EIC SME Instrument Frequently Asked Questions for experts

participating in the Evaluation

[Version December 2017]

The document includes a list of frequently asked questions by the experts involved in the evaluation of the SME Instrument's proposals. Please consult this document before writing to EASME-SME-EXPERTS@ec.europa.eu.

1

Table of Contents Section 1 - Evaluation ............................................................................................................................. 4

1.1 – Management of the workload ............................................................................................ 4

A. How many cut-off dates are there every year? Which are the dates planned for 2018? ... 4

B. How many proposals may I receive during each cut-off? ..................................................... 4

C. I received 10 proposals in one day. Why? ............................................................................. 4

D. Do I have to confirm my availability for each cut-off? .......................................................... 5

E. When should I accept or decline a task?................................................................................ 5

F. When I decline a proposal, should I inform the SME Instrument team? ............................. 5

G. Do I receive a notification by e-mail each time I receive a proposal to evaluate? .............. 5

H. In how many days should I assess a proposal? ...................................................................... 5

I. Which are the documents I have to assess for a Phase 1 and a Phase 2 proposal? ............. 5

J. How many pages could an annex contain?............................................................................ 6

K. What shall I do if I receive a proposal which is not in English? ............................................. 6

L. How are proposals allocated to experts? .............................................................................. 6

1.2 – Scoring a proposal ................................................................................................................ 7

A. How do I score a proposal? .................................................................................................... 7

B. How detailed should my comments be for each sub-criterion? ........................................... 7

C. How is the proposal's final score calculated? ........................................................................ 7

D. How is the qualitative assessment scored? ........................................................................... 8

E. If the Impact criterion is below threshold, do I still evaluate the rest of the proposal? ..... 8

F. I have already submitted my IER, why was it reopened? ..................................................... 8

G. How do I assess the following aspects of a proposal? .......................................................... 9

H. The applicant has its headquarters outside the European Union or associated countries.

How do I assess this? .................................................................................................................... 10

I. Is it possible that I am assigned with a similar proposal in two different cut-off dates? .. 10

J. The proposal mentions the scores received in a previous evaluation. How should I

proceed? ........................................................................................................................................ 10

K. I made an error in one of my submitted IERs, how can I correct it? ................................... 10

L. May I contact directly an applicant/subcontractor/third party?........................................ 11

M. May I contact directly other experts or ask to see their evaluation? ............................. 11

2

N. When assessing a proposal do I rely only on my expertise or may I seek further

information (for example through the internet, specialised databases, etc.)? ......................... 11

O. I feel I am not specialised in the specific subject/innovation of the proposal, should I

decline the task? ........................................................................................................................... 11

P. The SME Instrument focuses on growth and jobs. How does this impact on my approach

to the evaluation? ......................................................................................................................... 12

Q. If a proposal is no longer in the Valley of Death, how should we consider this?............... 12

R. What is the "Seal of Excellence"? ........................................................................................ 12

1.3 – Subcontracting ................................................................................................................... 13

A. What is a subcontract? ......................................................................................................... 13

B. What could be a conflict of interest situation between an applicant and a subcontractor?

13

C. Are there budget limits (max/min) for unknown/known subcontractors? ....................... 13

D. What is the difference between subcontracts and contracts? ........................................... 13

E. What if one out of a several subcontractors involved is not adequately described? ........ 14

F. How do I deal with the best value for money principle in case of a usual provider? ........ 14

G. What is the difference between a subcontractor and a linked third party? ...................... 14

1.4 - Conflict of Interest .............................................................................................................. 15

A. Which is the correct definition of the Conflict of Interest?................................................. 15

B. Am I in a Conflict of interest's situation? ............................................................................. 15

C. What shall I do if I feel I am in a conflict of interest situation? .......................................... 16

Section 2 – Contracting and Payment .................................................................................................. 17

2.1 – Contract .................................................................................................................................... 17

A. How long will my contract last? ........................................................................................... 17

B. What happens if I exceed the threshold of the 30 days? .................................................... 17

C. How and when do I sign my contract? ................................................................................. 17

D. How many times could my contract be renewed? .............................................................. 17

E. Is it possible to indicate in the contract the name of my company instead of my name? 18

F. I have been approached by the EC as a possible evaluator for the SME instrument but I

still have not signed a contract. May I expect to be contacted for future cut-offs? .................. 18

2.2 – Payment ................................................................................................................................... 18

A. What is the reimbursement rate for the evaluation of the SME Instrument proposals? .. 18

B. How many times may I claim reimbursement for the half day remote briefing? .............. 18

C. When can I claim the reimbursement for the work done? ................................................. 19

D. Do I receive a notification when I have to submit my reimbursement claim? .................. 19

3

E. I assessed a number of proposals for Phase 1 and for Phase 2 during the same cut-off,

how should I claim the reimbursement for the work done? ...................................................... 19

F. Who is responsible for keeping track of the number of proposals I evaluated during each

cut-off and Phase? ........................................................................................................................ 19

G. May the reimbursement be paid directly on my company's account? .............................. 20

H. Which are the tax rules I should apply to the work done in the framework of the H2020

SME Instrument? .......................................................................................................................... 20

I. As self-employer may I request a VAT exemption certificate? ........................................... 20

J. The link I received to encode my legal and bank account details does not work, what shall

I do? ............................................................................................................................................... 20

K. How do I contact the SME Instrument team in case of need? ............................................ 20

4

Section 1 - Evaluation

1.1 – Management of the workload

A. How many cut-off dates are there every year? Which are the dates planned for 2018?

There are four cut-offs for Phase 1 and four cut-offs for Phase 2. The specific dates for both

Phases in 2018:

Phase 2 Phase 1

2018 10 January

14 March

23 May 10 October

08 February

03 May

05 September 07 November

B. How many proposals may I receive during each cut-off?

We cannot give an accurate estimate of the workload as it depends on the number of proposals

received for each cut-off (Phase 1 and Phase 2) and on the availability of all the evaluators

involved.

In past cut-offs, we received around 2000 Phase 1 proposals and 1300 Phase 2 proposals. We

expect similar figures in the near future. We are trying to increase the number of contracted

experts and therefore the average workload per expert is expected to decrease.

For payment purposes, the payment of the evaluation of one proposal is

For Phase 1: 90€ per proposal evaluated;

For Phase 2: 135€ per proposal evaluated.

C. I received 10 proposals in one day. Why?

It might happen that during the week of the cut-off date you are assigned a high number of

proposals in one single day. This only happens during cut-off weeks.

This situation is likely to continue only for a few days, until we eliminate our backlog. In any

case, payments will still be calculated based on the number of proposals evaluated by each

expert, at the rate defined above, in B.

Although we understand that this situation of high workload may not be ideal in some cases,

we would like you to remain aware that you still have one week to complete each report,

counting from the date of reception of each proposal.

5

Nevertheless, if you find that a continuously high workload would not suit you at a given

moment, please let us know, so that we may allocate proposals to different experts.

D. Do I have to confirm my availability for each cut-off?

Yes. Due to the high number of applications and the high number of experts participating in

the evaluation, good planning is the key to a swift and smooth assignment of proposals.

Shortly before each cut-off date you will receive a request to confirm and detail your

availability via an EU Survey. Please consider that if you confirm your availability we count

on your commitment to complete the workflow within the fixed deadlines. Therefore to ensure

a good organization of the process, kindly inform us about any change affecting your

availability.

E. When should I accept or decline a task?

You should accept or decline a task within 24 hours from the day of the assignment. You

were assigned a task because you confirmed your availability in the period. If you do not

accept a task within 24 hours, it will be reassigned to another expert.

Please consider the impact of declining a task, as we have to reassign it to another evaluator

and this creates delays. The best solution is always that you keep us informed of your

availability. If you do not feel in position to cope with the workload received, please inform

us as soon as possible. Declining a task due to your lack of availability will not harm your

position in future work allocation.

F. When I decline a proposal, should I inform the SME Instrument team?

No, you are not obliged to inform us as we receive an automatic notification. However, an e-

mail addressed to the Expert Management team EASME-SME-EXPERTS@ec.europa.eu

could be helpful to understand the reason for the decline, avoiding similar situations in the

future and speed-up the reallocation of the proposal.

G. Do I receive a notification by e-mail each time I receive a proposal to evaluate?

Yes. Each time that you have to perform an evaluation in the system, you receive a

notification by e-mail. The notification message includes a link to the Individual Evaluation

Report (IER). Within the evaluation platform, you will see all your tasks grouped under the

Dashboard.

H. In how many days should I assess a proposal?

When a proposal is assigned, you have a maximum of seven calendar days to complete the

remote evaluation. The system automatically generates this deadline.

I. Which are the documents I have to assess for a Phase 1 and a Phase 2 proposal?

For Phase 1 - proposal:

Part A: the administrative form;

Technical Annex Section 1-3: the description of the proposal with a limit of 10 pages;

6

Technical Annex Section 4-5: the members of the consortium;

Optional Annex 3: additional information on ethics.

For Phase 2 - proposal:

Part A: the administrative form;

Technical Annex Section 1-3: the description of the proposal with a limit of 30 pages;

Technical Annex Section 4-5: the members of the consortium

Optional Annex 3: additional information on ethics.

Phase 1 feasibility study: for Phase 2 proposals with previous Phase 1 funding

J. How many pages could an annex contain?

As indicated in the question I, the number of pages for the Section 1-3 is limited and any

additional pages are automatically watermarked to be disregarded.

Section 4-5 and the Optional Annex 3 have no page limit. However, applicants are invited to

submit documents which are reasonable, justifiable and acceptable in terms of content. It

might happen that some applicants try to circumvent the rule of the maximum pages for the

annex 1-3 by adding longer additional annexes. Same applies to cases where the proposal

includes hyperlinks in section 1-3 which are used to go over the page limits. When facing

these cases, please focus your reading on the information strictly linked to the content of the

proposal.

K. What shall I do if I receive a proposal which is not in English?

Your selection took into account your language skills. If you do not feel comfortable to work

in one of the languages initially indicated, please update your language skills in the Participant

Portal to reflect those languages in which you really are capable to work efficiently.

L. How are proposals allocated to experts?

Before the 2018 evaluations begin, you will be sent a task through the evaluation platform to

select a number of keywords which most closely correspond to your area(s) of expertise.

Expert-evaluators are requested to select 3 sub-keywords from the same list as applicants in

order to facilitate the matching of proposals. Choosing a keyword from the lower level will

also add the higher level 'main' keyword to the expert's profile. In the event that a match on

the lower level is not found, the higher level will be taken into account for matching.

For instance, selecting the words 'fishery', 'toxicology' and 'ocean engineering' from the lower

level will add the main keywords 'Engineering and Technology', 'Biotechnology' and

'Agriculture/Rural Development' to the expert's profile.

The tool for matching proposals will also take into account nationality (no more than one

expert of the same nationality as the applicant coordinator) and expert availability.

7

1.2 – Scoring a proposal

A. How do I score a proposal?

The IER includes a score for each evaluation sub-criterion using a scale from 0 to 10. One

decimal digit may be used, if experts wish to be more precise with their scoring. However the

scale of 0-10 should provide a sufficient scoring range.

The individual scores (from 0 to 10) you have given to each sub-criterion are automatically

converted to a scale from 0 to 5 in order to calculate the Criterion score per evaluator. After

that, the system determines the median score for each Criterion across all evaluators. The

overall score is obtained by the weighted sum of the three criteria median scores. To each

result obtained, a qualitative assessment is attributed.

B. How detailed should my comments be for each sub-criterion?

You must provide comments for each sub-criterion. The comments should cover the criterion

fully and include a clear, complete justification of the marks given, not just a repetition of

the sub criterion text. The completeness of the justifications provided ensures a high quality

standard for the evaluation of the proposals and allows us to easily justify the outcome

provided to the applicants in cases of redress.

During the quality checks following each evaluation, tasks will be reopened for those experts

who did not adequately justify their scores, with a request to provide supporting comments.

C. How is the proposal's final score calculated?

Grant proposals are evaluated by 4 independent experts, on the basis of the award criteria

‘impact’, ‘excellence’ and ‘quality and efficiency of the implementation’ (Annex H of the

H2020 Work Programme 2018-2020, Article 15 of the Horizon 2020 Rules for Participation

Regulation No 1290/2013).

Evaluation scores of up to 5 points are awarded for each main criterion, giving a total score of

maximum 15. The overall threshold, applying to the weighted sum of the three individual

scores, is 13 for both Phase 1 and Phase 2.

The overall score is established as follow:

- for each criterion, a median score (the median is the mean of the two "middle" scores,

e.g. median of scores 1; 2; 3; 4 is (2+3)/2 = 2.5) across the 4 evaluators is established;

- the final score of a proposal - "ESR Total score" - is then calculated by adding up the

weighted median scores of all three criteria.

ESR Total Score = Impact score x 1.5 + (Excellence + Implementation scores) x 0.75

- This score serves to decide if proposals are above or below threshold.

Below you can find an example of a score calculation.

8

D. How is the qualitative assessment scored?

The scale used to obtain the qualitative assessment, which is included in the Evaluation

Summary Report (ESR) sent to applicants, is the following:

Very Good to Excellent (4.5 – 5)

Good to Very Good (3.5 – 4.49)

Fair to Good (2.5 – 3.49)

Insufficient to Fair (1.5 – 2.49)

Insufficient (0-1.49)

E. If the Impact criterion is below threshold, do I still evaluate the rest of the proposal?

Yes. It is important that the proposal is assessed against all the evaluation criteria. Each

proposal, in fact, will be assessed by four experts and the final score will be determined on the

basis of the scores reported in each IER. The fact that an evaluator might consider the

proposal below the threshold of criterion ‘Impact’, does not necessarily prevent the final score

from being above threshold. Therefore evaluators are required to duly assess each proposal

against all evaluation criteria.

F. I have already submitted my IER, why was it reopened?

Your evaluation task might be reopened for several reasons, including:

Phase 1 and 2:

Comments in the IER When there is a discrepancy between the scores and the comments provided, we might ask

the evaluator to better justify their position;

Phase 2 only:

9

Evaluation of the subcontracting Subcontracting may be an essential part of the implementation of the project.

The assessment of the subcontracting is crucial because the best-value-for-money

principle for choosing subcontractors (or to choose subcontractors in the future) must be

respected and detailed. As successful proposals cannot be negotiated at grant preparation

level, this aspect must be evaluated with rigour by each expert and for all known and

unknown subcontractors.

Therefore, shortcomings in the explanation of subcontracting must be reflected in the

Quality & efficiency of implementation criterion (criterion 3) and the proposal has to be

scored below threshold of 4 in this criterion.

If the assessment of the subcontracting is not coherent and consistent, we will ask the

evaluator to clarify their position.

G. How do I assess the following aspects of a proposal?

Operational Capacity:

Phase 2 only You should assess whether, based on the information provided, the applicants and other

parties associated to the project possess the basic operational capacity to carry out the

proposed work. If you think that this is not the case, you should choose “No” in

Operational Capacity and score the proposal below the threshold of 4 in the “Quality &

efficiency of implementation” criterion. Please consider that if you choose "No" in

operational capacity, you should also justify your position in the box for comments and

complete the evaluation of the proposal against all the evaluation criteria.

Subcontracting:

Phase 2 only Under the SME Instrument, the subcontracting is not restricted to a limited part of the

action. The best value for money principle for choosing subcontractors must be

respected and detailed. The experts shall assess:

For known subcontracts: information provided on the award procedure, tasks to

be subcontracted and reasons why the subcontractor has been chosen and why the

price is appropriate, all ensuring the best value for money principle.

For unknown subcontracts: tasks to be subcontracted, the estimate budget and the

procedure to be followed to ensure the best value for money principle.

If the above is not met, the proposal should be scored below the threshold of 4 in the

criterion “Quality & efficiency of implementation”.

In summary, for Subcontracting:

If you are satisfied with the subcontracting, please choose “Yes” for each

subcontractor.

10

If you are not satisfied with the subcontracting, please choose “No or lack of

explanation” for each subcontractor and provide a short explanation that can

also justify scoring of criterion “Quality & efficiency of implementation” below

threshold (<4)

For further information on subcontracting, please see section 1.3 hereafter.

Eligible costs:

Some costs are not eligible for funding and, specifically, those related to commercialization

activities. For example, publicity costs, signature of contract costs, sales training costs, etc.

are not eligible for funding. Therefore, if these are included in the proposal, please write

relevant comments and score appropriately in criterion 3.

European dimension:

A proposal shows a European dimension if the proposed innovation has the potential to be

implemented/replicated/expanded and, therefore, have an impact across Europe (and even

beyond).

H. The applicant has its headquarters outside the European Union or Associated Countries.

How do I assess this?

Companies may, in some cases, comply with the eligibility criteria while at the same time

going against the spirit of the SME Instrument. For example a non-EU-based company may

apply through their EU-based affiliate. In such a situation, we would ask evaluators to pay

particular attention, as the main benefits of the funded project should be directed to the

growth and jobs of the EU-based affiliate and, generally speaking, to the growth of the EU-

economy and not to the growth of the non-EU based company.

I. Is it possible that I am assigned with a similar proposal in two different cut-off dates?

Yes. Under the SME Instrument Programme, applicants do not face any limitations in the

number of times they might decide to re-submit the same and/or a similar proposal. As long as

they have been notified of the results of their previous submission, they are allowed to submit

the same proposal in the next cut-off. Therefore, when you evaluate a resubmitted proposal,

please complete the evaluation and score the proposal on its own merits.

J. The proposal mentions the scores received in a previous evaluation. How should I

proceed?

Applicants are free to decide what to include in a proposal. It is up to the expert to evaluate

any information provided, specifically its credibility.

K. I made an error in one of my submitted IERs, how can I correct it?

11

As soon as you realize that you made an error in your IER, you should send an e-mail to the

Expert Management team EASME-SME-EXPERTS@ec.europa.eu and ask them to reopen

your task in the system. Please do this at the earliest possible moment.

L. May I contact directly an applicant/subcontractor/third party?

No. As stated in the expert contract, you are not allowed to contact any entity mentioned in

the proposal at any time. For detailed information, see the Annex 1 – Code of Conduct – of

your expert contract:

- Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality – Paragraph 2 – Point (iii): "The expert must not

communicate with applicants on any proposal: during the evaluation……, after the

evaluation."

- Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality – Paragraph 6 – Point (b): "the confidentiality

obligations are binding on the expert during performance of the Contract and for five

years from the date of the last payment made……"

M. May I contact directly other experts or ask to see their evaluation?

No. As stated in the expert contract you are not allowed to contact or share evaluations with

any other experts. For detailed information, see the Annex 1 – Code of Conduct - of the expert

contract:

- Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality – Paragraph 2 – Point (i): "the expert must not

discuss any proposal with others, including other experts……"

- Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality – Paragraph 6 – Point (b): "the confidentiality

obligations are binding on the expert during performance of the Contract and for five

years from the date of the last payment made……"

N. When assessing a proposal do I rely only on my expertise or may I seek further

information (for example through the internet, specialised databases, etc.)?

When analysing a proposal you should first evaluate the content of the proposal based on your

expertise, experience, knowledge. Besides this you are allowed to seek further information if

you think this is useful, provided that you respect the overall rules for confidentiality. For

more information, see the Annex 1 – Code of Conduct – of the expert contract:

Art 3 – Obligation of Confidentiality – Paragraph 5: "if the expert seek further

information……..she/he: must respect the overall rules for confidentiality….., must not

contact applicants, must not contact third parties….."

Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality – Paragraph 6 – Point (b): "the confidentiality

obligations are binding on the expert during performance of the Contract and for five

years from the date of the last payment made……"

O. I feel I am not specialised in the specific subject/innovation of the proposal, should I

decline the task?

12

The choice to accept or refuse a proposal is up to each evaluator. However, on several

occasions we have noticed that some evaluators declined assessing proposals because they felt

they were not experts on the specific technology described in the proposal.

Although in some instances this was a justifiable action, in some others we feel it may have

resulted from a slight misunderstanding of the evaluation process, which has eventually

generated unnecessary delays.

We have chosen groups of four experts to evaluate each proposal based on their business

knowledge of a sector through their choice of keywords (i.e. Energy, Transport, ICT, etc.).

Although an expert may be more accustomed to dealing with a particular technology within

those sectors (for example through research or product sales) it is the overall expertise and

business experience of the evaluator within the overall sector that we are trying to capture.

We are trying to assess the merits of the overall business proposition, rather than just of

the technology or innovation proposed.

As we said, we invite four experts to evaluate each proposal and we work to ensure that each

panel includes a variety of business experiences and at least one person with the knowledge of

the specific technology. Some experts will be more familiar with the technology, while others

will be more familiar with the management context or with production or sales. Some will

know the competitors well, while others will perhaps be more skilled in appraising the

financial viability of the proposal. Therefore, each expert needs to be seen as part of a team

evaluating new businesses.

We are convinced that an expert receiving a proposal slightly outside their comfort zone

may bring an even greater added value to the evaluation panel, enabling it to better assess its

potential.

P. The SME Instrument focuses on growth and jobs. How does this impact on my approach

to the evaluation?

The SME Instrument Programme is trying to find excellent innovative business opportunities,

not just excellent innovation research. We are looking for business propositions that will

allow the applicant SMEs to grow and create jobs. For this reason, the proposed business is at

the heart of the proposal and should be the driving subject of the evaluation. Experts should

look at the proposed market and how such a business proposition could operate in that market

and benefit the applicant SME, in terms of growth and jobs.

Q. If a proposal is no longer in the Valley of Death, how should we consider this?

The aim of the SME Instrument is to assist companies to overcome the lack of financial cash

flow between start up seed money and development capital/banks - often referred to as the

Valley of Death. It may still be in line with the SME Instrument's objectives to fund

proposals which are beyond the Valley of Death but before growth and sales are visible.

R. What is the "Seal of Excellence"?

The 'Seal of Excellence' is a quality label awarded to project proposals under the H2020

framework programme which have received a score above threshold but are not funded due to

13

lack of budget. A holder of the certificate can approach alternative funding sources (public or

private), i.e. national, regional, European or international and present the certificate as proof

of a high-quality project proposal.

For further information please see: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-15-

5802_en.htm

1.3 – Subcontracting

A. What is a subcontract?

Subcontracts are the purchase of goods, works or services that are identified as action tasks

(in Technical Annex 1-3 of the proposal) which are necessary to implement the action.

The beneficiaries must award the subcontracts ensuring the best value for money or, if

appropriate, the lowest price. In doing so, they must avoid any conflict of interests.

Examples of subcontracting could include: contracts for (parts of) the research or innovation

tasks which are clearly written in Technical Annex 1-3 of the proposal.

For more information see page 125 of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement

B. What could be a conflict of interest situation between an applicant and a

subcontractor?

Conflict of interest could exist for reasons of economic interest, political or national affinity,

family or emotional ties or any other shared interest which could influence the subcontractor's

selection/award procedure; influence the subcontractor's price (so that it does not correspond

to the market price) or affect the action's performance.

For more information and examples see page 143 Annotated Model Grant Agreement

C. Are there budget limits (max/min) for unknown/known subcontractors?

There are no maximum or minimum limits for subcontractors. Subcontracting is NOT

restricted to a limited part of the action in the SME Instrument.

However, the motivation or the capacity of the participant to carry out the action should be

very well justified. This is in line with the spirit of the SME Instrument that the applying

SME should have the capacity to carry out the activity. In addition, vigilance is used to

spot proposals charging very high amounts for services of subcontractors adding little value

to the development of the product or service proposed as well as where subcontractors have

the core part of the tasks.

D. What is the difference between subcontracts and contracts?

14

Subcontracts are directly linked to the implementation of specific tasks described in Annex

1 (Technical Annex Section 1-3). For example: Contract for (parts of) the research or

innovation tasks mentioned in Annex 1 which could include: demonstration; testing;

prototyping; piloting; scaling-up; miniaturisation; design; market replication. These should

be listed under "direct costs of subcontracting" in Part A (section 3 (C) - Budget breakdown).

Contracts do not directly cover the implementation of specific action tasks mentioned in

Annex 1, but they can provide support to them. For example: Contract for a computer;

contract for an audit certificate on the financial statements; contract for the translation of

documents; contract for the publication of brochures; contract for the creation of a website

that enables action’s beneficiaries to work together (if creating the website is not an action

task); contract for organisation of the rooms and catering for a meeting (if the organisation

of the meeting is not an action tasks mentioned as such in Annex 1); contract for hiring IPR

consultants/agents. These should be listed under "other direct costs" in Part A (section 3 (B)

- Budget breakdown. For more information see page 111 of the Annotated Model Grant

Agreement

E. What if one out of a several subcontractors involved is not adequately described?

The best value for money must be evaluated for each of the subcontractors. If not enough

information is provided, this shall be reflected in your assessment of Criterion 3- Quality &

Efficiency of Implementation.

If best value for money is not demonstrated, the overall score for Criterion 3 should be below

the threshold of 4. To achieve this, questions 1, and 2 relating to subcontracting under

Criterion 3 should be scored in such a way that the final score will be below 4 for the

Implementation Criterion.

Furthermore, in the section entitled "subcontracting", each subcontractor must be evaluated

and an explanation on why best value for money was not demonstrated should be provided.

F. How do I deal with the best value for money principle in case of a usual provider?

The fact that a subcontractor has been working with the applicant for years could be an

element to demonstrate best value for money. In any case, the motivation to choose a

subcontractor must be demonstrated and the best value for money must be explained in detail

(i.e. expertise, efficiency, price, etc.). In addition, any conflict of interests should be avoided.

G. What is the difference between a subcontractor and a linked third party?

A subcontractor has a contractual agreement with the beneficiary to implement

specific action tasks. The subcontractor charges a price which usually includes a profit.

The beneficiary must award contracts on the basis of best-value-for-money and absence of

conflict of interest.

A linked third party should be an affiliate to the beneficiary or have a legal link with

the beneficiary. The work carried out by the linked third party cannot be for a profit and

the linked third party must declare their own costs.

15

For more information see page 111 and 131 Annotated Model Grant Agreement

1.4 - Conflict of Interest

A. What is the correct definition of Conflict of Interest?

According to the expert contract - Annex 1 – Code of Conduct – Art 2 – Obligation of

impartiality, Point 2 – Definition of the conflict of interest:

"For a given proposal, a conflict of interest exists if an expert:

a. was involved in the preparation of the proposal;

b. stands to benefit directly or indirectly if the proposal is accepted;

c. has a close family or personal relationship with any person representing an applicant

legal entity;

d. is a director, trustee or partner or is in any way involved in the management of an

applicant legal entity;

e. is employed or contracted by one of the applicant legal entities or any named

subcontractors;

f. is a member of an Advisory Group set up by the Commission to advise on the

preparation of EU or Euratom Horizon 2020 Work Programmes, or Work

Programmes in an area related to the call for proposals in question;

g. is a National Contact Point, or is directly working for the Enterprise Europe

Network;

h. is a member of a Programme Committee.

In the following situation the contracting party (EASME) will decide whether a conflict of

interest exists, taking account of the objective circumstances, available information and

related risks, when an expert:

i. was employed by one of the applicant legal entities in the last three years;

ii. is involved in a contract or grant agreement, grant decision or membership of

management structures (e.g. member of management or advisory group etc.) or

research collaboration with an applicant legal entity or the fellow researcher, or had

been so in the last three years;

iii. is in any other situation that casts doubt on their ability to participate in the

evaluation of the proposal impartiality, or could reasonably appear to do so in the

eyes of an external third party.

B. Am I in a Conflict of interest situation?

Conflict of interest is a highly sensitive issue for any close-to-market programme such as the

SME Instrument. Despite the precise indications included in the code of conduct of the expert

contract, in the majority of the cases it is the evaluator who must determine whether a

conflict of interest applies to their specific situation. When facing these situations, please

also consider how they might be seen by third parties.

Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that, every time you do not feel comfortable in

assessing a proposal or a group of proposals, you inform and explain the reason to us. Below

16

we provide you with a few examples of possible scenarios you might encounter as an

evaluator for the SME Instrument Programme.

Scenario 1

I work for the Enterprise Europe Network in COUNTRY A but the Enterprise Europe

network is only my part time job. Recently I have been approached by the European

Commission to be part of the next experts' pool for the SME Instrument Programme. Am I in

a conflict of interest’s situation?

Yes. According to Art 2 (Point G) of the Annex 1 - Code of conduct - of the expert contract,

you are in a conflict of interest situation.

Scenario 2

I have been involved as a consultant / advisor / service provider / applicant preparing a

proposal under the SME Instrument. Can I still be involved as an evaluator for the SME

Instrument Programme?

No, if you are evaluating proposals for the SME Instrument. Please note that you may be

required to suspend your evaluator activities during the ongoing evaluation.

Scenario 3

I am an evaluator for the SME Instrument Programme and recently I have been asked to give

a presentation on the programme during an event organized in my country by an incubator of

start-ups. Am I in a conflict of interest’s situation?

No. There is no conflict of interest if you accept to participate in such events organized in

your region/country. A conflict of interest might occur only if you mention the

contents/details of a proposal you have evaluated.

Scenario 4

I would like to be evaluator and a coach for the SME Instrument. Would I be in a conflict of

interest's situation?

Yes. In this combination of roles we see a potential conflict of interest and we ask you to

make a choice and to not combine the roles.

C. What shall I do if I feel I am in a conflict of interest situation?

Whenever you do not feel comfortable in the assessment of a proposal or you feel that you

are in a situation that could cast doubts on your ability to evaluate with impartiality, you

should decline the task received and inform the SME Instrument team accordingly.

17

Section 2 – Contracting and Payment

2.1 – Contract

A. How long will my contract last?

You receive a contract specific to the SME Instrument that cannot exceed the maximum of

30 working days for remote evaluation of both Phase 1 and Phase 2 proposals. The contract

indicates the starting day but does not mention the ending date. Your contract ends when

the 30 days have been used up. It is in your interest and it is also your responsibility to

control that the threshold of the 30 days is not exceeded as any extra days may not be paid.

B. What happens if I exceed the threshold of the 30 days?

If you exceed the threshold of the 30 days worked, you may be not paid for the extra

evaluations.

C. How and when do I sign my contract?

The signature of the experts’ contract is done electronically in your expert profile of the

H2020 Participant Portal. The signature of the contracts for the experts is launched by the

Research Executive Agency (REA) at the same time for a high number of experts. You will

receive an email notification informing you that a contract has been sent to you by the

Commission for your signature. It will be accessible from the link provided in the email you

will receive or if you received such a notification, by logging-in to the Expert Area in the

Participant Portal. Prior to signing your contract, you will be presented with a screen inviting

you to make some declarations. Once you have filled in all the sections, you can proceed to

the signature itself. To sign the contract, you will simply have to enter your personal ECAS

password. You will then be directed back to the Participant Portal where you will see that the

signature status on the left-hand side has changed to signed and the ‘proceed to sign’ button

becomes inactive. An electronic seal will be displayed at the end of your contract once it has

been signed by both parties and you will be notified once it’s accessible to you in the

Participant Portal.

D. How many times could my contract be renewed?

There is no limit in the number of times that the contract can be renewed. However, as

indicated in the revision of the implementation of the rotation rules applicable to H2020

experts, the ceiling of maximum working days is increased to 200 days for any activity

under Horizon 2020 (regular evaluator, ethics evaluator, monitor, ethics monitor, and expert

group).

The target to renew 25% of the contracted experts every year is retained.

It is in your interest to monitor that the limit of the 200 days is not exceeded across the

H2020 framework programme, especially in cases when you are involved in the evaluation of

more than one programme.

18

E. Is it possible to indicate in the contract the name of my company instead of my name?

No. As indicated in the Art 1 of the Annex 1 – Code of Conduct – of the expert contract: "the

expert works independently, in a personal capacity and not on behalf of any organization".

Therefore, the contract can only be contracted under your name.

F. I have been approached by the EC as a possible evaluator for the SME instrument but I

still have not signed a contract. May I expect to be contacted for future cut-offs?

You could be contacted, because your details are in our approved pool of experts. This pool

is meant to be used throughout the year. Although you may not have been selected to work as

an expert in the first cut-offs, it does not mean that you will not be selected at a later point in

the year.

2.2 – Payment

A. What is the reimbursement rate for the evaluation of the SME Instrument proposals?

Since 1st January 2017, the reimbursement rate will be based on working unit. One working

unit represents 45€.

Phase 1

- One proposal evaluated counts for 2 working units

Phase 2

- One proposal evaluated counts for 3 working units

Under the SME Instrument Programme the payment will be always done separately for

Phase 1 and Phase 2.

Please consider that only when an IER is finalised can it be considered as a completed

proposal evaluation even if it has been reopened.

Below we provide you with two examples of reimbursement claims:

Phase 1: I assessed 10 proposals, 10x90€, I can claim reimbursement for 900€.

Phase 2: I assessed 9 proposals. I can claim reimbursement for 1215€ (9 x 135€).

B. How many times may I claim reimbursement for the half day remote briefing?

You may claim it only once per contract.

19

C. When can I claim the reimbursement for the work done?

The reimbursement procedure starts only when the whole evaluation process for each cut-

off date is completed (all the evaluations for each Phase have been finalised). Please

consider that after the cut-off date for each Phase, the evaluation may take around four or five

weeks to fully complete.

D. Do I receive a notification when I have to submit my reimbursement claim?

You will receive a notification from the system and we will send you an email stating when

you can submit your payment request. After the completion of each evaluation process, an

attendance session is created in the participant portal allowing you to submit your payment

request. Each attendance session has a start-date and an end-date. The attendance session

lasts 30 days. If you pass this limit you will not be able to submit your claim anymore. In

2017 a total of 8 sessions will be opened (four for Phase 1 and four for Phase 2). When

drafting your payment request, please remember that:

No payment can be processed if it has been validated more than 30 days after the closure of the attendance session;

No payment is processed when requested on an individual basis.

Once you have submitted your claim, it cannot be modified.

The payment in your bank account is processed by REA within the 30 days following the submission of your claim.

If you miss claiming your reimbursement within the designated period, we will be unable

to do ad-hoc payments. To solve the issue of any unclaimed evaluation work, we will open

two additional payment sessions per year, at times designated by us.

E. I assessed a number of proposals for Phase 1 and for Phase 2, how should I claim the

reimbursement for the work done?

Under the SME Instrument Programme the payment will be always done separately for

Phase 1 and Phase 2. You will receive a separate notification for the opening of two

attendance sessions. The latter depends on the speed with which the relevant evaluation

rounds are completed. Please do not aggregate your cost claims for Phase 1 and Phase 2.

Aggregated claims will not be processed and this will slow down the entire process.

F. Who is responsible for keeping track of the number of proposals I evaluated during

each cut-off and Phase?

It is your responsibility to monitor the number of evaluations performed in order not to

exceed the limit of the 30 days mentioned in your contract and the limit of 200 days fully

worked across the H2020 framework programme.

Our systems keep track of the SME Instrument evaluations performed by each expert during

each cut-off date and for each specific Phase. The SME Instrument Team is also monitoring

the allocations done in order to avoid situations of high workload to experts.

20

G. May the reimbursement be paid directly on my company's account?

Yes. You may choose to claim reimbursement on your company's account or on your

personal account. If you choose your company's account you need to request to add a new

bank account in your expert area in the H2020 Participant Portal. You can then choose the

other account when introducing your reimbursement file.

H. Which are the tax rules I should apply to the work done in the framework of the H2020

SME Instrument?

According to the Chapter 4 – Article 6 of the expert contract, no payment received by the

expert is exempted from national taxes and the expert is obliged to ensure compliance with

his/her applicable national legislation on taxes and social security law. As far as the VAT

obligation is concerned, the services provided to the Commission/REA are VAT exempted

(see article 151 (1) (a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC and article 51 of Council

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 282/2011 governing purchases made by the European

Commission and other EU institutions).

I. As self-employer may I request a VAT exemption certificate?

Yes. If you are self-employed and VAT taxable under your national law (the VAT number

has to be registered to the same person as in your expert contract), you might request a VAT

exemption certificate. If you wish to receive such a document please provide the REA

EVALUATION team by e-mail (REA-EVALUATION@ec.europa.eu) with the official

national VAT registration document proving your self-employed status and your VAT

number. Please specify also the number of the expert contract for which you would like to

have the certificate.

J. The link I received to encode my legal and bank account details does not work, what

shall I do?

The provision of the legal and banking account details is a prerequisite to receive an expert

contract through the electronic system on the Participant Portal. You may want to open the

link via a different browser like Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome. If it still does not work,

please seek assistance from the IT helpdesk by clicking on the 'Support' tab on the

Horizon2020 Participants' Portal.

K. How do I contact the SME Instrument team in case of need?

For further information not included in this document, please contact the SME Instrument

Team via the functional mail box EASME-SME-EXPERTS@ec.europa.eu.