ARTEMIS Call for proposals 2008 Tom Bo Clausen

ARTEMIS Call for proposals 2008 Tom Bo Clausen “Embedded Systems & Control” European Commission, Brussels

JU Operations 2008 • JU is established since 7 February 2008 • Commission is responsible for the establishment of the ARTEMIS in collaboration with other founding members until the JU has operational capacity to implement its own budget • Negotiations with Belgium authorities on the premises of the ARTEMIS JU • ARTEMIS JU Interim Executive Director appointed is Kostas Glinos, European Commission • 1 st Call is launched on 8 May 2008 • Executive Director job vacancy is published on 24 May 2008 (deadline 25 June 2008) in Official Journal C 127 and in newspapers 2

ARTEMIS JU Call 2008 – Research Budget • Member States : • JU contribution: 63. 8 M€ 35. 1 M€ (55% of 63. 8 M€) • Total funding PAs: • R&D actors: 98. 9 M€ minimum 98. 9 M€ (in kind) 3

ARTEMIS Member States (19 EU Member States + Norway) • Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom 4

Who can participate and also get JU funding? • Legal entities from ARTEMIS Member States • Legal entities from Member States and Associated Countries to FP 7 – Albania, Croatia, Iceland, Israel, Liechtenstein, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey 5

Which documents do you need • • Call text Annual Work Programme 2008 (AWP) Eligibility criteria Guide for Applicants All documents can be found at: https: //www. artemis-ju/call_2008 6

Guide for Applicants 1. The ARTEMIS JU 2. ARTEMIS Research Projects 3. Proposal preparation 4. Proposal submission 5. Check list 6. What happens next 7. Project negotiations Annexes 7

1. The ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking • Public-private partnership • ARTEMIS JU will support R&D Projects (through open and competitive Calls) • Evaluation is a peer-review carried out by independent experts • Public Authorities Board decides on the selection and allocation of public money • ARTEMIS JU negotiates with selected proposals 8

2. ARTEMIS research projects • Industry-driven research projects in the field of Embedded Systems • Clearly defined and sharply focused objectives and approach • At least three legal entities established in at least three different ARTEMIS Member States (collaborative research) • Co-funding scheme, ARTEMIS Member States, ARTEMIS JU and in kind from the project participants 9

3. Proposal preparation (1) • Consult carefully the ARTEMIS AWP 2008 • Check eligibility criteria for proposals – Submitted through the APS – Received before the deadline – It involves the 3 non-affiliated legal entities established in at least 3 ARTEMIS Member states – It is complete – It is submitted in English (except for some additional forms) – The content relates to the topics in the ARTEMIS AWP 2008 10

3. Proposal preparation (2) • Check eligibility criteria for JU funding – Location in EU Member State or in an Associated Country to the FP 7 – Not being bankrupt etc. (see eligibility criteria document) • Check eligibility criteria for national funding of participants from ARTEMIS Member States – See eligibility criteria document and national websites – Provide requested information in proposal 11

4. Proposal Submission • Use the ARTEMIS Proposal Submission System (APS) • Part A: Structured information • Part B: Proposal description as PDF file (use template) • Part Cs: Specific information for participants from France, Germany, Hungary and Italy 12

5. Check list • Does your planned work fit the call for proposals? – ARTEMIS AWP 2008 • Is your proposal eligible? – Eligibility criteria document • Is your proposal complete? – Part A, Part B and eventually Part Cs • Does your proposal follow the required structure? – Use the template • Have your maximised your chances? – Check evaluation criteria • Do you need further advice and support – National funding authorities 13

6. What happens next • Acknowledgement of receipt – Does not mean that proposal is eligible • Evaluation report – After the completion of the evaluation and selection process • Official letters regarding: – Start of negotiation or – Reserve list or – Rejection 14

7. Project negotiations • Conducted by ARTEMIS JU Staff following a mandate from the Public Authorities Board • Aim to conclude a grant agreement and where appropriate a corresponding national grant agreement • Covers both technical, administrative and financial aspects 15

ANNEXES 1. Timetable and specific information on the call 2. Evaluation criteria and procedure 3. Instructions for completing Part A of the proposal 4. Instructions for drafting Part B of the proposal 16

Annex 1 • • • Publication: 8 May 2008 Deadline: 3 September 2008 ARTEMIS JU Helpdesk: ict@ec. europa. eu IT Helpdesk: helpdesk@artemis-ju. eu https: //www. artemis-ju. eu 17

Annex 2 • Evaluation by 4 independent experts (2 from a list suggested by IRC and 2 from a list suggested by PAB) • 5 Criteria – Relevance and contributions to the content and objectives of the Call – R&D innovation and technical excellence – S&T approach and work plan – Market innovation and impact – Quality of consortium and management 18

Annex 3 • Structured information filled in through the ARTEMIS Proposal Submission System 19

Annex 4 • Use template and submit as PDF file • Section 1: Relevance • Section 2: R&D innovation and technical excellence • Section 3: S&T approach and Workplan • Section 4: Market innovation and impact • Section 5: Quality of consortium and management • Annex A: Funding calculation forms and any additional national eligibility criteria information 20

Back-up Slides 21

Joint Undertaking funding flow R&D and € cash for running costs EC € cash for running costs MAS € for R&D Member & (fixed %) Associated € for R&D In-kind for R&D work States Research Industry Project 22

Examples of ARTEMIS project funding 2008 • Finnish large company: • Finnish SME: • Finnish University: 20% + JU (16. 7%) 48% + JU (16. 7%) 55% + JU (16. 7%) • French company: • French Univ. (marginal costs): 13. 3% +JU (16. 7%) 83. 3% +JU (16. 7%) • Dutch company (industrial res. ): • Dutch SME (industrial res. ): • Dutch Univ. (industrial res. ): 18. 3% + JU (16. 7%) 28. 3% + JU (16. 7%) 33. 3% + JU (16. 7%) • Maltese organisation: JU (16. 7%) 23

Grant agreement establishment National Grant Agreements JU Grant Agreement Partner 1 Coordinator MAS 1 MAS 2 Partner 2 MAS 3 Partner 4 Signature of National Grant Agreements Signature of JU Grant Agreement Accession to JU Grant Agreement 24

Cost statements and payments Partner 1 Co-ordinator MAS 1 Partner 2 MAS 2 Partner 3 MAS 3 Partner 4 Cost statements Payments 25

Framework Programme vs. JTIs What’s different? • Scope • Upstream research in FP – downstream research in JTI • Funding rates • Industry – academia balance in consortia • Public-private partnership approach • One body vs. many in governance and decision making bodies • One central money pot vs. co-funding • One set of rules in FP vs. specific national rules in JTI 26

Why JU Grant Agreement in addition to National Grant Agreements? – Reception of Community funding – Overall technical coherence of the project as well as the role of the technical co-ordinator – No practical implications in the daily management of partners: • Single technical monitoring process at JU level • Single administrative request for both national and JU reimbursement of cost (JU automatic) 27