NEF, FORCE - two tools with very similar applications. The finance help desk recently published a comparison of these tools in their newsletter.
Both of these tools are accessed through the Participant Portal. NEF stands for "Negotiation Facility" (however, in fact, it covers Negotiation, Amendments and Periodic Reports). FORCE stands for "Form C editor" and is used for Periodic Reports.
It depends on which unit your project is with as to which tool is used to produce your Financial Reports. From the user's point of view, this choice is academic, as the correct tool will appear automatically from the project link in your participant's portal.
Here a summary of the NEF and FORCE usage:
- Negotiations: NEF is for all FP7 projects used to generate the Grant Preparation Form (GPF) and to access the legal information of partners involved in negotiated proposals such as contact persons, budget, bank account, and Description of Work
- Amendments: NEF is for all FP7 projects used to collect the information required to implement an amendment (mainly to implement budget restructuring)
- Periodic reporting: NEF is used to collect periodic reports such as cost declarations for a financial period in projects administered by DG INFSO, DG MOOV, and DG ENER. DG RTD uses FORCE for Periodic Reporting.
Please note that Firefox 3.x is not supported for both tools.
Monday, 17 May 2010
Monday, 3 May 2010
Commission to cut research funding red tape
The European Commission has set out its plans to simplify the procedures for taking part in EU-funded research projects. The Commission hopes that cutting red tape in this way will entice the very best researchers to get involved in the framework programmes. In the following, parts of the EC press release are quoted. Read the full release here.
'I want researchers to spend more time in the lab and less time in the office,' stated Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, the EU Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science. 'Our proposals aim to minimise administrative burdens in Europe's research programmes. We need to get the best researchers and most innovative companies taking part and we need to enable them to concentrate on results, not red tape.'
The simplification strategy, outlined in a Communication from the Commission, is split into three parts. The first part concerns changes that can be made under the current legal and regulatory framework. For example, better user support reduces the time taken to award grants and make payments.
The Commission has also committed to ensuring that rules are applied consistently and that calls for proposals and deadlines are timed to take into account major holiday periods. Finally, the Commission plans to investigate the use of prizes, noting that these are administratively simple to run and encourage other investors to spend money on research to win the prize. The Commission will run a pilot action for prizes under the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7).
The second strand of the simplification plan is devoted to more radical changes to the current financial rules. Both the European Parliament and Council must give the green light in order for these changes to take place. Ideas put forward here include a wider use of 'average cost methodologies', which would free projects from accounting separately for each small item of expenditure.
Recording personnel time for accounting purposes is cited as a problem by many grant beneficiaries; the Commission suggests paying a lump sum for personnel based on an agreement of the personnel costs during grant negotiations. The Commission also proposes allowing projects to use the same accounting methods for EU projects as they do for national research schemes.
The third and final part of the Communication concerns changes which could be implemented under future framework programmes. Here the Commission plans to explore options which would work on a 'payment by results' principle. 'The Court of Auditors itself has asked whether instead of the current system of 'payment by input', we could move towards 'payment by output',' explained Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn. 'Agreed objectives would be set in return for funding. Payment of full amounts would be linked to whether those objectives are achieved.'
Mrs Geoghegan-Quinn emphasised that simplification could be achieved without compromising on financial control. 'I am a former member of the Court of Auditors,' she pointed out. 'I can tell you that multiplying different and overlapping procedures equals confusion. Clear and simple rules, consistently applied, equal good financial control.'
'I want researchers to spend more time in the lab and less time in the office,' stated Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, the EU Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science. 'Our proposals aim to minimise administrative burdens in Europe's research programmes. We need to get the best researchers and most innovative companies taking part and we need to enable them to concentrate on results, not red tape.'
The simplification strategy, outlined in a Communication from the Commission, is split into three parts. The first part concerns changes that can be made under the current legal and regulatory framework. For example, better user support reduces the time taken to award grants and make payments.
The Commission has also committed to ensuring that rules are applied consistently and that calls for proposals and deadlines are timed to take into account major holiday periods. Finally, the Commission plans to investigate the use of prizes, noting that these are administratively simple to run and encourage other investors to spend money on research to win the prize. The Commission will run a pilot action for prizes under the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7).
The second strand of the simplification plan is devoted to more radical changes to the current financial rules. Both the European Parliament and Council must give the green light in order for these changes to take place. Ideas put forward here include a wider use of 'average cost methodologies', which would free projects from accounting separately for each small item of expenditure.
Recording personnel time for accounting purposes is cited as a problem by many grant beneficiaries; the Commission suggests paying a lump sum for personnel based on an agreement of the personnel costs during grant negotiations. The Commission also proposes allowing projects to use the same accounting methods for EU projects as they do for national research schemes.
The third and final part of the Communication concerns changes which could be implemented under future framework programmes. Here the Commission plans to explore options which would work on a 'payment by results' principle. 'The Court of Auditors itself has asked whether instead of the current system of 'payment by input', we could move towards 'payment by output',' explained Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn. 'Agreed objectives would be set in return for funding. Payment of full amounts would be linked to whether those objectives are achieved.'
Mrs Geoghegan-Quinn emphasised that simplification could be achieved without compromising on financial control. 'I am a former member of the Court of Auditors,' she pointed out. 'I can tell you that multiplying different and overlapping procedures equals confusion. Clear and simple rules, consistently applied, equal good financial control.'
Thursday, 15 April 2010
Staff change at SwissCore
Swisscore informs that on 1 May, Thomas Marty, European Advisor since December 2005 and Deputy Head of Office, will leave SwissCore to take up a position as Senior Consultant at Zurich-based Berinfor, a small management consulting firm focusing on universities, higher education institutions and other organisations active in the fields of education and research. There, he will work on projects addressing the strategy, organisation, governance, controlling as well as the processes of Berinfor’s clients.
During his time at SwissCore, Thomas Marty was mainly in charge of research policy and programmes. He put a special focus on the legal and financial aspects of FP7 and this expertise was greatly appreciated by SwissCore’s partners and customers.
During his time at SwissCore, Thomas Marty was mainly in charge of research policy and programmes. He put a special focus on the legal and financial aspects of FP7 and this expertise was greatly appreciated by SwissCore’s partners and customers.
“New approach” in SSH research under FP7
Starting with the 2010 Work Programme, the European Commission is implementing a “new approach” for the Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (SSH) Theme of FP7.
Instead of calling for a mix of “traditional” topics in all fields of SSH, the Commission is now funding large- scale projects (over €6 mio.) addressing so-called “societal challenges”. These “societal challenge projects” will require an interdisciplinary approach bringing together several teams of scientists from different fields, a professionalised scientific and administrative management, stock-taking and forward-looking activities as well as dedicated dissemination activities by specialised staff.
In order to illustrate the logic behind this new approach and to detail the new requirements towards such large-scale SSH projects, the Commission has recently published an information booklet.
A short leaflet is completing the more exhaustive booklet and can serve as a good tool for general dissemination of SSH research and its new focus on societal challenges in particular
Instead of calling for a mix of “traditional” topics in all fields of SSH, the Commission is now funding large- scale projects (over €6 mio.) addressing so-called “societal challenges”. These “societal challenge projects” will require an interdisciplinary approach bringing together several teams of scientists from different fields, a professionalised scientific and administrative management, stock-taking and forward-looking activities as well as dedicated dissemination activities by specialised staff.
In order to illustrate the logic behind this new approach and to detail the new requirements towards such large-scale SSH projects, the Commission has recently published an information booklet.
A short leaflet is completing the more exhaustive booklet and can serve as a good tool for general dissemination of SSH research and its new focus on societal challenges in particular
New Director-General at DG INFSO
On 31 March, the European Commission appointed Robert Madelin as new Director-General of the DG for Information Society and Media (DG INFSO), replacing the retiring Fabio Colasanti as of 1 April 2010.
Monday, 12 April 2010
Trust researchers initiative: More than 10000 signatures!
More than 10000 researchers from all over the world agree that the administrative burden and the financial regulation of European research funding should be simplified and signed the Trust Researchers declaration to the attention of the European Council of Ministers and the Parliament.
Have a look at the list of those who signed and read their comments on the Trust Researchers site.
SCIPROM supports this initiative and invites you to join.
Have a look at the list of those who signed and read their comments on the Trust Researchers site.
SCIPROM supports this initiative and invites you to join.
European Research Council slams EU bureaucracy
The work of Europe's scientific funding body has been marred by ongoing tensions with the European Commission and "stupid" bureaucratic rules, agency representatives have told MEPs says the EURACTIV network.
Helga Nowotny, who was appointed president of the European Research Council (ERC) last month, wants the fledgling body to be an autonomous and permanent fixture in the EU's complex scientific landscape, warning that its work has been hampered by Brussels bureaucracy.
Speaking to the European Parliament's committee on industry, research and industry (ITRE) this week (7 April 2010), she said the ERC's original structure was deeply flawed.
This, she said, had led to "an uneasy relationship" between the scientific and administrative sides of the agency and problems between the ERC and the European Commission's research directorate.
Read the full article on the EURACTIV website.
Helga Nowotny, who was appointed president of the European Research Council (ERC) last month, wants the fledgling body to be an autonomous and permanent fixture in the EU's complex scientific landscape, warning that its work has been hampered by Brussels bureaucracy.
Speaking to the European Parliament's committee on industry, research and industry (ITRE) this week (7 April 2010), she said the ERC's original structure was deeply flawed.
This, she said, had led to "an uneasy relationship" between the scientific and administrative sides of the agency and problems between the ERC and the European Commission's research directorate.
Read the full article on the EURACTIV website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)