1 / 9

Project selection Review PAG Meeting - 12 October 2005

Project selection Review PAG Meeting - 12 October 2005. Ulrich Leiss (IABG), EXTR@Web WP2 leader. Project Selection Review (PAG 11.22). Review Steps Findings Pragmatic solution to solve problems Further actions required Process finalisation. 1. Review Steps.

veta
Download Presentation

Project selection Review PAG Meeting - 12 October 2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Project selection Review PAG Meeting - 12 October 2005 Ulrich Leiss (IABG), EXTR@Web WP2 leader

  2. Project Selection Review (PAG 11.22) • Review Steps • Findings • Pragmatic solution to solve problems • Further actions required • Process finalisation

  3. 1. Review Steps • Checking 30 individual Theme/Sub-theme selections • Checking each selected project and contributing labels individually • Checking overview lists EU and National • Checking balance among EU programmes and countries • Checking resource implications

  4. 2. Findings • Selection process months behind schedule • Some mislabelling of projects (number of labels and target theme) • Number of sub-themes in some cases far beyond the target of 5 ( up to 27, see list of WH) • Some sub-themes duplicate titles of themes • Selection deviating from guidance note (details next slide) • Documentation of selection needs substantial reworking

  5. 2. Findings – deviation from guideline • Not using primary label for regular selection (flexibility agreed for exotic themes) • Selection of non-eligible projects • Selection without any label • Selecting projects for more than one theme/sub-theme • No re-labelling or colour-coding due to selection • Step 4 (selection of dimension 1+2) done before consolidation of step 3 (selection of dimension 1+2)

  6. 3. Pragmatic solution to solve problems • No time for improvement loop with partners • Reworking the individual selection sheets and combining all sheets into one document at IABG • Establishing new overview lists for all selected EU and National projects at IABG, indicating all deviations from regular selection process • Re-labelling of projects due to selection and in some other obvious cases • Project responsibility leaves at the label 2 owner

  7. 4. Further actions required • Reducing labels of selected projects (2 NL, 3 SE) • Skip themes, e.g. “Long distance”, moving sub-themes to other themes • Merging themes e.g. “Financing tools” and “ Pricing and taxation”, “Rural” and “Regional” • Complementary primary selection ( provision of projects) in some cases e.g. air for France, non-air for Germany, all for Austria • Sorting all contributing projects into sub-themes • Final consolidated overview lists for daily work

  8. 5. Process finalisation • Project selection seems in overall balance after the proposed adjustments • EU project responsibilities at partners are: DITS 48, GIE 2, IABG 52, ISIS 1, ITS 27, Neptune 55 • Resources needed for selected projects are below existing resources at partners for all projects (compensation at ITS less EU versus more Nat.) • Subcontractor resources needed as of the data list • Subcontractor resources need to be clarified

  9. 5. Process finalisation (continued) • Following step 5 onwards of the guideline • Contacting coordinators of all selected projects to provide information • Completing project level analysis • Completing D2D • Completing D2E with identification of research gaps

More Related