Horizon 2020 LEIT-Space. Programme & call implementation & the new rules. Birgit Blasch Deputy Head of Unit

Transcription

1 Horizon 2020 LEIT-Space Programme & call implementation & the new rules Birgit Blasch Deputy Head of Unit European Commission Research Executive Agency REA.S2 Space Research Vienna 17/12/2013

2 Overview Horizon 2020 Timetable for Space Rules, GA, funding rates Proposal preparation and submission Proposal evaluation and ranking 2

3 Horizon 2020 Three pillars Excellent Science Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies (LEIT) Societal Challenges 3

4 Space Research implementation Research Executive Agency (REA) Call handling, receipt of proposals, evaluation process, negotiation, grant agreements signature, receipt of reporting, reviews, payments, audits New Mandate for Horizon 2020 and continued implementation of FP7 Space projects European GNSS Agency (GSA) Executive Agency for SMEs (EASME) ex-executive Agency for Competitiveness and Innovation (EACI) European Commission DG ENTR: EU Space policy and Horizon 2020 Space Research 4

5 Calls are published 5

6 LEIT-Space Schedule Opening Calls December 2013 Closure Calls 2014 Galileo: 3 April :00:00 Brussels time EO, COMPET, PROTEC: 26 March 2014 SME: several cut-off dates per year Admissibility/eligibility checks and early April 2014 allocation of experts to proposals Remote evaluation end April end May 2014 Central evaluation end May end June 2014 Information to coordinators July 2014 First projects starting early 2015 Closure Calls 2015 Galileo: 4 February :00:00 Brussels time EO, COMPET, PROTEC: 28 * November 2014 (indicative) SME: several cut-off dates per year * likely to change to 27 November

7 Simplification & new rules Per project one single, pre-determined funding rate Single flat rate for indirect costs (25%) Acceptance of beneficiaries' usual accounting practices for direct costs Acceptance of 'average' personnel costs No more time-sheets for personnel working full time on EU project No reporting of interest on pre-financing Ex-ante financial capacity checks only for private coordinators Only 1 certificate on the financial statements at the end of the project for beneficiary requesting EUR or more 7

8 Grant agreement MULTI-BENEFICIARY GENERAL MODEL GRANT AGREEMENT = General terms and conditions + the following annexes: Description of the action ("technical annex") (Annex I) Estimated budget for the action (Annex II), Accession forms of the other beneficiaries and a declaration on joint and several liability of linked third parties (Annex III), Model financial statements (Annex IV), Model for the certificate on the financial statements (Annex V), Model for the certificate on the methodology (Annex VI) 8

9 Grant agreement Specific models, MULTI- and MONO-BENEFICIARY ERANET Cofund Pre-commercial Procurement (PCP) Public Procurement of Innovative Solutions (PPI) Cofund European Joint Programme Cofund (EJP) for Euratom European Research Council (ERC) actions for ERC Starting Grants (StG), Consolidator Grants (CoG), Advanced Grants (AdG), Synergy Grants (SyG) European Research Council (ERC) actions for Proof of Concept Grants (PoC) Marie Skłodowska-Curie Co-funding of regional, national and international programmes (COFUND) Marie Skłodowska-Curie Innovative Training Networks (ITN) Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowships (IF) Marie Skłodowska-Curie Research and Innovation Staff Exchange (RISE) SME instrument (phase 1 and 2) 9

10 Types of action / funding rates Research and Innovation Action (RIA): Up to 100% of eligible costs Innovation Action (IA): Up to 70% of eligible costs (exception: up to 100% for non-profit) Coordination and Support Action (CSA): Up to 100% of eligible costs In all cases: co-funding of the European Union 10

11 How to prepare & submit a proposal Follow strictly the instructions Read carefully the work programme topic What is expected? o High oversubscription in many topics Be clear and explicit o Evaluators must judge what they read Respect admissibility and eligibility criteria o Basic checks by electronic submission system Convince the evaluation experts regarding the selection and award criteria Let someone do a mock evaluation before submitting o No pre-proposal checks 11

12 Standard admissibility criteria 1. Submitted in the electronic submission system before the deadline Acknowledgement of Receipt 2. Complete (requested administrative forms + proposal description + supporting documents) 3. Readable, accessible and printable 4. Respect of page limit (70) o o Automatic warning in electronic submission system if exceeded and advice to re-submit a version that conforms; excess pages will bear watermark to disregard them Outside the limit: participating organisations CV or profile description of staff carrying out the work A list of up to 5 publications and/or other research or innovation products A list of up to 5 relevant previous projects/activities Relevant available infrastructure/equipment description Description of additional third parties contributing to the work ethics self assessment, data management plan (open access to peerreviewed scientific publications) 12

13 Standard eligibility criteria can be supplemented or modified in the call conditions Content corresponds, wholly or in part, to topic description against which it is submitted Proposal complies with the minimum participation and any other eligibility conditions set out for the type of action: Research & innovation action Innovation action Coordination & support action Three legal entities. Each of the three shall be established in a different Member State or associated country. All three legal entities shall be independent of each other. One legal entity established a Member State or associated country. Non-eligibility can also be discovered during/after evaluation 13

14 Countries eligible to receive funding WP General Annex A EU-Member States The Overseas Countries and Territories (OCT) linked to the MS: Anguilla, Aruba, Bonaire, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Curaçao, Falkland Islands, French Polynesia, Greenland, Montserrat, New Caledonia, Pitcairn Islands, Saba, Saint Barthélémy, Saint Helena, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Sint Eustatius, Sint Maarten, Turks and Caicos Islands, Wallis and Futuna. Horizon 2020 associated countries Check Funding Guide for up-to-date information whether agreements are signed: Third countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, American Samoa, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Congo (Democratic Republic), Congo (Republic), Costa Rica, Côte d Ivoire, Cuba, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Buissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Korea (Democratic Republic), Kosovo*, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Micronesia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palau, Palestine, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam,, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe. Except where this is explicitly excluded in the call text. International European interest organisations 14

15 Countries eligible to receive funding Legal entities established in countries not listed and international organisations will only be eligible for funding: o If explicitly mentioned in the call text. o When funding for such participants is provided for under a bilateral scientific and technological agreement or any other arrangement between the Union and an international organisation or a third country o When the Commission deems participation of an entity essential for carrying out the action funded through Horizon

16 European Space Agency In general, ESA will not participate in LEIT-Space consortia (marked as exception to general eligibility conditions in work programme) However, ESA may participate in proposals submitted against some topics: o COMPET 3, 4, 7 (2014) o COMPET 4 (2015) ESA experts may support the REA for the evaluation of proposals and for reviewing on-going projects regarding their progress 16

17 Gender equality in Horizon objectives Gender balance in decision-making o Advisory groups: 50 % men/women, at least one expert with gender expertise o Evaluation panels and expert groups: 40 % under-represented sex, taking into account the situation in the field of the action Gender balance in research teams at all levels o Model Grant Agreement Art 31: Best effort obligation to promote equal opportunities between men and women in the implementation of the action. They must aim, to the extent possible, for gender balance at all levels of personnel assigned to the action, including supervisory and managerial level. Gender dimension in research and innovation content o Explicitly introduced as a component of research concept o Flagging of topics with explicit gender dimension o Follow-up through the research cycle from WP to reporting 17

18 Ethics appraisal Ethics self-assessment o Complete the Ethics issues table. Main areas: Human protection, animal protection and welfare, data protection and privacy, environment protection, participation of non-eu countries, malevolent use of research results. o How are the ethics issues addressed by the proposal o How does the proposal meet the national legal and ethics requirements of the countries where the task raising ethics issues will be performed Often in Space proposals: export control, data protection, experiments with human subjects 18

19 19

20

21

22

23 23

24 en/funding/index.html

25 25

26 26

27 27

28 Proposal evaluation Commission decision Eligibility checks Individual evaluation Consensus group Panel review May include hearings with applicants (see WP) 28

29 Proposal evaluation Done by independent experts o Selected REA/GSA/EASME from EMPP o Balance in terms of skills, experience and knowledge geographical diversity gender where appropriate, the private and public sectors an appropriate turnover from year to year o No conflict of interest 29

30 Evaluation: Award criteria Excellence The following aspects will be taken into account to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the topic description in the work programme: Impact The extent to which the outputs of the project should contribute at the European and/or International level to: Quality and efficiency of the implementation The following aspects will be taken into account: Type of action: All types of action Clarity and pertinence of the objectives; Credibility of the proposed approach. The expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources; Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management. Research and innovation; Innovation; SME instrument Coordination & support actions Soundness of the concept, including trans-disciplinary considerations, where relevant; Extent that proposed work is ambitious, has innovative potential, and is beyond the state of the art (e.g. ground-breaking objectives, novel concepts and approaches) Soundness of the concept; Quality of the proposed coordination and/or support measures Enhancing innovation capacity and integration of new knowledge; Strengthening the competitiveness and growth of companies by developing innovations meeting the needs of European and global markets; and by delivering such innovations to the markets; Any other environmental and socially important impacts (not already covered above); Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results (including management of IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant. Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results (including management of IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant. 30

31 Proposal scoring Excellence: "The objectives.." 4,0 4,5 Impact: "The innovation capacity.." 1. Per criterion: Assessment, comments, justifications 2. Matching scores Quality and efficiency of the implementation: "The management.." 3,5 Σ 12,0 out of 15,0 Evaluation scores are awarded per criterion, scale from 0 to 5, half point scores may be given Maximum score: 15 Individual criteria threshold: 3 Total score threshold: 10 31

32 Proposal scoring 0 - The proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information 1 - Poor. The criterion is inadequately addressed or there are serious inherent weaknesses 2 - Fair. The proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses 3 - Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well but with a number of shortcomings 4 - Very Good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well but with a small number of shortcomings 5 - Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion; any shortcomings are minor. 32

33 Ranking of proposals Done by experts in panel review 1 ranked list per topic or per group of topics with a dedicated budget 13,5 14,0 14,5 11,5 Preparation: "cross-reading" Rules for the ranking o Priority criteria RIA: excellence>impact IA: impact>excellence and other criteria 33

34 New experts needed EMPP: Call for Expression of Interest for new experts for H en/experts/index.html Roles: Evaluator, rapporteur, quality support, independent observer; also project reviewer Register or update profiles! Keyword lists Confirm availability for H FP7 Experts may work max 120 days per 4 years 34

35 Thank you for your attention 35