Writing the Proposal: Scientific and technological objectives PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia 02.09.2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Researchers nights Information Day Colette RENIER Research Executive Agency FP7-PEOPLE-2010-NIGHT INFORMATION DAY Brussels, 12 November.
Advertisements

European R&D Support Programme ACCESSING EUROPEAN FUNDING FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
Proposal Structure.
Integrating the gender aspects in research and promoting the participation of women in Life Sciences, Genomics and Biotechnology for Health.
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in the Seventh Framework Programme Large-scale integrating projects (IPs)
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in the Seventh Framework Programme Support actions.
Structure of the Application Evaluation Criteria Oskar Otsus January 2013 Moldova.
Page 1 Marie Curie Schemes Science is not the whole story! (How to write a successful Marie Curie RTN Proposal) Siobhan Harkin.
2-Stage procedure: special attention to the 1st stage, how to build a successful proposal Caterina Buonocore Health National contact Point for Italy “
Getting European Research Funds Dr Philip Griffiths Associate Head of School, Built Environment Centre for Sustainable Technologies University of Ulster.
University of Trieste PHD school in Nanotechnology Writing a proposal … with particular attention to FP7 Maurizio Fermeglia.
DR MACIEJ JUNKIERT PRACOWNIA BADAŃ NAD TRADYCJĄ EUROPEJSKĄ Guide for Applicants.
COST on the go: the experience of an Italian COST Actions’ representative Piermaria Corona.
Gloria Peasso APRE Communication & Dissemination of project results Sunny Beach, 19-20/09/2013.
Identification of critical success factors for implementing NLLS, through collaboration and exchange of expertise IDENTIFY LLP-2008-RO-KA1-KA1NLLS.
Performance Appraisal System Update
Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar January 2014 Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar.
FP6 PROPOSAL WRITING. What makes a good proposal - A strong proposal idea - Avoiding common weaknesses and pitfalls What to know about evaluation - Process.
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.
Training & research for academic newcomers A project of the King Baudouin Foundation.
AICT5 – eProject Project Planning for ICT. Process Centre receives Scenario Group Work Scenario on website in October Assessment Window Individual Work.
1 Project Management Principles Coursework Assignment: Things to pay attention to, for the report and the oral presentation...
Proposal evaluation process in FP7 Moldova – Research Horizon 29 January 2013 Kristin Kraav.
How to write a successful proposal
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
NCP meeting Brussels 12 May 2009Julian Ellis, FET proactive Objective 8.9, Budget 1.5 M€. Coordinating Communities Plans and Actions in FET Proactive Initiatives.
Professional Certificate – Managing Public Accounts Committees Ian “Ren” Rennie.
Work Programme for the specific programme for research, technological development and demonstration "Integrating and strengthening the European Research.
Communicating and disseminating EU research Charlotte Haentzel European Commission’s Representation in Sweden.
How to write a successful EU funded project proposal? Fred de Vries Brussels 21 April 2004 Seminar Networking eLearning Practitioners.
Project Cycle Management presentation
Technology Strategy Board Driving Innovation Participation in Framework Programme 7 Octavio Pernas, UK NCP for Health (Industry) 11 th April 2012.
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.
TEN-T Experts Briefing, March Annual Call Award Criteria.
1 Women Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism Evaluation Indicators Bristol, November 2010 RG EVANS ASSOCIATES November 2010.
1 NEST New and emerging science and technology EUROPEAN COMMISSION - 6th Framework programme : Anticipating Scientific and Technological Needs.
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.
Graduate studies - Master of Pharmacy (MPharm) 1 st and 2 nd cycle integrated, 5 yrs, 10 semesters, 300 ECTS-credits 1 Integrated master's degrees qualifications.
Participation in 7FP Anna Pikalova National Research University “Higher School of Economics” National Contact Points “Mobility” & “INCO”
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.
1 Proposal Preparation J. Cosgrave, CSJU IT Officer Clean Sky Call 11 Info Day Brussels, 20th January 2012.
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Warszawa 18 luty th Framework Programme NMP - 2nd Calls Integrated Projects for SMEs Hervé Péro, Christophe Lesniak DG Research.
Network of Excellence in Internet Science Network of Excellence in Internet Science (EINS) 1 st REVIEW Brussels, 12th April 2013 FP7-ICT
How is a grant reviewed? Prepared by Professor Bob Bortolussi, Dalhousie University
ESPON Info Day on New Calls and Partner Café 18 May 2010 in Bruxelles Call for Proposals on Transnational Networking Activities (Projects carried through.
© Services GmbH Proposal writing: Part B 2/1/ St. Petersburg, May 18, 2011 Dr. Andrey Girenko
Results orientation: audit perspective Jiri Plecity, Head of Unit H1, Relations with Control Authorities, Legal Procedures, Audit of Direct Management.
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.
Writing the Proposal: Impact PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia
The 7th Framework Programme for Research: Strategy of international cooperation activities Robert Burmanjer Head of Unit, “International Scientific Cooperation.
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.
The view of a reviewer Johan Ahnström, PhD Ecology (SLU)
COFUND Proposal th March 2017 EUSC.
“CareerGuide for Schools”
Helene Skikos DG Education and Culture
The Evaluation Phase Juras Ulbikas.
Presentation transcript:

Writing the Proposal: Scientific and technological objectives PHOENIX Training Course Laulasmaa, Estonia

2 Concept and objectives Explain the concept of your project. What are the main ideas that led you to propose this work? –Describe in detail the S&T objectives. –Show how they relate to the topics addressed by the call. –The objectives should be those achievable within the project, not through subsequent development. –They should be stated in a measurable and verifiable form, including through the milestones.

3 Progress beyond the stat-of-the-art Describe the state-of-the-art in the area concerned, and the advance that the proposed project would bring about. Show how the project is beyond the state-of-the- art, be clear and precise but remember that the evaluator may be a scientist in a neighbouring field.

4 Example: SURPASS Collaborative research will constitute the bulk and the core of European Union research funding. The ambitious idea to be the most successful knowledge based society by 2010 calls for attracting not only European resources but also resources from all around the world. Promoting international research cooperation will be the main guarantee of success. The concept of SURPASS is to show how quantitative studies of science help to find and surpass barriers in the way of research cooperation, and the role of SSH in it. The general objective of SURPASS is to support the development of the European Research Area, to boost and improve scientific and technological collaboration through quantitative studies, to enrich the European research landscape with new ideas worked out in emerging research societies, and to support the generation of common understanding within different research communities. The main objective of SURPASS is to improve the world wide access to the results of studies about collaboration in S&T. Besides the expertise of MS partners, the skills and knowledge of emerging INCO countries and the existing collaboration networks will be taken into account. “The concepts and the objectives are stated in a very general and vague way so that it looks difficult to understand its potential.”

5 S/T methodology and associated work plan A detailed work plan should be presented, broken down into work packages which should follow the logical phases of the implementation of the project, and include consortium management and assessment of progress and results. Please present your plans as follows:

6 Describe the overall strategy of the work plan To achieve the above aims different modern technologies for communication and dissemination will be used, like video links, Skype forums, project blogs and news feed RSS format. An important task is to attract young researchers into implementation of the project in all its phases, and via this to form the basis for future collaboration activities between the currently active and emerging generation of researchers.. To support established practitioners, distance learning course on S&T collaboration studies will be organized. SURPASS will link different target groups (academia, decision makers, industry and research progeny), and will disseminate the achieved results through verious events and the electronic media. The project goal is to increase the impact of research by empowering the target groups with the information they need to accelerate discovery. The planned activities of the project are split into 7 work packages... In theory the activities spelt out in the project are above reproach: annual conferences with a clear thematic orientation, doctoral forums and masters courses. However, there are some problems in the organisation of the work. The work package on dissemi- nation is the first one and starts in month 3, but the kick-off meeting only comes in month 5. Master courses are planned on e-learning technologies (mostly WebCT and Skype), but a more detailed description of these activities might have been given (accreditation of the courses, exams, etc.). » Mark:3

7 Show the timing of the different WPs and their components (Gantt chart or similar ) Example: Net4SOCIETY

8 Provide a detailed work description broken down into work packages: Work package list

9 Deliverables list

10 Description of each work package, and summary

11 Summary effort table

12 List of milestones

13 Provide a graphical presentation of the components showing their interdependencies (Pert diagram or similar) Net4Society SURPASS

14 S/T methodology and associated work plan The number of work packages used must be appropriate to the complexity of the work and the overall value of the proposed project. The planning should be sufficiently detailed to justify the proposed effort and allow progress monitoring by the Commission. Any significant risks should be identified, and contingency plans described. – (Maximum length – 20 pages, plus the tables )

15 Evaluation criteria: “Scientific and/or technological excellence Soundness of concept, and quality of objectives Progress beyond the state-of-the-art Quality and effectiveness of the S/T methodology and associated work plan The relevance of a proposal will be considered in relation to the topic(s) of the work programme open in a given call, and to the objectives of a call. –These aspects will be integrated in the application of the criterion "S/T quality ", and the first subcriterion under "Impact" respectively. –When a proposal is partially relevant because it only marginally addresses the topic(s) of the call, or if only part of the proposal addresses the topic(s), this condition will be reflected in the scoring of the first criterion. –Proposals that are clearly not relevant to a call ("out of scope") will be rejected on eligibility grounds.

16 Evaluation Each criterion will be scored out of 5. Half marks can be given. – 0 - The proposal fails to address the criterion under examination or cannot be judged due to missing or incomplete information – 1 - Very poor. The criterion is addressed in a cursory and unsatisfactory manner. – 2 - Poor. There are serious inherent weaknesses in relation to the criterion in question. – 3 - Fair.While the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses that would need correcting. – 4 - Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, although certain improvements are possible. – 5 - Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion in question. Any shortcomings are minor. Thresholds will be applied to the scores. The threshold for individual criteria will be 3,0. The overall threshold, applying to the sum of the three individual scores plus one, will be 10,0.