Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
http://
Building links with partners and
FP7 Proposal Writing
Royal Holloway, University of London
6 November 2012
Inga Benner [email protected]
Why Participate?
• Internationalisation of research
• Benchmarking performance in European context
• Range of project types (multi-disciplinary, industrial)
• Networking opportunities – research and teaching
• Opening up new opportunities
• Mobility of staff and students
• Research capacity
• Pan-European university networks
EU
Re
se
arc
h
Who do I need in my consortium?
B
uild
ing y
our
co
nso
rtiu
m
• Depends on topic…
• Partners must match activities in proposal
• Appropriate balance of sectors – industry,
academia, civil society, user groups, etc
• Consideration of expected impact of project
• Commission may stipulate or offer advice on
types of partner or country involvement
• EU dimension/ added-value!
Who do I need in my consortium?
B
uild
ing y
our
co
nso
rtiu
m
• Have you worked with the partner institutions
before?
• Can you trust them?
• Make clear from the beginning what will be
expected from them
• Talk about the budget early on
What is expected of a co-ordinator?
• Administers EU financing, makes payments to partners
• Needs to keep record of how the financing is distributed
• Reviews reports to the Commission
• Monitors compliance of partners with grant agreement
• Is the only point of contact for the Commission
None of these tasks can be subcontracted!
C
o-o
rdin
ation
of F
P p
roje
cts
How do I find partners?
• Existing contacts
• FP6/ FP7 Projects
• http://cordis.europa.eu/fp6/projects.htm
• http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/projects_en.html
• EU/national conferences and project evaluation
• European Technology Platforms
http://cordis.europa.eu/technology-platforms
• Partner searches:
• UKRO can distribute partner profiles
• NCPs
• CORDIS
Note! Use partner searches with caution
Ch
oosin
g P
art
ne
rs
EU Conferences & Information Days
• Announced under ‘Events’ on UKRO information
services
• Usually held in Brussels, but also in UK locations
• Information days normally free; conferences
generally have a registration fee attached
• Always include networking and brokerage
opportunities; presentation of projects, proposal
ideas, etc.
Ch
oosin
g P
art
ne
rs
Eu
rop
ea
n T
ech
no
log
y P
latf
orm
s
Advanced Engineering Materials and Technologies – EuMaT
Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe – ACARE
Embedded Computing Systems – ARTEMIS
European Biofuels Technology Platform – Biofuels
European Construction Technology Platform – ECTP
European Nanoelectronics Initiative Advisory Council – ENIAC
European Rail Research Advisory Council – ERRAC
European Road Transport Research Advisory Council – ERTRAC
European Space Technology Platform – ESTP
European Steel Technology Platform – ESTEP
European Technology Platform for the Electricity Networks of the Future
European Technology Platform for Wind Energy – TPWind
European Technology Platform on Smart Systems Integration – EPoSS
European Technology Platform on Sustainable Mineral Resources
Farm Animal Breeding and Reproduction Technology Platform
Food for Life – Food
Forest based sector Technology Platform – Forestry
Future Manufacturing Technologies – MANUFUTURE
Future Textiles and Clothing – FTC
Global Animal Health – GAH
Industrial Safety ETP – IndustrialSafety
Integral Satcom Initiative – ISI
Mobile and Wireless Communications – eMobility
Nanotechnologies for Medical Applications – NanoMedicine
Networked and Electronic Media – NEM
Networked European Software and Services Initiative – NESSI
Photonics21 – Photonics Photovoltaics – Photovoltaics
Plants for the Future – Plants Robotics – EUROP
Sustainable Nuclear Technology Platform – SNETP
Sustainable Chemistry – SusChem
Water Supply and Sanitation Technology Platform – WSSTP
Waterborne ETP – Waterborne
Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants – ZEP
Agree
Common
Vision
Define
Strategic
Research
Agenda
Implement
Strategic
Agenda
Industry-led stakeholder forums on
Europe’s key research challenges
http://www.ukro.ac.uk
Getting started on proposal writing
The whole process
1. Speak to Research Support Office
2. Consult the Work Programmes
3. Identify a topic
4. Consider the requirements of the funding scheme
5. Check deadline in WP and Call Text
6. Identify activities
7. Identify partners
8. Meet, allocate activities, develop a short proposal
9. Understand the application forms and plan submission carefully
10. Write the full proposal…
G
ett
ing S
tart
ed
Who shapes the Work Programmes?
Advisory
Groups
Programme
Committee
Work
Programme
Agencies
European Technology
Platforms
(e.g. Food for Life)
Other Sources
(FP Projects, literature,
conferences...)
Other
Commission
Services
What is EU added-value?
B
uild
ing y
our
co
nso
rtiu
m
• Expertise from other EU countries
• Access to data from other countries
• Different cultural and social perspectives
• Research too costly for one country
• Avoid having one partner dominate research activities
and budget
• Appropriate geographic spread for that project
• Feed into EU-wide policy objectives and their
development
• Decrease fragmentation and duplication
http://www.ukro.ac.uk
Writing the proposal
Proposal writing
• Involve both researchers and research support
• Involve all partners
• Think about whose need is being addressed
• Think about the impact of the project
• Ensure that ALL aspects are addressed (science,
socio-economic factors, management, integration,
training, technology transfer, dissemination….)
• Use simple, clear language
• Pay attention to layout
P
ropo
sa
l W
riting
Before you start to write…
• What is the main objective of your proposal?
• How is your proposal unique?
• Whose problem does this solve?
• Why can’t other actors be expected to carry out this
work?
• Which consortium member will provide which skills?
• How will you measure your progress?
• How will you know if you have succeeded?
• What infrastructure and data sets will be needed?
F
P7
– G
oo
d P
ropo
sa
ls
Top tips – preparation
1. Clarify your own goals for participation
2. Read all Call documentation (ie, GfA and WP) - Also consider relevant EU policy documents
3. Fully appreciate the evaluation criteria
4. Discuss with and meet potential partners
5. Use appropriate partnership (including balance of budget and activities)
6. Set aside enough time
7. Research previous and current projects
8. Work with your institution
F
P7
- E
sse
ntials
Completing the Application Forms
F
P7
Fo
rms
Part A
• Basic info – call details, title, summary, partners,
outline budget…
• Standard forms
Part B
• Is a ‘template’ designed to highlight aspects that will
be assessed against the evaluation criteria..
• Core Proposal
• Leave nothing to the imagination
• Goes to ‘expert’ evaluators
Part B: Top tips
• Fully address the evaluation criteria
• Include well worked out plans
• Outline any ‘Plan B’ (risk analysis)
• Appropriate, flexible partnership
• Use tables and diagrams
• Get the right balance (budget, activities, etc)
P
art
B
Evaluation Criteria E
va
luation
crite
ria
Implementation S/T Quality
Excellence
Impact
3/5 3/5 3/5
Overall threshold = 10/15
NOTE – check Work Programme for specific criteria,
weightings and thresholds.
Also different for Marie Curie and ERC
Evaluation criteria applicable to Collaborative project proposals
S/T QUALITY “Scientific
and/or technological
excellence (relevant to the
topics addressed by the
call)”
IMPLEMENTATION
“Quality and efficiency of
the implementation and
the management”
IMPACT “Potential impact
through the development,
dissemination and use of
project results”
• Soundness of concept,
and quality of objectives
• Progress beyond the
state-of-the-art
• Quality and effectiveness
of the S/T methodology and
associated work plan
• Appropriateness of the
management structure and
procedures
• Quality and relevant
experience of the individual
• participants Quality of the
consortium as a whole
(including complementarity,
balance)
• Appropriateness of the
allocation and justification of
the resources to be
committed
(budget, staff, equipment)
• Contribution, at the
European
[and/or international] level,
to the expected impacts
listed in the work
programme under the
relevant topic/activity
• Appropriateness of
measures for the
dissemination and/or
exploitation of project
results, and management of
intellectual property.
Evaluation Criteria E
xa
mple
of To
pic
to
Pro
po
sa
l
• Relevance is considered in relation to the topic(s) in the
Work Programme open in a given call, and to the
objectives of the call
• Integrated into ‘S&T quality’ and ‘Impact’
• This must be addressed in the proposal!
• If it is only partially relevant – it will be reflected in the
scoring
• If it is not relevant – it will be ‘out of scope’ and rejected on
eligibility grounds before the evaluation
F
P7
Pro
po
sa
l P
repa
ration
Relevance
‘S&T Quality’
Scientific and/or technological excellence (relevant
to the topics addressed by the call)
• Soundness of concept itself
• Quality of objectives
• Acknowledgement of, and development beyond,
the ‘state-of-the-art’
• Methodology and Work Plan
• Quality of co-ordination
FP
7 P
ropo
sa
l P
repa
ration
‘Quality and efficiency of the implementation and the management’
• Management structure and procedures
• Quality, complementarity and balance of the consortium
• Matching of consortium to objectives
• Appropriateness of allocation of: • Staff resources
• Equipment
F
P7
Pro
po
sa
l P
repa
ration
Implementation
Evaluator comments: S&T Quality
“Lacks relevance to programme objectives”
“Scope of the proposed research is rather narrow”
“Proposal lacks focus”
“The work described is not particularly novel”
“Proposal is too broad”
“Given the extent of previous work and patenting in this area, doubts were raised as to whether a novel product could be developed”
F
P7
– Issu
es to
Ad
dre
ss
Evaluator comments: Implementation
“Role of the Co-ordinator is unclear”
“Interaction between work packages is not clearly
demonstrated”
“the standard and experience of partners is variable”
“the management structure is not sufficiently worked
out to guarantee the success of this project”
“unclear how partners will exchange information”
“the role of partner X is unclear”
“the costs are not linked to activities and not well
balanced”
“no formal planning of assessment of milestones”
F
P7
– Issu
es to
Ad
dre
ss
Comments on Impact
“Exploitation and dissemination plans
are not specific to the project”
“the exploitation plan could be better
developed”
“the European added value of the consortium
is limited”
“there is no indication of publication plans”
“Does not explicitly describe the importance
of solving the problem in a European context”
F
P7
– Issu
es to
Ad
dre
ss
Advice for Impact
• Does proposal explicitly address the Impact
section in Work Programme?
• Impact should be measured against other
developments in research area
• Include clear dissemination/ publication plans
• Does it have ‘EU added value’?
• Have plan to track the project’s impact post-
project
• Include plans on how IPR is to be exploited
F
P7
– G
oo
d P
ropo
sa
ls
http://www.ukro.ac.uk
Submitting your proposal
Application Process Overview F
P7
Su
bm
issio
n a
nd
Eva
luation
Call One/two stage
e-submission Eligibility
Check Individual
Evaluation
Panel
Review
Consensus Feedback
(ESR)
Commission
Ranking Report to
PC
Negotiation of
Proposals
FP7 Proposal Submission - PPSS
Participant Portal Submission
System
• New system piloted for some 2012 calls
• Used for most 2013 calls
• Exception: European Research Council
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
Proposal registration
• First proposal registration via the Call page in
the Participant Portal
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
Proposal registration
• Every applicant needs an ECAS account to
access the system
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
Proposal registration
• PIC (Participant Identification Code) now
mandatory for co-ordinators and partners!
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
Access to proposals from
Participant Portal
• New “My proposals tab” in Participant Portal
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
Access for partners
• Need to be invited by the co-ordinator via the
system
• Can see the entire proposal and can input,
change and validate some information in the
administrative forms
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
Drafting and submitting
• Part A forms are completed online in Acrobat
• Part B form is uploaded as PDF
• Resubmission possible until deadline
• PPSS carries out validation before submission
• Submitted proposal can be downloaded with
“digital stamp”.
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
Evaluators
• Selected from a wide pool from a database
• Selected per call
• Replace about ¼ in any given area annually
• Sign confidentiality and conflict of interest
declarations
• Names published after evaluation (though not at call or proposal level)
• Target at least 40% female
• Mix of geographical location and background
• To register: https://cordis.europa.eu/emmfp7
FP
7 O
ve
rvie
w
In short, the best proposals…
F
P7
- S
ucce
ss F
acto
rs
• Have an EU added value
• Clearly address the topic and meet objectives
• Push back the frontiers of S&T
• Consist of the right consortium for the project
• Highlight the impact of the project
• Are well budgeted
• Are concise and easy to read
The institutional aspect
• Use experience within the institution – ask
European Office for examples, speak to
successful colleagues
• Standard text / facts on the institutional track-
record?
• Experience of managing FP6 and FP7 projects?
• Use calls strategically – success-rates vary
greatly for different areas!
• Institutional approach to co-ordinating projects?
F
P7
– P
ropo
sa
l T
ips
Further Information UKRO Website: http://www.ukro.ac.uk
UKRO information services: http://ims.ukro.ac.uk
Use advanced search function on the UKRO Information Services!
ERC Website: http://erc.europa.eu
UK Marie Curie NCP: [email protected]
UK ERC NCP: [email protected]
Other NCPs: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ncp_en.html
Technology Platforms: http://cordis.europa.eu/technology-
platforms
Cordis FP7 pages: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html
EPSS Helpdesk: e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +32 2 233
3760
Lin
ks
Useful links
• Participant Portal:
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/porta
l/page/home
• ECAS: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/cas/
• Commission guidance:
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/porta
l/ShowDoc/Participant+Portal/portal_content/h
elp/sep_usermanual.pdf
• UKRO Portal Participation pages:
http://www.ukro.ac.uk/subscriber/fps/fp7/parti
cipation/Pages/ProposalPreparationandSubmi
ssion.aspx
FP
7 P
rop
osal S
ub
mis
sio
n P
PS
S
http://
Building links with partners and
FP7 Proposal Writing
Royal Holloway, University of London
6 November 2012
Inga Benner [email protected]