Project Status Update Carlos Díaz, FIMIM

1. Project Status Update Carlos Díaz, FIMIM

2. Project status in previous meeting PAR Coord. & manag. Evaluation PMR D20 D22 D23 D24 D27 Final D21 Tools usage & monitoring Implementation of Action Plan, outreach D28 Implementation of Action Plan, TCs, SE, Mobility, evaluation D29 Ongoing update of SOA, gaps, training materials D25 Selected developments, INFORMA pilot Ongoing update of SOA, gaps, training materials D26 Selected developments Implementation of Work plans, evaluation, integration b/w pilots D30 9th CM

3. Current project status PAR Coord. & manag. Evaluation PMR D20 D22 D23 D24 D27 Final D21 Tools usage & monitoring Implementation of Action Plan, outreach D28 Implementation of Action Plan, TCs, SE, Mobility, evaluation D29 Ongoing update of SOA, gaps, training materials D25 Selected developments, INFORMA pilot Ongoing update of SOA, gaps, training materials D26 Selected developments Implementation of Work plans, evaluation, integration b/w pilots D30 10th CM

4. Highlights since last meeting • 3rd Training Challenge successfully held in Edinburgh. • Completion of D21 – Final report on common platforms and tools for research. • Drafts of final deliverables for all WPs elaborated. • Provide objective measurement of the success and usefulness of training activities. • Provide information on impact of the journals publishing INFOBIOMED articles. • New versions of the SoA deliverables should explicitly identify gaps and propose lines of action. • Several dissemination activities, including initial organisation of a closing event in Jun’07. This would be devised as a cross-project event (INFOBIOMED, SEMANTIC MINING, ACGT, EURESIST,…). • Progress on pilot applications, some work on evaluation. • Continuation of generic developments in WP4 and WP5. • Reporting: effort, financial. Contingency funds requests. • Final review of the project to be held in September 2007.

5. Effort consumption Effort usage per WP – 2006 Effort usage per partner – 2006

6. Budget consumption • Overall budget consumption: • Year 1: 1.56 MEUR = 32% of total project funding (31% of scheduled effort). • Year 2: 2.03 MEUR = 42% of total project funding (46% of scheduled effort). • Year 3: 1.56 MEUR = 32% of total project funding (37% of scheduled effort). • TOTAL up to Y3: 5.14 MEUR = 106% of total funding (113% of effort). • Approx. budget consumption per cost category: • YEAR 1YEAR 2YEAR 3 • Personnel: 65 % 63% 64% • Travel: 8 % 8% 9% • Other costs: 6 % 6% 10% • Overheads: 21 % 23% 17% • Significant increase in Other costs. Less weight of FORTH affects overhead percentage. • This is not official financial reporting. Forms C, audits, will be needed in Jun’07. • Generalised high rate of budget consumption per partner.

7. Budget consumption per partner

8. Use of contingency budget • 5 requests for contingency budget received, for a total of 146072 Euro. • Other general uses of contingency, if any, must be identified URGENTLY. (E.g. reviews of deliverables by SAB members? another TC?) – small contingency reserve may be advisable.

9. Next steps • Immediate focus will be now on: • Completion of draft deliverables as needed • Formal review process for deliverables with close deadline • BUT, of greater importance: • Evaluation activities are key. • Completion of initiated work in all WPs. • Special attention will be given to tasks object of a contingency request. • We need a strong commitment of all partners in this final period. • Therefore, during this meeting: • Work undertaken and results obtained by each WP have to be clear. • Work yet to be done and associated (final) results have to be clear. • All doubts have to be solved.

10. Deliverable list

11. Brief SWOT • Strengths, opportunities: • We have a good working group and environment, despite the size. • We have been successful in turning INFOBIOMED into the NoE of reference in eHealth. Good reputation at the Commission. • We have proved a BMI approach is possible. • Extended time schedule with the 6-month extension allows us to provide better results. • Weaknesses, threats: • FP7 priorities do not favour us in eHealth. Have to look in other areas as well. • Danger of “letting go” until the end of the project, potential for reduction of integration as a consequence of drawn interest towards new projects. • We have yet to demonstrate that a BMI approach is better. • Impressive results, esp.from pilots are a must. Impact must be demonstrated. Evaluation is key, but not fully deployed yet. • Reputation can disappear.

12. Final messages PAR Coord. & manag. Evaluation PMR D20 D22 D23 D24 D27 Final • We are in the final period • Need to deliver meaningful results that prove the BMI concept (the benefits of an integrated perspective) • Need to review progress and follow-up closely • A final push until tangible results are delivered can make all the difference D21 Tools usage & monitoring Implementation of Action Plan, outreach D28 Implementation of Action Plan, TCs, SE, Mobility, evaluation D29 Ongoing update of SOA, gaps, training materials D25 Selected developments, INFORMA pilot Ongoing update of SOA, gaps, training materials D26 Selected developments Implementation of Work plans, evaluation, integration b/w pilots D30 10th CM