This information refers to the Fifth Framework Programme, this Programme is now closed and information on the Sixth Framework Programme can be found at on our new Sixth Framework Programme pages.

How to Write a Winning Proposal

Analysis of the results of the evaluation of ENERGIE proposals submitted under the calls to date has shown that winning funding is indeed a competitive process, with the total projects deemed "worth funding" exceeding the budget available. With this series we aim to increase your chances of success, by looking at the evaluation criteria and highlighting the key factors you need to consider to make a high quality proposal submission, which will merit high evaluation markings. We will be covering:

What do I need to know about the evaluation process?

Scientific / technological quality and innovation

Community added value and contribution to EU policies

Contribution to the environment and EU social objectives

Economic development and scientific and technological prospects

Resources, partnership and management

What do I need to know about the evaluation process?

Evaluation criteria - thresholds and weighting

After an initial eligibility check, the evaluators assess the pertinence of your ENERGIE proposal with regard to the problems outlined in the call. Only relevant proposals go forward to be assessed by both technical experts and socio-economists. In order to succeed in the highly competitive process of winning funding for your project you need to address the following five evaluation criteria:

Each criteria is marked from 0 to 5. Three of the criteria are "threshold" criteria. This means that a proposal has to achieve a minimum "threshold" mark - in this case 3 out of 5 - for that criterion in order to be considered for funding. So, for example, any proposal which scores less than 3 out of 5 marks for the evaluation criterion "Scientific and technological quality and innovation" will fail the evaluation process.

The different evaluation criteria are also weighted in importance, with the relative importance depending on whether the proposal is for a Research, Demonstration or Combined project. For example, the most important evaluation criteria for Demonstration projects is "Economic Development and Scientific and Technological prospects" which accounts for up to 30% of the total score of the proposal. It is important to remember the balance between Threshold and Weighting - if an excellent demonstration project scores highly on four criteria, but does not address "Resources, partnership and management" adequately, it will fail.

From the first ENERGIE call we know that an incredible 73% of the UK ENERGIE proposals rejected by the Commission failed on the criteria ‘Scientific and technological quality and innovation’. However, this does not necessarily mean that the projects addressed other criteria satisfactorily, it reflects the fact that this is the first issue to be considered. Remember that there is often insufficient funding available for all projects deemed "worth funding". So to succeed you don't just have to reach the threshold levels, you have to excel in each area.

Evaluation Tips:

• Check the issues - no matter how brilliant your proposal is, if it does not address the problems outlined in the call for proposals it will not be considered for funding.
• Address all areas - although there is only a threshold for 3 evaluation criteria, (2 evaluation criteria for research projects) take all the evaluation criteria seriously. You need as high an overall score as possible.
• Focus your effort - bear in mind the relative weighting of each issue when preparing your proposal.
• Answer the questions - evaluators will be following the same "script". Evaluators do not want to have to search for marks to award, make their life easy and you stand a better chance of success
• Do your homework - check the existing research in your area, one way of doing this is to use the ETDE World Energy Base http://www.etde.org/etdeweb/
• Keep it concise - evaluators have many proposals to mark and little time.
• Make your points clearly - evaluators will be of different nationalities and may not be experts in your field.
• Use the ENERGIE Helpline and DTI advisers - we are here to help.

Return to top of page

Scientific / technological quality and innovation

Although there are five criteria considered in the evaluation of each ENERGIE proposal, the greatest weighting for research projects, 35%, is given to Scientific and technological quality and innovation. For demonstration and combined projects it is worth 20% of the marks. In addition, you must score a minimum threshold score of 3 out of 5 in this area. From the first ENERGIE call we know that an incredible 73% of the UK ENERGIE proposals rejected by the Commission failed on this criterion. This does not necessarily mean that the projects were satisfactory in all other areas, but reflects the fact that scientific quality and innovation is the first hurdle to cross, and as such is looked at first.

What does "Scientific/technological quality and innovation" mean?

These criteria reflect the overall "drives" of the project:

Why did so many UK proposals fail on this criterion in the first ENERGIE call?

It appears that the main issues applicants fail to consider seriously enough are:

How do I meet these criteria?

The European Commission expects that scientifically and technologically high-quality and innovative projects will lead to advances in an existing process of technology, a new hypothesis, concept or method, or a new approach or solution. Your proposal should start by specifying the needs and issues for carrying out the research as follows:

Remember that the RTD objectives of the project should be clearly defined, relevant to both the ENERGIE programme and the Key action and, most importantly, the problems outlined in the Work Programme. The RTD objectives of your proposal must address objectives, problems to solve and anticipated deliverables. It is of crucial importance to define them - wherever possible - in a quantified, verifiable and realistic form. Additionally, the more themes of the ENERGIE or overall 5th Framework programme your project addresses the more convincing it will be.

The project's degree of originality and level of innovation can be shown by the international state-of-the-art on which the project's approach is based. This can be described in a documentary study including references to literature, publications, patents, standards and database searches. It is also expected that your proposal will address briefly the technical limitations of existing products, processes or services together with comments on competing techniques. For example, if your project is about developing advanced wind turbine components aiming at tackling specific problems of offshore site conditions, you should be able to indicate the latest technological achievements in the field of wind energy. The scope for development of new or improved products, processes or services should also be well defined. So your proposal should show that the project represents a significant step forward beyond the state-of-the-art.

It is also expected that ENERGIE proposals give a critical appraisal of the level of technical risks influencing the chance of the project's success. If all issues have been addressed adequately, the European Commission may consider high-risk favourably since it is anticipated that higher-risk projects may return higher value-added.

Last but not least, you should state the adequacy of the chosen research approach, methodology and work plan for achieving the scientific and technological objectives. Keep in mind the following pieces of advice:

In summary….

Return to top of page

Community added-value and contribution to EU energy - related policies

This evaluation criterion has been given an increased importance. It is now a threshold criterion for all projects. But what does it mean? Community-added value means that the project adds value to the EU as a whole through improving knowledge on a European scale or creating technology which can compete in the world market. Contribution to EU energy policies was specifically introduced during the duration of the FP5 - demonstrating the importance placed on this issue and how poorly it has been addressed to date.

Firstly, your proposal should indicate clearly how it helps to solve a European problem.

Secondly, your proposal should address the European added-value of the consortium.

Thirdly, your proposal should have a close link to EU energy-related policies.

How do I meet these objectives?

Whilst the questions above seem clear and reasonable, formulating answers sometimes proves difficult. It is important to remember that you should try to provide a thorough answer to the above questions even if your ENERGIE proposal only has a minor influence in the specific field to which the question refers. Consider the following:

The need for European level research may be argued by explaining how the project:

The European added-value for the consortium could include:

Contribution to EU energy-related policies could cover issues such as:

In addition to being a strategic priority for the general call for proposals, addressing Pre-normative research will gain you points for any proposal.

Finally, remember funding is meant for projects which deal with genuine European problems and show real involvement of all European partners. Have you asked 'why do we need any other EU partners in our project?' If the principle of your project is wrong - if your proposal does not really possess any community-added value or contribute to EU policies - it will show from your application and may result in failure.

In summary….

Return to top of page

Contribution to the Environment and EU Social Objectives

Compared with FP4, FP5 has been specifically designed to help respond to the major social and economic challenges currently facing the EU. This new orientation aims to combine socio-economic objectives with scientific ones, therefore requiring researchers to adopt a more multi-disciplinary approach.

As a result of this, FP5 aims to bring Community research "closer to the citizens" so that there are tangible and everyday benefits resulting, both directly and indirectly, from EU funded research. In the case of "social objectives", this refers to:

Therefore reflecting the major concerns to increase industrial competitiveness in the EU and the quality of life for European citizens. This evaluation criterion was amended part way through the FP5 to make specific mention on environment in the title, reflecting that this was not covered adequately in the first calls for proposals.

Contribution to preserving and/or enhancing the environment

It is important to highlight if the project will contribute to the development of any environmentally friendly or energy efficient processes. There may be direct environmental benefits such as the reduction of non-GHG emissions, noise, solid waste or other pollutants, or the project may contribute to minimising the use or enhancing the conservation of natural resources. To maximise your score it is necessary to quantify any benefits. You will have to do this anyway to complete the tables in part B of the application form, so remember to include the figures in your written text. If you have a demonstration project, the evaluators will be looking for an environmental impact assessment. Many energy projects have a negative impact on the environment. Addressing how to minimise environmental problems, such as the disposal of waste or hazardous materials, pollution reduction or prevention, is as important as addressing the positive benefits of the project.

How do I meet the social objectives?

The link between the technical research and its potential benefit or interest to the general public needs to be made clear. It has been proven that an increase in research spending per capita correlates to a subsequent increase in GDP per capita. FP5 aims to put this into practise by making it easier for Europe to take advantage of its world-class research capabilities and translate the outcomes into new technologies, products, jobs and markets.

Obvious issues are:

But remember to consider both direct and indirect effects. For example,

These may all indirectly lead to increased opportunities for employment.

Consider how such activities could contribute to European social and economic cohesion policy. For example technology transfer to less technically advanced regions could happen directly through the partners of the consortium working together.

Your proposal doesn't necessarily have to create thousands of jobs or develop a technology that is instantly going to improve the quality of life for EU citizens. There may be scope to introduce an element of "social conscience" for example, by highlighting any environmentally friendly procedures used. It is also advisable to check the requirements detailed in the Guide for Proposers that relates to the specific call to which you are responding. If it is possible to quantify potential benefits in any area, it will help give you a higher score.

An issue of increasing importance is the integration of socio-economic research into the proposal. This is a strategic priority for the General Call for proposals, and will gain you points for any project. Moreover, such research will help ensure that you have a commercially exploitable technology or product.

In summary ...

Return to top of page

Economic Development and Scientific and Technological Prospects

In very basic terms, these objectives are included to enable the Commission to assess whether a proposal will actually create something that is useful and that will in some way further European research. More specifically, the Commission is looking for indication that each of the following three requirements are incorporated in your ENERGIE proposal:

How do I meet these objectives?

In order to score highly, think carefully about how you will translate these objectives into concrete tasks or outputs of the project. Each of the three points above is explained in more detail below.

Firstly, demonstrate the strategic impact of your project. For example what potential does the project offer in terms of increased competitiveness? Does your demonstration or combined project demonstrate economic viability with an acceptable payback calculation? This should be seen as your opportunity to show how the results of the project will be used in the future to benefit, both directly and indirectly, European organisations and partners in the consortium. It is important to indicate that you have clearly identified potential "end-users" and, where appropriate, a market access strategy. If you produce something that can be exploited commercially, then now is the time to explain this. If the project simply lays the foundations for future research, then say so and explain how you intend to take the project results to the next stage. Demonstrating the project's potential contribution to economic and scientific growth is best shown through careful preparation of your activities and the compulsory exploitation plan, the second point to be addressed. These may show that a project will produce patentable ideas, improve the competitiveness of the proposer or demonstrate replication possibilities within a demonstration project. For example, if your consortium creates a new energy-saving system, you should use the exploitation plan to give quantified estimates of:

Show that you have not simply thought about your project in isolation, but also in the context of the competition, the potential market for the product or technology and its place in the European Research and Development world.

The third point is the dissemination plan. This needs to show the means, timetable, resources and expected publicity for the dissemination of the project results. Have the target groups, sectoral and geographical, been identified? Is the potential of new Information and Communication Technologies fully exploited for dissemination? The plan is not binding and can be amended if unforeseen events occur during the implementation of the project

In summary…

Return to top of page

Resources, partnership and management

This set of criteria refers to the project management and human resources used in the implementation of the project. To carry out a trans-national project successfully over a number of years requires a well-organised consortium and means you need to think carefully about the resources used and the definition of the tasks involved. Apart from the fact that the Commission will evaluate your proposal on these criteria, these issues are important for ensuring that your project, when selected, can be carried out successfully.

The Commission felt that generally proposals under the 4th Framework Programme did not give sufficient importance to project management, so this criterion has been given more weight under the 5th Framework Programme, 20% of the total score for research projects and 25% for demonstration and combined projects. In addition, this is a threshold criterion for demonstration and combined projects so you need to score a minimum 3 out of 5. You need to convince the evaluators that the project consortium you have put together is well-balanced, has the ability to manage the resources involved and is capable of delivering the expected results.

There are three aspects to consider:

• The quality of management and the project approach proposed:
  It is important to demonstrate clearly the experience, management capability and commitment of the proposed co-ordinator. Then consider how the co-ordinator will ensure good communication between the consortium. How will the partners communicate with each other? What means will be used to ensure that everyone is kept up to date? Is email communication sufficient? Will there be regular assessment meetings? How will progress be monitored? Will there be performance indicators? How will you be able to tell if project milestones have been reached on time? There is little point in defining milestones and deliverables in the project proposal if there is nothing in place to ensure that they are achieved successfully.

• The quality of the partnership:
  To illustrate the quality of the consortium partners, a mini-CV is required from each. Be sure to highlight the experience that is relevant for the tasks they are to carry out and the qualifications they have for this role. Define the structure of the consortium, the reasons for having industrial partners, universities, research institutes, end-users etc and the complementary expertise and experience that they have. End-users should be included wherever possible as their participation helps to demonstrate potential interest in the project's results. Each partner must have a clearly defined and justified role, and there should be an obvious benefit resulting from their participation in the project.

• The appropriateness of the resources:
  To fulfil this criterion you must show the manpower effort (in person/months) for each partner and each task, the reasons for this distribution (e.g. partner A has particular research capabilities) and the equipment (durables) required for the project.

The Commission wants the management, co-ordination and administrative issues to be thought about in detail and articulated clearly. Each of the consortium partners should be in no doubt as to their involvement in the project, the communication channels to be used, the performance indicators in place etc. A well-balanced consortium with a clear management structure and an appropriate allocation of resources should have no problem in fulfilling these criteria.

In summary…

Return to top of page

Return to main News page