NATIONAL DOCUMENTATION CENTRE
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 56

NATIONAL DOCUMENTATION CENTRE Athens, 18 December 2002 HELLENIC KICK-OFF EVENT PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 42 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

NATIONAL DOCUMENTATION CENTRE Athens, 18 December 2002 HELLENIC KICK-OFF EVENT 6th Framework Programme. Maria Theofilatou. Framework Programme (2002-2006). Framework Programme 6 (2002-2006).

Download Presentation

NATIONAL DOCUMENTATION CENTRE Athens, 18 December 2002 HELLENIC KICK-OFF EVENT

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

NATIONAL DOCUMENTATION CENTRE

Athens, 18 December 2002

HELLENIC KICK-OFF EVENT

6th Framework Programme

Maria Theofilatou


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Framework Programme (2002-2006)


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Framework Programme 6 (2002-2006)

Focus on strategic areas where immediate and longer term integration of European research is needed to generate and sustain necessary critical mass

New instruments-integrated projects

networks of excellence


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Overall architecture of the 6th FP


Sixth framework programme

Sixth Framework Programme

Thematic priorities: € 11285 M

M €

1.1.1 Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology

for health 2255

1.1.2. Information society technologies3625

1.1.3. Nanotechnologies and nano-sciences, knowledge-

based multifunctional materials & processes1300

1.1.4. Aeronautics and space1075

1.1.5. Food quality and safety 685

1.1.6. Sustainable development, global change

and ecosystems2120

1.1.7. Citizens and governance in a

knowledge-based society 225


Thematic priority 1 life sciences genomics and biotechnology for health

1.1 Advanced genomics and its application for health

Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health

(€ 1100 M)

  • 1.1.a Fundamental knowledge and basic tools for functional genomics in all organisms

  • 1.1.b Applications of knowledge and technologies in the field of genomics and biotechnology for health

1.2 Combating major diseases

(€ 1155 M)

  • 1.2.a Application oriented genomic approaches to

  • medical knowledge and technologies

  • 1.2.b Combating cancer

  • 1.2.c Confronting the major communicable

  • diseases linked to poverty

755 M

400 M


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health

Advanced genomics and its application for health

(1100 M € )

Fundamental Genomics

Biotechnology


1 1 a fundamental knowledge and basic tools for functional genomics in all organisms

Gene expression and proteomics

Structural genomics

Comparative genomics and population genetics

Bioinformatics

Multidisciplinary functional genomics approaches to basic biological processes

1.1.a. Fundamental knowledge and basic tools for functional genomics in all organisms

110001ATC1010010101010011011AUG01101010010101101010101010TTC110101001001000CCG


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health

Combating major diseases

(1155 M € )

Medical knowledge & technologies

Cancer

Poverty-related diseases


Success will depend on mobilisation of all actors

SMEs

Academia

Ethical Bodies

Clinicians

DELIVERABLES

FOR SOCIETY

RESEARCH

DEVELOPMENT

REGULATION

Regions

Private Sector

European

Investment Bank

Civil Society

Parliament

Member States

Commission

Success will depend on mobilisation of all actors


From 2000 eoi to one workprogramme

From 2000 EoI to one Workprogramme

  • Where do the topics in our workprogramme come from?

    • Submitted EoIs

    • Gaps identified by experts

    • Commission’s Strategy to foster ERA

  • None of the topics reproduce exactly one EoI:

    • Combination of several EoIs

    • Addition of elements

    • Modification of scope

A balance between

Focusing  Ensuring Competition


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Invitation for Expressions of Interest

An opportunity for Europe’s research community to help prepare for the first calls of FP6

  • Consultation to the scientific community on its readiness to implement new instruments in the 7 priority themes of 6FP

  • The results have helped to define the Work Programmes and to prepare the 6FP calls

  • It has facilitated the understanding by the research community of the potential of the new instruments


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Expressions of Interest Result

WholeFP6:

 Some 13.000 EoIs received and evaluated

Priority one:

 Close to 2.000 EoIs received

 Evaluated with the help of over 200 external experts

 2/3 Integrated Projects and 1/3 Networks


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Close to 2000 EoI !!!

Expressions of Interest

Results


National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

Priority One Implementation

  • 53 topics published in the first call

  • Total budget for first call: EUR 513 million,

  • broken down as follows:

  • InstrumentEUR (millions)Integrated project or network of excellence385 – 410

  • Specific targeted research project or

  • co-ordination action 92 – 121

  • Specific support actions 8 – 10


  • National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

    Priority One Implementation

    15% of FP budget is for participation of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs)


    Priority one implementation

    Priority One Implementation

    • Ethics:

      • Research with human beings

      • Research with animals

      • Stem cells

      • Biological materials or data atribuable to individuals

    • Clinical Trials

      • EDCTP

      • Pediatrics

    New in FP6


    Evaluation process

    Call for proposals

    Evaluation by a strengthened peer-review system

    involving individual reviews, remote evaluation, panel sessions, hearings of applicants…

    Specific criteria will include:

    scientific quality

    potential impact on strengthening Europe’s excellence

    excellence of the network members

    extent, depth and lasting nature of the integration

    contribution to spreading excellence

    management and governance of the network

    Evaluation process


    How to find partners

    www.cordis.lu/life/src/projects.htm

    Thematic priority 1: Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health

    How to find partners?

    Former EU-funded projects including partner information can be found on:

    FP6 Partners Database:www.cordis.lu/fp6/partners.htm

    EoI:eoi.cordis.lu/search_form.cfm


    More information

    More information

    Help-Desk

    Life Sciences, Genomics & Biotechnology for Health:

    [email protected]


    Instruments for implementing the thematic priorities i

    Wider range

    Better differentiation

    New instruments

    Integrated projects (IP)

    Networks of excellence (NoE)

    Article 169 (joint implementation of national programmes)

    Instruments for implementing the thematic priorities (I)


    Instruments for implementing the thematic priorities ii

    Traditional instruments

    Specific targeted research projects

    Co-ordination actions

    Specific support actions

    Instruments for implementing the thematic priorities (II)


    Principles guiding their design i

    Simplification and streamlining

    to minimise the overheads for all concerned whether applicant, contractor or the Commission

    to speed up procedures, especially time-to-contract

    Flexibility and adaptability

    to enable instruments to be applicable throughout the priority themes

    to enable projects to evolve

    Principles guiding their design (I)


    Principles guiding their design ii

    Increased management autonomy

    to eliminate unnecessary micro-management

    While preserving public accountability and protecting interests of the Community

    Principles guiding their design (II)


    Classification of the instruments

    Classification of the instruments


    Instruments to be used in priority i

    Calls for proposals will identify which instruments are to be used, which have priority, and for what

    From the outset, IPs and NoE will be the priority means

    for implementing those themes where it is already deemed appropriate

    while maintaining the use of specific targeted research projects and coordination actions

    Instruments to be used in priority (I)


    Instruments to be used in priority ii

    In 2004, the Commission will arrange an independent evaluation of the use of the instruments

    may lead to an adjustment of their relative weightings

    Instruments to be used in priority (II)


    National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

    “FP6

    Integrated

    Projects”


    Purpose of integrated projects i

    Designed to generate the knowledge required to implement the priority thematic areas of FP6

    by integrating the critical mass of activities and resources needed

    to achieve ambitious,clearly defined scientific and technologicalobjectives

    Essentially an instrument for supporting objective-driven research of a European dimension

    Purpose of Integrated Projects (I)


    Activities

    Activities integrated by a project may cover the full research spectrum

    should contain objective-driven research

    technological development and demonstration components as appropriate

    may contain a training component

    the effective management of knowledge will also be an essential feature

    the whole carried out in a coherent management framework

    Activities


    Rates of community support

    Maximum rates of support for FC and FCF participants:

    50% for RTD and innovation-related components

    35% for any demonstration component

    100% for any training activities

    100% for consortium management

    AC participants: supported at up to 100% for all components of the project (except for consortium management which will be supported as under FCF)

    For IPs, no more than 7% of the Community contribution can be used to support consortium management costs reimbursed at up to 100%

    Rates of Community support


    What is the scale of critical mass i

    Concerning resources: each IP must assemble the critical mass of resources needed to achieve its ambitious objectives

    activities integrated may range up to several tens of million euro

    but no minimum threshold, provided necessary ambition and critical mass is achieved

    What is the scale of critical mass (I)?


    What is the scale of critical mass ii

    Concerning the partnership: minimum of 3 participants from 3 different Member States or Associated States, of which at least 2 should be Member States or Associated candidate countries

    but in practice likely to be substantially more

    SME participation is strongly encouraged

    ‘third country’ participants may be included, with a possibility of Community financial support for entities from certain groups of countries

    What is the scale of critical mass (II)?


    What is the scale of critical mass iii

    Concerning its duration: typically 3 to 5 years

    but more if necessary to deliver the objectives

    What is the scale of critical mass (III)?


    Proposal submission i

    Through calls for proposals

    may be preceded by expressions of interest to help focus calls and assist in consortium building

    Simplified proposal-making

    requiring only sufficient “management-level” detail

    reflecting evolutionary nature of the project

    summary description of activities for entire duration

    detailed implementation plan only for first 18 months

    Proposal submission (I)


    Flexibility and autonomy of implementation ii

    For changes in the consortium

    the consortium may itself decide to take in new participants (though without additional funding)

    the contract will specify when this must involve a competitive call

    the Commission may decide to launch calls to add activities and participants (with additional funding)

    e.g. to enhance SME participation

    Flexibility and autonomy of implementation (II)


    Monitoring

    Robust monitoring of each IP by the Commission

    by one or possibly a team of project officers

    through

    annual review

    mid-term or milestone review (optional)

    final review

    involving external experts at all stages

    Monitoring


    More information on the instruments

    Regularly updated website on the instruments

    europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/networks-ip.html

    Brochures and leaflets on the new instruments (also available on Europa as above)

    Presentation slides (on Europa as above)

    Guide on “Participating in European Research”

    On integrated projects

    [email protected]

    More Information on the instruments


    National documentation centre athens 18 december 2002 hellenic kick off event

    “FP6

    Networks

    of

    excellence”

    europa.eu.int/comm/research/nfp/networks-ip.html


    Noe objectives

    NoE Objectives

    Strengthen Europe’s excellence on a particular research topic

    by integrating the critical mass of expertise needed to provide European leadership and be a world force

    around a joint programme of activities

    Tackling the fragmentation of European research

    where the main deliverable is a durable structuring and shaping of how research is carried out in Europe

    Spreading excellence beyond its partners


    Noe the joint programme of activities 1

    NoEThe joint programme of activities (1)

    A range of neworre-oriented activities:

    Integrating activities

    coordinated programming of the partners’ activities

    sharing of research platforms/tools/facilities

    joint management of the knowledge portfolio

    staff mobility and exchanges

    relocation of staff, teams, equipment

    reinforced electronic communication systems


    Noe the joint programme of activities 2

    NoEThe joint programme of activities (2)

    Joint research activities: a programme of joint research to support the network’s goals

    development of new research tools and platforms for common use

    generating new knowledge to fill gaps in or to extend the collective knowledge portfolio


    Noe the joint programme of activities 3

    NoEThe joint programme of activities (3)

    Activities to spread excellence

    training researchers and other key staff

    dissemination and communication activities

    networking activities to help transfer knowledge to trams external to the network

    where appropriate, promoting the exploitation of the results generated within the network

    where appropriate, innovation-related activities


    Noe the joint programme of activities 4

    NoEThe joint programme of activities (4)

    Network management

    overall coordination of the joint activities

    communication with the Commission, reporting

    activities linked to consortium-level financing and accounting management and legal issues

    coordination of the knowledge management activities, if appropriate, other innovation-related activities

    promotion of gender equality

    science and society issues

    supporting the governing board and other network bodies

    ALL ACTIVITIES WITHIN

    A COHERENT MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK


    Noe measuring integration 1

    NoEMeasuring integration(1)

    In their proposal, participants will include possible qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring progress towards integration


    Noe measuring integration 2

    NoEMeasuring integration(2)

    Main factors to be examined

    extent of mutual specialisation and mutual complementarity

    sharing /development for common use of research infrastructure, equipment, tools and platforms

    regular joint execution of research projects


    Noe measuring integration 3

    NoEMeasuring integration(3)

    Main factors to be examined

    interactive working through electronic communication systems

    joint management of the knowledge portfolio

    joint training programme (researchers and other key staff)

    coherent management framework


    Noe critical mass 1

    NoECritical mass (1)

    Expertise: assembling of the critical mass needed to achieve the ambitious goals of the network

    variable from topic to topic

    larger networks may involve several hundreds of researchers

    may be smaller provided that the necessary ambition and critical mass are achieved


    Noe critical mass 2

    NoECritical mass (2)

    Partnership: in general at least six (legal minimum: 3 from 3 different countries)

    Duration of Community support:typically 5 years

    more if necessary BUT no more than 7 years


    Noe financial regime 1

    NoEFinancial regime (1)

    Community support targeted at overcoming the barriers to a durable integration

    these barriers are mainly organisational, cultural, human  cannot be quantified in normal accounting terms

    Has led to the concept of an incentive, taking the form of a global “fixed grant for integration”


    Noe financial regime 2

    NoEFinancial regime(2)

    A fixed grant for integration, acting as an incentive, calculated on basis:

    of the degree ofintegration

    of the total number ofresearchers

    of the characteristics of thefieldofresearch

    of thejoint programme of activities

    with a bonus for registereddoctoral students


    Noe financial regime 3

    NoEFinancial regime(3)

    The average annual grant to a network could vary with the number of researchers as follows:


    Reminder main noe features 1

    Reminder Main NoE features(1)

    Demonstrated need for structuring

    description of fragmentation on the topic

    existence of excellent capacities in Europe in the topic

     Is there a real need for a structuring

    intervention?


    Reminder main noe features 2

    Reminder Main NoE features(2)

    Characteristics of the network planned:

    composition of the partnership: presence of key excellent actors

    potential synergies, complementarities, specialisation among the members

    quality/degree of integration planned

     Is the network planned likely to tackle the fragmentation problem identified?


    Reminder main noe features 3

    Reminder Main NoE features(3)

    Viability of the network during and beyond the period

    awareness of high decision level representatives of the participating organisations: strong commitment

    security regarding network’s funding, particularly beyond the period

     Will the network constitute a durable answer to the problem identified?


    More information1

    More information?

    Regularly updated website on the instruments: europa.eu.int/comm/research/fp6/networks-ip.html

    Brochures and leaflets on the new instruments: available at Heysel conference and on Europa as above

    Presentation slides: on Europa as above

    Networks of excellence: [email protected]


  • Login