1. No category

Forum 4: Session 2.4 European Funding and Partnership Opportuni9es 11.45 – 13.45 Opportunities for European
Funding and Partnership
Liverpool Health is Wealth Conference
22 January 2015
NHS European Office
•  Who are we?
–  Established 2007
–  Part of the NHS Confederation
–  Funded by national NHS bodies
•  What do we do?
–  Represent NHS organisations in EU policy-making and legislation
–  Assist the NHS with the implementation of EU law
–  Offer strategic advice on EU funding opportunities
–  Promote partnerships between NHS organisations and bodies from
other sectors/countries.
EU affairs and the NHS: joining the circle
European funding EU policy & legisla9on Exchanging best prac9ce Finance
Market
RTD&I state aid
framework
Internal Market
rules
(finance, products,
services …)
EIB i2i
Financial
instruments
ERDF,
COSME, Horizon2020,
Linking up
CreativeEurope
innovation actors
3%
objective
Infrastructure
ERDF,
Horizon2020,
CEF digital
Pooling
public funds
ERA-Nets, Art 185, JPIs,
EIPs, EUREKA
Research
funding
ESFRI
ERIC
SET, nano-tech…
Challenge driven
innovation
Horizon, ESIF, LIFE
EGTC
Eco-innov.
policies &
management
RIS3, ETPs, EIPs
"synchronisation"
INTERREG
ERA
Knowledge
5 freedom
th
COSME: EEN, IPR helpdesk,
Horizon Participants portal
ESIF
EURAXESS
EITKICs
researchindustryeducation
Innovation policy
analysis (IUS, RIS,
RIM, RIO, Cluster
Observatory, …)
Horizon2020,
ESIF
User-driven
innovation
LivingLabs
(ERDF)
Support services
Health &
safety & eco
regulations
PCP & PPI
Market
replication
projects Horizon
SME instrument
EcoAP
Art 187,
JTI
Improve R&I
Horizon2020 (focus
on fundamental
research, but also
applied & innovation)
ESIF
IPR &
Community
Patent
pool / share
knowledge, capacities
& practice
Sector / technology
initiatives
PPPs
Access to
global markets,
trade
Public
procurement
Directive
Usercentred
innovation:
design
initiative
Social innovation
ESF, EaSI, ERDF,
Horizon2020
Mobility
Skills
ERASMUS+
Horizon: Marie Curie
ESF
Modernising
universities;
qualification
standards
ESF
ERASMUS+
CreativeEurope
Human Capital
Legend:
Policy
initiative /
legislation
Action with
funding
Why does the EU fund things?
•  It’s in the Treaty!
•  But some things are not in the Treaty – need a complementary
mix of legislation and funding
•  Member States ask it to get involved
•  EU competence in associated areas, for example EU
Regulations and Directives on clinical trials, medical devices,
data protection
•  RTD role in jobs and growth critical for EU internal market
•  It’s ultimately a global race - EU vs USA vs BRIC – and this is a
recognised area of strength
What kind of things does the EU fund?
•  Research and Development, esp commercialisation of new
technologies, products
•  Movement and training of professionals
•  Drug discovery
•  Networks of providers, procurers, researchers
•  Pre-commercial procurement
•  Translational research
•  Health system comparisons
•  Infrastructure projects
•  Economic regeneration
•  Entrepreneurship
Who gets involved in these EU funds?
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Universities
SMEs
Big industry
Hospitals
Researchers
Charities
Local Authorities
National governments
•  BUT move away from institutions to regional collaborations
What are the benefits of competing for this funding?
•  Complement local health initiatives with (match) funding
•  Improve service delivery through new developments,
information-sharing and exchange of good practice
•  Develop pan-European networks
•  Benchmark and compare NHS practice with partners from other
EU member states
•  Showcase the organisation’s achievements in a specific field or
topic to international colleagues
•  Profile local, regional and national health innovations at
international events
•  Attract world-class clinicians/researchers to the organisation
And how does the UK do?
Horizon 2020
The basics:
• €70.2bn research and innovation funding programme (2014-2020)
• Strengthens the EU’s global position in research, innovation and
technology
• New framework programme bringing together a range of separate
programmes/initiatives
• More support for innovation activities – focus on business
opportunities – and less on pure research
• No match funding needed for research related activities
• Simplified rules (e.g. reduction of average time to grant by 100
days, one funding rate, new funding schemes, SME instrument)
• 3 legal entities from minimum of 3 EU Member states needed
Horizon 2020: The three priorities
Excellent Science Industrial Leadership Societal Challenges Seven focus areas under ‘personalising health and care’:
• Understanding health, ageing & disease
• Effective health promotion, disease prevention,
preparedness and screening
• Improving diagnosis
• Innovative treatments and technologies
• Advancing active and healthy ageing
• Integrated, sustainable, citizen-centred care
• Improving health information, data exploitation and
providing an evidence base for health policies and regulation
CODE
PHC 9 - 2015
PHC 15 - 2015
PHC 21 - 2015
PHC 25 - 2015
PHC 27 - 2015
TITLE
Vaccine development for poverty-related and neglected infectious
diseases: HIV/AIDS
Clinical research on regenerative medicine
BUDGET (€M)
TYPE OF ACTION
15 – 20
R&I Actions
4–6
R&I Actions
Advancing active and healthy ageing with ICT: Early risk detection
and intervention
3–4
Advanced ICT systems and services for integrated care
3–5
R&I Actions
Self-management of health and disease and patient empowerment
supported by ICT
3–5
Pre-commercial
procurement
3–5
R&I Actions
R&I Actions
PHC 28 - 2015
Self management of health and disease and decision support
systems based on predictive computer modelling used by the
patient him or herself
PHC 29 - 2015
Public procurement of innovative eHealth services
1–5
Public
procurement
PHC 30 - 2015
Digital representation of health data to improve disease diagnosis
and treatment
3–5
R&I Actions
PHC 2015 (single stage – deadline 21st April 2015)
Horizon 2020 also underpins or links to many
other programmes
Its competitive…
H2020-PHC-2014-single-stage (8 topics, €185 million)
•  Opened 11/12/13, Deadline: 15/04/14 – 451 proposals received, maximum 52
projects funded
Summary of where we can get to through Horizon 2020:
•  Success rate of c3% in some areas in 2014 – need to
collaborate to get the money in future
•  Clinicians already part of pan-European networks and
collaborations – let’s get them recognised and funded
through Horizon 2020
•  NHS institutions becoming more specialised – EU focus
can help them develop this further
•  Increasing knowledge base within health sector about
need for complementarity of funding
•  Better collaboration can mean better intelligence
Impact can only be achieved through collaboration
Finding an
approach that
works for you
and your
community
Academia NHS LEPs / SMEs Early warning
“The eight main themes proposed with their potential
strategic priorities in the report for the calls 2016–2017 are:
- Ageing at large
- Personalized medicine
- ICT for health
- Population health and health promotion
- Infectious diseases
- Early development
- Sustainable health and care systems
- Environment and health challenge”
Finding European partners
Often toughest part of the puzzle
– no exact science but critical to success
– need to be aware of what you offer as a partner and
what your consortium is missing
Where to look?
•  Existing networks/research/conversations/successful
partners
•  Ask your clinicians!
•  The National Contact Points (NCPs) may know
•  EIP AHA Marketplace & European Reference Sites
•  www.Healthcompetence.eu
•  https://connect.innovateuk.org/web/fp7-uk-health
•  http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/
•  http://www.fitforhealth.eu/
•  www.nhsconfed.org.uk/europe
•  www.h2020.uk.org
Written in the stars
•  Renewed EU focus on societal challenge of ageing
demographic as part of quest for growth
•  Horizon 2020 better linked in with existing
programmes and now has new feeder concepts
•  Commission moving (or widening) the goalposts from
institutional and sectoral engagement in EU affairs to
regional input – research, test and market in one place
•  In, through and with Horizon 2020 you have the
opportunity to drive regional change
The ‘Euro pro quo’
•  EU has thrown down the gauntlet directly to regions
•  The potential of having a regional strategy wrapped
around excellence, need and collaboration makes
this real
•  Bringing more partners on board opens door to new
and exciting opportunities and funding programmes
•  Horizon 2020 when viewed by institutions is a good
funder, when viewed by individuals is a natural
collaborator, when viewed by regions can be a key
driver
•  There are NHS experts in EU funding out there – can
you find them and use them?
•  Teaching hospitals/specialist providers good place to
start – success breeds success
•  Explore EVERY bit of Horizon 2020
•  There may be domestically funded projects that can be
taken to EU level – eg. DALLAS projects
•  Utilise fully our relationships with the academic sector,
can we align priority areas to focus on – with an eye to
commercialisation and the product!
•  Offer to SME groups – are we in a position to facilitate
interactions with range of NHS members
•  What has been funded before? Can we learn from it?
•  Speak to LEPs
So, you want to get involved?
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Sign up for our bulletin
Keep an eye on our website
Read our briefings
Follow us on twitter
Tell your colleagues!
•  Michael.wood@nhsconfed.org
•  www.nhsconfed.org/europe
•  @NHSConfed_EU
Horizon2020 and Stratified Medicine
Liverpool Health is
Wealth Conference
Forum 4: “Opportunities for European
Funding and Partnership”
22 January 2015
Horizon 2020 Information Day
12 September 2013
Brussels
Jean-Luc SANNE
Innovative and personalised medicine Unit,
Research & Innovation DG, European Commission
Research &
Innovation
One size doesn't fits all / custom made therapy
•  Only 25 to 80 % of
patients respond to
common drugs
•  5-7 % of all hospital
admissions result from
adverse drug reactions
Research &
Innovation
Personalised medicine: towards a definition
"Personalised medicine refers to a medical model
using characterization of individuals’ phenotypes and
genotypes (e.g. molecular profiling, medical imaging)
for tailoring the right therapeutic strategy for the
right person at the right time, and/or to determine
the predisposition to disease and/or to deliver timely
and targeted prevention"
Definition by Horizon 2020 Advisory Group for Societal Challenge 1, July 2014
Research &
Innovation
Usual Medical Practice
Disease
Diagnostics
Molecule X
Personalised medicine
Disease
Diagnostics
+
Companion
Diagnostics
Responders
& tolerant
Molecule X
Non
Responders
Molecule Y
New dose X
Responders
not tolerant
Molecule Z
New dose X
Research &
Innovation
Personalised Medicine: preparing the ground
•  2010: Preparatory workshops (-omics, biomarkers,
clinical trials/regulatory, uptake)
•  2011: European Perspectives conference
•  2013: "Omics report"
•  Identify key challenges to be addressed by research
Research &
Innovation
The framework for Personalised Medicine
R&D
the basics
“Omics”
Technologies
R&D
stratifying
tools
Biomarkers
Identification
Qualification
Validation
Data
Samples
Statistics
Data modelling
tools
R&D
test in
human
Towards
the market
Clinical trials
Methodologies
Ethics
Patient recruitment
Uptake in
healthcare
Diagnostics &
Therapies
Pricing &
Reimbursement
Approval
processes
Health economy
HTA
Regulatory
aspects
Technical
aspects &
challenges
Novel models of
healthcare
organisation
Prediction - Prevention – Treatment - Cure
Research &
Innovation
In patients
Availability &
usability in
the clinic
Patient
perspective
Equal
treatment
Training of
professionals
Identified key research challenges
Breaking barriers
& speaking the same
language
Translating knowledge
to medical applications
"cross-disciplinarity",
capacity building,
education & training
disease taxonomy,
biomarker validation,
clinical trials
Generating knowledge
& developing the right
tools
Understanding the value
& economic aspects
health care pilots, HTA,
comparative
effectiveness research,
value chain
standards, clinical
bioinformatics, adaptation
of tools
Research &
Innovation
Personalised medicine: A matter of big data?
Various sources
of data
Personalised
medical decision
Lifestyle
Molecular
profile
Environmental
data
Health
records
Epidemiology
Clinical trials
Pharmaco-vigilance
Diagnostics &
monitoring
Research &
Innovation
Staff Working Document on
Use of '-omics' technologies in the development
of personalised medicine
•  The potential for, and issues with, the use of
'-omics' technologies in personalised medicine,
and the related EU research funding
•  Recent developments in EU legislation for
placing medicinal products and devices on the
market
•  Factors affecting the uptake of personalised
medicine in health care systems
Available on:
http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/latest_news/2013-10_personalised_medicine_en.pdf
Research &
Innovation
Conclusions
•  Horizon 2020 to address research challenges
•  Efficient regulatory framework for medicines and in
vitro diagnostics
•  Robust HTA facilitate re-use of high quality joint
work at National/regional level
-> essential responses from the EU to the current
challenges
-> continued fruitful dialogue with all stakeholders
Research
Research
& and
Innovation
Innovation
•  The EU’s 2014-20 programme
for research & innovation (around € 80 billion)
•  A core part of Europe 2020, Innovation Union & European
Research Area
•  Three priorities: Excellent science, Industrial leadership,
Societal challenges
HORIZON 2020
Research &
Innovation
Horizon 2020
Novelties
•  Simplification:
•  Simpler programme architecture, a single set
of rules
•  Easy to use cost reimbursement model: one
project - one funding rate
•  Less paperwork in preparing proposals
•  Reduce time to grant by 100 days
•  Inclusive approach:
•  More support for innovation and activities
close to the market
•  Strong focus on creating business
opportunities
•  New SBIR-like scheme dedicated to SMEs
•  Renewed successful
partnerships:
•  EDCTP
•  IMI
©
Fotolia.com
Research &
Innovation
Funding instruments for health research in the
EU funding programme Horizon 2020
Excellent science
European
Research
Council
Future and
Emerging
Technologies
Marie
Skłodowska
Curie Actions
Research
Infrastructures
LEIT Biotech
Financial
instruments
Industrial leadership
Fast Track to
Innovation
Eureka
Eurostars 2
Societal Challenge 1 Health
Collaborative
projects
SME instrument
Research &
Innovation
IMI-2
EDCTP-2
AAL-2
Health, demographic change
and wellbeing challenge
•  Translate science to benefit citizens
•  Test and demonstrate new
healthcare models, approaches and
tools
•  Promote healthy and active ageing
•  Improve health outcomes, reduce
inequalities
Over € 7 billion to health research •  Support a competitive health sector
Research &
Innovation
Focus areas of 2014-2015 Work Programme
Understanding
health, ageing &
disease
Innovative
Improving
treatments
diagnosis
and
technologies
Improving health
information, data
exploitation and
providing an
evidence base for
health policies and
regulation
Effective
health
promotion,
disease
prevention,
preparedness
and screening
Advancing
active and
healthy
ageing
Integrated,
sustainable,
citizencentered care
Implementing personalised medicine in healthcare
settings
Research &
Innovation
PHC 5 – 2014: Health promotion and
disease prevention: translating ‘omics’ into
stratified approaches
•  Develop and assess a personalized /
stratified health promotion or disease
prevention programme, taking into
account the ‘omics’ characteristics of
individuals, complemented by
environmental and/or lifestyle factors
Research &
Innovation
PHC 24 – 2015: Piloting personalised
medicine in health and care systems
•  Pilots of new models of care, based on the
concept of personalised medicine
•  Proposals should ensure coordination with
national, regional or local authorities
engaging in health sector reform
•  Evidence for a validated model of organisation
of care based on the concept of personalised
medicine should be produced
Research &
Innovation
PHC 30 – 2015: Digital representation of
health data to improve disease diagnosis
and treatment
Enable the use of Decision Support Systems
by healthcare professionals for personalised
prediction and decision in prevention,
diagnosis or treatment and should take into
account data protection and ethical
considerations,..
Research &
Innovation
Horizon 2020
Activities for SMEs
All forms of R&D and all forms of innovation,
towards exploitation and commercialisation
•  SME participation in collaborative R&D or innovation projects
(all three priorities)
•  SME instrument (applied in all societal challenges as well as
the LEITs)
•  Innovation in start-ups, spin-offs and young research-intensive
companies (Eurostars and other measures)
•  Access to risk finance (debt and equity facility)
•  Exchange and mobility of researchers involving SMEs (Marie
Curie actions)
•  Links for access to procurements…
Research &
Innovation
Idea/Concept = Business plan I
Horizon 2020
Phase 1: Concept
and feasibility
assessment
Feasibility of concept
Risk assessment
IP regime
Partner search
Design study
Pilot application
intention
Business plan II
Phase 2: R&D,
demonstration,
market replication
Development,
prototyping, testing
Piloting innovative
processes, products
and services
Miniaturisation/design
of products
Planning & developing
scaling-up (market
segments, process
etc.)
Market replication
Business plan III
Lump sum: around
50.000 to 100.000 €
Cost reimbursement:
1 to 3 M€ EC funding
~ 6 months
12 to 24 months
Research &
Innovation
Phase 3:
Commercialisation
Quality label for
successful projects
Facilitate access to
private finance
Support via
networking , training,
coaching, information,
addressing i.a. IP
management,
knowledge sharing,
dissemination
SME window in the EU
financial facilities (debt
facility and equity
facility)
No direct funding
Horizon 2020 - societal challenge 1
Topic of the SME instrument
•  PHC 12 – 2014 and 2015: Clinical validation of biomarkers
and/or diagnostic medical devices
Scope
Identification
• 
• 
• 
• 
Qualification
Device validation
Biomarker validation
All existing potential biomarkers are eligible.
€ 50 000 and 6 months – Phase 1
Between € 1 and 5 million – Phase 2
Duly justified duration (time for samples, patient follow up, etc.) – Phase 2
Expected impact
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Clinical availability and exploitation of biomarkers
New diagnostic devices
Improved diagnostics in the clinic and the market
Enhancing profitability and/or growth performance of SMEs
Support to revised IVD regulation...
Research &
Innovation
SME instrument
Check list for participating in H2020
•  Find a topic (call for proposals) and find partners
•  Check status register and provide documents for
validation of legal entity (Appoint a LEAR; financial
viability check in some cases)
•  Address rules for participations (minimum number of
participants, etc. ) and check specific requirements in
the work programme
•  Read the provision of the standard Grant Agreement
•  Plan exploitation and dissemination aspects, and
address IPR issues (in the proposal and later in a
consortium agreement)
•  Address ethics issues (in particular if clinical trials)
Research &
Innovation
Participant Portal– your one-stop shop
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal
Research &
Innovation
Innovative Medicines Initiative 2
•  Up to €3,3 billion, shared equally
between EU and industry
•  Breakthrough vaccines, medicines
and treatments
•  For top quality research and
innovation with great public
health benefits and commercial
possibilities
•  Compared to IMI: more budget,
broader scope and objectives,
open to other industry partners
Research &
Innovation
IMI 2 Priorities
Enablers
Priority Themes
Patient access to innovative
solutions:
1. Neuro-degeneration
2. Immuno-inflammation
3. Metabolic disorders
4. Infection control
• 
Target validation
• 
Stratified medicine, precision
medicine
5. Translational Safety
• 
Innovative trials
• 
Data generation and
interpretation
Support Technologies
1. Imaging
2. ICT
3. Medical devices….
Research &
Innovation
• 
Prevention, disease interception
• 
Patient adherence
• 
Health disease management
• 
Regulatory framework
• 
Reimbursement/patient access
Overview of IMI's Calls for Proposals
two calls launched simultaneously in December 2014
IMI 2 - Call 3 (Stage 1deadline - 24 March 2015)
•
Remote assessment of disease and relapse (RADAR) - CNS
•
Towards a quantitative biological approach for neuropsychiatry
•
Assessing risk and progression of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes to
enable disease modification
•
The consistency approach to quality control in vaccine manufacture
•
Pertussis vaccination research
•
Knowledge repository to enable patient focused medicine development
IMI 2 - Call 4 (Stage 1deadline - 11 Feb. 2015)
•
Enabling Platform on Medicines Adaptive Pathways to Patients
Research &
Innovation
How to take part in IMI projects
Apply for funding
§  Look out for new IMI
Calls
§  www.imi.europa.eu
§  IMI newsletter
§  Twitter, LinkedIn
§  Link up with other
experts
§  Read and understand
the Call documents
§  Info sessions /
webinars
§  Contact the IMI
Programme Office
§  Submit your proposal
Contribute to IMI as an
Associated Partner
Your contribution is
matched by the EU
§  Read the IMI
Strategic Research
Agenda
§  Identify points that
match your priorities
§  Contact the IMI
Programme Office
Research &
Innovation
Information about IMI2 funding opportunities
EU Research
Participants portal
………………………………………..
Stay up to date about IMI2
Website: www.imi.europa.eu
Twitter: @IMI_JU
Research &
Innovation
Learn more & take part!
http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020
Research &
Innovation
Thank you
www.ec.europa.eu/research/health
www.ec.europa.eu/research/horizon2020
Research &
Innovation
EC Funding – a Case Study 22nd January 2014 Nick Rhodes Musculoskeletal Biology Institute of Ageing & Chronic Disease Nick Rhodes – Biography •  Academic, University of Liverpool since 1992 •  Research in Regenerative Medicine & Tissue Engineering (bone, musculo-­‐skeletal tissues) •  Funding from UK research councils (EPSRC, BBSRC , MRC) & EC •  Participated in EC framework projects since 1997 •  Writing and submitting EC framework projects since 2000 •  Reviewed ERC starter grants for European Commission •  Asked to evaluate H2020 proposals in NMP-­‐12-­‐2015 Framework Projects Successfully Executed/Written •  1997-­‐2002
FP4
HyperGRAFT (Biomed) •  1998-­‐2003
FP4
Hybrid bio-­‐artiXicial ligament (Brite-­‐Euram) •  2000-­‐2004
FP5
Soft tissue reconstruction through adipogenesis (Industrial Growth) •  2000-­‐2006
FP5
Silicone cross-­‐linked polyurethane materials for engineered small-­‐diameter vascular grafts (Industrial Growth) •  2003-­‐2005
FP5
IGIOD -­‐ Interfacial-­‐guided osteogenesis (Industrial Growth) •  2005-­‐2009
FP6
STEPS – Systems approach to Tissue Engineering (NMP) Academic Coordinator •  2008-­‐2009
FP6
MeStells -­‐ Phenotypic differentiation of mesenchymal progenitor cells (Marie Curie) •  2010-­‐2014
FP7
REDONTAP (NMP) Coordinator •  2012-­‐2017
FP7
THE GRAIL (Health) •  2012-­‐2018
FP7
DevelopAKUre (Health) Advisor €36.5 M Researcher only Framework Projects Successfully Executed/Written •  1997-­‐2002
FP4
HyperGRAFT (Biomed) •  1998-­‐2003
FP4
Hybrid bio-­‐artiXicial ligament (Brite-­‐Euram) •  2000-­‐2004
FP5
Soft tissue reconstruction through adipogenesis (Industrial Growth) •  2000-­‐2006
FP5
Silicone cross-­‐linked polyurethane materials for engineered small-­‐diameter vascular grafts (Industrial Growth) •  2003-­‐2005
FP5
IGIOD -­‐ Interfacial-­‐guided osteogenesis (Industrial Growth) •  2005-­‐2009
FP6
STEPS – Systems approach to Tissue Engineering (NMP) Academic Coordinator •  2008-­‐2009
FP6
MeStells -­‐ Phenotypic differentiation of mesenchymal progenitor cells (Marie Curie) •  2010-­‐2014
FP7
REDONTAP (NMP) Coordinator •  2012-­‐2017
FP7
THE GRAIL (Health) •  2012-­‐2018
FP7
DevelopAKUre (Health) Advisor €36.5 M Researcher only Some Key Metrics Nature of project demographic and applicants is changing: FP5 FP6
FP7 Coopera8on
H2020 Health-­‐2S 2015 Date range Avg Budget Avg Partners Success Rate 1998-­‐2002
€ 1.0M
6
26% 2002-­‐2006
€ 2.7M
12
18% 2007-­‐2012
€ 3.7M
11
19% 2015 € 5 M ?
c 3% 2096 proposals for ~56 projects In H2020: •  Calls are less prescrip9ve -­‐ they do not outline the expected solu9ons to the problem, nor the approach to be taken to solve it •  Calls/topics descrip9ons allow plenty of scope for applicants to propose innova9ve solu9ons of their own choice Evaluation Procedure Reviewer 1 Typical EC proposal evaluation: Reviewer 2 Call announced Reviewer 3 E.C. •  APPLIED Science Proposal submitted Contract issued with possible funding cut (often 30%) stage 2 Reviewer 5 Invitation to submit STAGE 2 Top scores -­‐ Contract Negotiation Reviewer 4 Scores STAGE 2 Passed 50% STAGE 1 Passed 20% Remote Concensus Meeting •  Score moderation •  Proposal ranking Failed 80% Panel Meeting Evaluation Procedure Reviewer 1 Typical EC proposal evaluation: Reviewer 2 Call announced Reviewer 3 E.C. •  APPLIED Science Proposal submitted Contract issued with possible funding cut (often 30%) stage 2 Reviewer 5 Invitation to submit STAGE 2 Top scores -­‐ Contract Negotiation Reviewer 4 Scores STAGE 2 Passed 50% STAGE 1 Passed 20% Remote Concensus Meeting •  Score moderation •  Proposal ranking Failed 80% Panel Meeting Primary Motivators Academic Clinic/Hospital •  What are the characteristics of the disease condition? •  How does a gene/protein etc. cause the disease? •  How can we make the treatment cheaper/more effective/quicker? Patient Group •  How can we cure the health condition? Company •  How can we exploit a business opportunity? Treat Research Discover new facts about a disease NICE Use new knowledge & advice to improve patient care/health Advocate Patent Publish Recommend new advice Development Patent Jobs Use new knowledge to develop different treatment or cure Sell treatment CASE STUDY •  DevelopAKUre project: 2012-­‐2018 •  €6 Million (EC contribution) •  13 partners -­‐ RLUH & University of Liverpool leads •  Includes 2 patient groups, 3 universities, 2 hospitals, 2 research groups, 4 companies (3 of which SMEs) •  Research to establish Nitisinone as a drug to reduce the impact of Alkaptonuria •  Partners already met through the International Workshop on AKU, an annual meeting initiated by the AKU Society since 2007 CASE STUDY •  Had already unsuccessfully sought funding as a (smaller) consortium in 2007 •  New Health call in 2011 completely Xit the research of the consortium HEALTH.2012.2.4.4-1: Preclinical and/or
clinical development of substances with a clear
potential as orphan drugs for rare diseases.
FP7-HEALTH-2012-INNOVATION-1. Support
will be provided to preclinical studies
(pharmacological, pharmacodynamics,
pharmacokinetics and toxicological) in models
and/or clinical studies (including phase III clinical
trials) of EU designated orphan medicinal
products. Clinical studies should focus on
biopharmaceutical studies (including
bioavailability, bioequivalence, in vitro-in vivo
correlation), human pharmacokinetic and
pharmacodynamic studies, human efficacy and
safety studies. Clinical trials must be appropriately
powered to produce statistically significant
evidence. Involvement of industry, in particular
SMEs, is strongly recommended.
One or more proposals can be selected.
Hospital in France AKU Society Professor of Clinical Chemistry, UK COORDINATOR AKUS France University, UK Comp, Sweden Bone research DRUG Research centre, Slovakia Genetics research University, Italy Biochemistry Hospital in Slovakia SME, NLs Clinical Trials SME, NLs Regulatory approval SME, Denmark Biomarker research •  Consortium had a great research plan, that Xit well with the call •  Credible consortium •  General hypothesis was sound •  Introduction, rationale, impact justiXication were poor MY ROLE •  As a scientist in bone research I understood the terminology, the research plan and hypothesis – similar to the position of an expert evaluator (not experts in AKU) •  I looked at the research potential from the point of view of an independent set of eyes •  I created a hook that linked the requirements of the call to the research programme, but demonstrated reduction in health spending AND improvement in patient quality of life MY ROLE •  I ensured a clear role for each participant (no hangers-­‐on) •  I eliminated the confusion in the introduction, and created an irresistible proposal •  Final score was 15/15 and no reduction in budget MY TIPS What makes an Irresistible Proposal? • 
• 
• 
• 
Clear concept Described in concrete terms (not vague) Has credibility Has a good risk mitigation strategy • 
• 
• 
• 
Improves health/quality of life Reduces cost Builds jobs and a new industry Improves social cohesion, gender issues, security, privacy, ethics, etc. HOW TO IDENTIFY PARTNERS • Most academics Xind it difXicult to Xit their research into a commercial context • Firstly, identify a call which Xits well with your research aims • Identify how the research could be commercialised, whilst Xitting within the scope of the call • 
Most calls now require industrial, and speciXically SME involvement • 
• 
SME participation needs to be clearly real, not contrived SME-­‐requirements may reach 30%, several non-­‐competing companies will need to be used Find SMEs that are used to research (active at conferences) • 
• 
• 
• 
Think how the research results could represents a added value to their CORE business, and how this forms a piece of the jigsaw with other SMEs Don’t create conXlicts of interest!!! Even foreign SME research directors can be quite amenable on the phone when the research is within their core competence HOW TO IDENTIFY PARTNERS • Only use the number of partners that are required to complete the programme • 
Large-­‐scale consortia (>€6M, 10-­‐15 maximum) • 
• 
Small-­‐scale consortia (<€4M, 6 is adequate) Academic partners should be the best / most highly esteemed that you can recruit • 
Identify teams that publish in the best journals, active at the best conferences • 
Since 2012, Health calls will allow the recruitment of US partners (unfunded -­‐ only use if they are clearly the best) WHAT IS REQUIRED GOING FORWARD IN H2020 • 
• 
Huge jump in proposal quality in 2014 Very difXicult to separate merely good proposals from the poor • 
It is clear proposals now need to stand out clearly using quality metrics: • 
• 
The most expert partners Clearly differentiatable business plan/product idea/treatment • 
Cannot propose just an idea – needs pump priming data Strict adherence to the call Added value (not just health beneXits), e.g. reduction in health cost, job creation 1st paragraph is now possibly the most important part of the proposal and needs to hook the reviewers using advanced psychology • 
• 
• 
Thank you ! Nick Rhodes npr@liv.ac.uk EU Programme 2014-2020
22 January 2015
Alan Welby, Executive Director, Liverpool City Region LEP (alan.welby@liverpoollep.org)
Background
Significant EU Programmes in Merseyside since 1994
Two dedicated programmes for Merseyside
•  1994 – 1999 Objective One Programme (£560m)
•  2000 – 2006 Objective One Programme (£920m)
MSIF (first use of ERDF in EU for venture capital funds), Pathways and community
development, Arena and Conference Centre, Airport expansion, School of Tropical
Medicine, Wirral Int Business Park, Knowsley Industrial Estate, Skillworks
Current sub-regional / regional programme (2007 -13)
•  Ringfenced allocation within the NW England Programme (£530m £320m)
Ø  Funding is fully committed, able to spend up until June / Sept 2015
Ø  Possible scope for limited reallocation of any underspend
Formal evaluation (accepted by EC and UK Government) shows that EU
funding has supported the creation of 50,000 jobs in Merseyside / LCR
EU Context
•  Thematic approach (across all of the EU), concentrated on:
Ø 
Innovation, research, technology development
Ø  Competitiveness, SMEs
Ø  ICT
Ø  Transition to Low Carbon Economy
)
) mainly
) ERDF
)
Employment (particularly youth) and Skills
Ø  Social inclusion (20% of ESF)
) mainly
) ESF
Ø 
•  60% intervention rate for Transition Regions (Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton, St
Helens, Wirral), 50% in Halton
•  Intention to develop closer links to other EU funding, including rural
(LEADER) and pan-European programmes (such as Horizon 2020)
UK Context
•  Govt asked LEPs to lead on EU Investment Strategy (ESIF)
•  LEP led programmes / activities to
•  focus on local need and opportunity
•  reflect and align with national policy and priorities
•  LEP and local partners working together (regulatory)
•  Local EU Strategies sit within the National Growth and Job strategy Single
pot ( April 2015)
•  LEPs to produce a Local Growth Plan / Competitive element
•  Local Growth Teams (DWP and DCLG) to support delivery of ESIF and
ensure compliance
•  “Opt-in” prospectuses (received July 2013) to align with national initiatives /
delivery / match funding
LCR Allocation
•  LCR given EU “allocation” of €220.9m (c. £190m), comprising £112.3m
ERDF and £77.7m ESF – circa 10% of this is allocated for Halton
•  This is roughly 1/3 of amount received in 2007-2013 period
•  The LCR allocation equates to €147 per head of population, which is the
lowest in NW, and half the amount per head awarded to the North East
•  LCR joined with Sheffield City Region to seek a Judicial Review into the
allocations, arguing that Government had used a flawed methodology when
making allocations
•  Through the court process we have been provided with UK Govt estimates of
how the EU budget is broken down by region in the UK – and this shows that
the Merseyside/LCR element of the UK allocation was circa €350m (£280m)
•  Despite this we lost the JR (Feb 2014), lost an appeal to Court of Appeal
(June 2014), and await outcome of appeal to the Supreme Court (Oct 2014)
What UK Government wants
•  Collective submissions from 39 LEPs and can come together to create a national
ERDF and ESF programme
•  A strong emphasis on economic growth (to create jobs)
•  international trade (to help balance of trade)
•  low carbon / energy (sustainability and climate change agenda)
•  Greater involvement of the private sector
•  developing local strategy / priorities
•  programme delivery (particularly private sector match funding)
•  Opportunities for Govt Depts (BIS, DWP etc) to access ERDF and ESF by asking
LEPs to “opt-in” to national initiatives
•  More investment and less grant
•  Increased use of revolving funds,
•  encouraging LEPS to use Financial Instruments
•  Continued focus on about claw back and misuse of EU funding with tight control of
programme management and project approvals
LCR Approach
•  The reduced levels of funding demand a significantly
different programme
•  Cut our cloth accordingly
•  Acts as a catalyst
•  Unlocks major schemes
•  Need for focus and fewer projects
•  Challenging but realistic in delivery terms
•  Remains a significant funding package
•  Moving towards a commissioning model
Development of the ESIF
•  Stakeholder events (April & September 2013) wider buy-in
•  Bottom up approach:
•  Initial Thematic responses led by Thematic leads
•  Distilled into 5 Liverpool City Region Portfolios
•  5 Portfolio drafting workshops (July 2013)
•  5 Portfolio consultation workshops (August 2013)
•  5 Portfolio delivery workshops (December 2013)
•  Leadership / challenge by EU Sub group and Advisory Group
•  Draft ESIF submitted to Govt early October 2013
•  Final ESIF submitted to Govt end Jan 2014
•  ESIF “signed off” by Govt mid 2014
Portfolio Approach
• Blue/ Green Economy
• Business Economy
• Innovation Economy
• Inclusive Economy
• Place and Connectivity
Portfolio Approach
•  Reflects LCR opportunities and challenges
•  Integrated and focused approach
•  Aligned to City Region governance
•  Guards against “unpicking”
•  Clear LCR narrative to Government and partners
•  Based on long established evidence base
•  Seamless fit into Local Growth Plan
•  Challenge to partners to avoid silos
ESIF Budget (Portfolios) in £s
Portfolio
ERDF
ESF
Totals
Blue Green
25m
3m
28m
Business
32m
8m
40.8m
Innovation
26.5m
5m
31.5m
Inclusive
3m
61.7m
64.7m
Place & Connectivity
25m
-
25m
Total
112.3m
77.7m
190m
92
Budget (Blue Green) in £s
Blue / Green
ERDF
Energy
5m
Supply chain
5m
Infrastructure
5m
Infrastructure (FIs)
10m
Skills
Total
ESF
Totals
3m
25m
3m
28m
93
Budget (Business) in £s
Business
ERDF
Winning new business
7m
Start up and entrepreneurship
8.8m
Business support, investment
readiness
7m
Finance for business FI
10m
Skills
Total
ESF
Totals
8m
32m
8m
40.8m
Budget (Innovation) in £s
Innovation
ERDF
Infrastructure (grant)
5m
Infrastructure FI
5m
Business start and early growth
3.75m
Finance for business FI
5m
Business growth
6.5m
Higher level skills
Promotion of LCR
Total
ESF
Totals
5m
1.25m
26.5m
5m
31.5m
Mi Liverpool Liverpool Knowledge Quarter Hydrogen Network Stra9fied Health Health and Wellbeing
Advanced
Manufacturing
Materials Innova9on Factory Marine Energy
Deployment
and Operations
Centre Manufacturing Technology Centre Solutions for
sustainable growth
Sci-­‐Tech Daresbury Creative and Digital
Liverpool Plug and Play Sensor City Innova9on Exchange Big Data 96
Budget (Inclusive) in £s
Inclusive
ERDF
ESF
Youth and NEETS
30m
Adults into work
20m
Social growth and connectivity
10m
Local Impact Fund FI
Total
3m
3m
1.7m
61.7m
Totals
64.7m
Budget (Place and Connectivity)
in £s
Place and Connectivity
ERDF
ESF
Totals
Business infrastructure (gap funding) 6m
Infrastructure FI
9m
Transport Infrastructure
7.5m
Place marketing
2.5m
Total
25m
25m
Draft Outputs
Output
Enterprises supported
Number
1,665
New jobs created
2,000
New companies established
600
Companies involved in research collaboration
Amount private sector funding levered
110
Reduction of GHG emissions (Tonnes)
80,000
Number of ESF beneficiaries/ participants
56,000
ESF participants unemployed
ESF participants inactive
ESF participants employed
ESF participants 15- 24 years old
39,000
11,000
6,000
28,000
£77m
Financial Instruments
Building on previous experience (North West Fund / MSIF / Chrysalis)
•  £24m infrastructure / energy (JESSICA)
•  Up to £15m financial assistance for businesses (JEREMIE)
•  £3m financial assistance for social enterprises / charities (Local Impact
Fund)
•  Total FI Spend: £42 million
•  Evaluations of current JESSICA and JEREMIE programmes are
underway
•  Local Impact Fund pilot project
Opt-ins
•  Opt-in model to allow LEPs and partners to join with national
organisations/programmes
•  LEPs commit part of funds to national programme
•  In return local areas receive match funding / administrative support
•  Critically, local areas have role in designing and commissioning activity
Organisation/
Programme
Support
Amount
DWP
Employment
£5m ESF tbc
Big Lottery Fund
Social inclusion &
combating poverty
£2.5m ESF tbc
Skills Funding
Agency
Skills
£24m ESF tbc
Rural Development Programme
•  The Rural Development Programme comprises European Agricultural
Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and LEADER
•  Liverpool has been allocated £339,995 EAFRD for the 2014-2020 period
and the LCR EU Sub-Committee will have responsibility for overview of
EAFRD alongside ERDF/ESF.
•  The 2014-2020 Liverpool LEADER programme has been awarded circa
£2.1m. LEADER has it’s own management committee
•  The challenge is align Rural Development programme with
mainstream ERDF / ESF programme. The chair of the LEADER
management committee has been invited onto the LCR EU subcommittee to help achieve this.
Timeline / Next Steps
UK Government
•  Feedback from Govt on all 39 ESIFs – April 2014
•  Govt submit draft ERDF and ESF Operational Programmes to the EC –
July 2014
•  UK Partnership Agreement signed off - October 2014
•  Consultation and negotiation with the EC on the Operational
Programmes – commenced Autumn 2014
•  ERDF and ESF Operational Programmes agreed – Feb 2015??
•  First call for projects – March / June 2015
Liverpool City Region
• 
• 
• 
• 
Develop Commissioning/Bidding Framework
Shadow ESIF Committee & EU Delivery Group established
Work with DCLG on business process / programme management
Publish the LCR ESIF and produce summary brochure