FP6 PROPOSAL WRITING. What makes a good proposal - A strong proposal idea - Avoiding common weaknesses and pitfalls What to know about evaluation - Process.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DOs and DONTs Joan-Anton Carbonell Kingston University EC External Expert TEMPUS Modernising Higher Education TEMPUS INFORMATION DAY.
Advertisements

– Seoul December 06 ERCIM Preparing European proposals Bruno Le Dantec ERCIM EEIG France – Seoul December 2006.
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in the Seventh Framework Programme Large-scale integrating projects (IPs)
Oficina AproTECH de AETIC: Información y asesoramiento en la preparación de propuestas de I+D+I FP7: The evaluation process. The negotiation.
2-Stage procedure: special attention to the 1st stage, how to build a successful proposal Caterina Buonocore Health National contact Point for Italy “
University of Trieste PHD school in Nanotechnology Writing a proposal … with particular attention to FP7 Maurizio Fermeglia.
R.König / FFG, European and International Programmes (EIP)Page 1/18 Submission and Evaluation of Proposals Ralf König FFG - Austrian Research Promotion.
Provisional FP7-ICT InfoDay, Torino, 11/12/ The ICT Theme in FP7 How to submit a proposal 2. The Funding schemes.
Provisional draft The ICT Theme in FP7 Submission and Evaluation (preliminary information) ICT-NCP Information Day 19 th October 2006.
EU-Büro des BMBF DLR-PT Königswinterer Str Bonn Tel: 0228 / Fax: 0228 / Das EU-Bureau of the Federal.
NIS-NEST Information days on FP7 2 - How to prepare a competitive EU research proposal NIS-NEST Information days on FP7 2 - How to prepare a competitive.
RTD/E.2/JL1 CARERA THE IMPACT OF CAP REFORM ON THE EMPLOYMENT LEVELS IN RURAL AREAS Kick off meeting CRETE; 16 – 17 March 2006 Martin Greimel Project Officer.
Developing an FP6 Proposal and How We Can Help METU - Office of EU Affairs.
©M. Horvat, BIT, AT - Nr. 1 How to participate in the 6th EU Framework Programme Manfred Horvat BIT - Bureau for International Research and Technology.
Self-evaluation of project concepts for application in Horizon 2020
Proposal evaluation process in FP7 Moldova – Research Horizon 29 January 2013 Kristin Kraav.
How to write a successful proposal
Federico Milani European Commission March 2004 – Part2 eContent European Digital Content on the Global Networks.
TEMPUS IV- THIRD CALL FOR PROPOSALS Recommendation on how to make a good proposal TEMPUS INFORMATION DAYS Podgorica, MONTENEGRO 18 th December 2009.
APRE Agency for the Promotion of European Research Lifecycle of an FP 7 project Caterina Buonocore Riga, 13th September, 2007.
1 Framework Programme 7 Guide for Applicants
FET in the 6th FP Future and Emerging Technologies (FETs) DG Information Society FET in the 6th FP Future and Emerging Technologies (FETs) DG Information.
Work Programme for the specific programme for research, technological development and demonstration "Integrating and strengthening the European Research.
Implementation Instruments for FP6 Thematic Priorities Joseph Prieur - Aeronautics DG Research- Space &Transport.
Technology Strategy Board Driving Innovation Participation in Framework Programme 7 Octavio Pernas, UK NCP for Health (Industry) 11 th April 2012.
NANOTECHNOLOGIES AND NANO-SCIENCES, KNOWLEDGE-BASED MULTIFUNCTIONAL MATERIALS AND NEW PRODUCTION PROCESSES AND DEVICES Priority 3 – NMP in FP6 Ewa Jędryka.
Bidding for EU ICT research projects Stephen Brown, 15 June 2008.
IST programme 1 IST KA3: The Evaluation Introduction & Contents Principles Outline procedures Criteria and Assessment What this means for proposers.
Dr. Margaretha Mazura (EMF) ICT Day Opportunities to participate in EU ICT research projects San José, 16 February 2010 Principles of EU Research Funding.
TEN-T Experts Briefing, March Annual Call Award Criteria.
Practical aspects Dr. Ir Matthijs Soede Senter/EG-Liaison “Practical Aspects of Preparation FP6 projects Poznan - 21 November 2002 Dr. Ir.
Dr. Marion Tobler, NCP Environment Evaluation Criteria and Procedure.
“Thematic Priority 3” Draft Evaluation of IP + NoE.
1 Designing Effective Programs: –Introduction to Program Design Steps –Organizational Strategic Planning –Approaches and Models –Evaluation, scheduling,
Citizens and Governance in a Knowledge-based Society Guidelines on Proposals Presented by Henry Scott, EKT.
Case study of a successful proposal Rob Davies. Parts of a proposal Part A - Proposal Administrative Overview - forms Part B- Description of objectives.
IPA Funds Monitoring and Evaluation December Bölgesel Rekabet Edebilirlik Operasyonel Programı’nın Uygulanması için Kurumsal Kapasitenin Oluşturulmasına.
Participation in 7FP Anna Pikalova National Research University “Higher School of Economics” National Contact Points “Mobility” & “INCO”
PROJECT LIFECYCLE.
1 Direction scientifique Networks of Excellence objectives  Reinforce or strengthen scientific and technological excellence on a given research topic.
Guidelines for drafting a research project (theory and laboratory) Carlo Polidori Aurélie Pancera.
Writing the Proposal: Scientific and technological objectives PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia
Consortium building PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia
Project preparation workshop “Bringing a transnational project to life” Project idea “Challenges and chances from Climate Change for regional and local.
Warszawa 18 luty th Framework Programme NMP - 2nd Calls Integrated Projects for SMEs Hervé Péro, Christophe Lesniak DG Research.
Proposals and projects in FP7 On-line Information Day Brussels/Budapest 22nd January 2007.
European Commission Research 1 Participation in the EU 6th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development Peter Härtwich, DG Research,
The ICT Theme in FP7 Proposal evaluation The Evaluation criteria: Keys to success and reasons for failure - The Golden Rules.
1 Call for Proposals & Eligibility Call for Proposals & Eligibility Guide for Proposals & Evaluation Criteria Guide for Proposals & Evaluation Criteria.
© Services GmbH Proposal writing: Part B 2/1/ St. Petersburg, May 18, 2011 Dr. Andrey Girenko
1 STREPS INTELLIGENT HERITAGE IN FP6. “Traditional Instruments in FP6 ” An outline of the implementation of Specific Targeted Research Projects (STREPs)
FP6UK Roadmap to Participation Cliff Funnell UK National Contact Point for Waterborne Transport OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FP6UK SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.
Evaluation of proposals Alan Cross European Commission.
10 February “FP6 Networks of excellence” Colette Renier Research DG.
1 Framework Programme 7 Evaluation Criteria. 2 Proposal Eligibility Evaluation by Experts Commission ranking Ethical Review (if needed) Commission rejection.
Practical Aspects of Preparation FP 6 projects Senter/EG-Liaison Nationaal Contact Punt voor het 6de Kaderprogramma Sandra de Wild 11 december 2002.
Date: in 12 pts Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions Award criteria Education and Culture Policy Officers DG EAC.C3 People NCPs Training on H2020, Brussels,
Richard Escritt, Director – Coordination of Community Actions DG Research, European Commission “The development of the ERA: Experiences from FP6 and reflections.
Training Event, Sofia – Feb 22 nd, 23 rd 2007 Recommendations for building successful proposals in FP7* Dipl.-Ing. Pierre.
Experience from H2020 Proposals (a personal assessment)
“Preparing competitive grant proposals that match policy objectives - project proposal evaluators' viewpoint ” Despina Sanoudou, PhD FACMG Assistant Professor.
Coordinators' day on FP7 Project Negotiation Description Of Work Annex I Griet Van Caenegem DG CNECT R5 Programme Operations May 28, 2013.
2. The funding schemes ICT Proposer’s Day Köln, 1 February 2007 The ICT Theme in FP7 How to participate to ICT in FP 7.
Sharing solutions for better regional policies European Union | European Regional Development Fund Erika Fulgenzi Policy Officer | Interreg Europe JS
FP7 SCIENTIFIC NEGOTIATIONS Astrid Kaemena European Commission
FP7 SCIENTIFIC NEGOTIATIONS
Information session SCIENTIFIC NEGOTIATIONS Call FP7-ENV-2013-two-stage "Environment (including climate change)" Brussels 22/05/2013 José M. Jiménez.
Information session SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL NEGOTIATIONS Call FP7-ENV-2013-WATER-INNO-DEMO "Environment (including climate change)" Brussels 24/06/2013.
Helene Skikos DG Education and Culture
The Evaluation Phase Juras Ulbikas.
Presentation transcript:

FP6 PROPOSAL WRITING

What makes a good proposal - A strong proposal idea - Avoiding common weaknesses and pitfalls What to know about evaluation - Process - Criteria - Their application to specific Calls

What goes where - Parts carrying the key messages - Selling the team - Program objectives vs project objectives, milestones and deliverables objectives, milestones and deliverables

WHAT MAKES A GOOD PROPOSAL

Motivation of Commission Officials To find out those proposals that have the consortia to conduct potentially useful work in a way that stands a reasonable chance of delivering valuable results CONSORTIUM USEFUL WORK REASONABLE CHANCE (RISK) VALUABLE RESULTS

Project Proposal Let’s say that: There is a suitable objective in the workprogram covering your project... There is a Call for Proposals including the type of instrument (contract) that suits your project... You have a suitable and eligible consortium... You can get prepare it before the closing date... You have thought of the management plans...

What to Provide in the Proposal Summary of the proposal Rationale/justification ( S&T objectives, program objectives, potential impact,consortium members) Details of the participant Details of the budget Work/Implementation plan Management structures List of deliverables

Where to Find Supporting Documentation Workprogram Guidelines on proposal evaluation and selection procedures Guidance notes for evaluators (call-specific) Guide for proposers (call/instrument-specific)

Instruments (project types) Integrated Projects (IP) Specific Targeted Research Projects (STREP) Networks of Excellence (NoE) Coordination Actions (CA) Specific Support Actions (SSA) Article 169

WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT EVALUATION

Some Basics About Proposals YOUR PROPOSAL MUST:  meet certain eligibility criteria  fall within the scope of the Call for Proposals priority’s workprogram, specific workprogram YOUR PROPOSAL WILL :   be read by a team of independent evaluators

Consensus is required within the evaluation team as to which proposals are to be considered further Proposals selected by each evaluation team are then read by people from other teams evaluating the Call They are ranked at a meeting involving all teams and a funding scenario is then produced by the EC A panel hearing, is used for IPs and NoEs A panel hearing, is used for IPs and NoEs Results of the evaluation then form the basis of contract negotiation

Evaluation Criteria Relevance Potential impact Scientific and technological excellence Quality of the consortium Quality of the management Mobilization of the resources

Evaluators give a mark between 0 and 5 to each criterion 0 – the proposal fails to address the issue under examination or cannot be judged against the criterion due to missing or incomplete information 1 – poor 2 – fair 3 – good 4 – very good 5 – excellent There are thresholds to be passed Marks may be weighted to calculate the final score

IP thresholds STREP CRITERIAIP thresholds STREP Relevance 3/5 3/5 Potential Impact3/5 3/5 S & T Excellence4/5 4/5 Quality of Consortium3/5 3/5 Quality of Management3/5 3/5 Mobilization of Resources 3/5 3/5 OVERALL SCORE THRESHOLD IP : 24/30 STREP : 21/30

Potential Impact suitably ambitious in terms of its strategic impact on reinforcing competitiveness (including that of SMEs) or on solving societal problems adequate innovation-related activities, exploitation and dissemination plans (to ensure optimal use of the project results) demonstrating a clear added value in carrying out the work at European level

S&T Excellence The project has clearly defined and well- focused objectives The objectives represent clear progress beyond the current state-of-the-art The proposed S&T approach is likely to enable the project to achieve its objectives in research and innovation

Quality of Consortium adequate industrial involvement to ensure exploitation of results (esp. İn IPs) constitution of a consortium of high quality well-suited participants, committed to the tasks assigned to them good complementarity between participants real involvement of SMEs

Quality of the Management Project management is demonstrably of high quality There is a satisfactory plan for the management of knowledge, of intellectual property and other innovation-related activities The organizational structure is well matched to the complexity of the project and to the degree of integration required

Mobilization of the Resources The project mobilizes the minimum critical mass of resources (personnel, equipment, finance...) necessary for success The resources are convincingly integrated to form a coherent project The overall financial plan for the project is adequate

WHAT GOES WHERE

Proposal Structure B.1. S&T objectives and state-of-the-art - up to 3 pages B.2. Relevance to the objectives of the priority - up to 3 pages B.3. Potential Impact - - up to 3 pages - - plus one page on contribution to standards

B.4. The consortium and project resources - up to 5 pages + ‘STREP Project Effort Form’ - plus one page to justify subcontracting - plus one page to justify ‘other countries’ B.5. Project Management - up to 3 pages B.6. Work Plan - (as many pages as it needs) B.7. Other (horizontal) issues - e.g. ethical, gender, EC policies, education

B.1. S&T Objectives and State-of-the-Art What are you going to do? How will you know when you have done it? What value will it add to the state-of-the-art? How well do you understand the problems?

B.2. Relevance to Priority Objectives Justify your request for money allocated to those specific objectives within this priority area N.B. The Commission may argue for adequate coverage of all relevant objectives

B.3. Potential Impact What type of impact are you expecting to achieve? - what is the expected consequence of funding? Explain how you will achieve this impact - innovation- related activities - dissemination activities - exploitation activities Why do you need European money? - European added value - role of national/other initiatives

B.4. Consortium Participants are of high quality Participants are well-suited and committed to their tasks, including: - research - demonstration - dissemination - exploitation - management, etc. Participants are complementary with each other

B.5.Project Management The project management is demonstrably of high quality - key partner(s) with suitable resources? - CV of key individuals? - appropriate methodology? - work plan capable of being managed? Managing knowledge, IPR, innovation

B.6. Work Plan Introduction – structure of the workplan and how the plan will lead participants to achieve objectives Timing and components of workpackages (GANNT) Interdependencies between components (PERT) Workpackage list (form) - lead contractor- timing - effort- outputs Workpackage description (template) - participants/effort- timing - objectives- description of work - deliverables- milestones

Designing Workpackages Major sub-divisions of overall project appropriate to complexity and value of project Sufficiently detailed to allow progress monitoring by the EC...AND SO - keep different types of activity separate - reflect logical phases of project - provide clearly-defined end-points (e.g. deliverable or project milestone) (e.g. deliverable or project milestone)

SOME TIPS

General TIPS on Proposal Writing Apply the mindset of an evaluator to your own work View the proposal as a whole, not as a set of separate elements Identify and sell the special features of a proposal Communicate in simple and well-structured language

TIPS Concerning Evaluators Your proposal will be read by a team of evaluators of whom it should be assumed that English need not be their first language Your specific research interest may not be their specialist area They have many other proposals to read Define the work you’ll do in a way to make them understand it Initial impressions count...

TIPS Concerning Writing Certain Parts of Proposal POTENTIAL IMPACT use OECD reports, EU policy papers S&T EXCELLENCE refer to the workprogram QUALITY OF CONSORTIUM find diverse partners QUALITY OF MANAGEMENT is hard job. Do not jump on it!

CONCLUSION Project writing is not easy. It is a hard job It consumes your time, energy and confidence The result can be negative BUT, DO NOT FORGET... So many people have tried it and been successful So many people have tried it and been successful Believe in yourself! You can do it, too! Believe in yourself! You can do it, too!

Thank you and Good Luck METU – Office of EU Affairs Middle East Technical University Ankara / Turkey Phone: Fax: February 2005