Participation & Dissemination Rules for the 6th Framework Programme 2002-2006 (EC)

RTD-A.3 Legal Unit - Participation rules for FP 2002-2006 21/04/23 1 Not legally binding

Participation & DisseminationRules for

the 6th Framework Programme2002-2006

(EC)

Jean-David MALODG RTD - Unit A3


Legal Framework

EC TREATY

FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

SPECIFIC PROGRAMS

PARTICIPATION AND

DISSEMINATION RULES

CONTRACTS

Other relevant EC Regulations:

e.g. EC Financial Regulations

(Budgetary Law)

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS


General issues

Final Adoption by the Council (November 2002)

Development of Model Contracts and work programmes + Calls for proposals (December 2002)

Publication of Calls : 17 December 2002


General IssuesDrafted with the aim of

Simplification: no implementing regulations; less than 10 model-contracts (currently 33)

Flexibility: the work programme may adjust rules to RTD activities’/instruments’ specificity

Autonomy for participants: within the framework of the rules, organisation of relations within the consortium is a matter for participants themselves


Core contractstandard text (completed with project data)

Annex Ithe “project” (technical tasks - work to be carried out)

Annex IIgeneral conditions (standard, applicable to every instrument)

Annex IIIinstrument specific provisions (variable per instrument)

Contract Structure


Instruments

New Networks of excellence, Integrated projects, Integrated initiatives infrastructures, Collective research projects (Specific research projects for SMEs), Article 169

Traditional Specific targeted projects, Co-operative research projects (Specific research projects for SMEs), Actions to promote and develop human resources and mobility (Some are new), Co-ordination actions, Specific support actions

BUT RULES APPLIES TO ALL


Principles guiding their design

Simplification and streamlining– to minimise the overheads for all concerned – to speed up procedures, especially time-to-contract

Increased legal and financial security– to avoid weaknesses of FP5 instruments

Flexibility and adaptability– to enable instruments to adapt to changing

circumstances, both in science and partnership Increased management autonomy

– to eliminate unnecessary micromanagement While preserving public accountability and

protecting interests of the Community


Participation

Who can participate?

New Every legal entity that contributes to the project (incl. Project managers)

New Associated candidate countries = Member States

New International European interest organisations = Member States


Participation

Minimum number

New 3 from MS or AS, with 2 from MS or Ass. Cand. Countries for all the instruments

1 (MS or AS or Third Country or International organisation) possible for fellowships and specific support actions

Flexibility : Minimum number can be increased

by work-programmes


ParticipationOther countries and other International organisations

INTEGRATING PARTParticipation for allFinancing for INCO countriesFinancing for others if essential to carry out the project

OTHER PARTSParticipation for all those with co-operation agreement

under its conditions; funding if essential.

Participation for the others in activities if necessary to carry out the project; funding if essential.


PARTICIPATION/FINANCINGPARTICIPATION AND FINANCING POSSIBILITIES BY COUNTRY OF ESTABLISHMENT OF PARTICIPANT

Participant’s country of establishment Participation Financing

European Union Member States, JRC Rightfully Rightfully

Associated Candidate Countries Rightfully Rightfully

Other Associated Countries Rightfully Rightfully

International organisations of Europeaninterest

Rightfully Rightfully

Russia, New Independent States,Mediterranean Countries, Developingcountries (with or without a co-operationagreement)

Rightfully over and abovethe minimum threshold

Within the limits of the budget available forinternational co-operation activities in thecontext the thematic priorities

Third countries having a co-operationagreement

Rightfully over and abovethe minimum threshold

If Community contribution is necessary andforeseen by the Work Programme

Other third countries If participation is foreseenor if it is necessary forcarrying out the project

If Community contribution is foreseen or if it isessential for carrying out the project

Other international organisations Rightfully over and abovethe minimum threshold

If Community contribution is foreseen in thework programme or if it is essential forcarrying out the project


EvaluationCore criteria & Criteria for new instruments

To be specified and complemented in work programmes according to instrument and activity

New Additional criteriaSynergies with education, role of women in research,

societal impact

Not compulsory

Exclusion criteriaViolation of fundamental ethical principles

New Financial irregularities (see EC Financial Regulations)


Evaluation

New Two-stage evaluation procedureIf specified in the call for proposals

New Evaluation on a non-anonymous basisUnless otherwise specified in call for proposal

New Manuals on evaluation and on negotiation and selection procedures


Key issues in the evaluation of IPs

Relevance to the objectives of the programme (S&T, S-E, policy objectives of WP)

S&T excellence (focus, progress beyond state-of-art, S&T approach)

Potential impact (ambition,competitiveness, societal problems, European dimension, optimal use of results)

Quality of the consortium (commitment, suitability, complementarity, SMEs)

Quality of the management (organisational structure, project, knowledge, IPR, innovation)

Mobilisation of resources (critical mass, coherence, financial


Key issues in the evaluation of NoE

Relevance to the objectives of the programme (S&T, S-E, policy objectives of WP)

Participants excellence (R&D, suitability, critical mass)

Potential impact (strenghthening S&T excellence, ambition, spreading excellence, durable structuring)

Degree of integration & JPA (deep and durable integration, quality)

Organisation and management (organisational structure, network)


•Relevance to the objectives of the programme (S&T, S-E, policy objectives of WP)

•S&T excellence (focus, progress beyond state-of-art, S&T approach)

•Potential impact (competitiveness, societal problems, European dimension, optimal use of results)

•Quality of the consortium (commitment, suitability, complementarity, SMEs)

•Quality of the management (project, knowledge, IPR, innovation)

•Mobilisation of resources (necessity, coherence, financial plan)

Key issues in the evaluation of STREPs


•Relevance to the objectives of the programme (S&T, S-E, policy objectives of WP)

•Quality of the co-ordination (progress beyond state-of-art, robustness of mechanisms)

•Potential impact (European dimension, Community support, critical mass mobilisation, optimal use of results)

•Quality of the consortium (suitability, complementarity)

•Quality of the management (project, knowledge, IPR, innovation)

•Mobilisation of resources (necessity, coherence, financial plan)

Key issues in the evaluation of CAs


•Relevance to the objectives of the programme (support objectives of WP, Call, SPs, ERA)

•Quality of the support action (soundness and quality of design, competencies, innovation-originality)

•Potential impact (European dimension, Community support, optimal use of results)

•Quality of the management (credibility of capacity to deliver)

•Mobilisation of resources (necessity, financial plan)

Key issues in the evaluation of SSAs


ImplementationHow? Contractual link of all participants with the

Commission New no more categories : all participants are contractors and

have the same rights & obligations

Contract enters into force and the advance is paid New once signed by the coordinator and the Commission

New other contractors’ written consents are collected by the coordinator and sent to the Commission within two months

= quicker entry into force and payment


ImplementationHow?

Change/addition of participants – New at the request of the coordinator, deemed to

act on behalf of the consortium– New with implicit agreement of the Commission

within 6 weeks– New in IP/NoE, enlargement of the consortium to

new participants and new activities may be foreseen. This enlargement follows then a call launched by the consortium with evaluation of proposals by external experts


Flexibility and autonomy in implementing IPs

For the implementation plan, each year, the consortium– proposes a detailed plan for the coming 18 months– and may propose to update the overall plan

both need approval of the Commission to enter into force

For the Community contribution– the contract will not specify its distribution between

participants nor between activities For changes in the consortium

– the consortium may itself decide to take in new participants (though without additional funding) the contract will specify when this must involve a

competitive call– the Commission may decide to launch calls to add

activities and participants (with additional funding)


Flexibility and autonomy for NoE

For the JPA, each year, the network– proposes a detailed JPA for the coming 18 months– and may propose to update the overall JPA

both need approval of the Commission to enter into force

For the allocation of the Community grant– the partnership will have freedom to distribute it

between partners and between activities For changes in the network partnership

– the partnership may itself decide to take in new partners (though without additional financing) the contract will specify when this must involve a

competitive call– the Commission may decide to launch calls to add

partners (with additional financing)


Implementation of STREPs, CAs and SSAs

For the work plan, the consortium– proposes a detailed plan for the whole duration– and may propose to modify the detailed work plan

but needs approval of the Commission to enter into force and

without modifying the overall objectives and deliverables

For the Community contribution– the contract will not specify its distribution between

participants For changes in the consortium

– the consortium may modify its composition (subject to Commission approval, without additional funding, infrequent occurrence)


Financing


Financing


Financing

Grant for integration (NoE) New mechanism Calculation basis: degree of integration, number

of researchers to be integrated, characteristics of the field concerned, JPA

not as a %age of the budget for the JPA Payment basis: completion of the JPA + costs

certificates mentioning that the costs incurred are greater than the grant itself

Premium for integration (fixed grant)


Financial regime of NoE

The average annual grant to a network could vary with the number of researchers as follows:

In this illustration, a network of 200 researchers supported over 5 years would therefore receive a fixed grant of €17.5 million (plus bonus for registered doctoral students)

50 researchers € 1 million/year 100 researchers € 2 million/year 150 researchers € 3 million/year 250 researchers € 4 million/year 500 researchers € 5 million/year 1000 researchers and above € 6 million/year

(for intermediate numbers, the grant would be calculated by linear interpolation)


Financing

Grant to the budget

Calculation basis: %age of the preliminary budget of the execution plan

Payment basis: covers a share of the expenditure incurred, necessary for the execution of the indirect action

%age depends on: type of activity participant involved


FinancingWhere it takes the form of reimbursement of eligible

costs, the Community financial contribution :

can only cover “supplementary costs” (costs not already

covered by another source of financing, especially public)

can cover up to 100% of those supplementary costs, providing a real co-financing scheme

must be adapted for some legal entities (“commercial

entities”) to take into account the ceiling of public financial support for research and demonstration activities.


FinancingFor instruments with no R&TD and/or demonstration

activities

100% of the supplementary costs whatever the instrument and its activities, providing a real co-financing scheme.

As a general rule (except special clause in the contract), indirect costs are deemed to be covered by a flat rate (established in the contract) [ACF][SCF]

Reports: Financial statement : only supplementary costs Management report : description of use of all resources involved


For instruments with R&TD and/or demonstration activities (1/3)

100% of the supplementary costs whatever the instrument and its activities, providing a real co-financing scheme, for legal entities for which the Community framework on State aids for research and development does not apply.

For those entities : either real indirect costs ([AC][SC]) or flat rate (20% of their direct costs except subcontracting costs) deemed to cover their indirect costs ([ACF][SCF])

Reports: Financial statement : only supplementary costs Management report : description of use of all resources involved

Financing


For instruments with R&TD and/or demonstration activities (2/3)

Up to 100% of the supplementary costs whatever the instrument and its activities, for legal entities for which the Community framework on State aids for research and development apply (“commercial entities”), in so far as: it does not exceed 50% of the total eligible costs of research and

technological development activities and does not result in total support from public sources exceeding 75% of the total eligible costs of research and technological development activities ;

it does not exceed 35% of the total eligible costs of demonstration activities and does not result in total support from public sources exceeding 50% of the total eligible costs of demonstration activities ;

Financing


FinancingFor instruments with R&TD and/or demonstration

activities (3/3)

For those entities (“commercial entities”) : real indirect costs ([FC][TC]), except for SMEs (real indirect costs ([FC][TC]) or flat rate (20% of their direct costs except subcontracting

costs) deemed to cover their indirect costs ([FCF][TCF])) Reports:

Financial statement : total costs and receipts (public and private) Management report : description of use of all resources involved


FinancingType of activity

Research and technological development (including innovation related activity)

Demonstration

Training

New Consortium Management - reimbursed up to 100% within the limit of 7% of community contribution

Other activities specific to an instrument


FinancingModalities

New no cost categories but list of ineligible costs

New Participants’ own accounting rules

New Periodical cost certificates by external auditor

New Periodical advances and settlements

yearly for IP and NoE

periodicity of settlements to be specified in the contract for other instruments

New No pre-allocation of the EC contribution between participants (funding is granted to the consortium as a

whole)


Consortium agreement

Renewed importance due to the new legal and financial approaches

Regulates internal organisation of consortium, such as i.a.:

management of the project and allocation of the EC financing

agreement on IPR access rights

crisis management


Consortium agreement

New Compulsory except otherwise mentioned in the call for proposal

Not signed nor approved by the Commission

After or (preferably) before signing the contract but some decisions must be made by the participants before signature of contract (e.g. IPR issues)

Non binding guidelines published by the Commission


LiabilityNew Collective responsibility of the

participants

Responsibility of a last resort Limited in proportion to the participant’s share of costs in

the project, up to the total payment they are entitled to receive

IOs, public bodies or entities guaranteed by MS/AS solely responsible for their own debts

Exceptions for specific actions for SME’s and fellowships, and when duly justified for specific support actions


Control and SanctionsObjective to reinforce ex-post controls

To simplify and streamline ex-ante controls:

no systematic ex-ante financial controls (for instruments with collective responsibility)

no bank guarantee (for instruments with collective responsibility)

As a counterbalance to increased autonomy for participants


Control and Sanctions

How?

New Continuous monitoring by Commission with external experts (mandatory for IP and NoE)

Periodical verification of expenditure made (annual for IP & NoE) based on audit certificates

Technical (incl. ethical), technological, and financial audits


Control and Sanctions

Sanctions

Collective responsibility is also a form of sanction

Exclusion criterion, up to 5 years: financial irregularity + other cases foreseen in Article 93 of the new EC Financial Regulations

Recovery decisions (art. 256 EC Treaty)

Other sanctions in contracts, such as financial penalties


Monitoring and audits for IPs

Robust output monitoring by the Commission, involving external experts at all stages

annual review mid-term or milestone review,and final review

Commission may also carry out audits financial (at least one per IP) technical technological ethical


Governance and monitoring for NoE (1)

A network’s governance must ensure institutional engagement by the partner organisations– through e.g. a “governing board” of senior

representatives from the partners

to oversee integration of the partners’ activities


Governance and monitoring for NoE (2)

Robust output monitoring by the Commission, involving external experts at all stages– annual reviews

basis for payment by results triggering a yellow flag/red flag, if a review is failed

– end-of-term review to assess impact of network on strengthening and

spreading excellence Audits carried out by the Commission: financial

(at least one for each NoE, technical, technological, ethical.


Monitoring of STREPs, CAs and

SSAs

Follow-up scheme:– Commission PO assigned

– may foresee mid-term review with assistance of experts (e.g. if duration 3 years or more), with a go/no go decision to continue the project

– may include various types of audits as appropriate


Intellectual property rights (IPR)

Developed on the basis of

Feedback from FP5

Features of the “new instruments” participants may leave/join during the project “larger” projects


Consistency with FP5 (same concepts)

Simplification

New Same IPR rules for all instruments (few exceptions)

New Same IPR rules for all participants

Increased certainty, in particular regarding access rights (restricted to what is necessary)

Increased emphasis on the management of knowledge and IP (especially new instruments)

Principles


General concepts Definitions: no major change w.r.t. FP5

“knowledge”, “pre-existing know-how”, “use”, “dissemination”, ...

Ownership: no major changes w.r.t. FP5

resides with the participants (incl. JRC) generating knowledge

exception for SMEs actions : ownership resides with the SMEs, not with the “RTD Performers”

exception for public procurements (Commission buys a result)

transfer: prior notice to other participants+ Commission (possible objection within 30 days)


General concepts Protection

New required but not limited to legal protection (public domain approach, etc. possible)

Publication New allowed if not detrimental to protection prior notice to Commission + other participants

(possible objection within 30 days) Use / dissemination

New compulsory under conditions Commission may disseminate itself if needed


Access rights

General principles

New Granted on written request No sub-licensing (unless explicitly agreed + possible

optional clause for software) Obligatory ARs between participants limited to what

they really need (either for carrying out the project or for using their own knowledge) but broader ARs may be freely negotiated

ARs granted to third parties : Commission may object


Access rights

New features Feedback from FP5: need for pre-existing know-

how (PEKH) to be better safeguarded

New Possibility for a participant to exclude specific pieces of its PEKH from the obligation to grant ARs to the others with the agreement of all participants before the participant concerned signs the contract

(or before entry of a new participant)


FP6 System of Access RightsAccess rights to

pre-existing know-howAccess rights to

knowledge

If a participant needs them for carrying out its own work under the project

For carrying out the project

Royalty-free unless otherwise agreed

before signing the contract

Royalty-free

If a participant needs them for using its own knowledgeFor use

(exploitation + further research)

Non-discriminatory conditions to be agreed

Royalty-free unless otherwise agreed

before signing the contract

Possibility for participants to agree on exclusion of specific pre-existing know-how before signature of the contract (or

before entry of a new participant)


General FP6 Site : http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/index_en.htmlInstruments :http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/networks-ip.htmlContracts :http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/working -groups/model-contract/index_en.html

For further information

Documents

Participation & Dissemination Rules for the 6th Framework Programme 2002-2006 (EC)