Hi, Forgot to comment. What I have forwarded to you was a draft message I had prepared. The mail has not been sent yet to the PO. As you see, the PO expressed her concerns regarding the one2one meetings. @Rosa: may you please review the draft message and confirm you would agree with the response given to this particular point? Feel free to amend in order to get a message that is enough precise and not risky. Cheers, Juanjo On 29/9/21 15:14, Juanjo Hierro wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Unfortunately, the PO has responded negatively to our request to > relax the rule that was limiting the funding of DIHs to 18 K€ in total. > > Looking towards preparation of the review of the project, we should > not forget to run a survey with DIHs that will summit to get a clear > statement from them that the rule established prevented them to > prepare multiple applications. This way, we will be able to place > that information in an objective manner in front of the PO and > reviewers and justify the decision to relax the rule for the second > open call. > > We will have now to double our efforts towards identification of new > DIHs and helping SMEs willing to submit an application to find a DIH > they can partner with. > > Cheers, > > Document > Juanjo Hierro > Chief Technology Officer > juanjose.hierro at fiware.org <mailto:juanjose.hierro at fiware.org> > www.linkedin.com/in/jhierro <https://www.linkedin.com/in/jhierro> > Twitter: @fiware <https://twitter.com/fiware> @JuanjoHierro > <https://twitter.com/JuanjoHierro> > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Re: IMPORTANT: Insights from Open Call 1 and concrete action > for your approval > Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 15:08:54 +0200 > From: Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at fiware.org> > To: NAGY Annamaria <Annamaria.NAGY at ec.europa.eu> > CC: cnect-h2020-951975 at ec.europa.eu <cnect-h2020-951975 at ec.europa.eu> > > > > Dear Annamaria, > > Ok. This means that most (if not all) the DIHs will prepare one > application which will mean less applications but we'll have to live > with it, I guess. > > With regards to the point on "one2one meetings" just let you know we > have offered these meetings to all and we have asked them to formulate > their questions in advance so that we can prepare responses that then > can be shared with others, precisely following the principle that > guidance should be available to all applicants in an equally and fair > manner. > > Best regards, > > Juanjo > > > On 28/9/21 17:24, NAGY Annamaria wrote: >> >> Dear Juanjo, >> >> In principal, I do not support any changes to an already published >> call. This should be done only exceptionally. There is a big change >> already done, i.e. the extension of deadline. Every time we change an >> ongoing call, there is a risk that transparency and equal treatment >> would be impaired. >> >> Regarding the limit of funding for DIHs, the current Guide for >> Applicants states that funding received from any other similar >> sources (e.g. other DT-ICT-05 projects) would be counted into the EUR >> 60K limit. So I don’t see the point in raising the 18K limit for DIHs >> to 40K instead. The participation in other experiments without >> funding is already available for them as well. >> >> Also, I don’t see how this planned raise in funding can help >> geographical distribution either. Instead, it would be desireable to >> make effort to involve DIHs from under-represented EU member states, >> to mobilize them as well. Then the applications would have an ideal >> geographical balance. >> >> I have a problem with the offered “one2one meetings to applicants” as >> well. This goes against equal treatment. Basically, the >> guidance/advice you give to applicant X should be available to all >> the rest of applicants, too. >> >> I would not change the rules at this point, but rather collect all >> the lessons learnt and use them when drafting the call documentation >> for the next open call. >> >> Many thanks and best regards, >> >> Annamaria >> >> *From:*Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at fiware.org> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 28, 2021 10:27 AM >> *To:* NAGY Annamaria (CNECT) <Annamaria.NAGY at ec.europa.eu> >> *Cc:* CNECT H2020 951975 I4TRUST <cnect-h2020-951975 at ec.europa.eu> >> *Subject:* Re: IMPORTANT: Insights from Open Call 1 and concrete >> action for your approval >> >> Dear Annamaria, >> >> May you give us the approval for implementing the change proposed >> in my last mail regarding the Open Call ? >> >> As explained, we believe this may boost the number of applications. >> >> Thanks in advance, >> >> Juanjo >> >> On 24/9/21 13:55, Juanjo Hierro wrote: >> >> Dear Annamaria, >> >> As mentioned in my previous mail, figures regarding responses >> to the first i4Trust Open Call are improving. Current statistics >> are: >> >> ·115 applicants registered in the open call management platform >> (this is not really a good indicator because we know many >> organizations will just register to check the complexity of the >> process or just for curiosity) >> >> ·29 applications already include basic information (this starts >> to be promising) >> >> ·20 applications have a consortium of DIH and SMEs already formed >> (we expect that they will most likely submit their application) >> >> ·19 applications include already a draft description of their >> experiment (these are indeed applications we expect will be >> submitted) >> >> Several applicants indeed expressed they were glad with the >> extension of the call and expressed their interest to further >> discuss how they could improve their applications. For this >> purpose, a number of actions have been planned to make sure that >> consortium which have started to work in the proposal will >> finalize their process. For example: >> >> ·we have offered one2one meetings to applicants in order to solve >> specific questions they may have >> >> ·we will organize a webinar on October 7th to provide hints on >> design of experiments and solve general doubts >> >> We are also going to perform a campaign towards DIHs within the >> S3 Catalogue which have not jet joined the i4Trust Community in >> order to promote the Open Call, leveraging the recent >> announcement about the Data Spaces Business Alliance which we >> hope may help to raise their interest. >> >> However, one of the most valuable insights we have obtained >> through direct feedback from DIHs and SMEs is that one >> requirement we had established in the Open Call was creating too >> high barriers for submission. Actually, we had established that >> DIHs would be funded a maximum of 18 K€ per proposal *AND* they >> can only be funded up to 18 K€ in all the proposals they are >> included (note that consortiums are funded between 72 K€ and 120 >> K€ depending on the number of SMEs involved). Since the each >> consortium is required to bring a DIH, we are facing these two >> scenarios that are impacting the number of proposals we may receive: >> >> ·Since 18 K€ is already not a large funding and DIHs are expected >> to require it for covering their support in a given experiment, >> DIHs are taking the option of submitting only one proposal. This >> despite they are receiving request from SMEs of their community >> that are interested in the call. DIHs are telling those SMEs: >> "sorry, we will be submitting just one proposal, therefore we'll >> have to wait for the 2nd Open Call". >> >> ·Since having a DIH in the consortium is a must requirement, SMEs >> that got attracted by the Open Call and have a nice experiment in >> mind, have to search for a DIH they may integrate in their >> consortium. However, they are approaching DIHs they see part of >> the i4Trust Community that may be also connected to their region >> and, since they are telling them, "sorry, we are already booked" >> and they cannot find easily another DIH in their region, they >> finally give up >> >> This is not speculation but we got very concrete testimonies/cases. >> >> After this analysis, the i4Trust partners have come to the >> conclusion that we could overcome this problem just by relaxing a >> bit the requirements on DIHs as follows: *keep the funding of a >> DIH per proposal limited to 18 K€, but allow them to get involved >> in more than one selected proposal, provided that the maximum >> funding they will gather among all experiments selected where hey >> are involved is limited to 40 K€ which can be negotiated at the >> negotiation phase* (that is, if they are involved in three >> experiments that get selected, and placed 18 K€ of funding in >> each, they will come with a proposal to adjust their funding, >> based on synergies they can bring, so that the overall funding >> gets limited to 40 K€) >> >> With this approach, we will make sure that many DIHs will >> support creation of consortium for two experiments, perhaps some >> of them even up to 3 or 4. >> >> Note that, at the end of the date, one criteria for final >> selection of experiments that may have very similar scoring in >> terms of excellence, implementation and impact will be >> geographically distribution, therefore we believe that >> introduction of this change in the requirements will not mean in >> practice that out of the 16 experiments to be selected we will >> have only 6 DIHs. At the end, we can expect they would be >> higher number of DIHs for sure. However, we will create >> incentives for submitting more applications, which willl turn >> into more competition, which will lead in better quality of >> selected experiments. >> >> Would you agree with relaxing the rule as described (in blue >> bold above)? >> >> Looking forward your feedback and thanks in advance for a quick >> response, >> >> -- >> >> *Juanjo Hierro* >> >> Chief Technology Officer >> >> juanjose.hierro at fiware.org <mailto:juanjose.hierro at fiware.org> >> >> www.linkedin.com/in/jhierro >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/in/jhierro__;!!DOxrgLBm!TiRVJicOhqs8A_B6wYhSBVPitv7W1PDyb-NA2FFtIF9uRJeViTZHw9DL98L0GuNG7GUF9Yw$> >> >> Twitter: @fiware >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/fiware__;!!DOxrgLBm!TiRVJicOhqs8A_B6wYhSBVPitv7W1PDyb-NA2FFtIF9uRJeViTZHw9DL98L0GuNGlaPp6NA$> >> @JuanjoHierro >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/JuanjoHierro__;!!DOxrgLBm!TiRVJicOhqs8A_B6wYhSBVPitv7W1PDyb-NA2FFtIF9uRJeViTZHw9DL98L0GuNGc0k_yI0$> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/i4trust/attachments/20210929/edd10ae3/attachment-0001.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: foundation-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8201 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/i4trust/attachments/20210929/edd10ae3/attachment-0002.png> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 8201 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/i4trust/attachments/20210929/edd10ae3/attachment-0003.png>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy