IST in FP6 - Proposal submission and evaluation How? Aymard de Touzalin Grids for Complex Problem...

IST in FP6 - IST in FP6 -

Proposal submission and evaluationProposal submission and evaluation How?How?

Aymard de Touzalin

Grids for Complex Problem Solving Information Day

Brussels, 12 June 2003

Information Day 20/06/03 2

OverviewOverview

IST Call 2 Overview

Submission and Evaluation process

First lessons from IST Call1

Information sources


publication date in Official Journal 17 Jun. 2003

closing date 17h00 on 15 Oct. 2003

Evaluation 10-21 Nov. 2003

IP & NoE hearings up to 24 Nov - 5 Dec. 2003

Feedback (ESR) mid Dec. 2003

Negotiations start Jan. 2004

First contracts expected March/April 2004

IST - Call 2IST - Call 2


Brochure “The 6FP in Brief” - an overview

IST Work Programme 2003-2004

Call for proposals text - Call 2 (Official Journal)

Guides for Proposers Call 2

Guidelines on Proposal Evaluation and Selection Procedures (Evaluation Manual)

Guidance notes for Evaluators

IST - Call 2 Information materialIST - Call 2 Information material

Info -pack

IST Call 2


IST Priority Work Programme 2003-2004 Strategic objectives, Instruments applicable, Call “roadmap”

and indicative total budgets For each instrument - criteria, threshold scores required including

threshold on Overall score Consortium requirements

Call for proposals text - Official Journal Identifies the Strategic objectives open in Call Identifies the instruments applicable to each objective Repeats the indicative budget information Notes the consortium eligibility rules Specifies modalities/address for submission of proposals Fixes call deadline * (*based on time of arrival of proposal)

Workprogramme and call textWorkprogramme and call text


PROPOSALPROPOSAL - - The Submission and Evaluation ProcessThe Submission and Evaluation Process

FUNDING FUNDING SCENARIO(s)SCENARIO(s)

CommissionCommission

•Official JournalOfficial Journal•CORDISCORDIS•NCPsNCPs

CALL FOR CALL FOR PROPOSALSPROPOSALS

Eligibility Check: CommissionEligibility Check: CommissionEVALUATIONEVALUATION:: Peer review principles/Peer review principles/

independent expertsindependent experts

MARKING AND MARKING AND PRIORITY ORDER PRIORITY ORDER OF PROPOSALSOF PROPOSALS

Panel (optional)Panel (optional)

NEGOTIATIONNEGOTIATION

SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTSIGNATURE OF CONTRACT

INFORMATIONINFORMATIONProgramme CommitteeProgramme Committee


Type of submission and evaluation One stage submission - full proposal One stage evaluation (with a hearing for IP and NOE)

How to prepare a proposal Pre-notification - highly recommended Part A (forms)Part A (forms) Part B (format for text document)Part B (format for text document)

How to submit a proposalHow to submit a proposal

Support for proposers

Guides for proposersGuides for proposers


General information on Proposal Type of instrument Acronym, Full title Duration in months Call id Strategic objective (s) Proposal abstract, keywords

One A1 form per proposalOne A1 form per proposal

Proposal Part A - Form A1Proposal Part A - Form A1


Information on participant Participant no *., Name, Address etc.

(* Coordinator is participant no. 1) Activity type, Legal status, SME Dependencies with other participants Person in charge - Name, Address etc. Previously submitted similar proposals

As many A2 forms as there are consortium As many A2 forms as there are consortium membersmembers



type of activity:• research, innovation,

• demonstration• training• management

Cost breakdown - All instruments except NOEAll instruments except NOE

Activity type Activity type…... Total

Cost Req grant Cost Req grant…. Cost Req grant

Participant 1

Participant 2 etc

Total

One A3 form per proposalOne A3 form per proposal



Cost breakdown - Networks of ExcellenceNetworks of Excellence

No. of researchers to be integrated

Female Male Total

Participant 1

Participant 2 etc

Total

No. of PhD students to be integrated -No. of PhD students to be integrated - table as abovetable as above

Total (not annual!) funding requestTotal (not annual!) funding request

Proposal Part A - Form A3 (NoE)Proposal Part A - Form A3 (NoE)


All instruments Title page Links to Priority (Strategic objectives) Criterion 1 aspects Criterion 2 aspects etc Overall workplan of project Other aspects (ethics, gender issues….)

IPs, NOEs additionally provide 18 month Implementation plan / Joint Programme of Activities

(including sharing of resources, not only the researcher)

Proposal Part B Proposal Part B it’s detailed - it’s detailed -

it’s meant to be helpfulit’s meant to be helpful

don’t omit anything !!don’t omit anything !!


Electronically via the Internet --- RECOMMENDEDElectronically via the Internet --- RECOMMENDED Fully electronic submission via the EPSS tool Needs username and password (apply early) Store always latest version online! Do not forget to press the submit button! Don’t fiddle until the last moment! Submit 24 hrs in advance of deadline!

On CD-ROM/diskette Only with one paper backup (sometimes problems with reading) Download forms from EPSS tool - to prohibit miscalculations etc.

How to submit ? How to submit ?

Free text documents:Free text documents:

PDF or RTF format PDF or RTF format only !!!only !!!

Virus checks!Virus checks!

On paper to the ADDRESS SET OUT IN THE CALL TEXT (NOT to the address used in FP5: NOT to any other Commission office !)(NOT to the address used in FP5: NOT to any other Commission office !) Paper submission in one copy only


1. Eligibility check

Complete (Part A and Part B)

Eligible consortium

In scope

Timely arrival

2. Experts’ individual reading

Overview of evaluation process (1)Overview of evaluation process (1)

3-5 experts per proposal

Commission


3. Consensus groupScores & comments per evaluation criteria.

Overall comments and calculated score

4 a. IP and NoE hearings

4 b. Panel discussionFinalisation of Evaluation Summary Report (ESR)

5. Panel prioritisation and Pannel report

6. Implementation plan

Overview of evaluation process (2)Overview of evaluation process (2)

Full Panel

Commission


Evaluation criteria and thresholdsEvaluation criteria and thresholds

IP NoE STREP CA SSA

Relevance 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 4 out of 5

Potential Impact 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5

S&T excellence 4 out of 5 4 out of 5Degree of integration and JPA 4 out of 5Quality of Coordination 4 out of 5Quality of the Support Action 3 out of 5

Quality of the Consortium 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5Excellence of participants 3 out of 5

Quality of the Management 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5Organisation and Management 3 out of 5

Mobilisation of Resources 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5

OVERALL SCORE 24 out of 30 20 out of 25 21 out of 30 21 out of 30 17,5 out of 25


For all IPs and NOEs passing the thresholds

Costs not paid by the Commission

Coordinator and key consortium members only

Hearing addresses specific questions, supplied in advance

Based on the proposal as submitted

Duration - about 60 minutes; Exact time slot to be respected

No further input from consortium permitted

Evaluation Hearings - special issues Evaluation Hearings - special issues


Some proposers still don’t realise there is a Part A and B !

The main reason for late arrival is leaving electronic

submission till the last hours of the call

There are proposers who can write the entire proposal section

“B.2 Relevance to the objectives of the IST Priority” without

once mentioning the IST Priority !

First feedback from IST Call 1First feedback from IST Call 1


Integrated projects are not just expensive STREPs. Plan a full

range of activities - Research, Demonstration, Training…..

NoEs don’t just share researchers. Describe in detail the

shared resources and the joint activities

NoEs represent a permanent re-structuring of the sector

NoEs can apply for less than the full funding formula

First feedback from IST Call 1First feedback from IST Call 1


Choose your instrument with care

Notify your intention to propose

Read the FAQs

Identify your Strategic objective clearly

- to the Commission

- to yourself

Key advice to proposersKey advice to proposers


Follow the Part B format exactly

More detailed - it’s meant to be helpful

Don’t omit any section !

Leave nothing to the imagination

Pay attention to the “recommended lengths” for the sections in Part B

Evaluators easily spot repetition and padding

But also don’t “under-write”

Aim to submit 24 hours early

Remember, a few hours delay can’t significantly improve your proposal - but can certainly kill it



Register as an expert !

(http://www.cordis.lu/experts/fp6_candidature.htm)

And use the information in the Guide for proposers

Section VI “Support to proposers”

http://www.cordis.lu/ist



1. http://www.cordis.lu/fp6/calls.cfm

2. http://www.cordis.lu/fp6/instruments.htm

3. http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/index_en.html

4. Other Information Commission contact persons Financial guidelines Negotiation guidelines Model contracts

Call informationCall information


if in trouble, call the IST Infodesk for

More information at

http://www.cordis.lu/ist and:

IST InfodeskIST Infodesk

IST infodeskPhone: +32 2 296 85 96Fax: +32 2 296 83 88

E-Mail: [email protected]

IST in FP6 - Proposal submission and evaluation How? Aymard de Touzalin Grids for Complex Problem...

Documents

Transcript of IST in FP6 - Proposal submission and evaluation How? Aymard de Touzalin Grids for Complex Problem...