1 proposal preparation j. cosgrave, csju it officer clean sky call 11 info day brussels, 20th...

1

Proposal Preparation

J. Cosgrave, CSJU IT Officer

Clean Sky Call 11 Info Day

Brussels, 20th January 2012

2

Recall about Funding Splitting

Call 11 Info-Day, Brussels, 20th January 2012

ITD leaders & AssociatesOrganisation necessary to the

delivery of the platform objectives

7 years commitment Sign the JTI StatutesParticipate in JTI operational

costsCannot respond to the Calls for

Proposals of the platform Partners

will respond to the calls for proposal (CFP) organised by Clean Sky JU

CFP follows the ITDs Specifications

Contract for a limited duration up to 7 years

Maximum Overall EC Contribution: 800 M€

Partners(min 200 M€

i.e.25%)

Callfor

Proposals

Members(max. 600 M€ i.e. 75%)

ITD Leaders(max 400 M € i.e. 50%)

Associates(max 200 M €

i.e. 25%)

match EC contribution 50% (in-kind)

match EC contribution 50%

(in-kind)



i.e.25%)

Callfor

Proposals




i.e. 25%)



(in-kind)



i.e.25%)

Callfor

Proposals




i.e. 25%)



(in-kind)



i.e.25%)

Callfor

Proposals




i.e. 25%)



(in-kind)

12 67

3

Clean Sky Peculiarities


Topics and not research themes, with limited duration and specific targeted results expected (at higher Technology Readiness Levels).

Topics prepared by the Topic managers of the ITDs and checked by the Project Officers at the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking (JU).

Budget is defined by the topic value, and not by the maximum funding

A single entity can present proposals, with no need for a consortium to be created

There is ONE winner per topic

4


Funding up to 75%

IPR agreed at the beginning with the Topic Manager

Single entity or consortium

Day-to-day work with the Topic Manager

Contract managed by the CS Project Officer: reporting, costs claims, amendment requests, …

Reporting and Review at the end of each reporting period (up to 18 months)

Time to contract: 6 months after the launch of the call (« target »)

A promising start for SME and research organisations (academic or not)

Clean Sky Peculiarities

5

Clean Sky Web Site


6

Call Fiche and Rules for Participation


X

X

7

Topic Fiche


8

Looking for Partners


9

Proposal Evaluation


Three guiding principles:

ObjectivityEach proposal is evaluated as it is written

Accuracy Proposal evaluated against the official evaluation

criteria, and nothing else

ConsistencyThe same standard of judgment is applied to each

proposal

10

Eligibility Criteria


Receipt before deadline Firm deadlines

Completeness of proposal Presence of all requested forms

“Out of scope” A proposal will only be deemed ineligible in clear cut

case

Other criteria may apply Eg. budget limits

11

Eligibility Criteria


Make sure this total amount is below the value of the topic!

Proposal Total Cost

Affiliation

Please check on the Web Site the composition of the ITDs in the dedicated page!

Applicants who are affiliated to any leaders or associate of an ITD will be declared noteligible for the topics of that ITD

12

Evaluation Criteria


Criteria adapted to Clean Sky Specified in the Rules for Participation and Rules for Submission of

Proposals; refer also to sec. 3.10 Instructions for drafting "Part B" of the CS-RTD proposal

Six main criteria:C1 Technical excellenceC2 Innovative CharacterC3 Compliance with the Call for Proposals specification and

timetable (relevance)C4 Adequacy and quality of respondent's resources, management

and implementation capabilities and track recordC5 Appropriateness and efficient allocation of the resources to be

committed (budget, staff, equipment)C6 Contribution to European Competitiveness

13

Proposal Scoring


Each criterion is scored 0-5 half-scores to be used whole range should be considered Scores must pass thresholds if a proposal is to be

considered for funding

Thresholds apply to individual criteria… Default threshold is 3

…and to the total score higher than the sum of the individual thresholds Default threshold is 20

14

Scores Interpretation


0 - The proposal fails to address the criterion under examination or cannot be judged due to missing or incomplete information

1 - Poor. The criterion is addressed in an inadequate manner, or there are serious inherent weaknesses.

2 - Fair. While the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses.

3 - Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, although improvements would be necessary.

4 - Very Good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, although certain improvements are still possible.

5 - Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion in question. Any shortcomings are minor.

15

Evaluation Criteria Assessment (1/4)


Proposal

1. Scientific and Technical quality

1.1 Progress beyond the State of the Art

Describe the state of the art and demonstrate the innovative character of the proposal

This section will be used to assess evaluation criteria:

C2 Innovative Character

16



1.2 Scientific and Technology methodology and work plan:

A detailed work plan should be presented, broken down into workpackages (WPs). Please present your plans as follows:1.2.1) Describe the overall strategy of the work plan.1.2.2) Show the timing of the different WPs and their components (Gantt chart or similar timetable)1.2.3) Provide a detailed work description broken down into work packages:1.2.4) Provide a graphical presentation of the components showing their interdependencies (Pert diagram or similar)1.2.5) Describe any significant risks, and associated contingency plans.

This section will be used to assess evaluation criteria:C1 Technical excellenceC3 Compliance with the Call for Proposals specification

and timetable (relevance)

17



2. Implementation2.1 Management structure and procedures 2.2 Participants2.3 Resources to be committed

In addition to the costs indicated in Part A of the proposal, and the staff effort shown in table 5 above, please indicate any other major costs (e.g. equipment).Please ensure that the figures stated in part B are consistent with thosein Part A.

This section will be used to assess the evaluation criteria:

C4 Adequacy and quality of respondent's resources, management and implementation capabilities and track record

C5 Appropriateness and efficient allocation of the resources to be committed (budget, staff, equipment)

18



3. Impact3.1 Expected impactsDescribe how your project will contribute to the expected impacts in relation to the Topic in question. Mention the steps that will be needed to bring about these impacts. Mention any assumptions and external factors that may determine whether the impacts will be achieved.

3.2 Dissemination and/or exploitation of project results, and management of intellectual propertyDescribe the measures you propose for the dissemination and/or exploitation of project results, and the management of knowledge and intellectual property rights.

This section will be used to assess the evaluation criteria:

C6 Contribution to European Competitiveness

19


Evaluation Criteria Summary

Six CRITERIA

1 Technical excellence EXCELLENCE

2 Innovative character INNOVATION

3 Compliance with the Call for Proposals specification and timetable (relevance) COMPLIANCE / RELEVANCE

4Adequacy and quality of respondent's resources, management and implementation capabilities and track record

CAPABILITY

5 Appropriateness and efficient allocation of the resources to be committed (budget, staff, equipment) EFFICIENCY

6 Contribution to European competitiveness IMPACT

20


Concluding Remarks

Opportunity to fund research project in alternative to classical FP7 Collaborative Research Project scheme, with very focused technical targets.

Peculiarities with respect to FP7 on participation rules, proposal preparation and proposal evaluation.

Main advices to write a good proposal:•Fulfil the requirements contained in the topic description.•Read carefully the documentation of the call.•In particular rules of participation in order to understand how your proposal will be evaluated (A summary is provided in this presentation). •Check eligibility criteria.•Find complementary partners in order to have a good consortium if needed.

All information about the call and tools in order to help you to apply can be found on the Clean Sky Web Site: www.cleansky.eu.

21


© 2012 by the CleanSky Leading Partners: Airbus, AgustaWestland, Alenia Aeronautica, Dassault Aviation, EADS-CASA, Eurocopter, Fraunhofer Institute, Liebherr Aerospace, Rolls-Royce, Saab AB, Safran Thales and the European Commission.

Permission to copy, store electronically, or disseminate this presentation is hereby granted freely provided the source is recognized. No rights to modify the presentation are granted.

1 proposal preparation j. cosgrave, csju it officer clean sky call 11 info day brussels, 20th...

Documents