Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Work programme 2009 – Info Day European Commission – DG Enterprise & Industry E-M. Engdahl Security Work Programme 2009 Information Day 15 September 2008.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Work programme 2009 – Info Day European Commission – DG Enterprise & Industry E-M. Engdahl Security Work Programme 2009 Information Day 15 September 2008."— Presentation transcript:

1 Work programme 2009 – Info Day European Commission – DG Enterprise & Industry E-M. Engdahl Security Work Programme 2009 Information Day 15 September 2008 Seventh Framework Programme Security Research

2 Total 50,5 M€ FP7:

3 Security Theme in FP7: Four Security missions / activities: 1.Security of citizens 2.Security of infrastructure and utilities 3.Intelligent surveillance and border security 4.Restoring security and safety in case of crisis Three Cross cutting activities: 5.Security systems integration, interconnectivity and interoperability 6.Security and Society 7.Security Research coordination and structuring

4 Research routes to meet the Security theme objectives System development and validation - Combination of capabilities - Mission specific Systems of systems demonstration - Combination of IP results - Multi-mission Capability development - Technology development - Multi mission and mission specific

5 Content of the Work Programme 2009  Introductory part: policy context and approach  Content of the Security Call 2  fewer topics (26 in total) but more than one proposal per topic can be selected  more flexibility in choosing among the different funding schemes  Implementation of the Security Call 2  Other actions  Indicative priorities for future calls

6 Policy context Specific issues:  Up to 75% funding for limited market  Active involvement of end-users  Sensitive activities and information (clearance already at proposal stage)  Ethical principles, including questions of privacy need to be taken into account also in technological proposals

7 Budget of the 2 nd Call Indicative Call budget: M€  Collaborative projects: integrated projects ~40% (30-50%), capability projects ~50% (40-60%)  Coordination and support actions (incl. Demo phase 1) and Networks of Excellence ~10% (5-20%)  Up to ~3% for international cooperation and up to ~3% for ERA-NET

8  Collaborative projects:  Integration projects (large scale)  Capability projects (small and medium scale)  Coordination and support actions (including Demo phase 1)  Networks of Excellence Funding schemes for the 2 nd Call

9 Research topics in the 2 nd call  3 topics for Demo project phase 1 (CSA): activities 1 and 4  7 topics for Integration project: activities 1-4  8 topics for Capability project: activities 1,2 and 4  1 topic for Coordination and Supporting Action (CSA): activity 3 Flexible topics:  5 topics for Capability project, CSA or Networks of Excellence: area 6  2 topics for CSA or Networks of Excellence: area 7

10  Demonstration projects phase 1 should define the strategic roadmap and trigger Europe wide awareness, involving end-users, industry and academia; Phase 2 will then technically implement the systems of systems demonstration projects, taking into account steps which have to follow the research (standardisation, development of marketable products, etc). Workshops during phase 1 (Spring 2009) will aim to define the requirements for the first two phase 2 Demonstration projects: Demonstration projects (phase 1) - European-wide integrated border control system - Security of mass transportation

11 Security of citizens  Logistic and Supply chain Security  CBRNE (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear agents and Explosives) Restoring security and safety in case of crisis  Aftermath crisis management system Demonstration projects (phase 1) – 3 topics

12 Integration projects Integration projects are large-scale integrating Collaborative projects, which aim at combining mission specific individual capabilities providing a security system and to demonstrate its performance. Indicative total cost M€, duration ~ 4 years (indicative EC funding>3.5M€)

13 Integration projects -7 topics  Security of citizens: - Information and knowledge management for the prevention of terrorism and organised crime  Security of infrastructures and utilities: - Integrated protection of rail transportation; - Integrated comprehensive approach to airport security  Intelligent surveillance and border security: - Main port security system; - Sea borders surveillance system; - Exploitation of open source information in support of decision making processes  Restoring security and safety in case of crisis: - First responder of the future

14 Capability projects Capability projects are small and medium scale Collaborative projects. They aim at building up and/or strengthening security capabilities in the required missions. This will be done by adapting available technologies and by developing security specific technology and knowledge aimed at tangible results. Indicative total cost 2-5 M €, 2-4 years (indicative EC funding =<3.5M € )

15 Capability projects - 12 topics Security of citizens: - B-agent and detection - Drug precursors - Properties of improvised explosive devices, additives to precursors… -Advanced forensic toolbox Security of infrastructures and utilities: - Built infrastructure protection, incl building in resilience to attack at the design stage Restoring security and safety in case of crisis: - Neutralisation of CBRNE effects following a terrorist event - Bio-dosimetric tools to manage radiological casualties - Simulation, planning and training tools and methods for management of crises and complex emergencies 10.6 Security and society: all 5 topics in area 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4

16 Networks of excellence Networks of excellence are designed for research institutions that wish to combine and functionally integrate in a durable way a substantial part of their activities and capacities in a given field, with a view to creating in this field a European ‘virtual centre of research’. No indicative total cost or duration (very exceptional cases > 5 years)

17 Networks of excellence – 7 topics 10.6 Security and Society: 6.1 Better understanding of the rationale and the drivers underlying the radicalisation processes and how these drivers interact 6.2 Inventories of existing national resources, institutional mandates and practices across relevant sectors Foresight activities as action research to inspire public debate, to foster shared understanding and self-organisation… Research on rigorous methodologies for assessment of security investments and trade-off between security and other societal objectives (e.g. privacy and social cohesion) 6.4 European Security Indicator: methodological research to provide a few select indicators of security and security policy in Europe measuring the effects… 10.7 Security research coordination and structuring: Transparency and networking amongst Member States and Associated States (ERA-NET activities) Supply chains and market integration

18 Coordination and support actions CSA can be either supporting or coordinating. Co-ordination (or networking) actions aim at coordinating research activities and policies, while support actions aim at contributing to the implementation of the FP and to prepare future research policy or to develop synergies with other policies, or to stimulate, encourage and facilitate the participation of SMEs, civil society organisations, small research teams, etc, or for setting up of research-intensive clusters across the EU regions. Support actions often focus on one specific activity and on one specific event. Indicative total cost M€, years (up to 100% EC funding)

19 Coordination and support actions – 8 topics 10.3 Intelligent surveillance and border security: Continuity, coverage, performance (incl. UAV; secure data link) 10.6 Security and Society: all 5 topics in area Security research coordination and structuring: both topics in area 7

20 Seventh Framework Programme Security Research FP7-SEC Submission, Evaluation, practical issues

21 Timing of the Security Research Call 2 FP7-SEC September 2008Publication 4 December h00Deadline January/February 2009Evaluation March 2009Initial information letters (incl. ESR) April 2009Ethical review / Security scrutiny May / JuneInvitation to negotiate Rejection letters From 2 nd half of 2009Signature of first Grant Agreements

22 Unavoidable readings The Work Programme  The topics against which the proposals will be judged  The philosophy, the logic, the context Guide(s) for applicants  The funding schemes  The templates, all required sections  Tips, advices, explanations… Check on Cordis that you have the relevant and latest versions !

23 Topic / funding schemes One proposal: One (major) topic One type of project (funding scheme) Different requirements and expectations for:  Integration Project, Capability Project, Demo phase 1 (Areas 1 to 4)  Collaborative Project, Network of Excellence, Support Action, Coordination Action (Areas 6 & 7)

24 Types of projects vs funding schemes Capability projects  2 to 4 years, budget: M€  Capability development, research oriented  (Demonstrated) Tangible results Integration projects  ~ 4 years, budget: M€  Large scale combination of capabilities  Demonstration of a security systems FP7 funding schemes : Collaborative project

25 Evaluation Process - Basic Principles TRANSPARENCY EXCELLENCE FAIRNESS & IMPARTIALITY CONFIDENTIALITY ETHICAL & SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS EFFICIENCY & SPEED

26 Evaluation Criteria Same 3 criteria for all FP7-cooperation : Scientific / technological quality Implementation Impact But different sub-criteria for CP,CA, SA, NoE (see Guides for Applicants) Assessed vis-à-vis the topic addressed

27 Evaluation process – peer review Experts selection based on Competence Geographical balance Balance between end users and technical experts Gender balance Public / private balance

28 Evaluation process – peer review Reading – individual assessment* Minimum 3 external experts by projects Balance backgrounds No conflict of interest Consensus meeting Consensus report Chaired by a Commission official Panel meeting Ranked list(s) of proposals *could be done remotely

29 Reminders All 3 (5) evaluators will not be technical experts in your specific area Limited time to read each proposal No access to external information B&W paper copies only Measurable and achievable objectives

30 End users involvement Police forces, border guards, firemen, first responders, public authorities… Part of the consortium or “end-user club” Quality of the involvement is more important than quantity

31 Cross cutting issues Societal acceptability (Economical) feasibility, sustainability Ethical questions Interoperability European added value Structuring effect Human factors issues => To be taken into account in all projects

32 International cooperation Definition: Third countries which are not associated countries General rule: welcome Need to justify the benefit of the international cooperation Own financing except for developing countries In the 2nd call, all topics are open to international cooperation

33 Feed back from 1st call 1st call was 7 times over-subscribed “Good (3/5)” in all 3 criteria is below threshold Don’t miss the deadline ! Ask from feed back from experienced colleagues (use NCP)

34 More information EU Security research website: Helpdesk: Centralised FP7 Enquiries Service: National Contact Points:   European Security Research Conference: 

35 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /35 Seventh Framework Programme Security Research FP7-SEC FP7 rules for participation and legal/financial issues

36 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /36 1.Upper funding limits Reimbursement according to the type of organisation, of action and/or activity Research and technological development activities: up to 50% of eligible costs. However, it can be up to 75% for: Non profit public bodies, secondary and higher education establishments and research organisations, SMEs Demonstration activities: up to 50% Other activities including management: up to 100% Coordination and support actions: up to 100%

37 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /37 2. Eligible Costs  Eligible actual during duration of project in accordance with its usual accounting and management principles recorded in the accounts of beneficiary used for the sole purpose of achieving the objectives of the project  Non-eligible identifiable indirect taxes, including VAT…

38 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /38 2. Indirect Costs (2) For all:  either Actual Indirect Costs  Simplified Method ( to calculate indirect costs at the level of the legal entity, and not at a detailed level )  Standard Flat Rate of 20% of direct costs Non-profit Public Bodies Secondary and Higher Education establishments, Research Organisations SMEs unable to identify real indirect costs, may apply for a Special Transitional Flat Rate of 60% of direct costs For CSA limit of 7% of direct costs

39 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /39 3. Payment modalities  One pre-financing (within 45 days upon entry into force of G.A.) for the whole duration, depending on how many reporting periods are foreseen: a) 1 or 2 : between 60 & 80% of total EC contribution b) 3+: 160% of the average fund per period (around 53% of total EC contribution)  Interim payments based on financial statements (EC contribution= amounts justified & accepted * funding rate)  Retention (10%)  Final payment

40 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /40 4. Certification (1) 2 types of certificates: certificate on financial statements (CFS) (Form D)- expenditure verification certificate on the methodology (Form E) - system verification  Personnel & Overheads N.B.: The submission of a certificate does not waive the right of the Commission to carry out its own audits (Article II.22 of the FP7 model grant agreement).

41 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /41 4. Certification (2) Certificate on financial statements (CFS) Mandatory for a beneficiary when its requested funding for the project equal or more than 375,000€  exception for project of 2 years or less, no intermediate CFS submitted, only at the end

42 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /42 4. Certification (3) These certificates can be provided by auditors:  Qualified ( according to Directive 2006/43/CE)  Independent 1.Public bodies 2.Secondary and higher education establishments 3. Research organisations may opt for a competent public officer

43 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /43 5. Subcontracts Subcontractors charge a price, which usually includes a profit (different from third parties, which charge only the costs of the activity) Tasks have to be indicated in Annex I awarded according to best value for money principle shall not be a “ core ” part of the work (based on qualitative criteria more than quantitative) Can be under framework contracts Public entities: must follow national procurement principles Private entities: should follow the rules that they usually apply for the selection of procurement contracts e.g. submission of several quotes

44 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /44 5. Third parties -Costs may be claimed by the beneficiary if tasks to be performed, an estimation of the costs and the resources allocated to the Project are indicated in Annex I -Same rules of beneficiaries apply a. Third parties making available resources 1.Free of charge 2.Beneficiary reimburses the third party b. Third parties carrying out part of the work (special clause No. 10) Requirements : 1. relationship is broad and not limited to the G.A. 2. its duration goes beyond the duration of the Project 3. formal external recognition (legal structure or sharing facilities) e.g. European Economic Interest Grouping, Joint Research Units, affiliates and groupings Need to be validated in Unique Registration Facility as the beneficiaries!!

45 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /45 6. Receipts 2 kinds of receipts must be taken into consideration to avoid any profit: Transfers from third parties to the beneficiary (if specifically attributed to the project and not reimbursed):  Financial transfers  Contributions in kind Income generated by the project

46 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /46 6. Receipts (2) At final payment the EC contribution will take into account any receipts of the project For each beneficiary: the eligible costs ≥ EC contribution + the receipts for the project

47 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /47 7. Reporting (1) Periodic reports to be submitted by coordinator 60 days after end of period: overview of progress of the work, including a publishable summary report, use of the resources and Financial Statement (Form C) Final reports to be submitted by coordinator 60 days after end of project: publishable summary report, conclusions and socioeconomic impact, covering wider societal implications and a plan on use and dissemination of foreground.

48 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /48 7. Reporting (2) Commission has 105 days to evaluate and execute the corresponding payment:  No tacit approval of reports  Automatic payment of interests (NEW) After reception Commission may:  Approve  Suspend the time-limit requesting revision/completion  Reject them giving justification, possible termination  Suspend the payment

49 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /49 8. Guarantee Fund The Fund belongs to all beneficiaries of grant agreements under the FP7 All beneficiaries contribute to the Fund to insure against financial losses of the project The contribution equals 5% of the EC financial contribution foreseen for each participant Deducted from the pre-financing Financial interest generated by the Fund will serve to cover financial risk In principle the amount contributed to the Fund will be reimbursed at the end of the action No bank/financial guarantee requested anymore

50 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /50 9. Financial viability Since Guarantee Fund, financial check only for - Coordinators - beneficiaries requesting more than € Exempted: -public entities, -International Organisations, -higher and secondary education establishments -entities whose participation is guaranteed by a Member State or Associated country, -natural persons in receipt of a scholarship Financial Viability checktool available on CORDIS! Audit report certifying the amounts of the checktool to be provided (if not available, business plan) Insufficient beneficiaries can not participate! Weak beneficiaries can not be coordinator (could participate under certain conditions, e.g. voluntary bank guarantee)

51 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme / Amendments Principles - Continuity with main lines of FP6 policy - Exchange of letters - Coordinator requests amendments on behalf of the consortium - For addition/withdrawal tacit approval after 45 days - Model Letters to be used

52 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme / Amendments (2) Main Novelties: Procedure (1) Coordinator can accept on behalf of the Consortium an amendment proposed by the Commission One single amendment procedure: exchange of letters – One letter from the Consortium – One letter from the Commission Possibility for the Commission to make a counter- proposal to the Consortium request (no need for the Consortium to re-submit a request)

53 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme / Amendments (3) Main Novelties: Information Letters Information letters to be used in case of: – Universal transfer of rights & obligations – Change of legal name or details – Change of FP7 legal status (i.e. SME which is no longer an SME) and mistake in indirect cost calculation Advantages: – Directly from the beneficiary to the Commission – One letter per beneficiary not per GA – Signature of Contact person enough

54 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme / Sanctions Recovery procedures Liquidated damages (if overstatement) Financial penalties (if false declarations)

55 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /55 Information Find a document  FP7 Helpdesk  Seventh Framework Programme: cfm Information requests:

56 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /56 Seventh Framework Programme Security Research FP7-SEC Handling Sensitive Proposal

57 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /57 Handling “Sensitive” Proposals What is a sensitive project?  A “Sensitive” Project is handling (*): – Data or information requiring protection against unauthorised disclosure: classified information  No “Sensitive” Proposals are allowed in the call (no classified information in a proposal)  BUT: a Proposal could lead to a “Sensitive” Project (project that could use classified background and/or produce classified foreground) (*)- Information or materials subject to security restrictions - Material subject to export- or transfer- control Legal basis for classified Grant agreements 2001/844/EC amended by 2006/548/EC – OJ L215,

58 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /58 Handling “Sensitive” Projects Sensitive proposals with non-EU participants EU classification is limited to EU Member States Sensitive projects can include participants from associated or third countries Countries having a security agreement with the EU (Council level) could refer to that security agreement for handling sensitive information and material Special MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) could be agreed between the countries involved in the handling of sensitive information/material of a project limited to that project No restriction for the participation to sensitive projects for associated countries and from third countries if no access foreseen to sensitive information/material

59 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /59 Handling “Sensitive” Proposals Information to Proposers: Use of sensitive information No classified information to be used in the proposal However, the project could use classified/sensitive background and/or produce classified/sensitive foreground If this is the case,  The proposal should be flagged on page 1 of the part B of the proposal as security sensitive  The table of deliverables must specify the level of classification for each deliverable  When self flagged: a Security Aspect Letter (SAL) + its annex the Security Classification Guide (SCG) must be attached to the proposal; evidence of Facility Security Clearance (FSC) must be given.

60 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /60 Handling “Sensitive” Proposal Scrutiny Procedure For all proposals of the selection list:  The concerned Security Committee Members or Security Committee Observers will be requested (via their national security authority representative) to verify that all security aspects are properly addressed and to reach an agreement among themselves  this scrutiny procedure is done, in a 2 months period, following the evaluation and before the start of the negotiation of the projects The results of the scrutiny could be:  No classification: go ahead with negotiation (and possibly some recommendation);  Classification of some part of the foreseen work/deliverables: recommendation for the negotiation;  Recommendation not to finance the proposal Proposers are informed of the conclusions of the scrutiny procedure

61 INFO day – 15 september 2009FP7 Security Theme /61 Handling “Sensitive” Projects Some recommendations Give the greatest attention to the sensitivity declaration Consider carefully the requirements for accessing classified information/material in a project (limit it as far as possible) Get reference of all applicable EU and national legislation For non-EU countries find out if there are some security agreement between your country and EU Contact your National Contact Point (NCP) – see CORDIS Contact your National Security Authority (NSA) - see list on (OJ L193 of p.31-36) Contact ENTR SECURITY HELPDESK


Download ppt "Work programme 2009 – Info Day European Commission – DG Enterprise & Industry E-M. Engdahl Security Work Programme 2009 Information Day 15 September 2008."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google