1. Giacomo Somma Project coordinator
P4ITS Meeting #10
Giacomo Somma Project coordinator

2. Welcome!

3. Participants list Excused Benef. number Benef. short-name First name
Family name 1
ERTICO
Giacomo
Somma 2
NDR
Lasse
Stender 3
ATE
Bianca
Kapl 4
ASFINAG
Bernhard
Jelinek 5 VL
Jozef
Cannaerts 6
VIGO
Antonio
Vivero
Manuel
Monroy 7
CTAG
Jose Manuel
Martínez 8
FTA
Kari
Hiltunen 9
VTT
Johan
Scholliers 10
HBMO
Melinda
Mátrai 13
LIST
Christophe
Feltus 14
ITS Sweden
Christer
Karlsson 15
LIGURIA
Jacopo
Riccardi
Silvia
Risso 16
OHLC
Emilio
Cacheiro
Excused 11
ITS Bretagne
Imad
Fhail 12
VERONA
Bruno
Pezzuto 17
TOPOS
Jean-Philippe
Méchin

4. Meeting objectives and agenda

5. P4ITS objectives (last period)
Overall project objectives
Mutual learning and training
Set up an external consultation process
Raise awareness on PPI in C-ITS purchasers
Propose key recommendations (guidelines) for PPI in C-ITS
Consolidate P4ITS into a sustainable longer-term network
Specific WP6 objectives (M25 – M30)
Finalise recommendations
Decide on the need and conditions for the continuation of the network

6. WP6: Final recommendations and continuation framework
WP6 objectives (M25 – M30):
Finalise recommendations
Decide on the need and conditions for the continuation of the network
Task Network recommendations
Network meeting # 9 (19-20 January 2016, Brussels, Belgium)
Reach a common position on some topics and propose some recommendations, based on draft doc;
The network recommendations:
Target Group(s): addressed to themselves (as procuring authorities), to a specific type of external stakeholders (e.g. industry suppliers) or to the community at large;
Rationale: be specific, realistic and support the deployment of C-ITS through wider use of PPI approaches. PPI will be presented in a critical way, with advantages and disadvantages, and in the context of the different tools supporting C-ITS deployment, with areas where PPI is more adequate than other tools.
Format: short deliverable, easy to communicate on; attractive format for a wide dissemination is expected.
Task Network continuation
Network meeting # 10 (5-6 April 2016, Vigo, Spain)
Decide whether the network will continue its activity after the end of the project : YES or NO, format, objectives in a wider context (pilot deployment projects, readiness of the C-ITS market, number of PPI cases undertaken in Europe, implementation of the new public procurement directives, etc.)
If YES, sign a letter of commitment, highlighting the main objectives of the follow-up network, potential format of the network, its sources of financing (e.g., subscription based) and its terms of reference.

7. Agenda of P4ITS Meeting #10
Day 1 – Tuesday, 26 April 2016
13:30
Arrival of the participants
14:00 – 14:10
Opening and welcome
14:10 – 14:30
Meeting objectives and agenda
Network management and status overview
14:30 – 15:30
Session 1:
Review of draft D6.2, including graphical outline
Round table on contributions & feedbacks provided / missing
15:30 – 16:00
Coffee break
16:00 – 18:00
Session 2:
Finalisation of:
Chapter 2 - The definition of PPI and the context of C-ITS
Chapter 3 - Legal aspects and framework for PPI
19:30
Network dinner

8. Agenda of P4ITS Meeting #10
Day 2 – Wednesday, 27 April 2016
8:30
Arrival of the participants
9:00 – 11:00
Session 3:
Finalisation of:
Chapter 4 - PPI for C-ITS: experiences, barriers and opportunities
Including examples on existing cases of innovative C-ITS solutions developed / deployed in national / EU projects and C-ITS platform (phase 1 outcomes & phase 2 plans)
11:00 – 11:30
Coffee break
11:30 – 13:00
Session 4:
Discussion on PPI enablers & key points for a concerted approach that can have a positive impact for the market deployment of cooperative ITS
Including advantages and disadvantages of using PPI in the context of different tools supporting C-ITS deployment, with areas where PPI is more adequate than other tools
13:00 – 14:00
Lunch
14:00 – 16:00
Session 5:
Chapter 5 - Ways forward for PPI in the field of C-ITS
16:00 – 16:30
16:30 – 17:30
Session 6:
Discussion on after-project life continuation: yes/no - if yes: objectives, format, plans and funding opportunities, ToR, commitment letter.
17:30
End of the meeting

9. Network management status overview

10. Actual / planned submission date
Deliverables
Deliverable No.
Deliverable name
WP No.
Nature
Dissem. level
Due delivery date
Actual / planned submission date
D1.1
Network quality plan
WP1
Report CO M3
M13
D1.2
Year 1 progress report PU
M14
D1.3
Year 2 progress report
M25
M26
D1.4
Final report
M30
D1.5
Project factsheet
Other M2 M5
D1.6.(0 to 9)
Quarterly Progress Report
M4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 30
M5, 9, 11, 13, 16, 19, 21, 26, 29
D1.7
Draft standalone webpage
D2.1
Network topics description and work plan
WP2 M6
M10
D2.2
New partners application process
D3.1
WP3 meetings proceedings
WP3
M12
D3.2
Discussion paper
M15
D4.1
WP4 external meetings proceedings and feedback
WP4
M18
M21
D4.2
Updated network topics description and work plan
Cancelled
D5.1
WP5 meetings proceedings
WP5
M24
D6.1
WP6 meetings proceedings
WP6
D6.2
Final guidelines/recommendations
D6.3
Letter of commitment for the network continuation (if agreed by the network members)
D7.1
Communication plan
WP7 M7
D7.2
Network website M9
M3 (report M13)
D7.3
Network leaflet
M11
D7.4
Final event
M23 (report M26)
D7.5
Network compendium
Renamed: WP2 meetings proceedings

11. Milestones Milestone No. Milestone name WP No. Achievement
Planned date
Actual date
Leads to M1
Project confirmed
WP1
Grant agreement signed M0
Start of the project Opening of WP1 and WP2 M2
WP2 end
WP2
Agreement on key topics and work plan M6 M7
End of WP2 Start of WP3 M3
WP3 end
WP3
Invitation sent to external stakeholders, with the discussion paper enclosed
M13
M15
End of WP3 Start of WP4 M4
WP4 end
WP4
Agreement on the 2nd analysis phase work plan
M18
M19
End of WP4 Start of WP5 M5
WP5 end
WP5
Draft guidelines internally circulated
M24
M25
End of WP5 Start of WP6
Network continuation
WP6
Go/no go decision on the continuation of the network
M30
Set-up of a sustainable network following the project / end of the network activities
Project completed
Final review successfully passed
M31
Finalisation of reporting and closing

12. Second Annual Review Main outcomes: Excellent progress
Consortium well working during meetings, although few partners did not attend some meeting the coordinator was convincing that all partners strongly contributed to the work, reports and review
Despite limited resources, capability to produce valuable outcomes and intangible benefits in terms of knowledge, know-how, mutual learning, awareness raising, with strong focus on its objectives
External consultation run methodically and efficiently, and has brought valuable information
PPI flowchart well defined and considered useful for public authorities
Recommendations scalable to the pan EU level as well as down to local city level, usable by practitioner as well as supplier, to be disseminated widely
Excellent project management, on time, well organised and proactive, with progress indicators on track
Three public bodies joined as associated partners are measure of success to build a longer term network
Recommendations:
Involvement of industry suppliers to gather their feedback and consider entire innovation ecosystem

13. Final Progress Report & Review
Final Report:
Simplifications on financial aspects for lump sum Thematic Networks:
No definition of eligible costs
No actual cost reporting
No justification of costs
No provision of certificates
No budget transfers
Only coordinator financially validated
Technical report:
Contractually due to the EC within 60 days after the end of reporting period ( )
…but to be submitted at least two weeks prior to the Review ( )
Report prepared by coordinator and distributed to partners end- May 2016 for review / approval by all partners until Monday, 6 June 2016 (at the very latest)
Review:
Duration: half day
Participants: Coordinator (delegated by all partners), EC project officer, two external reviewers
Thomas Zunder
Eleni Lianou
Agreed date & venue: 23 June 2016,09:30-13:30, DG CNECT premises BU25 0/S03

14. P4ITS conclusion / way forward

15. Expectations & contributions for continuation
CTAG & VIGO: good learning, C-ITS focus, OK to continue provided there are funding opportunities.
VTT: good learning, funding needed to continue, need to see benefit and go from high to practical level to be able produce best practices for daily work of Finnish procurers.
LIST: new partnership to investigate & provide procurement tool to support the PPI tendering and select the best solution; funding opportunity could be MG (not a PPI call), interest by city of Tampere.
OHLC: interest to continue, but need to define the right framework.
ATE: good network, good dynamics, interest to continue collecting best practices examples to create a body of knowledge on PPI (funding needed, CSA?), but not to go for actual joint procurement action for now
EARDA: learning phase for change management, stage-1 PCP proposal submitted, but not sure about continuation due to company re-organisation in the near future.
VL: good networking partnership; no continuation due to re-organisation; Flemish innovation agency could be right partner; push to address procurement aspects in WG in the EU C-ITS platform (knowledge creating / sharing). Send them final recommendations deliverable. Set up an EU project to work as WG in EU C-ITS Platform (like the EIP  European ITS platform, follow-up of EasyWay project, now EIP+ and soon EU-EIP, funded by H2020 and CEF)?
NDR: good common understanding achieved on “flexible thinking” about PPI / procurement, hoped to have more legal/procurement expertise in the network  learning limited on these aspects; very positive about continuation with another EU project to provide legal advice on flexible framework to allow C-ITS deployment.
ITSB: set up training programme / promotion as next step? Agree with VTT & LIST.
ITSS / STA: good learning, continuation to be considered depending on focus (procurement vs. ITS).
TOPOS/CEREMA: re-organisation after ITS WC might lead to terminate TOPOS, so possible continuation as CEREMA. CEREMA’s continuation in P4ITS depends role in EU-EIP, where CEREMA is partner and on policy level decision. Indeed a national WG will be set up in coming months to define guidelines and create software for public procurers for implementing new French procurement law.
VERONA: support VTT proposal, but need to see possibility of follow up due to entity reorganisation.
LIGURIA: support VTT proposal, but feasibility depending on legal frameworks developed at national level, which can be a barriers to common approach (depends on policy level decision).
ERTICO: challenge as coordinator to elaborate on legal, procurement, ITS aspects, but good value to work with P4ITS network; a different project structure could have facilitated the work and the contributions of each partner (e.g., vertical axes for specific legal, ITS, etc. aspects and horizontal axis to bring everything together; need to seek EU funding opportunities where VTT proposal for continuation could fit in, provided that this coagulates interest of the ERTICO partnership.

16. H2020 funding opportunities
P4ITS towards a sustainable longer-term network (new partners, funding opportunities, etc.):
MG-4.4: CSA on urban transport deployment, 2M€, 26 Jan 2016
Proposal submitted by ERTICO partnership
ICT-34: PCP on ICT based solutions for any area of public interest, 4 M€, 12 Apr 2016
Declined invitation to join a proposal
ICT-33: 4 M€ for (a) and (b) together, 25 Apr 2017
(a): European wide networks of public procurers preparing future PCPs or PPIs in any area of public interest that requires ICT based solutions
(b): European wide networks of competence centers on innovation procurement
EC invitation: any ideas for new PCPs or PPIs arising from your project?
Contact relevant COM service – prepare for PPI after your PCP
Horizon 2020 WP consultations started: reply to the survey that consults procurers about their interests in future PCPs/PPIs
PCP actions: co-finance (90%) actual procurement cost for joint PCPs + coordination costs
PPI actions: co-finance (35%) actual procurement cost for joint PPIs + coordination costs
CSA actions: co-finance (100%) only coordination costs e.g. procurer networks preparing future PCP/PPI