1 / 21

from EXPRESSION of INTEREST to SELECTION of PROPOSAL

from EXPRESSION of INTEREST to SELECTION of PROPOSAL. Before Evaluation Evaluation Finalization of Evaluation. BEFORE EVALUATION. Call for Expression of Interest Call for Proposals Pre-proposal Checks Submission of Proposals Acknowledgement of Proposal Receipt Eligibility Check.

Download Presentation

from EXPRESSION of INTEREST to SELECTION of PROPOSAL

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. fromEXPRESSION of INTERESTtoSELECTION of PROPOSAL

  2. Before Evaluation • Evaluation • Finalization of Evaluation

  3. BEFORE EVALUATION • Call for Expression of Interest • Call for Proposals • Pre-proposal Checks • Submission of Proposals • Acknowledgement of Proposal Receipt • Eligibility Check

  4. a) Calls for Expression of Interest Aim - Prepare and set the objectives of work programs - Define the scope of calls of proposals to implement it Method - By consulting research community on: the readiness to prepare proposals likely objectives relevance of research actions N.B. An EoI is not a pre-requisite for participation in any future calls or a guarantee for the selection of a future proposal derived from it

  5. b) Calls for Proposals -submitted under the terms of ‘Calls for Proposals’ - provided for in the work programs - published in the Official Journal of EU - may involve a single- or two-stage submission and evaluation procedure - in two-stage submissions, only coordinators whose proposals are evaluated positively in the first stage are invited to submit complete proposals

  6. c) Pre-proposal Checks Aim • Advise potential proposers on whether proposals appear to be eligible and within the scope of the Call An informal advisory pre-proposal check service may be offered to researcher (esp. for SMEs)

  7. d) Submission of Proposals Method • via the web-based Electronic Proposal Submission System (EPSS) N.B. Submission by fax or e-mail is not acceptable

  8. e) Acknowledgement of Proposal Receipt - sent to proposal coordinator by e-mail, fax or post - contains proposal title acronym proposal number date of receipt time of receipt name of the program and/or activity/research area and call identifier to which the proposal was addressed

  9. f) Eligibility Check • receipt of proposal by the Commission on or before the deadline date and time • minimum number of participants • completeness of the proposal (all requested administrative forms + proposal description) N.B.Completeness of information is for the expert to evaluate Eligibility checks apply to the presence of all appropriate parts

  10. EVALUATION(by independent experts) a) Briefing of the independent experts -oral or in writing -by representatives of the Commission -info on general evaluation guidelines -info on objectives of research area under consideration b) Individual evaluation of proposals -by several experts -evaluated against applicable criteria -give marks -provide comments

  11. c) Consensus -a consensus report -reflects views of the independent experts d) Panel evaluation -convened if necessary -examines and compares consensus remarks and marks in a given area -makes recommendations on a priority order, possible clustering or combination of proposals

  12. Proposal Marking 0 - proposal fails to address the issue under examination or cannot be judged against the criterion due to missing or incomplete info 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - good 4 - very good 5 - excellent N.B. Where appropriate, half marks may be given Evaluators are encouraged to ‘look at the larger picture’

  13. Thresholds and Weightings Thresholds • set for some or all blocks of criteria • if proposal fails to achieve a threshold for a block of criteria, evaluation may be stopped Weightings • depend on the type of instrument and Call blocks of criteria may be weighted • applicable weightings are set out in the Call

  14. Feedback to Proposers - coordinator receives the evaluation report (ESR) - comments recorded must give sufficient and clear reasons for the scores - any recommendations for modifications are given

  15. FINALIZATION OF EVALUATION a) Commission Ranked List . in priority order . marks received and advice from independent experts are taken into account . program priorities (e.g. coverage of program objectives) + compatibility of proposal with stated community policy objectives + available budget are decisive elements . ranking may foresee conditions for negotiation -adjustment of budget -content -merging with other proposals -funding up to a certain milestone (with the possibility to grant complementary funding following a subsequent Call)

  16. b) Commission Reserve List - failure of negotiations on projects - withdrawal of proposal - saving to be made during contract negotiation N.B.Coordinators of any proposals held in reserve, receive info about the possiibility of the offer of a contract preparation if further funding becomes available When the budget has been used up, proposals in the reserve list are rejected and their coordinators are informed

  17. c) Commission Rejection Decisions - ineligible - out of scope - failing any of the individual thresholds - due to budgetary reasons (those proposals that fall below a certain ranking) Coordinators of these proposals are informed in writing with an explanation of the reasons for rejection

  18. Negotiation of Proposals • Coordinators of successful proposals (acceptable + available funding) are invited to begin negotiations • Further administrative info may be requested • Any technical changes (proposed during evaluation) may be requested • A deadline for replying to these requests may be given

  19. Negotiation may cover : a) Scientific aspects revisions to the workprogram adjustments to it b) Legal aspects review of any special contractual clauses or conditions c) Financial aspects negotiations of the EU contribution amount of initial pre-financing timing of reporting and payments any financial security (may be requested by the Commission) d) Any other aspects date of start of project timing of reports

  20. TIPS • Pre-proposal checks are not obligatory, however, they help a lot • Go through the checklist before submitting your proposal • Even if your proposal fails, your Evaluation Summary Report will help you a lot because it is a good indicator showing what is expected by the evaluators • You can submit your proposal twice or even three times after modifying it

  21. Thank you... METU - Office of EU Affairs Middle East Technical University 06531 Ankara / Turkey Phone: 0 312 210 3834 Fax: 0 312 210 1348 http://www.euoffice.metu.edu.tr

More Related