Cultural Heritage in REGional NETworks REGNET

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 2 Management Issues January 2002 – June 2002 Reporting 2 nd Cost Statement 2 nd Project Review Consortium Agreement 2 nd Contract Amendment Deliverables D4 to D6 Current Project Planning

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 3 Reporting Reports sent to the Commission: 1st Trimonthly Report nd Trimonthly Report nd Progress Report Additional information rd Trimonthly Report to please send in til 15 July 2002

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 4 Cost Statement – Period 2 Submission Process Start of evalution process according to Request in 1 st official Review report: The co-operative atmosphere in the team is excellent. Due to the number of partners, the co-ordinator must carefully check the progress of each task. And Annex II, Article 2(c) Role of the coordinator..... He shall submit to the Commission the..[CST, PR, FR and TR]... after incorporating the content of data provided by the contractors and verifying their consistency with any corresponding cost statement,... Questions arose regarding CC, SPAC and TINC

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 5 Cost Statement – Period 2 (SPACE)

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 6 Cost Statement – Period 2 (SPACE) O 10. Clustering Union catalogue, network-wide access to meta-collections, data exchange, meta- search functionality. This will be based on activities carried out by REGNET. The integration between OpenHeritage and REGNET will be assured by the introduction of Index+ as one of the enabling technologies the REGNET architecture will rely on. This will make the TSCs perfectly compatible with the core collections management technology established by OpenHeritage for use at the local level; In terms of resources, the impact of clustering can be described as follows: In WP1, there will be a decrease of SPACEs budget in the resources devoted to the development of a data entry component by 6 Person Months, and in WP2 a decrease by 5 PMs. In WP2 there is also a decrease by 3 PMs related to the effort of AIT. WP3 was reduced by 2 PM (AIT), which means a decrease of the version-2 development of the REGNET system. By the resulting amount (16 PMs) the development activities related to data generation will be decreased.

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 7 Cost Statement – Period 2 (SPACE)

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 8 Cost Statement – Period 2 (TINC)

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 9 Cost Statement – Period 2 (TINC)

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 10 Cost Statement – Period 2 (TINC)

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 11 Cost Statement – Period 2

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 12 Cost Statement – Period 2

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 13 Cost Statement – Period 2 Final Results CC issue solved by shift of resources to WP3 SPAC issue regarded as not solved: no delivery of technical development, no delivery of index+ within an appropriate time span delivery of updated version IR61 only after several requests from the coordinator – not worked out carefully (REGNET conference organization?) TINC issue regarded as not solved: no delivery of T2.5 contribution or task leadership as required from official 1 st Review Report and REGNET contract

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 14 Cost Statement – Period 2 Reaction of partners TINC not agreeing to shift resources which need to be done due to the emergency procedures carried out now official letter requesting to leave the consortium because of having accomplished its core work within REGNET SPAC agreeing to reduce budget by 11 PM nevertheless claiming costs for development putting into question the clustering ( 8.5. Openheritage list) - although received D3 and D6 Not signing non-disclosure agreement

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 15 Cost Statement – Period 2 Cost Statement 2 was transferred to the Commission together with TR2 and PR2 on 13 June 2002 and the Additional Information File containing AIT – new address IMAC – shift between categories SUL – shift between categories VALT – shift between categories TINC – official letter on leaving the consortium Details on consumables and actual labour rates from various partners, subcontractor invoice PR2 containing coordinator request to shift resources from TINC and SPAC to partners that took over their responsibilities PR2 containing coordinator request to terminate clustering

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 16 Comments from the EC – received Friday 21 June 2002 IMAC please provide proof of prior approval for travel to Zurich and Bern, Switzerland. SPACE, CONSORZIO CIVITA please confirm travel dates ICCS charge personnel costs for permanent staff. AC partners can only charge personnel costs for temporary staff recruted for the project. Personnel costs will be rejected for all but Chakarov in cs 2. An adjsutment to permanent personnel costs accepted in cs 1 will be made by us when processing cs 2. Please provide copies of work contracts for temporary staff. VALTECH please confirm name of financial officer who signed the claim ONB, Imac, Motorola, Fratelli Alinari, Granollers, Zeus, Valtech and Terra Incognita charge the same labour rates for all staff. Do the labour rates charged correspond to actual costs paid to staff. Real actual costs need to be claimed and not budgeted rates. Partners inform us of budget shifts less than 20% of their budgets through the cost statement. Can you send us a new set of CPFs integrating all changes and an explanatory letter explaining all changes made.

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 17 Project Review 2 nd Project Review: advanced to 4 July 2002, Luxembourg Due to open clustering-T2.2.2/SPAC and T2.5/TINC issues 14 June 2002 Review Agenda and updated Deliverables sent in electronic version to the reviewing team 18 June 2002 Total Review Documentation file sent to the reviewing team in bound paper file and on CD-ROM

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 18 Consortium Agreement RN_CAv03 ( version including museums rights and copyright statement ) Signature Process started at 1 st Review Half of the consortium has already signed Further signing at Sofia (mandates)

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 19 2 nd Contract Amendment Relevant changes which should result in a second contract amendment are just being worked out and transferred to the European Commission Among them are the shift between categories of several partners Adress changes of AIT and MOT Change of legal representative CC The request of TINC to leave the consortium Furthermore a shift of resources (see Progress Report 2) among partners has been suggested resulting from the difficulties that arose regarding SPAC and TINC

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 20 Deliverables D4 to D6 Deliverables D4 – delivered to the Commission ( ) Updated version delivered to review committee ( ) D5 – delivered to the Commission ( ) Updated version delivered to review committee ( ) D6 – it has been agreed with the Commission (9 April) to deliver a first version of D6 and to extend the deadline for the delivery of the final version until end of June First version delivered to the Commission ( ) Second version delivered to review committee ( ) Final version planned for 30 June 2002

June 2002PMG04 Sofia – Management Issues 21 Current Project Planning