Transcript FP6 PROPOSAL WRITING

90
80
70
60
East
West
North
50
40
30
20
10
0
1st Qtr
2nd Qtr
3rd Qtr
4th Qtr
FP6
PROPOSAL WRITING
What makes a good proposal
- A strong proposal idea
- Avoiding common weaknesses and pitfalls
What to know about evaluation
- Process
- Criteria
- Their application to specific Calls
What goes where
- Parts carrying the key messages
- Selling the team
- Program objectives vs project
objectives, milestones and deliverables
WHAT MAKES A GOOD
PROPOSAL
Motivation of Commission Officials
To find out those proposals that have the
consortia to conduct potentially useful work
in a way that stands a reasonable chance of
delivering valuable results
CONSORTIUM
USEFUL WORK
REASONABLE CHANCE (RISK)
VALUABLE RESULTS
Project Proposal
Let’s say that:
There is a suitable objective in the workprogram
covering your project...
There is a Call for Proposals including the type of
instrument (contract) that suits your project...
You have a suitable and eligible consortium...
You can get prepare it before the closing date...
You have thought of the management plans...
What to Provide in the Proposal
Summary of the proposal
Rationale/justification (S&T objectives, program
objectives, potential impact,consortium members)
Details of the participant
Details of the budget
Work/Implementation plan
Management structures
List of deliverables
Where to Find Supporting
Documentation
Workprogram
Guidelines on proposal evaluation and selection
procedures
Guidance notes for evaluators (call-specific)
Guide for proposers (call/instrument-specific)
Instruments (project types)
Integrated Projects (IP)
Specific Targeted Research Projects (STREP)
Networks of Excellence (NoE)
Coordination Actions (CA)
Specific Support Actions (SSA)
Article 169
WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT
EVALUATION
Some Basics About Proposals
YOUR PROPOSAL MUST:


meet certain eligibility criteria
fall within the scope of the
Call for Proposals
priority’s workprogram,
specific workprogram
YOUR PROPOSAL WILL :

be read by a team of independent evaluators
Consensus is required within the evaluation
team as to which proposals are to be considered
further
Proposals selected by each evaluation team are then
read by people from other teams evaluating the Call
They are ranked at a meeting involving all teams and a
funding scenario is then produced by the EC
A panel hearing, is used for IPs and NoEs
Results of the evaluation then form the basis of contract
negotiation
Evaluation Criteria
Relevance
Potential impact
Scientific and technological excellence
Quality of the consortium
Quality of the management
Mobilization of the resources
Evaluators give a mark between 0 and 5 to
each criterion
0 – the proposal fails to address the issue under examination or
cannot be judged against the criterion due to missing or
incomplete information
1 – poor
2 – fair
3 – good
4 – very good
5 – excellent
There are thresholds to be passed
Marks may be weighted to calculate the final
score
CRITERIA
Relevance
Potential Impact
S & T Excellence
Quality of Consortium 3/5
Quality of Management
Mobilization of Resources
IP
3/5
3/5
4/5
3/5
3/5
OVERALL SCORE THRESHOLD
IP
: 24/30
STREP : 21/30
thresholds STREP
3/5
3/5
3/5
4/5
3/5
3/5
Potential Impact
suitably ambitious in terms of its strategic
impact on reinforcing competitiveness (including
that of SMEs) or on solving societal problems
adequate innovation-related activities,
exploitation and dissemination plans (to ensure
optimal use of the project results)
demonstrating a clear added value in carrying
out the work at European level
S&T Excellence
The project has clearly defined and wellfocused objectives
The objectives represent clear progress beyond
the current state-of-the-art
The proposed S&T approach is likely to enable
the project to achieve its objectives in
research and innovation
Quality of Consortium
adequate industrial involvement to ensure
exploitation of results (esp. İn IPs)
constitution of a consortium of high quality
well-suited participants, committed to the tasks
assigned to them
good complementarity between participants
real involvement of SMEs
Quality of the Management
Project management is demonstrably of high
quality
There is a satisfactory plan for the
management of knowledge, of intellectual
property and other innovation-related activities
The organizational structure is well matched to
the complexity of the project and to the
degree of integration required
Mobilization of the Resources
The project mobilizes the minimum critical mass
of resources (personnel, equipment, finance...)
necessary for success
The resources are convincingly integrated to
form a coherent project
The overall financial plan for the project is
adequate
WHAT GOES WHERE
Proposal Structure
B.1. S&T objectives and state-of-the-art
- up to 3 pages
B.2. Relevance to the objectives of the priority
- up to 3 pages
B.3. Potential Impact
- up to 3 pages
- plus one page on contribution to standards
B.4. The consortium and project resources
- up to 5 pages + ‘STREP Project Effort Form’
- plus one page to justify subcontracting
- plus one page to justify ‘other countries’
B.5. Project Management
- up to 3 pages
B.6. Work Plan
- (as many pages as it needs)
B.7. Other (horizontal) issues
- e.g. ethical, gender, EC policies, education
B.1. S&T Objectives and
State-of-the-Art
What are you going to do?
How will you know when you have done it?
What value will it add to the state-of-the-art?
How well do you understand the problems?
B.2. Relevance to Priority
Objectives
Justify your request for money allocated
to those specific objectives within this
priority area
N.B. The Commission may argue for adequate coverage
of all relevant objectives
B.3. Potential Impact
What type of impact are you expecting to
achieve?
- what is the expected consequence of funding?
Explain how you will achieve this impact
- innovation- related activities
- dissemination activities
- exploitation activities
Why do you need European money?
- European added value
- role of national/other initiatives
B.4. Consortium
Participants are of high quality
Participants are well-suited and committed to
their tasks, including:
- research
- demonstration
- dissemination
- exploitation
- management, etc.
Participants are complementary with each
other
B.5.Project Management
The project management is demonstrably of
high quality
- key partner(s) with suitable resources?
- CV of key individuals?
- appropriate methodology?
- work plan capable of being managed?
Managing knowledge, IPR, innovation
B.6. Work Plan
Introduction – structure of the workplan and how the
plan will lead participants to achieve objectives
Timing and components of workpackages (GANNT)
Interdependencies between components (PERT)
Workpackage list (form)
- lead contractor
- effort
- timing
- outputs
- participants/effort
- objectives
- deliverables
- timing
- description of work
- milestones
Workpackage description (template)
Designing Workpackages
Major sub-divisions of overall project
appropriate to complexity and value of
project
Sufficiently detailed to allow progress
monitoring by the EC
...AND SO
- keep different types of activity separate
- reflect logical phases of project
- provide clearly-defined end-points
(e.g. deliverable or project milestone)
SOME TIPS
General TIPS on Proposal
Writing
Apply the mindset of an evaluator to your own
work
View the proposal as a whole, not as a set of
separate elements
Identify and sell the special features of a
proposal
Communicate in simple and well-structured
language
TIPS Concerning Evaluators
Your proposal will be read by a team of
evaluators of whom it should be assumed that
English need not be their first language
Your specific research interest may not be
their specialist area
They have many other proposals to read
Define the work you’ll do in a way to make
them understand it
Initial impressions count...
TIPS Concerning Writing
Certain Parts of Proposal
POTENTIAL IMPACT use OECD reports, EU
policy papers
S&T EXCELLENCE refer to the workprogram
QUALITY OF CONSORTIUM find diverse
partners
QUALITY OF MANAGEMENT is hard job. Do
not jump on it!
CONCLUSION
Project writing is not easy. It is a hard job
It consumes your time, energy and confidence
The result can be negative
BUT, DO NOT FORGET...
So many people have tried it and been
successful
Believe in yourself! You can do it, too!
Thank you
and
Good Luck
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
February 2005