Proposal submission, evaluation, selection and award procedures

Carmen Aguilera

Market Development

carmen.aguilera@gsa.europa.eu

Agenda

Proposals submission

Evaluation and selection

Time to Grant

Pictures’ sources:

1. www.commissions.aegee.org

2. www.st-ives.co.uk

3. blog.norwayvisas.com

Proposals submission

Agenda

Picture source:

www.commissions.aegee.org

High Precision

Road Transport

Agriculture

New markets & technologies

Start from bright and concrete ideas

Rail LBS

Aviation

Maritime

Be focused and concrete: Build on fairly mature application or business concepts and fill the gap Explain what is new, your added value, how you will move forward

Successful proposal- some hints

Build on technical and market understanding and expertise: Ideally, entities with sufficient knowledge of specific markets Consortium bringing all needed competences: clear roles, no overlap

Demonstrate a clear motivation to commercialise the products and services: Market entry plan (marketing strategy & business plan) Previous achievements in the specific market Show your commitment and capability to go to market

Focus on practical impact: Maximise the use of the available signals Prefer trials and large scale demonstration, involving final users in their real life procedures Produce practical tools useful for the GNSS developer community

Select applications where EGNOS and Galileo differentiators are key for the product/service success

7/16/2014 6

How to prepare & submit a proposal

Follow strictly the instructions

Read carefully the work programme topic

Be clear and explicit: Evaluators must judge what they read

Respect admissibility/eligibility criteria: Basic checks by electronic submission system

Convince the evaluation experts regarding the selection and award criteria

o Consider the time pressure: a careful presentation/executive summary helps o Avoid inconsistencies in the proposal o Facilitate finding answers to criteria sub-questions o Consider ALL criteria

Provide a structured proposal

o Establish clear division of the planned work into work packages o Ensure that tasks match the description of the idea o Define accurate and realistic schedule, main milestones and deliverables o Assign the specific responsibilities and resources within the consortium

7/16/2014 7

Participants Portal

7/16/2014 8

Participants Portal- search a call

1

2

3

7/16/2014 9

Participants Portal- where to find a call

1

2

3

4

7/16/2014 11 Source: REA

Submission flow

7/16/2014 12

Submission flow (1)

7/16/2014 13

Submission flow (2)

7/16/2014 14

Submission flow (3)

7/16/2014 15

Submission flow (4)

7/16/2014 17

Submission flow (6)

7/16/2014 18

Submission cycle

Agenda

Evaluation and selection

Picture’s source: www.st-ives.co.uk

7/16/2014 20

Evaluation process

Admissibility/Eligibility Check

Evaluation by independent experts

• Individual evaluation

• Consensus meeting

• Panel review

Commission/Agency ranked list

Final Information on the outcome of the evaluation

4

3

2

1

Preliminary results

7/16/2014 21

Admissibility criteria

Submitted in the electronic submission system before the deadline- Acknowledgement

of Receipt

Complete (requested administrative forms + proposal description + supporting

documents specified in the call).

Supporting documents: ! Remember that Topics 1, 2, 3 request a Business Plan

Supporting documents (optional):

o CV or profile description of staff carrying out the work

o 1-5 publications and/or other research or innovation products

o 1-5 relevant previous projects/activities

o Relevant available infrastructure/equipment description

o Description of additional third parties contributing to the work

Readable, accessible and printable

Respect of page limits (70)

o Automatic warning in electronic submission system if exceeded and advise to re-submit a

version that conforms; excess pages will bear watermark

1

7/16/2014 22

Eligibility criteria

It is in the scope of the call and specific topics, i.e. GNSS applications

It complies with the eligibility conditions below, depending on the type of action.

o Innovation action: Three legal entities. Each of the three shall be established in a different Member State or associated country. All three legal entities shall be independent of each other

o Coordination & support action: One legal entity established in a Member State or associated country.

All proposals must conform to the conditions set out in the Rules for Participation

1

7/16/2014 23

AWARD Criteria

All types of actions

Excellence

Impact

Quality and efficiency of the

implementation

Clarity and pertinence of the objectives; Credibility of the proposed approach.

The expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic

Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources; Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant); Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management.

2 Evaluation by experts

7/16/2014 24

AWARD Criteria

IA

Excellence Impact Quality and efficiency of

the implementation

Soundness of the concept, including trans-disciplinary considerations, where relevant; Extent that proposed work is ambitious, has innovation potential, and is beyond the state of the art (e.g. ground-breaking objectives, novel concepts and approaches)

Enhancing innovation capacity and integration of new knowledge; Strengthening the competitiveness and growth of companies by developing innovations meeting the needs of European and global markets; and, where relevant, by delivering such innovations to the markets; Any other environmental and socially important impacts (not already covered above); Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results (including management of IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant.

As in all types of actions Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources; Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant); Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management.

2 Evaluation by experts

7/16/2014 25

AWARD Criteria

CSA

Excellence Impact Quality and efficiency of

the implementation

Soundness of the concept; Quality of the proposed coordination and/or support measures.

Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results (including management of IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant.

As in all types of actions Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources; Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant); Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management.

2 Evaluation by experts

7/16/2014 26

Interpretation of the scores

0—Proposal fails to address the criterion or can’t be assessed due to missing or incomplete information.

1—Poor The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses.

2—Fair Proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses.

3—Good Proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present.

4—Very Good Proposal addresses the criterion very well, a small number of shortcomings are present.

5—Excellent Proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion; any shortcomings minor.

Scoring

Scoring

• Each criterion will be scored out of 5.

• Threshold for individual criteria: 3.

• Overall threshold: 10 10.

7/16/2014 27

Commission/Agency ranked list

We will rank the proposals that passed the thresholds according to the results

of the evaluation by the experts

Award of the grants will be made on the basis of this ranking, and the available

budget.

Information on the outcome of the evaluation

o Invitation to prepare the grant: If your proposal is successfully evaluated, we will

send an ‘evaluation information letter’ to the proposal coordinator, to inform you

of the results of the evaluation and to invite you to take part in the grant agreement

preparation phase.

o Reserve list: We may keep a number of proposals in reserve in case proposals are

withdrawn, excluded or extra funding becomes available.

o Rejection decisions: we will inform you if your proposal has been rejected and the

reason why.

3

4

Agenda

Time to Grant

Picture’s sources blog.norwayvisas.com

Time to grant: speeding up the process

16-Jul-14 European GNSS Agency 29

• A maximum TTG of 8 months

Some exceptions apply

5 months for informing all applicants

on evaluation results

3 months for signature of GA

Thank you!

Thank you!

Marta Krywanis-Brzostowska marta.krywanis@gsa.europa.eu