[Token-all] Fwd: Feedback on the written response to the assessment report

Stefano De Panfilis stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org
Wed Oct 13 14:05:48 CEST 2021


dear all,

here is an important yet constructive email from our po which i received
just few moments before going on holiday.
it will be discussed during tomorrow ebm.

see you tomorrow!
stefano

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: COSTANTINO Giorgio <Giorgio.COSTANTINO at ec.europa.eu>
Date: Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 18:07
Subject: Feedback on the written response to the assessment report
To: Stefano De Panfilis <stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org>


Dear Stefano,



thanking again for your patience, please find here below the feedback form
the monitors and myself to the written response addressing the remarks made
in the review report.



We’d like to thank the consortium for the effort done in addressing the
recommendations. On some points there is perhaps a need to further
refine/clarify.



-        The ultimate goal of 'TOKEN' is to develop an experimental
ecosystem to enable the adoption of DistributedLedger Technologies and to
prove its value, via highly replicable Use Cases, as driver for the
transformation of public services towards an open and collaborative
government model approach. Regarding the evaluation framework this means
that it should go beyond evaluating the individual PUCs, and result in more
or less generalisable findings that help public service suppliers to
understand the benefits and drawbacks of DLT for public service
transformation, exemplified by use cases.



-        Re Recommendation 5: from the perspective of the overall
objective, the exploitation should be about the experimental ecosystem, for
public administrations to develop use cases and pilot them, with a low
threshold and cost efficient manner. For the core development of this
concept, the exploitable results do not have to be there yet, what is
needed is to understand the market for such an experimental environment and
the value added it brings to take the experimental approach, which needs of
prospective users are addressed and what they would expect from it (vis a
vis what the ecosystem will deliver), what alternatives exist, and at a
later stage if and how much they would be prepared to pay, operational
costs and additional sources of income (for instance additional paid
services) etc.



-        We’d like to stress the importance of establishing and activating
an Advisory Board as soon as possible, in order to assist and be a sounding
board to the Team through high-level inputs in the current critical issues
of the Project.



In agreement with Robbert and Marcella, I’d like to propose a small meeting
with you and the impacted WPs leaders after the resubmission of the
deliverables to take stock and way forward.

Second half of November would work for you?





Kind regards ,



Giorgio







*From:* COSTANTINO Giorgio (REA)
*Sent:* Thursday, September 23, 2021 5:41 PM
*To:* 'Stefano De Panfilis' <stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org>
*Cc:* CALDERON Maria (REA) <Maria-Jesus.CALDERON-GUTIERREZ at ec.europa.eu>
*Subject:* RE: d8.8



Dear Stefano, thank you for your patience.

Coming back to your questions, please see my notes below.



Kr,

Giorgio





*From:* Stefano De Panfilis <stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org>
*Sent:* Friday, September 3, 2021 3:25 PM
*To:* COSTANTINO Giorgio (REA) <Giorgio.COSTANTINO at ec.europa.eu>
*Cc:* CALDERON Maria (REA) <Maria-Jesus.CALDERON-GUTIERREZ at ec.europa.eu>
*Subject:* Re: d8.8



dear giorgio,



thank you very much for your answer.

at this point some other questions:

- is there any limitation/suggestion for the honorary allowed for the
ethics advisor?

No specific limitations except the usual principle of sound financial
management and good value for money.



- i assume for this expenditure that a subcontract to us (fiware
foundation) is needed. is this correct?

Yes

- as i initially did not allocate any budget for the role (my mistake),
shall we have an amendment to enable the subcontract?

No, as the subcontracting is requested to comply with an EC requirement, it
is safe to say that you can go with the simplified approach and report it
in the next period (final).

If there will be need for an amendment in the future we can include the
subcontracting too.







thank you in advance.



ciao,

stefano



On Fri, 3 Sept 2021 at 13:28, COSTANTINO Giorgio <
Giorgio.COSTANTINO at ec.europa.eu> wrote:

Hi Stefano,

Summer break went … fast ;)

Back to your question,  the Ethical Advisor should provide independent
recommendations, so I’d say the CEO of the coordinator would not be the
best option. Same applies to the DPO of FIWARE foundation who I assume
would have in some way the role of the DPO of the project.



I am waiting for the monitors opinion on the reply you sent on 30/07.

A feedback will be sent shortly.



Kr,

Giorgio





*From:* Stefano De Panfilis <stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org>
*Sent:* Thursday, September 2, 2021 12:11 PM
*To:* COSTANTINO Giorgio (REA) <Giorgio.COSTANTINO at ec.europa.eu>
*Cc:* CALDERON Maria (REA) <Maria-Jesus.CALDERON-GUTIERREZ at ec.europa.eu>
*Subject:* d8.8



dear giorgio,



hope to find you well after the summer break (i did not have mine yet
hopefully end of this month ...).



we are finalising the aspects about the ethic advisor as foreseen in d8.8.

the question to you is:



shall the ethic advisor be completely outside the consortium and thus
sub-contracted from an external organisation not in the consortium, or
could he/she be an employee of one of the consortium partners but not in
the project team? if the latter applies, could for instance be the ceo of
fiware foundation? or, as another example, fiware foundation dpo which is
an expert not formally an employee of the fiware foundation as he has just
a consultancy contract on dpo matters?



thank you for your wise advise on the matter.



ciao,

stefano



-- 

*Stefano De Panfilis*

Chief Operating Officer

stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org <charlotte.kotterman at fiware.org>

www.fiware.org
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.fiware.org/__;!!DOxrgLBm!VmQCZ-CfO13Sj7bpaP6y4E4rYuy2f3VpJ_Nx9dqiNXNpjGnKc9z-cUwl_zPU1U3qSw0YJ9XEE5M$>

Mob: +393357542567

Skype: depa01

twitter: depa01



<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/fiware__;!!DOxrgLBm!VmQCZ-CfO13Sj7bpaP6y4E4rYuy2f3VpJ_Nx9dqiNXNpjGnKc9z-cUwl_zPU1U3qSw0YBfcWm8E$>










-- 

*Stefano De Panfilis*

Chief Operating Officer

stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org <charlotte.kotterman at fiware.org>

www.fiware.org
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.fiware.org/__;!!DOxrgLBm!RGYiWZQoT0EcEh54WC53gGQL5UL23WoXA4WHg_HT4BVMT8-cTx1H6GQNKO_-9mRJijP3Xc9W7E4$>

Mob: +393357542567

Skype: depa01

twitter: depa01



<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/fiware__;!!DOxrgLBm!RGYiWZQoT0EcEh54WC53gGQL5UL23WoXA4WHg_HT4BVMT8-cTx1H6GQNKO_-9mRJijP3aIs5P2U$>








-- 
Stefano De Panfilis
Chief Operating Officer
stefano.depanfilis at fiware.org <charlotte.kotterman at fiware.org>
www.fiware.org
Mob: +393357542567
Skype: depa01
twitter: depa01

<https://twitter.com/fiware>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/token-all/attachments/20211013/aa1c3fdf/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Token-all mailing list

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