Overview. EU Energy Focus. Key aspects of Horizon EU Energy Focus. Funding Actions eligibility and funding rates

Transcription

1 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 of Energy and Climate Change Provide support for UK organisations on European energy programmes Part of European National Contact Point network Key aspects of Horizon 2020 Research, innovation and market transformation Collaborative in majority of cases Cost sharing (no profit) Commission defined priorities Innovative at European level European impact Funding Actions eligibility and funding rates Funding Actions eligibility and funding rates Research and Innovation Actions (RIA): Includes basic and applied research, technology development and integration, testing and validation on a small scale prototype or simulated environment 3 independent legal entities from different Member States or Associated Countries Funding rate: maximum 100% Innovation Actions (IA): Includes demonstration or pilot to validate technical and economic viability of a new or improved technology, product, process, service or solution Also market replication i.e. support for the first application or deployment in the market of an already demonstrated innovation 3 independent legal entities from different Member States or Associated Countries Funding rate: maximum 70% (except for non-profit legal entities where a maximum of 100% applies check precise definition) Coordination and Support Actions (CSA): Including improving market conditions and aiding market transformation e.g. standardisation, fostering dialogue, capacity building (similar to FP7 CSA and IEE activities) 1 legal entity from different Member States or Associated Countries * Funding rate: maximum 100% * however EU collaboration may be favoured for some topics 1

2 Costing Direct Costs Eligible direct costs are funded at 70% or 100% depending on type of action and type of organisation RIA, CSA: 100% funding for all applicants IA: 70% funding, but non-profit legal entities funded at 100% Indirect Costs Flat rate 25% of total direct eligible costs excluding direct eligible costs for subcontracting and the costs of resources made available by third parties which are not used on the premises of the beneficiaries, as well as financial support to third parties NB - For smart cities demonstrator projects a unit cost rate is used for the building-related demonstration activities. 5 th May 2015 deadline - Call topics Focus in this session on Research and Innovation Actions (RIA) and Innovation Actions (IA): LCE : Demonstration of renewable electricity and heating/cooling technologies (IA) LCE : Demonstrating advanced biofuel technologies (IA) LCE : Modelling and analysing the energy system, its transformation and impacts (RIA) LCE : Innovation and technologies for the deployment of meshed off-shore grids (IA) LCE : Transmission grid and wholesale market (IA & RIA) LCE : Large scale energy storage (IA) SCC : Smart Cities and Communities solutions integrating energy, transport, ICT sectors through lighthouse (large scale demonstration - first of the kind) projects (IA) Also Stage 2 proposals for LCE2, LCE11, LCE15, LCE17 (only those successful at stage 1) H2020 Key Messages to date Work Programme Structure Importance of technology being at the appropriate Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and including evidence of this assessment Need to address Specific Challenge and the Scope of the Call topic Vital to describe how the project will contribute to the Expected Impact set out in the Call topic SCC1 replication plans are compulsory and are part of the evaluation NB - Extract, not full text 3 evaluation criteria Excellence Impact Implementation Score range of 0 to 5. The threshold for individual criteria is 3. The overall threshold, applying to the sum of the three individual scores is 10. For Innovation actions, to determine the ranking, the score for the criterion impact will be given a weight of 1.5. Excellence Clarity and pertinence of the objectives Credibility of the proposed approach Soundness of the concept, including trans-disciplinary considerations, where relevant Extent that proposed work is ambitious, has innovation potential, and is beyond the state of the art (e.g. ground-breaking objectives, novel concepts and approaches) NB - Stage 2 proposers do not assume that stage 1 success means that you will pass the threshold for Excellence at stage 2 without further work on section 1 of the proposal 2

3 Key messages - Excellence Excellence evaluator comments Define clear, focused, quantified objectives (3 to 5 goals for the project) these should not be a list of your activities Make a clear link to the Specific Challenge and Scope of the Call topic Include a thorough description of the state of the art and how the activities will build upon it and advance it Convince the evaluators that the concept will work, justify your approach (evidence) and highlight any unique selling points The proposal is very good, clear and pertinent in general: overall, the objectives are interesting and ambitious. However, some of them are not sufficiently focussed. The approach of the project is generally appropriate for the stated objectives. The concept is very sound. The advantages of the concept have been convincingly described. X The description of the background and existing initiatives is somewhat superficial, and it is unclear how the consortium plans to build on running/past projects. X There is a comprehensive review of the state of the art, however the innovation potential looks limited. X A shortcoming is that the starting TRL has not been fully described. X The gender approach is weak because the proposal does not involve a proper analysis of the role and significance of gender aspects in relation to energy. Impact The expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic Enhancing innovation capacity and integration of new knowledge Strengthening the competitiveness and growth of companies by developing innovations meeting the needs of European and global markets, and where relevant, by delivering such innovations to the markets Any other environmental and socially important impacts Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results (including management of IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant Impact example Output thin-film PV technology with module efficiency of higher than 15% Output development of a low cost manufacturing route Impact reduction in cost of thin-film PV module to < EUR../W thus increasing European thin-film PV installed by.% to.gw For Innovation actions, to determine the ranking, the score for the criterion impact will be given a weight of 1.5. Key messages - Impact Impact evaluator comments Ensure there is a link between your programme of work and expected impact Explain how you have calculated your baseline Quantify the expected impact Explain the assumptions you have used to extrapolate the expected impact Describe how you will monitor the project and measure the impact Include a detailed dissemination plan that is tailored to the stakeholders and explains their involvement Explain how the work will be continued after the end of the project The specific impact for each country is considered and this is a positive aspect. The proposal addresses the expected impact listed in the work programme. Short-term, medium and long-term impacts are provided. The economic and social impacts including jobs creation and affordable energy supply are presented in a measurable way and in relation with the technical objectives of the proposal. X The presented dissemination and communication plans are appropriate for increasing the visibility to the project, however as presented, they are not fully suitable to reach the target groups. X The impact analysis is very vague. The claimed impacts are not supported by appropriate and credible evidence. 3

4 Section 2.2 Measures to maximise impact Section 2.2 Measures to maximise impact Two sections Dissemination and Communication distinct difference between the two Dissemination linked to exploitation and therefore should address potential users and uses and have a clear link to the achievement of the expected impact 2.2a) Dissemination and exploitation of results Proposal should include a draft dissemination and exploitation plan describing a credible path to deliver the innovations to the market or to the next development stage Communication provision of information on the project 2.2b) Communication activities promoting the project and its findings during the period of the grant. Measures should be proportionate to the scale of the project, with clear objectives. They should be tailored to the needs of various audiences, including groups beyond the project's own community. Where relevant, include measures for public/societal engagement on issues related to the project. 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 Key messages - Implementation Follow a logical structure including clear feedback loops Provide sufficient detail to justify the budget allocations Include a consistent level of detail for each work package Include a risk plan Explain why the project team has been selected Consider the balance of effort and whether the partners have provided evidence that they have sufficient operational capacity Implementation evaluator comments Common feedback on draft proposals (1) The overall work plan is coherent and well adapted to the proposal's targets. The allocation of tasks and resources is balanced and reflects the skills of the partners. The consortium has all the relevant skills and the partners complement each other. The work packages and the tasks are detailed and wellstructured. X The mitigation measures for the risks addressed are not fully satisfactory. X There is a lack of information on costs, particularly relating to subcontractors. The subcontracted activities are not sufficiently explained. Sub-sections not in the same order as the template guidance this makes the evaluators task more difficult Objectives should be specific to the project Impact should directly relate to objectives and be specific impact will be used to compare competing proposals (further information in Impact slides) There are many references to UK context and UK data but little information on the European situation this is crucial in order to convince the evaluators of the need for European funding and the exploitation potential of the technology The sections on international research and innovation activities and state of the art often only refer to activity undertaken by the partners the description should be broader than this, covering all relevant research and innovation activities and explaining the link between it and the proposed work 4

5 Common feedback on draft proposals (2) Support Services The section on gender is missing some reference should be made in order to show that it has been considered The indicators and targets are not quantified these should be quantified wherever possible The impact section is largely statements of what the project will achieve (outputs) this section should cover what will happen as a result of the outputs being achieved (impact) Telephone and helpline 9am to 5.30pm Monthly bulletins and alerts to new information Website Factsheets Webinar sessions on H2020 Work Programme and proposal development Proposal clinics in person or conference call Proposal review service Useful information LCE Call FAQ lce html#tab2 Smart Cities Information Day presentations and FAQ Presentations D927C5762E197D63 Recordings - df0bd90823 FAQ scc-2015.html#tab2 Proposal evaluation forms - #h2020-call_ptef-ef Contact details mail@euenergyfocus.co.uk 5