IST programme 1 IST KA3: The Evaluation Introduction & Contents Principles Outline procedures Criteria and Assessment What this means for proposers.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
– Seoul December 06 ERCIM Preparing European proposals Bruno Le Dantec ERCIM EEIG France – Seoul December 2006.
Advertisements

How to submit a Proposal Elisabeth COLINET. Conception Phase MAIN MILESTONES IN PREPARING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL Elaboration Phase Submission Phase.
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.
1 17/3/2009 European Commission Directorate General Information Society & Media Funding Instrument Briefing for Remote Reading.
Launch of the ESPON 2013 Programme Procedures for Call for Proposals under Priorities 1-3.
European R&D Support Programme ACCESSING EUROPEAN FUNDING FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
Centro Sviluppo Materiali SpA 2001 Simposio de Siderurgia no Século XXI ABM São Paulo de Brasil 19 e 20 de junho de 2001.
Information Society Technologies In the 6th Framework Programme Information Society Technologies In the 6th Framework Programme Proposal submission and.
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in the Seventh Framework Programme Support actions.
5 Framework Programme ( ) Information Society Technologies 5 th Framework Programme ( ) Information Society Technologies Key Action.
2-Stage procedure: special attention to the 1st stage, how to build a successful proposal Caterina Buonocore Health National contact Point for Italy “
EVALUATION Prof.Dr.Şakire Pöğün Ege Ün. Tıp Fakültesi (expert evaluator) Intra-European (IEF) International Outgoing (OIF) Fellowships International Incoming(IIF)
Horizon 2020 Energy Efficiency Information Day 12 December 2014 Essentials on how to submit a good proposal EASME Project Advisors: Francesca Harris,
Review of EIA Quality A formal step in the EIA process Purpose is to establish if the information in the EIA report is sufficient for decision –making.
R.König / FFG, European and International Programmes (EIP)Page 1/18 Submission and Evaluation of Proposals Ralf König FFG - Austrian Research Promotion.
FP6 PROPOSAL WRITING. What makes a good proposal - A strong proposal idea - Avoiding common weaknesses and pitfalls What to know about evaluation - Process.
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.
Istanbul, 24 April 2003 European Commission - Directorate General for Research DGRTD- Dir B.3 Dr. If.Pottaki SMEs & Research SMEs and Research under the.
How to prepare a wining Eurostars application IBRAHIM SıNAN AKMANDOR EUROSTARS-2 IEP CHAıRMAN, MIOMIR KNEZEVIC EUROSTARS IEP MEMBER (MBSI SA, LUTRY, SWITZERLAND;
AAL2 Active and Assisted Living Research and Development Program Presentation for the Symposium on Active Healthy Home 23 oktober 2014 Greet Bilsen.
How to prepare a good Eurostars application IBRAHIM SıNAN AKMANDOR EUROSTARS-2 IEP CHAıRMAN, 17 NOVEMBER 2014, BRUSSELS 1.
How experts evaluate projects; key factors for a successful proposal
©M. Horvat, BIT, AT - Nr. 1 How to participate in the 6th EU Framework Programme Manfred Horvat BIT - Bureau for International Research and Technology.
Proposal evaluation process in FP7 Moldova – Research Horizon 29 January 2013 Kristin Kraav.
APRE Agency for the Promotion of European Research Lifecycle of an FP 7 project Caterina Buonocore Riga, 13th September, 2007.
Programme Procedures and Information Information Society Technologies (IST) DG Information Society European Commission.
Work Programme for the specific programme for research, technological development and demonstration "Integrating and strengthening the European Research.
Michalis Adamantiadis Transport Policy Adviser, SSATP SSATP Capacity Development Strategy Annual Meeting, December 2012.
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.
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.
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.
Writing the Proposal: Scientific and technological objectives PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia
Consortium building PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia
COMPETITIVE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Research DG European Commission Expressions of interest / Dedicated call mechanism.
IST programme Building the ‘Connected’ Europe of Tomorrow EU will Provide ‘free’ money Enabling business growth –Transnational opportunities –Technology.
Atlantic Innovation Fund Round VIII February 5, 2008.
Developing a Project Proposal - SPROUT - ACTRAV-Turin.
COMPETITIVE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Science, research and development European Commission Søren Bøwadt, M&T,I Workshop on Virtual Institutes 28th of Sept.
TEN-T Executive Agency and Project Management Anna LIVIERATOU-TOLL TEN-T Executive Agency Senior Programme and Policy Coordinator European Economic and.
How is a grant reviewed? Prepared by Professor Bob Bortolussi, Dalhousie University
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)
Evaluation of proposals Alan Cross European Commission.
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.
Session 3 – Evaluation process Viera Kerpanova, Miguel Romero.
Date: in 12 pts Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions Award criteria Education and Culture Policy Officers DG EAC.C3 People NCPs Training on H2020, Brussels,
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.
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
Participation in Horizon 2020
Marie Curie Career Integration Grants
Information Society Technologies (IST) Programme
ARTEMIS Brokerage Event Barcelona, December 14th 2010
Insights to proposal submission and evaluation
Evaluation processes Horizon 2020 Info Days November 2017
FP7 SCIENTIFIC NEGOTIATIONS
The Evaluation Phase Juras Ulbikas.
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.
Presentation transcript:

IST programme 1 IST KA3: The Evaluation Introduction & Contents Principles Outline procedures Criteria and Assessment What this means for proposers

IST programme 2 IST KA3: The Evaluation Independent Anonymous Confidential Impartial Objective criteria Human fallibility Basic Principles

IST programme 3 IST KA3: The Evaluation Procedures (1): before the Evaluation Pre-registration of proposals Appointment of expert panels NDAs and notification of Interests Reading the Manuals Proposal eligibility screening

IST programme 4 IST KA3: The Evaluation Procedures (2): During the Evaluation Initial Briefing Reading, commenting and scoring Panel discussion Ranking of proposals Reporting and justification Consensus meeting of readers

IST programme 5 IST KA3: The Evaluation Procedures (3): after the Evaluation IST Committee approval Notification of Decision Contract Negotiation

IST programme 6 IST KA3: The Evaluation Assessment Criteria 1 Scientific/Technical Quality & Innovation 2 Community added value and contribution to EC policies 3 Contribution to Community Social Objectives 4 Economic Development, S&T prospects 5 Resources, Management and Partnership

IST programme 7 IST KA3: The Evaluation Scoring Numerical points scale from = Unsatisfactory, out of scope or incomplete 1 = Poor 2 = Fair 3 = Good 4 = Very Good 5 = Excellent

IST programme 8 IST KA3: The Evaluation Weighting and thresholds for RTD bids Criterion 1, threshold 3; weighting 4 Criterion 2, threshold 2; weighting 1 Criterion 3, threshold - ; weighting 1 Criterion 4, threshold 3; weighting 2 Criterion 5, threshold 2; weighting 2

IST programme 9 IST KA3: The Evaluation What evaluators look for - fast The Vision Thing - Originality - Significant innovation Credibility - Realism - Precision and clarity

IST programme 10 IST KA3: The Evaluation What the evaluators assess 1 Scientific/technological quality & innovation Does it contribute significantly to Key Action S&T issues? What is the overall quality, strengths and weaknesses? How original is it? How far does it claim to extend the ‘state of the art’? How credibly will it achieve this? How risky is it & what is the risk/benefit balance? Are the approach, methodology and workplan credible? Are there good self-assessment procedures?

IST programme 11 IST KA3: The Evaluation What the evaluators assess 2 Community added value and contribution to EC policies Does it clearly identify and address European issues? Is there clear value in doing it at the European level? What is the expected impact at the European level? What is the European added value of the Consortium? Does is give ‘critical mass,’ complementary expertise? Does it further EC policy on (e.g.) Standards and SMEs?

IST programme 12 IST KA3: The Evaluation What the evaluators assess 2 Community added value and contribution to EC policies Does it clearly identify and address European issues? Does it reinforce national and international actions? Is there clear value in doing it at the European level? Does it help solve European problems? What is the expected impact at the European level?

IST programme 13 IST KA3: The Evaluation What the evaluators assess 3 Contribution to Community Social Objectives Will it contribute to Quality of Life, Health and Safety? Will it improve employment prospects and skills? Does it help the environment or resource conservation?

IST programme 14 IST KA3: The Evaluation What the evaluators assess 4 Economic Development S&T prospects Are there good potential applications? How good is the exploitation plan? Can the partners exploit the results? Will it have a strategic impact on the market? Will it create new business for users? Will it be widely disseminated to the right people?

IST programme 15 IST KA3: The Evaluation What the evaluators assess 5 Resources, partnership and management Is there a good management plan? Are there clear milestones and monitoring? Is there a good decision process? Are the partners good? Can they do all the tasks, without duplication? Are the resources right? Is the budget reasonable?

IST programme 16 IST KA3: The Evaluation What this means for Promoters Be ‘in scope’ - get the right Action Line - discuss with the PO Be eligible Register the proposal Follow the Guide to Promoters Read the Guidelines for Evaluators

IST programme 17 IST KA3: The Evaluation What this means for Promoters (2) Stand out from the crowd - make a clear pitch, quickly - justify it precisely - no promotional hype - clear English - well illustrated

IST programme 18 IST KA3: The Evaluation What this means for Promoters (3) Part B - defined objectives - domain expertise - significant innovation - research methodology - the right work packages

IST programme 19 IST KA3: The Evaluation What this means for Promoters (4) Part C - policy contribution - avoid bullshit - tight management - strong partnership - future business model

IST programme 20 IST KA3: The Evaluation What this means for Promoters (5) Part A - reasonable budget - committed partners - summary information