www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.ukWORKSHOP – Modules 3 - 4

BEST PRACTICEEU Participation Strategy •

Successful Proposals • IMPACT • EvaluationProject Management Team

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

2

Best Practice: Strategy & Proposals

• PHASES OF PROPOSAL WRITING3.1

• STEPS TO SUCCESS3.2

• MODELS OF PARTICIPATION (ICON)3.3

• RISKS ASSESSMENT • STAGE-GATE© APPROACH3.4

• PARTICIPATION CONCERNS3.5• ICON SUPPORT • ADVICE • PARTICIPATION3.6

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

3

CONTINUOUS ACTIVITY

FP7 CALL

Collect Ideas

Potential Partners

Promote Expertise

Future Proposals

Network

Conferences

PRE-CALL (3-6MO.)

DRAFT Work Programmes

DRAFT Ideas

CHECK Ideas

(NCPs, EU , DGs)

IDENTIFY Partners

NECESSARY Expertise

CORE / CONSORTIUM

Meetings

DESIGNATE WP leaders

DISTRIBUTE WORK

START WRITING

Submission

Short Outline

Part B

Parts A

3.1 Best Practice: Phases of Proposal Writing

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

4

• Register on CORDIS and formulate a STRATEGY/ RISKSs1• Navigate the INFO and FIND a CALL / AREA

(Work Programmes/Call Fiche)> special requirements?

s2

• Formulating a project IDEA and a WORKPLANs3• Identify suitable PARTNERS • Build a CONSORTIUM /

CORE contributors/ Preliminary RISK ASSESSMENTs4• Identify RESOURCES needed – realistic budgets/ correct

funding rates and OH/ resources ‘in kind’s5• Technical Part (Part B)- CLEAR/ CONCISE- attention to

IMPACT section!/ PERT/GANTT/ Risks/ Governance-Mgms6• Timely SUBMISSION > Evaluation points for Stage 2>

NEGOTIATIONS (Consortium Agreement build up> GAs7

3.2 BEST PRACTICE: STEPS TO SUCCESS

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

5

s1

https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/cas/ec/index.jsp

REGISTER & FORMULATE A STRATEGY

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

6

s1

European Commission (Head of Unit)

Project Officer > (Scientific Officer)

(Project Scientific/Technical Advisor)

Scientific (Project) Coordinator

(Deputy)

P1-Principal Investigator

Technology Developers / Integrators

Project Manager (Administrator)

Direct Users of Results (SMEs)

3rd Parties (Subcontractors)

MAIN PLAYERS

CONSORTIUM

Adv

isor

y B

oard

Sta

keh

old

ers

Pre

vio

us e

xper

ienc

eResearcher

Group/ Unit

Institution

ResearchCluster

SME

Trade Association

NGO

FORMULATE A PARTICIPATION STRATEGY

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

7

s2

http://cordis.europa.eu/eu-funding-guide/home_en.html

http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/participate_en.html

Navigate the INFO and FIND a CALL/AREA

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

8

s2

http://cordis.europa.eu/eu-funding-guide/home_en.html

http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/participate_en.html

Navigate the INFO and FIND a CALL/AREA (Work Programmes)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

9

s2 Navigate the INFO and FIND a CALL/AREA (Work Programmes/ Call Fiche/ Guides)

Call Fiche

WP2012 KBBE

Guide for Applicants

CPGuide for Applicants

CSA-CAGuide for Applicants

CSA-SA

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

10

s2 Navigate the INFO and FIND a CALL/AREA (Work Programmes/ Detailed Area)

Additional eligibility criteria?

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

11

s2 Navigate the INFO and FIND a CALL/AREA (Work Programmes/ Specific Guides)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

12

s2 Navigate the INFO and FIND a CALL/AREA (Instruments / Funding Regime)

CSA Coordination and Support Actions (100% funded, 7%OH)NO RESEARCH FUNDED !!!!!

CSA Support(€0.3mil-€1mil, average €0.5mil)

CSA Coordination (€0.3mil-€3mil, average €1 mil)

Workshops/Expert Groups

Conferences/ Seminars

Monitoring/Studies

Workshop/Event Series

Common Information Systems

Research Strategies

Networks / Personnel Exchanges

Development Research & Innovation Strategies

CP Collaborative Projects (IP, Large)

(€2mil-€16mil, average <€10 mil)

RTD 50-75%DEMO 50%

OTHER 100%

CP Focused (STREPs)(€0.8mil-€4mil, average <€3 mil)

minimum 3 MS/AC

CP SICA (INCO) (€0.8mil-€6mil, average <€4 mil)

min 2 MS/AC + 2-6 ICPC

FP6••••••••••••••FP7•••••••••••HORIZON2020

NETWORKS OF EXCELLENCE(€4mil-€12mil, average €5 mio)

Collaborative Research Joint Programming

EUROPEAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

13

s3

Original IDEA needs to be worked around CALL TEXT!

PROJECT OBJECTIVES based on CALL/AREA OBJECTIVES

Start build the CONSORTIUM based on ADDITIONAL ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA !!!!

Draft a WORKPLAN based on EXPECTED IMPACT!!!

Formulating a project IDEA and a WORKPLAN

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

14

s3 Formulating a WORKPLAN

KEY: Manage by WORKPACKAGE (WP) – NOT by PARTNER

SEPARATE WPs for MANAGEMENT and for DISSEMINATION/TRAINING (OTHER activities)

Identify WP Leader and Partners in order of priority and contribution/responsibilityDesignate DEPUTIES for continuity

AVOID: Everyone in every WP

AVOID: Partner per WP (except non-RTD= MGM & OTHER)

AVOID: Doing work in every WP (too dispersed)

AVOID/CHECK: ‘FLOATING PARTNERS’ or ‘TOKEN PARTNERS’

IDEAL: Lead one WP, be involved in a couple more.

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

15

s4

WHERE to find the ‘BEST PARTNERS’ ?

Best Scientists • Journals / Conferences/ R&D Cttees

Your NETWORKS

• Existing Projects• Coordination / COST Actions• EU R& D Associations/ ETIPs

Experts/ Advisors

• European Technology & Innovation Platforms

• Evaluators• High Level Groups• EU Desk Officers (for lobbying)• Faculty Research Services/ ICON

Strategic Partners

• SMEs• ICPC countries/ MPC countries• New Member States/AC• 3rd Countries

CONTACTS & LINKS :

National Contact Points

ICT Support Network

ENTERPRISE Europe Network• NCP-SME Network

Thematic Area Support Networks

ETIPs

Identify suitable PARTNERS & build a CONSORTIUM / add CORE contributors

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

16

s4 Search for PARTNERS /THEMATIC AREAS NETWORKS

COOPERATION PEOPLEHEALTH Health-NCP-

Netwww.healthncpnet.eu PEOPLE People

Networkwww.fp7peoplenetwork.eu

KBBE BIONET www.ncp-bio.net CAPACITIESICT IdealIST2011 www.ideal-ist.net RESEARCH

INFRASTRUCTUREEuroRIs-Net

www.euroris-net.eu

NMP NMP TeAm www.nmpteam.com SME NCP SME www.ncp-sme.net

ENERGY C-Energy + www.c-energyplus.eu REGIONS OF KNOWLEDGE

TRANS REG NCP

www.transregncp.eu

ENVIRO ENV-NCP-TOGETHER

http://env-ncp-together.eu RESEARCH POTENTIAL

ResPotNet www.respotnet.eu

TRANSPORT ETNA www.transport-ncps.net SCIENCE IN SOCIETY

EUROSIS www.eurosis-project.eu

SSH NET4SOCIETY www.net4society.eu INCO INCONTACT www.ncp-incontact.eu

SPACE COSMOS www.fp7-space.eu EURATOMSECURITY SEREN www.serenproject.eu EURATOM NUCL-EU www.nucleu.net

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

17

s4 Research for SMEs and SME Associations

Research for SMEs ‘Bottom-up’ scheme- any research topic across

SME Definition • Employ ≤ 250 persons • Annual turnover ≤ EUR 50 mil or ABS ≤ EUR 43 mil • Autonomy conditions

Minimum requirements

• ResSMEs: 3 independent SMEs from 3MS/AC + 2 independent RTD Performers (plus other enterprises/ end-users to contribute) • Projects between 1-2 years; EUR 0.5 to 1.5 million• ResSME-AGs:3 indep.SME-AGs from 3MS/AC or EU + 2 indep.

RTD Perform (& enterprises/ end-users)• Projects between 2-3 years; EUR 1.5 to 4 million

IPR Rules &Costing

• Cost & payment modalities should reflect the value of IPR rights• Special Agreements on ownership and IPR to SMEs/SME-Ags• Price of licences lower than price of ownership of results! • RTD Performers’ costs for RTD/Demo would be subcontracted to

SMEs under RTD (paid 100%)• RTD can also charge Management / Other activities (i.e.

training/dissemination) as eligible costs as partners• Overall EU financial support limited to 110% of subcontracting

by SMEs to RTD Performers (to be invoiced by RTD-P to SMEs)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

18

s4

Proposal Risks • Not enough time to cover the necessary time/ input• Over-enthusiastic initial approach and not timely

delivery of work for the proposal

Financial Risks • Under-evaluation of resources, wrong budget/work ratio

• Severe budget cuts during the length of project; £/€ fluctuations

• Cashflow, mainly for SMEs !• Late/wrong claims, very late payments, Financial

AUDITS

Legal risks • Restructuring the company/institution • Non-viable partners

• Defective/Incomplete Consortium Agreement

Partners / Coordinator Risk

• ‘weak’ or non-delivering partners• Non-performing or ‘weak’ Coordinator (Main

Beneficiary)

Best Practice: Preliminary Risk Assessment (1)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

19

s4 Best Practice: Preliminary Risk Assessment (2)

Technology Risk • Model/Software/ Pilot (DEMO) not performing/incomplete

Reputation • Damage to Brand or Image

Strategic Risk • Give away ideas, missing opportunities (proposal)

• Reduced Role in the project (negotiation)• Project non-relevant to organization, no

support, poor outcome

IPR Risks • No access rights to Background IPR during the project, extra costs

• Bad negotiation on access rights to Foreground IPR post-closure

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

20

s5

Proposal & Negotiation Stages

• Allocate appropriate personnel and time resources (non-recoverable on the project!!!!)

Correct Funding Rates

• Different Funding Rates > different TYPE of Organisations• Different TYPE of activities RTD -DEMO- MGM-OTH

Correct rate of OH (indirect costs)

• Public Organisations / SME (check conditions) allowed 60%• REAL indirect costs (could be audited)

Realistic Budgets • Staff Costs taking in account category of staff/ inflation rate• To reflect specific front-loaded /back-loaded work

Equipment • Purchase only if necessary- consider leasing/rental• Depreciation has to be taken in account for short projects!!!

In-kind Resources • Identify in the Proposal stage ‘in-kind’ resources of available equipment / personnel / support / use of facilities, etc.

Post-closure • Necessary travel, also expenses for maintenance (web), etc.

Identify RESOURCES needed

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

21

s6

Overall strategy of Workplan, PERT chart Coordinator and Core Team

WP description, objectives, deliverables and milestones WP Leaders with input

List of deliverables and milestones Project Manager with input

GANTT Chart, Summary Effort Table Project Manager with input

Risk & Contingency Plans Core Team & PM

Individual Partners description PIs for each Partner

Consortium as a Whole Coordinator with input ALL

Resources to be committed PM with input from ALL

IMPACT Section, including dissemination, exploitation, management , IPR, Ethical & Gender issues

Core Team with PM for dissemination/exploitation

Technical Part (Part B)RESPONSIBILITIES

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

22

s7

Stage 1 Submission

EV

AL

UA

TIO

N

EV

AL

UA

TIO

N

EV

AL

UA

TIO

N

SUBMISSION (single-stage)

GR

AN

T A

GR

EE

ME

NT

SIG

NIN

G

STA

RT

CO

NS

OR

TIU

M A

GRE

EMEN

T

TIMELY SUBMISSION > EVALUATION STAGE 2 > NEGOTIATIONS (CA BUILD UP) > GA

Stage 2 Submission

Negotiation

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

23

MODEL

A(coordinated)

MODEL

B(partnership)

MODEL

C(coordinator)

MODEL

D(secondment)

MODEL

E(service provider/ subcontractor)

IMPERIAL Main Beneficiary

Partner Partner Main Beneficiary

=

Coordinator Different Organisation

ICON Different Organisation

Imperial Consultants

Non-RTD Partner (Mgm-Diss-Trg)

Non-RTD Partner (Mgm-Diss-Trg)

CoordinationNon-RTD(Mgm-Diss-Trg)Limited RTD

Secondment(Mgm-Diss)

Special clause 38GA

Non-RTD Partner (Mgm-Diss-Trg)

RTD provider + Other activities

Funding (Imperial Consultants)

100% funded93% OH

100% funded93% OH

Non-RTD (100% funded, 93% OH)RTD (50% funded, 93% OH)

100% funded60% OH (IMP)

100% funded93% OH

50-100% fundedAdmin/dissem/training93% OH

Project Types

Large-Medium CP/IP

Strategic CP/IP

SME-targeted CP / IP/ STREPs

Small STREPs / IP / CSAs

Industrial-led Strategic CP/IP

Commercial / PPP

3.3 MODELS OF PARTICIPATION IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

24

3.4 RISK ASSESSMENT /STAGE-GATE© APPROACH

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

25

College Mgm BoardICON Board / CEO

College Mgm BoardICON Board / CEO

Heads of Department/Imperial Consultants

Heads of Department/Imperial Consultants

College Support ServicesCollege Support Services

Research Groups / Academics

Research Groups / Academics

ProposalsProposals

ConcernsConcerns -Implement Strategy-Increase Income

-Improve Reputation

-Implement Strategy-Increase Income

-Improve Reputation

ConcernsConcerns-Vision/Strategy

-Scientific Reputation

-Vision/Strategy-Scientific Reputation

ConcernsConcerns -Clear Procedures-Risks & Liabilities

-Clear Procedures-Risks & Liabilities

ConcernsConcerns -Resources-Funding

-Academic Freedom

-Resources-Funding

-Academic Freedom

3.5 PARTICIPATION CONCERNS

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

26

EvaluationEvaluation PossibleAudit

PossibleAuditNegotiationNegotiation Project

Delivery

ProjectDeliveryProposalProposal

Identify most suitable ‘Topics’ and Funding Schemes /Link to NCPIdentify most suitable ‘Topics’ and Funding Schemes /Link to NCP

Advice on selecting strategic partners + role in projectsAdvice on selecting strategic partners + role in projects

‘IMPACT’ / ‘IMPLEMENTATION’ ‘IMPACT’ / ‘IMPLEMENTATION’

Pre-check Proposal (Management, Dissemination, Financial, IPR)Pre-check Proposal (Management, Dissemination, Financial, IPR)

EPSS, Templates, SpreadsheetsEPSS, Templates, Spreadsheets

Call for Proposals Alert ServiceCall for Proposals Alert Service Sample Proposals/ ‘Clinic’Sample Proposals/ ‘Clinic’

Additional eligibility criteria • SME/INCO partners • Risk assessm.Additional eligibility criteria • SME/INCO partners • Risk assessm.

3.6 IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS SUPPORT – ADVICE - PARTICIPATION

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

27

3.6 IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS SUPPORT – ADVICE - PARTICIPATION

EvaluationEvaluation PossibleAudit

PossibleAuditNegotiationNegotiation Project

Delivery

ProjectDeliveryProposalProposal

Review of Evaluators Comments / RecommendationsReview of Evaluators Comments / Recommendations

Support for FP7 software tools (GPF, Excel spreadsheets, etc.)Support for FP7 software tools (GPF, Excel spreadsheets, etc.)

Advice on Model Grant Agreements/Consortium AgreementsAdvice on Model Grant Agreements/Consortium Agreements

Financial Forms (calculating budgets and signing forms)Financial Forms (calculating budgets and signing forms)

Attend Grant Negotiation meetings in BrusselsAttend Grant Negotiation meetings in Brussels

Contributions to re-writing ANNEX 1 to GA (DoW)Contributions to re-writing ANNEX 1 to GA (DoW)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

28

3.6 IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS SUPPORT – ADVICE - PARTICIPATION

EvaluationEvaluation PossibleAudit

PossibleAuditNegotiationNegotiation Project

Delivery

ProjectDeliveryProposalProposal

Advice on Legal and Financial IssuesAdvice on Legal and Financial Issues

Advice on Preparation/Review of ‘Claims’ (Form C + Certs)Advice on Preparation/Review of ‘Claims’ (Form C + Certs)

Troubleshooting (‘Fire fighting’) • Emergency Management Troubleshooting (‘Fire fighting’) • Emergency Management

Annual Reps, Mid-Term Reviews, Final Reviews, Dissemination, IPR MgmAnnual Reps, Mid-Term Reviews, Final Reviews, Dissemination, IPR Mgm

Day to Day Consortium Mgm & Admin • Closure ManagementDay to Day Consortium Mgm & Admin • Closure Management

Event Management (Kick-off / Annual Meetings/Training Workshops)Event Management (Kick-off / Annual Meetings/Training Workshops)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

QUESTIONS ?

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

30

• IMPACT4.1

• EVALUATION4.2

• THE EVALUATORS4.3

• COMMON MISTAKES & TIPS4.4

4. BEST PRACTICE: IMPACT & EVALUATION

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

31

• What Gaps/ Problems is the PROPOSAL trying to fill / solve ?• Is it a European PRIORITY ? Can be solved at National/ Regional

level ?• Are SOLUTIONS already available ? (Products- Services- Technologies)• How will the PROPOSAL advance things BEYOND the state of the art ?• Why NOW? What happens if it is planned / achieved in the future ?• Why YOUR CONSORTIUM ? Do you have the best lined-up

partnership?• Any LINKS with ongoing work / research ? NETWORKING synergies?• Who will use the outcome/ results ? End-Users ? Stakeholders ?

Background to the Proposal

Inform (‘Educate’) the Evaluators

4.1 BEST PRACTICE: IMPACT (1)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

32

4.1 BEST PRACTICE: IMPACT (1)

Questions to Assess IMPACT

Expected Results- WHAT will come out of the Project ?

End Users – WHO would want the RESULTS of your Project ?

Lead Users – WHY would want they want the OUTCOME?

Stakeholders– HOW do you plan to disseminate results ?

Further Development – WHAT steps will be needed ? EXPLOITATION ? HOW? WHOM ?E

XP

EC

TE

D I

MP

AC

T (

Cal

l te

xt)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

33

4.1 BEST PRACTICE: IMPACT (3)EX

PECT

ED IM

PACT

(Cal

l tex

t) EXPECTED OUTPUTS

Researchers PhDs • Publications • Recognition • New research Ideas

Industry / SMEs

Patents • Licenses • Know-how • Problems solved• Models

Policy Makers Officials

Data/Studies to support policy • Advice • Workshops

Standards Draft Protocols • Solid support data • Harmonization

Society Data & Studies • Workshops • Support • Validation

OUTPUTS (RESULTS) OUTCOMES IMPACTS

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

34

Stage 1 Criteria

TWO-STAGE PROPOSALS EVALUATION

HEALTH2013-INNO.1/2 * ICT-FET OPEN * NMP2013 * ENERGY2013-2STG * ENV2013-2STG

4.2

Stage 2 Criteria

BEST PRACTICE: EVALUATION (1)

EVALUATION

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

35

S/T QUALITY

IMPLEMENTATION

IMPACT

• RELEVANCE to the TOPIC (CALL/AREA)

• Soundness of CONCEPT & quality of OBJECTIVES

• Progress BEYOND state of the art• Quality & Effectiveness of S/T

METHODOLOGY & WORKPLAN• PERT & GANTT charts

4.2 BEST PRACTICE: EVALUATION (2)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

EVALUATION (3)4.2

36

S/T QUALITY

IMPLEMENTATION

IMPACT

• Quality and Efficiency of IMPLEMENTATION

• Appropriateness of MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE & GOVERNANCE

• Appropriate PROCEDURES• Quality & Relevant Experience of

PARTICIPANTS• Quality of CONSORTIUM as a whole• PRIOR COLLABORATIONS & LINKS• Appropriate allocation &

JUSTIFICATION of RESOURCES (budget, staff, equipment) & ‘in kind’ resources

• RISK ASSESSMENT & Contingency Plans

BEST PRACTICE: EVALUATION (3)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

37

4.2

S/T QUALITY

IMPLEMENTATION

IMPACT

• Potential/Expected IMPACT through DEVELOPMENT, DISSEMINATION, USE OF RESULTS

• Appropriate DISSEMINATION PLAN• EXPLOITATION PLAN of results

and MANAGEMENT of IPR• Separate CRITERIA > MARIE CURIE

& FET (Frontier Res)

BEST PRACTICE: EVALUATION (4)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

38

4.2

Eligibility Pre-check

Individual Evaluation

Individual Evaluation

Consensus meetingScores, ESR

Thresholds ESRletter

Panel Review(optional hearing-

IP/NoE)

Ethical Review(if needed)

Commission Ranking

ESRletter

NEGOTIATION PROPOSAL

ESRletters

Individual Evaluation

BEST PRACTICE: EVALUATION (5)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

39

• Evaluators work individually, no communication allowed• Each proposal evaluated by 3 to 5 evaluators• Evaluators fill in IAR forms (Individual Assessment Report)• Each evaluator has 3 to 6 proposals/day with max. 2h per

proposal• First impressions:

• Title• ABSTRACT• Objectives• Partnership• Consistency, Formatting & Length

• First 15-30 minutes of evaluation are CRUCIAL

EVALUATORS (1)

4.3

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

40

EVALUATORS (2)

4.3

• Detailed reading for each specific criterion• ‘Within scope’ assessment• Objectives and soundness of S/T concepts• ‘Make-or-break’ evaluation:

• Technical issues • Management structures• Consortium complementarity• Finances/ Resources justification• IMPACT• Ethical & Security considerations

• Decide SCORE and complete IAR (Individual Assessment Report)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

41

EVALUATORS (3)

4.3

• CONSENSUS MEETING • Minutes recorded by a Rapporteur• Commission represented by a Moderator• Reading and understanding each other EXPERT’s

individual comments• Preliminary discussions• Roundtable discussion on each CRITERIA• Consensus obtained (NOT a mathematical

average of individual scores!)• Explanation text and justification• CONSENSUS REPORT (drafted by Rapporteur)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

42

EVALUATORS (4)

4.3

• PANEL MEETING to assess/compare Consensus Reports

• Overall quality and number of proposals evaluated

• Special attention:

• Proposals that scored very high but failed ONE non-S/T criteria

• Proposals with equal scores near funding thresholds

• Proposals with equal scores will be ranked:

• Objectives > Relevance > Impact > Resources >

>Horizontal issues

• FINAL RANKING

• Commission prepares FINAL DECISION > NEGOTIATION LIST

• RESERVE LIST (for withdrawals, unsuccessful negotiations)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

43

4.4

Best Practice: Common Mistakes Best Practice: Problems

• Excellent S/T- Poor Consortium / Implementation/ POOR IMPACT

• EC requested contribution EXCEEDS the limit (no evaluation!)

• Does NOT address the text of CALL • EPSS crashed due to last minute submissions

• General/ Vague IDEAS • Overlap of research ALREADY funded

• Proposal NOT edited/ NOT Proof Read • Incomplete TABLES of effort, deliverables

• Unclear relation between WPs / PERT?

• TOO LONG- exceeds prescribed pagination

• Incongruous Proposal- looks patched together

• Part A not validated properly• Budget does not tally!

COMMON MISTAKES & TIPS (1)

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

44

4.4 COMMON MISTAKES & TIPS (2)

BEST PRACTICE:TIPS for SUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS

CREDIBILITY IDEA convincing and achievable

COMMUNICATION Clear description of work and what/how will be done

CONCRETE Very specific (not general) conceptsWHO will do WHAT, WHEN and HOW!

CONSISTENCY High quality documentation (proof-read) edited

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

www.imperial-

consultants.co.uk

QUESTIONS ?THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !

consultants@imperial.ac.uk