- Specific actions and RTD objectives:Check that your proposed work does indeed address an activity included in the current Call. Ineligible proposals, or proposals not addressing activities open in the Call, will be excluded from evaluation.
- Selection criteria: Any proposal evaluated below the thresholds will not be considered for funding.
- Management: Clearly indicate ability for high quality management adapted to the size of the project.
- Content: Good proposals show consistency with the five selection criteria.
- Ethical issues: Clearly describe any potential ethical aspects and applicable regulatory aspects of the research to be carried out and the way they are dealt with according to national regulations.
- Presentation: Good proposals are drafted in a clear and easily understandable way. Good proposals are precise and concise, not “wordy” - evaluators judge on content, not on number of pages.
- Results: Good proposals clearly show the results that will be achieved, and how the participants intend to diffuse or exploit these results.
- Completeness: Proposals must be complete, as they are evaluated only on the basis of the written material submitted. Follow the format of the Proposal Submission Form. You are highly recommended to use the ProTool software supplied free of charge by the Commission to proposers.
- Partnership: Partners should discuss and agree beforehand their respective roles and responsibilities.
- Contract: Check that the model contract conditions for the type of work that you are proposing are acceptable for your organisations.
- Competition: There will be competition, and a weak element in an otherwise good proposal might make it lose out to others. Therefore edit your proposal tightly, strengthen or eliminate weak elements.
Last but not least:
Arrange for your draft proposal to be evaluated by experienced colleagues before sending it, using the evaluation criteria described in the Evaluation Manual and in Appendix 6 (PART 2). Use their advice to improve it before submission.
[1] On the 22/12/98, the Council also decided on the Fifth Euratom Framework Programme for research and training (CORDIS : http://www.cordis.lu/fp5/src/decisions.htm)
The specificity of the latter will be described in a separate information document.
[2] It will also carry out research and development activities conducted by the Joint Research Centre
[3] In the Decisions adopting the Specific Programmes, there can be no derogation from the financial participation rates set out here, with the exception of duly justified special cases
[4][4] The rates may need to be adjusted in individual cases to comply with the Community framework for State aid for R&D (O.J. C 45, 17.2.1996) and with article 8 of the WTO Agreement on subsidies and countervailing measures (O.J. L 336, 23.12.1994). If the project is supported financially by a Member State or one of its public bodies, the cumulation rule applies, according to item 5.12 of the above mentioned Community framework.
[5] In the special case of legal entities which do not keep analytical accounts, the additional eligible costs generated as a result of the research will be financed at the rate of 100 %
[6] EC funding up to maximum of €22,500
[7] In the case of industrial host fellowships, this will normally approximate to 50 % of the total eligible costs
[8] Mored detailed information on this area are given in an explanatory note, available from CORDIS at : http://www.cordis.lu/life/calls/199902.htm#refdocs
[9]The implementation modality “Support for access to research infrastructure” should not be confused with “Support for research infrastructures”, which is part of the programme and supports various actions. The action “Support for access to research infrastructures” is supported by the horizontal programme “Improving human potential”.
[10]European Parliament and Council Decision N° 1999/182/ECof 22 December 1998 concerning the Fifth Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (1998-2002)
[11]Council Decision 1999/65/EC of 22 December 1998 concerning the rules for the participation of undertakings, research centres and universities and for the dissemination of research results for the implementation of the Fifth Framework Programme of the European Community (1998-2002)
[12] Council Decisions on the specific programmes, Commission Regulation implementing the Council Decision 1999/65/EC concerning the rules of participation, Work Programmes of the specific programmes, model contracts, Evaluation Manual, …
[13] See the Work Programme of the Specific Programme “Confirming the international role of Community research” and its corresponding Guide for Proposers.
[14] Such calls are based on Community need to support certain of its policies (standardisation, anti-fraud actions…)
[15] See Vademecum on grant management and the rules for public procurement
[16] Experts shall be selected following a Call for candidates. However, in exceptional cases, the evaluation process may be conducted without them. The Commission's services shall however follow the rules set out in the Evaluation Manual.
[17] These include human resources, infrastructure, financial resources and, where appropriate, intangible property.
[18] In certain exceptional cases by paying a fixed lump sum.
[19] Anywhere where it is possible for easy reading, the word “contractor” may be used.
[20] Specific rules related to their participation in this type of action can be found in the ad hoc information brochure devoted to SMEs.
[21] A single contractor is possible in the case of Concerted Actions, Thematic and Training Networks
[22] A single contractor is possible in the case of Concerted Actions, Thematic and Training Network Actions, where he carries out the co-ordinator role.
[23] This role may in exceptional cases be carried by two contractors, with one responsible for the scientific co-ordination, and the other responsible for financial matters (e.g.: if the scientific co-ordinator is unable to receive Community funding due to his status, his location, his uncertain financial standing, or because he is unable to distribute funds to participants in due time).