Austrian NANO Initiative

Programme Action Line

National cooperative RTD Projects

Research and Technology Development in Project Clusters (RPCs)

PHASING OUT (PhOut) Submission Form

Text Form for Part A(RPC)

6thCall, April 2010

RPC Type 1 or Type 2 / RPC Type 1<
RPC Type 2<
RPC Project Title / >project title (max. 150 characters)<
RPC Project Acronym / >acronym (max. 20 characters)<
RPC Coordinator / Applicant / >name of applicant<
RPC Project Partners / >name of organisation, country<

Version 01, English

Date: 23.04.2010

Submission Deadline: 14th February 2011, 12:00 noon

0.1 General Information for PHASING OUT Proposal Submission

Before filling in the proposal submission forms, it is essential to read the Guide for Proposerswhich contains information about the PHASING OUT of individual RPCs and which is relevant to all project partners. The proposal structure consists of:

Part A:Form A describes the RPC PHASING OUT and its overall management

Part B:Forms BI are relevant toPHASING OUT projects which focus on basic research
Forms BII are relevant toPHASING OUT projects which focus on applied research
(industrial and experimental)

Submission on Paper and CD-ROM

RPC – Type 1

The RPC Coordinator submits the complete PHASING OUT RPC proposal consisting of:

1 Part Aoverall RPC description and management (Forms A)

(n) Parts B I RP Description (Forms B I) and
(m) Parts B IIRP Description (Forms B II)

Please indicate the name of the file of your proposal in the footer of the respective document as suggested there.

NEW: The writing parameters for each proposal are as follows: Font Arial, 11 pt font size and 1.3 line spacing. The maximum number of pages for each chapter is as indicated in the Forms.

Submission on CD-ROM:

A CD-ROM with an electronic version of the RPC proposal has to be submitted together with the two printed copies (one original, hard-back, and 1 hard copy). Each part of the proposal must be saved as a separate and write-protected file on CD-ROM in two document formats. Furthermore the tables (XLS format) have to be added on the CD-ROM as separate files for each BI and BII Project and for Part A.

The tables of costs (XLS) also have to be added to the relevant text form. The tables of costs are an integral part of the submitted proposals.

On CD ROM: BI, BII and A

rich text format (*.rtf) or MS-Word (*.doc), including cost tables

portable document format (*.pdf), including cost tables

For each part BI, BII and A all tables of costs in addition:

excel format (*.xls)

RPC and RP acronyms are indicated below (PhOut stands for Phasing Out)

Part A: PhOut_RPCacronym_A_call2010

Tables of Costs Part A: RPCacronym_A_call2010

RP BI: PhOut_RPCacronym_BI_RPacronym_call2010

Tables of Costs Part BI: RPCacronym_BI_RPacronym_call2010

RP BII: PhOut_RPCacronym_BII_RPacronym_call2010

Tables of Costs Part BII: RPCacronym_BII_RPacronym_call2010

It is mandatory to add a list of all files on the CD-ROM cover. The CD-ROM is to be labelled as follows:

Austrian NANO Initiative
Call 2010
”Phasing Out RPC Proposal Acronym”

0.2Submission

The RPC Coordinator and the proposresfill in the text forms and add the tables (xls sheet) for each individual proposal.

The minimum font size is 11pt, the standard line spacing is 1.3.

Numbers are rounded to the nearest full amount. The RPC acronym (provided by the RPC Coordinator) is to be added to the RP acronyms on all proposal forms BI and BII in the footer. All costs must be indicated in EURO.

It is mandatory to fill in all fields of the document and to answer all questions.

IMPORTANT: Before submitting the proposal, please (i) delete Chapter 0 and the information provided in italics for filling in the proposal and (ii) up-date the Table of Contents.

Submission Address

Austrian Research Promotion Agency
Sensengasse 1, 1090 Wien
z.Hd. Dr. Margit Haas, NANO Initiative

Submission Deadline

13. February 2009, 12:00 o´clock noon

Signatures

Signatures have to be provided in the xls.Document (table sheet 11 for signatures).

0.3 Checklist for Proposers

Relevant to RPC Coordinator and Principal Investigators (Proposers)
  • File format of documents in parts A, BI and BII: both PDF and RTF or DOC?
  • Tables of costs for parts A, BI and BII as separate files in XLS format and as integral parts in parts A, BI and BII?
  • Each document saved on the CD-ROM as a separate file?
  • Complete proposal virus-checked using adequate software?
  • Each page of the proposal with the proposal acronym in the footer?
  • Type BI or BII on the front page?
  • Each of the pages numbered (page 1 of X, 2 of X…)?
  • Signed “Memorandum of Understanding” xls.Document, table sheet 11 for part A?

Relevant to the RPC Coordinator only
  • All proposal parts fully completed?
  • Twocopies and one original of the proposal and the CD-ROM placed in the appropriate package?
  • Appropriate arrangements to ensure that the proposal arrives at FFG in time?
  • If several packages: labelled 1 of 3, 2 of 3, 3 of 3 with each envelope clearly marked as described in the Guide for Proposers?
  • All necessary preliminary authorisations from each consortium partner to the RPC Coordinator to submit the proposal on their behalf?

IMPORTANT NOTE:

Please be aware that to be considered for the Phasing out evaluation, the content of the full proposal submission must be clearly taken into consideration as it is the base for the Phasing out proposal submission.

0.4Phasing Out (PhOut)

Framework Conditions of Phasing-out

-A Phasing-out Application is made on the basis of the full proposal, the Jury’s recommendation and the decision of the BMVIT. This application can be submitted by 14 February 2011, 12:00 o´clock noon at the latest at FFG
Austrian Research Promotion Agency
Sensengasse 1, 1090 Wien
z.Hd. Dr. Margit Haas, NANO Initiative

-The content of the work packages, the methods and resources for a possible Phasing-out are already evaluated, on the basis of the Full Proposal, by experts in the course of the Hearings, and subsequently by the Jury. They make a clear recommendation as to which tasks should be completed in a value-preserving manner in the course of the Phasing-out, and which tasks are therefore included in the Phasing-out Application.

-Within the framework of the Phasing-out, the Phasing-out Application consists mainly of the adapted cost schedules and work schedules and their respective text descriptions.

-The structure provided in the submitted Project Cluster of RPC Type 1 (Part A, BI and BII projects) or RPC Type 2 has to be continued within the Phasing-out Application, unless otherwise recommended by the experts and the Jury.

-Within the Phasing-out, a difference is made between Cluster Coordination (Part A) and Research Activity (Parts BI and BII).

-Further integrative parts of the Phasing-out are the possibilities laid down in the contract of a cost-neutral extension of individual RTD projects, insofar as sufficient funds are available within the individual projects. The cost-neutral extension starts with the official expiry of the duration of the project and can have a maximum duration of one year.

-Within the Phasing-out, personnel costs and material costs are considered above all. Additional funds for investments (e.g. for appliances) which are provided for in principle for building up projects, are not accepted within the Phasing-out.

-The Phasing-outApplication is checked by FFG experts. In case there are any open questions, international experts from the preceding selection procedure are called in. The Phasing-out funds applied for are awarded by the BMVIT on the basis of the evaluation by the FFG.

-Experts Jury Recommendation and Decision of the BMVIT: The maximum funding amount possible is decided on the basis of the Jury’s recommendation in accordance with the funds available and is communicated to the applicants after the decision of the BMVIT.

-The annual maximum funding volume for Phasing-out is limited to a maximum of 65% of the average funding year of the preceding funding period – calculated over the awarded funding of the total Cluster – unless otherwise recommended by the Jury and communicated by the BMVIT after its decision. Public funding in Phasing-out amounts to between 35 and 100 %, depending on the type of project.

-The RTD Directives and the Research Contract, according to §10 sub-paragraph 13 of the Federal Procurement Act (BVergG) “Exemptions from the Scope of the Law“, Federal Law Gazette I No. 17/2006 as amended, form the legal basis.

Evaluation

The Phasing Out Proposal is assessed based on the full proposal and based on the set of criteria indicated in the Guide for Proposers.

Finanzierungstechnische Rahmenbedingungen des Phasing out

Auf Basis des durch die ExpertInnen der FFG überprüften Antrages wird im Managementteam der NANO Initiative eine Empfehlung inkl. allfälliger Auflagen an das BMVIT übermittelt. Die Entscheidung erfolgt durch das BMVIT. Das finale Förderanbot und die Vertragsgrundlagen werdenvon der FFG in Folge übermittelt.

Im Rahmen dieser Förderung sind Eigenmittel in das Phasing out einzubringen.

Der Eigenmittelanteil kann „in kind“ oder „in cash“ oder in einem „Mix von beiden“ eingebracht werden. Sie sind pro Partner, aber auch für das Gesamtprojekt Phasing out darzustellen. Betrachtet wird der Eigenmittelanteil des gesamten Phasing out Vorhabens in der Evaluierung. Die Eigenmittel sind vorzugsweise durch die Unternehmenspartner einzubringen.

Antragstellung

Mittels vorliegender Antragsvorlage müssen entsprechen der zu Grunde liegenden Antragsunterlagen (A, BI, BII) jeweils ein Antrag gestellt werden.

Mögliche Kostenkategorien / Partner:
- Personalkosten
- Materialkosten und Subaufträge sowie Reisekosten in geringem Ausmaß.

Mittel für Investitionen (zB. Geräte), die grundsätzlich für einen Aufbau von Projekten vorgesehen sind, sind im Phasing out nicht möglich.

Dauer des Phasing out ist maximal ein Jahr. Dies bezieht sich auf das Datum beginnend ab Projektende.

Rückwirkende Kostenanerkennung ist möglich (offizielles Vertragsende der vorhergehenden Phase).

Berichtswesen: ein Status Quo Bericht der erfolgten Aktivitäten (seit dem letzten Berichtszeitraum = Endbericht oder Bericht als Basis für kostenneutrale Verlängerung) mit einer Darstellung der aktuellen Kosten (bzw. Endabrechnung).

Ratenzahlung: Startrate für Phasing out 60% + 2. Rate 30% (2. Rate wird auf Basis des Phasing out Endberichtes und des darin erfolgten Kostennachweises ausgezahlt). Endrate von 10% nach Revision.

Ein Konsortialvertrag ist verpflichtend für das Phasing out

Auflage: Das Konsortium des Phasing out hat einen veröffentlichbaren Ergebnisbericht vorzulegen.

Alle Partner im Phasing out sind aufgefordert die allfällig notwendige Bereitstellung von Materialien, Produkten, etc die zur Durchführung des Phasing out benötigt werden sicherzustellen und im Rahmen des Phasing out Antrages zu bestätigen.

Die Abgrenzung zu allenfalls bereits gewährten Mitteln zur kostenneutralen Verlängerung oder gewährte Mittel anderer Art sind pro Partner darzustellen.

Revision

Nach Abschluss des Phasing Out und vor Auszahlung der letzten Rate erfolgt eine Revision durch die FFG in welcher der widmungsgemäße Einsatz der Mittel geprüft wird.

Table of Contents

0.1 General Information for PHASING OUT Proposal Submission

Submission on CD-ROM:

0.2 Submission

0.3 Checklist for Proposers

0.4 Phasing Out (PhOut)

1RPC Phasing Out Abstract (RPC Executive Summary)

2RPC Phasing Out Scientific and Technical Description

2.1State-of-the-art, Objectives and Innovation Content of the RPC

2.2Time and Work Schedule (RPC Roadmap)

3Relevance of the RPC

3.1Contribution to the Objectives of the NANO Initiative

4RPC Phasing Out Consortium

5RPC Phasing Out Economic Potential and Exploitation

Supplementary Information

RPC Phasing Out Costs and Financing - Comments

PhOut_RPCacronym_A_call2010

Seite 1 von 11

Austrian NANO InitiativePhasing OutProposal Submission Form, Part A,Call for RPCs 2010

1RPC Phasing Out Abstract (RPC Executive Summary)

Please be aware that to be considered for evaluation, the Phasing Out abstract must maintain relevant parts of the content of the full proposal

In English and German, max. 3 pages, tables 1 to 3separately.
Abstract and Executive Summaries for the relevant projects (BI and BII). Please note that this part might be published. Describe the scientific and technical relevance of the overall Phasing out. Describe the goals within the phasing out and what is the work to be done beyond the already reached goals and existing results.

Table 1:List of all Partner Organisations involved in the RPC Phasing Out

SHORT NAME
Partner / FULL NAME
Organisation / Research Institute / University / Enterprise etc. / NAME
Responsible Person / For RPC Type 1: Involved in which project BI/BII (acronym) of the RPC?
RTD Organisation
RTD Organisation
Etc. (1)
Enterprise
Enterprise
Etc.

(1) Insert rows for more partners, if required. First insert RTD organisations and then continue with the enterprises.

Table 2:RPC Type 1: Overview of all RTD Projects to be considered in the Phasing Out

Proposal Type / Acronym / Title / Short name
of Leading Organisation / Name
Project Coordinator
B I.1
B I.2
etc. (1)
B II.1
B II.2
etc. (2)

(1) insert rows for more B I Projects if required

(2) insert rows for more B II Projects if required

Table 3:Overview of projects to be considered also for cost neutral prolongation in the Phasing out and budget available beyond the official project end.

Proposal Type / Acronym / Title / Short name
of Leading Organisation / Name
of Project Coordinator / Budget available for cost neutral prolongation
(please indicate the Total Costs available in EURO)
B I.1
B I.2
etc. (1)
B II.1
B II.2
etc. (2)

(1) insert rows for more B I Projects if required

(2) insert rows for more B II Projects if required

2RPC Phasing Out Scientific and Technical Description

Max. 8 pages incl. figures

2.1State-of-the-art, Objectives and Innovation Content of the RPC

Describe the Cluster and give and /or give an overview for thePhasing Out based on the content of the full proposal.

Objectives and innovation content in the Phasing Out

Concept and structure of the Phasing out

Methods and expertise

Expected results of the phasing out and value added

Valorisation and dissemination aspects

Economic relevance of the project so far and together with the phasing out (incl. market situation) and expected application fields.

Quality of planning based on the full proposal

Project Management and resources

  • Adapted Project goals and work plan ( refer also to section 2.2)
  • Human resources (person effort, availability of competencies / capacities) refer to section 2.2
  • Costs and financial plan of the RPC management in the Phasing Out
  • Interfaces in the Phasing out

2.2Time and Work Schedule (RPC Roadmap)

Max. 2 pages including chart(s). Describe the overall Road map of the Cluster for the Phasing Out and give a detailed description of the time and work schedule of the Phasing Out.

Use a Gantt chart and indicate the milestones of the RPC Phasing Out as well as the related resources needed.

3Relevance of the RPC

3.1Contribution to the Objectives of the NANO Initiative

This chapter is not to be filled in. It refers to the full proposal submission.

4RPC Phasing Out Consortium

Max. 2 pages. General information on the RPC Phasing Out Consortium, clear overview of the central participating scientists, institutions and enterprises.

Quality of the consortium and management

The following questions have not to be filled in. The answers refer to the full proposal.

  • Scientific - technical qualification of the participants in the RPC
  • Multidisciplinarity, synergies, interfaces in the RPC
  • Management skills and capacities, decision making structures
    Ability of the consortium to realize the goals

The following questions have to be answered for the Phasing Out.

  • Adequacy of costs and financial plan for the Phasing Out RPC management in detail and for the RPC in general
  • Description of the management and the decision finding structures in the RPC Phasing out. What is the responsibility of the RPC Coordinator.

5RPC Phasing Out Economic Potential and Exploitation

Max. 2 page. Please describe how the Phasing Out will support further progress, potential impact, valorisation and IPR strategy.

Describe in short and refer to the full proposal.

  • Relevance of results to consortium partners and groups outside the consortium
  • Measures with regard to the protection of intellectual property, possible exploitation strategies
  • Current market situation and chances of success
  • Economic advantages / profitability of the project for the applicants
  • Description of possible aspects: Are new economic markets opened up, and if so, which?
  • Please describe what the future perspectives for exploitation of the results are after the Phasing out.
  • Valorisation and dissemination aspects
  • Economic relevance of the project (incl. market situation) and expected application fields after the Phasing Out.

Supplementary Information

RPC Phasing Out Costs and Financing - Comments

Max. 2 pages.

For listing the costs please use the tables of costs in „FormPhasingOut_TABLES_20100423.xls“,

Resources, reasons and individual costs have to be described for the Phasing Out RPC Management:

For further explanations regarding the cost plan of the RPCPhasing Out and for the costs of the RPC Phasing Out , we kindly ask for your comments here (description of the overhead costs for Part A Cluster Management, reasons for individual cost categories …)

If there are no sufficient reasons provided for the costs in the RPC, this can lead to the costs not being recognised as costs eligible for funding.

Please refer also to the full proposal.

PHOut_PCacronym_A_call2010

- 1 -