European Commission - DG INFSO Presentation on 6th Call KA1 Systems and Services for the Citizen W. Van Puymbroeck

European Commission - DG INFSO

Presentation on 6th CallPresentation on 6th Call

KA1 Systems and Services for the Citizen

W. Van Puymbroeck


OverviewOverview1. KA1 objectives, strategy and focus - recap

2. KA1 6th IST call

- Call for Proposals and eligibility

- Health - RTD and Best practice/Trials

- Persons with Special Needs - RTD

- Administrations - Best practice/Trials

3. Guide for proposers and evaluation criteria

4. Project portfolio - work in hand by cluster

5. Some evaluation feedback

6. Key messages


KEY Action 1:KEY Action 1:Systems and Services for the CitizenSystems and Services for the Citizen

Objectives:Objectives:• Foster the creation of the next generation of Foster the creation of the next generation of

user-friendly, dependable, cost-effective and user-friendly, dependable, cost-effective and interoperable general-interest servicesinteroperable general-interest services

• Usability and acceptability of new Usability and acceptability of new services…services…

improve competitiveness & meet user demands


Strategy & focusStrategy & focus::• InnovativeInnovative applicationsapplications

based on based on innovativeinnovative systemssystems

that have significant that have significant exploitationexploitation potential potential• Long-term & medium-term R&D projectsLong-term & medium-term R&D projects• Embrace “the ambient intelligent paradigm”Embrace “the ambient intelligent paradigm”

KEY Action 1:KEY Action 1:Systems and Services for the CitizenSystems and Services for the Citizen

- - progress state of the art integrationIST components


Call for ProposalsCall for Proposals published on 27th January published on 27th January

It defines:It defines: the Action Lines that are openthe Action Lines that are open

Reference to the Reference to the Workprogramme 2001Workprogramme 2001 the Type of Actions called forthe Type of Actions called for

See See Guide for ProposersGuide for Proposers the deadline and method of delivery of a proposalthe deadline and method of delivery of a proposal refers torefers to Manual of Proposal Evaluation ProceduresManual of Proposal Evaluation Procedures

Proposals have to be in Brussels Proposals have to be in Brussels

on 25 April 2001 before 17:00on 25 April 2001 before 17:00

Call for Proposers and EligibilityCall for Proposers and Eligibility


HealthHealthAction Line I.1.1 - Intelligent environment for citizen Action Line I.1.1 - Intelligent environment for citizen

centred health managementcentred health managementOriginsOrigins1999 (AL I.2.1) - “personal health appliances”1999 (AL I.2.1) - “personal health appliances”2000 (AL I.1.1) - “process of illness prevention - access to 2000 (AL I.1.1) - “process of illness prevention - access to

information”information”2001 - integration of the above2001 - integration of the above

FocusFocus• Health information and guidanceHealth information and guidance• Monitoring healthMonitoring health


HealthHealthAction Line I.1.2 - Intelligent collaborative environment supporting Action Line I.1.2 - Intelligent collaborative environment supporting continuity of carecontinuity of careOriginsOrigins1999 (AL I.2.2 + AL I. 2.3) 1999 (AL I.2.2 + AL I. 2.3) and 2000 (AL I.1.2 + AL: I.1.3) -and 2000 (AL I.1.2 + AL: I.1.3) - “patient-orientation” “patient-orientation”

- “health care professionals - - “health care professionals - orientation” orientation”

2001- integration of the above2001- integration of the above- “collaboration” between patient and health professional- “collaboration” between patient and health professional- continuity of care /telemedicine- continuity of care /telemedicine

FocusFocus•Care at the point of need Care at the point of need •Virtual and collaborative environmentVirtual and collaborative environment


HealthHealthAction Line I.1.3 - Best practice and trials in Action Line I.1.3 - Best practice and trials in eeHealthHealthOriginsOrigins2000 (AL I.1.4) - “regional healthcare networks”2000 (AL I.1.4) - “regional healthcare networks”2001 - links with 2001 - links with eeEurope 2002Europe 2002FocusFocus• promote the adoption of interoperable promote the adoption of interoperable eeHealth Health

solutionssolutions• demonstrate large-scale health information networkdemonstrate large-scale health information network


HealthHealthRecurring “themes”Recurring “themes”• privacy & security & safetyprivacy & security & safety• interactive & portable appliancesinteractive & portable appliances• interoperability interoperability • but also ...but also ...• advances in sensor technologyadvances in sensor technology• legal and ethical issueslegal and ethical issues• trust & confidencetrust & confidence• ......


Persons with Special NeedsPersons with Special NeedsAction Line I.2.1 - Action Line I.2.1 - Intelligent assistive systems Intelligent assistive systems for social inclusionfor social inclusionOriginsOrigins1999 (AL I.3.1) - systems and services for 1999 (AL I.3.1) - systems and services for independent livingindependent living2000 (AL I.2.1 + additional call) - compensate for 2000 (AL I.2.1 + additional call) - compensate for

functional impairmentsfunctional impairments2001- social inclusion - full participation of all2001- social inclusion - full participation of all including at including at

workworkFocusFocus• ““senior friendly” application systemssenior friendly” application systems• integration of disadvantaged and disabled persons in the workplace.integration of disadvantaged and disabled persons in the workplace.


Persons with Special NeedsPersons with Special Needs

Recurring “themes”Recurring “themes”• intelligent interfacesintelligent interfaces• personal devicespersonal devices• ““design for all”design for all”• home environmenthome environment• ......


AdministrationsAdministrationsAction Line 1.3.2 - Best practice and trials in Action Line 1.3.2 - Best practice and trials in

administrative systemsadministrative systemsOriginsOrigins1994 - 1999 FP IV - successful TAP projects 1994 - 1999 FP IV - successful TAP projects

related to administrations related to administrations Focus Focus • uptake by early adoptersuptake by early adopters• upgrade existing systemsupgrade existing systems


A proposal has 3 parts:A proposal has 3 parts: Part A: Administrative, budgetary information (Forms A0-A4)Part A: Administrative, budgetary information (Forms A0-A4) Part B: Description of contribution to scientific/technical Part B: Description of contribution to scientific/technical

objectives and workplanobjectives and workplan Part C: Description of EC policies, Economic development, Part C: Description of EC policies, Economic development,

management and participantsmanagement and participants There are 5 blocks of Evaluation CriteriaThere are 5 blocks of Evaluation Criteria::

Scientific/technological quality and innovationScientific/technological quality and innovation Community added value and contribution to EC policiesCommunity added value and contribution to EC policies Contribution to Community social objectivesContribution to Community social objectives Economic development and S&T prospectsEconomic development and S&T prospects Resources, Partnership and managementResources, Partnership and management

Guide for Proposers - Evaluation Guide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaCriteria



Guide to proposers has 2 parts:

Part 1: common sections

– 1. Fp5 - general presentation - fp5 common

– 2. Ist programme presentation - ist programme specific

– 3. Rules of participation - fp5 common


ACTION TYPE TITLE PART

RTD, Demonstration, andcombined RTD/Demonstrationprojects

Fixed deadline proposals - for RTD 2A

Take-up (assessment, bestpractice, trials)

Fixed deadline proposals - for Take-up Actions 2B

Accompanying Measures,Concerted Actions andThematic Networks

Fixed deadline proposals - for Support Measures

OR

2C

Continuous Submission Scheme - for SupportMeasures

2E

FET Open Actions (short andfull proposals)

Continuous Submission Scheme - for FET Open 2D

Grants (conferences, seminars,exhibitions and workshops)

Applications for Grants 2F

PART PART 2: Six versions (yes 6!)2: Six versions (yes 6!)


Guide for Proposers -Evaluation Guide for Proposers -Evaluation CriteriaCriteriaPart B of Part B of

ProposalProposalB1 Title pageB2 Content listB3 ObjectivesB4 Contribution to programme Key Action objectivesB5 InnovationB6 Project Workplan

Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Criteria 11

Scientific Technological Scientific Technological quality and innovationquality and innovation

(incl. Workpackage list, deliverables list, workpackage description)

For RTD For RTD

proposals proposals

this part this part

needs to be needs to be

anonymousanonymous



Part C of ProposalPart C of Proposal

C1 Title pageC2 Content listC3 Community added value

and contribution to EC policiesC4 Contribution to Community social objectives

Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Criteria 22

Community added value Community added value and contribution to EC and contribution to EC

policiespolicies

Evaluation Criteria 3Evaluation Criteria 3Contribution to Community social Contribution to Community social

objectivesobjectives



Part C of ProposalPart C of Proposal

C5 Project managementC6 Description of the consortiumC7 Description of the participantsC8 Economic development and

scientific and technological prospects

Evaluation Criteria 4Evaluation Criteria 4Economic development and S&T Economic development and S&T

prospectsprospects

Evaluation Criteria 5Evaluation Criteria 5Resources, partnership and Resources, partnership and

managementmanagement


Criteria Weight (1) Threshold (2)

Scientific/Technological Qualityand innovation 4 >= 3Community Added Valueand contribution to EU policy 1 >= 2Contribution to Comm. Social objectives 1 -Economic Dev; S&T prospects(range of applications, exploitation, strategic impact, dissemination) 2 >= 3Resources, Partnership, Management 2 >= 2

1) Weight on a scale of 10 (sum 10)2) Threshold with respect to score 0-5

Guide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaGuide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaFor RTD


Guide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaGuide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaEvaluation criterion 1:

Scientific/technological quality and innovation (for RTD)

• Quality

• Innovation and risk

• AdequacyEvaluation criterion 2:

Community added value and contribution to EC policies (for RTD)

• European dimension of the problem

• European added value

• EU policy


Guide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaGuide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaEvaluation criterion 3:

Contribution to community social objectives (for RTD)

• Quality of life and health and safety

• Employment

• Preserving and/or enhancing the environmentEvaluation criterion 4:

Economic development and S & T prospects (for RTD)

• Usefulness and range of applications, exploitations plans

• Strategic impact

• Dissemination strategies


Guide for Proposers - Evaluation CriteriaGuide for Proposers - Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation criterion 5:

Management and resources (for RTD)Quality of management and project approachQuality of partnership, involvement of users and

other actorsAppropriateness of resources

• Only RTD i.E. Research, demonstration and combined research and demonstration projects

• When the contract has– A cost of more than 250 000 euros for the first 12 month period of the

project, the audit certificate to be provided with first interim cost statement

– A total project cost exceeding 250 000 euros for the final consolidated cost statement, the audit certificate to be provided together with the final consolidated cost statement, also for those that have provided audit certificates with their first interim cost statement

• Eligible costs

– Community financial contribution shall not exceed 4000 euros per audit certificate

Guide for Proposers:Guide for Proposers:Audit CertificatesAudit Certificates NEW

!


Rules for ParticipationRules for Participation• Normally (RTD): - at least 2 EU partners

- or 1 EU + 1 associated state

• Under normal funding conditions/obligations– EU (+JRC) - participants from an associated country

• Self financing - conform with community interests– Non-associated european and mediterranean partner countries– Countries with S&T agreement– International organisations

• Self financing - conform with community interest& substantial added value for programme– Other countries

• Accompanying measures and most take-up actions: – 1 contractor (EU or associated state) possible


Rules for Participation:associated Rules for Participation:associated StatesStates• EEA:

Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway

• EU candidate member states: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Rep, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia

Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia

• Other: Israel

• Not yet (20.02.2001) ratifiedMalta, Switzerland

Before association agreement is ratifiedparticipation is possible on self-financing basis

Project porfolioProject porfolio: Health - 3 Clusters: Health - 3 Clusters

Intelligent Systems for the Patient

Intelligent Systems for the Citizen

Intelligent Systems for Healthcare Professionals

ADICOLBEPROBODY LIFECORASHEALTHSATH-LIFEMEDITRAVPROEHTELPICNICSPIRITWEIGHT-INFO

@HOMEAMONCHARMHEALTHMATETOPCAREVEPSY UPDATEDCHRONICCHSDAPHNED-LABEDISCIMEPI-MEDICSE-REMEDYINTERPRETM2DM

AMITDOCMEMMITTUGMOBI-DEVPARREHARESHENSMARTIESTEMNETTEAM HOSTELELOGOSUSBONEIS4ALLJUSTMI3TELE-PLANPHARMATELEMEDICARETOSCAC-CAREIERAPSITREATADEQUATEDYNCTSCREENWARD-IN-HAND

*

*


Health Sample ProjectHealth Sample ProjectAMONIntelligent (diagnosis) and communicating (with telemedecine center) watch for citizens at risk (with cardiovascular problems, diabetes, asthma, epilepsy) and athletes.

PartnersTARDIRAN SPECTRALINK LTD. - IL

MDIRECT LTD - ILMOON COMMUNICATION - UK

AURELIA MICROELETTRONIKA - ITSWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - CH

ART OF TECHNOLOGY - CHASSISTANCE PUBLIQYE HOPITAUX DE PARIS SAMU -

FR

Project porfolioProject porfolio: Persons with Special : Persons with Special Needs - 2 ClustersNeeds - 2 Clusters

Intelligent Assistive Systems

Intelligent Systems for Independent Living

BLUEEARENORASIFASTYMEDIATEOPTIVIPREHAROBSENIORTECH21

CONFIDENTDOC@HOMEGRABIRISMAPSMEDICATEPLAY2SAIDTELECAREVISICASTWISDOMWWAAC

**

Persons with Special Needs Sample ProjectsPersons with Special Needs Sample ProjectsVisiCAST•Development of realistic virtual humans (avatars) generating and recognizing

European deaf sign languages •Building applications for Television, Multimedia and the Web

PartnersINDEPENDENT TELEVISION COMMISSION

STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY - UKINSTITUT NATIONAL DES TELECOMMUNICATIONS - FR

INSTITUT FUER RUNDFUNK TECHNIK INFORMATIONS - DESTICHTING INSTITUT VOOR DOVEN - NL

TELEVIRTUAL LTD. - UKUNIVERSITEIT HAMBURG - DE

UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA - UKROYAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR DEAF PEOPLE - UK

THE POST OFFICE - UK


Project porfolioProject porfolio: : Administrations - 2 ClustersAdministrations - 2 Clusters

E-Democracy

Smart GovernmentAIDAEMPLOYEUSLANDFASMESAMPLETRIDENT

AGORA 2000CYBERVOTEDEMOSE-POLLEURO-CITIWEBOCRACY

**


Administrations Sample ProjectsAdministrations Sample Projects

TRIDENTIntelligent system transforming aero-stereographic images into remotely accessible 3D representation of selected sample urban areas for improving. Urban development planning, urban monitoring, telecom services etc.

To be tested in Madrid, Helsinkiand Rome


Some Evaluation FeedbackSome Evaluation Feedback• Evaluators consider all aspects of the proposal and have

different backgrounds• experts in IST, knowledgeable in application area, understand

business issues

• Proposers have to make convincing case of innovation and present very clear objectives

• Proposal has to be realistic and “exciting” at the same time

• Make the case for Community funding• i.e. both European level and need for public money


Some Evaluation FeedbackSome Evaluation Feedback

• The proposal may not have a weak point • thresholds

• each evaluation criteria discussed on its own merits

• Avoid easy criticism• ask colleagues to critique early versions

• Proposals which are “incontournable” have always been funded


Some Evaluation FeedbackSome Evaluation Feedback Call 3 Evaluation resultsCall 3 Evaluation results

Area Received Ranked Selected Reserve

Best practice inhealthcare (I.1.4)

21 5 4 1

Health (I.1.1, I.1.2,I.1.3)

98 19 18 1

Intelligentassistive systems(I.2.1)

32 8 7 1

Systems andservices forindependentliving (I.3.1)

42 13 11 2

Total 193 45 40 5


Key Messages Key Messages

• Innovation

• ‘Users’ include public & private organisations

• Exploitation and strong industrial participation

• Long-term & medium-term R&D projects


Key Messages Key Messages • Attract proposals with critical mass, strategic impact and

real economic value e.g.: – proposals of 1.5 - 2.0 Meuro EU funding

• Attract consortia that are manageable and where all partners have a clear role and a significant task in contribution, e.g.– Consortia of not more than 8 partners

• In order to avoid cost on your and our side, only high quality proposals should be submitted, e.g.– Over subscription not more than a factor of 5 (ideally 3)

Documents

European Commission - DG INFSO Presentation on 6th Call KA1 Systems and Services for the Citizen W. Van Puymbroeck