External Monitoring of the Fourth Call CAPACITIES Programme (e-Infrastructures) Brussels, 2 February 2009 Research Infrastructures Programme Committee.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ENTITIES FOR A UN SYSTEM EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 17th MEETING OF SENIOR FELLOWSHIP OFFICERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM AND HOST COUNTRY AGENCIES BY DAVIDE.
Advertisements

TEN-T Info Day for AP and MAP Calls 2012 EVALUATION PROCESS AND AWARD CRITERIA Anna Livieratou-Toll TEN-T Executive Agency Senior Policy & Programme Coordinator.
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in the Seventh Framework Programme Support actions.
ARC Medical Research Policy Faculty of Human Sciences Macquarie University 3 February 2015 Professor Marian Simms ARC Executive Director.
DR MACIEJ JUNKIERT PRACOWNIA BADAŃ NAD TRADYCJĄ EUROPEJSKĄ Guide for Applicants.
Welcome Welcome and thank you for agreeing to become an External Examiner for Goldsmiths, University of London. Our External Examiners play an important.
1 EFCA - 21th March 2002 Raul Mateus Paula. 2 This presentation underlines: The key objectives of the Relex Reform The division of the responsibilities.
Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar January 2014 Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar.
Capitalising the full potential of online-collaboration for SME innovation support Horizon 2020 call Innosup (Participant Portal code: H2020-INNOSUP )
European Chemical IndustrySocial Project Application: VP / 2014 / 001 / 0466 Partners Roadmaps 2015 – 2020 Steering Group meeting 1 18 and 19 February.
How experts evaluate projects; key factors for a successful proposal
External Quality Assessments
Purpose of the Standards
EVALUATION AND QUALITY ASSURANCE STRATEGY PRESENTED BY DR SHYAM PATIAR.
Implementation of Leader Axis measures by Jean-Michel Courades AGRI-F3.
David Halldearn, ERGEG Conference on Implementing the 3 rd Package 11 th December 2008 Implementating the 3rd Package: An ERGEG Consultation paper.
Internal Auditing and Outsourcing
Ensuring an Equitable Review AmeriCorps External Review Training.
APPRAISAL OF THE HEADTEACHER GOVERNORS’ BRIEFING
Culture Programme - Selection procedure Katharina Riediger Infoday Praha 10/06/2010.
AICT5 – eProject Project Planning for ICT. Process Centre receives Scenario Group Work Scenario on website in October Assessment Window Individual Work.
Proposal evaluation process in FP7 Moldova – Research Horizon 29 January 2013 Kristin Kraav.
1 Framework Programme 7 Guide for Applicants
The Audit Process Tahera Chaudry March Clinical audit A quality improvement process that seeks to improve patient care and outcomes through systematic.
Developing a result-oriented Operational Plan Training
Overview report of a series of FVO fact- finding missions and audits carried out in 2012 and 2013 in order to evaluate the systems put in place to give.
EARTO – working group on quality issues – 2 nd session Anneli Karttunen, Quality Manager VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland This presentation.
Technology Strategy Board Driving Innovation Participation in Framework Programme 7 Octavio Pernas, UK NCP for Health (Industry) 11 th April 2012.
UK Wide Core Skills & Training Framework Findings of 2 nd Stage Consultation and Implications for Development of the Framework.
IAOD Evaluation Section, the Development Agenda (DA) and Development Oriented Activities Julia Flores Marfetan, Senior Evaluator.
Second expert group meeting on Draft fiche on delegated act on the European code of conduct on partnership (ECCP) Cohesion Policy
GCP & ETHICS COMMITTEES Ravi Rengachari Vector Control Research Centre PONDICHERRY.
From membership to leadership: advancing women in trade unions Working groups ETUC workshop, Berlin 28 October 2010.
Leonardo da Vinci Partnerships: an opportunity to work together Italian National Agency for LLP - Leonardo da Vinci Sectoral Programme.
HORIZON 2020 European Commission Research and Innovation First stakeholder workshop on Horizon 2020 Implementation Brussels, 16 January 2015.
Dr. Marion Tobler, NCP Environment Evaluation Criteria and Procedure.
Citizens and Governance in a Knowledge-based Society Guidelines on Proposals Presented by Henry Scott, EKT.
Participation in 7FP Anna Pikalova National Research University “Higher School of Economics” National Contact Points “Mobility” & “INCO”
APPRAISAL OF THE HEADTEACHER GOVERNORS’ BRIEFING.
COMPETITIVE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Research DG European Commission Expressions of interest / Dedicated call mechanism.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Methodology and Responsibilities for Periodic Safety Review for Research Reactors William Kennedy Research Reactor.
Evaluate Phase Pertemuan Matakuliah: A0774/Information Technology Capital Budgeting Tahun: 2009.
TEN-T Executive Agency and Project Management Anna LIVIERATOU-TOLL TEN-T Executive Agency Senior Programme and Policy Coordinator European Economic and.
Negotiation of Proposals Dr. Evangelos Ouzounis Directorate C DG Information Society European Commission.
Learning the lessons 2012 and 2014 procurements of audit services.
ASSESSING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN FISCAL POLICY PROPOSED INDICATOR.
Evaluation of proposals Alan Cross European Commission.
Draft fiche on delegated act on the European code of conduct on partnership (ECCP) Structured Dialogue Brussels, 19 September
Methodology of RIA for European integration purposes and practical examples Outsourcing RIA preparation to external consultants: project management issues.
VICH Training Strategy Steven D. Vaughn, DVM Director, Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center for Veterinary Medicine U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Ministry of Finance Compliance assessment of the management and control systems of the managing authorities under the Operational programmes. Conclusions.
Raising standards improving lives The revised Learning and Skills Common Inspection Framework: AELP 2011.
Report of the Ethics Committee Eighteenth Board Meeting, 7-8 November 2008.
Experience from H2020 Proposals (a personal assessment)
TAIEX-REGIO Workshop on Applying the Partnership Principle in the European Structural and Investment Funds Bratislava, 20/05/2016 Involvement of Partners.
Industrial & ACC participation in NMP Stage IPs DG RTD/G-1/IA NCP Meeting - Ad Hoc group’s results Slide 1 Results of the AD HOC Group.
Stage 3. Consultation and Review Standard Setting Training Course 2016.
WP3 - Evaluation and proposal selection
Internal Audit & Accounting Systems Review
European Commission “Intelligent Energy for Europe”
INEA Innovation and Networks Executive Agency
Roadmap to Enhanced Technical Regulations of WMO
Evaluation processes Horizon 2020 Info Days November 2017
The evaluation process
Juan Gonzalez eGovernment & CIP operations
Item 2.2 of the Agenda Remote access to confidential data for researchers: possible actions under the 7th Framework Programme Pascal JACQUES Unit B 5 15.
Key steps of the evaluation process
2012 Annual Call Steps of the evaluation of proposals, role of the experts TEN-T Experts Briefing, March 2013.
General Discussion Conclusions:
Evaluation of ESF support to Gender Equality
Presentation transcript:

External Monitoring of the Fourth Call CAPACITIES Programme (e-Infrastructures) Brussels, 2 February 2009 Research Infrastructures Programme Committee Meeting Anna M. Assimakopoulos

Overall statement-Main Conclusions The observer is fully satisfied that the evaluation process was efficient, effective and overall valid. Evaluators and Commission officials acted fairly, equitably, ethically and with integrity. Consortia were given fair and equitable consideration, complying with standards laid down by the evaluation process. Consortia were given fair and equitable consideration, complying with standards laid down by the evaluation process. The evaluation process successfully identifies the best proposals. The evaluation process successfully identifies the best proposals. Proposals selected for funding are those which best meet the criteria and objectives detailed in the workprogramme. Proposals selected for funding are those which best meet the criteria and objectives detailed in the workprogramme. The remote evaluation has contributed to increased efficiency and produced added value in terms of quality of the results. The remote evaluation has contributed to increased efficiency and produced added value in terms of quality of the results.

Call Basics (1) 4th call for proposals under the “Capacities” Programme of the Seventh Framework Programme (e- Infrastructures) covering: INFRA : GÉANT; INFRA : Scientific Data Infrastructures (SDI) 4th call for proposals under the “Capacities” Programme of the Seventh Framework Programme (e- Infrastructures) covering: INFRA : GÉANT; INFRA : Scientific Data Infrastructures (SDI) The topic “Scientific Data Infrastructure” has a total available budget of 20 million €. It received 46 proposals, of which 44 were eligible, requesting funding of 146 million € which corresponded to an oversubscription of 7:1. The topic “Scientific Data Infrastructure” has a total available budget of 20 million €. It received 46 proposals, of which 44 were eligible, requesting funding of 146 million € which corresponded to an oversubscription of 7:1. 36 evaluators were engaged to assist in the evaluation of the written proposals, of which 9 were women; 9 came from the new Member States, and 2 from outside EU. 12 out of 36 came from the industry sector, with the remaining part from Universities, Research Centres and Consultancy firms. 4 experts were engaged as recorders. 36 evaluators were engaged to assist in the evaluation of the written proposals, of which 9 were women; 9 came from the new Member States, and 2 from outside EU. 12 out of 36 came from the industry sector, with the remaining part from Universities, Research Centres and Consultancy firms. 4 experts were engaged as recorders. 64% of the proposals submitted had SME participation. 11% of the participants in these proposals were SMEs and 10% of the requested funding was for SMEs. 64% of the proposals submitted had SME participation. 11% of the participants in these proposals were SMEs and 10% of the requested funding was for SMEs.

Call Basics (2) The topic GÉANT received 16 proposals, of which only one was eligible (15 were ineligible), requesting an overall funding of approximately 104 million €. The topic GÉANT received 16 proposals, of which only one was eligible (15 were ineligible), requesting an overall funding of approximately 104 million €. 6 evaluators were engaged to assist in the evaluation of the written proposals, of which none were women; 1 came from the new Member States, and 1 from outside EU. 5 out of 6 came from the industry sector, with the remaining part from Universities, Research Centres and Consultancy firms. 6 evaluators were engaged to assist in the evaluation of the written proposals, of which none were women; 1 came from the new Member States, and 1 from outside EU. 5 out of 6 came from the industry sector, with the remaining part from Universities, Research Centres and Consultancy firms.

11 Main Recommendations Preparative activities and logistics The planning of and preparation for the evaluation process carried out by the Commission officers was extremely well-organized, efficient and effective. Positive comments were made from all sides on the remote evaluation. The planning of and preparation for the evaluation process carried out by the Commission officers was extremely well-organized, efficient and effective. Positive comments were made from all sides on the remote evaluation. Recommendation No. 1: the observer considers that the remote reading was an overall success and recommends that it be adopted as a definitive practice. Recommendation No. 1: the observer considers that the remote reading was an overall success and recommends that it be adopted as a definitive practice.

11 Main Recommendations Selection of the Evaluators Recommendation No. 2: The observer reiterates the previous recommendation to continue and intensify efforts to attract women evaluators as well as evaluators from industry. Recommendation No. 2: The observer reiterates the previous recommendation to continue and intensify efforts to attract women evaluators as well as evaluators from industry.

11 Main Recommendations Evaluation Infrastructure and Security Recommendation No. 3: The observer reiterates the suggestion already made in previous Observation Reports that the Commission undertake an in-depth review of Pinocchio’s performance and its interoperability with other software systems used during the evaluation process (remote and on-site) Recommendation No. 3: The observer reiterates the suggestion already made in previous Observation Reports that the Commission undertake an in-depth review of Pinocchio’s performance and its interoperability with other software systems used during the evaluation process (remote and on-site) Recommendations regarding security checks made in the previous monitoring report were duly taken into consideration. Recommendations regarding security checks made in the previous monitoring report were duly taken into consideration.

11 Main Recommendations Evaluation Process-Briefings Recommendation No. 4: The observer underlines the significance of specific briefings of the dedicated recorders, especially those who are performing the task for the first time in order to further implement best practice, expedite the Consensus Meetings and harmonize and secure the high-quality of the Consensus Reports produced. Recommendation No. 4: The observer underlines the significance of specific briefings of the dedicated recorders, especially those who are performing the task for the first time in order to further implement best practice, expedite the Consensus Meetings and harmonize and secure the high-quality of the Consensus Reports produced. Recommendation No. 5: The observer also suggests advance distribution of a video of the general and specific briefings to be delivered to the experts during the remote phase of the evaluation as a supplement and complement to the material already distributed. Recommendation No. 5: The observer also suggests advance distribution of a video of the general and specific briefings to be delivered to the experts during the remote phase of the evaluation as a supplement and complement to the material already distributed.

11 Main Recommendations Evaluation Process-Individual Assessments-Marks Recommendation No. 6: The observer recommends that the Commission in continuing to carry out the individual assessment of proposals remotely, attempts to implement procedures to minimize the time experts spend on-site, simultaneously continuing to widely publicize the overall exercise to female experts and experts from industry with particular fervour. Recommendation No. 6: The observer recommends that the Commission in continuing to carry out the individual assessment of proposals remotely, attempts to implement procedures to minimize the time experts spend on-site, simultaneously continuing to widely publicize the overall exercise to female experts and experts from industry with particular fervour. Recommendation No. 7: As a “best practice” suggestion, it is recommended that the Commission staff steering the Consensus Meetings, frequently remind the evaluators of the precise meaning of the scores, by reading and/or projecting the definitions thereof. Recommendation No. 7: As a “best practice” suggestion, it is recommended that the Commission staff steering the Consensus Meetings, frequently remind the evaluators of the precise meaning of the scores, by reading and/or projecting the definitions thereof.

11 Main Recommendations Evaluation Process-Consensus Meetings Recommendation No. 8: As aforementioned, the overall evaluation exercise is highly “streamlined”. However, it is recommended to continually pursue pro-forma best-practice “process” for Consensus Meeting management. Recommendation No. 8: As aforementioned, the overall evaluation exercise is highly “streamlined”. However, it is recommended to continually pursue pro-forma best-practice “process” for Consensus Meeting management. Recommendation No. 9: It is recommended that these best- practice guidelines be presented also as part of the initial briefings and that they are coupled with specific training for new Project Officers and Recorders to ensure that they are continually observed. Recommendation No. 9: It is recommended that these best- practice guidelines be presented also as part of the initial briefings and that they are coupled with specific training for new Project Officers and Recorders to ensure that they are continually observed.

11 Main Recommendations Evaluation Process-Panel Meetings Recommendation No. 10: It is recommended that the questions posed should be read aloud by the Commission Officer or the Rapporteur at the beginning of each hearing and that the questions appear on the slides presented by the Consortium. Recommendation No. 10: It is recommended that the questions posed should be read aloud by the Commission Officer or the Rapporteur at the beginning of each hearing and that the questions appear on the slides presented by the Consortium. Recommendation No. 11: The observer recommends that the Commission review the policy of inviting all proposals above threshold to the hearings. This review can include a statistical overview related to the number of proposals invited to hearings that are actually approved and the average score cut-off for final approval. Solutions such as an increased threshold, a hearing cut-off based on an oversubscription percentage of the available budget (e.g. 200%) or providing proposers with information about the chances of approval should be considered as part of this review. Recommendation No. 11: The observer recommends that the Commission review the policy of inviting all proposals above threshold to the hearings. This review can include a statistical overview related to the number of proposals invited to hearings that are actually approved and the average score cut-off for final approval. Solutions such as an increased threshold, a hearing cut-off based on an oversubscription percentage of the available budget (e.g. 200%) or providing proposers with information about the chances of approval should be considered as part of this review.

Conclusions (1) Conclusions (1) Overall, the observer finds that the evaluation process was carried out fairly, equitably and transparently. The rules and guidelines set out for the evaluation were carefully followed in all phases and aspects of the evaluation. Overall, the observer finds that the evaluation process was carried out fairly, equitably and transparently. The rules and guidelines set out for the evaluation were carefully followed in all phases and aspects of the evaluation. There is no doubt that everyone involved in the evaluation process, evaluators and Commission staff, have shown dedication to ensuring that all proposals and respective consortia are given due consideration according to the standards laid down in the evaluation process. There is no doubt that everyone involved in the evaluation process, evaluators and Commission staff, have shown dedication to ensuring that all proposals and respective consortia are given due consideration according to the standards laid down in the evaluation process. The observer is satisfied that the evaluation process as executed in this call has proved effective in ensuring that the proposals selected for funding are those which best fit the aims and objectives as detailed in the workprogramme. The observer is satisfied that the evaluation process as executed in this call has proved effective in ensuring that the proposals selected for funding are those which best fit the aims and objectives as detailed in the workprogramme. Conflicts of interest and resubmissions were handled in an appropriate way. Conflicts of interest and resubmissions were handled in an appropriate way.

Conclusions (2) Conclusions (2) The evaluation exercise itself, has reached a stage of maturity by which, in general, processes and procedures run smoothly. The evaluation exercise itself, has reached a stage of maturity by which, in general, processes and procedures run smoothly. The evaluation has now fully “acclimated” to the new facilities. IT infrastructure still poses challenges in terms of functionality and interoperability. The evaluation has now fully “acclimated” to the new facilities. IT infrastructure still poses challenges in terms of functionality and interoperability. The remote reading has been an overall success and made a positive contribution to the process, enhancing its efficiency, effectiveness and quality. The remote reading has been an overall success and made a positive contribution to the process, enhancing its efficiency, effectiveness and quality. Potential further efficiency gains, balanced against fairness and quality considerations should be examined in the context of reviewing the “above-threshold” invitation rule for hearings. Potential further efficiency gains, balanced against fairness and quality considerations should be examined in the context of reviewing the “above-threshold” invitation rule for hearings. Commission officers have exhibited a high level of professionalism and courtesy in creating a proactive yet strict working environment yielding high-quality and well-documented results, while remaining open to suggestions for further improvements. Commission officers have exhibited a high level of professionalism and courtesy in creating a proactive yet strict working environment yielding high-quality and well-documented results, while remaining open to suggestions for further improvements.