Smes go Health RSS feed

Help us improve our services - Your feed-back on the VBE is important !

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:00:00 GMT

As a researcher you can benefit from the Health research virtual community and SMES go Health experts' support. We would highly appreciate your feedback on the Virtual Brokerage Event in order to further improve this service.

A questionnaire has been put on line at at http://www.ffg.at/buk/healthsurvey2008 to assess your needs.

By kindly completing this questionnaire (requiring maximum 5 minutes) you could help us to assess the process and the results of the "SMEs go Health" Virtual Brokerage Event which took place between June 9th and 16th, 2008, and in the course of which 1.600 researchers were contacted.

The analysis of the questionnaire results will provide an important basis for the future activities of "SMEs go Health". Therefore, we would also be very grateful in case you would like to enter some comments in the optional fields as well. May we therefore invite you to complete this questionnaire before 21 July 2008 ?

Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation!

In case you have any questions on this survey, please contact
Dr. Ylva Huber
Tel: +43 5 77 55 4102, ylva.huber@ffg.at

Third call delay for FP7 health Theme; 3rd call publication expected on 3 September 2008

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The Commission announced that the expected schedule for the 3rd Call has been modified.

This delay is actually not specifically related to the Health Theme but related to agreeing budget figures with other Directorate Generals for the horizontal activities in the Cooperation programme (COST, CORDIS, ERA-NET etc). The Commission inter-services consultation has eventually been launched on Tuesday, 11 June 2008 - a month later than originally planned.

According to the new schedule all programmes within "Cooperation", the consultation of the Programme Committees is foreseen between 10 and 31 July 2008. The adoption iis planned for late August, with a call publication date shortly thereafter in September, most likely 3^rd of September 2008.

On the basis of a publication on 3 September 2008, the Commission envisages a deadline for submission at around 3 December 2008, to be confirmed when the calls are published.

Further detailed information on FP7 Heatlh theme - 3rd Call is available at http://www.smesgohealth.org/media/documents/3rd_call-opportunities_conditions.pdf

A VIRTUAL BROKERAGE EVENT has been organised between 9 June and 13 June 2008 on www.smesgohealth.org

Fri, 23 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

This VIRTUAL BROKERAGE EVENT (VBE) was designed to help identify research interests in the Health area at the European level and maximise the involvement of SMEs and academic organisations in research projects in the field of Health/Life Sciences of the 7th Framework Programme (FP7).

To this end, all 29 partners of the "SMEs go Health" network have collected and selected relevant partner searches and profiles from researchers and Health companies in their own countries.

The classification of the partner searches and profiles is done according to the draft topics which will be open for submission in Call 3 but can also be searched upon any keyword.

Experts from “SMEs go Health” supported their national candidates to match profiles and contacted potential partners among more than 1.600 profiles collected up to now in 35 countries.

In particular, the network perfored an intensive “matching” process and assisted each company and academic researcher from the database to find relevant partners.

As a result 195 new profiles were registered and 37 new Partner Searches have been entered in the database online during the Virtual brokerage event period.

You can access yourselves the profiles and partner searches which are accessible in the SGH database at: www.smesgohealth.org/common/ContactsLogin.asp

The “SMEs go Health” network was created in order to assist SMEs and academia in their European R&D strategy and successful participation in FP7 and the VIRTUAL BROKERAGE EVENT is an important means
to achieving that aim.

The 3^rdFP7 call in Health will probably be published on 3^rd September 2008 with the first deadline for submission of applications on 3^rd December 2008.

Your national SMEs go Health contact person will inform you about the deadlines as soon as they are publicly available.

Kick-off for the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI): Governing Board and First IMI Call

Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

OPEN CALLS & PARTNER SEARCHES

The first IMI Call with a budget of around € 295 million is now published.

You can find the necessary documents for the first IMI call ready to download
under:
http://imi.europa.eu/calls-01_en.html

IMI Guide for Applicants with application forms
IMI 1st Call Topics
IMI Rules for Participation
IMI Rules for Submission, evaluation and selection of EoIs and
proposals
IMI Evaluation form Stage 1
IMI IPR Rules

Background Information:

On April 30^th 2008, an information event has been held in Brussels, providing details on the IMI scientific priorities and application procedures, as well as networking opportunities for potential IMI stakeholders, particularly the public sector, the European pharmaceutical industry, biopharmaceutical SMEs and patient groups.

The Governing Board is composed by 5 representatives each of the European Commission and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). Jonathan Knowles (EFPIA) was elected Chair of the Governing Board, whereas Alain Vanvossel from the European Commission was appointed Interim Executive Director of the IMI JU.
The unique cooperation between the European Commission and EFPIA within the Innovative Medicines Initiative aims to overcome European bottlenecks in the develop-ment of new medicines and therapies, thereby strengthening the competitiveness of the European Pharmaceutical Industries. IMI will mobilise € 2 billion in research funds, with € 1 billion stemming from the 7^th EU Framework Programme (FP7, Theme "Health") and € 1 billion being contributed in-kind from the EFPIA member companies.

The presentations of the event will be published shortly!

DEA - Partners with humanistic and social scientific background

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Looking for partners with a humanistic and social scientific background?

The Danish Business Research Academy (DEA) is the coordinator of a EU-funded project. DEA is a non-profit and non-governmental organisation. The primary goal of the project is to facilitate the creation of consortiums of researchers and enterprises and integrate them into interdisciplinary research working groups. The aim is to have the broadest skill-base for business research when applying to calls for proposal under the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7).

Background
To a still larger extent the European Commission stresses the importance of inter-disciplinary research projects. Especially, the dimension of the social sciences and humanities has attracted attention and can be important in the evaluation of a project. For instance, the following areas within the social sciences and the humanities are often important sub points in the evaluation of project within health:

• The socio-economic of a research results
• The regulatory and ethical aspects of research
• Quality, efficiency and solidarity of healthcare
• Dissemination of research results to the press and the public
• How to translate research results into policy
• User friendly technology
• The engagement of civil society

A good application within the health-programme can ultimately be rejected, if the above aspects are not taken into consideration. Trans-disciplinary collaboration between all stakeholders should ensure that due consideration is taken of the ethical and societal dimensions of the project proprosals.

Advantages of DEA’s EU-project
The EU-network offers SMEs and technical and scientific researchers contacts to a wide range of social scientific and humanistic researchers within the above mentioned areas.

Furthermore, the project will cover the following activities:
• start up activities relevant to the project partners, facilitate the job of working groups and hence ease the creation of research consortiums
• arranging international conferences with aim of networking between the different researchers and companies
• monitoring and informing researchers, enterprises and policy-makers about the development of the 7th Framework Programme

Contact information
DEA’s EU-project will probably be interesting for you, if your SME or research institution already takes part in EU research or you are thinking of applying for calls within FP7. Please feel free to contact DEA’s EU advisor for more information about the project and the relevance to you.
Ms Nanna Rosenfeldt
EU advisor
The Danish Business Research Academy, DEA
Tel. +45 3342 6609 / +45 6066 6252
E-mail: nr@dea.nu

New Commission Recommendation on the management of IP

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

On 10 April 2008, the European Commission adopted a new Recommendation on the management of intellectual property (IP) in the knowledge transfer activities of universities and other public research organisations.

The specific objectives of the Recommendation are to assist Member States in the development of policies and guidelines in the area of intellectual property management and knowledge transfer activities and to promote the exploitation of publicly-funded research results.

In many cases this will entail public research organisations and private enterprise working more closely together, for example in academia-industry collaborations.

The Recommendation also outlines a Code of Practice which Member States and academic institutions could use as a basis for introducing or adapting national guidelines and legislation concerning the management of intellectual property or knowledge transfer. The Code of Practice consists of three main sets of principles; principles for an internal intellectual property policy; principles for a knowledge transfer policy; and principles for collaborative and contract research.

Full text (in EN, FR, DE) can be found on:

http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/ip_recommendation_en.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/ip_recommendation_fr.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/ip_recommendation_de.pdf

Presentations of the SMEs go Health Information and Training Workshop in Berlin now available on line

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:00:00 GMT

SMEs go Health held a successful Information and Training Workshop in Berlin, Germany, on 10 March 2008.

This fully booked training day attracted participants from several European countries as representatives of SMEs, academia and other research organisations gathered to benefit from high-quality training provided by the European Commission officials and other experts in the field.

The presentations offered a broad view to the 7th Framework Programme participation as they contained information on successful proposal preparation, evaluation procedures, success stories and specific knowledge of upcoming initiatives in the area of Health to name but a few.

The presentations of the training day can be downloaded by clicking the links below (note that some files are large and may take some time to download):

The 7th EU Framework Programme and research areas in Health
Ludovica Serafini, European Commission
Risk Sharing Finance Facility
Ludovica Serafini, European Commission
SMEs go Health: A support action for FP7 Health projects
Sandra Habegger, Euresearch, Switzerland
Innovative Medicines Initiative - a European Technology Platform
Ludovica Serafini, European Commission
Life cycle of an FP7 project: From the idea to a successful project
Martina Kedrova, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Slovakia
Success story: Experiences of coordinating an EU-funded project
Dr. Hassan Jomaa, University of Giessen, Germany
Experiences of an FP7 project Evaluator: A look from the other side
Joseph Rosenecker, University of Munich, Germany
Financial aspects & funding schemes: Tips for your cost planning
Martin Baumgartner, Austrian Research Promotion Agency, Austria
Dos and Don’ts in a proposal
Ylva Huber, Austrian Research Promotion Agency, Austria

Testimony of Prof Vincent Geenen, Euro-Thymaide Project Coordinator, Liege University Center of Immunology.

Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Prof Vincent Geenen, you are coordinator of the FP6 Integrated Project called Euro-Thymaide. Why this project, which started in January 2004 with duration of 5 years, needed to include so many partners (25 partners from 12 countries) in the Consortium?

V.Geenen:

"Autoimmune diseases represent a significant burden for the quality of life and health insurance cost. Despite intense research efforts, the mechanisms underlying the development of autoimmune diseases are still largely obscure. This obvious ignorance explains why the current treatment of these chronic diseases remains inadequate and is associated with severe side effects. The Euro-Thymaide approach is mainly based on the major physiological function of the thymus, i.e. to ensure self-tolerance of a diverse repertoire of T-cell receptors, as well as generation of self-antigen specific regulatory T cells.

The main novelty of Euro-Thymaide approach is a coherent and integrated research effort focused on the central organ responsible for the establishment of self-tolerance, which is a cornerstone of immune physiology together with diversity, specificity, and memory.

Euro-Thymaide had a large ambition by regrouping the leader research groups in Europe including 20 academic research centres and 5 biotech SMEs.

There are other research networks that investigate the pathways leading to immunological self-tolerance, but Euro-Thymaide is the first one that is entirely dedicated to research on thymus-dependent (central) self-tolerance."

It is commonly said that coordinating such a large project is not easy. How did you manage to efficiently integrate these different organisations and how did you smoothly maintained a control on these ambitious objectives?

V.Geenen

"To succeed, Euro-Thymaide needed researchers with different scientific and clinical backgrounds, and it had to wheedle them to cooperate. This ambitious and potentially risky project would examine ethically complex and unprecedented experimental trials. But Euro-Thymaide has also been a thorough managerial test. Few of the scientists running it had ever designed multi-site investigations before and many of them work in different cultural and working environment.

As most European integrated projects, Euro-Thymaide is organized in work packages with lead investigators for each WP. Moreover, five biotech SMEs are part of the consortium to assure the rapid exploitation of the scientific results or support technical advances for the research. The journey has not been always easy for the network, in particular to foster strong interactions among partners. After the first revision of the project by the European Commission, it was decided to reinforce integration among the work packages. This led to the implementation of
researchers trainings and exchange programmes among laboratories.

The ambitious project objectives require indeed the implementation of a joint program of activities, including exchange of personnel and services between research teams in order to provide a viable basis for focused research collaboration.

In order to elaborate new clinical approaches, an additional SME, ProImmune LTd , (UK) has been recruited by the project in 2006 after an international competitive call, to complete the design of defined multimers, which allow the detection of T cells specific for autoantigens. The network SMEs go Life Sciences (now SMEs go Health) including National Contact Points helped us matching our needs and addressing the European biopharmaceutical SMEs to find the right partner. "

The Euro-Thymaide project has met significant success and has deciphered important tolerogenic mechanisms that take place in the thymus. Is it important to keep this approach in the future calls of FP7?

V. Geenen

"Yes indeed, we have progressed quite fast with the support of the European Commission.

From January 2004, the research activities conducted in the FP6 Integrated Project Euro-Thymaide have provided a track record of novel knowledge (http://www.eurothymaide.org/common/ScientificPublication.asp) that demonstrates a crucial role for thymus-dependent self-tolerance in protection from autoimmunity.
A European database of thymus self-antigens is now available online (http://www.EDTSA.org).

More importantly, the Consortium has provided new clear evidence that a thymus dysfunction is a major initiating event in the development of organ-specific autoimmunity. These results are already paving the way for novel therapeutic approaches aiming at self-tolerance restoration and treatment of autoimmune diseases.

Thanks to one dedicated work package, the intrathymic pathways leading to the generation of self-antigen-specific regulatory T cells (Treg) are elucidated, and we are now able to modulate the function of specific naturally occurring Treg through several molecular tools.

Therefore, it clearly appears that the integration of Euro-Thymaide research activities performed by European scientists has generated original and meaningful insights into our knowledge of the biological and genetic mechanisms at the basis of organ-specific autoimmune diseases.

For these reasons and its specific European touch, we are convinced that “Thymus, self-tolerance and autoimmunity” is a fundamental topic that should be maintained and listed in one of the future calls launched in the European Framework Programme 7. "

With your experience, what would be your 5 key recommendations for the coordinators of FP7 financed projects?

V. Geenen: "I would cleraly recommend the following:"

1. A clear definition of the research objective(s).
2. A high level of communication within and between work packages.
3. To delegate management responsibilities to specialists in this domain.
4. To support integration of biotech SMEs.
5. A good level of communication and confidence with the Scientific Officer of the European Commission.

Contact and Info:

Vincent GEENEN MD, PhD — FNRS Research Director
Institute of Pathology CHU-B23
Liege University Center of Immunology
B-4000 Liege — Sart Tilman / Belgium
Tél.: 32 43 66 25 50 - Fax: 32 43 66 98 59
vgeenen@ulg.ac.be
www.eurothymaide.org

The Commission publishes the proceedings of the Workshop "SMEs in Health, opportunities during and after participation in EU funded projects"

Fri, 01 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT

This publication has been developed by Commission Services to assist participants of EU-funded Health research projects, in particular SMEs, in the valorisation of results and in the communication of project successes.

It is a practical guide providing information on existing support structures available in Europe (such as the European Medicine Agency's SME office) and on potential sources of financial support.

This publication has been produced thanks to the valuable assistance of the participants to the workshop "SMEs in Health Research, Opportunities during and after participation to EU funded projects". The workshop has been organized to support participants to our FP6 "SME call" (namely call FP6-2005-LIFESCIHEALTH-7), through which 86 projects have been funded for a total EU contribution of € 200 million, out of which about 40% is going to about 240 SMEs.

The invited experts ranged from representatives of financial institutions, European associations, EU funded support structures plus Commission officials either from the Health Directorate or other services and institutions.

Through this initiative, it intended to assist coordinators (and other participants) of SME driven projects for results valorization and in the communication of project successes, informing them of existing support structures available in Europe and possible sources of financial support.

The workshop objectives were to:

provide information on project management and on various support mechanisms available to SMEs for exploitation of results sharing the acquired knowledge with other project participants;
explore how the Commission services could improve the working relationship with SMEs;
initiate an exchange and discussion with SMEs and academia, representatives of the major European SME associations and other relevant stakeholders, on areas of research most suitable to SMEs for the further development of the new Framework Programme; foster debate on innovation and improvement in the exploitation of research results.

The Health Directorate published the workshop proceedings as a source of practical information and included the next contents:

1. WORKSHOP INTRODUCTION (INCLUDING SURVEY RESULTS)

The survey was sent to 86 coordinators of the SME-STREP Call; 50 of them responded. The suggestions for the workshop coverage were taken on board in the development of the programme.

2. FP6 ONGOING PROJECTS

This session was designed to provide the necessary information for a successful kick-off of funded projects; in particular it gives guidance on project management. This was complemented by a presentation on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and communication to help project participants with successfully preparing the future valorisation of project results from the very beginning.

3. SUPPORT PROVIDED THROUGH OTHER INSTITUTIONS

This session included presentations by EU institutions or support structures not funded by DG RTD but which are relevant for SMEs. Presentations were made by the European Medicines Agency and the SME Office and the Innovation Relay Centres, funded by DG ENTR and included the example of the Medical Technology Thematic IRC group (MTTG).

4. EUROPEAN ASSOCIATIONS RELEVANT TO SMEs

In a “tour de table”, the main European associations, relevant to SMEs working in Healthcare in Europe, illustrated their potential service and explained main political objectives.

5. POSSIBLE SOURCES OF FINANCIAL SUPORT

It provides a short flash on possible sources of financial support, clarifying the role of different players and helping companies to understand the complex investment market reality. It included presentations from the European Investment Fund, the Biotech and Finance forum and the European Venture Capital Association. A short presentation on the Risk Sharing Finance Facility has been added to the proceedings, being relevant as another possible source of loan financing for large companies, Universities, but also to SMEs, through a programme co funded by the European Commission and the European Investment Bank.

6. THE FUTURE: FP7

This session was designed to provide insight on FP7, with focus on the Health Theme and Calls. It also illustrated the support structures tailored to encourage health researchers to participate in FP7 proposals and some examples of the support actions designed for the valorisation of health funded projects’ results.

7. OPENING THE DEBATE ON HOW TO STRENGTHEN INDUSTRY-GOVERNMENT-ACADEMIC-ENTREPRENEURIAL PARTNERSHIPS

Leonard Lerer, Senior Research Programme Manager at the INSEAD Healthcare Management Initiative, was one of the workshop participants. He provided the included contribution to the proceedings to stir up debate and reflection on Life Science Technology Transfer. INSEAD is one of the world’s leading and largest graduate business schools, aiming at developing responsible, thoughtful leaders and entrepreneurs who create value for their organisations and their communities. Through its research, INSEAD aims to expand the frontiers of academic thought and influence business practice.

Link to the whole document: ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/docs/sme-health-proceedings_en_pdf.zip

Interview with an FP7 evaluator

Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT

For ethical issues and following his request, the real name of the FP7-HEALTH evaluator will not be mentioned and during the whole interview will be addressed as Dr John Smith.

Dr John Smith, with a background in Chemical Engineering and Economics and extensive research experience in Pharmaceutical, Chemical and Energy industries in the United States, shared with us his experience as an FP7-HEALTH evaluator, providing his personal insight into the FP evaluation procedure and valuable tips on how to submit a good FP7 proposal.

When and why did you become an evaluator of the EU Framework Programme?
In 2001 and after an extended research and consultation career in the United States, I returned to Europe for personal reasons. Because of my background, I was immediately involved in the FP6 as a researcher, consultant and soon after as an evaluator. As an evaluator I consider that I am able to offer a different approach due to my industrial background and my diverse education and work experience in the United States. I also had much to gain, by understanding the research priorities of the EU and by being exposed to new research ideas and thinking approaches.
Following the EU’s call for candidatures, I registered my Curriculum Vitae in a Framework Programme (FP) experts’ database on the CORDIS website of the EU.

Could you explain in simple terms the evaluation procedure?
The evaluation procedure is clearly described on CORDIS. But before explaining it, I should mention that I have participated in two types of evaluations: the evaluation of FP proposals and the evaluation (monitoring and revision) of ongoing research programmes.
In the evaluation of FP proposals, the EU administration conducts a preliminary check on the eligibility of the proposals according to the description of the call (if proposal arrived before the deadline, if the criteria for a minimum partnership are satisfied, if all the forms are submitted etc.). Unless these conditions are fulfilled, the proposal cannot be evaluated.
Depending on the number of proposals, the type of proposals and the topics, the relevant EU officer decides and selects the evaluators needed. Each expert is provided with general evaluation principles, the details of the evaluation procedure and the proposals. The expert has to sign a form that guarantees his/her independency and declares no conflict of interest with the proposals to be evaluated.
Then the individual evaluation, that can be remote or on location, starts. The experts first assess whether a proposal is within the scope of the call. This is a pass-fail criterion. After that, the evaluators have to decide on three criteria: Scientific and or technological Excellence, Quality and efficiency of management and the consortium, and Impact and dissemination. In order for the proposal to be eligible for funding it has to pass the threshold on all three criteria and the overall threshold. In addition, gender and ethical issues have to be addressed and recommendations made if appropriate.

The expert has to provide a written evaluation report (Individual Assessment Report or IAR) for each proposal where he provides full justification of his marks and a series of suggestions on how the proposal can be improved. Indeed, the IAR includes a total score, overall comments detailing strengths and weakness, a recommendation whether or not the proposal should be funded (each threshold and final threshold should be reached) and an evaluation of the requested grant in relation to the work plan (whether realistic or overestimated).
Subsequently, a consensus meeting takes place in Brussels where a panel of experts (from three to ten in my experience) that have previously evaluated the specific proposals discuss, justify and have to reach a consensus on each individually evaluated criterion. They also prepare a consensus report for each proposal that has to be signed by all the experts of the panel. A moderator is present to aid the debate and provide additional information when needed. The entire process is supervised by independent inspectors that can enter the evaluation room as observers. The proposals that pass all the thresholds have to be ranked.
Depending on the evaluation process, a panel meeting may take place in order to assess and compare the consensus reports of the proposals which exceed the thresholds and may include a hearing with the proposers on specific issues and establish a ranking list in the case of similar total scores.
After the evaluation process, the Commission prepares the list of the proposals that have reached all thresholds, the list of proposals for which the negotiation process can start (taking into account the available total funding for the given panel), the reserve list (in case of negotiation failure from either side) and the list of rejected proposals (scoring below one or more thresholds). Finally, the coordinator of each proposal receives the Evaluation Summary Report. It reflects the consensus reached between the independent experts as well as the panel results on each main criteria and it provides overall comments and a final score for the proposal.
The evaluation process for FP proposals in addition to ranking the proposals for funding, provides binding recommendations to the EU officer for the negotiation of the contract. For example, the evaluation panel can suggest a specific reduction in the budget of the project, implementation of contingency plans etc. The evaluation report is also very important for proposals that did not pass the threshold, since it provides concrete suggestions on how to improve the proposal in case of re-submission.
The evaluation of the ongoing projects has a different scope. Here the officer assigns to several experts the monitoring and revision of the periodic reports. The work document (Technical annex of the contract) and the progress report (with the project deliverables) are provided to the evaluators that have signed a secrecy agreement and a non-conflict declaration. The evaluators have to judge the progress of the project: whether it is on schedule, if the milestones have been met, the quality of the deliverables, problems and contingency actions, the use of resources etc. They have to provide suggestions and recommendations that are binding for the consortium. A detailed consent report between the evaluators involved is written and sent to the EU officer in Brussels.

What has been your experience so far?
The first time, in 2003, they contacted me to evaluate proposals on a topic of the FP6-TP1 (LifeSciences, Genomics and Biotechnology for Health) call. I communicated with the EU officer in charge and discussed with him his expectations before accepting the assignment. It is important for the EU officer to know what you can offer and for the evaluator to understand how to approach the evaluation.

My first evaluation was a remote one. I received several proposals and a set of instructions pertaining to the evaluation process and to the particular call. Based on these guidelines I had to write my detailed assessment of the proposals and send it to Brussels. The remoteness of the process made the evaluation more difficult.
Later on, I participated in the evaluations of proposals on site. In some cases, the proposals were sent to me beforehand in order to perform my assessment and be prepared in advance for the discussion that was to take place in Brussels, whereas in other cases the proposals were provided in Brussels where I had a limited time to read them and take notes before the discussion with other experts (consensus meeting) took place. As part of my FP evaluation experience, I was invited to several consensus meetings (the last one related to the FP7-HEALTH-A call) where the evaluation was performed by small panels of three to ten evaluators that met in a room with a moderator who just supervised the process and provided aid if needed. The results of the remote evaluation were presented to the panel as an additional element in the evaluation process. Each evaluator brought different points to the discussion that, through a thorough debate, reached the consensus result. The value of the debate in decision making is fully exploited by this process in which all the evaluators are experienced and competent to prevent a group mentality.
Personally, I prefer the on-site evaluation. In addition to having a more direct impact on the final evaluation decision, it allows a direct contact with other evaluators and with EU officials. It also offers insights into EU research trends, exposure to new ideas and new professional contacts.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of being an FP evaluator? How would you improve the FP evaluation procedure?
I already mentioned some of the main advantages of being an evaluator: global view of research, enriching exchange of ideas with top scientists in Europe, to be updated on the latest innovative ideas of top research consortia in Europe, to have an insight into the evaluation process and to understand and contribute to the EU research priorities. It also provides a first hand experience on how to write successful proposals. However, to perform an honest and helpful task, the FP evaluation is an extremely hard and sometimes difficult work. It could be exhausting to read carefully several hundred pages of research proposals describing complex processes within the limited time provided by the EC. It is easy to pass a good proposal and cut a bad one but the difficulty comes from ranking the proposals that are in the cut-off point in the case of limited funds. It is also very difficult and time consuming to formulate constructive suggestions for a promising proposal that needs further work.

The whole FP evaluation procedure is quite objective and difficult to manipulate since it is the result of a consensus reached by numerous individuals. The experts are established professionals. In addition, during the whole procedure relevant weight is given to objectivity, to the confidential treatment of the information, the experts’ independency, the avoidance of conflict of interest between evaluators and the FP-proposals to be evaluated. Finally, the whole process is followed by independent observers and the list of evaluators is published at the end of each FP. However, it is my opinion that the evaluation procedure could be improved by providing more evaluation time per proposal or by reducing the proposal length.

In your opinion, what is required to become a good FP7 evaluator?
Despite the fact that my professional training was in evaluating research projects for funding by the private sector, my first experience with the FP evaluation was extremely time-consuming. After several FP-evaluations, I learned to identify more quickly the relevant information that needs to be judged and checked. However, although evaluation experience is extremely important, a good FP-evaluator also needs to be reliable/honest, objective, open minded (avoid preconceived ideas), cautious, thorough and practical. He has to understand very clearly what is expected from him. The expert should have the courage to admit that he is not competent to evaluate a given proposal or some aspect(s) of that proposal. In that sense, a good EU officer combines different expertise and professional experiences in the same evaluation panel and a good evaluator has to remain open to those experts that may be more experienced in certain evaluation criteria of the proposals at hand. The expert should be at the forefront of S&T developments and he should understand very clearly the EU’s broader research priorities and the priorities of the specific call. First hand experience in project coordination and administration is important particularly in the evaluation of ongoing projects. Finally, it is important to have written FP proposals in order to appreciate and understand the importance of the task, to respect the effort of the proposers and to provide them with a useful, valuable and constructive feedback to their work.

Finally, could you provide us with some tips on how to write a good FP7 proposal?
There are several key points for a good proposal.
First of all read the call carefully. All the requirements of the call should be satisfied: relevance of the topic and work, consortium composition, complete documents and on-time submission. If these requirements are not fulfilled the proposal is not going to be evaluated and you will have wasted your time and effort.
Before writing the proposal read on the CORDIS website all the available documents related to the call and topic as well as the guide for evaluators. This will give you a good idea on how your proposal is going to be evaluated and could be used as a guideline during the writing-up.
Do not forget to communicate with a good, clear and concise abstract since it is the first contact that the evaluator has with your proposal.
A well written project is extremely important. Write simply and clearly. Consider that the evaluator may not be a top expert in the subject and, despite this fact, needs to understand the importance of and the reasons behind the research that you propose to undertake. In addition, experts have limited time to read hundreds of pages of proposals, so please avoid long paragraphs and use self explanatory tables, diagrams, figure, pictures, schemes whenever possible.

In my opinion, the most important parts of the proposal are:

The relevance to the call and the scientific soundness of the proposed work. It is very important to fully address the topic of the call and to have an innovative and clear idea. An elaborated work plan with well focused and defined tasks should be presented, broken down into work packages (WPs) which should follow the logical phases of the implementation of the project.
The impact of the work: Describe how the proposed project and specifically the deliverables will contribute to the objectives of the call/specific topic listed in the work programme and the overall objectives of ERA (European Research Area). Show how the proposed project will enhance the state-of the-art and will have a significant impact in the European/International economy and in the society (if applicable). Take adequate measures in order to efficiently disseminate and exploit the results of the project.

Other important points are:

Complementarity, the European dimension and documented expertise of the consortium. Clearly describe the critical mass (with complementary expertise, resources and capabilities) required at EU level to achieve the objectives of the project and the key benefits of working together in this consortium. Show that all partners are necessary and how they are suited and are committed to their tasks. Quality of the R&D groups should be clearly documented in the proposal by only providing background that is relevant to the proposal. Do not forget to include in the consortium end-users and SMEs that have a decisive role in the exploitation and dissemination of results.
The management structure and experience. The bigger the project and the budget, the more important is the management of the proposal and particularly the technical management. In that case, describe a clear and practical management plan that will facilitate the accomplishment of the research objectives and communication between all partners. Establish experienced governance bodies and clear decision-making structures and select coordinators (technical and administrative coordinators) and a management team with previous managerial experience. Do not forget to provide a satisfactory plan for the knowledge and intellectual property rights (IPR) management (financial & IPR issues should be agreed upfront by all partners).
Resources utilisation. Provide an adequate plan for the management utilisation of resources (personnel/skills, budget, equipment) that should be consistent with the deliverables of the proposal.

And finally, do not forget to submit ALL ELEMENTS ON TIME!!!!

7th Award for Communication in Life Sciences

Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) invites entries for its 7^th Award for Communication in the Life Sciences.

The Award is presented annually to a practising life scientist in Europe who has made an outstanding contribution to the communication of science for the public.

It consists of a personal award of 5,000 Euro and a silver and gold medal.

Entries are accepted as self-applications, or as nominations by a
third-party, and must be submitted by 1 May 2008.

The conditions and application/nomination forms are available at:
http://www.embo.org/awards/communications.html

Last year's winners were Christian Sardet and Ali Saib from France.

For moreinformation please see:
http://www.embo.org/awards/communication_award07_en.pdf

Innovative Medicines Initiative: 6 Research Areas for the First Call

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

The Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) is taking shape: about twenty topics belonging to six thematic areas available for funding in the first IMI call will be informally presented at the next “IMI Member States Contact Group Meeting” in Brussels on November 27th, 2007. The official publication of the call is expected for January 2008. It will be a two-stage call, the deadline of the first stage being envisioned for April 2008.

As presented by the European Commission at the “IMI National Platform Day” in Madrid on October 10th, 2007, the 20 topics of the first call will be derived from the following 6 thematic areas:

1. Translational biomarkers for brain disorders
2. Islet cell function and vascular complications of diabetes
3. Predictive toxicology
4. COPD and asthma
5. Pharmacovigilance
6. Education and training in various disciplines

With the aim to reduce bottlenecks and weaknesses in the development of new drugs and therapies, thereby strengthening the competitiveness of the European pharma-industry, IMI was established as a Technology Platform by the European Commission (DG Research) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries (EFPIA) in 2004.

IMI regroups the main actors of the pharmaceutical and medical sector in Europe (research organisations, universities, enterprises, patient organisations, regulators, and others). IMI issued a “Strategic Research Agenda” (SRA) in order to develop the vision of the group on the future of the European Research in these sectors. Key objectives of IMI are supporting the accelerated discovery and development of better drugs and therapies by funding research projects in the pre-competitive area. These projects will address the main bottlenecks in the drug development process:

- Improve prediction of the Safety and Efficacy of new drug candidates
- Develop joint Knowledge Management systems
- Ensure a more skilled workforce in Europe to bridge the Training gaps

Subject to the approval of the European Council and the Consultation of the European Parliament, the IMI Technology Platform is expected to be converted into a Public-Private-Partnership, the “IMI Joint Undertaking” (JU), at the end of 2007. The IMI JU will fund calls for pre-competitive research projects based on the key thematic areas identified in the Strategic Research Agenda. Altogether, a € 2 billion budget is foreseen for IMI for 7 years, which will be provided in equal parts by the Commission (1 billion cash) and the EFPIA (largely in-kind contributions).

You can find further information, including the Strategic Research Agenda, at: www.imi-europe.org/

Czech Experience from the 1st Call, Priority Health, FP7

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

The Czech team of the Institute of Pharmacology of the Faculty of Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Czech Republic, submitted a project proposal to the FP7 topic in the first HEALTH Call “2007 – 1.3.5: In silico modelling for ADMET outcomes”. Unfortunately, the consortium of 10 members with a coordinator from Finland did not succeed in the evaluation procedure.

The head of the Czech team, Prof. Pavel Anzenbacher kindly answered our questions regarding the identification of possible reasons for not getting funded. He also gave some recommendations for other submitters of how to be able to turn an unsuccessful proposal into a lesson and enhance the future chances of success. He pointed out the six most important issues to be taken into account during the proposal preparation phase:

1. Omission or insufficient explanation of ethical issues. The proposal should create a feeling that the ethical issues are covered by written approval or documents which are in accordance with the legislation in the country of origin and are not discordant with approaches enforced by the EC. This is valid for both proposals dealing with humans and with materials of human origin as well as for experiments using animal models or animal tissues.

2. Authors are not able to convince the reviewer of their scientific competence. Although the proposal was rich in brilliant scientific ideas, the participants could not convincingly show that they would be able to implement these ideas (by their publications and previous activities). Less words, more relevant references - this is what counts.

3. In planning of activities as well as of the budget, submitters should not forget to include the dissemination by all possible means. Referees and EC loves it.

4. Submitters should try to persuade the reviewers that the consortium is able to cover all or almost all topics included in the respective theme. This may be hard, but gathering the right partners that are able to do this will open doors.

5. Management of the project is at least as important as the scientific idea. Creating a team with at least some experience in managing larger project(s), even non-scientific co-workers, will prove helpful.

6. Documentation proving that the partners are able to work as a team, preferably with some common publications or activities already before the project, is a good plus. If not, the complementarity of the approaches of the partners should be stressed.

Prof. Pavel Anzenbacher
Institute of Pharmacology - Faculty of Medicine,
Palacky University Olomouc, Czech Republic

The ERA-Net EUROTRANS-BIO's 3rd Transnational Call is open- Deadline: 15 February, 2008

Mon, 26 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

EUROTRANS-BIO gathers biotechnology R&D funding programmes from 9 countries/regions: Austria, Basque Country (Spain), Flanders (Belgium), Finland, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands and Spain.

EUROTRANS-BIO’s objective is to foster economic and academic biotech players in sharing risks, costs and skills related to innovation in order to develop new products, technologies or supply services that could reach the market more efficiently.

In the two first calls (2006 & 2007), EUROTRANS-BIO received 125 pre-proposals and 41 were successfully evaluated and recommended for funding. Selected projects cover various fields of economic interest (health, agro/food and environment). The total cost of supported projects is 69 M€.

The 3rd call for international projects has been launched on November 9th 2007.

Topic
The ETB call 2007 is a generic call including all fields of biotechnology: red, green, grey/white and blue biotechnology.
Supported projects follow a bottom-up approach.

Who can apply?
EUROTRANS-BIO is dedicated to support SMEs and their academic partners.
Consortia consisting of at least two SMEs from two different participating countries can apply for EUROTRANS-BIO funding (Austria, Basque Country (Spain), Flanders (Belgium), Finland, France, Germany, Italy*, The Netherlands* and Spain). SMEs forming a consortium can include large companies on a case-by-case basis, academic research groups and organisations which belong to their countries. Consortia can involve as many partners as necessary to achieve the projects goals. The coordinator of the consortium has to be a SME (European definition).

Application Procedure
The application process is two-phased. Pre-proposals and full-proposals are submitted electronically.

The deadline for submitting the pre-proposals is February 15th 2008. The results of the pre-proposal check are expected to be communicated to the applicants by early April. For those projects that pass the pre-proposal phase, the dead-line for full proposal submission is May 30th. The funding decisions are expected to be made in September 2008.

All the material is available on line www.eurotransbio.net.

EUROTRANS-BIO employs national resources. Each applicant is highly encouraged to contact his/her national contact to check national criteria before submission.

(*) Participation of The Netherlands and Italy is very probable but has to be formally confirmed.

contact : Marielle Mailhes
email : marielle.mailhes@oseo.fr
phone : +33 1 41 79 91 35

Announcement of the 4th International Greek Biotechnology Forum- IGBF 4- in Zappeio Megaro, Athens, Greece, to be held on 2 & 3 Feb. 08

Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

IGBF is Greece’s top Biotechnology science and business event specially crafted to promote the leading edges of research. IGBF is the key point of reference for the advancement of Bio-Business and Bio-Sciences in the Balkans and aims this year to embrace the entire regions of Southeastern, CEE Europe and Middle East.

The past three fora were very successful in terms of attendance and scientific contribution while the careful choice of speakers and subjects guarantee the continuing success of previous years.
Biotechnology leaders involved in basic research, medicine, agronomics, environment, economy and business will give presentations and discuss their opinion with distinguished foreign and Greek speakers.

The spirit and aim of the congress are to stimulate the creation of new, feasible research programs and collaborations and to constitute a forum of ideas for new biotechnological applications that have brooded from the biomedical research.
Many have called the 21st century the "Century of Biology". Greece as a Country is trying reach the modern Biology developments, but a lot of steps remain in the sector of Biotechnology. Nevertheless, as a nation, Greece has enormous assets of intellectual and human resource both located in Greece or represented in the Greek scientific and business community disseminated all over the world.
Apart from its human potential and institutions, Greece, as member of the European Union has access to various resources which have not been completely exploited yet.

One of the aims of this congress is to help the integration of Greek basic and mainly applied bioscience into those of Europe and USA.

IGBF also features:
• EXPO of biomedical products and services
• Partnership meetings (B2B)
• Career Fair
• Laureate for Best Poster submitted
• Laureate for Best Business Plan submitted
• Painting Exhibition of Medical Doctors

contact : Dr. E. Bonoris
email : info@bionova.gr
phone : +30 210 8004910
fax : +30 210 8004913
more information : http://www.igbf.gr
Register online:

See all Open Partner Searches in Health theme at one glance!

Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Find in one place all the partner searches that are currently open in the SMEs go Health database!

Look at the list without registration by going to http://www.smesgohealth.org/common/partnerssearches.asp

In order to get further details of the partner searches that interest you, go to > More information and log in to the service.

In case you are not registered yet, you can easily do it here.

SMEs go Health initiative received the Excellency Prize "Partner of Health System"

Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

SMEs go Health initiative received the Excellency Prize "Partner of Health System" at the Policies and Business Mechanisms in the CEE Healthcare Industries event held in September in Romania!

The price was granted to the SMEs go Health project for perseverance and efficiency in supporting the researchers from the health domain to access European funding. The prize was awarded by a media group FORUMINVEST.

Ms Liliana Munteanu (on the left), the Vice-president of FORUMINVEST, handed over the diploma to Ms Flaviana Rotaru, Head of Funded Programs Department at FM Management Consultancy SRL, the Romanian partner of the "SMEs go Health" project.

Research involving the use of human Embryonic Stem Cells

Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

The Commission clearly stated that “All proposals for funding involving the use of human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC) and/or foetal issues will be automatically submitted to an ethical review panel”.
At the evaluation step, once the scientific evaluators confirm the necessity of using hESC in the research proposal, the ethical review panel assesses:

That the proposal does not include research activities which destroys embryos
Whether the consortium has taken into account the legislation, regulations, ethical rules and/or codes of conduct in place in the country(ies) where the research using hESC is to take place, including the procedures for obtaining informed consent
The source of the hESC;
The measures taken to protect personal data, including genetic data, and privacy;
The nature of financial inducements, if any.

Each research proposal involving the use of hESC, which is supported within FP7, is assessed by at least two independent ethical reviews: one in the country(ies) itself where the research will be carried out and one at the EU level. A list of National Ethics Committees is available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/european_group_ethics/link/index_en.htm#4

The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies, a neutral, independent, pluralist and multidisciplinary body, composed of fifteen experts appointed by the Commission, suggested that, among others, the following considerations have to apply to hESC funded by the EU:

FP7 hESC lines have to result from non-implanted IVF embryos;
hESC lines banked in the European Registry should be used where possible;
If alternatives to hESC with the same scientific potential as embryo-derived stem cells will be found in the future, their use should be maximised;
Donors' rights (in terms of health, informed consent, data protection and free donation) have to be protected and safeguarded;
Actions to stimulate public debate on this research area are needed at EU level.

How Ethical Review works in FP7

Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Despite the recommendation from the Commission that, in FP7, every proposal should address ethical issues at the very submission (and not in a later stage like in FP6), a large number of proposals in the first and second Health calls did not include them. It is important to note that this is an eligibility criteria and that a proposal can be disregarded without further warning because the ethical issues are not included. If the scientific evaluators are concerned about the ethical aspects of a proposal, it may be submitted to an Ethical Review Panel.
We strongly advice to include an Ethical Review in all proposals, even if it obviously raises no ethical problem.

In order to help you in that difficult matter, besides your always-available-SMEs go Health-expert and your National Contact Point, some important information are available online. You should go through the well explained ethical checklist at: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ethics_en.html and include it in your proposal.

If your project includes ethically sensitive activities, two main questions should be answered in the Ethical Review:
• Are these activities necessary to achieve the scientific objectives set forth in the proposal? Is there no alternative?
• What will be the benefit/burden balance of the research project? i.e. the impact of this research not only regarding scientific advance but also in terms of Human dignity as well as social and cultural impact?

Ethical issues in FP7: The Importance of “getting it right the first time”

Despite frequent announcements by the European Commission that proposals submitted in FP7 need to thoroughly address ethical issues, a large number of proposals from the first Health call were found deficient in this respect. It is therefore important to bear in mind that the adequate coverage of ethical issues in a FP7 proposal constitutes an eligibility criterion - a proposal may be disregarded without further warning, solely because of insufficient treatment of ethical issues.

All proposals received by the Commission must describe the ethical, safety and socioeconomic issues raised by the research proposed and how they will be addressed so as to conform to national, European and international regulations.

The major changes from FP6 to FP7 in the context of ethical issues are:

The Ethics Review will be carried out on the proposal submitted
No additional information will be requested from the Consortium at a later stage
The Consortium is asked to submit drafts of Information Sheets and Consent Forms
The Consortium does not need to submit copies of legislation

Following a call for proposals, all applications submitted to the Commission are evaluated on their scientific merit. During this evaluation, the panel of scientists also makes a preliminary check of the ethical issues raised by a project and identifies any projects requiring special attention. This applies when projects raise sensitive ethical issues or when applicants fail to address ethical issues appropriately.

Following the evaluation, those proposals retained by the Commission with a view to funding, but identified by the experts as raising ethical issues, will be submitted to an Ethics Review panel. Ethics Review is automatic for proposals which include a research intervention on human beings, the use of human embryonic stem cells (hESC), or the use of non human primates.

The European Commission provides guidance on addressing ethical issues for prospective applicants at the following website: http://cordis. europa.eu/fp7/ethics_en.html, including a document on “ethics for researchers” at ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/docs/ethics-for-researchers.pdf

Open ERA-NET Call and updated Call list

Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

CURRENTLY OPEN ERA-NET CALLS:

Genomics of human pathogenic microorganisms (PathoGenoMics) http://www.pathogenomics-era.net/index.php PathoGenoMics PhD Award, deadline 28.02.2008.

There are 11 ongoing ERA-NETs which relate to the Health Theme. In particular they target:

1. Ageing (ERA AGE) http://era-age.group.shef.ac.uk/

2. Health emergency (HESCULAEP) http://www.hesculaep.org/index.php

3. Organ donation and transplantation (ALLIANCE-O) http://www.alliance-o.org/

4. Genomics of human pathogenic microorganisms (PathoGenoMics) http://www.pathogenomics-era.net/index.php

5. System biology and genomics (ERA-SysBio) http://www.erasysbio.net

6. Guidelines on cancer best clinical practice (CoCanCPG) http://www.cocancpg.eu

7. Medicines for children (PRIOMEDCHILD)

8. Rare disease (E-RARE) http://www.e-rare.eu/cgi-bin/index.php

9. Neurosciences (NEURON) http://www.neuron-eranet.net/

10. New and emerging risks in occupational safety and health(NEW OSH ERA) http://www.newoshera.eu/

11. EUROTRANS-BIO: support trans-national R&D private/private and private/public co-operations (biotech sector) http://www.eurotransbio.net

SMEs go Health Information and Training Session at international conference "Baltic Dynamics'07", Riga, Latvia

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Information and Training Workshop on the 7^th EU-Framework Programme for Research and technological development will be organised by the SMEs go Health network on 13 September 2007 at the International conference “Baltic Dynamics’07”, Riga, Latvia

The aim of the 1^stInformation & Training Workshop was to provide comprehensive information and to train Health and Biotech SMEs, researchers, industry, associations, representative of Bio Clusters and Bio Incubators for successful participation into FP7 Programme projects.

The plenary session in the morning was dedicated to topics about funding opportunities of the 7^thEU-Framework programme, life cycle of an FP7 project, benefits and challenges of participation in EU-Framework programme – case studies of successfully participated SME and the coordinator of the research project, European Technology Platform-Innovative Medicine Initiative.

After theoretical part in the morning, participants have been trained on practical issues in 2 parallel sessions – Health and Biotechnology. Subjects focused on research areas in Health and BIO themes in FP7, processing of project proposal, financial issues and evaluation aspects.

The event was organized by two European initiatives “SMEsgoHealth” and “Match2BIOSME”, whose networks consist of experienced partners from more then 27 European countries.

Contact:
Mrs Diana Krievina
Latvian Technological Center (LTC)
Aizkraukles 21, LV-1006, Riga, LATVIA
Tel: +37/1/7558754
dianak@edi.lv

Trans-regional Information and Training Workshop on the 7th EU-Framework Programme (FP7) in Riga

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 00:00:00 GMT

On September 13th, 2007 the first trans-regional Information and Training Workshop took place in Riga, Latvia – at the international Baltic Dynamics’07 conference.

The event was organised by the two European initiatives, SMEs go Health and Match2BioSMEs, whose networks consist of experienced partners from more than 27 European countries. Small and medium-sized enterprises, research institutes, universities, industry and associations, representatives of bio-clusters or bio-incubators, working in the field of Health and Biotechnology and interested in EU funding for research & technology development were attracted to attend the workshop. More than 60 participants from various countries registered for this one day and free of charge event.
After the opening of the day by Mrs. Diana Krievina, Latvian Technology Center and host of the workshop, Mrs. Liene Bigača, Latvian State agency "Public Health Agency", gave an overview on public health and knowledge based bio-economy in Latvia, Dr. Frank Heemskerk, RIMS, Belgium, subsequently introduced the 7th EU-Framework Programme and its funding opportunities, explained the main financial and legal rules of participation and emphasized the specific possibilities and support for SME and SME associations to participate in EU-funded research projects.

Mrs. Caterina Buonocore, APRE, Italy, showed the life cycle of an FP7 project, from the idea to the end of a successful project, explaining the writing process and negotiation phase. She pointed out how researchers can build a consortium and find partners with the help of different tools – like the SMEs go Health database and its matching facilities. The afternoon was divided into two parallel sessions where participants were encouraged to give their input: the first one led by SMEs go Health for the “Health” (red biotech) sector and the second led by Match2BioSMEs for the white and green biotech sectors.

To summarize, the workshop was not only a full success, but also a perfect opening for the Baltic Dynamics’07 conference which followed on September 14th-15th. This international conference attracted more than 400 participants from 35 countries.

SMEs go Health offers an advanced Match Making service!

Wed, 22 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT

In order to better serve your needs and speed up the process of finding potential project partners or initiators that exactly fit your objectives, SMEs Go Health has developed a new automatic function that screens the database of partner searches and profiles on your behalf.

All you need to do is to register your own profile and indicate which Call Topics you are interested in. After this, the system automatically generates for you a list of relevant partner searches based on the Call Topics. (Note: In case you do not choose any specific Call Topics that are of your interest, no Match Making will be done. If you decide to modify your profile and change the Call Topics later on, a new list will appear.).

When the list has been generated, you have a possibility to mark which partner searches/profiles are of interest to you, and directly contact the relevant ones just by one click of a mouse! The system provides an automatic email with reference to your profile and invites the other party to view it and get in touch with you in case collaboration could be possible. The service also allows you to keep track which organizations you have already contacted and when.

To access the Match Making service, we invite you to log in to the database if you have already registered. If you do not have a profile yet, please register here. It’s totally free!

Finding and contacting relevant partners interested in joint research projects for FP7 Health thematic could not be any easier!

A VIRTUAL BROKERAGE EVENT has been organised between 25 June and 29 June 2007

Mon, 25 Jun 2007 00:00:00 GMT

This VIRTUAL BROKERAGE EVENT (VBE) was designed to help identify research interests in the Health area at the European level and maximise the involvement of SMEs and academic organisations in research projects in the field of Health/Life Sciences of the 7th Framework Programme (FP7).

To this end, all 29 partners of the "SMEs go Health" network have collected and selected relevant partner searches and profiles from researchers and Health companies in their own countries. The classification of the partner searches and profiles was done according to topics open for submission in Call 2 but can also be searched upon any keyword.

Experts from “SMEs go Health” supported their national candidates to match profiles and contact potential partners among more than 1.100 profiles collected up to now in 35 countries.

In particular, the network performed during one week - from 25 June to 29 June 2007 - an intensive “matching” process: and assisted one by one each company and academic researcher from the database to find relevant partners.

The “SMEs go Health” network was created in order to assist SMEs and academia in their European R&D strategy and successful participation in FP7 and the VIRTUAL BROKERAGE EVENT is an important means
to achieving that aim.

The deadline for Call 2 was 18 September 2007 but all profiles and partner searches are still accessible in the SGH database at: www.smesgohealth.org/common/ContactsLogin.asp.

Lump sums for International Cooperation Partner Countries - a simpler approach for FP7 financing

Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:00:00 GMT

On 4 June 2007 the Commission adopted a decision on the use of lump sum payments for International Cooperation Partner Countries (ICPC). This is one way in which the Commission has made the grant agreement process simpler for participants from these countries.

This decision enables the use of a flat rate lump sum amount to be used within grant agreements for indirect actions concluded under the Seventh Framework programme.

The Rules for Participation in FP7 included a provision for ICPC countries to opt for the Community financial contribution to take the form of a single lump sum payment. The lump sum covers all the costs of an ICPC participant including not only the costs for personnel and travel, but also those of equipment, consumables and indirect costs

If the participant chooses the lump sum option for financing, the maximum EC contribution is calculated on the basis of the economy of the ICPC, the number of persons-years requested for the project by the legal entity, the type of funding scheme of the project and the legal status and the activity type of the legal entity in the ICPC.

It is up to the individual participants to decide whether or not to opt for the lump sum system of payment. Alternatively ICPC participants may request the standard reimbursement of eligible costs.

For more information, check out the details in the "Guide to financial issues". (Art. II.18 ECGA of the DRAFT Guide to Financial Issues relating to FP7 Indirect Actions)

EFBIC RED: a bridge on red biotechnology between China and Europe

Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:00:00 GMT

--> EFBIC can help you be involved in EU-China Collaboration networks.

EFBIC RED, European Focus on Biotechnology with China, is a Specific Support Action (SSA) co-funded under Framework programme 6, aiming to establish strategic relations with high-level decision-makers and scientists from Europe and China.

EFBIC RED action responds to the ever-growing scientific and commercial importance of China for the EU in the HEALTH field and to common interests for collaboration. Its focus is both on developing joint EU-China research and strategies and on encouraging the participation of Chinese scientists in EU Framework Programme research consortia.

In cooperation with science, industry and public interest organizations, EFBIC will work to encourage, develop and facilitate cooperative strategies and activities in research, innovation, commercial development and training.

The strategic objectives of the project are:

To promote and facilitate the participation of Chinese scientists in EU Framework Programme consortia and EU scientists in Chinese research programmes in relation to the current Health Theme of FP7 in close coordination with the European Commission;
To monitor and evaluate the HEALTH research policies of the EU and China and best cooperation practices between them, especially as they relate to the development of the EU FP7 and China's mid and long-term (10 to 20 year) strategy;
To review the current state of knowledge in the relevant science and technology of shared interest and define strategies for the application of this knowledge to selected objectives of common purpose;
To build on and extend the already-established research and development networks, offices and National Contact Points (NCPs) in the EU and China from an earlier phase of EFBIC for R&D cooperation.

The project will review and define strategies in HEALTH field and will strengthen scientific cooperation in the immediate and longer term between the EU and China. It will be carried out in close collaboration between the European Federation of Biotechnology Europe Unlimited, FFG, APRE and the CNCBD sponsored by MOST.

EFBIC RED consortium is constituted by public and private companies from Denmark, China, Italy, Austria and Belgium.

The project will last for 2 years. EFBIC RED identified 6 scientific topics with potential of promoting European Chinese Corporation: Traditional Chinese Medicine, Regenerative Medicine, Diabetes, Genomics for Health, Ageing and Infectious diseases.

If you are interested in EFBIC RED activities, please contact project coordinator:

Coordinator: Jens Sundbye
e-mail: js@biomedicoforum.dk

ERA-Net scheme : an important funding opportunity for healthcare initiatives in Europe

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 00:00:00 GMT

ERA-NET ACTIONS IN HEALTH THEME:

The objective of the ERA-Net scheme is to develop and strengthen the coordination of national and regional research programmes.

Under the ERA-NET scheme, national and regional authorities identify research programmes they wish to coordinate or open up mutually. The participants in these actions are therefore programme “owners” (typically ministries or regional authorities defining research programmes) or programme “managers” (such as research councils or other research funding agencies managing research programmes).

There are 11 ongoing ERA-NETs started within Framework Programme 6, which relate to the HEALTH Theme. In particular they target:

1. Ageing (ERA AGE) http://era-age.group.shef.ac.uk

2. Health emergency (HESCULAEP) http://www.hesculaep.org/index.php

3. Organ donation and transplantation (ALLIANCE-O)

http://www.alliance-o.org

4. Genomics of human pathogenic microorganisms (PathoGenoMics) http://www.pathogenomics-era.net/index.php

5. System biology and genomics (ERA-SysBio) http://www.erasysbio.net

6. Guidelines on cancer best clinical practice (CoCanCPG) http://www.cocancpg.eu

7. Medicines for children (PRIOMEDCHILD)

8. Rare disease (E-RARE) http://www.e-rare.eu/cgi-bin/index.php

9. Neurosciences (NEURON)

10. New and emerging risks in occupational safety and health(NEW OSH ERA)

11. Support trans-national R&D private/private and private/public co-operations (biotech sector) EUROTRANS-BIO http://www.eurotransbio.net

Eurotrans-BIO call for proposal - deadline 7th May 2007

Mon, 16 Apr 2007 00:00:00 GMT

EUROTRANS-BIO is a four year project funded under the European Commissions ERA-NET scheme. This initiative involves government funding bodies in Austria, Basque Country (Spain), Flanders (Belgium), Finland, France (coordinator : OSEO innovation), Germany, Italy, The Netherlands and Spain. It aims at coordinating national and regional funding programmes for the benefit of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in the field of biotechnology.

In its first call launched last year, EUROTRANS-BIO supported 23 projects (out of 66 evaluated projects), covering fields of economical interest (health, agro/foo and environment) for a total cost of 45 M€.

EUROTRANS-BIO is now launching its second call for proposals. The strategic objective of this call is to foster the competitiveness of European's biotechnology industry by supporting the research intensive SMEs and their strategic partnerships. Funding will be offered to excellent innovative industrial R&D and applied research projects in all fields of biotechnology.

The deadline for submitting pre-proposals is May 7th 2007 and the overall budget of the call will be up to 35 million euros.