FP 7 Proposal Writing Royal Holloway Inga Benner

FP 7 Proposal Writing Royal Holloway Inga Benner – inga. benner@bbsrc. ac. uk http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

UK Research Office • • • Established in Brussels in 1984 Staff of 14 Sponsored by the seven UK Research Councils Receives subscriptions from over 140 research organisations Services for sponsors and subscribers include: • • Query service – advice and guidance by email and telephone Bespoke institutional briefing visits Website and tailored web- and email-based information services Meeting room in Brussels Runs training courses and organises Annual Conference UK National Contact Point for the ERC and Marie Curie Produces European RTD Insight for the British Council For more information see www. ukro. ac. uk

FP 7 Proposal writing What will be covered? • Approaching Proposal Writing UK Research Office • Forming Consortia • Finance • Evaluation criteria and process • Application process • Hints and tips

Basic Proposal Requirements http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

Who is eligible for funding? FP 7 Overview EU-27 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria , Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK Associated Countries (FP 7) Albania*, Bosnia and Herzegovina *, Croatia*, Faroe Islands*, FYR, Macedonia*, Iceland*, Israel*, Liechtenstein*, Montenegro*, Norway*, Serbia*, Switzerland, Turkey* *except Euratom

ICPC Countries

Different Project Types http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

FP 7 Funding Schemes Small to Medium/ Focused Collaborative Projects • Targeting a specific objective in a clearly defined overall approach • Fixed overall work plan • Research/technological development activity and /or a demonstration activity Typically • 18 -36 months • € 0. 8 - 4 million EC contribution • 6 -15 participants

FP 7 Funding Schemes Large Scale/Integrating Collaborative Projects • Ambitious objective driven research with a ‘programme approach’ • Coherent, flexible and updateable set of activities • RTD activities, demonstration, tech transfer, training, dissemination, knowledge management and exploitation Typically • 36 -60 months • Around € 4 -10 million EC contribution • 10 -20 participants

FP 7 Funding Schemes Networks of Excellence • Supports Long Term durable integration of research resources and capacities • Jointly executed research to support integration • Joint training programme • Dissemination and communication are vital Typically • 5 to 7 years maximum • € 4 – 7 million EC contribution • 6 – 12 participants

FP 7 Funding Schemes CSA - Co-ordination Actions • Designed to promote and support ad hoc networking and coordination of RTD • Consists of co-ordination and networking activities • For example, establishment of expert groups, workshops, communication platforms, etc Typically • 18 -36 months • € 0. 5 - 1. 8 million EC Contribution • 13 -26 participants

FP 7 Funding Schemes CSA - Support Actions • Support to programme implementation, preparation of future actions • Complement other FP 7 funding schemes • For example, studies, thematic or geographic assessments, providing support to Third Countries, etc Typically • 9 -30 months • € 0. 03 - 1 million EC Contribution • 1 -15 participants

Approaching Proposal Writing http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

Who shapes the Work Programmes? Advisory Groups Technology. Platforms (e. g. Food for Life) Programme Committee Work Programme Other Sources (FP Projects, literature, conferences. . . ) Agencies Other Commission Services

FP 7 Submission and Evaluation Process Overview Call opens One/two stage e-submission Feedback (ESR) Eligibility Check Individual Evaluation Panel Review/ Consensus Post-evaluation Ranking Report to PC Negotiation of Proposals

Find a Call for Proposals

What does a proposal contain? • Part A (administrative details, budget, consortium information) • Part B (proposal text) • Scientific proposal, description of work packages, tables on person months, deliverables, milestones • Implementation • Impact • Ethical issues, Gender issues

Building your consortium Who do I need in my consortium? • • • Depends on topic… Partners must match activities in proposal Appropriate balance of sectors – industry, academia, civil society, user groups, etc Consideration of expected impact of project Commission may stipulate or offer advice on types of partner or country involvement • EU dimension/ added-value!

How do I find partners? Choosing Partners • • Existing contacts FP 6/ FP 7 Projects • http: //cordis. europa. eu/fp 6/projects. htm • http: //cordis. europa. eu/fp 7/projects_en. html • EU conferences and project evaluation • European Technology Platforms http: //cordis. europa. eu/technology-platforms • Partner searches: • UKRO can distribute partner profiles • NCPs • CORDIS • IDEAL-IST (ICT research) and SINAPSE (SSH platform) Note! Use partner searches with caution; Check out track record; Understand motives for getting involved

European Technology Platforms Industry-led stakeholder forums on Europe’s key research challenges Agree Common Vision Define Strategic Agenda Implement Strategic Agenda Advanced Engineering Materials and Technologies – Eu. Ma. T Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe – ACARE Embedded Computing Systems – ARTEMIS European Biofuels Technology Platform – Biofuels European Construction Technology Platform – ECTP European Nanoelectronics Initiative Advisory Council – ENIAC European Rail Research Advisory Council – ERRAC European Road Transport Research Advisory Council – ERTRAC European Space Technology Platform – ESTP European Steel Technology Platform – ESTEP European Technology Platform for the Electricity Networks of the Future European Technology Platform for Wind Energy – TPWind European Technology Platform on Smart Systems Integration – EPo. SS European Technology Platform on Sustainable Mineral Resources Farm Animal Breeding and Reproduction Technology Platform Food for Life – Food Forest based sector Technology Platform – Forestry Future Manufacturing Technologies – MANUFUTURE Future Textiles and Clothing – FTC Global Animal Health – GAH Industrial Safety ETP – Industrial. Safety Integral Satcom Initiative – ISI Mobile and Wireless Communications – e. Mobility Nanotechnologies for Medical Applications – Nano. Medicine Networked and Electronic Media – NEM Networked European Software and Services Initiative – NESSI Photonics 21 – Photonics Photovoltaics – Photovoltaics Plants for the Future – Plants Robotics – EUROP Sustainable Nuclear Technology Platform – SNETP Sustainable Chemistry – Sus. Chem Water Supply and Sanitation Technology Platform – WSSTP Waterborne ETP – Waterborne Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants – ZEP

Contractual and Financial Considerations http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

Contractual Arrangements t European Commission n me t an r G e e r Ag FP 7 Participation m u i t sor ent n Co reem Ag Partner 1 (Co-ordinator) Partner 2 Su n co b t ra License ct Third Parties Li c s en e Partner 3 Partner 4

FP 7 – EC Contribution Direct Costs: Maximum EC reimbursement rates FP 6 FP 7: Industry FP 7: Public Bodies, Universities, SMEs, etc. RTD* 50% 75% Demonstration 35% 50% Management Other** 100% ERC 100% direct costs, plus 20% flat rate for indirect costs Coordination Actions; Support Actions 100% direct costs, plus up to 7% for indirect costs Marie Curie Actions Lump sum + flat rates, some actions 10 % for indirect costs * Activities directly aimed at creating new knowledge, new technology, and products, including scientific coordination. ** Training, Consortium Management 26

Evaluation criteria http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

Evaluation Criteria FP 7 Proposal Writing Impact 3/5 S/T Quality Excellence Implementation 3/5 Overall threshold = 10/15 NOTE – check Work Programme for specific criteria, weightings and thresholds

FP 7 – Example of Topic to Proposal Evaluation Criteria Evaluation criteria applicable to Collaborative project proposals S/T QUALITY “Scientific and/or technological excellence (relevant to the topics addressed by the call)” • Soundness of concept, and quality of objectives • Progress beyond the state-ofthe-art • Quality and effectiveness of the S/T methodology and associated work plan IMPLEMENTATION “Quality and efficiency of the implementation and the management” IMPACT “Potential impact through the development, dissemination and use of project results” • Appropriateness of the management structure and procedures • Contribution, at the European [and/or international] level, to the expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic/activity • Quality and relevant experience of the individual • Quality of the consortium as a whole (including complementarity, balance) • Appropriateness of the allocation and justification of the resources to be committed (staff, equipment) • Appropriateness of measures for the dissemination and/or exploitation of project results, and management of intellectual property.

FP 7 Proposal Preparation Relevance • Relevance is considered in relation to the topic(s) in the Work Programme open in a given call, and to the objectives of the call • Integrated into ‘S&T quality’ and ‘Impact’ • This must be addressed in the proposal! • If it is only partially relevant – it will be reflected in the scoring • If it is not relevant – it will be ‘out of scope’ and rejected on eligibility grounds before the evaluation

FP 7 Proposal Preparation ‘S&T Quality’ Scientific and/or technological excellence (relevant to the topics addressed by the call) • Soundness of concept itself • Quality of objectives • Acknowledgement of, and development beyond, the ‘state-of-the-art’ • Methodology and Work Plan • Quality of co-ordination

FP 7 Proposal Preparation Implementation ‘Quality and efficiency of the implementation and the management’ • • Management structure and procedures Quality, complementarity and balance of the consortium Matching of consortium to objectives Appropriateness of allocation of: • Staff resources • Equipment

FP 7 Proposal Preparation Impact ‘The potential impact through the development, dissemination and use of project results’ • Expected Impact is described in the Work Programme • The nature of the Impact can vary considerably between calls • Think of your measures for: • • Dissemination Exploitation of project results IPR management Disseminating knowledge through stakeholder and public engagement

Application Process and EPSS http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

FP 7 Submission and Evaluation Key documents Call Fiche Focus Work Programme Guide for Applicants EPSS Guide Preparation and submission Rules on Submission and Evaluation, Guide for Evaluators Background Model Grant Agreement Financial, negotiation, reporting and IPR guidelines FP 7, Specific Programme Text Other policy documents

Electronic Submission (EPSS) Submission and Evaluation • • • Co-ordinator must register on Cordis and be sent password and access details PIC code – ask your institution’s European Office Passes on access to other participants Complete A forms (admin details) Upload. pdf file of Part B (10 Mb limit) ‘Submission’ must be selected Automated check Can revise up to deadline Deadline strictly enforced Technical problems addressed to EPSS helpdesk

Writing a Successful Proposal http: //www. ukro. ac. uk

Top tips – preparation 1. Clarify your own goals for participation 2. Read all Call documentation (ie, Gf. A and WP) FP 7 - Essentials - Also consider relevant EU policy documents 3. Fully appreciate the evaluation criteria 4. Discuss with and meet potential partners 5. Use appropriate partnership (including balance of budget and activities) 6. Set aside enough time 7. Research previous and current projects 8. Work with your institution

FP 7 - Essentials Top tips - application 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Register in EPSS (Coordinator) Put yourself in the shoes of the evaluator Write clearly and concisely Stick to formatting rules (page limits, font, etc) Include well worked out plans Outline any ‘Plan B’ (risk analysis) Use tables and diagrams where appropriate Ask someone to read through your proposal Make sure final version is submitted!

FP 7 - Success Factors In short, the best proposals… • • Have an EU added value Clearly address the topic and meet objectives Push back the frontiers of S&T Consist of the right consortium for the project Highlight the impact of the project Are well budgeted Are concise and easy to read

FP 7 Proposal Writing Royal Holloway Inga Benner – inga. benner@bbsrc. ac. uk http: //www. ukro. ac. uk