SME Instrument Frequently Asked Questions for experts participating in the Evaluation [Version December 2016] The document includes a list of frequently asked questions by the experts involved in the evaluation of the SME Instrument's proposals. Please consult this document before writing to EASME-SME- EXPERTS@ec.europa.eu.
Table of Contents Section 1 - Evaluation... 4 1.1 Management of the workload... 4 A. How many cut-off dates are there every year? Which are the dates planned for 2017?... 4 B. How many proposals may I receive during each cut-off?... 4 C. I received 10 proposals in one day. Why?... 4 D. Do I have to confirm my availability for each cut-off?... 5 E. When should I accept or decline a task?... 5 F. When I decline a proposal, should I inform the SME Instrument team?... 5 G. Do I receive a notification by e-mail each time I receive a proposal to evaluate?... 5 H. In how many days should I assess a proposal?... 5 I. Which are the documents I have to assess for a Phase 1 and a Phase 2 proposal?... 5 J. How many pages could an annex contain?... 6 K. What shall I do if I receive a proposal which is not in English?... 6 L. Do I evaluate proposals only in one of the 13 topics?... 6 1.2 Scoring a proposal... 6 A. How do I have to score a proposal?... 6 B. How detailed should my comments be for each sub-criterion?... 6 C. How is the proposal's final score calculated?... 7 D. Which scale is used to convert the scores into a qualitative assessment?... 7 E. If the Impact criterion is below threshold, do I still evaluate the rest of the proposal?... 7 F. I have already submitted my IER, why was it reopened?... 8 G. How do I assess the following aspects of a proposal?... 8 H. The applicant has its headquarters outside the European Union or associated countries. How do I assess this?... 9 I. Is it possible that I am assigned with a similar proposal in two different cut-off dates?.. 10 J. The proposal mentions the scores received in a previous evaluation. How should I proceed?... 10 K. I made an error in one of my submitted IERs, how can I correct it?... 10 L. May I decide to contact directly an applicant/subcontractor/third party?... 10 M. May I decide to contact directly experts or ask to see their evaluation?... 10 1
N. When assessing a proposal do I rely only on my expertise or may I seek further information (for example through the internet, specialised databases, etc.)?... 11 O. I feel I am not specialised in the specific subject/innovation of the proposal, should I decline the task?... 11 P. The SME Instrument focuses on growth and jobs. How does this impact on my approach to the evaluation?... 12 Q. If a proposal is not anymore in the Death Valley, how should we consider this?... 12 R. What is the "seal of excellence"?... 12 1.3 Subcontracting... 12 A. What is a subcontract?... 12 B. What could be a conflict of interest situation between an applicant and a subcontractor? 13 C. Are there budget limits (max/min) for unknown/known subcontractors?... 13 D. What is the difference between subcontracts and contracts?... 13 E. What if one out of four subcontractors involved is not adequately described?... 13 F. How do I deal with the best value for money principle in case of a usual provider?... 14 G. What is the difference between a subcontractor and a linked third party?... 14 1.4 - Conflict of Interest... 14 A. Which is the correct definition of the Conflict of Interest?... 14 B. Am I in a Conflict of interest's situation?... 15 C. What shall I do if I feel I am in a conflict of interest situation?... 16 Section 2 Contracting and Payment... 16 2.1 Contract... 16 A. How long will my contract last?... 16 B. What happens if I exceed the threshold of the 12 days?... 17 C. How and when do I sign my contract?... 17 D. How many times could my contract be renewed?... 17 E. Is it possible to indicate in the contract the name of my company instead of my name? 17 F. I have been approached by the EC as a possible evaluator for the SME instrument but I still did not sign a contract. May I expect to be contacted for future cut-offs?... 17 2.2 Payment... 18 A. What is the reimbursement rate for the evaluation of the SME Instrument proposals?.. 18 B. How many times may I claim reimbursement for the half day remote briefing?... 18 C. When can I claim the reimbursement for the work done?... 18 D. Do I receive a notification when I have to start drafting my reimbursement claim?... 19 2
E. I assessed a number of proposals for Phase 1 and for Phase 2 during the same cut-off, how should I claim the reimbursement for the work done?... 19 F. Who is responsible to control the number of proposals I evaluated during each cut-off and Phase?... 19 G. May the reimbursement be paid directly on my company's account?... 19 H. Which are the tax rules I should apply to the work done in the framework of the H2020 SME Instrument?... 20 I. As self-employer may I request a VAT exemption certificate?... 20 J. The link I received to encode my legal and bank account details does not work, what shall I do?... 20 K. How do I contact the SME Instrument team in case of need?... 20 3
Section 1 - Evaluation 1.1 Management of the workload A. How many cut-off dates are there every year? Which are the dates planned for 2017? There are four cut-offs for Phase 1 and four cut-offs for Phase 2. The specific dates for both Phases in 2017: Phase 2 Phase 1 2017 18 January 06 April 01 June 18 October 15 February 03 May 06 September 08 November B. How many proposals may I receive during each cut-off? We cannot give an accurate estimate of the workload as it depends on the number of proposals received for each cut-off (Phase 1 and Phase 2) and on the availability of all the evaluators involved. In the past cut-offs, we received around 2000 Phase 1 proposals and 1300 Phase 2 proposals. We expect similar figures in the near future. We are trying to increase the number of contracted experts and therefore the average workload per expert is expected to decrease. For payment purposes, the payment of the evaluation of one proposal is For Phase 1: 90 per proposal evaluated; For Phase 2: 135 per proposal evaluated. C. I received 10 proposals in one day. Why? It might happen that during the week of the cut-off date you are assigned a high number of proposals in one single day. This only happens during cut-off weeks. This situation is likely to continue only for a few days, until we eliminate our backlog. In any case, payments will still be calculated based on the number of proposals evaluated by each expert, at the rate defined above, in B. Although we understand that this situation of high workload may not be ideal in some cases, we would like you to remain aware that you still have one week to complete each report, counting from the date of reception of each proposal. Nevertheless, if you find that a continuously high workload would not suit you at a given moment, please let us know, so that we may allocate proposals to different experts. 4
D. Do I have to confirm my availability for each cut-off? Yes. Due to the high number of applications and the high number of experts participating in the evaluation, a good planning is key to a swift and smooth assignment of proposals. Just a few weeks before each cut-off date you will receive a request to confirm and detail your availability. Please consider that if you confirm your availability we count on your commitment to complete the workflow within the fixed deadlines. Therefore to ensure a good organization of the process, kindly inform us about any change affecting your availability. E. When should I accept or decline a task? You should accept or decline a task within 24 hours from the day of the assignment. You were assigned a task because you confirmed your availability in the period. If you do not accept a task within 24 hours, it will be reassigned to another expert. Please consider the impact of declining a task, as we have to reassign it to another evaluator and this creates delays. The best solution is always that you keep us informed of your availability. If you do not feel in position to cope with the workload received, please inform us as soon as possible. Declining a task due to your lack of availability will not harm your position in future work allocation. F. When I decline a proposal, should I inform the SME Instrument team? No, you are not obliged to inform us as we receive an automatic notification. However, an e- mail addressed to the responsible project officer could be helpful to understand the reason of the declination, avoiding similar situations in the future and speed-up the reallocation of the proposal. G. Do I receive a notification by e-mail each time I receive a proposal to evaluate? Yes. Each time that you have to perform an evaluation in the system, you receive a notification by e-mail. The notification message includes a link to the Individual Evaluation Report (IER). H. In how many days should I assess a proposal? When a proposal is assigned, you have a maximum of seven calendar days to complete the remote evaluation. The system automatically generates this deadline. I. Which are the documents I have to assess for a Phase 1 and a Phase 2 proposal? For Phase 1 - proposal: Part A: the administrative form; Technical Annex Section 1-3: the description of the proposal with a limit of 10 pages; Technical Annex Section 4-5: the members of the consortium; Optional Annex 3: additional information on ethics. For Phase 2 - proposal: 5
Part A: the administrative form; Technical Annex Section 1-3: the description of the proposal with a limit of 30 pages; Technical Annex Section 4-5: the members of the consortium Optional Annex 3: additional information on ethics. Phase 1 feasibility study: for Phase 2 proposals with previous Phase 1 funding J. How many pages could an annex contain? As indicated in the question I, the number of pages for the Section 1-3 is limited and any additional pages are automatically watermarked to be disregarded. Section 4-5 and the Optional Annex 3 have no page limit. However, applicants are invited to submit documents which are reasonable, justifiable and acceptable in terms of content. It might happen that some applicants try to circumvent the rule of the maximum pages for the annex 1-3 by adding longer additional annexes. Same applies to cases where the proposal includes hyperlinks in section 1-3 which are used to go over the page limits. When facing these cases, please focus your reading on the information strictly linked to the content of the proposal. K. What shall I do if I receive a proposal which is not in English? Your selection took into account your language skills. If you do not feel comfortable to work in one of the languages initially indicated, please update your language skills in the Participant Portal to reflect those languages in which you really are capable to work efficiently. L. Do I evaluate proposals only in one of the 13 topics? Yes. You are assigned to one specific topic. If a need for change occurs, we will contact you. Similarly if you feel like changing topics, please contact us, so that we try to accommodate this change in a future cut-off. 1.2 Scoring a proposal A. How do I have to score a proposal? The IER foresees a score for each evaluation sub-criterion using a scale from 0 to 10. One decimal digit may be used, if experts wish to be more precise with their scoring. However the scale of 0-10 should provide a sufficient scoring range. B. How detailed should my comments be for each sub-criterion? You must provide comments for each sub-criterion. The comments should cover the criterion fully and include a clear, complete justification to the marks given, not just a repetition of the sub criterion text. The completeness of the justifications provided ensures a high quality standard for the evaluation of the proposals and allow us to easily justify the outcome provided to the applicants in case of redresses. 6
C. How is the proposal's final score calculated? The individual scores (from 0 to 10) you have given to each sub-criterion are automatically converted to a scale from 0 to 5 in order to calculate the Criterion score per evaluator. After that, the system determines the median score for each Criterion across all evaluators. The overall score is obtained by the sum of the three criteria median scores. To each result obtained, a qualitative assessment is attributed. Below you can find an example of a score calculation. D. Which scale is used to convert the scores into a qualitative assessment? The scale used to obtain the qualitative assessment is the following: Scores from 0 to 2.99 generate "Insufficient" Scores from 3 to 4.99 generate "Insufficient to Fair" Scores from 5 to 6.99 generate "Fair to Good" Scores from 7 to 8.99 generate "Good to Very Good" Scores from 9 to 10.0 generate "Very Good to Excellent" E. If the Impact criterion is below threshold, do I still evaluate the rest of the proposal? Yes. It is important that the proposal is assessed against all the evaluation criteria. Each proposal, in fact, will be assessed by four experts and the final score will be determined on the basis of the scores reported in each IER. The fact that an evaluator might consider the proposal below the threshold of criterion Impact, does not necessarily prevent the final score to be above threshold. Therefore evaluators are required to duly assess each proposal against all evaluation criteria. 7
F. I have already submitted my IER, why was it reopened? Your evaluation task might be reopened in several cases including: Phase 1 and 2: Comments in the IER When there is a discrepancy between the scores and the comments provided, we might ask the evaluator to better justify his/her position; "Out of scope" option When a proposal is declared "out of scope" and the justification provided is not sufficiently detailed, we might ask the evaluator to detail and justify his/her position. Phase 2 only: Evaluation of the subcontracting Subcontracting may be an essential part of the implementation of the project. The assessment of the subcontracting is crucial because the best-value-for-money principle for choosing subcontractors (or to choose subcontractors in the future) must be respected and detailed. As successful proposals cannot be negotiated at grant preparation level, this aspect must be evaluated with all the rigour by each expert and for all known subcontractors and unknown subcontractors. Therefore, shortcomings in the explanation of subcontracting must be reflected in the Quality & efficiency of implementation criterion and the proposal has to be scored below threshold in this criterion (criterion 3). If the assessment of the subcontracting is not coherent and consistent, we will ask the evaluator to clarify their position. G. How do I assess the following aspects of a proposal? Out of scope: Phase 1 and 2 Innovation happens on the "margins" of what is known. The out of scope option should be a last resort option allowing the exclusion of proposals which are clearly and absolutely not linked to the topic description. For example, please avoid declaring a proposal 'out of scope' if you simply find that it is not innovative enough, or that it is not at the required TRL, etc. To find a description of the 13 topics of the SME Instrument, please follow this link to the Work Programme 2016-2017: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2016_2017/main/h2020- wp1617-sme_en.pdf Operational Capacity: Phase 2 only 8
You should assess whether, based on the information provided, the applicants and other parties associated to the project possess the basic operational capacity to carry out the proposed work. If you think that this is not the case, you should choose No in Operational Capacity and score the proposal below the threshold of 3 in the Quality & efficiency of implementation criterion. Please consider that if you choose "No" in operational capacity, you should also justify your position in the box for comments and complete the evaluation of the proposal against all the evaluation criteria. Subcontracting: Phase 2 only Under the SME Instrument, the subcontracting is not restricted to a limited part of the action (except in the SMEInst-05-2016-2017 topic - former PHC -Health). The best value for money principle for choosing subcontractors must be respected and detailed. The experts shall assess: For known subcontracts: information provided on the award procedure, tasks to be subcontracted and reasons why the subcontractor has been chosen and why the price is appropriate, all ensuring the best value for money principle. For unknown subcontracts: tasks to be subcontracted, the estimate budget and the procedure to be followed to ensure the best value for money principle. If the above is not met, the proposal should be scored below the threshold of 3 in the criterion Quality & efficiency of implementation. In summary, for Subcontracting: If you are satisfied with the subcontracting, please choose Yes for each subcontractor. If you are not satisfied with the subcontracting, please choose No or lack of explanation for each subcontractor and provide a short explanation that can also justify scoring of criterion Quality & efficiency of implementation below threshold (<3) For further information on subcontracting, please see section 1.3 hereafter. Eligible costs: Some costs are not eligible for funding and, specifically, those related to commercialization activities. For example, publicity costs, signature of contract costs, sales training costs, etc. are not eligible for funding. Therefore, if these are included in the proposal, please write relevant comments and score appropriately in criterion 3. European dimension: A proposal shows a European dimension if the proposed innovation has the potential to be implemented/replicated/expanded and, therefore, have an impact across Europe (and even beyond). H. The applicant has its headquarters outside the European Union or associated countries. How do I assess this? 9
Companies may, in some cases, comply with the eligibility criteria while at the same time going against the spirit of the SME Instrument. For example a non-eu-based company may apply through their EU-based affiliate. In such a situation, we would ask evaluators to pay particular attention, as the main benefits of the funded project should be directed to the growth and jobs of the EU-based affiliate and, generally speaking, to the growth of the EU-economy and not to the growth of the non-eu based company. I. Is it possible that I am assigned with a similar proposal in two different cut-off dates? Yes. Under the SME Instrument Programme, applicants do not face any limitations in the number of times they might decide to re-submit the same and/or a similar proposal. As long as they have been notified of the results of their previous submission, they are allowed to submit the same proposal in the next cut-off date. Therefore when you evaluate a resubmitted proposal, please complete the evaluation and score the proposal on its own merits. J. The proposal mentions the scores received in a previous evaluation. How should I proceed? Applicants are free to decide what to include in a proposal. It is up to the expert to evaluate any information provided, specifically its credibility. K. I made an error in one of my submitted IERs, how can I correct it? When you realize that you made an error in your IER and you want to correct the error committed, you should send an e-mail to the project officer who assigned you the task and ask them to reopen your task in the system. Please do this at the earliest possible moment. L. May I decide to contact directly an applicant/subcontractor/third party? No. As stated in the expert contract, you are not allowed to contact any entity mentioned in the proposal at any time. For detailed information, see the Annex 1 Code of Conduct of your expert contract: - Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality Paragraph 2 Point (iii): "The expert must not communicate with applicants on any proposal: during the evaluation, after the evaluation." - Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality Paragraph 6 Point (b): "the confidentiality obligations are binding on the expert during performance of the Contract and for five years from the date of the last payment made " M. May I decide to contact directly experts or ask to see their evaluation? 10
No. As stated in the expert contract you are not allowed to contact or share evaluations with any other experts. For detailed information, see the Annex 1 Code of Conduct - of the expert contract: - Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality Paragraph 2 Point (i): "the expert must not discuss any proposal with others, including other experts " - Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality Paragraph 6 Point (b): "the confidentiality obligations are binding on the expert during performance of the Contract and for five years from the date of the last payment made " N. When assessing a proposal do I rely only on my expertise or may I seek further information (for example through the internet, specialised databases, etc.)? When analysing a proposal you should first evaluate the content of the proposal based on your expertise, experience, knowledge. Besides this you are allowed to seek further information if you think this is useful, provided that you respect the overall rules for confidentiality. For more information, see the Annex 1 Code of Conduct of the expert contract: Art 3 Obligation of Confidentiality Paragraph 5: "if the expert seek further information..she/he: must respect the overall rules for confidentiality.., must not contact applicants, must not contact third parties.." Art 3 - Obligations of Confidentiality Paragraph 6 Point (b): "the confidentiality obligations are binding on the expert during performance of the Contract and for five years from the date of the last payment made " O. I feel I am not specialised in the specific subject/innovation of the proposal, should I decline the task? The choice to accept or refuse a proposal is up to each evaluator. However, on several occasions we have noticed that some evaluators declined assessing proposals because they felt they were not experts on the specific technology described in the proposal. Although in some instances this was a justifiable action, in some others we feel it may have resulted from a slight misunderstanding of the evaluation process, which has eventually generated unnecessary delays. We have chosen groups of four experts to evaluate each proposal based on their business knowledge of a sector (i.e. Energy, Transport, ICT, etc.). Although an expert may be more accustomed to dealing with a particular technology within those sectors (for example through research or product sales) it is the overall expertise and business experience of the evaluator within the overall sector that we are trying to capture. Therefore based on our experience we feel that declining to evaluate a proposal for not being an expert on its specific technology may not necessarily bring added value to the assessment of the proposals. We are trying to assess the merits of the overall business proposition, rather than just of the technology or innovation proposed. As we said, we invite four experts to evaluate each proposal and we work to ensure that each panel includes a variety of business experiences and at least one person with the knowledge of the specific technology. Some experts will be more familiarized with the technology, while 11
others will be more familiarized with the management context or with production or sales. Some will know the competitors well, while others will be more skilled, perhaps, in appraising the financial viability of the proposal. Therefore, each expert needs to be seen as part of a team evaluating new businesses. We are convinced that an expert receiving a proposal slightly outside their comfort zone may bring an even greater added value to the evaluation panel, enabling it to better assess its potential. P. The SME Instrument focuses on growth and jobs. How does this impact on my approach to the evaluation? The SME Instrument Programme is trying to find excellent innovative business opportunities, not just excellent innovation research. We are looking for business propositions that will allow the applicant SMEs to grow and create jobs. For this reason, the proposed business is at the heart of the proposal and should be the driving subject of the evaluation. Experts should look at the proposed market and how such a business proposition could operate in that market and benefit the applicant SME, in terms of growth and jobs. Q. If a proposal is not anymore in the Death Valley, how should we consider this? The aim of the SME Instrument is to assist companies overcome the lack of financial cash flow between start up seed money and development capital/banks - often referred to as the Valley of Death. It may still be in line with the SME Instrument's objectives to fund proposals which are after Death Valley but before growth and sales are visible. R. What is the "seal of excellence"? The 'Seal of Excellence' is a quality label, awarded to project proposals under the H2020 framework programme which receive a score above threshold but are not funded due to lack of budget. A holder of the certificate can then approach alternative funding sources (public or private), i.e. national, regional, European or international and present the certificate as a proof of a high-quality project proposal. For further information please see: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_memo-15-5802_en.htm 1.3 Subcontracting A. What is a subcontract? Subcontracts are the purchase of goods, works or services that are identified as action tasks (in Technical Annex 1-3 of the proposal) which are necessary to implement the action. The beneficiaries must award the subcontracts ensuring the best value for money or, if appropriate, the lowest price. In doing so, they must avoid any conflict of interests. 12
Examples of subcontracting could include: contracts for (parts of) the research or innovation tasks which are clearly written in Technical Annex 1-3 of the proposal. For more information see page 125 of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement B. What could be a conflict of interest situation between an applicant and a subcontractor? Conflict of interest could exist for reasons of economic interest, political or national affinity, family or emotional ties or any other shared interest which could influence the subcontractor's selection/award procedure; influence the subcontractor's price (so that it does not correspond to the market price) or affect the action's performance. For more information and examples see page 231 Annotated Model Grant Agreement C. Are there budget limits (max/min) for unknown/known subcontractors? There are no maximum or minimum limits for subcontractors. Subcontracting is NOT restricted to a limited part of the action in the SME Instrument (except for SMEInst05). However, the motivation or the capacity of the participant to carry out the action should be very well justified. This is in line with the spirit of the SME Instrument that the applying SME should have the capacity to carry out the activity. In addition, vigilance is used to spot proposals charging very high amounts for services of subcontractors adding little value to the development of the product or service proposed as well as where subcontractors have the core part of the tasks. D. What is the difference between subcontracts and contracts? Subcontracts are directly linked to the implementation of specific tasks described in Annex 1 (Technical Annex Section 1-3). For example: Contract for (parts of) the research or innovation tasks mentioned in Annex 1 which could include: demonstration; testing; prototyping; piloting; scaling-up; miniaturisation; design; market replication. These should be listed under "direct costs of subcontracting" in Part A (section 3 (C) - Budget breakdown). Contracts do not directly cover the implementation of specific action tasks mentioned in Annex 1, but they can provide support to them. For example: Contract for a computer; contract for an audit certificate on the financial statements; contract for the translation of documents; contract for the publication of brochures; contract for the creation of a website that enables action s beneficiaries to work together (if creating the website is not an action task); contract for organisation of the rooms and catering for a meeting (if the organisation of the meeting is not an action tasks mentioned as such in Annex 1); contract for hiring IPR consultants/agents. These should be listed under "other direct costs" in Part A (section 3 (B) - Budget breakdown. For more information see page 111 of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement E. What if one out of four subcontractors involved is not adequately described? 13
The best value for money must be evaluated for each of the subcontractors. If not enough information is provided, this shall be reflected in your assessment of Criterion 3- Quality & Efficiency of Implementation. If best value for money is not demonstrated, the overall score for Criterion 3 should be below the threshold of 3. To achieve this, questions 1, 2 and 5 relating to subcontracting under Criterion 3 should be scored in such a way that the final score will be below 3 for the Implementation Criterion. Furthermore, in the section entitled "subcontracting", each subcontractor must be evaluated and an explanation on why best value for money was not demonstrated should be provided. F. How do I deal with the best value for money principle in case of a usual provider? The fact that a subcontractor has been working with the applicant for years could be an element to demonstrate best value for money. In any case, the motivation to choose a subcontractor must be demonstrated and the best value for money must be explained in detail (i.e. expertise, efficiency, price, etc.). In addition, any conflict of interests should be avoided. G. What is the difference between a subcontractor and a linked third party? A subcontractor has a contractual agreement with the beneficiary to implement specific action tasks. The subcontractor charges a price which usually includes a profit. The beneficiary must award contracts on the basis of best-value-for-money and absence of conflict of interest. A linked third party should be an affiliate to the beneficiary or have a legal link with the beneficiary. The work carried out by the linked third party cannot be for a profit and the linked third party must declare their own costs. For more information see page 111 and 131 Annotated Model Grant Agreement 1.4 - Conflict of Interest A. Which is the correct definition of the Conflict of Interest? According to the expert contract - Annex 1 Code of Conduct Art 2 Obligation of impartiality, Point 2 Definition of the conflict of interest: "For a given proposal, a conflict of interest exists if an expert: a. was involved in the preparation of the proposal; b. stands to benefit directly or indirectly if the proposal is accepted; c. has a close family or personal relationship with any person representing an applicant legal entity; d. is a director, trustee or partner or is in any way involved in the management of an applicant legal entity; e. is employed or contracted by one of the applicant legal entities or any named subcontractors; 14
f. is a member of an Advisory Group set up by the Commission to advise on the preparation of EU or Euratom Horizon 2020 Work Programmes, or Work Programmes in an area related to the call for proposals in question; g. is a National Contact Point, or is directly working for the Enterprise Europe Network; h. is a member of a Programme Committee. In the following situation the contracting party (EASME) will decide whether a conflict of interest exists, taking account of the objective circumstances, available information and related risks, when an expert: i. was employed by one of the applicant legal entities in the last three years; ii. is involved in a contract or grant agreement, grant decision or membership of management structures (e.g. member of management or advisory group etc.) or research collaboration with an applicant legal entity or the fellow researcher, or had been so in the last three years; iii. is in any other situation that casts doubt on their ability to participate in the evaluation of the proposal impartiality, or could reasonably appear to do so in the eyes of an external third party. B. Am I in a Conflict of interest's situation? Conflict of interest is a highly sensitive issue for any close-to-market programme such as the SME Instrument. Despite the precise indications included in the code of conduct of the expert contract, in the majority of the cases, it is the evaluator who must determine whether a conflict of interest applies to his/her specific situation. When facing these situations, please also consider how they might be seen by third parties. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that, every time you do not feel comfortable in assessing a proposal or a group of proposals, you inform and explain the reason to us. Below we provide you with a few examples of possible scenarios you might encounter as an evaluator for the SME Instrument Programme. Scenario 1 I work for the Enterprise Europe Network in COUNTRY A but the Enterprise Europe network is only my part time job. Recently I have been approached by the European Commission to be part of the next experts' pool for the SME Instrument Programme. Am I in a conflict of interest s situation? Yes. According to Art 2 (Point G) of the Annex 1 - Code of conduct - of the expert contract, you are in a conflict of interest situation. Scenario 2 I have been involved as a consultant / advisor / service provider / applicant preparing a proposal under the SME Instrument. Can I still be involved as an evaluator for the SME Instrument Programme? 15
No, if you are evaluating proposals for the SME Instrument whatever the topic. Please note that you may be required to suspend your evaluator activities during the ongoing evaluation. Scenario 3 I am an evaluator for the SME Instrument Programme and recently I have been asked to give a presentation on the programme during an event organized in my country by an incubator of start-ups. Am I in a conflict of interest s situation? No. There is no conflict of interest if you accept to participate in such events organized in your region/country. A conflict of interest might occur only if you mention the contents/details of a proposal you have evaluated. Scenario 4 I would like to be evaluator and a coach for the SME Instrument. Would I be in a conflict of interest's situation? Yes. In this combination of roles we see a potential conflict of interest and we ask you to make a choice and to not combine the roles. C. What shall I do if I feel I am in a conflict of interest situation? Whenever you do not feel comfortable in the assessment of a proposal or you feel that you are in a situation that could cast doubts on your ability to evaluate with impartiality, you should decline the task received and inform the SME Instrument team accordingly. Section 2 Contracting and Payment 2.1 Contract A. How long will my contract last? You receive a contract specific to the SME Instrument that cannot exceed the maximum of 12 working days for remote evaluation of both Phase 1 and Phase 2 proposals. The contract 16
indicates the starting day but does not mention the ending date. Your contract ends when the 12 days have been used up. It is your interest and it is also your responsibility to control that the threshold of the 12 days is not exceeded as any exceeding days may not be paid. B. What happens if I exceed the threshold of the 12 days? If you exceed the threshold of the 12 days worked, you may be not paid for the exceeding evaluations. C. How and when do I sign my contract? The signature of the experts contract is done electronically in your expert profile of the H2020 Participant Portal. The signature of the contracts for the experts is launched by the Research Executive Agency (REA) at the same time for a high number of experts. You will receive an email notification informing you that a contract has been sent to you by the Commission for your signature. It will be accessible from the link provided in the email you will receive or if you received such a notification, by logging-in to the Expert Area in the Participant Portal. Prior to signing your contract, you will be presented with a screen inviting you to make some declarations. Once you have filled in all the sections, you can proceed to the signature itself. To sign the contract, you will simply have to enter your personal ECAS password. You will then be directed back to the Participant Portal where you will see that the signature status on the left-hand side has changed to signed and the proceed to sign button becomes inactive. An electronic seal will be displayed at the end of your contract once it has been signed by both parties and you will be notified once it s accessible to you in the Participant Portal. D. How many times could my contract be renewed? There is no limit in the number of times that the contract can be renewed. However, as indicated in the revision of the implementation of the rotation rules applicable to H2020 experts, the ceiling of maximum working days is increased to 200 days for any activity under Horizon 202011 (regular evaluator, ethics evaluator, monitor, ethics monitor, expert group). The target to renew 25% of the contracted experts every year is retained. It is in your interest to monitor that the limit of the 200 days is not exceeded across the H2020 framework programme, especially in cases when you are involved in the evaluation of more than one programme. E. Is it possible to indicate in the contract the name of my company instead of my name? No. As indicated in the Art 1 of the Annex 1 Code of Conduct of the expert contract: "the expert works independently, in a personal capacity and not on behalf of any organization". Therefore, the contract can only be contracted under your name. F. I have been approached by the EC as a possible evaluator for the SME instrument but I still did not sign a contract. May I expect to be contacted for future cut-offs? 17
You could be contacted, because your details are in our approved pool of experts. This pool is meant to be used throughout the year. Although so far you have not been picked out to be part of the first batch, it does not mean that you will not be selected during another round. 2.2 Payment A. What is the reimbursement rate for the evaluation of the SME Instrument proposals? Since 1 st January 2017, the reimbursement rate will be based on working unit. One working unit represents 45. Phase 1 - One proposal evaluated counts for 2 working units Phase 2 - One proposal evaluated counts for 3 working units A full day worked represents 10 working units. Under the SME Instrument Programme the payment will be always done separately for Phase 1 and Phase 2. Please consider that only when an IER is finalised can it be considered as a completed proposal evaluation even if it has been reopened. Below we provide you with two examples of reimbursement claims: Phase 1: I assessed 10 proposals, 10x90, I can claim reimbursement for 900. Phase 2: I assessed 9 proposals. I can claim reimbursement for 1215 (9 x 135 ). B. How many times may I claim reimbursement for the half day remote briefing? You may claim it only once per contract. C. When can I claim the reimbursement for the work done? The reimbursement procedure starts only when the whole evaluation process for each cutoff date is completed (all the evaluations from all the topics in each Phase have been 18
finalised). Please consider that after the cut-off date for each Phase, the evaluation may take around four or five weeks. D. Do I receive a notification when I have to submit my reimbursement claim? You will receive a notification from the system and we will send you an email stating when you can submit your payment request. After the completion of each evaluation process, an attendance session is created in the participant portal allowing you to submit your payment request. Each attendance session has a start-date and an end-date. The attendance session lasts 30 days. If you pass this limit you will not be able to submit your claim anymore. In 2017 a total of 8 sessions will be opened (four for Phase 1 and four for Phase 2). When drafting your payment request, please remember that: No payment can be processed if it has been validated more than 30 days after the closure of the attendance session; No payment is processed when requested on an individual basis. Once you have submitted your claim, it cannot be modified. The payment in your bank account is processed by REA within the 30 days following the submission of your claim. If you miss claiming your reimbursement within the designated period, we will be unable to do ad-hoc payments. To solve the issue of any unclaimed evaluation work, we will open two additional payment sessions per year, at times designated by us. E. I assessed a number of proposals for Phase 1 and for Phase 2 during the same cut-off, how should I claim the reimbursement for the work done? Under the SME Instrument Programme the payment will be always done separately for Phase 1 and Phase 2. You will receive a separate notification for the opening of two attendance sessions. The latter depends on the speed with which the relevant evaluation rounds are completed. Please do not aggregate your cost claims for Phase 1 and Phase 2. Aggregated claims will not be processed and this will slow down the entire process. F. Who is responsible to control the number of proposals I evaluated during each cut-off and Phase? It is your responsibility to monitor the number of evaluations performed in order not to exceed the limit of the 12 days mentioned in your contract and the limit of 200 days fully worked across the H2020 framework programme. Our systems keep track of the SME Instrument evaluations performed by each expert during each cut-off date and for each specific Phase. The SME Instrument Team is also monitoring the allocations done in order to avoid situations of high workload to experts. G. May the reimbursement be paid directly on my company's account? Yes. You may choose to claim reimbursement on your company's account or on your personal account. If you choose your company's account you need to request to add a new 19
bank account in your expert area in the H2020 Participant Portal. You can then choose the other account once you will introduce your reimbursement file. H. Which are the tax rules I should apply to the work done in the framework of the H2020 SME Instrument? According to the Chapter 4 Article 6 of the expert contract no payment received by the expert is exempted from national taxes and the expert is obliged to ensure compliance with his/her applicable national legislation on taxes and social security law. As far as the VAT obligation is concerned, the services provided to the Commission/REA are VAT exempted (see article 151 (1) (a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC and article 51 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 282/2011 governing purchases made by the European Commission and other EU institutions). I. As self-employer may I request a VAT exemption certificate? Yes. If you are self-employed and VAT taxable under your national law (the VAT number has to be registered to the same person as in your expert contract), you might request a VAT exemption certificate. If you wish to receive such document please provide the REA EVALUATION team by e-mail (REA-EVALUATION@ec.europa.eu) with the official national VAT registration document proving your self-employed status and your VAT number. Please specify also the number of the expert contract for which you would like to have the certificate. J. The link I received to encode my legal and bank account details does not work, what shall I do? The provision of the legal and banking account details is a prerequisite to receive an expert contract through the electronic system on the Participant Portal. You may want to open the link via a different browser like Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome. If it still does not work, please seek assistance from the IT helpdesk by clicking on the 'Support' tab on the Horizon2020 Participants' Portal. K. How do I contact the SME Instrument team in case of need? For further information not included in this document, please contact the SME Instrument Team via the functional mail box EASME-SME-EXPERTS@ec.europa.eu. 20