[oasc-iot-lsp-cities] About the dates of the Open Call

Sofia Taborda staborda at futurecities.catapult.org.uk
Mon Apr 11 09:44:18 CEST 2016

Previous message: [oasc-iot-lsp-cities] About the dates of the Open Call
Next message: [oasc-iot-lsp-cities] About the dates of the Open Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Dear Juanjo,

The timing of the open call can be adjusted, it was sent as is Friday because we did a bling guess when we still thought the project was 30 months (something also agreed several months ago, but changed without even some partners knowing what had happened???). There are also interdependencies with wp3, which cannot be overlooked.
However, at this point changing either the scope of the calls, and the key objectives is just not acceptable. This topic has been discussed over and over in the last few months, and it is not only disrespectful to everyone involved in preparing WP5, but also a very unfortunate last minute suggestion. The principles of the open calls have been agreed several weeks ago, and they should not be subject of discussion at this point!
Also, as I mentioned Friday, average rates should not be applied to estimate the weight of this WP in the overall budget, as we do have a complete breakdown of the type of resource needed.
Martin, as agreed yesterday I am available for a call this morning to go through WP5, yet again... Any anonymous votes are everything but what we need now!!!

Regards,
Sofia

On 11 Apr 2016, at 05:31, Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>> wrote:

Hi again,

One of the reasons why the dates for the Open Call have to be clearly changed is that keeping the current dates would go against one of the major principles of OASC: the "driven by implementation" approach.

Actually, common information models shared by OASC cities are expected to come as the result of a curation process starting with the information models that the application selected for solving a specific challenge would support in one city, then checking how that model may work for several cities and be compatible with the information models other applications rely on. This is a process which requires as many applications as possible and start as early as possible.

Precisely because of that, it brings a very big challenge to the development of task 2.2, which among other things is intended to produce common information models extracted and curated from applications that have been selected for pilots.

Do we need/want to wait until month 15 to start such implementation-driven information model curation process ? My answer would be that clearly not. Month 12 for starting working with applications sounds indeed very late to me, month 18 as currently proposed is out of the window opportunity.

Besides of all the above, what would you think if you were comparing two proposals targeted to this call (which, don't forget, is about PILOTS) and one starts working with SMEs/startups and bringing showcases from month 9 until say month 27 and another one (ours) working with them from month 18 to 27 ? I would kill the second, for sure.

Cheers,

-- Juanjo

______________________________________________________

Coordinator and Chief Architect, FIWARE platform
IoT Unit, Telefónica

email: juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>
twitter: @JuanjoHierro

You can follow FIWARE at:
website: http://www.fiware.org
twitter: @FIWARE
facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932

On 11/04/16 00:19, Juanjo Hierro wrote:
Dear all,

There are serious concerns we would like to highlight when analysis the current status of the proposal.

First of them has to do with the Open Call which we have learnt just recently that the Open Call is expected to be launched in month 15 so that SMEs start working on the pilot reference zones in month 18 !!! This is simply not going to fly at the eyes of evaluators and I wonder whether it is what we want since one of the goals of this project was giving it a boost to OASC ... With this approach we wouldn't have the first SME/startup on board until mid 2018 !!!! We definitively need to have them on board earlier (month 13 at the latest). Either OASC takes off in terms of ecosystem creation next year or we are done. Opportunity windows are more tight in the fast moving Digital sector. We need to have the Open Call launched at most in month 9 so first SMEs/startups are on board in month 12.
Besides this, we have been going through a deep analysis of the latest budget proposal from Martin. These are the main outcomes. See the charts below:

1. WP5 devotes 1M€ for the management and support of an 3M€ Open call !!
* 830 k€ just for managing the open call !! Best practices in Open Calls (and several of us have managed large Open Call budgets) indicate that you shouldn't spend more than 20% of the amount given away in managing the Open Call.
* Launching the call earlier should allow the adjustments (or if not, we have to make them anyways)
* 180 k€ for supporting SMEs from technical and city point of view (this might be ok)
2. Assuming that the reference zones budget + open call grants (given away to SMEs/startups) is purely technical work, vs. other activities, non technical activities represent over 40% of the budget. This is hard to justify in a project that is about pilots. This is because we haven't meet what was agreed initially in distribution of budget/funding:
* The overall budget/grant for initial pilots (T3.1+T3.2) is 1.1 M€ versus the 3 M€ in the agreed sketch of the budget/funding !!
* The overall budget/grant for reference zone activities (platform, deployment, validation) (T2.5+T3.3+T3.4+WP4) is 4,2M€, 1,7M€ below the agreed sketch of the budget/funding !!
* As a consequence, the overall budget per reference zone (both for piloting and platform) was foreseen to be 1.27M€ of grant in average. The current average for these activities is 775k€.
3. The distribution of effort in the Reference zones (ideally 30% (T2.5) - 50% (T3.3+T3.4) - 20% (WP4) is very different among reference zones.
* Manchester has a very low effort for T2.5!! It would be interpreted as “no platform or interoperability activity will be done in this city”.
* Antwerp has very high effort for WP4. Santander too, but UC is WP4 Leader.
4. Co-creation, methodology, etc (WP1) has a budget of 1.1M€, instead of 300k€ planned!
* It might have been underestimated, but the deviation is huge.
5. WP2 transversal activities has a budget (grant) of 1.4 M€ , instead of 0.9 M€ planned
* More than 500k€ for Architecture!!
* Models and IoT tasks too weak!!
6. WP6 (excluding communication) has a budget of 900k€, versus 600k€ initially planned

With those deviations, specially the low profile of technical activities for a Pilot project and the high amount of budget devoted to manage the open call, we have a serious risk to fail. Therefore we propose:

1. The open call opens at month 15. That means that SMEs will have only 6 months to work. The open call should start at month 9 and SMEs/startups selected should be running at month 13 the latest.
2. Cut the funding devoted to admin of the Open Calls and distribute it to technical activities, mostly around pilots development (T3.1 and T3.2)
3. Transfer resources in T2.1 (architecture) to T2.5 (we can make a proposal) so that distribution of tasks within WP2 get more balanced. In those case where that means having too much in T2.5, we will probably can transfer to WP3
4. Translate 300 K€ of the budget/funding in WP1 to WP3 or in those cases where after action 3, there is still very low efforts in T2.5, translate to that task)
5. Translate 200 K€ of the budget/funding in WP6 to WP3 or in those cases where after action 3, there is still very low efforts in T2.5, translate to that task)

Best Regards,
Juanjo and Sergio

<mime-attachment.png>

<mime-attachment.png>
<mime-attachment.png>

--
Sergio Garcia Gomez
Telefónica
CCDO - IoT - Smart Cities – Product Management
Parque Tecnologico de Boecillo.
47151 Boecillo (Valladolid), SPAIN.
E-mail: sergio.garciagomez at telefonica.com<mailto:sergio.garciagomez at telefonica.com>
Phone: (+34) 983 36 77 09
Mobile: (+34) 629 14 39 51

________________________________

Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.

The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it.

_______________________________________________
Fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities mailing list
Fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities at lists.fiware.org>
https://lists.fiware.org/listinfo/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities

________________________________

Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição
_______________________________________________
Fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities mailing list
Fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities at lists.fiware.org>
https://lists.fiware.org/listinfo/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities/attachments/20160411/d4ae9b69/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 41549 bytes
Desc: ATT00001.png
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities/attachments/20160411/d4ae9b69/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 33131 bytes
Desc: ATT00002.png
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities/attachments/20160411/d4ae9b69/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 16325 bytes
Desc: ATT00003.png
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities/attachments/20160411/d4ae9b69/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7723 bytes
Desc: ATT00004.png
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities/attachments/20160411/d4ae9b69/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10452 bytes
Desc: ATT00005.png
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities/attachments/20160411/d4ae9b69/attachment-0004.png>

Previous message: [oasc-iot-lsp-cities] About the dates of the Open Call
Next message: [oasc-iot-lsp-cities] About the dates of the Open Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the Fiware-oasc-iot-lsp-cities mailing list

You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy