Approaching the last FP7 Security Call

Transcription

1 Approaching the last FP7 Security Call Patricio ORTIZ DE LA TORRE Call Coordinator - REA S3 1 OSMOSIS 2nd International Workshop Madrid 28/02/2012

2 AGENDA 1- FP7 Security Theme Security Call 3- Overview of the evaluation process 4- Who can participate 5- Funding schemes 6- Recommendations 7- Horizon Madrid 28/02/2012

3 1- FP7 Security Theme FP Total M FP7 Cooperation Programme: 32,413 M The 10 Themes Space 1,430 4% Socio-economics 623 2% Security 1,400 4% Health 6,100 19% Transport 4,160 13% Food, 1,935 6% Environment 1,890 6% Energy 2,350 7% NMT 3,475 11% ICT 28% 9,050 3 Madrid 28/02/2012

4 Theme 10 Security Objectives To develop the technologies and knowledge for building capabilities needed to ensure the security of citizens from threats such as acts of terrorist acts and (organised) crime, natural disasters and industrial accidents while respecting fundamental human rights including privacy; To ensure optimal and concerted use of available and evolving technologies to the benefit of civil European security; To stimulate the cooperation of providers and users for civil security solutions; To improve the competitiveness of the European security industry and To deliver mission-oriented results to reduce security gaps. 4 Madrid 28/02/2012

5 Activities of the Security theme Security missions / activities 1. Security of citizens 2. Security of infrastructure and utilities 3. Intelligent surveillance and border security 4. Restoring security and safety in case of crisis Cross cutting activities 5. Security systems integration, interconnectivity and interoperability 6. Security and Society 7. Security Research coordination and structuring 5 Madrid 28/02/2012

6 Security Call: under preparation Last FP7 Security call and then H2020 Expected similar number of topics Higher budget: the highest for FP7 Security Work Programme under preparation Guides for Applicants to be draft 6 Madrid 28/02/2012

7 7 Madrid 28/02/2012 WP specific issues (1) Up to 75% funding (just for the Security theme): EU funding for RTD activities may reach a maximum of 75% also for participants usually entitled only to 50% (i.e. entities that are not secondary and higher education establishments, non-profit public bodies, research organisations or SMEs) if all of the following three conditions are met: very limited market size a risk of market failure for accelerated equipment development in response to new threats. Applicants need to demonstrate these requirements in their proposal Demonstration activities are always financed up to 50%

8 WP specific issues (2) The broad involvement of SMEs in consortia is highly encouraged for all topics and might be explicitly mentioned in the description of the specific topics. Normally actions are open to international co-operation to Hi-Income & ICPC countries and might be explicitly mentioned in specific topics for enhanced IC. Active involvement of end users is considered of utmost importance: Direct participation of user organisations implementing research actions Other forms of indirect participation might also be followed 8 Madrid 28/02/2012

9 Tentative Timeframe Call publication: End July 2012 REA Info-day (Brussels): Beginning September 2012 Deadline for submissions: End Nov 2012 at 17:00 Brussels time Proposals evaluation: - Remote: mid Dec 2012 / end Jan Presence: end Jan 2013 / mid Feb Panel meeting: mid Feb Ethics screening: Mar 2013 / mid Apr Security Scrutiny: end Feb 2013 / mid May 2013 Indicative start of negotiations of short listed proposals: mid 2013 Indicative projects starting date: end 2013 / beginning Madrid 28/02/2012

10 3 - Overview of the Evaluation Process Briefing 15 December 22 Feb 2012 Submission Individual evaluation Consensus Panel Finalisation Full Proposal Proposal forms Eligibility Call publication: 20 July 2011 Deadline: 23 November Evaluators Criteria 16 Dec 23 Jan IER Evaluators CR Criteria W1: 30 Jan 3 Feb W2: 6-10 Feb W3: Feb Hearings Feb Evaluators ESR Criteria Proposals in suggested priority order Ethical Screening Individual Consensus Info-letter & Redress Final ranking list Rejection list May - July Security Scrutiny Individual Consensus 2 Mar-16 Apr 24 Feb-11 May 10 Madrid 28/02/2012

11 Electronic Submission EPSS - Electronic Proposal Submission System Online preparation only Submission failure: Main reasons Technical problems Panic-induced errors several cases every year Too late starting upload, run out of time Submit early, submit often! If more than one copy of the same proposal is received before the call deadline, only the most recent version is considered for checking eligibility and possible evaluation If in trouble, call the helpdesk! 11 Madrid 28/02/2012

12 Eligibility checks 1- Receipt of proposal by REA before the deadline date and time established in the call 2- Minimum conditions: - number of participants - as set out in WP - (Only information provided in part A will be used to determine whether the proposal is eligible with respect to the minimum number of eligible participants) - Budget: If eligibility criteria 3- Completeness of proposal - Presence of all requested administrative forms (Part A) and the content description (Part B) - Part B of the proposal shall be readable, accessible and printable. 4- In scope of the call: the content of the proposal must match to the topic(s) and funding scheme(s) set out in that part of the work programme open in the call. A proposal will only be deemed ineligible on grounds of scope in clear-cut cases. 5- Proposals containing any classified information shall be declared ineligible. If the question of eligibility is not clear-cut: Eligibility review committee 12 Madrid 28/02/2012

13 Overview of the Evaluation Process Briefing 15 December 22 Feb 2012 Individual evaluation Consensus Panel Evaluators Evaluators Evaluators Criteria 16 Dec 23 Jan CR Criteria W1: 30 Jan 3 Feb W2: 6-10 Feb W3: Feb Criteria ESR Proposals in suggested priority order Info-letter & Redress Final ranking list IER Hearings Feb 13 Madrid 28/02/2012

14 Evaluation: 3 steps Each proposal is read and evaluated independently & remotely by 3/5 evaluators: IER A meeting is convened in Brussels by a REA/EC officer Outcome is summarised in a consensus report: CR 14 Madrid 28/02/2012

15 Evaluators Experts selection criteria: a high level of expertise, an appropriate range of competencies. Providing the above conditions, other criteria are taken into consideration: an appropriate balance between academic and industrial expertise and users, a reasonable gender balance ( aims at achieving in the medium term at least 40 % of members of each sex ) a reasonable distribution of geographical origins regular rotation of experts ( at least a quarter of the experts will be replaced each calendar year ) Encourage to register relevant experts: 15 Madrid 28/02/2012

16 The scoring scale 3 Criteria Each criterion is given a score out of five, with explanatory comments A threshold of 3/5 on each criterion An overall score is calculated for each proposal by simple addition A threshold of 10/15 on the overall score 16 Madrid 28/02/2012

17 Overview of the Evaluation Process Finalisation Final ranking list Rejection list May - July Ethical Screening Security Scrutiny Individual Consensus Individual Consensus 2 Mar-16 Apr 24 Feb-11 May 17 Madrid 28/02/2012

18 Security Scrutiny Procedure Proposals in the main and reserve list: - Security Committee Members verify that all security aspects are properly addressed The results of the scrutiny could be: - go ahead with negotiation; - recommendations for the negotiation without classification; - recommendations for the negotiation with classification; - recommendation not to finance the proposal Applicants receive the conclusions of the scrutiny procedure with the negotiation mandate 18 Madrid 28/02/2012

19 4- Who can participate? Any undertaking, university, research centre or other existing legal entity established in: EU Member States (27 MS) Associated Countries to FP7 (13 AC) = Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Croatia, Serbia, Turkey, FYROM, Switzerland, Israel, Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Faroe Islands If the conditions for participation are met: Minimum number: at least 3 independent participants from 3 MS/AC (JRC as if established in another MS/AC); Except for Support Action: 1 legal entity International organisations and participants from third countries can participate only in addition to the minima 19 Madrid 28/02/2012

20 International Cooperation Third countries: 1- International Cooperation Partner Countries (ICPCs) - May participate in FP7 activities (provided that the minimum conditions have been met). - They are eligible to receive EC funding. 2- High-income countries - Countries not included in the ICPC list and not associated to FP7: USA, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand + Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao + the Vatican, San Marino, Monaco and Andorra - May participate (provided that the minimum conditions have been met). - However, they are normally not eligible to receive an EC contribution to cover their costs - May, exceptionally, be granted an EC contribution if certain conditions are met: - such funding is provided for in a bilateral scientific and technological agreement - clear provisions are included in the WP/call for proposals - in absence of the above specifications, the participation of the entity is essential for carrying out the indirect action, i.e.: the participation of the organisation in question in the project is essential due to its unique experience/capacities in the field covered by the project (and lack of such experience/capacities among other partners) while carrying out the project tasks by this organisation is impossible without the EC funding, as there is no possibility of getting funds from alternative sources. This should remain an exception and must be duly justified by the proposers. 20 Madrid 28/02/2012

21 5- Funding schemes (1) Collaborative projects: Large-scale integrating projects (CP IP): - Demo Projects II & Integration projects - indicative EU funding >3.5M (eligibility criteria???) Small and medium-scale focused research projects (CP-FP): - Capability Projects - indicative EU funding 3.5M (eligibility criteria???) CPs to be as small and simple as possible and as large as necessary 21 Madrid 28/02/2012

22 Large Demonstrators Maritime Border Security Security of Mass Transportation CBRNE Supply Chain & Logistics Crisis management Demonstration Phase II projects 22 Madrid 28/02/2012

23 Funding schemes (2) Networks of Excellence Research organisations, end users and stakeholders wishing to combine and integrate in a durable way a large part of their activities and capacities in a given field (possibly: European virtual centre of research ) To promote new collaborative networks between research players with limited experience (e.g. end-users) or limited mutual knowledge (e.g. new research networks): establishing a form of distributed centre of scientific and technological excellence 23 Madrid 28/02/2012

24 Funding schemes (3) Coordination and Support actions: CA (or networking): Coordinating research activities and policies SA: Contributing to the implementation of the FPs and to prepare future EU RTD policy or the development of synergies with other policies, or to stimulate, encourage and facilitate the participation of SMEs, civil society organisations and their networks, or small research teams and newly developed or remote research centres in the activities of the thematic areas of the Cooperation programme. normally focus on one specific activity and often one specific event Core activities: studies, networking, exchanges of personnel, exchange and dissemination of good practices, the definition and organisation of joint or common initiatives, meetings, conferences and events etc. and the management of the action 24 Madrid 28/02/2012

25 Funding schemes (summary) Funding scheme Typical funding Typical duration (Years) Activities Capability projects 3,5M 2-4 small or medium-scale focused research project (CP-FP) Collaborative Project Integration projects >3,5M 3-4 large scale integrating project (CP-IP) Demo Phase II projects Demo Phase I Projects ~ 20 M 3-4 large scale systems of systems demonstrations ~ 1 M 1 strategic roadmaps Coordination and support actions Networks of Excellence CSA 0,5-1 M 0,5-3 NoE - CA: coordinating research activities and policies - SA: contributing to the implementation of the FP and to prepare future research policy stakeholders combination/integration of activities/capacities in a given field, JPA Demonstration Programme 25 Madrid 28/02/2012

26 Reimbursement rate Fixed maximum rates of reimbursement per activity and per beneficiary 26 Madrid 28/02/2012

27 Read and understand the WP: Not only the relevant topic Also the activity description And general recommendations 6- Recommendations (1) Consult the relevant GfA (CP/CA/SA/NoE/CP-CSA) Use the evaluation criteria and sub-criteria for building your proposal: The experts base their assessment on them! Divide your effort over the evaluation criteria Many applicants concentrate on the scientific element, but lose marks on project planning or impact description 27 Madrid 28/02/2012

28 Recommendations (2) The size of projects and of consortia should be the result of the intended project objectives and not the other way round! Within the partnership look for the right expertise needed for reaching the proposal objectives: end users, private and public, academia, industry, SMEs, etc: - Avoid sleeping partners without real contribution, - Avoid redundant partnerships, - But the involvement of SMEs and relevant End Users is strongly encouraged! Direct or indirect participation CPs: to be as small and simple as possible and as large as necessary Clearly explain/justify the project budget 28 Madrid 28/02/2012

29 Recommendations (3) Address ethical and sensitiveness issues within the proposal Justify the real innovative aspects (Incremental vs. breakthrough) Check/link the project with relevant ongoing or finished EU/international research projects: clearly present the state of the art! ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/security/docs/securityresearch_catalogue2010_2_en.pdf Present an overall vision of market deployment Respect the eligibility rules: completeness and number of partners 29 Madrid 28/02/2012

30 30 Madrid 28/02/2012 Recommendations (4) Proof-read your proposal by a neutral person Make the reading of an evaluator easy: - Use a simple and clear language - Be short and concise - Clearly define objectives, milestones and deliverables - well-organised contents, following the Part B structure - useful and understandable diagrams/graphs/tables - no typos, no inconsistencies and obvious paste-ins, no numbers which don t add up, no missing pages Respect the page limits: Applicants must ensure that proposals conform to the page limits and layout given in the GfA Don t leave the evaluators to figure out why it s good, tell them why it s good: leave nothing to the imagination Make sure you submit the latest, complete version of your proposal And do not leave the proposal submission to the last minute!

31 From Calls to Projects Call1 ( ) 156 million 48 projects Joint Call SEC-INFSO 20 million 9 projects Call 2 (2009) 117 million 32 projects Call 3 (2010) 209 million 40 projects Call 4 (2011) 221 million 54 projects Call 5 (2012) 241 million ~ 55 projects???? Call 6 (2013) 300 million These projects involve more than 1,500 organisations ranging from universities, large industries, SMEs (~20%), to security end users. Projects description available on 31 Madrid 28/02/2012

32 Success rate (number of proposals) Type Call Received Main List Reserve List Success rate CP-IP CP-FP, CSA & NoE Total ,9% ,7% ,4% ,7% ,7% ,6% 32 Madrid 28/02/2012

33 7- What is Horizon 2020 Commission proposal for a 80 billion euro research and innovation funding programme ( ) A core part of Europe 2020, Innovation Union & European Research Area: Responding to the economic crisis to invest in future jobs and growth Addressing people s concerns about their livehoods, safety and environment Strengthening the EU s global position in research, innovation and technology 33 Madrid 28/02/2012

34 3 Priorities 1. Excellent science 2. Industrial leadership 3. Societal challenges Concerns of citizens and society/eu policy objectives (climate, environment, energy, transport etc) cannot be achieved without innovation Breakthrought solutions come from multi-disciplinary collaborations, including social sciences & humanities Promising solutions need to be tested, demonstrated and scaled up 34 Madrid 28/02/2012

35 Societal challenges Proposed funding (million euro, ) Health, demographic change and wellbeing Food security, sustainable agriculture, marine and maritime research & the bioeconomy Secure, clean and efficient energy* Smart, green and integrated transport Climate action, ressource efficiency and raw materials Inclusive, innovative and secure societies *Additional 1 788m for nuclear safety and security from the Euratom Treaty activities ( ). Does not include ITER. 35 Madrid 28/02/2012

36 Next steps From 30/11: Parliament and Council negociations on the basis of the Commission proposals Ongoing: Mid 2012: Parliament and Council negociations on EU budget (including overall budget for Horizon 2020) Final calls under 7th Framework Programme for research to bridge gap towards Horizon 2020 By end 2013: Adoption of legislative acts by Parliament and Council on Horizon /1/2014: Horizon 2020 starts, launch of first calls Find out more: 36 Madrid 28/02/2012

37 Thank you for your attention! Patricio Ortiz de la Torre Patricio.ortiz-de-la-torre@ec.europa.eu REA: REA-security-research@ec.europa.eu DG ENTR: entr-security-research@ec.europa.eu FP7 Helpdesk: Centralised FP7 Enquiries Service: 37 Madrid 28/02/2012