Proof of Concept IGLO Veronica Beneitez Pinero March 2015 First of all, I would like to thank you all for being here. Today we have a mixture of reviewers. Some of you are going to review for the ERC for the third or fourth year, some of you stepped in last year to evaluate the proposals for DL2 other have not yet seen an ERC PoC application yet. To all of you thank you for your attention today, I hope I will be able to shed some light.

The Scientific Management Department in the ERC Executive Agency I HOPE BY NOW MOST OF YOU KNOW WHAT IS THE ERC ABOUT. THE ERCE IS A PUBLIC RESEACRH FUNDED AGENCY ; The core of the work of the agency is to select the best project that will later be funded. This is done in department B, the Scientific mangement department.

Functions of the Scientific Managament Department Evaluation of the proposals of ERC calls Scientific evaluation Ethics clearance of proposals proposed for funding Project follow-up Scientific project follow-up Ethics follow-up Ex-post qualitative assessment of the research funded IT and BP support in the evaluation process Expert management recruitment and support Redress Implementation of international agreements │ 3

Structure of the Scientific Management Department B Scientific Management Department Process Management and Review Call and Project Follow-up Coordination Life Sciences Physical Sciences and Engineering Social Sciences and Humanities B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 44, 39 y 17 Antes 40, 35, 15, 10 PoC Staff of the Department: 165 │ 4

Role of independent experts Independent experts, evaluate proposals submitted in response to a given call. The experts are responsible for carrying out the evaluation of the proposals themselves. They are not allowed to delegate the work to another person! Significant funding decisions will be made on the basis of their assessment.

Objective and activities PoC : Principles Objective and activities Objective: The ERC Proof of Concept Grants aim to maximise the value of the excellent research that the ERC funds, by funding further work to verify the innovation potential of ideas arising from ERC funded projects. What kind of activities that can be financed: establishing viability, technical issues and overall direction market research clarifying IPR strategy investigating business opportunities Initial expenses for start-up

Financial contribution and duration PoC : Principles Financial contribution and duration The financial contribution will be up to a maximum of EUR 150 000 for a period of 18 months. "The ERC expects that normally, proof of concept projects should be completed within 12 months. However, to allow for those projects that require more preparation time, projects will be signed for 18 months. Given this initial flexibility, extensions of the duration of proof of concept projects may be granted only exceptionally." The ERC contribution will take the form of the reimbursement of up to 100% of the total eligible and of flat-rate financing of indirect costs of a maximum of 25% of the total eligible direct costs

PoC : Evaluation Flow Reception of proposals - SEP submission Remote Evaluation (SEP) Preliminary evaluation results Evaluation results Panel meeting Feedback to applicants Eligibility check

Reception of proposals - SEP submission PoC : Submission of proposals Reception of proposals - SEP submission ERCEA published the call on the Participant Portal - Work Programme - Guide for Applicants - Templates - Frequently Asked Questions The work programme is a legally binding document. It is a dynamic document , published annually, set out the evaluation criteria. Main Changes 2015 WP: Increase of PoC budget : €20 million Resubmission restriction: 1 PoC application per year. Simplification of evaluation criteria

PoC : Submission of proposals The applicant must submit the required documents before the call deadline The documents are : Administrative data Part B ( 7 pages + budget table Max) Host Support Letter Additional documents: Annexes ( Not relevant for the evaluation)

PoC : Structure of the submitted proposal (1/2) Section 1: The idea - Innovation potential (max. 2 pages)   a. Succinct description of the idea to be taken to proof of concept b. Demonstration of Innovation Potential Section 2 – Expected Impact (max. 2 pages): a. Economic and/or societal benefits b. Commercialisation process and/or any other exploitation process c. Proposed plans for : - Competitive analysis - Testing, technical reports (where applicable) - IPR position and strategy (where applicable) - Industry/sector contacts (where applicable)

PoC : Structure of the submitted proposal (2/2) Section 3: The proof of concept plan (max 2 pages)   a. Plan of the activities b. Project-management plan c. Description of the team Section 4: The budget (max 1 page + costing table) Resources (incl. project costs) Justification (description of the budget) Only the material that is presented within this limit will be evaluated

Done in house by ERCEA Scientific Officers PoC : Elegibility Check 1/2 Eligible Project: Proposal complete and submitted on time The content of the proposal must relate to the objectives and to the grant type set out in the call Demonstrate the relation between the idea to be taken to PoC and the ERC research grant. Eligibility check Done in house by ERCEA Scientific Officers Eligible Principal Investigator: The PI has to be in an ERC frontier research that is either ongoing or has ended less than 12 months before the opening date of the call. The PI is subject to resubmission restrictions ( one eligible application per call) Eligible Host Institution: In a Member State or Associated Country

PoC : Elegibility Check 2/2 The check is done in parallel to the evaluation. So a proposal can be declare ineligible at any stage. If ineligible, you will be informed and the proposal will dissapear from your list of assigned proposal. Applicants will be informed as soon as the decistion is taken. Applicants can redress on the elegibility decision.

Remote Evaluation (SEP) PoC : Remote evaluation 1/4 Remote Evaluation (SEP) 5 reviews/proposal No discussions between reviewers Report any Conflict of Interest (CoI) Remote, using SEP PASS/FAIL mark on each criterion Succinct explanatory comment for each mark Sign and submit your reviews

PoC : Remote evaluation 2/4 We have aligned the template of Part B with the evaluation criteria to make the review process a bit more simple. Evaluation Criteria 1 Excellence (Innovation potential) Section 1: The idea - Innovation potential (max. 2 pages) Does the proposed proof of concept activity greatly help move the output of research towards the initial steps of a process leading to a commercial or social innovation? Demonstration of Innovation Potential

PoC : Remote evaluation 3/4 2. Impact Section 2 – Expected Impact: 2.1 Is the project to be taken to proof of concept expected to generate economic and/or societal benefits which are appropriately identified in the proposal? 2.2 Does the proposal indicate a suitable process that is designed to result in a concrete application, including outlining a process of commercialisation or a process of generating social benefits? a. Economic and/or societal benefits b. Commercialisation process and/or any other exploitation process c. Proposed plans for : The proposal should include: - plans for the analysis of whether the project’s outcomes are innovative or distinctive compared to existing solutions; - plans for seeking confirmation of the actual effectiveness of the project’s results; - plans to clarify the IPR position and strategy33; - plans for setting up contacts with industry partners, societal organisations or potential ‘end users’ of the projects’ results. - Competitive analysis - Testing, technical reports (where applicable) - IPR position and strategy (where applicable) - Industry/sector contacts (where applicable)

PoC : Remote evaluation 4/4 3. Quality and efficiency of the implementation (Quality of the proof of concept plan) Section 3: The proof of concept plan (max 2 pages) Section 4: The budget (max 1 page + costing table) Does the proposal provide a reasonable and acceptable plan of activities against clearly identified objectives and towards establishing the feasibility of the project? This should include: - a sound project-management plan, including appropriate risk and contingency planning; - demonstration that the activities will be conducted by persons well qualified for the purpose; -demonstration that the budget requested is necessary for the implementation of the project and properly justified. a. Plan of the activities b. Project-management plan c. Description of the team

Preliminary evaluation results PoC : Preliminary Results ranking 1/3 Proposals which fail a criterion will not be ranked Proposal’s score = S PASS marks Same number of reviews for each proposal Every mark has an impact Proposals will be funded up to depletion of budget 6,6 M€ for each deadline = ~44 proposals Preliminary evaluation results

PoC : Preliminary Results ranking 2/3 If there is not enough budget to fund all the proposals which pass all three evaluation criteria, those proposals which pass all three evaluation criteria will be sorted by the number of pass marks awarded by peer reviewers to criterion 1 (Excellence- Innovation potential), then by the number of pass marks awarded to criterion 2 (Impact), then by the number of pass marks awarded to criterion 3 (Quality and efficiency of the implementation). Proposals will be funded in order of the ranking resulting from this 3-level sorting exercise until depletion of the available budget per evaluation round.

PoC : Preliminary Results ranking 3/3 If there is a group of equally ranked fundable proposals that crosses the budget cut off line, the panel will proceed as follows: All the experts involved in the evaluation of at least one proposal in this group will be sent the reviews of all the proposals in the group. They will then examine all the proposals in the group and the existing reviews, and decide on their own personal ranking. The ERCEA will compile a sub-ranking within the group taking into account the CoIs1, and will then come up with an overall final ranking list.

PoC : Panel meeting Panel meeting After the evaluation, all the experts will have to confirm by sending an e mail that they agree with the results of the evaluation. Only in the case a consensus cannot be reached, the ERCEA can call for a panel meeting in order to discuss the ranking order of the proposals.

Feedback to applicants PoC : Feedback to applicants Applicants are informed on the results of the evaluation: - Status of their proposal (Retained, Rejected, Failed) - Scores (pass/ failed) + Comments Ethical Granting Feedback to applicants

PoC : Evaluation Process Redress Who? PI / PI host institution Deadline? within 1 month of feedback How? online form Scope? Formal review = procedural errors only No scientific judgment No evaluation of the proposal on the substance Successful redress ≠ financed project !

PoC : Evaluation Process Cases that may lead to re-evaluation Wrong eligibility decision ( 2 cases 2014 DL1) Application of irrelevant criteria (2 cases 2014 DL2) Incorrect application of criteria Wrong thresholds or scoring Clear conflicts of interest Unqualified experts Factual errors affecting whole evaluation

PoC : Tentative Evaluation Calendar ( depending on workload) DEADLINE 1 DEADLINE 2 DEADLINE 3 Deadline for submission of proposals : 05/02/2015 Deadline for submission of proposals : 28/05/2015 Deadline for submission of proposals : 01/10/2015 Allocation of proposals in SEP: 16/02/2015 Allocation of proposals in SEP: 08/06/2015 Allocation of proposals in SEP: 12/10/2015 Deadline Remote evaluation: 16/03/2015 Deadline Remote evaluation: 08/07/2015 Deadline Remote evaluation: 12/11/2015 Ranking etc 25/03/2015 Ranking etc 15/07/2015 Ranking etc 20/11/2015 Expected feedback to applicants: April 2015 Expected feedback to applicants: July 2015 Expected feedback to applicants: January 2016 When they will be informed about the elegibility….

ERC PoC 2014 - Overview Call published in December 2013. ERC received 442 proposals 182 proposals DL1 260 proposals DL2 167 LS (79 DL1/ 88 DL2) 215 PE (75 DL1/140 DL2) 60 SH (28 DL1/32 DL2) 2 Synergy proposal (1DL1/1DL2)

ERC PoC 2014 - Overview 205 proposals passed all the thresholds 91 DL1 / 114 DL2 The SC decided to increase the budget by 20% . Finally 121 proposals funded 61 proposals DL1 60 proposals DL2 Success rate 27% DL1/ 20% DL2 Publication of results in the website: list of projects , PI and Host Institutions

ERC Proof of Concept Evolution of Success rates and Budget used

ERC Proof of Concept 2011-2012-2013-2014 - Success rates by domain

Number of PoC Projects SIGNED per panel as at January 2015

ERC Proof of Concept 2014- DL1- DL2 # of Funded proposals by panel.

Proof of Concept Grant PoC 2014: all the applicants have been informed 4 redress cases submitted ( to be dealt with)

Number of PoC proposals submitted by deadline until now

% of PoC submissions by domain

ERC PoC 2015: Submissions by panel %

Number of PoC proposals submitted by HI country

PoC Challenges What is the life after the PoC? Applicants behaviour Fairness of the process Get good SH applications

Thank you for your attention