How to write a competitive proposal for FP7 Health/Cooperation?

1. How to write a competitive proposal for FP7 Health/Cooperation? Barbara Rebecchi Ufficio Ricerca e Relazioni Internazionali Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia

3. Cooperation Cooperation is the core strand of FP7 Programme. The Cooperation programme benefits from two thirds of the FP7 budget. This program promotes collaborative research in Europe and other countries between partners through transnational projects consortia between industry and academia. It addresses the following ten major themes: Cooperation Health Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, Biotechnology Information & communication technologies Nanosciences, nanotechnologies, materials&new production Energy Environment (including Climate Changes) Transport (including aeronautics) Socio-economic sciences and the Humanities Space Security

5. Health 2007-2013

7. The evaluation • 3 simple criteria (0-5): • Scientific and/or technologicalexcellence • (relevantto the topicsaddressedby the call) • 2. Quality and efficiencyof the implementation and the management • 3. Potentialimpactthrough the development, dissemination and useof project results

8. The evalutaion Scientific and/or technological excellence (relevance to the topics addressed by the call) The most important criteria Demonstrate the knowledge of the state of the art Why it is innovative? The proposal must be relevant to the call workflow, risk analysis & contingency plan

9. The evaluation: positive remarks Scientific and/or technological excellence (relevant to the topics addressed by the call) Concepts and the objectives are very sound. It is demonstrated that a [...] does not exist. It will bring a valuable contribution to the [...], an area not yet well understood. The innovation value of this research and the proposed concepts and objectives is high. Moreover, it is commendable that the project intends to build on previous knowledge. The methodology and related work plan are detailed and well defined.

10. The evaluation: negative remarks Scientific and/or technological excellence (relevant to the topics addressed by the call) The overall structure of the project is not clear enough and very traditional The actual content of different WPs are not very precise and many things remain open The plan is professionally written in an academic sense and includes good literature review. However, the proposal lacks user aspects

11. The evaluation 2. Quality and efficiency of the implementation and the management A resonable distribution of effort & budget Importance of the reputation of the coordinator It must be very clear Who does what (e.g. he/she represents excellence in that field - past projects approved)

12. The evaluation: positive remark 2. Quality and efficiency of the implementation and the management Individual participants from 8 different countries (members and associated members) are qualified and experienced in their respective area of expertise and resources are appropriately allocated. The consortium represents all the relevant areas: academic, SME, airport, training developers, companies with extensive expertise in social & behaviour sciences, aviation and aviation security. The coordination institution is well respected.

13. The evaluation: negative remarks 2. Quality and efficiency of the implementation and the management The consortium covers a range of relevant fields of expertise, but there is not much specific and practical expertise. Academic and more pragmatical science expertise is not enough balanced. The consortium is not large, including 6 European participants.

14. The evaluation 3. Potential impact through the development, dissemination and use of project results Impact (e.g. greater competitiveness of Europe) - quantifiable Dissemination of results Exploitation of the results Intellectual Property Rights

15. The evaluation: positive remarks 3. Potential impact through the development, dissemination and use of project results Advancing the state-of-the-art research leads to potential increase of efficiency of international civil air transportation by decreasing false alarms, increased safety through training and increased coordination for all stakeholders in cases of emergency and security threat. Moreover, clear and explicit reference is made to the relations with other programmes underway. The consortium foresees an exploitation plan at M12, which we believe to be a commendable undertaking.

16. The evaluation: negative remarks 3. Potential impact through the development, dissemination and use of project results There is not much information how case studies and findings are going to be disseminated to key professional audiences in Europe. This plan only meets basic professional requirements but it is not an excellent dissemination plan. The plan adresses only academic audiences, not other professional audiences. There could be a lot of academic knowledge to be disseminated in this project, but practical impacts for European cluster are not clear.

17. The proposal writing The project design must consider two issues : formal Parts that, even you do not understand the usufulness, must be presented in anycase substantial explain in convincingly, assertive and argued ways the reasons you believe important for the project

18. The proposal writing No precise and steady rules (no 'silver bullet') At least 3 month for the proposal writing (and a lot of emails) Organize meetings in the project start up phase, information from Bruxelles, from national contact points, and from your research office

19. The proposal writing It is a narrative description , clear and readable (bold and indented texts) Division of the work : Agencies for management, tracking of versions Researchers for the scientific part

20. The proposal writing consistency, coeherence, conciseness emphasis (moderately enthusiastic) on innovation emphasison results and implications (policies, products)

21. For all programmes • Policy usefulness of research findings is a key objective ('evidence-based policies') • Dissemination from the earliest stages of the project • Define the potential users of your projects right from the beginning

22. To sum-up • The difference: not just research, but: • cohesion (e.g. new Member States) • competitiveness (industries, SME) • cooperation • Sustainable development

23. Change your approach: focus on the policy-makers side Policy The policy makers (Member States) UE Legislation Researchers and enterprises FP7 + CIP You do not apply funding only for your own research but in order to propose solutions to problems that EU POLICY MAKERS have identified and to which the proposed research represents a step forward at European/world-class level. The proposal must be formulated to solve a common and shared problem at EU level, for which individual efforts and national/regional resources are not enough, or not effective.

24. Principles • Eligibility • Subsidiarity = decisions are made as close as possible to the citizens, the actions undertaken at European level must be justified in light of the possibilities available at national, regional or local. According to this principle the EU can come into play only if the proposed objectives can not be sufficiently achieved by individual Member States, or regional or local entities, but can be better achieved only at European level. • European added value= European dimension of the project and its impact • S&T excellence of the partners/project (significant changes/advances, innovation) • Equal treatment and equal opportunities (inclusiveness) • Principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness: only necessary costs, managing capacity, "good house keeping", and appropriateness of resources mobilized. • Public Private Partnership (public/private consortia) • Financial capacity of the contractors • Operational capacity of the contractors • Just 1 single contribution may be granted for the same action.

25. Official documents Call for proposal Work programme Guide for applicant Rules for the participation Model Grant Agreement Financial Guidelines Useful documents Essentialdocuments!

26. Structure the workplan of your project idea Establish clear objectives. Goals, NOT results!! • Before you start writing, you can answer these questions WHY Define the results in a measurable way “deliverables” WHAT ? Responsibility (?) choice of the partnership. For each partner = 1 clear role e responsibility – linked to a project result to deliver WHO? HOW? Plan carefully the project activities WHEN? Schedule the project activities (timeline) Allocate costs to appropriate cost categories – reasonable and economic HOW MUCH? Allocate and breakdown of resources per WP, activity and partners

27. Projec Application Forms:an example PART AADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION FORM A1: General information (coordinator) FORM A2: Participant information, (1 each partner) FORM A3.1: Budget (one each partner, completed by the coordinator) FORM A 3.2 Budget overview PART B TECHNICAL INFORMATION in PDF format The sections follow the evaluation criteria

28. Forms:an example 1: Scientific and/or technical quality, relevant to the topics addressed by the call 1.1 Concept and objectives 1.2 Progress beyond the state of the art 1.3 S/T methodology and associated work plan Maximum length for the whole of Section 1: 20 pages, plus the tables

29. Forms:an example 2. Implementation 2.1 Management structure and procedures 2.2 Individual participants 2.3 Consortium as a whole 2.4 Resources to be committed Clear management structure Clear rights & responsibilities for each partner Describe why this partnership is the best to achieve the scope of the project Clear financial plan: Budget + Cofinancing

30. Forms:an example 3. Impact 3.1 Expected impacts listed in the work programme 3.2 Dissemination and/or exploitation of project results, and management of intellectual property 4. Ethical issues 5. Consideration of gender aspects

31. Application and Negotiation Process Final Work Programme Activities Application Ranking Decision (via EC to Coord) Consortium Budget Consortium Agreement Authorisation Negotiation Grant Agreement Project Account Project Start Preparation of Grant Agreement Staff Recruitment Consortium Agreement

32. ‘FP7 Funding Schemes’

33. Maximum Reimbursement Rates * Co-ordination and Support Actions (CSA), Dissemination, Training, Management

34. What is the Project Cycle Management? Set of tools and techniques to ensure greater effectiveness of projects and programmes and an overall improvement of their management. The PCM is based on the principles of management by objectives

35. What is the Project Cycle Management? The PCM isdesignedtoensurethatprojects are: • Relevantfor the needs of partners and beneficiaries • Feasible – from a technical, financial and economic point of view • Effective and efficient (well managed) • and therefore Aimed at generating sustainable/transferable results

36. Programmazione Valutazione & Audit Identificazione Realizzazione Formulazione Project Cycle Management Programming Identification Evaluation and audit Implementation Formulation

37. Programming identify and agree the main objectives and sectorial priorities of cooperation Provide an adequate framework to enable the identification and preparation of individual projects Country Strategy Regional Sectoral • The national and sectoral contexts are analyzed to identify problems and opportunities to be tackled through international cooperation, taking into account the lessons of previous experience The goals are:

38. Programming • The EU project must be compliant to: • National Development (i.e. Strategies for poverty reduction). • EU policies for development and country strategy papers. • National Programmes (i.e. Sanità pubblica, istruzione etc.)

39. The key concepts Present situation Future situation Development objective National Sector area National Sector area Immediate objective Project area Project area Inputs Outputs Activities

40. Identification • The ideas are identified and analyzed through… • Stakeholder analysis – identification and assessment of major groups, identification of problems and possible solutions. • Problem analysis – identification of key issues, barriers & opportunities; determining the cause-effect relationships (problem tree). • Objective analysis – formulate objectives (solutions) starting from the problems previously identified. • Strategy analysis– identify the most appropriate strategy for solution to the problem / the previously identified.

41. Formulation • The project ideas are developed into operational plans • Planning the structure of the intervention– define the builduing blocks of the project, formulation of measurable and veriable objectives. • Assumptions and risks– identification of external factors that may affect project implementation and are outside the control of Project Management- RISK MANAGEMENT. • Indicators– formulation of indicators, identification of means and methods to measure progress. • Activity Schedule– determining the logical sequence of activities and their interdependencies. • Budget– identification of the necessary material and financial contributions, preparation of a detailed budget.

42. Implementation • The projects shall be implemented and executed • Preparation of deliverables– the project team working on the preparation of project deliverables • Monitoring– while deliverables are finalised, the project manager takes care of: • Cost Management - identification and recording of costs in accordance with the project budget • Change Management – examination and adoption of necessary changes for better implementation of the project • Quality Management – review the quality of deliverables and of the management • Risk Management– risk assessment for the project and adoption of measures to reduce those risks • Communication Management – keeping stakeholders constantly informed on the progress of the project • Reporting

43. implementation - phases CONCLUSION BEGIN IMPLEMENTATION • Procurement and mobilisation of the resources • Realisation of the activities and generation of the results/deliverables • Monitoring and evaluation of the project • Retargeting of operation plans if necessary • Reporting. • Grant/Consortium Agreement signature. • Mobilisation of resources. • Kick Off Meeting organisation. • Analysis and revision of the project workplan. • Adoption of systems and procedures for monitoring and evaluating the action. • Use and Transfer of knowledge and skills. • After project sustainability • Further research

44. Evaluation & Audit • Activities usually carried out at the end of the project, or during the implementation phase (= mid-term evaluation) e • Aimed at: • Performing a systematic and rigorous analysis of the project and its effects, to verify and resolve problems of implementation • extracting useful information to identify and resolve problems of implementation (schedule of programs and future projects or to reorient the implementation of a project). Financing Body European Countries

45. Monitoring, evaluation and audit • Analysis of the project progress compared to the original workplan given in the Grant Agreement in order to enable the identification of problems and to adopt solution and corrective measures. Monitoring Evaluation Analysis of the efficiency, cost effectiveness, impact, relevance and sustainability of the project. • Has a financial nature. • Assurance of the compliance of the project expenditure against the Programme/National accouting rules. • Assessment that the resources are employes according to the needs of the project (necessary). Audit

46. Key points • Learn how to read the workprogramme • Find a place in the sun for your own favorite topic, and help to define its content (networking and lobbying) • Knowing the evaluation mechanisms

47. Key points • Learn how to read the work-programme • Find a place in the sun for your own favorite topic, and help to define its content (networking and lobbying – Learn how to write or influence the work-programme) • Knowing the evaluation mechanisms

48. FP7 Cooperation Work Programme: Health-2011Internal working document CONFIDENTIAL DRAFT2.4 TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH IN OTHER MAJOR DISEASES HEALTH.2011.2.4.1-3: Epidemiology and aetiology of infection-related cancers. FP7-HEALTH-2011-single-stage. Collaborative research should address one or more of the prevalent infectious agents that cause cancers of major public health importance in India as well as Europe, such as human papilloma virus, hepatitis B and C viruses, and/or Helicobacter pylori. The project must integrate different disciplines relevant to study both infection and cancer and include aspects such as prevalence of infection in different population groups, determinants of infection, clearance and re-infection, environmental cofactors in the carcinogenic process, mechanisms of infection-related cancers, and development of new testing and screening methods applicable to the wider community. In addition, the project must take advantage of the diversity of risk factors, cofactors and cancer incidence in different population groups of Europe and India. The project should focus on the prevention and early detection of infection-related cancers in Europe and India, addressing both established and putative associations between infectious agents and cancers. Active participation of research-intensive SMEs could lead to an increased impact of the research proposed and this will be considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Note: Limits on the EU financial contribution apply. These are implemented strictly as formal eligibility criteria.

49. HEALTH.2011.2.4.1-3: Epidemiology and aetiology of infection-related cancers. FP7-HEALTH-2011-single-stage. Funding scheme: Collaborative Project (small or medium-scale focused research project). EU contribution per project: Maximum EUR 3 000 000. One or more proposals can be selected. Expected impact: The results of research in this area will have to contribute to the prevention and early detection of infection-related cancers in Europe and India, which might take place through vaccination, early detection and identification of high-risk populations. A close cooperation between Europe and India is expected to result from the projects. Specific feature: It is expected that the Indian Council of Medical Research will issue a complementary call to support Indian projects in this field and that the funded projects will commence at the same time and will cooperate closely. The cooperation may also include joint meetings, workshops, exchange of scientists, technology transfer, etc.

50. Call topics specificity:Are they tailored for pre-existing Consortia?Who decide the call topics?