STARTPAGE

PEOPLE
MARIE CURIE ACTIONS

Marie Curie Industry-Academia Partnerships and Pathways (IAPP)
Call: FP7-PEOPLE-2012-IAPP

PART B

“PROPOSAL ACRONYM”

Part B - Page X of Y

Table of Contents 

To draft PART B of the proposal applicants should take into account the following structure. If required for the description of the project, applicants may wish to add further sub-headings. 

B.1	LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Start page count

B.2	S&T QUALITY (maximum 10 pages)
B.3	TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE (maximum 6 pages)
B.4	IMPLEMENTATION (maximum 10 pages)
B.5	IMPACT (maximum 4 pages)

STOP page count
B.6	Ethical aspects
B.7 	Table Capacities of the Host
B.8	GANTT CHART

Proposal page limit: Applicants must ensure that sections B.2-B.5 do not exceed the given page limits.	

PART B  

Practical Information:

PART B proposal page limits: A maximum length is specified for B.2 – B.5 sections of Part B:
•	S&T Quality - 10 pages, 
•	Transfer of Knowledge - 6 pages, 
•	Implementation - 10 pages, 
•	Impact - 4 pages

You must keep your proposal within these limits. The expert evaluators will be instructed to disregard any excess pages in each section where a page limit is indicated.

Applicants must ensure that proposals conform to the layout given in this Guide for Applicants, and in the proposal part B template available through the EPSS.
The Part B must be submitted as a PDF file. File formats other than PDF will not be accepted by the system. Any annex should be included directly in the Part B and immediately visible. Annexes should not be submitted as extra files or as files embedded in the PDF files, as these are not visible."
Proposals are evaluated against four criteria, these being "S&T Quality" (25%), "Transfer of knowledge" (30%), "Implementation" (20%) and "Impact" (25%). The weight of each of the criteria is shown in the brackets.
Please make sure that the free text used to describe the proposed project takes into account the issues covered by the 4 evaluation criteria. 
In addition, applicants are requested to provide information on ethical aspects (where relevant) and information on participation in previous projects under the Marie Curie actions. 

B.1	LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Please provide an overview of the consortium composition by giving details of the legal entity, the department carrying out the work and the person-in-charge of the project. 

All Participants	For Commercial Sector Participants, please tick
	If SME, please tick
	City, Country	Legal Entity Name	Department/Division/  Laboratory	Scientist-in-Charge	
-							
- 							
- 							
- 							

Data for SME participant(s):

SME name
	Location of research premises (city / country)	Number of full-time employees	Type of R&D activities	Number of employees in R&D	Company web site	Annual turnover (approx, in Euro)	
-							
-							
-							

Note that:
- any inter-relationship between different participating institutions (e.g. joint ownership, overlapping staff, etc.) must be declared and justified in the proposal;  
- the data provided relating to the capacity of the participating institutions will be subject to verification during the negotiation phase.

Start page count

B.2	S&T QUALITY (maximum 10 pages) 

In assessing the proposal, experts will be asked to review this criterion on the following basis (see People Work Programme Annex 2, table 3.1).

•	S&T objectives of the research programme, including in terms of intersectoral issues.
•	Scientific quality of the joint collaborative research programme.
•	Appropriateness of research methodology and approach.
•	Originality and innovative aspect of the research programme. Knowledge of the state-of-the-art.	
Explanatory note:  

Please provide an introduction to the proposal, describing its main objectives and how they will be achieved.

Provide a detailed description of the scientific and technological objectives of the research project / programme to be implemented by the partnership, highlighting planned research collaborations. The scientific part of the proposal should allow experts to assess the quality of the proposed research, including interdisciplinarity (if applicable) and intersectoral aspects.
Explain the key elements of the research methodology that will be followed, taking into consideration ethical and other relevant issues, where appropriate.

Describe the current state of the art and the originality and innovative aspects of the proposed research programme in relation to it. 

Explain how synergies/complementarities between the partners will be exploited to advance research in the chosen field. Show how each partner's respective expertise and competence makes them particularly suited for their allocated tasks.

Note that proposals will be subject to checks for plagiarism and to ensure that the proposed research has not been previously funded.
B. 3	Transfer of knowledge (maximum 6 pages)  

In assessing the proposal, experts will be asked to review this criterion on the following basis (see People Work Programme Annex 2, table 3.1).

•	Quality of the transfer of knowledge programme. Consistency with the research
programme;
•	Importance of the transfer of knowledge in terms of intersectoral issues;
•	Adequacy of the role of researchers exchanged and recruited from outside the partnership with respect to the transfer of knowledge programme.

Explanatory note: 
Outline the need for knowledge transfer for the host organisations through the secondment of their own staff and the recruitment of researchers from outside the partnership. Demonstrate how the knowledge transfer will significantly increase the research quality and overall RTD capability and competitiveness of the partners.
Detail the distinct special measures that will be taken to transfer knowledge between the host institutions. The measures should emphasise the scientific and technical transfer and also any broader training (e.g. communication, ethics, language training, and managerial skills) designed to benefit the personnel of the participating institutions. Provide details of the in-built return mechanisms that will ensure efficient transfer of knowledge back into the organisation of origin of the seconded staff.
Describe the relative roles of secondments and any envisaged recruitment. Indicate in person-months the overall total of researchers to be seconded and the total of de novo recruitment.
The following table should be used (please note that data given in this table must be identical with the data given in the table A4):

	Secondments	Newly Recruited Researchers	

	Early-Stage
Researchers
(0-4 years)	Experienced Researchers (<10 years)	Experienced Researchers  ( >10 years)	Experienced Researchers (<10 years)	Experienced Researchers  ( >10 years)	

	Researcher-months	Researchers	Researcher-months	Researchers	Researcher-months	Researchers	Researcher-months	Researchers	Researcher-months	Researchers	

											
Total											
Indicate the foreseen length of each secondment/recruitment (for example using a Gantt chart, see section B8). Pay attention to all eligibility rules for secondment and recruitment (described in section 2 of the Guide for Applicants).
Explain the chosen mixture of researchers in terms of their experience: early stage; experienced (break down into 4-10 years, and more than 10 years); and technical/managerial staff.

B.4	IMPLEMENTATION (maximum 10 pages)  

•	Capacities (expertise / human resources / facilities / infrastructures) to achieve the research and exchange of know-how and experience. Fit between capacity of host and size of support requested;
•	Adequate exploitation of complementarities and synergies among partners in terms of
transfer of knowledge;
•	Appropriateness of management plans (recruitment / secondment strategy, IPR strategy, demarcation of responsibilities, rules for decision making, etc); also working conditions, transparency of recruitment process and career development; * 
•	How essential is non-ICPC Other Third Country participation, if any, to the objectives of the research training programme;
•	In case of SMEs participation: Adequacy of the available infrastructures for the performance of the project. In case extra equipment is requested, necessity and justification in the context of the partnership.

* Sub-criteria to be evaluated in light of the principles of the 'European Charter for Researchers’ and the ‘Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers'.

Explanatory note: 

In the separate tables provided for in section B.7, please describe the capacities of each host institution (both full participants and associated partners, if any) in terms of research expertise, human resources, facilities and infrastructure to demonstrate that each participant has sufficient resources to host and/or offer a suitable environment for training and transfer of knowledge to seconded researchers and/or recruited experienced researchers (half a page maximum per participant). Each team should supply information on the key scientific staff who will be involved in the research, training and supervision, their individual expertise and the foreseen extent of involvement (in percentage of full time employment). 

List ONLY the three most significant recent publications for each of the research teams in the proposal.

Complementary to the information provided in B.7, describe in this section how the infrastructure and human resource capacity of each organisation relates to the proposed work plan and schedule of secondments and recruitments. 
Describe in practical terms how the participant teams complement one another and how possible synergies will be exploited to benefit the transfer of knowledge programme. Highlight the involvement of participants from different sectors (commercial, non-commercial) and provide details on the nature of the collaborations.
Provide an overview of the work packages, deliverables and milestones (tables B.4.1-3). The schedule should be in terms of number of months elapsed from the start of the joint collaboration programme. Indicate how these tasks are linked to the objectives of the research programme.
Describe, using charts if appropriate, the organisation and management structure and the techniques to be used to coordinate the activities. Detail demarcation of responsibilities, rules for decision making process, communication strategy, the methods for monitoring and reporting progress, and other managerial techniques. Comment on the gender balance of the management structure.
Describe the IPR strategy of the consortium, providing details as necessary of issues such as ownership, transfer, protection, use & dissemination. (Further information on IPR issues can be found at http://www.ipr-helpdesk.org).
Describe the competitive, international recruitment strategy explaining how vacancies for experienced researchers will be published by the host organisation. If any difficulties are anticipated in recruiting experienced researchers, please outline the measures foreseen to overcome these difficulties. Include information on promotion of equal opportunities and foreseen conditions of employment.
The coordinator should demonstrate the necessary scientific and organisational competence to manage the proposed scale of the project. In this context, relevant project management experience within the partnership should be described (such as previous and current involvement in projects under the Marie Curie Actions or other internationally-funded projects for example).
If one or more of the partners is based in an OTC, special care must be taken in the proposal to explain why the involvement of this team is essential for the consortium since only in exceptional cases will these organisations receive Community funding.
Templates for Section B4:

Table  B.4.1 Work Package List

Work package
No	Work package 
title	Type of activity
(e.g: research, training, transfer of knowledge, dissemination, etc.)	Lead 
beneficiary
No	Lead beneficiary short name	Person-months
(only ESR, ER)	Start
month	End
month	

								
								
		TOTAL				

Table B.4.2 	Deliverables List

Del. no. 	Deliverable Title	Work Package no.	Person months (ESR/ER)	Nature	Dissemination 
level
	Delivery date

							

Project deliverables are the verifiable output of the project. Tasks and activities will yield deliverables. A deliverable can be the completion of a specification, a prototype, a scientific paper or report, a patent, a conference, a training etc. Given that deliverables reflect the progress attained by the project at a certain moment they will be scheduled throughout the 'life' of the project (e.g.  synchronised with project reviews). As the Seventh Framework Programme is funded with public funds, a reasonable number of non-confidential deliverables, suitable for publication, should be foreseen. 

Table B.4.3 	List of Milestones

Milestone number	Milestone name	Work Package(s) involved	Lead Beneficiary	Expected Date 	Comments	

						

Milestones are control points where decisions are needed with regard to the next stage of the project. For example, a milestone may occur when a major result has been achieved, if its successful attainment is required for the next phase of work. Another example would be a point when the consortium must decide which of several technologies to adopt for the next phase of the project.

B.5	IMPACT (maximum 4 pages)  

In assessing the proposal, experts will be asked to review this criterion on the following basis (see People Work Programme Annex 2, table 3.1). 

•	Provision to develop new and lasting intersectoral collaboration; Extent to which SMEs contribute to the project, where appropriate;
•	Strategy for the dissemination and exploitation / commercialisation of the results; *
•	Impact on the innovation potential of the European Research Area; in the relevant fields, description of potential applications;
•	Facilitation of sharing knowledge and culture between the participants and external researchers (including international conferences, workshops, training events)
•	Impact of the proposed outreach activities. *
* Sub-criteria to be evaluated in light of the principles of the 'European Charter for Researchers’ and the ‘Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers'
Explanatory note:
This section should allow experts to assess the immediate and longer term benefits of the proposed collaboration. It should outline how the project/programme will foster new collaborations and how the proposed collaboration might continue beyond the lifetime of the project.
Outline the practical steps the partnership would take to ensure effective dissemination of the results of the collaboration, both during the project duration and after completion of the grant agreement. Where applicable, describe the industrial or commercial routes envisaged for the exploitation of the results by the commercial sector participants.
If funding is sought for participation of external researchers in transfer of knowledge and dissemination events, justify why this is beneficial for the project.

In order to promote communication between the scientific community and the general public and to increase awareness of science, various outreach activities should be outlined in this section. For the planned outreach activities (see examples below) their expected impact should be explained in the proposal. It is expected that each recruited fellow will contribute to at least one outreach activity per year (outreach activities should also be included in the Gantt chart in section B8).

OUTREACH ACTIVITIES WITHIN MARIE CURIE IAPP PROJECTS
Outreach Activities are dissemination initiatives directed at the general public. The primary goal is to create awareness of the importance of research to society and to raise awareness of the Marie Curie Actions. Each consortium is invited to submit an Outreach Activities Plan as part of their proposal. The type of outreach activities is freely chosen by the consortium and could range from press articles to exposing students from primary and secondary schools or universities to science, research and innovation in order to develop their motivation to embrace research careers.
Outreach activities and their impact are taken into account during the evaluation of proposals in light of the principles of the 'European Charter for Researchers' and 'Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers'. The relevant principle in the Charter is: "Public engagement" which notes that "researchers should ensure that their research activities are made known to society at large in such a way that they can be understood by non-specialists, thereby improving the public's understanding of science. Direct engagement with the public will help researchers to better understand public interest in priorities for science and technology and also the public's concerns."
Possible outreach activities:
• Marie Curie Ambassadors: seconded/recruited fellows visit schools, universities, community organisations, etc. and promote their research field or assist teachers in preparing and delivering teaching materials.
• Workshop Day: An IAPP project runs a workshop/activity day in areas related to the raising of scientific awareness, for school/university students.
• Summer-School Week: Students spend one week in a summer school where they receive a first hand experience from the seconded/recruited fellows about their current research activities or wider scientific issues; the recruited/seconded fellows prepare specific activities, lectures and experiments.
• IAPP Project Open Day: Students and the general public visit the research institutions or labs and receive first-hand experience or lectures.
• Public Talks, TV-Talks, Podcasts and Articles in Newspapers: seconded/recruited fellows give a public talk/TV interview or write an article in the local newspaper about the results of the project and how these results could be relevant to the general public.
• e-Newsletters: seconded/recruited fellows develop a web-based document to be released on the internet for the attention of the public at large (e.g. Wikipedia).
• Multimedia Releases: recruited fellows make video-clips to be released on the internet, in spaces open to the public at large.

STOP page count – MAX 30 pages

B.6 ETHICS ISSUES 

Describe any ethics issues that may arise in the proposal. In particular, you should explain the benefit and burden of the experiments and the effects these may have on the research subject.
This should be done in conjunction with the information provided in Guide for Applicants, Marie Curie Actions (Ethics) and for all proposals the following table must be completed.
ETHICS ISSUES TABLE
(Note: Research involving activities marked with an asterisk * in the left column in the table below will be referred automatically to Ethical Review)
 	Research on Human Embryo/ Foetus	YES	Page	
*	Does the proposed research involve human Embryos?	 	 	
*	Does the proposed research involve human Foetal Tissues/ Cells?	 	 	
*	Does the proposed research involve human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESCs)?	 	 	
*	Does the proposed research on human Embryonic Stem Cells involve cells in culture?	 	 	
*	Does the proposed research on Human Embryonic Stem Cells involve the derivation of cells from Embryos?	 	 	
	I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL			

 	Research on Humans	YES	Page	
*	Does the proposed research involve children?	 	 	
*	Does the proposed research involve patients?	 	 	
*	Does the proposed research involve persons not able to give consent?	 	 	
*	Does the proposed research involve adult healthy volunteers?	 	 	
 	Does the proposed research involve Human genetic material?	 	 	
 	Does the proposed research involve Human biological samples?	 	 	
 	Does the proposed research involve Human data collection?	 	 	
	I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL			

 	Privacy	YES	Page	
 	Does the proposed research involve processing of genetic information or personal data (e.g. health, sexual lifestyle, ethnicity, political opinion, religious or philosophical conviction)?	 	 	
 	Does the proposed research involve tracking the location or observation of people?	 	 	
	I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL			

 	Research on Animals	YES	Page	
 	Does the proposed research involve research on animals?	 	 	
 	Are those animals transgenic small laboratory animals?	 	 	
 	Are those animals transgenic farm animals?	 	 	
*	Are those animals non-human primates?	 	 	
 	Are those animals cloned farm animals?	 	 	
	I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL			
 	Research Involving ICP Countries                                                           	YES	Page	
 	Is the proposed research (or parts of it) going to take place in the one or more of the ICP countries?	 	 	
 	Is any material used in the research (e.g. personal data, animal and /or human tissues samples, genetic material, live animal, etc) 
a) collected in any of the ICP countries?	 	 	
	b) Exported to any other country (including ICPC and EU Member States)?			
	I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL			

 	Dual Use 	YES	Page	
 	Research having direct military use 	 	 	
 	Research having the potential for terrorist abuse	 	 	
	I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL			

B.7 Table - Capacities of the Host
For instructions on completing the tables, please see section B4 above.
 (1 table per partner – maximum half a page per table)

Partner X	
General description		
Staff Expertise	(Including names, qualifications and experience)	
Key facilities and infrastructure		
Previous involvement in Research Programmes 		
Current Involvement in Research Programmes 	(Detail the research and training projects in which the partner is currently participating)	

Publications
	
(Max 3)	

Ref in A forms	[Sending institution] [Country]
[Commercial sector Y/N]	[Hosting/ Recruiting institution]
[Country]
[Commercial sector Y/N]	Active  in WP	Type	Fellow starts at project month	Total PM	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3	Year 4	
							1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	
											1
Start	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25	26	27	28	29	30	31	32	33	34	35	36	37	38	39	40	41	42	43	
1	[Nowhere University], [UK], [N]	[Techno&Co], [BE], [Y]	2, 4	ESR	5	24									1	2	3	4	5	6																7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	
2**		[Nowhere University], [UK], [N]	8	ER	17	12																					1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12																
etc																																																					
	
B.8	GANTT CHART (example)
Organised per fellow and reflecting Secondments, Recruitments, Management and Dissemination / Outreach Activities

Key:

 Shows that an Early-Stage Researcher has been seconded from the university in the UK to the industrial participant in Belgium, for a total of 24 months, beginning project month 5.

** Shows that an Experienced Researcher has been recruited by the university in the UK, for a period of 12 months, beginning project month 17. 

   ENDPAGE

   PEOPLE 
   MARIE CURIE ACTIONS

   Marie Curie Industry-Academia Partnerships and    Pathways (IAPP)
   Call: FP7-PEOPLE-2012-IAPP

   PART B

   “PROPOSAL ACRONYM”

Part B - Page X of Y