Citizens and Governance in a Knowledge-based Society Guidelines on Proposals Presented by Henry Scott, EKT
Overview Who can participate? Ø Evaluation procedure Ø Evaluation criteria Ø Selection process Ø Opportunities for evaluators Ø The proposal itself Ø Pre-proposal check Ø Notification of intent Ø Hints regarding the contribution to the ERA Ø Advice to potential applicants Ø Further sources of information & help Ø
Who can Participate? Country Participation Money EU Candidate countries (BG, RO, Turkey) NO, FL, IS Israel Switzerland “INCO” countries “Rest of the world” Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes, . . . Yes, but. . .
Evaluation Procedure Ø External, independent evaluators Ø Three to five evaluators per proposal Ø Consensus Meetings Ø Detailed consensus report Ø All blocks of criteria with equal weighting Ø Thresholds per block and overall (x out of 5) Ø Only proposals passing thresholds are eligible for funding
Two-Stage-Evaluation for No. E/IP Ø First Stage: l l l Open to all applicants Proposals of maximum 25 pages Evaluated against key criteria: • IP: Relevance, S&T Quality • No. E: Relevance, Integration Ø Second Stage: l l l Open only for those passing the first stage Full proposals Evaluated against full range of criteria
Criteria for Networks of Excellence Ø Relevance to the objectives of the work programme (3) Ø Potential Impact (3) Ø Excellence of participants (3) Ø Degree of integration and the joint programme of activities (4) Ø Organisation and management (3) Overall threshold: 4
Criteria for Integrated Projects Ø Relevance to the objectives of the work programme Ø Potential Impact Ø S&T Excellence Ø Quality of the consortium Ø Quality of the management Ø Mobilisation of resources Overall threshold: (3) (4) (3) 4
Criteria for STREPs and CAs Ø Relevance to the objectives of the (3) programme Ø STREP: S&T Excellence/ CA: Quality of coordination Ø Potential Impact Ø Quality of the consortium Ø Quality of the management Ø Mobilisation of resources Overall threshold: (4) (3) 3. 5
Selection Ø Number of “positively” evaluated proposals (normally) exceeds available budget Ø Commission selects among the “positively” evaluated proposals according to l l l balanced distribution between disciplines etc. coverage of research tasks structuring and integrating effects for the ERA Ø Selection needs approval of Member States
Evaluators needed. . . Ø Evaluation is crucial ! Ø Involvement of high quality evaluators from all over Europe required Ø Stressful, but highly interesting task Ø Open call for applications from individuals and for suggestions from institutions: www. cordis. lu/experts/fp 6_candidature. htm
The Two Parts of a Proposal Ø Part A: Forms l l Factual information on partners, budget summary Specific for each instrument Ø Part B: Scientific part l l Objectives, Impact, Implementation Plan, Consortium, Management, Resources, Workplan, Workpackages, Milestones, Deliverables, … Specific for each instrument
Pre-Proposal Check Ø You can have an outline of your proposal checked by Commission staff Ø Strictly informal and not binding Ø Up to one month prior to deadline Ø Only one check per proposal Ø Preferably by e-mail to rtd-citizens@cec. eu. int Ø Please respect “roughly two pages”. . .
Notification (formerly ‘Pre-Registration’) Helps the Commission to prepare the evaluation process … Ø … by providing them with an early “warning” on what kind of proposals they can expect Ø Notification possible via www. cordis. lu/calls/citizens Ø Notification does not commit you to submitting a proposal … Ø. . . and is not mandatory. Ø
Hints regarding the contribution to the ERA (1) Ø Rigorous comparative research (IP, STREP) Ø Meaningful cooperation within and between disciplines (No. E, IP) Ø Common/Shared infrastructures (No. E, IP) Ø Reviews of the state-of-the-art for broader dissemination (all) Ø Scientific knowledge base for policy making (Evidence on topical issues) (No. E, IP)
Hints regarding the contribution to the ERA (2) Ø Mapping of research competencies Ø Links with national programmes or activities (No. E, IP) Ø Involvement of users and stakeholders (all) Ø Keep consortia open for new partners (No. E, IP) Ø Specialised training programmes (No. E)
Advice to potential applicants (1) Is it the right call, right instrument & right topic? Ø Address the topic as comprehensively as possible Ø Give a complete description of the scientific approach Ø Is there a sound description of methodologies ? Ø Provide concise information on participants Ø Are there clear ideas on who will do what ? Ø What is the added value to the European Research Area? Ø
Advice to potential applicants (2) Explain the budget and respect the budgetary guidance Ø Keep length of applications within reasonable limits Ø Consider Impact, dissemination, users Ø Is it easy / tiring to read your proposal ? Ø Use the Pre-Proposal Check Ø Ask advice from your NCP and Commission helpdesks Ø
Information Package Ø Call Text Ø Work programme Ø Guide for Proposers (per instrument) l includes (specific) Application Forms Ø Evaluation Guide Ø FP 6 in Brief Ø Financial guidelines Ø Download from http: //fp 6. cordis. lu/citizens/calls. cfm
Further help Ø Electronic Proposal Submission System (EPSS) helpdesk for technical problems with software: support@epss-fp 6. org Phone: +32 2 233 37 60 Ø Intellectual Property Rights Helpdesk – free helpline available to English, French, Italian, German + Spanish speakers: ipr-helpdesk@ua. es tel +34 96 590 97 18 fax +34 96 590 97 15 Ø Henry Scott, Hellenic NCP for - Citizens & governance in a knowledge-based society - Science & society Tel: +30 210 7273 926, Fax: +30 210 7246 824 email: hscott@ekt. gr
Скачать презентацию Citizens and Governance in a Knowledge-based Society Guidelines
f8c88e227e64d26ebad247b80cce24e4.ppt