I fattori di successo delle proposte vincitrici Dr Luigi Pari

Transcript

1 L ITALIA E IL PRIMO ANNO DI HORIZON 2020 Societal Challenge 2: Food Security, Sustainable Agriculture and Forestry, Marine, Maritime and Inland Water Research and the bioeconomy Roma, 30 Novembre 2015 I fattori di successo delle proposte vincitrici Dr Luigi Pari

2 Overview of the Evaluation Process Evaluators Receipt of proposals Individual evaluation Consensus group Panel Review Finalisation Eligibility check Allocation of proposals to evaluators Individual Evaluation Reports (Done remotely) Consensus Report (May be done remotely) Panel report Panel ranked list Final ranked list

3 Evaluation Process Proposal Eligible proposal Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Minimum 3 experts but can be more Individual Evaluation Report Individual Evaluation Report Individual Evaluation Report Individual evaluation Individual Evaluation Report Consensus group Individual Evaluation Report Consensus Consensus Report

4 Excellence Impact Implementation Evaluation criteria Clarity and pertinence of the objectives 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) Credibility of the proposed approach The expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant topic 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 Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and Coherence resources and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant) Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant) Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management

5 Scores 0 The proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information. 1 Poor. The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses. 2 Fair. The proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses. 3 Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present. 4 Very Good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, but a small number of shortcomings are present. 5 Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion. Any shortcomings are minor.

6 Eu indication in H2020 Calls are challenge-based, and therefore more open to innovative proposals There is a greater emphasis on impact, in particular through each call or topic impact statements There is more emphasis on innovation Proposals may bring together different disciplines, sectors and actors to tackle specific challenges A balanced approach to research and innovation Activities closer to the market emphasise the widest possible use of knowledge generated by the supported activities up to the commercial exploitation of that knowledge

7 Suggerimenti per la costuzione di un progetto Prima di scrivere una proposal nell ambito di una call di interesse bisogna fare alcune riflessioni: - Capire chiaramente le esigenze di innovazione descritte nella call - Specific Challenge, Scope, Expected Impact - Essere a conoscenza dello stato dell arte ed avere una idea innovativa - Costituire un partenariato forte che copra a 360 tutti gli aspetti legati all idea progettuale, con singoli ruoli definiti - Un partenariato che abbia un CV che dimostri le competenze specifiche richieste

8 Alcuni punti chiave da tenere a mente Chiarezza e la rilevanza degli obiettivi Ricerca oltre lo stato dell arte e innovativa Credibilità dell'approccio proposto. Rafforzare la capacità di innovazione e integrazione delle nuove conoscenze nonché la competitività e la crescita. Efficacia delle misure di valorizzazione e di diffusione dei risultati del progetto. Adeguatezza della ripartizione dei compiti e delle risorse Adeguatezza delle strutture e delle procedure di gestione, tra cui l adeguata valutazione del rischio. Un uso bilanciato di punti, tabelle, flow chart ecc.. è utile a rendere un idea più immediata dell oggetto e dell organizzazione della proposta di ricerca

9 Alcuni punti chiave da tenere a mente Idea chiara, innovativa, coerente, fattibile Consorzio coerente con la proposta Evitare che un partner (o un paese) abbia un ruolo preponderante Filiera, partner commerciali presenti, multi-actor approach Utilizzatori dei risultati; i ricercatori difficilmente sono inclini a includere associazioni di produttori, allevatori etc ) Dimensione europea Seguire rigorosamente i modelli (template) e non trascurare alcun sotto-criterio di valutazione Rileggere la call dopo aver concluso la scrittura della Proposta e interrogarsi se si è data risposta a tutti gli obiettivi indicati 01/12/2015 9

10 Budget: importante definirlo subito e motivarlo Budget sommario ma completo già al primo Stage Motivare la richesta economica in maniera coerente tra task e Work Packages Evitare da subito conflitti e incomprensioni Attenzione, in H2020 non c è più la grant negotiation phase! The time from submission of a proposal, evaluation and signature of the grant has been reduced to a maximum of 8 months (max. 5 months for evaluation + max. 3 months for grant signature) Che significa questo? Non essendoci più la fase di negoziazione, una sovra stima dei costi di Progetto si rifletterà sul punteggio della voce Implementation

11 Punti deboli in un progetto Proposte troppo lunghe con una descrizione poco incisiva Il proponente ha idee poco chiare Proposte con obiettivi confusi Scarsa transdisciplinarietà Partners con profilo non eccellente e con competenze non complementari Mancanza di applicabilità dei risultati Costi sovrastimati

12 Un esperienza personale SFS : Small farms but global markets: the role of small and family farms in food and nutrition security Extract from the call: The project intends to understand the role of small farms in the target countries around the Mediterranean basin helping to evaluate the potential benefits of this type of agriculture, namely regarding issues such as the global increase in demand for food, the development of biofuels, the rise in food prices, the climate changes. Evaluation Summary Report ESR

13 Impact: score 4,5/5 The proposal addresses the expected impacts listed in the work programme very well. The dissemination plan is solid and coherent, and addresses the full range of potential users. The research on precision agriculture may yield many relevant recommendations for sustainable production, renewable energies, water preservation and agriculture soil safety. However, the approach to researching water-use practices on farms is only partially developed. The dissemination plan is solid and coherent, and addresses the full range of potential users. However, the plan for deriving policy recommendations for the wider Mediterranean region from the extensive variety of very localized case studies is not so well developed.

14 Quality and efficiency of the implementation: Score 5/5 The overall structure of the work plan is excellent, with good linkages between the WP objectives and the overall objectives. The consortium description is clear and comprehensively shows that the partners have the right expertise and skills, they are strongly complementary The project shows a clear management structure and procedures. The risk assessment is very good (including risks identified for each work package)

15 Excellence: score 3,5/5 The overall objective is in line with the main requirements of the Call and the pertinence of the specific objectives is adequately demonstrated. They are logical and they fit with the global drivers of food security. However, the vast number of proposed case studies is a significant shortcoming because it undermines the consistency of the approach. A well organized and appropriately proactive approach is centred on specific and well-identified supporting measures. The overall approach and methodology are well described. However the proposal does not give enough information to convince of the feasibility of investigating the very diverse indicators suggested for each case study.

16 Finally we scored 13/15 The project was rejected! Lessons learned: you must convince the evaluators of the feasibility of your approach Thank you and good luck!!! Luigi Pari CREA ING