eContentplus 2006 call proposal evaluation by fkm75091

VIEWS: 10 PAGES: 21

									eContentplus 2006 call
proposal evaluation

Central InfoDay
28 June 2006



                   Gudrun Stock
Call closing date

   19 October 2006, 17:00 Luxembourg
    local time

   Applies to receipt by the Commission
Evaluation of proposals – by whom?



                               Eligibility
                                criteria
 Commission
                  Outside
 Evaluation   +                Award criteria
                  experts
 Committee
                               Selection
                                criteria
    Evaluation criteria

     Read them! They will help you prepare a good proposal


   Eligibility criteria
      Your proposal must be complete and arrive on time

   Award criteria
        Your proposals must contribute to the achievement of the
         eContentplus objectives
   Selection criteria
        You must have the means and financial/operational
         capacity to do what you propose to do
Eligibility criteria

      Your proposal must reach the Commission by
       closing date


      Your proposal must be complete




         Sufficient information to identify applicants,
   their legal status, their ability to carry out the work and
         to evaluate the scope of the proposed project
Award criteria
   Two sets: One for TP, another one for TN
   Applied on basis of information supplied in
    proposal
   Each criterion marked from 1-10; mind
    weighting: maximum score 100
   Criterion 1 >= 6/10, else exclusion from further
    evaluation
   Formal minimum of 60 points to be retained for
    co-funding; mind budget availability: 27.3
    million euro
Award Criteria

         Programme Objectives
          Common Requirements
                  Action


          Objective        Conditions


            Expected Results
Award Criteria




    Targeted Projects
    1. Relevance, Impact and European
    Dimension (35 %)
   Contribution to achieving the objectives of the
    eContentplus programme, of relevant Community
    policies referred to in this work programme and of the
    specific action as set out in the call.
   Fulfilment of common requirements for the expected
    impact and the European dimension of the proposed
    action.
   Adequacy of the exploitation and/or dissemination
    plans to ensure optimal use of the project results, also
    beyond the participants in the project.


Proposals not reaching 6/10 excluded from further evaluation
2. Content and Additional Conditions
(25%)

    Fulfilment of the common requirements for
     content.

    Fulfilment of the additional conditions for the
     specific action.
3. Quality of the Technical Part of the
Proposal (20 %)

    Clear description of the problems addressed
     and the proposed solutions.

    Adequacy of the methodology and work plan
     for achieving the objectives stated in the
     proposal.
    4. Resources and Management (20 %)

   Fulfilment of the common requirements for the
    consortium.
   Quality of the consortium in terms of relevance,
    competences, combination of complementary expertise,
    and European added value.
   Extent to which the project provides for the resources
    (personnel, equipment, financial, etc.) necessary for
    success.
   Adequacy of the management, decision-making
    structures, communication flow and cooperation
    mechanisms within the consortium.
   Adequacy of the measures and indicators for monitoring
    progress and assessing results and impact.
Award Criteria




   Thematic Networks
    1. Relevance, Impact and European
    Dimension (40 %)
   Contribution to achieving the objectives of the
    eContentplus programme, of relevant Community policies
    referred to in this work programme and of the specific
    action as set out in the call.
   Expected impact of the proposed action.
   European dimension of the issue(s) addressed, and
    extent to which the proposed action would contribute to
    tackling them at European level.



Proposals not reaching 6/10 excluded from further evaluation
2. Quality of the technical part of the
proposal (20 %)

    Clear description of the problems addressed
     and the proposed solutions.

    Adequacy of the methodology and work plan
     for achieving the objectives stated in the
     proposal.
3. Quality of the proposed Network and
Management (40 %)
   Fulfilment of common requirements for thematic
    networks and the additional conditions for the
    specific action.

   Quality of the partnership in terms of relevance,
    competences, combination of complementary
    expertise, and resources available.

   Quality of the coordinating team (good
    complementarities between participants) and
    adequacy of the organisations participating in the
    network to ensure the coordination envisaged.
3. Quality of the proposed Network and
Management (40 %) - continued

   Adequacy of the management, decision-making
    structures, communication flow and cooperation
    mechanisms within the network.

   Adequacy of the measures and indicators for
    monitoring progress and assessing results and
    impact.
Selection criteria
   Financial and operational capacity to carry out
    the project
      financial evaluation - co-financing
      adequate human resources


   Professional competencies and qualifications
      documented relevant experience (e.g. academic
       qualifications or previous projects)




        Proposals failing to pass the selection criteria
             cannot be retained for co-funding.
    Any assistance?

   Preproposal service
        Download preproposal form from programme website
        Send completed form to helpdesk at:
         econtentplus@ec.europa.eu
        Acknowledgement of receipt with target date for reply
        Beware: replies to pre-proposals submitted after 21
         September 2006 might not arrive in time to be of use for
         the development of a full proposal.



            Commission comments on pre-proposal do not
                     pre-empt full evaluation
Informing proposers
   Acknowledgement of receipt of proposal
      end October 2006

      contains date of receipt (eligibility criteria)



   Evaluation result
      Letter with Evaluation Summary Report (ESR)

      January 2007



   Invitation to negotiations / Rejection of proposals of
    insufficient quality
      Letter opening negotiations

      Letter rejecting proposal for funding
Overview:
Evaluation, selection, grant agreement signature
     Proposal submission

       Eligibility checks                  With assistance of
                                            outside experts
         Evaluation


             Priority List and Implementation Plan


                            Negotiations

                   Award/rejection decisions


                            Signature of grant agreement
                                  and project start

								
To top