1 Aalborg 7th Nov. 2002 Partners In Projects Aalborg 7th November 2002 Experience from framework programme projects. Fernando Ubieta INNOPOLE, Spain.

1 P E

Aalborg7th Nov. 2002

Partners In Projects

Aalborg 7th November 2002

Experience from framework programme projects.

Fernando Ubieta

INNOPOLE, Spain

2 P E

Index

• Introduction. Why EU RTD projects?

• INNOPOLE brief presentation.

• Dynamics of Framework Programmes.

• Tips for participation

• Examples: RURAL WINS, AFORO

3 P E

Index






4

More than just money!!More than just money!!

Achieving global consensus

Accessing best technological know-how

Accelerating integration

Strengthening business cooperation

Coping with the IT-skill shortage

Closing the digital divide

Why we recommend to be active

under EC Framework Programme?

5 P E

EC Funding helps companies to develop (products, services, technologies, etc).

But the majority of companies experiencing RTD collaborative projects consider cooperation and “knowledge” transfer the key asset.

Only for money better try elsewhere.

6 P E

- Are too bureaucratic?

- Are too complex for newcomers?

- No chances for SMEs?

- Too much “precompetitive” RTD?

I will explain our experience being SME, having been able to submit, have approved & manage EC RTD projects achieving exploitable results.

Some EC RTD Myths

7 P E

- Are too bureaucratic? – Not too much, some National funding schemes are similar for less available resources.

Project selection is based on competitive evaluations.

Proposers need to demonstrate that it is worth for EC to invest resources in the proposed action.

All will have to have similar opportunities.

Average project dimension is big so EC bureaucratic requirements are necessary.

Some EC RTD Myths

8 P E

- Are too complex for newcomers?

EU projects are complex (if you are not used to them). New comers should look for adequate participation schemes (take advantage of others` experiences, play a leading role only after a first experience, etc)

Some EC RTD Myths

9 P E

- No chances for SMEs?

In the Vth FP e.g IST KAII, >35% out of 1500 participants were SMES.

In the VIth FP minimum 15% of budget will have to go to SMEs.

SMEs have played a role as IT developers and IT users.

Very good chances for SMEs.

Some EC RTD Myths

10 P E

- Too much “precompetitive” RTD?

There is precompetitive RTD as it has to…

There are nevertheless chances for other schemes (in the Vth FP Take-up, Best Practices, Accompanying measures), all Ips will have to include implementation, dissemination , training, pilots, etc

Some EC RTD Myths

11 P E

I will explain our experience being SME, having been able to submit, have approved & manage EC RTD projects achieving exploitable results.

Some EC RTD Myths

12 P E

Index






13 P E

INNOPOLEConsultants in Technology

and Innovation.

We deal with people…Who make business with us to get busines

and personal reward.

14 P E

Some Experiences

VALUE IIIrd Framework Programme, ESPRIT IVth Framework Programme, IST Vth FP. Proposal evaluation.

IVth FP SMT Finished Project evaluation. IST Vth FP reviewer. ESPRIT (DonQ CIM, Qshop, BEP IiM) ERDF (IMPLACE).

AFORO Roadmap IST-2001-37258 Project Coordinator (actual).

National and Regional RTD Programmes and projects evaluation.

New Technology Based Firms strategy & training. Plans for the Exploitation of RTD results Management of complex projects. Technology Transfer to SMEs.

15 P E

Regional Dissemination Programmes in Castilla – La Mancha,Basque Country, Catalonia, Castilla – Leon, Northern Ireland,Porto Region, Bremen.

Services to companies in the definition of technologydevelopment and implementation strategies.

Business Plans and setting-up New Technology Based Firms. RTD Project and Programme evaluation (EC III, IV, V Framework

Programmes, Spanish Ministry for Industry, CLM Ministry for Industry, Basque Government Ministry for Industry).

Project Management KNOBA EA 5602, ESPRIT DonQ CIM EP8883, ERDF IMPLACE, ESPRIT BEP-IiM EP24024, ESPRIT Qshop EP22590, IST ECLAIR. MCYT TICTRAD2000, MCYT PROMARCO (I & II). JCCM PROMOTOR (RIS+), AFORO IST – 2002-37258

Some Experiences

16 P E

Index






17 P E

Dynamics ofFramework Programme

1

8

62

5 3

7

4

FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

SPECIFIC PROGRAMMES

WORKPROGRAMMES

CALL FOR PROPOSALS (nov 2002/April 2003)

EVALUATION

SELECTION OFPROPOSALS

NEGOTIATION ANDSIGNATURE OFCONTRACTS

PROJECTS

We are here

18 P E

Index






19 P E

Tip 1

• DECIDE QUICKLY

• Evaluate YOUR interests – and ideas - and available opportunities and take a decission (a risk?)

20 P E

Decision I

The present situation is excellent to evaluate potential interest in joining EC RTD projects.

• Documents available• Calls ready to be open• Whole Budget available• OPORTUNITY

21 P E

• Understand process and mechanisms. • Decide on business reasons for

participation:– Opening up your business to Europe– Creating synergy with European Industry– Getting complementary expertise,technology

transfer, etc.– Getting funding for your dream project

Decision II

22 P E

1. Which Priority(s) are of your research interest?

2. What specifically do you want out of it?- in business and technical terms

3. Which resources are you willing to invest?4. What type or specific partners do you wish

to work with?5. What expertise are you willing to apply?

Decision III

23 P E

Tip 2

• SELECT THE DOMAIN ADEQUATELY

• Ethere are too many possibilities. Analyse all carefully and select most sensible/promising ones.

24 P E

• Study Workprogramme and decide which Action Line best fits your idea.

• Find out types of projects supported by that action line (RTD, IPs, NoE, Accompanying,..)

• Identify Call and timetable i.e. closing date(s)• Build a consortium (or join a suitable one).• Prepare draft document (proposal skeleton)• Research background i.e. current projects, EoIs• Contact the related Commission Project Officer

If you decide to go on

25 P E

Which Research Priority?

Health & Safety

Nanotechnologies

ENERGY

ENVIRONMENT

26 P E

Strategic objectives addressed in Call 1

Pushing the limits of CMOS, preparing for post-CMOS

Micro and nano-systems

Broadband Access for All

Mobile and wireless systems beyond 3G

Towards a global dependability and security framework

Multimodal interfaces

Semantic-based knowledge systems

Networked audiovisual systems and home platforms

Networked organisations, businesses and governments

eSafety of road and air transports

e Health

Technology-enhanced learning and access to cultural heritage

WhichArea?

WhichCall?

27 P E

Select Instrument / project type

• Integrated Project• Network of Excellence• Targeted Research• Other smaller projects (will have 30% of total

budget)• Accompanying Measures, Dissemination,..

• (If they exist in your Research Priority)

28 P E

Decide Consortium (draft)

• Wich role are you playing (coordinator, partner)• With whom do you want to cooperate.• With whom are you already cooperating.• Wich experience/knowledge is needed.

• Prepare draft structure.

• Or look for existing one to join

29 P E

+40%of a good proposal ....

...lies in the process from the first idea to the elaboration of the outline

The PROPOSAL

30 P E

From idea to proposal

31 P E

Proposal is a “marketing” tool

Will be the ONLY evaluable document the evaluators may use.

Proposal = RTD Challenge + Consortium + Workplan + Budget + Exploitation.

32 P E

BUSINESS PROJECT IDEA

PROPOSAL IDEA

European Dimension Int. Cooperation Innovation level Critical mass

Factors which force a ‘re-thinking’

DO WE HAVE IDEASDO WE HAVE IDEAS

33 P E

PROJECT IDEA

EUROPEANPROPOSAL

PROJECT PLAN

34 P E

Steps to prepare RTD Proposals

Produce a brief document covering the following -1. Which Thematic Priority is addressed?2. Expected results?3. What is innovative?4. How does it compare to current technology?5. What is the market and route to market?6. What are major activities required?7. What skills and effort required for each?8. What is profile of organisation needed for each?

Validation with “closest partners” & project officers in Brussels

35 P E

Refine consortium & Proposal

• If feedback from EC and other partners is OK go ahead to refine your proposal.

• Partners` search• Final Proposal Preparation.

36 P E

Parts of a proposal (Parts B & C)

• Scientific/technological quality & innovation

• Community added value & contribution to EC policies

• Contribution to Community social objectives

• Economic development and S&T prospects

• Resources, partnership & management

37 P E

How the Proposals are Evaluated

• Sources of information• Evaluation process RTD• Evaluation criteria• Scoring• Weights & Thresholds• Scientific technical quality& innovation• Economic development & S&T prospects• Financial evaluation

FIFTH FrameworkProgramme

38 P E

Sources of information

• Proposers` Guide - Parts 1 and 2

• Guidelines for Evaluators participating in the evaluation of proposals of the IST Program

• FP5 Evaluation Manual

• Workprogramme

• Call for proposals

39 P E

Evaluation Process RTD

Step 1 Opening, registration & preparation

Step 2 Eligibility check - (deadline, signature, consortium eligibility, anonymity of Part B, in scope of key action)

Step 3 Evaluation of Part B by three evaluators

Step 4 Evaluation of Part C by same three evaluators

Step 5 Consensus meeting among the evaluators

Step 6 Ranking Panel (All the evaluators, project officers, head of unit)

40 P E

Evaluation Criteria ?¿

Criterion

1 Scientific/technological quality & innovation

2 Community added value & contribution to policies

3 Contribution to Community social objectives

4 Economic development and S&T prospects

5 Resources, partnership & management

41 P E

Scoring

Evaluators score each criterion 0-5 with 0 being low and 5 high

0 - Unsatisfactory

1 - Poor

2 - Fair

3 - Good

4 - Very good

5 - Excellent

Only excellent ones will assure selection

42 P E

Weights & Thresholds

Scores on each criterion is 0-5 with 5 best

For RTD (Different thresholds for different types):Criterion Weight Threshold 1 4 3 2 1 2 3 1 - 4 2 3 5 2 2

43 P E

This is Your Project Idea

44 P E

Partner Search

Most difficult point for new entrants - first project is the most difficult

Sources• CORDIS• Info days/events: best source• Current projects: excellent - major players• Consultants: some are very good• NCPs: some countries give good support• Concertation events etc: can be excellent

45 P E

Roles of Partners

• There must be players for the following roles:– Technology developer

– End user

– A partner with proven market access potential

• What is unique contribution of each partner?• Do you have more than one technological contributor?• Do you have an end user?• Do you have a partner with proven market access

potential?

46 P E

How to maximize the success rate?

• First timers should not try to coordinate• Try to get into a proposal with a major player• Make sure the proposal falls clearly into an Priority

Thematic Area• Make sure that for RTD, innovation is shown• Ensure you have key end users involved• Ensure you have a major market player in• Read the instructions and follow all of them

47 P E

Summary

• Check related existing projects• Validate with NCP/Project Officer• Write down an outline proposal: Breakdown into

Workpackages/Tasks/Roles• Get partners written agreement to participate• Split between partners and agree each’s work• Validate resource estimates and costs/iterate• Complete proposal draft and review• Finalise and submit on time

48 P E

Index






49 P E

IST- Strategic RoadmapRURAL WINS

Broadband solutions and Applications for Rural Areas and Maritime Regions

Thematic NetworkLeader: EUSKALTEL (Spanish regional telco)

31 partners from 14 states (incl NAS)Keywords: Wireless, Satellite, Knowledge mangt., e-inclusion, Public-private business

models, EC e-Rural policy.

50 P E

Technology providers

Rural devpt agencies

Telecom operatorsService providers

Government

Regulatory bodies

EC directorates

Technology providers Rural devpt agenciesTelecom operators

Service providers

GovernmentRegulatory bodiesEC directorates

LARGE CONSTITUENCYWP4

PROJECT SAMPLE

Needs analysisWP1

Tech mapsWP2

BusinessModels

WP3

ROADMAPWP5

DisseminationWP4

Input from project constituency sample Feedback from project

constituency sample

Dissemination toconstituency

51 P E

IST- Strategic RoadmapAFORO

A vision and workplan to implement future RTD trends for the transformation of agri-

food industries into digital companies.

Thematic Network

Leader: INNOPOLE (Spanish technology consult.)

18 partners from 14 states (incl NAS)

Keywords: Electronic markets, traceability, quality control, networks, SCM, GIS, automation.

52 P E

(A) AS-IS SituationPresent State

(A)(A) ASAS--ISIS SituationSituationPresent State(A) AS-IS Situation

Present State


Present State

(A)(A) ASAS--ISIS SituationSituationPresent State(A) As-Is Situation

Present State

(A)(A) AsAs--IsIs SituationSituationPresent State

(B) To-Be SituationDesired Vision

(B)(B) ToTo--BeBe SituationSituationDesired Vision(B) To-Be Situation

Desired Vision


Desired Vision


Desired Vision

(B)(B) ToTo--BeBe SituationSituationDesired Vision



Present State


Present State


Present State




Desired Vision


Desired Vision


Desired Vision


Knowledge Acquisition: Structured questionnaires, checklists and benchmarks …Knowledge Acquisition: Structured questionnaires, checklists and benchmarks …

Meta Model Analysis of A & B to locate position on a continuum …

ImplementationTest & Evaluate


Requirements AnalysisProject Planning

Design and Development



Perform Risk Analysis to selectOptimal path from A to B and towards C

Feedback

A B CPast Future

© CIMRU, 2002



Present State


Present State


Present State




Desired Vision


Desired Vision


Desired Vision




Present State


Present State


Present State




Desired Vision


Desired Vision


Desired Vision











Feedback

A B CPast Future

© CIMRU, 2002



Present State


Present State


Present State




Desired Vision


Desired Vision


Desired Vision




Present State


Present State


Present State




Desired Vision


Desired Vision


Desired Vision











Feedback

A B CPast Future

© CIMRU, 2002

53 P E

FP6 - Instruments

Centres Centres ofofExcellenceExcellence

RTD projectsRTD projects

NATIONAL RTDNATIONAL RTDPROGRAMMESPROGRAMMES

(Art 169)(Art 169)

NETWORK OFNETWORK OFEXCELLENCEEXCELLENCE

INTEGRATEDINTEGRATEDPROJECTPROJECT

54 P E

Contact

THANK YOU

Further contact:

www.innopole.net

www.aforo.net

[email protected]

1 Aalborg 7th Nov. 2002 Partners In Projects Aalborg 7th November 2002 Experience from framework programme projects. Fernando Ubieta INNOPOLE, Spain.

Documents

ec rtd projects

ec rtd myths

eu rtd projects

precompetitive rtd

aforo slide

rtd collaborative projects

ec framework programme

spain slide