1. NATIONAL DOCUMENTATION CENTRE Athens, 18 December 2002 HELLENIC KICK-OFF EVENT 6th Framework Programme Maria Theofilatou

2. Framework Programme (2002-2006)

3. Framework Programme 6 (2002-2006) Focus on strategic areas where immediate and longer term integration of European research is needed to generate and sustain necessary critical mass New instruments-integrated projects networks of excellence

4. Overall architecture of the 6th FP

5. Sixth Framework Programme Thematic priorities: € 11285 M M € 1.1.1 Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health 2255 1.1.2. Information society technologies3625 1.1.3. Nanotechnologies and nano-sciences, knowledge- based multifunctional materials & processes1300 1.1.4. Aeronautics and space1075 1.1.5. Food quality and safety 685 1.1.6. Sustainable development, global change and ecosystems2120 1.1.7. Citizens and governance in a knowledge-based society 225

6. 1.1 Advanced genomics and its application for health 1.1.a Fundamental knowledge and basic tools for functional genomics in all organisms 1.1.b Applications of knowledge and technologies in the field of genomics and biotechnology for health 1.2.a Application oriented genomic approaches to medical knowledge and technologies 1.2.b Combating cancer 1.2.c Confronting the major communicable diseases linked to poverty 1.2 Combating major diseases Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health 755 M (€ 1100 M) (€ 1155 M) 400 M

7. Advanced genomics and its application for health (1100 M € ) Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health Fundamental Genomics Biotechnology

8. 1.1.a. Fundamental knowledge and basic tools for functional genomics in all organisms Gene expression and proteomics Structural genomics Comparative genomics and population genetics Bioinformatics Multidisciplinary functional genomics approaches to basic biological processes 110001ATC1010 01010101001101 1AUG011010100 10101101010101 010TTC1101010 01001000CCG

9. Combating major diseases Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health Medical knowledge & technologies Poverty- related diseases Cancer (1155 M € )

10. Success will depend on mobilisation of all actors Regions Academia Private Sector Civil Society European Investment Bank RESEARCHDEVELOPMENTREGULATION DELIVERABLES FOR SOCIETY Parliament Commission Member States Ethical Bodies SMEs Clinicians

11. From 2000 EoI to one Workprogramme Where do the topics in our workprogramme come from? Submitted EoIs Gaps identified by experts Commission’s Strategy to foster ERA None of the topics reproduce exactly one EoI: Combination of several EoIs Addition of elements Modification of scope A balance between Focusing  Ensuring Competition

12. An opportunity for Europe’s research community to help prepare for the first calls of FP6 Consultation to the scientific community on its readiness to implement new instruments in the 7 priority themes of 6FP The results have helped to define the Work Programmes and to prepare the 6FP calls It has facilitated the understanding by the research community of the potential of the new instruments Invitation for Expressions of Interest

13. Expressions of Interest Result Whole FP6:  Some 13.000 EoIs received and evaluated Priority one:  Close to 2.000 EoIs received  Evaluated with the help of over 200 external experts  2/3 Integrated Projects and 1/3 Networks

14. Expressions of Interest Results Close to 2000 EoI !!!

15. 53 topics published in the first call Total budget for first call: EUR 513 million, broken down as follows: Instrument EUR (millions) Integrated project or network of excellence385 – 410 Specific targeted research project or co-ordination action 92 – 121 Specific support actions 8 – 10 Priority One Implementation

16. 15% of FP budget is for participation of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) Priority One Implementation

17. Ethics: Research with human beings Research with animals Stem cells Biological materials or data atribuable to individuals Clinical Trials EDCTP Pediatrics New in FP6

18. Evaluation process Call for proposals Evaluation by a strengthened peer-review system –involving individual reviews, remote evaluation, panel sessions, hearings of applicants… Specific criteria will include: –scientific quality –potential impact on strengthening Europe’s excellence –excellence of the network members –extent, depth and lasting nature of the integration –contribution to spreading excellence –management and governance of the network

19. www.cordis.lu/life/src/projects.htm Former EU-funded projects including partner information can be found on: How to find partners? Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health FP6 Partners Database: www.cordis.lu/fp6/partners.htm EoI: eoi.cordis.lu/search_form.cfm

20. More information Help-Desk Life Sciences, Genomics & Biotechnology for Health: rtd-genomics@cec.eu.int

21. Instruments for implementing the thematic priorities (I) Wider range Better differentiation New instruments –Integrated projects (IP) –Networks of excellence (NoE) –Article 169 (joint implementation of national programmes)

22. Instruments for implementing the thematic priorities (II) Traditional instruments – Specific targeted research projects – Co-ordination actions – Specific support actions

23. Principles guiding their design (I) Simplification and streamlining –to minimise the overheads for all concerned whether applicant, contractor or the Commission –to speed up procedures, especially time-to- contract Flexibility and adaptability –to enable instruments to be applicable throughout the priority themes –to enable projects to evolve

24. Principles guiding their design (II) Increased management autonomy –to eliminate unnecessary micro-management While preserving public accountability and protecting interests of the Community

25. Classification of the instruments

26. Instruments to be used in priority (I) Calls for proposals will identify which instruments are to be used, which have priority, and for what From the outset, IPs and NoE will be the priority means –for implementing those themes where it is already deemed appropriate –while maintaining the use of specific targeted research projects and coordination actions

27. Instruments to be used in priority (II) In 2004, the Commission will arrange an independent evaluation of the use of the instruments –may lead to an adjustment of their relative weightings

28. “FP6 Integrated Projects”

29. Purpose of Integrated Projects (I) Designed to generate the knowledge required to implement the priority thematic areas of FP6 –by integrating the critical mass of activities and resources needed –to achieve ambitious, clearly defined scientific and technological objectives Essentially an instrument for supporting objective-driven research of a European dimension

30. Activities Activities integrated by a project may cover the full research spectrum –should contain objective-driven research –technological development and demonstration components as appropriate –may contain a training component –the effective management of knowledge will also be an essential feature –the whole carried out in a coherent management framework

31. Rates of Community support Maximum rates of support for FC and FCF participants: –50% for RTD and innovation-related components –35% for any demonstration component –100% for any training activities –100% for consortium management AC participants: supported at up to 100% for all components of the project (except for consortium management which will be supported as under FCF) For IPs, no more than 7% of the Community contribution can be used to support consortium management costs reimbursed at up to 100%

32. What is the scale of critical mass (I)? Concerning resources: each IP must assemble the critical mass of resources needed to achieve its ambitious objectives –activities integrated may range up to several tens of million euro –but no minimum threshold, provided necessary ambition and critical mass is achieved

33. What is the scale of critical mass (II)? Concerning the partnership: minimum of 3 participants from 3 different Member States or Associated States, of which at least 2 should be Member States or Associated candidate countries –but in practice likely to be substantially more –SME participation is strongly encouraged –‘third country’ participants may be included, with a possibility of Community financial support for entities from certain groups of countries

34. What is the scale of critical mass (III)? Concerning its duration: typically 3 to 5 years –but more if necessary to deliver the objectives

35. Proposal submission (I) Through calls for proposals –may be preceded by expressions of interest to help focus calls and assist in consortium building Simplified proposal-making –requiring only sufficient “management-level” detail –reflecting evolutionary nature of the project summary description of activities for entire duration detailed implementation plan only for first 18 months

36. Flexibility and autonomy of implementation (II) For changes in the consortium –the consortium may itself decide to take in new participants (though without additional funding) the contract will specify when this must involve a competitive call –the Commission may decide to launch calls to add activities and participants (with additional funding) e.g. to enhance SME participation

37. Monitoring Robust monitoring of each IP by the Commission – by one or possibly a team of project officers – through annual review mid-term or milestone review (optional) final review –involving external experts at all stages

38. More Information on the instruments Regularly updated website on the instruments – europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/networks-ip.html Brochures and leaflets on the new instruments (also available on Europa as above) Presentation slides (on Europa as above) Guide on “Participating in European Research” On integrated projects Leonidas.Karapiperis@cec.eu.int

39. “FP6 Networks of excellence” europa.eu.int/comm/research/nfp/networks-ip.html

40. NoE Objectives Strengthen Europe’s excellence on a particular research topic *by integrating the critical mass of expertise needed to provide European leadership and be a world force *around a joint programme of activities Tackling the fragmentation of European research *where the main deliverable is a durable structuring and shaping of how research is carried out in Europe Spreading excellence beyond its partners

41. NoE The joint programme of activities (1) A range of new or re-oriented activities: Integrating activities coordinated programming of the partners’ activities sharing of research platforms/tools/facilities joint management of the knowledge portfolio staff mobility and exchanges relocation of staff, teams, equipment reinforced electronic communication systems

42. NoE The joint programme of activities (2) Joint research activities: a programme of joint research to support the network’s goals development of new research tools and platforms for common use generating new knowledge to fill gaps in or to extend the collective knowledge portfolio

43. NoE The joint programme of activities (3) Activities to spread excellence training researchers and other key staff dissemination and communication activities networking activities to help transfer knowledge to trams external to the network where appropriate, promoting the exploitation of the results generated within the network where appropriate, innovation-related activities

44. NoE The joint programme of activities (4) Network management overall coordination of the joint activities communication with the Commission, reporting activities linked to consortium-level financing and accounting management and legal issues coordination of the knowledge management activities, if appropriate, other innovation-related activities promotion of gender equality science and society issues supporting the governing board and other network bodies ALL ACTIVITIES WITHIN A COHERENT MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

45. NoE Measuring integration(1) In their proposal, participants will include possible qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring progress towards integration

46. NoE Measuring integration(2) Main factors to be examined extent of mutual specialisation and mutual complementarity sharing /development for common use of research infrastructure, equipment, tools and platforms regular joint execution of research projects

47. NoE Measuring integration(3) Main factors to be examined interactive working through electronic communication systems joint management of the knowledge portfolio joint training programme (researchers and other key staff) coherent management framework

48. NoE Critical mass (1) Expertise: assembling of the critical mass needed to achieve the ambitious goals of the network *variable from topic to topic *larger networks may involve several hundreds of researchers *may be smaller provided that the necessary ambition and critical mass are achieved

49. NoE Critical mass (2) Partnership: in general at least six (legal minimum: 3 from 3 different countries) Duration of Community support:typically 5 years *more if necessary BUT no more than 7 years

50. NoE Financial regime (1) Community support targeted at overcoming the barriers to a durable integration these barriers are mainly organisational, cultural, human  cannot be quantified in normal accounting terms Has led to the concept of an incentive, taking the form of a global “fixed grant for integration”

51. NoE Financial regime(2) A fixed grant for integration, acting as an incentive, calculated on basis: of the degree of integration of the total number of researchers of the characteristics of the field of research of the joint programme of activities with a bonus for registered doctoral students

52. NoE Financial regime(3) The average annual grant to a network could vary with the number of researchers as follows:

53. Reminder Main NoE features(1) Demonstrated need for structuring description of fragmentation on the topic existence of excellent capacities in Europe in the topic  Is there a real need for a structuring intervention?

54. Reminder Main NoE features(2) Characteristics of the network planned: composition of the partnership: presence of key excellent actors potential synergies, complementarities, specialisation among the members quality/degree of integration planned  Is the network planned likely to tackle the fragmentation problem identified?

55. Reminder Main NoE features(3) Viability of the network during and beyond the period awareness of high decision level representatives of the participating organisations: strong commitment security regarding network’s funding, particularly beyond the period  Will the network constitute a durable answer to the problem identified?

56. More information? Regularly updated website on the instruments: europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/networks- ip.html Brochures and leaflets on the new instruments: available at Heysel conference and on Europa as above Presentation slides: on Europa as above Networks of excellence: colette.renier@cec.eu.int