eurostars-2 webina… · eurostars-2 r&d smes sme instr. p2 . innovative smes . fti innovative...

© EUREKA Secretariat 2015

Eurostars-2 EUROSTARS WEBINAR

HELPING SMES TO INNOVATE

Dr Peter Chisnall Eurostars Operations Controller

EUREKA Secretariat

Brussels, 7 September 2015


EUREKA is…

2

Intergovernmental network

Leading platform for international cooperation

Supporting market-oriented

R&D projects

Facilitating access to finance


1985 2015

More than €37 billion invested

3

€37+ billion 5900+

projects

9500+ SMEs

2400+ Universities

2100+ Research centres

4600+ Large

companies


More than 40 EUREKA countries

4

Full members Associated countries National information points International cooperation


EUREKA characteristics

5

Innovative product, process or service

Market-oriented

nature

Bottom-up approach

International cooperation


Public-private partnership

6

At least 2 EUREKA countries involved

SME

University Large

Company

Example of EUREKA project


Technology area

7

1985–2014

2008–2014

Electronics, IT and Telecoms Technology

29.4%

30.0%

Data for EUREKA Network projects and Eurostars

Industrial Manufacturing, Material and Transport

21.4%

18.5%

Biological Sciences / Technologies

17.7%

21.4%

Technology for Protecting Man and the Environment

6.4%

5.3%

Energy Technology

6.3%

6.8%


Market area

8

1985–2014

2008–2014

Industrial Products / Manufacturing

20.2%

19.3%

Medical / Health Related

20.0%

22.1%

Transportation

9.8%

8.6%

Consumer Related

9.5%

8.8%

Data for EUREKA Network projects and Eurostars


Participants in EUREKA projects

9

Industry is representing 75% of participants Data for EUREKA Network projects and Eurostars

1985–1994 1995–2004 2005–2014

16% Research Institutes

11% 13% Universities

13%

5% 1%

Others

42% Large Companies

12%

24%

63% SMEs


Over 40 countries

NETWORK PROJECTS 4193 projects

UMBRELLAS CLUSTERS 784 projects

EUROSTARS 1012 projects

PRO- FACTORY+

EUREKA TOURISM

PLUS

E! SURF

EUROAGRI

CELTIC PLUS

EURIPIDES

CATRENE

ITEA 3 EUROGIA

2020

ACQUEAU

METALLURGY

EUREKA instruments


Eurostars is…

11


Eurostars under Horizon 2020

12


Eurostars countries

13

Austria Bulgaria Belgium Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece

Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta The Netherlands Norway Poland

Portugal Romania Slovak Republic Slovenia South Korea Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom

34 countries


SMEs in the driving seat

14

72% 12%

9% 6%

SME is always the project leader

R&D-performing SMEs and SMEs

University

Research institute

Large company



Eurostars SME profile

15

of the work done by SMEs

of participants are R&D performing SMEs

of SMEs have less than 50 employees

of SMEs workforce is dedicated to R&D activities

50% 64%

83% 40%


Market oriented

16


Bottom-up

17


A typical Eurostars project

18

average project cost

€1.4 million

average duration

29 months

2–3 countries

3–4 participants Data for

Cut-off 1–10


Eurostars in numbers

19

total costs of applications funded €1.1 billion

number of participants 2600

number of approved projects 783

total costs of applications €4.9 billion

number of applicants 11733

number of applications 3548

23% success

rate

Projects submitted Projects funded

47 countries involved

472M estimated

public funding

Cut-off 1–10


Impact

20


Impact

21


Real reasons to participate

22

Mutual sharing

of human and

financial resources

Develop new

products/services/

processes

Complement skills

with the skills of

other participants

Obtain

public funds

Access

new markets

Mutual sharing

of existing

know-how

Share the risk Develop strategic

co-operation

with competitors

Other

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

You want to do something that is too big to do alone

You need access to someone else’s science/ technology

Requires collaboration across the value chain

You have a solution for someone else

Access skills you do not have

Access new markets

Share risks


Eurostars process

23 © EUREKA Secretariat 2015


Easy application

24


Straightforward, secure application

25


Application form

26


Content of the application

27

• Project Pitch: Overview of your project • Business case: Why ? (how will it get to market,

competition, IPR,…) • Project description: What is it about? • Work packages: How, by whom, .. ? • Participants: Who are you? How is structured

your consortium? • Project annexes


Application: TO DO LIST

28

1. Check if your organization is eligible to receive funding Speak to your NPC about all available options!

2. Complete all sections of the application form 3. Ensure that each organization has the correct status 4. Ensure that all contact details are correct 5. Upload annexes 6. Double-check content – proof reading is the cheapest way

of making your application better 7. Check your application form is complete 8. Check your application is eligible 9. Submit !!!


Application: links to additional info

29


Evaluation

30


Eligibility

31


Eligibility criteria

32

E1 - Consortium leader is an R&D-performing SME * FTE = Full time equivalent E2 – The project leader is from a Eurostars country E3 – The project contains at least 2 legal entities, independent from each other E4 – The consortium is a partnership hosted by at least 2 Eurostars countries



33

E5 - The budget (excluding subcontracting) of the R&D-performing SME(s) located in Eurostars countries is equal to at least 50.00% of the total project budget E6 - No single entity is responsible for more than 75.00% of the project budget E7 – The participant(s) from a given country may not be responsible for more than 75.00% of the total project budget E8 – The project duration is 36.0 months or fewer E9 – Market introduction is within 24.0 months of the project’s completion



34

E10 - The project meets the EUREKA criteria and must have a civilian purpose E11 - Each of the participating organisations in the consortium is a legal entity in the host country E12 – None of the participating organisations have convictions for fraudulent behaviour, other financial irregularities or illegal business practices E13 – None of the participating organisations have been declared bankrupt or are in the process of being declared bankrupt


Evaluation criteria

35


1st step: Assessment by independent experts

36


1st step: Assessment by independent experts

37

• For each sub criteria experts must provide a score out of six

• The rounded average of the sub criteria scores is used as the score for the main criteria

• Experts are said to be in agreement when their scores fall on the same side of the mid-point of the scale

• If there is an outlying score (an expert scores the other side of the mid-point compared to the other two) that score is disregarded and not used in calculating the average value

• A threshold for progression to the panel evaluation where for at least two major criteria, the average of the expert’s scores is 4.3* or greater, where there is agreement for the criteria in question


1st step: Example 1

38

Project Expert Quality and

efficiency of the implementation

Impact Excellence Result

TEST 2 A 6 6 5 B 4 4 4 C 3 1 2 Sum of scores 13 11 11 Count of scores >3 2 2 2 Score to be subtracted Min Min Min Score to be subtracted 3 1 2 Sum of scores - Subtracted score 10 10 9

# criteria above 4.3 RESULT

Amended Average: 5.00 5.00 4.50 3 2nd Evaluation

Step- IEP


1st step: Example 2

39

Project Expert Quality and

efficiency of the implementation

Impact Excellence Result

TEST EX A 4 4 4 B 2 5 3 C 3 5 3 Sum of scores 9 14 10 Count of scores >3 1 3 1 Score to be subtracted Max - Max Score to be subtracted 4 - 4 Sum of scores - Subtracted score 5 14 6

# criteria above 4.3 RESULT

Amended Average: 2.50 4.66 3 1 Overseeing

Body


2nd step: Scoring and ranking by independent panel

40

• Only projects rated above the quality thresholds are recommended for funding • The funding of projects is following the ranking list until national budget exhaustion • The funding of partners is based on the national funding rules


Decentralized funding

41


Timing

42

Time-to-contract is within 4 to 7 months


Monitoring progress

43


Call planning

44

• Cut-off 4: 17 September 2015

• Cut-Off 3: 5 March 2015

266 applications – 96 funded; 36% success rate

• Cut-Off 2: 11 September 2014


• Cut-Off 1: 13 March 2014


2 Cut-off dates per year up to 2020


Eurostars, SME, & Fast-Track…

45

Similar, complementary … but different

• Industrial innovation • Bottom up (mostly)

• Target group • TRL • Consortium make-up • Thematic fields • Budget • Funding rates • Time to grant • Success rates

One size does not fit all - giving applicants a choice



46

Eurostars-2 R&D SMEs

SME Instr. P2 Innovative SMEs

FTI Innovative Companies

Eurostars-2 To prototype

SME Instr. P2 Demonstrator

(6)

FTI Demonstrator

(6)

Target Group Technology readiness level



47

Eurostars-2 2 international

partners

SME Instr. P2 1 applicant

FTI 3-5 partners

Consortium make-up (min.)

Eurostars 2 Bottom up

SME Instr. P2 13 topics

FTI Unclear

Thematic fields



48

Eurostars 2 164 MEUR

SME Instr. P2 232 MEUR

FTI 100 MEUR

Annual budget

Eurostars 2 <7 months

SME Instr. P2 6 months

FTI 6 months

Time to grant



49

Eurostars 2 Approx. 50%

SME Instr. P2 70%

FTI 70%

Funding rate

Eurostars 2 >25% (~75%)

SME Instr. P2 10-12% (~42%)

FTI 5%

Success rate



50

Eurostars • Fast decision - 13-19 weeks from application to result • Bottom up in technology, market and funding decision • Great for start-ups • Local contacts with specialist knowledge • Immediate and detailed feedback on success and failure


Some misconceptions

51

Reality Thoughts Descriptions of research methods matter more than business plans Partners from the countries with big budgets are best It’s all about who you know You are like the European Commission – you must have the same rules

Eurostars is for business. Exploitation and impact are vital Only the best projects are funded. If you sacrifice quality for budget availability you might still lose Strict criteria ensure that excellence is the only factor Funding is defined by NATIONAL rules and may differ across countries – contact your NPC


Factors for Success - Planning

52

• Be available > Allow time for necessary preparation (partner search, project

proposal, consortium agreement…)

• Build up a « win-win » cooperation > Show complementarities and added value of trans-national

partnership during and after the project

• Show partnership’s ability to meet its commitments > Demonstrate each party’s management, scientific and technical

skills as well as its available financial resources for the project

• In austerity, tax payers money is a scarce resource > Demonstrate the fact that you have good financial health and

have considered all of your options. > If you are too risky, you might not be able to access support.


Factors for Success

53

• Set clear, measurable and verifiable objectives > Define success indicators for technological performance as well as

the commercial and financial targets to achieve

• Demonstrate clearly why the projects should be financed > Highlight the risks and the strategic character of the project in

terms of expected commercial and financial impact on a European scale

> Is it value for money?

• Be technologically ambitious while remaining realistic > Define a methodical approach in line with partnership, budget and

time limit set for the completion of the project and the marketing of its results


Factors for Success

54

• Point out the innovative nature of the proposal submitted

> Present new industrial applications and their impact on the industry sector and relevant markets

• Describing the technology is the easy bit there is more… > Who are you? Describe the benefits of this partnership, the added

value that each organisation brings? > Focus on the project methodology (objectives, means, results) > Appropriate and realistic cost breakdown > Analyse the risks. How will you mitigate against them?


Factors for Success

55

• Don’t forget your market (it sounds strange, but people do) > Product plans, exploitation plans, commercialisation strategy. > Analysis and comparison with state of the art. > Barriers to market entry? > Competitive advantages? > Realistic market share? Will you actually make ROI? > Or how to protect it – Good IPR analysis/strategies are rare

• Fill in the project application carefully and ensure it is clear > Promote the key elements the evaluators are looking for and ask an

objective party to read it > Proof read it – this is the cheapest way of making it better.

• Don’t allow yourself to be surprised by anything

> Do your homework > Speak to your National Project Coordinator (NPC)


Any Questions?


Peter Chisnall [email protected]

Good luck!

eurostars-2 webina… · eurostars-2 r&d smes sme instr. p2 . innovative smes . fti innovative...

Documents