Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs

1.  Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Latest developments (September 2008)

2. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • Background The MIRA project aims at developing platforms of dialogue to improve the S&T cooperation; addressing training activities to improve the quality of participation and the management of the partners of FP7 from MPC; discussing and monitoring the content of FP7; creating an observatory of EU and MPC Cooperation in S&T, which will agree indicators for monitoring of RTD cooperation activities; creating networks of research institutions and technology transfer services that can provide a reference element for the development of the Euro-Mediterranean Innovation Space .

3. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • The assessment has been drafted on the basis of Questionnaire sent to all MPC. • Parts of the assessment are: a-General considerations based on the replies to the Questionnaires sent to the CPs. b-Specific comments for every CP that participated in the survey c-Condensed raw data from the received Questionnaires

4. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs a-General considerations • Sustainability, size, performance and financing of CPs Which are the critical parameters determining the sustainability of the CPs? BENEFIT • The setting up and sustainable CPs, reflects first of all a political willingness to cooperate with the EU in S&T. • In addition, there are concrete benefits envisaged , in terms of participations in EU funded research projects and hence: exchange of expertise, development of products and processes, financing of research teams. ./.

5. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs COSTS They mainly consist of the salaries of the staff dedicated to the CP, in expenses for missions, information days and other activities, equipment and office space, printed material, etc. Which is the optimum size for a CP? Are the CPs understaffed? Among the parameters: The size of the scientific community of the country and its potential to participate in the FP. The organizational model of the CP: if everything has to be organized centrally: more staff, if a network of (national) contact points is set up, then the central CP plays mainly a coordinating role and needs fewer but also more qualified staff.

6. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs What kind of performance indicators could be developed for the CPs? Among the parameters: A1. Number of Researchers in the CP’s database. A2. Percentage (%) of the estimated country’s research community in the database. B1. Number of events organized annually and in total. B2. Number of researchers that attended the events.   C1. Number of visitors of the CP; C2. Number of visitors of the web site; C3. Number of contacts by email;   D1. Number of proposals submitted to the FP from the country; D2. Number of funded proposals with that country’s participation and total amount of funding.

7. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Funding of the CP Two main sources:  The hosting country (allocation of permanent staff; office space, equipment and telecommunications; contribution to the organization of some events or missions, etc.)  The European Union, through several FP projects (EUROMEDANET 1&2, ERAMED, MIRA) contributed to the training and networking activities of the CPs, as well as to the organization of several of their activities (Info days, brokerage events, etc.).

8. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • Role, characteristics and organizational models for CPs ROLE There are two distinct functions/roles for the implementation of the cooperation between the EU and every MPC, in the field of S&T The institutional contacts under the responsibility of the Ministries for Research (negotiation and implementation of the S&T Cooperation Agreement with the EU, the representation of the country at the Monitoring Committee of the Euro-Mediterranean Cooperation, etc ).  The stimulation of the participation of the research community of the country in the FP.

9. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs CP MODEL OF FUNCTIONING Open to the research community, encouraging the contacts of the researchers with the CP staff by any means (face to face meetings, e-mails, etc.).  Pro-active towards the potential participants in the FP activities even outside the mainstream research institutions (i.e. in the industrial sector) ORGANIZATIONAL MODEL Even if a single well-structured and equipped central unit can be very efficient, a more decentralized structure through the setting up a network of (local) contact points/multipliers may have a better knowledge of the local research landscape, the more efficient organization of local events, etc. (It should be noted that in EU MS the CP (‘NCP’) system is more and more decentralize).

10. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs How to motivate the ‘institutional networking’ i.e. the contact persons in Institutions? Frequent invitations to events organized by the CP (central structure), organization of events locally, periodic contacts, etc., could act as incentives. Even more important could be the acknowledgement of the role of the contact person in the preparation of a successful project.

11. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • Possible role of CP in MoCo (or other policy fora) In recent years there has been a demand from the MoCo for discussion and implementation of more and more concrete actions and of a monitoring of its decisions. Hence, CPs role in the MoCo could be very important The same could be valid for other policy fora between the respective country and the EU (e.g. in committees in charge of the monitoring of the cooperation agreements).

12. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • SICA, topics with “recommended” participation and “core” activities of 7FP Besides the topics of privileged participation to the FP that are of particular interest for the CPs , the necessity to collect and study all the FP7 Work Programmes is among the core obligations of the CP in order to be in a position to disseminate the information and to provide advice to the research community. Moreover, the CPs should keep in mind that the real challenge is to stimulate the participation in the ‘core’ activities of the FP and not to restrict their activities to the relatively rare SICAs and topics with ‘recommended participation’. In this context, a deep knowledge of the overall 7FP is needed.

13. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • Web sites of the CPs All the CPs report having developed specific web sites. However, when looking at the updating of these web sites the situation is actually not satisfactory: most of the web sites are updated ‘rarely’ but even an updating ‘every two months’ is not sufficient for timely information on new calls. The possibility to update the content (e.g. new calls, news, etc. but not the structure) of the web site by the CP’s staff should be investigated as a first priority. At a second stage, the online services should be developed, as well as the possibility to count the visitors.

14. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs b-Notes for each CP that participated in the survey • ALGERIA The CP operates within a Research Center, where a team of few persons working on a part-time basis is set up. The CP is active in the typical expected activities (Info days, training, dissemination, etc.) and participates in EU and national projects. The CP operates as a single point, i.e. for the time being there is no network at national level. It has developed an on-line registration capability. Among the goals of the CP: the creation of Thematic contact points (Health, Energy, etc.) is reported.

15. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • EGYPT The CP is hosted by the Ministry responsible for Research. It has more the characteristics of an administrative structure rather than a unit working close to the research community. However, the existence of networks of thematic contact points and of Institutional contact points are reported. The CP participates in many EU projects but it seems under-staffed and reports weaknesses in its equipment. The CP makes reference to a EU Programme dedicated to Research, Development and Innovation in Egypt, which can support ‘multipliers’ for FP7. This is very positive for the country itself and could also serve as good practice for other MPCs.

16. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • JORDAN The CP is hosted by a Governmental Organization (Agency). It was set up as a small central unit and is currently coordinating a network of 32 persons in various Institutions of the country. The CP receives support from a National Programme and participates also in several EU projects related to CP activities. The CP is proactive, also in statistics. The mobilization of the researchers is reported as a problem. (many reasons can exist: complicated structure and procedures of the FP, false expectations, etc). Among the promising initiatives of the CP: its effort to join the network of EU NCPs.

17. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • LEBANON The CP operates within a University/Research Center, where a small team of few persons is set up. The CP is active in the typical expected activities (Info days, training, dissemination, etc.) and provides some statistics. It has developed an on-line registration capability.

18. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • MOROCCO The CP is hosted by the Ministry, with a small unit involving several staff. It has a considerable networking with Institutions. The CP is very active, reporting a considerable number of activities and a strong participation in FP projects. Despite of that, the CP is reporting financial problems. Among the good practices: participation in policy fora as the MoCo and the Maroc–EU Committee in S&T Its plans to organize national thematic networks.

19. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • PALESTINE The CP is hosted by the Ministry for Research, where a small team of few persons has been set up. There is no network. Among some initiatives: awareness raising activities and, occasionally, assistance to researchers.   • SYRIA The CP operated in the University with a small team (on a limited part time basis). It operates as a single point. Info Days and participation in some EU projects is reported. It has developed an on-line registration capability. The need of an interlocutor for S&T within the EU delegation in the country is reported as important.

20. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs • TUNISIA The CP is hosted by the Ministry responsible for Research. The CP reports the participation in several EU projects but nevertheless is relatively under-staffed with limited equipment and communication facilities.

21. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs b-Some of the raw data from the Questionnaires Type of host institution- Mission of host organisation (*)

22. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Date of creation of CP/ officially nomination

23. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs How is CP organized? • Network of thematic CP / Network of Institutional contact points / Only CP Staff composition: • N. of persons/Category of staff/ part time or full-time Have any person in the office been involved as evaluator during FP5/FP6? CP missions: • According to the guiding principles for setting up systems of NCP edited by EC, see the last version of 12-12-2007. Please classify the tasks that represent your activities:Informing, awareness/ Advisinng, assisting, training/ Signposting and feedback (i.e. Inform EC on problems and/or activities) • Provide statistics? What kind of statistics?

24. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs CP mission: • Are there any national incentives to encourage participation to the FP? (Yes/No) If yes, explain… • Are there any other organizations in your country providing information about FP? If yes, please list them. CP means: • Please describe your infrastructure situation: Is your ICPC CP well equipped (PC, printers, internet , fax, phone, international line, photocopy, etc )? • Is it easily accessible to visitors (near universities, location in the city center)? • Day to day assistance to FP participants: please indicate the frequency of using: phone, e-mail, meetings.

25. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Info on Web Sites: • Address/hosted in website of host institution or separate URL • Main sections on home page • Are there any “under construction” sections?” if yes, since when? Do you know when they will become accessible? • Electronic services (Online registration, forum of exchange for information, possibility of mass mailing to participants) • Is your web-site updated regularly? If yes, precise the frequency. • Do you have a visitor counter?

26. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs CP activities (description): • Organisation of info-days (Number/ Target audience/Content) • Dissemination tools (leaflets, reports, newsletters, guidelines, other) • Participation in NCP thematic meetings • Participation in EU projects • Participation in EU events • Participation in RD national projects • Participation in national events

27. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Networking • What type of contacts and international network do you maintain? At national level (ministries, R&D institutions, etc,); At regional lev. (other CP, ministries, R&D institutions, etc,); At international lev. (EC, ministries, R&D institutions, etc,) • National Information Flow From where and to whom you provide information • International Information Flow From where and to whom you provide information

28. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs CP Knowledge and needs • Degree of knowledge of General FP7 issues, partners search for FP proposals, Financial issues, Cost models, Legal issues, IPR issues, Management. • What kind of capacity building would you prefer among: Good practise examples of the work of European Organisations dealing with FP Lectures by EC officials/ Lectures by invited experts Workshop-type training by invited external trainers Small group discussion of selected topics Practical exercises

29. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs CP Difficulties(with answers) • Understanding of FP7 • Understanding of EC administrative and financial rules (AL/EG/ MO/ PA/TU) • IP internal organisation (MO/TU) • Contact with researchers (EG) • Mobilize research community in FP events (AL/EG/JO/PA/SY/TU) • Human potential (MO/PA/SY/TU) • Financial means (MO) • Administrative and financial mgmt of FP projects (MO) • Others (JO: need for strengthening contacts with EU NCP / SY: Complexity in taking part as coordinator in FP7)

30. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Improve cooperation between CP and Commission services (with answers) Some of means to improve cooperation between EC&CP -Nominate contact persons for CP in EC for all thematic and horizontal priorities of FP7 -Provide timely information on work-programs, roadmaps, so on -Support, where appropriate, additional costs related to special measures, activities and events of transnational dimension.

31. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Improve cooperation between CP and Commission services (with answers) Other suggestions from: - Morocco/Tunisia: Need for: - information on the WP draft and of calls before publication; - a summary of the thematic calls encouraging the participation of third country in one document from INCO directorate - information on unselected projects - suggestions on how to motivate the institutional contact point or thematic NCP in MPCs (Mo) - suggestions on how to improve (Mo) - implementation of the thematic IP and ensuring the sustainability of the institutional contact point (Tu) • Improvement of the national contact point management (Tu)

32. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Improve cooperation between CP and Commission services (with answers) Other suggestions from: - Syria: Need to define an important role for Delegations of EC in third countries in regard of FP7, with the presence of an expert in each delegation who represents the EC Research Directorate. This expert can be of great help to update information concerning rules, giving advises to the CP.

33. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs IP’s perspectives: Algeria: Create Thematic Contact Points (health, energy….) as other countries. Morocco/Tunisia: To continue working on MIRA and other projects favouring CP and capacity building To Implement the thematic CP and ensure the sustainability of the institutional contact point To Improve the national contact point management

34. Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s structure of MPCs Thanks you For further information: http://www.miraproject.eu/ marilena.rossano@cnr.it