Udine, 16 Dicembre 2008 APRE Agenzia per la Promozione della Ricerca Europea Come si prepara un...

Udine, 16 Dicembre 2008

APREAgenzia per la Promozione della

Ricerca Europea

Come si prepara un valutatore:

linee guida per la valutazione delle proposte nel VII Programma Quadro di RST

Dott.ssa Diassina Di Maggio

Direttore di APRE


Agenda

Il VII Programma Quadro

Le procedure di valutazione e

presentazione


Il VII Programma Quadro


Strategia di Lisbona

Diventare

l’economia più

competitiva e

dinamica basata

sulla

conoscenza

entro il 2010


Strategia di Lisbona: il circolo virtuoso

Ricerca

Crescita e lavoro

Formazione

Innovazione


– Supportare l’integrazione dello Spazio Europeo della Ricerca

– Contribuire alla crescita della competitività– Contribuire allo sviluppo sostenibile

7° PQ: gli obiettivi

Rinvigorire la strategia di Lisbona


Struttura 7°PQ Programmi specifici

Cooperazione – Ricerca su temi specifici

Persone – Formazione e mobilità

Idee – Ricerca 'di frontiera'

Capacità – Ricerca & Innovazione

Centro Comune di Ricerca (non-nucleare)

Euratom - ricerca e formazione in campo nucleare

+

4 p

rog

ram

mi

Sp

ecif

ici

CC

R

32.413

4.750

4.097

7.510

1.751

2.700

Eu

rato

m

+


Capacità 4.097Persone

4.750

Idee 7.510

Cooperazione 32.413

Budget FP7 (in M€)

Dati aggiornati al 30/11/2006


Budget Cooperazione

6100

1935

9050

3475

23501890

4160

6231400 1430

Salut

eFAB

ICT

NANO

Energia

Ambi

ente

Trasp

orti

Socio-E

co/U

man

.

Sicur

ezza

Spazio


Ricerca collaborativa

Joint Technology Initiatives

Coordinamento di programmi (non europei) di ricerca(ERA-NET; ERA-NET+; Articolo 169)

Cooperazione Internazionale

CooperazioneSchemi di finanziamento

A

B

C

D


A – Ricerca Collaborativa

• Progetti di ricerca collaborativa (CP)

• Reti di eccellenza (NoE)

• Azioni di coordinamento /supporto (CSA)

A


B - Coordinamento di programmi di ricerca non-Comunitari

ERA-NET: coordinare attività di ricerca nazionale e regionale; aprire bandi nazionali/regionali (solo) ad organismi di Paesi partecipanti

ERA-NET Plus: come sopra ma con la partecipazione finanziaria della UE ai bandi nazionali/regionali

Art. 169 (pochi casi ben giustificati, es. nuova infrastruttura): strumento per l'attuazione congiunta di programmi nazionali ad ampia scala, tramite una struttura dedicata, a fronte di un piano finanziario basato su impegni formali delle autorità nazionali

B

Anche non rientrante nei 10 temi, purché abbia valore Europeo


Formazione iniziale dei ricercatoriReti Marie Curie

Formazione continua e evoluzione delle carriereborse di studio individuali

concesse direttamente a livello comunitario e tramite il cofinanziamento di programmiregionali, nazionali o internazionali

Partenariati e collaborazione tra industria e universitàsostegno ai programmi di

cooperazione di lungo termine tra istituti accademici e organizzazioni industriali

La dimensione internazionaleBorse internazionali “in uscita” e “in

entrata”, partenariati finalizzati allo scambio di ricercatori

Azioni specificheSovvenzioni

Persone – Formazione e Mobilità


Infrastrutture di ricerca

Ricerca per le PMI

Regioni della conoscenza

Potenziale di ricerca

La scienza nella società

Supporto allo sviluppo coerente delle politiche di

ricerca

Cooperazione Internazionale

Capacità – Ricerca e Innovazione


Budget Capacità

1715

1336

126340 330

70180

Infr

astr

utt

ure

PM

I

Reg

ion

i d

ella

con

osc

enza

Po

ten

zial

e d

iri

cerc

a

Sci

enza

nel

laso

ciet

à

Svi

lup

po

po

liti

che

Co

op

eraz

ion

eIn

tern

azio

nal

e


Le procedure di valutazione e presentazione


1. Submission of proposal

2. Eligibility checks

3. Evaluation (experts)

4. Selection

Submission

Selection

Evaluation

Eligible?

Overview


Submission

Fixed deadline calls

Electronic proposal submission system (EPSS) only

Proposal template given in the ‘Guide for Applicants’Closely aligned to the evaluation criteria

Proposals are normally submitted and evaluated in a single stage

Two-stage submission of proposals May be used for large, ‘bottom up’ calls First stage

• short proposal (about 10-20 pages), dealing with main scientific concepts and ideas• use of limited set of criteria• successful proposers are then invited to submit complete proposals


Electronic submission

EPSSEPSS[Electronic Proposal Submission System]

Online preparation only!

Improved validation checks before submission is accepted

FP6 Failure rate = + 1%Main reason for failure - waiting till the last minuteSubmit early, submit often!


Elegibility checks

• Date and time of receipt of proposalDate and time of receipt of proposal on or before deadline

– Firm deadlines - except for Continuously Open Calls

• Minimum number of eligible, independent partnersMinimum number of eligible, independent partners– As set out in work programme/call

• Completeness of proposalCompleteness of proposal– Presence of all requested administrative forms (Part A) and

the content description (Part B)

• “Out of scopescope”• Others (eg. budget limits)


Evaluation - FP7

No major change for FP7

But improved and streamlined, based on experience

Adapted to the new features of FP7 where necessary

What’s new?What’s new? Clearer page limits

Elegibility criteria (includes “scope”)

Evaluation criteria (3 instead of 5 or 6)

More clarity on conflicts of interest (Indipendent experts)


Proposal Evaluation Evaluation Criteria

Overall threshold = 10Overall threshold = 10

Threshold = 3Threshold = 3 Threshold = 3Threshold = 3 Threshold = 3Threshold = 3


Evaluation - The experts (1)

The Commission draws on a wide pool of evaluatorswide pool of evaluators about 50.000 in FP6

Call for candidatesCall for candidates published on December 2006Call for applications are addressed to individuals/organisationsApplications via CORDIS

FP6 experts have been invited to transfer to FP7 (with a request to update their information)Commission invites individuals on a call-by-call call-by-call basisbasis

Not self-selection!Expertise, and experience are paramount

Geography, gender and “rotation” is also considered


Evaluation - The experts (2)

Experts agree to terms and conditions of an ““appointment letterappointment letter””

Typically an individual will review 6-8 proposals “remotely”…

…then spend a couple of days in Brussels

Some will participate in “hearings” with the consortia

Experts sign confidentiality and conflict of interest sign confidentiality and conflict of interest declarationdeclaration

Names published after the evaluations


Selection procedure

PROPOSAL

Eligibility

Individual evaluation

Consensus

Thresholds

Panel reviewwith hearings

(optional)

Commission ranking

Commission rejectiondecision

Negotiation

Consultation of programme committee(if required)

Commission funding and/or rejection decision

Applicants informed of results

of expert evaluation

Applicants informed of Commission decision

SecurityScrutiny

(if needed)

EthicalReview

(if needed)


Proposal Evaluation

Individual Evaluation of Proposals• Minimum 3 experts/proposal• Each criterion described in the WP is scored• Justification of scoring

Individual Evaluation Report(IAR)


Proposal Evaluation Consensus

Consensus AssesssmentConsensus meeting

(experts + moderator + rapporteur)

Consensus Report


Proposal EvaluationPanel Review

Role of the panel:

• to examine and compare the consensus reports in a given area, to check on the consistency of the marks applied during the consensus dicussions and, where necessary, propose a new set of marks.• recommending a priority order for proposals with the same score• making recommendations on possible clustering or combination of proposals


Panel Review

Outcome of panel review:

• An evaluation summary report (ESR) for each proposal, including comments and scores. Where relevant, any ethical issues are reported.• A list of proposals passing all thresholds, along with a final score for each proposal passing the thresholds and the panel recommendations for priority order.• A list of evaluated proposals having failed one or more thresholds.• A list of any proposals having been found ineligible during the evaluation.• A summary of any recommendations of the panel.


1. From Individual assessment to Consensus

Proposal XCopy 1

Proposal XCopy 2

Proposal XCopy 3

May be “remote”

IAR*Expert 1

IARExpert 2

IARExpert 3

CONSENSUSREPORT3 experts

*IAR= Individual assessment report


2. Consensus

Built on the basis of the individual on the basis of the individual assessmentsassessments of all the evaluators

Usually involves a discussion

Moderated by a Commission representative

One expert acts as a rapporteur

Agreement on consensus marks and Agreement on consensus marks and commentscomments for each of the criteria


3. Panel review

Panel MeetingPanel Meeting Compare consensus reports Examines proposals with same consensus score (if needed) Final marks and comments for each proposal Suggestions on order of priority, clustering, amendments, etc.

Hearings with proposers Hearings with proposers may be convened Questions to the invited proposal coordinators Small number of proposal representatives


4. Commission Follow-up

Evaluation summary reports (ESR) sent to applicants (“Initial information letter”)

Draw up final ranking lists

Information to the Programme Committee

Commission decisions on rejected proposals

Contract negotiation

Formal consultation of Programme Committee (when required)

Commission decisions on proposals selected for funding

Survey of evaluators


Link utili

CORDIS http://cordis.europa.eu/en/home.html

SME TechWeb http://sme.cordis.europa.eu/home/index.cfm

SME National Contact Points

http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ncp.htm

Towards FP7 http://ec.europa.eu/research/future/index_en.cfm

http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/

CIPhttp://enterprise_policy cip docs com121_en pdf

http://cordis.europa.eu/innovation/en/policy/cip.htm

Modern SME Policy http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/

2005/com2005_0551en01.pdf


Grazie per l’attenzione!

Diassina Di MaggioAPRE

+39 06 [email protected]

Udine, 16 Dicembre 2008 APRE Agenzia per la Promozione della Ricerca Europea Come si prepara un...

Documents

Transcript of Udine, 16 Dicembre 2008 APRE Agenzia per la Promozione della Ricerca Europea Come si prepara un...