USARepublic of Korea, Japan

IndustrialisedCountries

They can receive funding if:- their role is essential to the project- reciprocal arrangement in place

(e.g. Call 3+ Health is open to USA Research entities)

General Rule: Must have their own funding

(Note: Microsoft (German) is a German Partner)

China, India, Russia, BrazilHigh IncomeEmerging ?

158

Rules (Framework 7 versus Horizon 2020)

Framework 7Actual


Overheads Flat Rate (60%)Actual Rate

Flat Rate 25%

Funding Rates Research 75%Demonstration 50%Management 100%

Research 100%Innovation 70%*

Productive Hours Not Defined 1680 hours/annum(or agreed rate)

VAT Not Allowed Eligible if it cannot be claimed at home

Timesheets for people100% on project

Required Not Required (Only Declaration letter)

* 100% for non-profit research organisations



159


Framework 7Actual


Evaluation Criteria

ScienceImplementationImpact

ExcellenceImpactImplementation

Target for SMEs Cooperation 15% Pillar II,III 20%

Intellectual Property

Open Access (pilot) Open Access (more)

BRIC Countries Eligible for Funding Supply Own Funding?

JTI(Joint Technology

Initiatives)

All had different rules All same rules as Horizon 2020

160


Framework 7Actual


Interest on pre-financing

Must be recorded Not recorded

Extrapolation of Audit Findings

(Systematic Error)

Yes Not used for non-material errorsresearch 100%

Innovation 70%

CFS (Certificate of Financial Statement)

Needed EC Contribution >

€375,000

Needed EC Contribution >€325,000(1 cert at end only)

Role of Audit Fraud + Risk + Training

Fraud + Risk



161


Framework 7Actual


Guarantee Fund CooperationProgramme

All Programmes

Salary Bonus for EU projects

- €8000/year

ConsortiumAgreement

DESCA DESCA H2020

Grant Agreement Core+ Annex I,II, III, IV + special clauses

One document

Period of Audit “Up to 5 years after end of project”

Up to 2 years after last payment?

162

Notes



163


COURSE CONTENTS






Annex 2 Where to find the ‘Best’ Partners

How to Write the ‘Implementation’ Plan


ANNEXES

164

Member state of the European Union

Which Countries can Participate in H2020?

Details on http://cordis.europa.eu/inco2/src/participation.htm

Member States

Not a Member State (e.g. USA, Canada)Third Country

Developing and Emerging EconomiesMediterranean CountriesEastern Europe/Central Asian Countries

Eligible ThirdCountries

WHO, CERN, EMBL …International Organisations

Countries that make financial contribution to Horizon 2020 (International agreement)


Joint Research Centre (JRC) Ispra, Geel, Petten, Karlsruhe, Seville



165

Member States of the European Union (2013+)

Austria Estonia Italy Romania

Belgium Finland Latvia Slovakia

Bulgaria France Lithuania Slovenia

Croatia Germany Luxembourg Spain

Czech Republic

Greece Malta Sweden

Cyprus Hungary Poland The Netherlands

Denmark Ireland Portugal United Kingdom

166


Turkey

* European Economic Area Agreements** Bilateral Agreements

Liechtenstein *

Norway *

Iceland

Israel **

Switzerland **?????

Candidate States InternationalAgreements with EU

FYROM (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)

Serbia

Macedonia(FYROM)

Montenegro

Albania

Bosnia-Herzegovina Faroe Islands

Moldova



167

Institute for Transuranium Elements (ITU)

Institute for Energy (IE)

Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen(IPSC)

Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES)

Institute for Health and Consumer Protection (IHCP)

Institute for Reference Materials and Measurement (IRMM)

Joint Research Centre

Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS)

NB: JRC is part of the European Commission (DG JRC)

Five sites in Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands and SpainNB: JRC not considered to be from these Member States

JRC (Joint Research Centre) http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/index.cfm

168

Notes



169

International Organisation:Examples

World Health Organisation (WHO)

Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)

European University (Florence, Maastricht, Brugges)

International European Interest Organisations (Next slide)

170

ESA (European Space Agency) www.esa.int

ESO (European Southern Observatory) www.eso.org

ENO (European Northern Observatory) www.eno.org

EMBL (European Molecular Biology Laboratory)www.embl.org

ESRF (European Synchroton Radiation Facility)

CERN (European Organisation for Nuclear Research)

International European Interest Organisations

ILL (Laue-Langevin Instiute) www.ill.fr

Eureka www.eureka.be

www.eiroforum.org



171

Amsterdam Protocol on the Protection and Welfare of Animals

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

Horizon 2020 and EU International Agreements

Kyoto Protocol (1997)

UN Convention on Biological Diversity (1992)

Declaration of Helsinki on Human Rights and Biomedicine

Protocol on the Prohibition of Cloning of Human Beings (Paris 12/1/1998)

Universal Declaration of the Human Genome and Human Rights (UNESCO)

Millennium Development Goals (2000)

172

Eligible Third Countries

African, Pacific, Asia, Latin AmericaDeveloping Economies

Emerging Economies

Eastern Europeanand CentralAsian Countries(EECA)

South Africa

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia,Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova,Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan

MediterraneanPartner Countries

Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya,Morocco, Palestine administered areas,Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia

Source: General Annexes of Horizon 2020Complete list is in the General Annex of Horizon 2020



173

Horizon 2020 Funding for Third Countries

International Cooperation Partner Countries (ICPC)(a) Developing and Emerging Economies(b) Mediterranean Countries(c) Eastern European and Central Asian Countries (EECA)

Research Partner Pillar II and III

Research PartnerFET

Individual FellowshipsInnovative Training Networks

People

AC (Associated Country) SICA (Specific International Cooperation Actions)** not as partners * Countries with Science & Technology Agreements

Host in EU/AC/EIRO No nationality criterionERC

174

EU Scientific Co-operation Agreements

http://ec.europa.eu/research/iscp/index_en.cfm


IndustrialisedCountries*

BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China)Argentina, Chile, Mexico and South Africa

EmergingCountries(large and small)

Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia and UkraineJordan

European NeighbourhoodPolicy (ENP)

No 20 (under negotiation) Algeria



175

Participation of Industralised Countries


IndustrialisedCountries

They can receive funding if:- their role is essential to the project- participation specified in workprogramme

(e.g. Health is open to USA Research entities)

General Rule: Must have their own funding

(Note: Microsoft (German) is a German Partner)

Brazil, Russia, India, ChinaEmergingCountries

176

Marie Curie (RISE) Eligible Countries

27 Member StatesAssociated Countries

EU Member StatesAssociated Countries

Countries with anS&T Agreement

Eastern Europeanand CentralAsian Countries(EECA)

Argentina, Australia*, Brazil*, Canada*, Chile, Egypt, India*, Japan*, South Korea*, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand*, Russia*, South Africa, Tunisia, Ukraine, United States*, China*

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine

MediterraneanPartner Countries

(MCP)

Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya,Morocco, Palestine administered areas,Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia

Countries Covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy

* These countries cannot benefit from RISE subsistence contribution.



177

RISE (International Staff Exchange Scheme)The Marie Curie International Staff Exchange Scheme is a new action aimed at strengthening research partnerships through staff exchanges and networking activities between European research organisations and organisations from third countries with which the Community has an S&T agreement (or are in the process of negotiating one).This new action will provide support to research organisations to establish or reinforce long-term research co-operation through a coordinated joint programme of exchange of researcher staff for short periods. Requirements:The partnership must consist of at least 3 independent participants, of which two must be established in two different EU Member States/Associated Countries and one in a country with an S&T agreement or covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy ) The participating institutions may exchange researcher staff as well as technical or managerial staff for a duration of up to 12 months. There is no limit concerning the number of staff exchanged.Financial issues:

178

Involvement of Companies in Horizon 2020

High Research Intensive Sectors(Pharmaceuticals, IT, Aerospace)

y)

‘Middle Technology Sectors’(Materials, Machinery,

Services to Industry)

Less Research Intensive Sectors(Agro Industry, Textile, non-technical services)

Role in H2020

No Technology Sectors

In-houseR&D

Out-sourceR&D

LTechnology Provider

Lead Users of Results


End Users of ResultsNew Knowledge

New Knowledge



179

Involvement of Companies in Horizon 2020

High Research Intensive Sectors(Pharmaceuticals, IT, Aerospace)

y)

‘Middle Technology Sectors’(Materials, Machinery,

Services to Industry)

Less Research Intensive Sectors(Agro Industry, Textile, non-technical services)

Participation in H2020

No Technology Sectors

Pillar II and III(Innovative SMEs)

Marie Curie

No

No

In-houseR&D

Out-sourceR&D

* Except IRSES

180

Partners for Photonics Research

Materials (GaAs)

Components(LEDs)

Modules(LED array)


Energy

Company 1 Company 2 Company 3


Company 2

??????

ResearchPartner

Project



181

Partners in Migration Project

Cultural Group


Media

Museums


Parliament




ScientificEvidence

ScientificEvidence

ResearchPartners

LeadUsers

182

eLearning Application

‘Skills Matrix’

Example: Secure eLearning

Systems Integration

Network SoftwareDatabases Content Portal

Common Platforms e.g. Windows, Linux, Apple, etc.

Partner 1, 2

Partner 1,2,3,4

Partner 6,4 Partner 3,4 Partner 6,4,5 Partner 7,8,3 Partner 2,3,4

Partner 3,4,6

Integration of Different Expertise/Technologies



183

Criteria Used to Select Partners

Trust and Respect between partners

Resources (people, facilities)Capacity

Good personality – easy to work withProfessional

Willing to work in a teamTeam Player

Scientific Excellence (Reputation) Capability

Timely Delivery of documents, results…Organised

Key

Understanding the bureaucratic rulesSupport Services

184

Where to Find the ‘Best Partners’

EU R&D Associations/Networks

COST Actions Existing R&D Projects

New Member States, Third Countries

Journals, Conferences, Patent Database

AcademicR&D Networks


Strategic Partners

Best Scientists

Enterprises

Regulatory Bodies

Test Laboratories

Standards Groups

Evaluators, Advisory Groups, etc.‘Experts’



185


COURSE CONTENTS






Where to find the ‘Best’ Partners

Annex 3 How to Write the ‘Implementation’ Plan


ANNEXES

186

eLearning Application

‘Skills Matrix’

Example: Secure eLearning

Systems Integration

Network SoftwareDatabases Content Portal

Common Platforms e.g. Windows, Linux, Apple, etc.

Partner 1, 2

Partner 1,2,3,4

Partner 6,4 Partner 3,4 Partner 6,4,5 Partner 7,8,3 Partner 2,3,4

Partner 3,4,6

Integration of Different Expertise/Technologies



187

Work Breakdown Structure

Title

LeaderPartners

Title

LeaderPartners

Title

LeaderPartners

Integrating ActivitiesIntegrating ActivitiesNetworking activities ? Exchange of personnel?

Training courses?Workshops?

Studies?

Title

LeaderPartners

Title

LeaderPartners

Task 1

Task n

Task 1

Task n

Task 1

Task n

Task 1

Task n

Task 1

Task n

Some Project Officers expect a deliverable per task.

188

PERT CHARTWP1

Project ManagementWork package Leader: 1

Partners: All

WP6 Dissemination and Use PlanWork package Leader: 5

Partners: All

WP2Network + Database

Work package Leader: 3Partners: 1,6,4

WP3Portal Development

Work package Leader: 2Partners: 3,4

WP4Pilot Content

Work package Leader: 1Partners: 7,8,5,3

WP5 IntegrationWork package Leader: 3

Partners: 1,2,4

PERTProgrammeEvaluation andReviewTechnique

Template in www.hyperion.ie/templates.htm

5% of budget

2% of budget



189

Rules for the Work Plan

KEY: Manage by Workpackage NOT by Partner

Workpackage for Coordination and Exploitation/Dissemination

Identify Leader + partners (in order of priority)

AVOID: Everyone in every workpackage

CHECK: Floating Partners (partner no. 4 in example)

IDEAL: Lead one workpackage, be involved in 2 others. (No 5)

AVOID: Doing work in every workpackage (See partner 3)

AVOID: One partner per workpackage

190

GANTT CHARTTemplate in www.hyperion.ie/templates.htm

Named after Henry L. Gantt (1917)



191

Administration Cost of FP7 Project

Example: Small Project

Duration 3 Years

EU Contribution €3 million

Partners 9

CoordinatorAdministrationEffort

14 person months

Partners AdministrationEffort

5 person months per partner(8*5) = 40

Total AdministrationEffort

54 person months

Estimate % of total EU contribution

7%

Example: Large Project

Duration 4 Years

EU Contribution €12 million

Partners 20

CoordinatorAdministrationEffort

26 person months

Partners AdministrationEffort

6 person months per partner(6*19) = 40

Total AdministrationEffort

140 personmonths

Estimate % of total EU contribution

5%

Source: Peter Hartwich, European Commission (EARMA Conference 2011)

192

Deliverables (Brief description and month of delivery)

Description of Work (where appropriate, broken down into tasks), lead partner and role of participants

Work Package No Start date or starting event:Work Package Title

Participant NumberPerson-months per participant

Objectives

Table 3.1a Work Package Description



193

No.

(1)

Work Package TitlePersonmonths

LeadParticipant

ShortName

StartMonth

EndMonth

TOTAL PERSON MONTHS

Table 3.1b Work Package List

194

No.

(1)

Deliverables Name DisseminationLevel

Type DeliveryDate

WPNo.

LeadPartner

Table 3.1c List of Deliverables



195

MilestoneNumber

Milestone NameMeans of

Verification

* Measured in months from the start date

EstimatedDate

RelatedWork

Package (s)

Table 3.2a List of Milestones

196

Risk Description Proposed Mitigation Actions

WorkPackage(s)Involved

Table 3.2b Critical Risks



197

Consortium

Management Structure (Large Projects)

Organisation

General Assembly

Executive Board Management Support Group

Terminology based on DESCA www.desca-fp7.org

OrganisationOrganisation Organisation

198

Description of the Consortium Management

Scientific Coordinator Project Manager/Administrator

Scientific (or Project) Officer

European Commission

The ConsortiumSME(Small and Medium Sized Enterprises)

Academic +

ResearchCentres

PublicEnterprises

EnterprisesSMEs

+Large

InternationalOrganisations



199

How Horizon 2020 Projects are Managed

Coordinator( )

Project Manager/Administrator

(Staff)

*Special Clause 38. Special case when secondary and higher education establishments and public bodies are coordinator and there is an “Authorisation to Administer” given to a third party created controlled or affiliated to the coordinator.

One Organisation

Coordinator(Partner 1)

Project Manager/Administrator

(Partner 2)Two Partners

Coordinator(Partner 1)

Project Manager/Administrator (Third Party)

Third Party *

200

Distribution ofwork

Table 3.4a Summary of Staff Effort



201

3.3 Operational Capacity of Individual Partners*

WP No. Workpackage Title Role of Participants

* This is not a template – just an example

Name of OrganisationExpertise Relevant to the ProjectTable: Specific Responsibilities in the Project

Profile of Key PersonnelName: Relevant ExpertiseName: Relevant Expertise

202

END OF COURSE MATERIAL

This webpage has been designed to accompany the following:Training Course

How to Write a Competitive Proposal for Horizon 2020 www.hyperion.ie/h2020-proposalcourse.htm

Handbook

How to Write a Competitive Proposal for Horizon 2020 www.hyperion.ie/h2020-proposalhandbook.htm

Course participants are welcome to link to this webpage.

Module 1: Overview of Horizon 2020

Participant Portal http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/home.html

Official Documents on Horizon 2020

Horizon 2020 Website http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/European Commission Presentation of Horizon 2020 (Prezi)Horizon 2020 Online Magazine http://horizon-magazine.eu/Draft Work programmes (Link)Horizon 2020 Budget (Link)

How to Stay up-to-date

National R&D Offices in Brussels www.iglortd.orgEU R&D Associations www.hyperion.ie/euassociations.htmLinkedin Group 'Horizon 2020' led by EARTO (Link)Euractiv (General EU News service) www.euractiv.comCordis News (News from funded projects) http://cordis.europa.eu/news/en/home.htmlEuropa Website http://europa.eu (or Search Google europa.eu 'topic')Register on IPR Helpdesk http://www.iprhelpdesk.eu/user/registerResearch Europe www.researchresearch.com

Module 2: How to Lobby for Horizon 2020

Mapping + Lobbying for Horizon 2020

Page 1 of 3Horizon 2020 Proposal Websites

12/03/2014http://www.hyperion.ie/h2020-proposalwebsites.htm

Horizon 2020 Beginner's Website

The Technology Platforms

EIP (European Innovation Partnerships)

KET (Key Enabling Technologies)

Module 3: Research Priorities in Horizon 2020

EIT (European Institute for Innovation and Technology) www.hyperion.ie/eit.htmFET (Future and Emerging Technologies) www.hyperion.ie/fet.htmEuropean Research Council (ERC) http://erc.europa.eu/Public Private Partnerships www.hyperion.ie/ppp.htmJoint Programming www.hyperion.ie/jointprogramming.htmJoint Technology Initiatives www.hyperion.ie/jti.htmLead Market Initiatives www.hyperion.ie/lmi.htmPublic Procurement www.hyperion.ie/publicprocurement.htmSBIR (Small Business Innovation and Research) (USA) www.hyperion.ie/sbir.htm

Module 4: How Horizon 2020 Proposals are Evaluated

How Horizon 2020 Proposals are Evaluated

Module 5: How to Write the Impact of a Horizon 2020 Proposal

How to write the 'Impact' of the Proposal

Module 6: The One Page Proposal


Where to find facts and figures for the 5 Key Questions

Module 7: How to Streamline the Writing of a Horizon 2020 Proposal

How to Streamline the Writing of a Proposal

Module 8: Where to find the Best Partners

Where to find the best partners

Module 9: How to Write the Implementation Plan

How to write 'Implementation' Plan

Ethics and Gender Issues

Templates for Proposals and Projects

Module 10: The Legal and Financial Rules



Draft Rules of Participation http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0810:FIN:en:PDFSimplification in Horizon 2020 (fact sheet)

Limitation of Liability

This webpage has been designed to help researchers prepare their proposals for Horizon 2020.

Every effort has been made to ensure complete and accurate information concerning the material presented in this webpage. However ,Hyperion Ltd cannot be held legally responsible for any mistakes in printing or faulty instructions contained within the templates. The authors appreciate receiving notice of any errors or misprints.

There are no warranties, expressed or implied, including warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, made with respect to the materials or any information provided to the user herein. Neither the author nor publisher shall be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the use or inability to use the contents of this webpage.

