1 How to write proposal section 3:? The Hague Christiane Kummer Pt-Juelich
2 Research Proposal (Part B) - Structure Stage 1 1. Excellence 2. Impact 3. Implementation 3.1 Work plan Work packages, deliverables and milestones (tables) 3.2 Management structure and procedures 3.3 Consortium as a whole 3.4 Resources to be committed 4. Members of the Consortium (no page limit) 5. Ethics and Security Stage 2 2
3 Evaluation criteria Excellence Impact Quality and efficiency of the implementation Detailed aspects of evaluation depend on the type of action
4 3. Implementation 3.1 Work plan Work packages, deliverables and milestones (tables) 3.2 Management structure and procedures 3.3 Consortium as a whole 3.4 Resources to be committed 4. Members of the Consortium 4
5 Line of Reasoning 5
6 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Expectations of the EC Brief presentation of the overall structure of the work plan Timing of the different work packages and their components (Gantt Chart) Detailed work description A description of each work package (table 3.1a) A list of work packages (table 3.1b) A list of major deliverables (table 3.1c) 6 Graphical presentation of the components showing how they inter-relate (Pert Chart)
7 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Gantt Chart Work Package Name WP1: Co-ordination and Project Management WP2: Dissemination and Exploitation WP3: Assessment and Evaluation WP1.1: WP1.2: WP2.1: WP2.2: WP2.3: WP2.4: WP3: WP4: Milestones Deliverables D01 M1 M2 D121 D122 D123 M3 M4 M5 D211 D221 D231 D241 M6 D311 D321 D331 M7 D411 D421 D431 D441 7
8 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Gantt Chart 8
9 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Table 3.1a: Work package description (For each work package): Objectives clear and comprehensible realistic and feasible (personnel, technical equipment, financially, in time) (SMART) Sub-objectives of main objective (project) Tasks Detailed description of what you want to do to achieve the projects objectives: Result: Deliverables 9 Deliverables Results of WP Coherent labelling: e.g. D 4.2
10 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Objectives Obesity causes death in millions of Europeans. The objective of this research project is to study the role of nutritional signals causing bad food habits as a starting point for a possible new therapy The objective is to provide a new therapy for obesity based on bioactive compounds. 10
11 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Table 3.1b: List of Work packages Example: WP1: Project Management WP2: Biomarkers WP3: Clinical Trial 11 WP4: Dissemination
12 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Definition: Deliverable Dinstinct output / concrete result of the project Necessary to complete a task / WP meaningful in terms of the project s overall objectives constituted by a report, a document, a technical diagram, software etc Every deliverable has to be delivered 12
13 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones Table 3.1c: List of deliverables D 2.1 Report on validated Biomarkers WP 2 R CO M 6 Deliverable numbers in order of deliverable dates (e.g. D 4.2) Type: R, DEM, DEC, OTHER Dissemination level: PU, CO, CI Deliverable Date: in Months from project start date (e.g. M6) 13
14 3.1 Work plan work packages, deliverables and milestones PERT diagram INMiND project (www.uni-muenster.de/inmind/) 14
15 Implementation - Evaluation Criteria Implementation Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant) Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal4/desktop/en/funding/reference_docs.html#h2020 -work-programmes annexes
16 Reviewer s comments There are only weak links between the objectives and the workplan. In some cases it does not become clear how the objectives will be addressed in each of the work packages. WPs are structured more as a single partners effort rather than a consortium effort. The budget is disproportionately distributed among partners. 16
17 3. Implementation 3.1 Work plan Work packages, deliverables and milestones (tables) 3.2 Management structure and procedures 3.3 Consortium as a whole 3.4 Resources to be committed 4. Members of the Consortium 17
18 3.2 Management structure and procedures Expectations of the EC Describe any organizational structure and the decision-making (including a list of milestones) Clearly define: Who is responsible for what? Who will decide what, how and when? How effective will the innovation management be addressed in the management structure and work plan? What will happen in case of conflict? What will happen, if there won t be any agreement on something? Who will decide then? Veto right? 18
21 3.2 Management structure and procedures Definition: Milestones Structure project into important periods or interim goals Control points in project, help to chart progress Status of the project? Aims achieved so far? Need for change of direction? May correspond to completion of key deliverable Mark critical decision point / turning points 21
22 3.2 Management structure and procedures Expectations of the EC Describe any critical risks, relating to project implementation, that the stated project's objectives may not be achieved. Detail any risk mitigation measures. Please provide a table with critical risks identified and mitigating actions (table 3.2b) 22
23 Implementation - Evaluation Criteria Implementation Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant) Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal4/desktop/en/funding/reference_docs.html#h2020 -work-programmes annexes
24 Reviewer s comments Aspects of decision-making processes and conflict resolution mechanisms are not clear The structure would be strengthened by an external independent input (external advisory board) for the decisions A risk management section has been included into the proposal; however, it appears to have limited detail to address the potential problems that could occur.
25 3. Implementation 3.1 Work plan Work packages, deliverables and milestones (tables) 3.2 Management structure and procedures 3.3 Consortium as a whole 3.4 Resources to be committed 4. Members of the Consortium 25
26 3.3 Consortium as a whole Describe how the consortium as a whole will achieve the project aims why the very partners are necessary to achieve the project aims the partner s special skills relevant to the project How the partners complement each other Involvement of SME/industry partners : tasks, budget how the (commercial) exploitation of results will be ensured (if relevant) why partners from other industrial countries need to be involved (if relevant) the balance of the consortium 26
27 Implementation - Evaluation Criteria Implementation Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant) Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal4/desktop/en/funding/reference_docs.html#h2020 -work-programmes annexes
28 Reviewer s comments The roles of partners 6 and 8 appear overlapping More representatives from industry, regulatory authorities and patent groups would be desirable There is no partner with strong competence in XXX The coordinator seems to play a predominant role and the scientific integration of other partners in the proposal is not sufficiently demonstrated
29 3. Implementation 3.1 Work plan Work packages, deliverables and milestones (tables) 3.2 Management structure and procedures 3.3 Consortium as a whole 3.4 Resources to be committed 4. Members of the Consortium 29
30 3.4 Resources to be committed Information needs to match budget table (section 3 of administrative forms) and person months in WP form Provide requested person months (table 3.4a) Provide other direct costs (table 3.4b) for participants where these costs exeed 15% of the personnel costs (acc. to budget table in admin forms) Although not requested: provide a detailed financial plan here 30
31 3.4 Resources to be committed Table 3.4a: Summary of staff effort Table 3.4b: Other direct cost items (travel, equpiment, other goods and services, large research infrastructure) 31
32 3. Implementation 3.1 Work plan Work packages, deliverables and milestones (tables) 3.2 Management structure and procedures 3.3 Consortium as a whole 3.4 Resources to be committed 4. Members of the Consortium 32
33 4. Members of the consortium 4.1 Participants 4.2 Third parties invovled in the project (including use of third party resources) No page limit! 33
34 4. Members of the consortium 4.1 Participants (applicants) Expectations of the Commission a description of the legal entity and its main tasks, with an explanation of how its profile matches the tasks in the proposal (include partner number) a curriculum vitae or description of the profile of the people, including their gender, who will be primarily responsible for carrying out the proposed research and/or innovation activities; a list of up to 5 relevant publications, and/or products, services (including widely-used datasets or software), or other achievements relevant to the call content; a list of up to 5 relevant previous projects or activities, connected to the subject of this proposal; a description of any significant infrastructure and/or any major items of technical equipment, relevant to the proposed work; 34
35 4. Members of the consortium 4.2 Third parties Beneficiaries: appropriate resources to implement the action Third Parties legal entity not signing the grant agreement Making available resources by means of contributions in kind By carrying out part of the work itself (should not be core tasks of research) 35
36 4. Members of the consortium Third parties Contracts to purchase goods, works and services (Art. 10) Use of in-kind contributions provided by third parties against payment (Art. 11) Use of in-kind contributions provided by third parties free of charge (Art. 12) Subcontracting (Art. 13) Linked third parties (Art.14) 36
37 Thank you! Christiane Kummer PT-Juelich The copyright is owned by the author of this document. Please do not duplicate. Disclaimer: The "Fit for Health2.0" project partners do not assume any legal liability or responsibilities for the information provided in this document. 37
38 Reviewer comments FP7 38
39 The consortium itself identified several patents not held within the consortium itself, necessitating the negotiation of licences to carry out the work planned. A negotiation of licences thus needs to be commenced very soon. 39
40 The proposal describes a management structure that itself is complex and not that easy to follow.
41 The staff allocation versus justification of costs needs clarification.
42 It was also pointed out by the reviewers that IPR management could have been described in more detail.
43 The panel noted that not all the partners are represented in the steering committee. An appropriate representation of all the partners in a decision making body should be sought.
44 The gender aspect should have been better addressed, and should be considered in the negotiation phase.
45 However the management structure is somewhat too briefly mentioned in the proposal and a standard graphical representation and definitions of decisive positions including concrete names would have been useful.
46 The plan for managing Intellectual Property and innovation-related activities arising from the project is fairly addressed. Whilst an IP manager has been appointed, new IP will be submitted to the General Assembly, where only industrial partners have voting rights.
47 There is a significant weakness regarding the co-ordinating partner track record (recently founded) and as to whether they have the experience, capacity, capability and the necessary expertise to carry out their tasks and to act as project leader.
48 The industrial participant plays a specific technical role, but should also be encouraged to play a stronger role in the strategic planning of the project.
49 The sub-contracting costs appear high as they represent 20% of the project costs and should be better justified.
50 The panel expressed some concern whether sufficient funds were allocated to the management of IP strategy.
51 Involvement of patient advocacy groups in the proposed research is limited.
52 The resources for XXX are high in relation to the other partners and the rationale for this was lacking.
53 The time estimated for the computational part output seems significantly underestimated.
54 According to the panel opinion, the conflict resolution scheme was not sufficiently addressed.
55 The consortium as a whole is composed of a wide set of suitable partners. However, some topic related expertise - as an example science of physical activity - is not fully evident from the proposal.
56 The budget allocation appears unbalanced.
57 Milestones and deliverables in some cases overlap.
58 A very complex management structure has been proposed and described with abundance of details. However, the concern is that the related complexity will have a negative impact on the timely flow of the project.
59 The SMEs focus on very specific tasks with little relation to the other work packages.
60 The management structure is not described in all relevant details.
61 The experience of the coordinator to lead international projects could have been better documented.
62 The external expert advisory board is limited to two members. It was felt it could have comprised some additional key stakeholders not included as partners in the consortium.
Research and Innovation Actions (RIA) Innovation Actions (IA) Research proposal (Part B) Version 1.1 3 November 2014 Disclaimer This document is aimed at informing potential applicants for Horizon 2020
Proposal template (technical annex) Health, demographic change and wellbeing Two-stage Research and Innovation actions Innovation actions Note: This is for information only. The definitive templates to
Fast track to Innovation: a new instrument in Horizon 2020 29.01.2015 Webinar Ines Haberl Austrian Research Promotion Agency 29.01.2015 Webinar Fast track to Innovation in Horizon 2020 Content 1. Concept
Proposal Template (Technical Annex) ECSEL Research and Innovation Actions (RIA) ECSEL Innovation Actions (IA) Calls 2016 Please follow the structure of this template when preparing your proposal. It has
START PAGE MARIE SKŁODOWSKA-CURIE ACTIONS Innovative Training Networks (ITN) Call: H2020-MSCA-ITN-2015 PART B PROPOSAL ACRONYM This proposal is to be evaluated as: [ETN] [EID] [EJD] [delete as appropriate]
European Commission THE SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME The Seventh Framework Programme focuses on Community activities in the field of research, technological development and demonstration (RTD) for the period
Example of administrative forms and template for the technical annex for proposals for SME instrument Phase 1 Version 1.0 11 December 2013 Disclaimer This document is aimed at informing potential applicants
Project management in FP7 Gorgias Garofalakis ETAT S.A. The whole process EU FP7 Project Project idea Proposal writing Evaluation Negotiations Project implementation Contact with partners after the evaluation
How to write a successful proposal Miriam de Angelis NCP Smart, green and integrated transport NCP Climate action, environment, resource efficiency and raw materials APRE ESTIMATION OF EFFORTS EC SURVEY
Erfahrungen bei der Antragstellung im 7. Forschungsrahmenprogramm Dr. Andreas Lüdtke Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS Why am I here? coordinator of two projects in FP7 one received 15 points out of 15 the other
Project Management in H2020 Projects Gorazd Weiss, Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI), Austria Outline Project management Project Time Management Project Management structure Roles of project participants
Example of administrative forms and template for the technical annex for proposals for Research and Innovation Actions (RIA) Innovation Actions (IA) Version 1.0 11 December 2013 Disclaimer This document
Ref. Ares(2015)2346168-04/06/2015 Project Grants (HP-PJ) Administrative forms (Part A) Project proposal (Part B) Version 2.0 05 June 2015 Disclaimer This document is aimed at informing potential applicants
Guidelines for evaluators 2013 SAF RA joint call on Human and organizational factors including the value of industrial safety September 2013 SAF RA is an ERA-NET on industrial safety funded by the European
Administrative + Management Aspects EU - Framework Programme 7 Grant Agreement: Acronym FMT-XCT Project Kick-off Meeting, 14.05.2008 Dr. Jürgen Ertel Department Program Planing and Management Head of Project
European IPR Helpdesk Intellectual Property in Horizon 2020 overview with a focus on comparison with FP7 The European IPR Helpdesk is managed by the European Commission s Executive Agency for Small and
European Commission THE SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME The Seventh Framework Programme focuses on Community activities in the field of research, technological development and demonstration (RTD) for the period
2016-2017 Research and Innovation Actions (RIA) Innovation Actions (IA) Administrative forms (Part A) Research proposal (Part B) Version 2.0 13 October 2015 Disclaimer This document is aimed at informing
Intellectual Property in P7 projects IGLO training, russels, 25 th ebruary 2010 Stéphane eslier IPR Helpdesk - University of Alicante IPR-Helpdesk is a constituent part of the IP Awareness and Enforcement:
ERACoSysMed 1st Joint Transnational Call for Proposals for European Research Projects to demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of systems medicine Guidelines for applicants Submission deadline for pre-proposals:
Negotiations feedback for successful project preparation Negotiations procedure Feedback from the Commission on the project plan issues that need to be explained in more detail Request to formulate Annex
New Energy Jobs Fund Application Guidelines i Table of Contents 1. Background... 1 2. The Program... 1 2.1. Objectives... 1 2.2. Overview... 1 2.3. Program Timetable... 2 3. Funding... 3 4. Eligibility...
Guidelines for Applicants CORNET 19 th Call for Proposals Opening National and Regional Programmes for transnational Collective Research between SME Associations and Research Organisations. Closing date:
FP7 Space Research Proposal evaluation and role of the REA Christine Bernot Head of Unit European Commission REA S2 Space Research Rome, 20/09/2012 Overview 1. REA mission REA activities & Space Research
FP7 Requirements for your Project's Exploitation Plan Ulrich BOES URSIT Ltd., Bulgaria Outline Goal of the presentation Summarise the exploitation requirements of FP7 Outline Definitions Official documents
Guidelines for Applicants CORNET 21 st Call for Proposals Combining national and regional programmes for international Collective Research for the benefit of SMEs. Closing date: 30 st of March 2016, 12
Elementi vincenti in proposte SME Instrument e FTI Primi casi di successo: le esperienze delle aziende vincitrici SME Instrument e Fast Track Nicola Ciulli Head of R&D, Nextworks External expert for the
The Eurostars Programme TM funding excellence in innovation Guidelines for applicants Publication date: 29 June 2009 Version: 9.0 The Eurostars Programme is a joint initiative of EUREKA and the European
Guidance notes and templates for Project Technical Review involving Independent Expert(s) FP7 Collaborative Projects, Networks of Excellence, Coordination and Support Actions Version 18/12/2007 Disclaimer
SUSFOOD - An FP7 ERA-NET on Sustainable Food Production and Consumption Guidelines for applicants for the 1 st Transnational Call for Proposals (pre-proposal phase) Closing date for pre-proposals: 03 May
HabEat Determining factors and critical periods in food habit formation and breaking in early childhood: a multidisciplinary approach Grant agreement number: FP7-245012 Medium-scale Collaborative Project
7 STEPS of Proposal Development This section will go through proposal development step-by-step starting with the call search and finishing with the feedback from the Commission. 1. Finding a call 2. Formulating
Guidelines for a Consortium Agreement (CA) The CA is an agreement made between participants in a collaborative project to govern a number of issues, i.e. relationship between partners, organisation and
Innovative Medicines Initiative IMI-GB-DEC-2012-12 RULES FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE IMI JU COLLABORATIVE PROJECTS OUTLINE 1. Definitions 2. Participation in an IMI JU collaborative project 2.1 General provisions
January 2012 IP specificities in research for the benefit of SMEs TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 1 1. Actions for the benefit of SMEs... 2 1.1. Research for SMEs... 2 1.2. Research for SME-Associations...
Deliverable 1.5.1 Project ID 654241 Project Title Project Acronym Start Date of the Project Duration of the Project Work Package Number Work Package Title Deliverable Title Delivery Date Work Package leader
Guidance notes for Integrated Projects, Networks of Excellence, Specific Targeted Research or Innovation Projects, Coordination Actions, Specific Support Actions, Co-operative Research Projects and Collective
C-IPM is an ERA-Net funded by the European Commission s 7 th Framework Programme Guidelines for applicants for the 1 st Transnational Call for Proposals Full-proposal phase C-IPM Coordinated Integrated
Overview Addressing the evaluation criteria 12 th March 2015 Introduction Topics covered by May deadline Evaluation criteria Key messages Evaluator comments Common feedback services Funded by the Department
Funding for the development of products for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of neglected and poverty related diseases 19 October 2015 Guidelines for applicants Please structure your application
IL PROCESSO DI VALUTAZIONE IN HORIZON 2020 Roma 24 marzo 2015 - CNR Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions experiences and indications Dr M. Lucia Curri Istituto per i Processi Chimico Fisici Consiglio Nazionale
Innovation 4 Growth (I4G) Guidance for Applicants V5.0 (August 2015)) Contents 1. About Innovation for Growth (I4G) and Regional Growth Fund...3 2. Am I eligible to apply?...3 3. The types of project we
2016 Call for Projects on ALS Research 2016 AriSLA Call for Research Projects: PROMOTING RESEARCH EXCELLENCE IN THE FIGHT AGAINST ALS Deadline: at 1.00 pm, March 17 th 2016 1. Aims of the 2016 AriSLA Call
Impact & Innovation in H2020 IP Management & Exploitation Jörg Scherer Tallinn 04 March 2015 Get your ticket to innovation. Author: expert Dr. Eugene Sweeney 36 years experience of commercialising IP/research
Robotics in Horizon 2020: Rules for participation Cécile Huet, Deputy Head of Unit Unit A2 - Robotics Directorate-General for Communication Networks, Content and Technology European Commission Brokerage
PPI for Transport Infrastructure in Public Procurement of Innovation A twofold objective PPI Public Procurement of Innovative Solutions The challenges European transport infrastructure is faced with multifaceted
Fast Forward Proposal Template - January 2016 NOTE: A new grants management system called MS Grants has been implemented for preparation and submission of research proposals to the Society. MS Grants can
H2020 Model Grant Agreement for Lump sum grants (H2020 MGA Lump sum Multi) Version 1.0 9 June 2015 HISTORY OF CHANGES Version Publication date Changes 1.0 09.06.2015 Initial version 1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Movember Clinical Trial Awards Part 1: Overview Participating Organisation (s) Funding Category Description The Movember Foundation and Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia Movember Clinical Trial Award
Periodic Report Template (RIA, IA, CSA, SME instrument, MCSA) Periodic Technical Report (parts A and B) Periodic Financial Report Version 1.0 15 July 2015 Disclaimer This document is aimed at informing
TRAINING APPROACH With a learning-by-doing approach, the goal is to enable scientists, engineers, project managers, financial managers, administrators and other individuals to turn their ideas into successful
Project Audit & Review Checklist The following provides a detailed checklist to assist the PPO with reviewing the health of a project: Relevance (at this time) Theory & Practice (How relevant is this attribute
Guidance notes and templates for Project Technical Review involving Independent Expert(s) FP7 Collaborative Projects (CP), Networks of Excellence, Coordination and Support Actions (CSA), CP-CSA, ERA-NET,
EUinDepth IRSES Objectives IRSES Features To strengthen research partnerships through staff exchanges and networking activities between researcher organisations from EU/AC and countries with which EU has
Sustaining Ethical Aquatic Trade Management Theme 2 Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, and Biotechnology Improving the sustainability of food chains Why the EU supports this type of research Why is sustainability
Project Execution Guidelines for SESAR 2020 Exploratory Research 04 June 2015 Edition 01.01.00 This document aims at providing guidance to consortia members on the way they are expected to fulfil the project
PROCESS FOR CHANGE - Detailed Design Programme Governance and Management Plan Version 2 1 INTRODUCTION In October 2008, the Council approved the selection of seven opportunity themes to take forward from
SME instrument Phase 1 Administrative forms (Part A) Research proposal (Part B) Version 1.2 10 March 2014 Disclaimer This document is aimed at informing potential applicants for Horizon 2020 funding. It
Checklist for a Coordination Agreement for Coordinated Calls (Option 2) 01/04/08 Note There are two different types of coordinated calls: one where the result is a joint project, i.e. the third country
SUSFOOD - An FP7 ERA-NET on Sustainable Food Production and Consumption Guidelines for applicants for the 2nd Transnational Call for Proposals (full-proposal phase) Closing date for full-proposals: August
FP7 Project reporting FP7 INCO National Contact Points Meeting 9 June 2010 - Athens Anne Mandenoff - European Commission - RTD A.6 Reference documents 1 Model grant agreement - Grant Agreement (GA): Article
International Consortium for Harmonization of Clinical Laboratory Results Operating Procedures Approved: February 11, 2014 Background Results from clinical laboratory measurement procedures should be comparable
Scotland Your project business plan Scotland Your project business plan Further copies available from: Email email@example.com Phone 0870 240 2391 Textphone 0141 242 1500 Our website
Department of Energy and Water Supply Submission on the Proposal for a National Energy Consumer Advocacy Body Key Issues Queensland welcomes the opportunity to make a submission on the development of options
Project Management WP10 Carlos Díaz SYNAPSE Project status - as of last GAM D2.2 D2.3 D3.3 D3.4 D3.5 D4.1 D1.4 D3.6 D3.7 D3.8 D4.2 D4.3 D1.5 D4.4 Report on Specific Issues Related to Patient Rights Iterative
Introduction to the ITS Project Management Methodology In September 1999 the Joint Legislative Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review (PEER) produced a report entitled Major Computer
H12J 04 (CFAS4.1) Lead a sales team What is this Unit about? This Unit is about how you provide direction to the members of the sales team by motivating and supporting them to achieve their team and individual
Frequently asked questions ENERGY EFFICIENCY - Project Development Assistance Call ID: H2020-EE-2014-4-PDA Topic EE 20: Project Development Assistance (PDA) for innovative bankable and aggregated sustainable
FET-Open in Horizon2020 Work Programme 2014-2015 Roumen Borissov Future and Emerging Technologies FET-Open Research Executive Agency Content Future and Emerging Technologies (FET) in Horizon 2020 FET-Open
Allied Health Telehealth Capacity Building Implementation Project Plan Project statement The Allied Health Telehealth Capacity Building Implementation Plan is a joint initiative of the Allied Health Professions
European Research Area on Sustainable Animal Production Systems SusAn Guidelines for applicants Full proposal Amendment update: 21 July 2016 This ERA-NET receives funding from the European Union s Horizon
HORIZON HORIZON 2020 2020 Administrative and financial aspects Directorate D Key Enabling Technologies DG Research and Innovation Helene Chraye Head of Unit Content 1. One set of rules 2. Time to grant
Template for essential information to be provided for proposals including clinical trials / studies / investigations Document history Version 2016callsV1 September 2015 Modifications (compared to previous
CONSEILS AUX PORTEURS DE PROJETS Know the evaluation process and criteria to prepare a winning research proposal From to Paul JAMET Ministère délégud gué à l'enseignement supérieur et à la Recherche firstname.lastname@example.org
H2020 rules for participation, new instruments, evaluation criteria Disclaimer : H2020 Regulations are not yet adopted by the legislator. Any information contained in this presentation is legally not binding
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council FFIEC Development and Acquisition D&A APRIL 2004 IT EXAMINATION H ANDBOOK Development and Acquisition Booklet April 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...
WORK PROGRAMME 2011 CAPACITIES PART 2 RESEARCH FOR THE BENEFIT OF SMES (European Commission C(2010)4903 of 19 July 2010) OBJECTIVES... 3 I CONTEXT... 3 II CONTENT OF CALL... 8 Activity: 2.1 Research for
MSCA Innovative Training Networks (ITN) Administrative forms (Part A) Research proposal (Part B) Version.3 3 January 04 Disclaimer This document is aimed at informing potential applicants for Horizon 00
THIRD CALL FOR TRANSNATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECTS WITHIN THE EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA-NET ANIMAL HEALTH AND WELFARE ANIHWA GUIDELINES FOR APPLICANTS FULL PROPOSAL AMENDMENT CALL CLOSING: 2 ND JULY 2015(13:00,