Erfahrungen bei der Antragstellung im 7. Forschungsrahmenprogramm

Transcription

1 Erfahrungen bei der Antragstellung im 7. Forschungsrahmenprogramm Dr. Andreas Lüdtke Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

2 Why am I here? coordinator of two projects in FP7 one received 15 points out of 15 the other one 13.5 out of 15 So hopefully there is some experience I can transfer to you. I will try to present some lessons learned Page 2 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

3 Contents 1. General Information/Guidelines 2. Proposal Part A 3. Proposal Part B 3.1 Section B1 3.2 Section B2 3.3 Section B3 4. Final Remarks Page 3 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

4 GENERAL INFORMATION/GUIDELINES Page 4 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

5 Evaluation Criteria CRITERIA All funding schemes (C1) S/T quality "Scientific and/or technological excellen ce (relevant to the topics addressed by the call)" (C1a) Sound concept, and quality of objectives (C2) Implementation "Quality and efficiency of the implementation and the management" (C2a) Appropriateness of the management structure and procedures (C2b) Quality and relevant experience of the individual participants (C3) Impact "Potential impact through the development, dissemination and use of project results" (C3a) Contribution, at the European [and/or international level], to the expected impacts listed in the WP under relevant topic/activity Collaborative projects (C1b) Progress beyond the state-of-the-art (C1c) Quality and effectiveness of the S/T methodology and associated work plan (C2c) Quality of the consortium as a whole (incl. complementarity, balance) (C2d) Appropriate allocation and justification of the resources committed (budget, staff, equip.). (C3b) Appropriateness of measures for the dissemination and/or exploitation of projects results, and management of intellectual property Page 5 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

6 Evaluation Process 5-7 proposals ½ day for each 3 evaluators per proposal consensus meeting for each topic priority list funding depends on budget per topic Page 6 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

7 Needed documents You need certain crucial documents: The actual Work Programme relevant for your call, the Call Fiche, Guide for Applicants (How to prepare a proposal?), templates for the proposal, EPSS Manual, Strategic Research Agendas relevant for your topic (e.g. published by Technology Platforms), - go to the Cordis site Page 7 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

8 The Proposal Preparation Process Build up a core team Write a brief summary Identify needed competencies Build up a consortium Write proposal Proof reading Final Submission Submit Contact EC Page 8 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

9 Building your consortium Prepare a short summary of your project idea: main idea, starting basis (e.g. based on the results of previous projects), approach, expected results. Make a list of major project tasks. Derive a list of required competencies for your project. Find partners that are well known with regard to these competencies. Collect from each potential partner a profile which clearly describes previous experience relevant for the required competencies including a short profile of relevant staff members. Propose WP and Task Leaders and get the agreement of the consortium on the leadership. Prepare a Letter of Committment and have it signed by each partner Page 9 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

10 Building your consortium C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 Partner 1 X Partner 2 X X Identify holes in your C-P Matrix Page 10 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

11 Electronic Submission EPSS - Electronic Proposal Submission System Online preparation only Improved validation checks before submission is accepted Main reason for failure; waiting till the last minute Technical problems Panic-induced errors Too late starting upload, run out of time Submit early, submit often! If in trouble, call the helpdesk! Page 11 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

12 Submission via EPSS Call deadlines are absolute deadlines and one minute too late is too late. Submit your proposal, even if not entirely finished, and update it on the Electronic Proposal Submission System, EPSS. At the day of deadline the EPSS might be slow Page 12 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

13 General Guidelines Evaluators are usually just well informed technicians and not experts for that particular area: Use clear and common language whenever possible. In the project proposal you need to educate the evaluator about the context of the proposed topics Evaluators have always limited time (usually just a few hours) to read your proposal: You shouldn t expect the evaluator will make any extra effort searching for an information if it won t be able to find it on the place where it is expected Help the expert by telling her/him why your proposal must be funded. Be concise und underline key messages with schemes and graphs. Write your proposal in a way that makes it easy for the expert to fill out her/his evaluation from Page 13 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

14 General Guidelines clear language clear structure following the EC templates useful and understandable diagrams providing/summarizing the major statements no typos, no inconsistencies no obvious paste-ins, no wrong computations (e.g. in the effort tables) no missing pages Page 14 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

15 PROPOSAL PART A Page 15 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

16 Proposal Part A (online) A1 Title, acronym, objective etc. free keywords 2000 character proposal abstract previous/current submission (in FP7) A2 Legal address/administrator address/r&d address Clear identification as SME/Public body/research centre/ Educ. establishment Proposer identification code PIC A3 Cost details (direct/indirect costs distinguished) Page 16 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

17 PROPOSAL PART B Page 17 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

18 Proposal Part B (pdf format only) Part B format directly linked to evaluation criteria Summary S&T quality (sub-criteria = sections) - (C1) Implementation (sub-criteria = sections) (C2) Impact (sub-criteria = sections) (C3) Ethics Section lengths recommended (should not be exceeded) The criteria are equally weighthed. Devide your effort accordingly Page 18 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

19 Part B Section 1 (max 20 pages) Section 1.1 Concept and objectives (C1a) Rational Objectives and scope State the overall objective (summarizing the whole project idea in one sentence) in response to the challenge(s) introduced in the rationale. Describe your sub-objectives (1 sentence, 25 words) short/mid/long term Quantify your impact: to describe the sub-objectives in measurable terms and in line with the call targets. Describe the scope: your research axes. Clearly describe your output: The project will deliver the following output: output 1, output2, Clarify the Technology Readiness Level, e.g. a simple proof of concept or full prototype validation/demonstration Relevance to the call Provide a table showing how your proposal contributes ot the objectives of the call: Page 19 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

20 Part B Section 1 (max 20 pages) The call objectives x.x.x Call objective 1 Text from work programme 1 Text from work programme 1 x.x.x Call objective 2 Text from work programme 1 Project contribution Describe your contribution Describe your contribution Describe your contribution Page 20 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

21 Part B Section 1 (max 20 pages) Section 1.2 Progress beyond the state of the art (C1b) Has to be written giving clear indications on the "as-is" and the "as-will-be" after your project. Collect all running or recently finished EU projects with similar topics and describe the links to your proposal. Describe synergies and complementarity. Describe the project innovative aspects and research axes Page 21 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

22 Part B Section 1 (max 20 pages) Section 1.3 S/T methodology and associated work plan (C1c) Overall strategy of the work plan e.g. requirements phase, implementation phase, validation phase, demonstration phase rational for your milestone Gantt chart to present detailed timing Textual WP descriptions Objective of the WP, starting basis, approach, technique and tools to reach the objective, subtasks (main developments) and their interconnections, contribution to milestones (means of verification, quality measures). Clearly describe the roles of the partners, e.g. who will implement what? (e.g. who does what, in which time frame, the complementarities, I/O). Industrial partners for e.g. progress meeting, contribution with expertise, checking WP forms Page 22 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

23 Part B Section 1 (max 20 pages) WP Forms WP head Objective Description of work Task list: Task 1.1 (indicate Task Leader here) - just a short bullet list summarising the most important points form Task 1.2 Role of the partners: Partner 1: to lead, to participate/contribute, to implement Partner 2: Risks and contingency plan: Risk Risk-level (low, middle, high) Contingency plan Deliverables Enumerate the deliverables. Deliverables should be consistent with WP effort (big effort = important deliverable) Page 23 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

24 Part B Section 1 (max 20 pages) Needed WPs/Topics: Requirement Analysis Evaluation Dissemination Project Management Make sure that there are enough public deliverables - e.g. public core text with confidential annex Page 24 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

25 Part B Section 2 Implementation (C2) Section 2.1 Management structure and procedures (max 5 pages) (C2a) Use charts, tables and graphs to describe your management structure, work plan and concepts. You normally need: a Project Leader a Technical Committe or a Technical leader a Management Committee a Dissemination and Exploitation Leader a IPR Management Committee WP, Task and Deliverable Leaders You need processes for Quality management Project Management (e.g. foreseen distribution of responsibilities, which type of meetings, processes for collaboration (e.g. Project Place)) Budget Management (How many Progress Reports?, Distribution of budget based on Cost Statements, ) Risk Management including a Risk Register. Show that you know the processes of the EC, e.g. that you have to prepare periodic reports Page 25 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

26 Part B Section 2 Implementation Section 2.2. Individual participants (max 1 page per partner) (C2b) Keep the limits Organisation Name Abbreviation Type Description Previous experience Qualification of key personal Contribution Page 26 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

27 Part B Section 2 Implementation Section 2.3 Consortium as a whole (C2c) Underline the complementarity and balance of your consortium. Show why it is necessary to have industrial partners and research partners The collaboration is crucial because these have specific knowledge and expertise in an area XYZ that is currently not well developed in the industry. Show which partner covers which competency. Highlight the quality of your partners. Why at an international level: e.g. equipment (e.g. simulators) only available at an international level or the project builds on specific knowledge and expertise that is relatively scarce. Highlight presence of SMEs in the consortium Page 27 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

28 Part B Section 2 Implementation Section 2.4 Ressources to be committed (max 2 pages) (C2c) Explanation of all Other direct cost : travel cost equipment cost consumables Who will provide what equipment, test subjects, etc.? How will you guarantee that the equipment is available or can be mobilised? Page 28 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

29 Part B Section 3 Impact (max 10 pages) 3.1 Expected impacts listed in the work programme (C3a) Contribution to impacts listed in the Work Programme Refer to a relevant SRA Refer to timelines in the SRA. When will your technology be ready? Reinforcing European Competitivemness Describe similar initiatives in Asia and USA and Europe s position. Describe why your project will emphasize or improve Europe s position Societal needs e.g. reducing accidents, Education Accounts of national research activities Contribution to standards Page 29 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

30 Part B Section 3 Impact (max 10 pages) Section 3.2 Dissemination and/or exploitation of project results, and management of intellectual property (C3b) Individual plans What will be disseminated/exploited? Mention conferences and journals. website workshops Section 3.3 Intellectual Property Rights (C3b) see Model Consortium Agreements Page 30 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

31 Part B Section 3 Impact (max 10 pages) Section 4 Ethical Issues Section 5 Consideration of geneder aspects Glossary Abbreviations Literature Page 31 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

32 FINAL REMARKS Page 32 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

33 Reasons for rejection Bad consortium 76% Bad relevancy 59% (EU, exploitation, dissemination) Bad Implementation 32% Not enough innovation 29% Not enough information 21% Bad management 20% Out of scope of the call 10% Too high costs 10% Page 33 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS

34 Yes, it s a lot of work. And don t forget: if your proposal is successful, you are the ones who will have to carry out the promises. Good luck Page 34 Dr. Andreas Lüdtke - OFFIS