1 / 15

Priority 3 – NMP in FP6

Priority 3 – NMP in FP6. Ewa Jędryka Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies Unit European Commission Research DG. ewa.jedryka@cec.eu.int. Disclaimer: Note that these slides are not legally binding and do not represent any commitment on behalf of the European Commission.

holmes-king
Download Presentation

Priority 3 – NMP in FP6

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Priority 3 – NMP in FP6 Ewa Jędryka Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies Unit European Commission Research DG ewa.jedryka@cec.eu.int Disclaimer: Note that these slides are not legally binding and do not represent any commitment on behalf of the European Commission

  2. Transition towards knowledge-based society & sustainable development, from resource-based to knowledge-based enterprises Strong impactsaimed at EU level Promotion ofreal industrial breakthroughsnot incremental research Integrated, multidisciplinaryandholistic approach SMEemphasis Overall approach and objectives of Priority 3

  3. * As in 2004 : “Stage 1” IP proposals are “Incomplete”, i.e: 20 pages strict maximum – Font 12 3 Evaluation criteria:Relevance to call; Potential Impact; S/T Excellence Go/No-go after “Stage 1”Full proposal for “Stage 2”  Hearings N.B. – Electronic submission ! NMP calls in 2005

  4. Integrated Projects (IP) Aim: flagship, ambitious, leading to radical innovation and transformation of industry in the long term Strong industrial participation and preferred leadership Clear deliverables - new “knowledge” / new application of existing knowledge… (need for breakthroughs) Positive image of industrial research Include all inter-related activities - ”mini programme” New Instruments

  5. Integrated Projects For SMEs (IP SMEs) Aim: flagship projects leading to long term transformation of industry, involving high-tech SMEs and serving the needs of more traditional, SME-intensive industrial sectors Provide high-tech SMEs with an opportunity to have a leading and decisive role in an Integrated Project. Substantial industrial participation IPs to provide the integrated approach shaped to the needs of identified sectors New Instruments

  6. Specific Targeted REsearch Projects (STREP) at frontiers of knowledge: support long-term innovation and transformation of industry Coordination Actions (CA) to strengthenlinksbetween national, regional and EC RTD projects, co-ordination with EUREKA, COST and ESF actions: CA  NE!!! Specific Support Actions(SSA) to prepare future research activities, roadmaps and scenarios, effective communication Traditional Instrumentsunchanged…

  7. Full/short Proposal Proposal forms Overview Evaluation Process Submission Individual reading Consensus Panel with optional Hearings Commission Follow-up Final ranking list Evaluators Evaluators Evaluators Criteria Criteria Criteria Rejection list Questions Proposals in suggested priority order Eligibility

  8. Experts provide individual reports on proposals and defend their opinions in the discussions Officials in teams of two run an evaluation group, having shared responsibilities: As organisers: harmonised procedures As knowledgeable moderators: building the consensus and running discussions As rapporteurs: Writing the CR and ESR Role of experts and officials in the evaluation

  9. Successful proposal submission • Understand the context of the call • Read the call text • Read and understand the part of the work programme linked to the call • Read and use the Guide for Proposers • Read and understand the evaluation criteria • Read the Guidance Notes for Evaluators for the call • All of these can be found on CORDIS (http://www.cordis.lu/fp6)

  10. Successful proposal submission • Your proposal: • Is it complete? • Is the partnership right? • can we all work together? • clear roles responsibilities, critical mass, etc. • Have you understood the purpose of the instruments of FP6? • Does it address all the questions? • see Guide for Proposers

  11. Successful proposal submission • Your proposal: • Does it address the work programme? • check with the call! • Are the objectives clear? • Can a non-specialist understand them? • Is the novelty clear? • Say why it is novel • Is it clear how the project will be managed? • Requires very particular attention in the case of the new instruments (IPs and NoEs) • “A picture is worth a thousand words”

  12. Successful proposal submission • Common misunderstandings: • Credible NoEs should not involve very large numbers of laboratories • Goal is durable integration • IPs do not need to involve very large consortia or budgets • They need to be manageable • Scope of the problem and the approach proposed are the key factors

  13. Successful proposal submission • Common misunderstandings: • STREPs are not small IPs • They have a different purpose • May be specific requirements for some priorities • NoEs are not large Coordination Actions • Their purpose is to change the way people work together

  14. Successful proposal submission • Common mistakes: • Not reading the call and work programme • Leads to proposals that are out of scope • “Optimistic” reading of the work programme • Also leads to proposals that are out of scope • Read and understand what is written, not what you hope is written

  15. For more information:…http://…… www.cordis.lu/fp6/nmp.htm www.cordis.lu/fp6/contractpreparation/ europa.eu.int/comm/research/ europa.eu.int/comm/research/industrial_technologies www.cordis.lu/nanotechnology

More Related