justification by keralaguest

VIEWS: 95 PAGES: 3

									                                                           AUNP contract ASE/B7-301/1997/0178/01


Request of budget modifications
During the kick-off meeting the project Team went into details of the activities that should have
been carried on, deepening the workplan of the project.
This discussion led to understand that a certain number of budget modifications would have been
necessary for a better management of the project.

Such modifications do not involve a variation of the project total costs, but are a sort of money re-
allocation that will not compromise the good outcome of the project. On the contrary, thanks to this
re-allocation the partners will be able to carry on their activities better addressing the project aims.

Below the justification of the required modification is given.

Justification of budget modifications

Item 1.1.1.2 – Technical Staff (Applicant) – Post-doc
After the kick-off meeting discussion it was clear that the man-months of the technical staff had
been underestimated, so the Applicant decided to increase the number of months up to 16.

Item 1.1.2 – Administrative Staff (Applicant)
The Applicant realized, after the first month of activity, that the administrative work is more than
the one estimated in the proposal phase. So it became clear the it was necessary to increase the man-
months of administrative staff, increased up to 2.

Item 1.1.3.1 – Full Professor (P1)
The partner found that the salary Unit rate had been slightly overestimated, so it has been decreased
from 5.750 to 5.700 euro per month.

Item 1.1.7 – Technical Staff (Researcher) (P3)
After the discussion during the kick-off meeting, it was clear that the job up to P3 was more than
the expected one, but could be done by a researcher with a Master degree, and not necessarily with
a PhD qualification, as foreseen in the first hypothesis. Therefore, the salary was revised downward
to 1400 euro, increasing the man-months up to 20.
This change will not compromise the good outcome of the project, on the contrary it will lead to a
better management of the activities.

Item 1.1.8 – Administrative Staff (P3)
This item is intended to include all the work to be done for the reports preparation, contacts with the
Project Coordinator, slides preparation for the meetings and similar. In the kick-off meeting P3
decided that the person who is really going to do this job is Prof. See Kye Yak (project responsible
for P3). Prof. See accepted, even if his Unit Rate would be of 4800 EUR, to put in this budget the
Unit Rate of 1200 EUR, due to the fact that the salary unit rate can not be increased at this stage.
The merely administrative work will be included by P3 in the Administrative Costs Item (Item 8.)

Item 1.2.1 – Abroad - Thailand
The Applicant decided to charge on the project only 6 days in Thailand instead of 7 (the seminar
will be 5 working days long).

Item 1.2.2 – Abroad - Singapore
12 days instead of 11. P2 decided to increase from 1 to 2 days his stay in Singapore to attend the
EPTC conference.

                                                                                                       1
                                                          AUNP contract ASE/B7-301/1997/0178/01



Item 1.2.3 – Abroad - Germany
Item 1.2.4 – Abroad – Italy
These two items have been modified because in the proposal phase the task “visit to European EMC
labs” was expected to take place in Germany. Then the team decided it was better to split the visit,
half in UK and half in Italy, in the days just before the kick-off meeting, in order to save one
international flight. The stay in UK could not be inserted in the updated budget because we were not
allowed to insert new items, so only the stay in Italy was taken into account.
The laboratories in UK and in Italy were chosen because they were more suitable with the aims of
the course that has to be developed.

Below the stay per partner is shown (just to summarize):
Applicant: 11 days in Germany to attend SPI conference (4 days x 2 people + 3 days x 1 person)
P1: 2 days in Italy (1 for the kick-off meeting and 1 for the dissemination day)
P2: 2 days in Italy (1 for the kick-off meeting and 1 for the dissemination day) and 1 day in
Germany to attend SPI conference
P3: 6 days in Italy (3 for visiting labs and attending the kick-off meeting, 3 for the dissemination
day) and 3 days in Germany to attend SPI conference
P4: 4 days in Italy (3 for visiting labs and attending the kick-off meeting, 1 for the dissemination
day) and 1 day in Germany to attend SPI conference

Item 2.1. International travel (Europe to Asia)
The unit rate of this item was decreased to 942 euro, given that the team found that the rates
actually applied are lower than the ones expected during the proposal phase.

Item 2.2. International travel (within Europe)
The unit rate of this item was decreased to 400 euro, given that the team found that the rates
actually applied are lower than the ones expected during the proposal phase.

Item 2.3. International travel (Asia to Europe)
P4 added needed one flight more to Europe to attend the dissemination day

Item 2.4. International travel (within Asia)
The unit rate of this item was decreased to 385 euro, given that the team found that the rates
actually applied are lower than the ones expected during the proposal phase.

The number of flights was increased: the justification is summarized below:
Flights Europe to Asia
2 for the Applicant, 2 for P1 and 2 for P2. One is to Thailand to attend the seminar, the other is to
Singapore to attend EPTC conference.

Flights Asia to Europe
2 for P3 and 2 for P4: one is to attend the kick-off meeting, the other is to attend the dissemination
day

Flights within Asia
P3 has one flight to Thailand to attend the seminar




                                                                                                         2
                                                          AUNP contract ASE/B7-301/1997/0178/01

Flights within Europe
3 for the Applicant for the 3 people attending SPI conference in Germany, 2 for P1 (one to attend
the kick-off meeting, one to attend the dissemination day), 2 for P2 (one to attend the kick-off
meeting, one to attend the dissemination day)

Item 3.3.1 – Purchase of Wideband probe (P4)
P4 decided to decrease this item to 2400 euro because it had been overestimated.

Item 4 – Local office/project costs
P1 decided to decrease these costs that had been overestimated.

Item 5.4.1 – Kick off meeting-organisation+logistics (Applicant)
Item 5.4.2 – Dissemination day-organisation+logistics (Applicant)
The costs of the kick-off meeting organisation had been overestimated (it was organised in the
Polytechnic, so there were no logistic costs), whereas the cost of the organisation of the
dissemination day will be higher because it will be organized in a conference site out of the
University.

Item 6.1 – Laboratory organisation costs (P3)
After the kick-off meeting discussion, P3 found out the this item had been slightly overestimated.


The total cost of the project did not change after the budget variation.




                                                                                                     3

								
To top