Proposal submission, evaluation, selection and award procedures Carmen Aguilera Market Development carmen.aguilera@gsa.europa.eu

Agenda Proposals submission Evaluation and selection Time to Grant Pictures’ sources: www.commissions.aegee.org  www.st-ives.co.uk blog.norwayvisas.com 

Agenda Proposals submission Picture source: www.commissions.aegee.org 

New markets & technologies Start from bright and concrete ideas Road Transport High Precision Aviation New markets & technologies Agriculture Rail LBS Maritime

Successful proposal- some hints Be focused and concrete: Build on fairly mature application or business concepts and fill the gap Explain what is new, your added value, how you will move forward Build on technical and market understanding and expertise: Ideally, entities with sufficient knowledge of specific markets Consortium bringing all needed competences: clear roles, no overlap Demonstrate a clear motivation to commercialise the products and services: Market entry plan (marketing strategy & business plan) Previous achievements in the specific market Show your commitment and capability to go to market Focus on practical impact: Maximise the use of the available signals Prefer trials and large scale demonstration, involving final users in their real life procedures Produce practical tools useful for the GNSS developer community Highlight your strong points. Proposals should be clear, concise and concrete Explain what is new in your idea, why it is needed, how you will make it happen Address innovation from the end-user point of view Explain the added value of EGNSS Show realistic intention to go to market with a good preliminary business plan Show your commitment: H2020 is not your only source of funding, you have a plan B Select applications where EGNOS and Galileo differentiators are key for the product/service success

How to prepare & submit a proposal Follow strictly the instructions Read carefully the work programme topic Be clear and explicit: Evaluators must judge what they read Respect admissibility/eligibility criteria: Basic checks by electronic submission system Convince the evaluation experts regarding the selection and award criteria Consider the time pressure: a careful presentation/executive summary helps Avoid inconsistencies in the proposal Facilitate finding answers to criteria sub-questions Consider ALL criteria Provide a structured proposal Establish clear division of the planned work into work packages Ensure that tasks match the description of the idea Define accurate and realistic schedule, main milestones and deliverables Assign the specific responsibilities and resources within the consortium 4/9/2019

Participants Portal Proposals must be submitted electronically using the electronic submission system of the Participant Portal. Access to the electronic submission system is available after selecting a topic and a type of action of a call. The system is an online wizard that guides you step-by-step through the preparation of your proposal. 4/9/2019

Participants Portal- search a call 2 1 3 Choose your call and the relevant topic, and then read carefully the related documents or templates that are available on the given call and topic page on the Funding Opportunities page of the Participant Portal: general documents are listed on the Call Documents page, while topic specific documents are available on each topic's page under "Topic Conditions and Documents". Go to Search topics to find topics that belong to open or upcoming calls. You can search in the text of the call and topic titles, call and topic identifiers, topic description and keywords and tags related to this topic. For more extensive search in various fields of the call and topic pages, you find on the same page a link to the Europa search that functions and presents the results in a similar way as Google search. 4/9/2019

Participants Portal- where to find a call 1 2 4 Already familiar with EU research funding? You can go directly to the H2020 calls and filter open calls that interest you in the relevant programme sub-division. 3 4/9/2019

Submission flow 4/9/2019 Source: REA

Submission flow (1) Create a draft proposal (pre-registration) Proposals must be created and submitted by a representative/contact person of the coordinating organisation. For the preparation of the draft proposal, the coordinating organisation must be identified with its Participant Identification Code (PIC number), and the basic indicative pre-registration data has to be filled in (call title and topic, type of action, title of proposal, short summary (optional), panel (only for Marie Curie actions and ERC), keywords). Most of this data can be modified later in the administrative forms, except for the choice of the PIC number and the related organisation data. What is a PIC number? 2. Beneficiary registration - Participant Identification Codes (PIC numbers) All participants of a proposal must be registered in the central Beneficiary Register of the Commission managing Horizon 2020. Organisations have to be identified with their Participant Identification Codes, the 9-digit PIC number in the submission forms (the coordinator has to be identified with its PIC number at step 3, while other participants at Step 4). 4/9/2019

Submission flow (2) The proposal coordinator can set up the consortium ('Add Partners'), and give access to other contact persons. Organisations, additional partners ('participants'/'partner organisations' depending on the call) must be identified at this step by their nine-digit PIC numbers. To facilitate the consortium set-up, a search function is provided in the system or on the Beneficiary Register page of the Participant Portal. All participants have to be registered in the system before this step so that they can be found with the search function. Access rights of individual contact persons When granting access rights to a contact person for a given proposal, the e-mail address of the person (the one that s/he uses for her ECAS account) serves as the main identifier. 4/9/2019

Submission flow (3) 4/9/2019

Submission flow (4) The proposal itself consists of 2 main parts: Administrative forms (structured information of the basic administrative data, declarations of partners, organisations and contact persons, etc.) Part B or the technical annex, which is the detailed description of the planned research and innovation project outlining work packages, costs, etc. Proposal templates for the technical annex can be downloaded from the system at Step 5. The technical annex and any additional annexes have to be uploaded as PDF documents Further mandatory or optional annexes (e.g. supporting documents for ethics issues) can be required by the call and the given topic, as shown in the submission system. That is the case of the GNSS call: business plan following a specific template is mandatory for topics 1, 2, 3 4/9/2019

Submission flow (6) For calls with a specific deadline you can submit your proposal several times before the call deadline, e.g. to make updates or changes. All contact persons of the coordinating organisation ('coordinator'/Host Institution') will receive an e-mail after each submission of the proposal. The submitted proposal package is combined into one document and an e-receipt is generated indicating the date and time of submission by the user. When the e-receipt is ready, it can be downloaded from Step 6 of the submission. Proposals may be withdrawn before the call deadline at Step 6 using the 'Withdraw' button. These withdrawn proposals will subsequently not be considered for evaluation or for selection, 4/9/2019

Submission cycle 4/9/2019

Evaluation and selection Agenda Evaluation and selection Picture’s source: www.st-ives.co.uk

Evaluation process 1 2 Preliminary results 3 4 Admissibility/Eligibility Check Evaluation by independent experts Individual evaluation Consensus meeting Panel review Commission/Agency ranked list Final Information on the outcome of the evaluation 1 2 Preliminary results 3 Once you have submitted a proposal, the Commission: checks it is admissible (complete and properly put together) and eligible asks independent experts to evaluate it. In the evaluation process, proposals are given scores for excellence, impact, and quality and efficiency of implementation – based on the Standard Evaluation Criteria. A panel then checks that the evaluation criteria have been consistently applied to all proposals for the same call. Coordinators are informed of how their proposal did in the evaluation. A positive result does not constitute a confirmed offer of a grant. Following the evaluation round, grant negotiations are opened for the highest-scoring proposals. 4 4/9/2019

Admissibility criteria 1 Submitted in the electronic submission system before the deadline- Acknowledgement of Receipt Complete (requested administrative forms + proposal description + supporting documents specified in the call). Supporting documents: ! Remember that Topics 1, 2, 3 request a Business Plan Supporting documents (optional): CV or profile description of staff carrying out the work 1-5 publications and/or other research or innovation products 1-5 relevant previous projects/activities Relevant available infrastructure/equipment description Description of additional third parties contributing to the work Readable, accessible and printable Respect of page limits (70) Automatic warning in electronic submission system if exceeded and advise to re-submit a version that conforms; excess pages will bear watermark 4/9/2019

Eligibility criteria 1 It is in the scope of the call and specific topics, i.e. GNSS applications It complies with the eligibility conditions below, depending on the type of action. Innovation action: Three legal entities. Each of the three shall be established in a different Member State or associated country. All three legal entities shall be independent of each other Coordination & support action: One legal entity established in a Member State or associated country. All proposals must conform to the conditions set out in the Rules for Participation 4/9/2019

Quality and efficiency of the implementation Evaluation by experts 2 AWARD Criteria All types of actions Excellence Impact Quality and efficiency of the implementation Clarity and pertinence of the objectives; Credibility of the proposed approach. The expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic 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. 4/9/2019

Quality and efficiency of the implementation Evaluation by experts 2 AWARD Criteria IA Excellence Impact Quality and efficiency of the implementation 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) 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 (not already covered above); 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. As in all types of actions 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. 4/9/2019

Quality and efficiency of the implementation Evaluation by experts 2 AWARD Criteria CSA Excellence Impact Quality and efficiency of the implementation Soundness of the concept; Quality of the proposed coordination and/or support measures. 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. As in all types of actions 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. 4/9/2019

Scoring Scoring Interpretation of the scores Each criterion will be scored out of 5. Threshold for individual criteria: 3. Overall threshold: 10 10. Interpretation of the scores 0—Proposal fails to address the criterion or can’t be assessed due to missing or incomplete information. 1—Poor The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses. 2—Fair Proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses. 3—Good Proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present. 4—Very Good Proposal addresses the criterion very well, a small number of shortcomings are present. 5—Excellent Proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion; any shortcomings minor. For Innovation actions and the SME instrument (phases 1 and 2), to determine the ranking, the score for the criterion ‘impact’ will be given a weight of 1.5. 4/9/2019

Commission/Agency ranked list 3 We will rank the proposals that passed the thresholds according to the results of the evaluation by the experts Award of the grants will be made on the basis of this ranking, and the available budget. Information on the outcome of the evaluation Invitation to prepare the grant: If your proposal is successfully evaluated, we will send an ‘evaluation information letter’ to the proposal coordinator, to inform you of the results of the evaluation and to invite you to take part in the grant agreement preparation phase. Reserve list: We may keep a number of proposals in reserve in case proposals are withdrawn, excluded or extra funding becomes available. Rejection decisions: we will inform you if your proposal has been rejected and the reason why. 4 4/9/2019

Agenda Time to Grant Picture’s sources blog.norwayvisas.com 

Time to grant: speeding up the process A maximum TTG of 8 months 5 months for informing all applicants on evaluation results 3 months for signature of GA Some exceptions apply 9-Apr-19 European GNSS Agency

Thank you!

Thank you! Marta Krywanis-Brzostowska marta.krywanis@gsa.europa.eu