1. CONCERT-Japan Joint Call Secretariat
CONCERT-Japan Joint Call Lessons learnt
18 July 2013, Zurich
Anna BOITARD
CONCERT-Japan Joint Call Secretariat
National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS)

2. CONCERT-Japan Joint Call
Concept, funding modalities and procedure
Evaluation process
Results
Lessons learnt
Success factors of the Call
Problems raised and solutions
Summary

3. 1. Joint Call: Concept and aim
The CONCERT-Japan project aims at enhancing the cooperation of European countries with Japan, in various areas of S&T
The CONCERT-Japan Joint Call was a multilateral call for transnational research projects in two thematic areas: - Efficient Energy Storage and Distribution
- Resilience against Disasters
The aim was to start new or strengthen existing, sustainable and multilateral research collaborations between European and Japanese researchers, through funding joint research projects for a duration of up to two years

4. 1. Joint Call: Funding institutions
Japan: Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
Belgium/Flanders: Research Foundation Flanders (FWO)
France: French Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MAE)
France: French Ministry of Higher Education and Science (MESR)
Germany: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)
Germany/Region of North Rhine Westphalia: Ministry of Innovation, Science and Research of the State of North Rhine Westphalia (MIWF)
Hungary: Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA)
Italy/Region of Lombardy
Italy/Province of Trento
Norway: Research Council of Norway (RCN)
Slovakia: Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS)
Spain: Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO)
Romania: National Authority for Scientific Research (ANCS)
Switzerland: ETH Zurich on behalf of State Secretariat for Education and Research
Turkey: Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBITAK)
15 institutions from 12 countries
Of all these countries: MIWF, OTKA and MINECO will only fund the topic « Efficient Energy Storage and Distribution »

5. 1. Joint Call: Funding modalities
Opening of the Call: 3rd September – 15 November 2012
Funding principle: virtual common pot with juste retour
Total budget: €
Beneficiaries: public and private legal RTD entities/higher education institutions/non-university research establishments/small and medium-sized entreprises (SMEs)/large-sized entreprises
Consortium: min. 3 partners (1 Japan and 2 from two different European countries participating in the Joint Call), 2 project leaders (1 Japan, 1 Europe)
Eligible costs: research material and small-scale research equipment/personnel costs/travel costs/living expenses/expenses for the organization of small scientific events
Duration of funding: 2 years

6. 1. Joint Call: Submission process
Tool for submission: PT-Outline webtool
Available document:
Call Text and National/Regional Regulations
Guidelines for Applicants
Project Description:
General information
Work plan
Information on the expected impact of results
Envisaged value of multilateral cooperation
CVs of the main participating researchers
Confirmation letters for the additional European project partners from countries not participating to the Joint Call
Joint Call Secretary (JCS) and National and Regional Contact Persons (NRCPs) available for information and help

7. 1. Joint Call: Evaluation process
A four-step evaluation process has been implemented:
Checking of general eligibility criteria and national/regional eligibility criteria
An online evaluation by peer reviewers according to four criteria
- Scientific excellence of the project and the project partners
- Methodology and work plan
- Expected impact of project results
- Added values of multilateral cooperation
following a scoring system from 0 to 5 points (5 = excellent)
3. A Scientific Committee (SC) consisting of independent experts establishes a ranking list of projects based on the online evaluations and own discussions
4. The Funding Organisations Forum (FOF) decides on the projects to be funded, based on the recommendations of the Scientific Committees
Eligibility check by the JCS and the NRCPs
general eligibility criteria:
Appropriate length and layout of the proposal
Inclusion of all necessary information in English
Eligibility of all project partners
Participation of at least three partners from a minimum of two different eligible European countries and Japan
Eligible thematic focus
Eligibility of requested funding
Inclusion of the Confirmation Letter for additional partners (if necessary)

8. 1. Joint Call: Evaluation process
Number of received proposals: 96
426 researchers in total

9. 1. Joint Call: Evaluation process - eligibility check

10. 1. Joint Call: Evaluation process - SCs
Efficient Energy Storage
and Distribution
A+: 4
A: 5
A-: 5
B: 11
C: 9
A+: 2
A: 8
A-: 10
B: 15
C: 9
Resilience against Disasters

11. 1. Joint Call: Decision of funding
9 funded projects:
CONCERT_EN-015 iTHEUS
CONCERT_Dis-013 ROADERS
CONCERT_EN-019 SolarFuel
CONCERT_Dis-029 INFILTIE
CONCERT_Dis-021 RAPSODI
CONCERT_EN-049 UMBLA
CONCERT_Dis-053 RAPIDMAP
CONCERT_EN-046 NASEMS
CONCERT_Dis-033 URBIPROOF
Total budget used: €
July 2013: all the projects have been launched

12. 2. Lessons learnt: Success factors of the Joint Call
Good dissemination of the Call:
June-Oct 2012 and 2 brokerage events in Milan and Tokyo in Sept.
426 researchers from 19 countries, 96 projects
Smooth communication between NRCPs , FOF and JCS
FOF meetings and decision: agreement on balanced consensus
Adapted tools:
PT-Outline webtool updated regularly
Call Text and Guidelines updated
Excel tools
Flexibility: problems were solved efficiently by communicating them to the respective responsible bodies and if necessary, processes were adapted accordingly

13. 2. Lessons learnt 1/5 Application procedure
Timing adapted before launch of PJC to give more time for evaluation process. However, project starting date not moved raise of JCS workload
More time for a potential next Joint Call: be able to discuss the details more thoroughly.
Safety time in case of problems arising
Joint Call documents revised in Oct. 2012, after being published already. Call Text modified again in Dec., after FOF exchanges
PT-Outline webtool:
- Questions raised. Funding rate, national regulations
More precise Guidelines and PT-Outline
- Closure of webtool 1h before deadline  extra time given to consortia concerned, problems with eligibility check
Reinforcement of communication with DLR before the deadline
Pb of time for contracts as well

14. 2. Lessons learnt 2/5 Eligibility check
Difference between basic or applied research
All countries/regions with a limitation to either basic or applied research have to check themselves the eligibility of their projects
Eligibility check very flexible:
after the submission eligibility of proposals was discussed between FOF and JCS. Even with a list of eligibility criteria, it was unclear how strictly they should be applied.
A list with minor violations which do not lead to an ineligible proposal have to be agreed upon by the FOF before a next call  clear rules

15. 2. Lessons learnt 3/5 Online evaluation: Narrow the Call topics
Find more specific keywords
Do not attach too much attention to the researchers’ nationalities
More anticipation from the beginning and support by NRCPs for JCS in identifying online evaluators
Not necessary to have 1 European and 1 Japanese evaluator for each evaluation
Solutions given by the JCS and JST
The search for online evaluators took too much time, even with anticipation. Some countries were not able to provide a list of names. However, as the keywords were more important than nationalities, a practical attribution was possible. It should be noted that the keywords chosen by the FOF could have been more pertinent, as some projects were rejected by the online evaluators even on the eve of the deadline. After dealing with the attribution together with the JCS, JST suggested to pay less attention to the rule of having one European and one Japanese evaluator for each evaluation, as long as there is a consequent pool of Japanese evaluators

16. 2. Lessons learnt 4/5 Scientific Committees:
More time for the online evaluators
More attention to the proposals with big gaps between two online evaluations
Narrow down the thematic scopes
Clear table for the conversion scores between Online Evaluation (0- 20) and SC ranking (A+,A,A-,B,C) is required
Recommendations by SCs

17. 2. Lessons learnt 5/5 Communication of results
Rejected proposals are notified by JCS, with comments chosen by the Scientific Committee members, only.
This communication process has to be clarified  too many unsatisfied consortia trying to have more details
Complaint about the lack of a redress procedure
No solution: too much time and could only be organized with significant efforts.
Pb of time for contracts as well

18. 2. Lessons learnt: conclusion
Narrow the Call topics and the keywords
Allow more time for the implementation of the Joint Call
Reinforce communication to avoid small tool problems
Define better the eligibility check criteria
Adapt the timing for the online evaluators
Define clear tables of scores for the evaluation process
Clarify the communication of results
Recommendations by SCs

19. Thank you for your attention! anna.boitard@cnrs-dir.fr