5 th Framework Programme (1998 - 2002) Information Society Technologies

55th Framework Programme (1998 - 2002) Framework Programme (1998 - 2002) Information Society TechnologiesInformation Society Technologies

Key Action 1: Systems and Services for the Citizen

3rd Call Information DayFriday, March 17th

DG Information Society DG Information Society

European CommissionEuropean Commission

Objectives of the Information DayObjectives of the Information Day To help you to make a better proposal

To ensure that we receive quality instead of quantity

To answer the questions you might have

To allow you to network

Vision of the IST ProgrammeVision of the IST Programme

Objectives of Key Action 1Objectives of Key Action 1

Focus in Workprogramme 2000Focus in Workprogramme 2000

3rd Call3rd Call

3rd Call: Key Action 13rd Call: Key Action 1

ISTAG Vision -ISTAG Vision - “orientations for WP2000 and beyond”“orientations for WP2000 and beyond”

””CCreate an reate an ambient intelligenceambient intelligence landscape landscape

(for seamless delivery of services and applications)(for seamless delivery of services and applications)

in Europe relying also upon testbeds andin Europe relying also upon testbeds and

open source software, develop open source software, develop user-friendlinessuser-friendliness,,

and develop and converge the and develop and converge the networking infrastructurenetworking infrastructure in Europe to in Europe to

world-class"world-class"

http://www.cordis.lu/ist/

istag.htm

Key Action 1: ObjectivesKey Action 1: Objectives

Foster the creation of the next generation of user-friendly, Foster the creation of the next generation of user-friendly, dependable, cost-effective and interoperable general-dependable, cost-effective and interoperable general-interest servicesinterest services

Usability and acceptability of new services…Usability and acceptability of new services…

improve competitiveness & meet user demands & support to relevant EU-Policies

InnovativeInnovative applicationsapplications based on based on innovativeinnovative systemssystems

That have significant That have significant exploitationexploitation potential potential

Medium-term & Long-term R&D projectsMedium-term & Long-term R&D projects

Key Action 1:FocusKey Action 1:Focus

- - progress state of the artprogress state of the art integrationintegration

IST componentsIST components

Third IST call (First call in 2000)Third IST call (First call in 2000)

Open date: February 10Open date: February 10

Deadline: May 10Deadline: May 10

Evaluation starts: June 4 - 9 Evaluation starts: June 4 - 9

Quick Evaluation Summary Reports, immediately following Quick Evaluation Summary Reports, immediately following the evaluationthe evaluation

Indicative Budget for Key Action 1: Indicative Budget for Key Action 1: 50 M€50 M€

KEY Action 1 in Call 3KEY Action 1 in Call 3

I.1I.1 HealthHealthI.1.1, I.1.2, I.1.3 I.1.1, I.1.2, I.1.3 only RTD only RTD

I.1.4 I.1.4 only Best practice & demonstration only Best practice & demonstration

I.2 I.2 Persons with Special needs, including the Persons with Special needs, including the disabled and the elderlydisabled and the elderly

I.2.1 I.2.1 only RTD only RTD

I.4I.4 Humanitarian de-miningHumanitarian de-miningI.4.2 I.4.2 only RTD only RTD

Proposals for Support Measures are called for in a continuous submission scheme (up Proposals for Support Measures are called for in a continuous submission scheme (up to 15 June 2000 at 5.00 p.m. Brussels local time) to 15 June 2000 at 5.00 p.m. Brussels local time)

Additional Call I.3.1 (WP 1999)

KEY Action 1 in Call 3 (indicative budget)KEY Action 1 in Call 3 (indicative budget)

I.1I.1 Health (35 M€)Health (35 M€)I.1.1 I.1.1 10-14 M€10-14 M€I.1.2I.1.2 10-14 M€10-14 M€I.1.3I.1.3 6-9 M€ 6-9 M€I.1.4I.1.4 3-5 M€ 3-5 M€

I.2 I.2 Persons with Special needs, including the Persons with Special needs, including the disabled and the elderly (25 M€)disabled and the elderly (25 M€)

I.2.1 I.2.1 12-18 M€12-18 M€I.3.1I.3.1 8-12 M€ 8-12 M€

I.4I.4 Humanitarian de-miningHumanitarian de-miningI.4.2 I.4.2 8-12 M€ 8-12 M€

Call for Proposals & EligibilityCall for Proposals & EligibilityGuide for Proposals & Evaluation CriteriaGuide for Proposals & Evaluation CriteriaFurther details on rules for participation, Further details on rules for participation,

type of actions and eligible costs.type of actions and eligible costs.Final remarksFinal remarks

Proposal PreparationProposal Preparation

Call for Proposals published on 10 February 2000. Call for Proposals published on 10 February 2000.

It defines:It defines: the Action Lines that are openthe Action Lines that are open

Reference to the Reference to the WorkprogrammeWorkprogramme the type of Actions called forthe type of Actions called for

See See Guide for ProposersGuide for Proposers the deadline and method of delivery the deadline and method of delivery

And refers toAnd refers to Manual of Proposal Evaluation Procedures Manual of Proposal Evaluation Procedures

Call for Proposals and EligibilityCall for Proposals and Eligibility

Ensure that the subject of your proposals relates Ensure that the subject of your proposals relates

to Action Line open in the Call for Proposersto Action Line open in the Call for Proposers Ensure that in the Action Line description the type Ensure that in the Action Line description the type

of action is called for of action is called for Ensure that the consortium is eligible for the type Ensure that the consortium is eligible for the type

of actionof action Ensure that the proposal is delivered on time and Ensure that the proposal is delivered on time and

is completeis complete

Call for Proposals and Eligibility Call for Proposals and Eligibility Cont’dCont’d

A proposal has 3 parts :A proposal has 3 parts : Part A: Administrative, budgetary information (Forms A0-A4)Part A: Administrative, budgetary information (Forms A0-A4) Part B Scientific/Technical contentPart B Scientific/Technical content Part C EU added value, contribution to Community policies, Part C EU added value, contribution to Community policies,

dissemination, exploitation and managementdissemination, exploitation and management

There are 5 blocks of Evaluation Criteria:There are 5 blocks of Evaluation Criteria: Scientific/Technological Quality and InnovationScientific/Technological Quality and Innovation Community added value and contribution to EU policiesCommunity added value and contribution to EU policies Contribution to Community social objectivesContribution to Community social objectives Economic development and S&T prospectsEconomic development and S&T prospects Resources, Partnership and managementResources, Partnership and management

Guide Proposals and Evaluation CriteriaGuide Proposals and Evaluation CriteriaCont’dCont’d


Part B of Proposal

B1 Title pageB2 Content listB3 Objectives Quality of the research

proposedB4 Contribution to programme Key Action objectivesB5 Innovation Degree of innovationB6 Project Workplan Adequacy of the chosen

approach

Evaluation Criteria 1Scientific Technological

quality and innovation

Guide for Proposals and Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation criterion 1Evaluation criterion 1: :

Scientific/Technological quality and innovationScientific/Technological quality and innovationQualityQuality Is the proposal sound? Is the proposal sound? Does it meet the scientific / technological needs of RTD for the target Does it meet the scientific / technological needs of RTD for the target

groups of persons?groups of persons? Have you chosen the most relevant approach for the targeted Have you chosen the most relevant approach for the targeted

objectives?objectives? Have you addressed possible alternatives?Have you addressed possible alternatives? Are checks and balances present to measure and verify progress of Are checks and balances present to measure and verify progress of

work?work?



Scientific/Technological quality and innovationScientific/Technological quality and innovation

Innovation and riskInnovation and risk

Does the proposed work go beyond “state-of-the-art”Does the proposed work go beyond “state-of-the-art”

Is the proposed system novel (or does it already exist in the EU Is the proposed system novel (or does it already exist in the EU

market)? market)?

Have you described the innovative aspects:Have you described the innovative aspects:

- Innovative technologies, - Innovative technologies, OROR innovative application, innovative application, OROR an innovative an innovative

service using leading-edge IS technologies and systemsservice using leading-edge IS technologies and systems



Scientific/Technological quality and innovationScientific/Technological quality and innovationInnovation and risk (continued)Innovation and risk (continued) Have you demonstrated awareness of the limits of current knowledge Have you demonstrated awareness of the limits of current knowledge

and/or solutions, and justified which direction(s) for development may and/or solutions, and justified which direction(s) for development may be plausible? be plausible?

Will the proposed work be feasible in relation to the application Will the proposed work be feasible in relation to the application environment?environment?

Does previous work clarify the risk or support the likelihood of Does previous work clarify the risk or support the likelihood of success?success?

Have you shown details of how you will conduct risk analysis or Have you shown details of how you will conduct risk analysis or assessment? assessment?



Scientific/Technological quality and innovationScientific/Technological quality and innovation

AdequacyAdequacy Will your approach, methodology and workplan meet the Scientific Will your approach, methodology and workplan meet the Scientific

& Technological objectives?& Technological objectives?

Will the proposed IST system solve the real problems of disabled Will the proposed IST system solve the real problems of disabled

and elderly people, which are addressed?and elderly people, which are addressed?


Part C of Proposal

C1 Title pageC2 Content listC3 Community added value

and contribution to EC policies

C4 Contribution to Community social objectives

Evaluation Criteria 2Community added value

and contribution to EC policies

Evaluation Criteria 3Contribution to Community social objectives

Guide Proposals and Evaluation CriteriaGuide Proposals and Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation criterion 2Evaluation criterion 2: : Community added value and contribution to EC policiesCommunity added value and contribution to EC policies

European dimensionEuropean dimension Does the proposal address European-wide issues? Does the proposal address European-wide issues?

European added valueEuropean added value Will the proposal will have impact at the European level?Will the proposal will have impact at the European level?

EU policyEU policy Have you shown which EU policies are addressed, e.g. the Amsterdam Have you shown which EU policies are addressed, e.g. the Amsterdam

Treaty (“non-discrimination” clause), employment and “mainstreaming” of Treaty (“non-discrimination” clause), employment and “mainstreaming” of disability issues? See:disability issues? See:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg05/soc-prot/disable/policies_en.htmhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/dg05/soc-prot/disable/policies_en.htm If relevant, are regulation and standardisation issues described?If relevant, are regulation and standardisation issues described?


Evaluation criterion 3Evaluation criterion 3: : Contribution to Community social objectivesContribution to Community social objectives

Quality of life and Health and Safety Quality of life and Health and Safety Have you shown how the proposal will improve the quality of life, and Have you shown how the proposal will improve the quality of life, and

health and safety for the target groups of users?health and safety for the target groups of users?

EmploymentEmployment Will the proposal improve general employment prospects and/or develop Will the proposal improve general employment prospects and/or develop

the skills of individuals?the skills of individuals?

Preserving and/or enhancing the environmentPreserving and/or enhancing the environment Will the proposed project contribute to the EU policy relating to preserving Will the proposed project contribute to the EU policy relating to preserving

and enhancing the environment and the minimum use or conservation of and enhancing the environment and the minimum use or conservation of natural resources?natural resources?


Part C of Proposal cont’d

C5 Project managementC6 Description of the consortiumC7 Description of the participants

C8 Economic development and scientific and technological prospects

Evaluation Criteria 4Economic development and S&T prospects

Evaluation Criteria 5Resources, partnership and managment


Evaluation criterion 4Evaluation criterion 4: : Economic development and S & T prospectsEconomic development and S & T prospects

Usefulness and range of applications, exploitations plansUsefulness and range of applications, exploitations plans Have you described a plan for (Europe-wide) exploitation beyond the end of Have you described a plan for (Europe-wide) exploitation beyond the end of

the project?the project? Are partners genuinely committed to exploitation of the results - and Are partners genuinely committed to exploitation of the results - and

capable of ensuring this exploitation ?capable of ensuring this exploitation ? Can the results be exploited by others, beyond the partnership?Can the results be exploited by others, beyond the partnership?

Strategic impactStrategic impact Will the proposed work improve competitiveness and/or create new Will the proposed work improve competitiveness and/or create new

markets? What is the size and value of the intended market?markets? What is the size and value of the intended market?

Dissemination strategiesDissemination strategies How will the proposal contribute to Scientific & Technical progress?How will the proposal contribute to Scientific & Technical progress? How will the information be presented - and for which target groups? How will the information be presented - and for which target groups?



Management and resourcesManagement and resourcesQuality of management and project approachQuality of management and project approach Have you described the management tools and coordination methods?Have you described the management tools and coordination methods?

Quality of partnership, involvement of users and other Quality of partnership, involvement of users and other actorsactors

Have you chosen partners with complementary expertise and roles?Have you chosen partners with complementary expertise and roles? Do you have industrial partners or others who can deliver the intended Do you have industrial partners or others who can deliver the intended

product or service to the users?product or service to the users?

Appropriateness of resourcesAppropriateness of resources Are the resources you request in balance with the objectives and tasks?Are the resources you request in balance with the objectives and tasks?


Criteria Weight (1) Threshold (2)

Scientific/Technological Qualityand innovation 4 >= 3Community Added Valueand contribution to EU policy 1 >= 2Contribution to Comm. Social objectives 1 -Economic Dev; S&T prospects(range of applications, exploitation, strategic impact, dissemination) 2 >= 3Resources, Partnership, Management 2 >= 2

1) Weight on a scale of 10 (sum 10)2) Threshold with respect to score 0-5

Rules for participationRules for participation Normally (RTD): Normally (RTD): - at least 2 EU partners- at least 2 EU partners

- or 1 EU + 1 Associated State - or 1 EU + 1 Associated State

Under normal funding conditions/obligationsUnder normal funding conditions/obligations– EU (+JRC) - From associated countryEU (+JRC) - From associated country

Self financing - conform with Community interestsSelf financing - conform with Community interests– Non-associated European and Mediterranean partner countriesNon-associated European and Mediterranean partner countries– Countries with S&T agreementCountries with S&T agreement– International organisationsInternational organisations

Self financing - conform with Community interestSelf financing - conform with Community interest& substantial added value for programme& substantial added value for programme– other countriesother countries

Accompanying Measures and most Take-UP: Accompanying Measures and most Take-UP: – 1 Contractor (EU or Associated State) possible1 Contractor (EU or Associated State) possible

Rules for participation Rules for participation cont’dcont’d

Associated statesAssociated states EEA:EEA:

Iceland, Liechtenstein, NorwayIceland, Liechtenstein, Norway

EU candidate member states:EU candidate member states: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Rep, Estonia, Hungary, LatviaBulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Rep, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia

Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, SloveniaLithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia

Other: Other: IsraelIsrael

Not yet (15.02.2000) ratifiedNot yet (15.02.2000) ratifiedSwitzerlandSwitzerland

Before Association agreement is ratifiedBefore Association agreement is ratifiedparticipation is possible on self-financing basis.participation is possible on self-financing basis.

Types of actionsTypes of actions

Proposals for RTD, Demonstration and combined Proposals for RTD, Demonstration and combined TRD/demonstration projects (Fixed deadline)TRD/demonstration projects (Fixed deadline)

Proposals for Take-Up actions and Support Measures Proposals for Take-Up actions and Support Measures (fixed deadline)(fixed deadline)

Proposals for Support Measures (Continuous submission Proposals for Support Measures (Continuous submission scheme)scheme)

Note that rules for participation, guide for proposers, Note that rules for participation, guide for proposers, interpretation of Evaluation criteria-thresholds and interpretation of Evaluation criteria-thresholds and weights and eligible costs are dependent on the type of weights and eligible costs are dependent on the type of actionaction

1111 Full cost, actual overheadFull cost, actual overhead (funded at 50 %)(funded at 50 %)Full cost, actual overheadFull cost, actual overhead (funded at 50 %)(funded at 50 %)

2222Full cost, flat overhead rateFull cost, flat overhead rate (funded at 50 %). (funded at 50 %). Under this model overheads are fixed at 80 % Under this model overheads are fixed at 80 % of the labour cost claimed.of the labour cost claimed.

Full cost, flat overhead rateFull cost, flat overhead rate (funded at 50 %). (funded at 50 %). Under this model overheads are fixed at 80 % Under this model overheads are fixed at 80 % of the labour cost claimed.of the labour cost claimed.

3333

Additional costsAdditional costs (funded at 100 %). This model (funded at 100 %). This model is limited to those organisations whose accounting is limited to those organisations whose accounting system is based on disbursals and not on costs system is based on disbursals and not on costs (universities, governmental organisations, etc.)(universities, governmental organisations, etc.)

Additional costsAdditional costs (funded at 100 %). This model (funded at 100 %). This model is limited to those organisations whose accounting is limited to those organisations whose accounting system is based on disbursals and not on costs system is based on disbursals and not on costs (universities, governmental organisations, etc.)(universities, governmental organisations, etc.)

• 3 funding models are available3 funding models are available : :

Models of Funding - RTDModels of Funding - RTD

Eligible Cost categories - RTDEligible Cost categories - RTD

– Personnel,

– Durable equipment,

– Consumables,

– Travel and Subsistence,

– Computing,

– Subcontracting,

– IPR protection,

– Other specific costs,

– Overheads,

– Coordination costs

Final remarksFinal remarks Evaluators evaluate what is written, they do not evaluate what can be Evaluators evaluate what is written, they do not evaluate what can be

read into the proposalread into the proposal Evaluators look more for content than for styleEvaluators look more for content than for style Thresholds and weightings make that all elements of the proposal Thresholds and weightings make that all elements of the proposal

need to be of high quality need to be of high quality Ask somebody not involved in your proposal to critically evaluate the Ask somebody not involved in your proposal to critically evaluate the

draft proposaldraft proposal In order to help us,In order to help us,

– please pre-register your proposal (no lather than 19 April 2000), please pre-register your proposal (no lather than 19 April 2000), – please submit the full proposal in good time and ensure all forms that need to please submit the full proposal in good time and ensure all forms that need to

be signed are signed,be signed are signed,– ensure that budget figures add up.ensure that budget figures add up.

Good management practiceGood management practice

Innovation Innovation

ExploitationExploitation

Key MessagesKey Messages

Experiences from Previous CallsExperiences from Previous Calls

Projects should have critical mass, strategic impact and Projects should have critical mass, strategic impact and

real economic valuereal economic value

Our target projects of 1.5 - 2.0 M€Our target projects of 1.5 - 2.0 M€

Projects should be manageable and all partners should Projects should be manageable and all partners should

have a clear role and a significant contributionhave a clear role and a significant contribution Our targets project of not more than 8 partnersOur targets project of not more than 8 partners

In order to avoid cost on your and our side, only high In order to avoid cost on your and our side, only high

quality proposals should be proposedquality proposals should be proposed. . Our targets: oversubscription not more than 4 timesOur targets: oversubscription not more than 4 times

Good management practiceGood management practice

RTD and Support Proposals: Summary Information

AREA Received Selected OverscriptionRatio

Health 201 26 7.7

Persons with Special needs 92 2 46

Administrations 76 6 12.6

Environment 108 23 4.7

Transport & Tourism 106 25 4

Total 567* 82 6.9

* 1 Socio-Economic, 1 CPA 3

KA1: Over-subscription ratio: 1st CallKA1: Over-subscription ratio: 1st Call

StatisticsStatistics

3441

96

4146

106

1416

72

1018

92

3349

200

020406080100120140160180200

Hea

lth

Dis

able

d &

Eld

erly

Adm

inis

trat

ions

Env

iron

men

t

Tra

nspo

rt

Proposals received Criteria 1 SC & Tech Criteria 4 Exploitation

Innovation in proposals can be in the form of novel products, services Innovation in proposals can be in the form of novel products, services oror applicationsapplications

KA1 Focuses on innovativeKA1 Focuses on innovative applicationsapplications

SuchSuch applicationsapplications will be based on innovative systems (e.g. new user-will be based on innovative systems (e.g. new user-assistance systems for improving the access to government on-line assistance systems for improving the access to government on-line services, monitoring of transport etc.) Work may involve:services, monitoring of transport etc.) Work may involve:

Innovative integration of state-of-the-art IST systems and tools (e.g. UMTS, Innovative integration of state-of-the-art IST systems and tools (e.g. UMTS, GNSS2, new software agents capable ofGNSS2, new software agents capable of recognising individuals and recognising individuals and

learning learning their specific needs and abilities over time)their specific needs and abilities over time)

May require research and development of dedicated IST components and tools May require research and development of dedicated IST components and tools (e.g. new sensors, interfaces)(e.g. new sensors, interfaces)

KA1: The Meaning of InnovationKA1: The Meaning of Innovation

The application system to be developed is not yet on the The application system to be developed is not yet on the

marketmarket

The proposal doesn’t duplicate 4th FP or 5th FP The proposal doesn’t duplicate 4th FP or 5th FP (1st or 2nd call). (1st or 2nd call).

““Clear demonstration of novelty” should naturally include Clear demonstration of novelty” should naturally include a comparison with the “state-of-the-art”a comparison with the “state-of-the-art”

***We want a new system at the end of the Project******We want a new system at the end of the Project***

KA1: The Meaning of Innovation…Part 2KA1: The Meaning of Innovation…Part 2

Fight the European paradox: Fight the European paradox: Good research : no Good research : no exploitationexploitation

Consortia composition is crucial. No profit driven Consortia composition is crucial. No profit driven industrialists means industrialists means weak exploitation prospectsweak exploitation prospects

Exploitation potential should be Europe wide. In the past Exploitation potential should be Europe wide. In the past too many type partners didn’t care if the application was too many type partners didn’t care if the application was commercialised elsewhere: commercialised elsewhere: lost opportunity.lost opportunity.

KA1: Exploitation PlanningKA1: Exploitation Planning

Key MessagesKey Messages

Innovation (see Workprogramme 2000, page 10)Innovation (see Workprogramme 2000, page 10)

‘‘Users’ include public & private organisationsUsers’ include public & private organisations

Exploitation and strong industrial participationExploitation and strong industrial participation

Mainly long-term & medium-term R&D projectsMainly long-term & medium-term R&D projects

5 th Framework Programme (1998 - 2002) Information Society Technologies

Documents

Transcript of 5 th Framework Programme (1998 - 2002) Information Society Technologies