European Research Council UK National Contact Point

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "European Research Council UK National Contact Point"

Madeleine Bryan
5 years ago
Views:

1 European Research Council UK National Contact Point Information and Proposal Writing Event for the 2018 ERC Proof of Concept Grant Call June 2018 Jon Brookes

2 Agenda 14:00 Welcome and Introduction to UKRO & NCP 14:05 Implications of the EU Referendum Outcome 14:10 Introduction to ERC 14:15 ERC Proof of Concept Grant ERC Proof of Concept Grants - Objectives & Activities Eligibility Project Costs & Budget Evaluation Process Proposal Writing Further Statistics Q&A 15:45 Finish

3 Introduction to UKRO and UK ERC NCP

4 About UKRO Mission To maximise UK engagement in EU-funded research, innovation and higher education activities Our office Based in Brussels European office of the UK Research Councils Delivers subscription-based advisory services for around 150 research organisations in the UK and beyond Also provides National Contact Point services on behalf of the UK Government

5 Our suite of services UKRO Portal: always up to date with the latest in EU funding and policy Enquiry service and you dedicated European Advisor: individual support and advice, all year round Annual visit: a tailored event for your institution Meeting room: a venue in Brussels free of charge Specialist training courses, focus groups and information events: providing in-depth insight into EU programmes Annual conference for European officers: the latest information on programmes and policies presented by European Commission staff, and other speakers UK National Contact Points for the Marie Curie Actions and the European Research Council (ERC)

6 UKRO Portal sign up today at Whether you are a researcher, European liaison officer or research manager/administrator you can sign up for free to stay up-to-date with the latest news, opportunities and insight into European funding Tailored news articles on EU funding and policy UKRO Factsheets on Horizon 2020 and other funding streams alert function and search engine with refiners and tags Daily or weekly alerts - personalise your account to best meet your needs!

7 UKRO Factsheets on the Portal Designed to give UKRO sponsors and subscribers a quick overview - yet all the details they need on EU funding schemes

8 UKRO Brexit FAQs UKRO also provides a public page and FAQ sheet on UK participation in EU funding for research, innovation and higher education. Aims to provide factual answers to the most common questions, both with a UK and international audience in mind.

9 UKRO National Contact Points Advice on the European Research Council and the Marie Skłodowska- Curie Actions Websites Helpdesk Phone: Phone: UKRO NCPs on social media

10 Brexit - Continued UK engagement in Horizon 2020

11 Facts and Points of Uncertainty Post Invoking Article 50 The UK is still an EU Member State and continues to be until the end of the negotiations. This means it has the same rights and obligations as all other 27 Member States, including the participation in EU funding programmes Details on how the UK can participate after an exit need to be determined during the negotiations UK Government has a dedicated inbox for specific concerns Research@beis.gsi.gov.uk and UKRO can advise on latest developments UKRO@bbsrc.ac.uk

Joint report on UK participation in EU programmes 2014-2020 Following withdrawal from the Union, the UK will continue to participate in the Union programmes financed by the MFF 2014-2020 until their

12 Joint report on UK participation in EU programmes Following withdrawal from the Union, the UK will continue to participate in the Union programmes financed by the MFF until their closure. UKRO understands that, as a result, if there is an agreement at the European Council meeting, the UK will continue to benefit from EU programmes during this period, including Horizon UK-based individuals and organisations would therefore remain eligible to bid for funding, participate in and lead consortia including for calls in 2019 and If an agreement is reached, projects approved during this period will be able to continue with an uninterrupted flow of EU funding.

13 In the meantime UK Government Statement 13 August 2016 Guarantees EU Funding for UK researchers beyond the date the UK leaves the EU: "where UK organisations bid directly to the European Commission on a competitive basis for EU funding projects while we are still a member of the EU, for example universities participating in Horizon 2020, the Treasury will underwrite the payments of such awards, even when specific projects continue beyond the UK's departure from the EU Q&A released by UK Government in July 2017 gives further clarification. This remains valid until a formal deal has been reached. British universities and research organisations should therefore continue to apply for EU funding through mechanisms such as Horizon 2020 while the UK remains a member of the EU.

14 Negotiation timeline Source: European Commission

15 Commission guidance for evaluators The Commission explicitly briefs evaluators in their guidance: _expert-briefing_en.pdf

Framework for UK-EU Partnership in science, research and innovation Published in May 2018 it is part of a series produced by the UK Brexit negotiating team for discussion with the EU on a future

16 Framework for UK-EU Partnership in science, research and innovation Published in May 2018 it is part of a series produced by the UK Brexit negotiating team for discussion with the EU on a future partnership in R&I. It also looks at precedents for bilateral S&T agreements and outlines in more detail the vision for a science and innovation pact with the EU, which includes access to the relevant EU programmes among others. The UK Government will discuss this framework with the EU and aim to conclude it alongside the Withdrawal Agreement later this year. loads/attachment_data/file/ /SCIENCE_-_FINAL.pdf

17 UK Government Q&A Joint Report

18 Introduction to the ERC

19 What is the ERC? The fundamental activity of the ERC is to provide attractive, long-term funding to support excellent investigators and their research teams to pursue groundbreaking, high-gain/high-risk research. Scientific excellence is the sole criterion on the basis of which ERC frontier research grants are awarded. The ERC s frontier research grants operate on a bottomup basis without predetermined priorities. ERC Work Programme 2017

ERC budget in Horizon 2020 Other Excellent Science 15% Industrial

FP7). Largest amount of funding will go to the Starting Grants and

20 ERC budget in Horizon 2020 Other Excellent Science 15% Industrial leadership 22% ERC 17% JRC 3% EIT and other 5% Societal challenges 38% ERC allocated around 13.1 billion for Horizon 2020 (~ 60% increase in real terms compared to FP7). Largest amount of funding will go to the Starting Grants and Consolidator Grants schemes. In the present budget, support to ERC has been under its 2013 level from Source: ERC

21 ERC Grant Schemes Starting Grants For PIs 2-7 years from PhD, up to 2 million for 5 years Consolidator Grants For PIs 7-12 years from PhD, up to 2.75 million for 5 years Advanced Grants For leading researchers, up to 3.5 million for 5 years. Synergy Grants for 2 to 4 PIs, up to 15 million for 6 years. No call in 2016/2017. Proof of Concept For ERC grant holders only, up to 150,000 for 18 months

22 ERC Proof of Concept 2018 call Call identifier ERC-2018-PoC Call opens 06 September 2017 Deadline 16 January April September 2018 Budget million (estimated grants) 20 (130) Planned dates to inform applicants Indicative date for signature of grant agreements 30 March July December July October April 2019 Call information on the Research & Innovation Participant Portal

23 Proof of Concept 2017 The total budget for the 2017 call was 24 million, awarded to 160 researchers, 27 of whom were from the UK. The UK had the most PoC grants, followed by Germany (24) and France and the Netherlands (both with 16). The ERC Executive Agency (ERCEA) has announced the results of the first round of the 2018 Proof of Concept (PoC) Grant call and communicated these to each individual applicant. The cut-off date for these results was 16 January For this round of the call, 114 ERC grant holders applied and 50 projects were selected for funding, with 31 being held in reserve. Further information can be found in the ERC Press release. In this round, the UK secured the most PoC grants, with 11, followed by Israel (8) and Germany (7).

24 ERC Proof of Concept grants Background

25 Objective and activities

26 Proof of Concept Objectives To maximise the value of the excellent research that the ERC funds, by funding further work to verify the innovation potential of ideas arising from ERC funded projects What kind of activities can be funded? establishing viability, technical issues and overall direction market research clarifying IPR strategy Investigating business opportunities initial expenses for start-up Aim is to bring ERC-funded ideas to a pre-demonstration stage for potential: commercialisation opportunities or societal benefits 26

27 Proof of Concept grants Up to a maximum of EUR for a period of 18 months. Although the ERC expects that normally, Proof of Concept projects should be completed in 12 months Given that 18 months are allowed for projects which require it, extensions are only granted in exceptional cases The funding will cover activities at the very early stage of turning research outputs into a commercial or socially valuable proposition, i.e. the initial steps of pre-competitive development More than one Proof of Concept Grant may be awarded per ERC funded frontier research project but only one Proof of Concept project may be running at any one time for the same ERC frontier research project Have to outline the innovation potential of the idea and the expected societal and/or economic impact

28 Commercial opportunities Financial profit Licensing to new or existing company Venture-funded start-up Commercial innovation 28

29 Societal benefits a social venture, ICT-based non-profit social network, web-based platform, organisation, new grass-root organisation but also a new product, production process or technology 29

30 Eligibility

31 Eligibility Eligible Principal Investigator: The PI has to be in an ERC frontier research project that is either ongoing or has ended less than 12 months before the opening date of the call The PI is subject to resubmission restrictions (one eligible application per call) Eligible Proposals: Proposal complete and submitted on time The content of the proposal must relate to the objectives and to the grant type set out in the call Demonstrate the relation between the idea to be taken to PoC and the ERC research grant. Eligible Host Institution: In a Member State or Associated Country

32 Eligibility Assessment Performed by ERCEA staff in parallel to the evaluation. Eligible Project Eligible Principal Investigator Eligible Host Institution Applicants will be informed as soon as the decision is taken Ineligible proposals will dissapear from the list of proposals assigned to evaluators Applicants can seek redress on the eligibility decision. N.B. a proposal can be declared ineligible at any stage 32

33 Project Costs and Budget

34 Costs Reimbursement of up to 100% of total eligible costs: Direct costs: up to 100% of eligible costs Indirect costs: flat-rate of 25% of eligible direct costs Information on eligible and ineligible costs on next slides and also given in detail in Article 6 of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement for Horizon 2020: nts_manual/amga/h2020-amga_en.pdf

35 Direct costs [C]osts that are directly linked to the action implementation and can therefore be attributed to it directly. Must not include any indirect costs. Examples: personnel, equipment, consumables, travel and subsistence, and publication costs Most costs likely to be actual : actually incurred by the beneficiary; incurred within the duration of the project (except costs relating to last periodic/final report); must be indicated in estimated budget; must be incurred in connection with the action and necessary for its implementation; recorded in accounts (identifiable and verifiable) and determined according to hosts usual cost accounting practices; must comply with the applicable national law on taxes, labour and social security; must be reasonable, justified and must comply with the principles of sound financial management, in particular regarding economy and efficiency.

36 Indirect costs [C]osts that are not directly linked to the action implementation and therefore cannot be attributed directly to it. To be declared as a flat-rate of 25% of eligible direct costs, excluding: subcontracting; costs of certain resources made available by third parties, not used on the premises of the host institution Examples: Costs related to general administration and management Costs of office or laboratory space, including rent or depreciation of buildings and equipment, and related expenditure such as water, heating, electricity Maintenance, insurance and safety costs Communication expenses, network connection charges, postal charges and office supplies Common office equipment such as PCs, laptops, office software Miscellaneous recurring consumables

37 Ineligible costs Costs that do not comply with eligibility conditions, in particular: costs related to return on capital debt and debt service charges provisions for future losses or debts interest owed doubtful debts currency exchange losses bank costs charged by the beneficiary s bank for transfers from the Agency excessive or reckless expenditure deductible VAT costs incurred during suspension of the implementation of the action Also: costs declared under another EU or Euratom grant

38 Evaluation Process

39 Evaluation Flow Eligibility check Reception of proposals at ERCEA Remote evaluation Preliminary results Independent experts assess the proposals and select proposals for funding Ranking or panel meeting if needed Final results feedback to applicants 39

40 Reception of proposals at ERCEA ERCEA publishes the call on the Participant Portal which includes: Work Programme Information for Applicants Templates Part B and HI letter Frequently Asked Questions ERC grant holders are allowed to submit only one eligible application per Work Programme (year). By cut-off date, ERCEA collects all submitted proposals The proposals are allocated by the call coordination to the experts: 5 reviews/proposal compulsory no discussions between reviewers/ remote evaluation A complete proposal must have: Administrative data Part B ( 7 pages + budget table) Host Institution Support Letter Additional documents: Annexes if necessary.

41 Remote evaluation There is alignment of the evaluation criteria with the structure of part B of the application. Three evaluation criteria: Excellence, Innovation and Impact Evaluation Criterion 1 Excellence (Innovation potential) PART B- Section 1: The idea - Innovation potential (max. 2 pages) Does the proposed proof of concept activity greatly help move the output of research towards the initial steps of a process leading to a commercial or social innovation? a. Succinct description of the idea to be taken to proof of concept b. Demonstration of Innovation Potential 41

42 Evaluation criterion 2 - Impact 2.1. Is the project to be taken to proof of concept expected to generate economic and/or societal benefits which are appropriately identified in the proposal? 2.2 Does the proposal indicate a suitable process that is designed to result in a concrete application, including outlining a process of commercialisation or a process of generating social benefits? The proposal should include: plans for the analysis of whether the project s outcomes are innovative or distinctive compared to existing solutions; plans for seeking confirmation of the actual effectiveness of the project s results; plans to clarify the IPR position and strategy; plans for setting up contacts with industry partners, societal organisations or potential end users of the projects results. PART B- Section 2: Expected Impact a. Economic and/or societal benefits b. Commercialisation process and/or any other exploitation process c. Proposed plans for : Competitive analysis Testing, technical reports (where applicable) IPR position and strategy (where applicable) Industry/sector contacts (where applicable) 42

43 Evaluation criterion 3. Quality and efficiency of the implementation (Quality of the proof of concept plan) Does the proposal provide a reasonable and acceptable plan of activities against clearly identified objectives and towards establishing the feasibility of the project? This should include: a sound project-management plan, including appropriate risk and contingency planning; demonstration that the activities will be conducted by persons well qualified for the purpose; demonstration that the budget requested is necessary for the implementation of the project and properly justified. PART B - Section 3: The proof of concept plan (max 2 pages) Section 4: The budget (max 1 page + costing table) a. Plan of the activities b. Project-management plan c. Description of the team The budget a. Resources (incl. project costs) b. Justification (description of the budget 43

44 Scoring and comments Individual reviews consists of: I. Awarding a pass/fail mark for each of the evaluation criteria II. Providing a succinct explanatory comment substantiating each mark. Comments should take the form of a statement and explanation of key strengths and key weaknesses of the proposal, in the light of the evaluation criteria. 44

45 Selection of PoC Evaluators The selection of experts is done by the Scientific Council There is only one pool of experts responsible for the evaluation of the proposals, regardless of their originating Scientific Domain Experts DO NOT evaluate Science At the end of the call, the list of experts is made public via the ERC website 45

46 Profile of the PoC evaluator Experts in knowledge transfer with experience in: o o o management of tech transfer from research through practical use; working with academics to deliver research collaborations, exchange know-how, license new technologies and create new business ventures; developing innovative technologies from public (and private) sources, turning ideas into patented, scientifically validated and licensable technologies; o o o o building/commercialising IPRs; developing technologies through proof-of-concept and prototype stage and in licensing onwards to a wide variety of industry sectors; identifying, protecting and evaluating the commercial potential of (basic) research; providing investment to support the early stages of business formation out of research in the public sector science base. 46

47 Preliminary evaluation results Proposals which fail 1 criterion will not be ranked if 3 experts fail 1 criterion, the proposals will not be considered Proposal X Criterion 1 Criterion 2 Criterion 3 Expert 1 Fail Pass Pass Expert 2 Fail Pass Pass Expert 3 Fail Pass Pass Expert 4 Pass Pass Pass Expert 5 Pass Pass Pass 47

48 Ranking If there is not enough budget to fund all the proposals which pass all three evaluation criteria, those proposals which pass all three evaluation criteria will be sorted by: 1. the number of pass marks awarded by peer reviewers to criterion 1 (Excellence - Innovation potential); 2. then by the number of pass marks awarded to criterion 2 (Impact); 3. then by the number of pass marks awarded to criterion 3 (Quality and efficiency of the implementation). Proposals will be funded in order of the ranking resulting from this 3-level sorting exercise until depletion of the available budget per evaluation round. 48

49 PoC : Example of ranking 49

50 Ranking (cont.) If there is a group of equally ranked fundable proposals that crosses the budget cut off line: All the experts involved in the evaluation of at least one proposal in this group will be sent the reviews of all the proposals in the group. They will then examine all the proposals in the group and the existing reviews, and decide on their own personal ranking. The ERCEA will compile a sub-ranking within the group taking into account the CoI, and will then come up with an overall final ranking list. After the evaluation, all the experts will have to confirm by sending an that they agree with the results of the evaluation. Only in the case a consensus cannot be reached, the ERCEA can call for a panel meeting in order to discuss the ranking order of the proposals.

51 Examples of feedback to applicants 51

52 Examples of feedback to applicants (cont.) 52

53 Proposal Writing

54 ERC PoC Call 2018 now open-

58 PART B An overview

59 Part B1 Excellence - Tips State the expected output of you project Why is your proposal innovative? If you are going to improve a product, method, process. how will you do it? In a concise manner, mention how it is done today and how your project will do it better. Do you know the state of the art in the industry sector? - Find out!

60 60 Part B2 Impact - Tips Answer the first three questions (Compulsory): Impact: who will benefit from your idea? Why? Name your final users Generation of financial of social profit: You are not expected to know how much profit you will made, but at least a process should be indicated. prove that you have been thinking about it! Market research: PoC will provide funding for further market research, but an idea on how this will be carried on, is important. Know your competitors!

61 Part B3 Implementation (PoC) Plan - Tips Present the plan while having in mind the technical and the commercial needs. Write a management plan and do not forget to mention the risk and contingencies. Don't waste too much space on CVs. Justify the budget items. Subcontracting in PoC is allowed. Give names of subcontractors (they will be deleted later but are important for the evaluation).

62 Project Reporting In the ERC Proof of Concept grants, given the shorter length, the project report is required only once, at the end of the project, and will combine the technical and financial aspects in one single document. Article 20 of the H2020 ERC Proof of Concept Grant Agreement defines the reporting requirements. The ERC POC report must be prepared and submitted online via the Participant Portal. Project Officer may be different to existing Frontier Grant. Same budget and cost categories regardless of size.

63 Examples of Successful Projects

64 CAPITA Training Networks for Child Abuse Prevention en.html

65 CIPRID Online exhibition and Arts Consultancy /rcn/108128_en.html

Goldsmiths - Citizen Sense Air Monitoring Kit research pioneers new strategies of citizen-led monitoring and data analysis that join up hardware and software

66 Goldsmiths - Citizen Sense Air Monitoring Kit research pioneers new strategies of citizen-led monitoring and data analysis that join up hardware and software developments along with social innovations in order to produce an AirKit toolkit that has the potential to revolutionise community monitoring infrastructures and practices,

67 Further Statistics on PoC Grants

68 Success rates ERC call Submitted Evaluated Funded PoC Total

69 Useful Links Participant Portal Information for Applicants for the PoC-2018 call 2018 Work Programme ERC website statistics on funded projects funded projects Proof of Concept Grants: including link to Panel information for calls

70 Thank you, Any questions?

European Research Council. Alex Berry, European Advisor 15 December 2015, Royal Holloway

European Research Council. Alex Berry, European Advisor 15 December 2015, Royal Holloway European Research Council Alex Berry, European Advisor alexandra.berry@bbsrc.ac.uk 15 December 2015, Royal Holloway UK Research Office UKRO s mission is to maximise UK engagement in EU-funded research,