Resources to be committed. The beneficiaries also acknowledge the contribution of the European Commission to the project budget and commit to further acknowledge this contribution during the execution of project activities and in any resulting publications and dissemination material and events.‖ Done 4 Consider the best practices on dissemination and implement the ones explicitly mentioned therein The Outreach and Dissemination work package section has been substantially reviewed to take into account the recommendations and best practices. Additional details on the relationships with user communities, the ESFRI projects and public and media have Done been added 5 Prepare a fact sheet based on the template attached in the same e- mail message as these minutes and a 5 slide presentation of the project (deadline 29.04.10) Prepared and sent to the EC Done 6 Implement in the DoW the necessary changes to address the recommendations and weaknesses raised in the ESR (see more detailed points below) All subtasks referring to the actions adopted to address the reviewers recommendations have been implemented as described below Done
Resources to be committed. E-ScienceTalk’s request for funds is primarily to keep together the highly effective consortium established during the first phase of the project, which was identified as one of GridTalk’s strongest assets by the first year reviewers. GridTalk funded the employment of three full time members of staff for the two year duration of the project, one in each partner institution of the consortium. For e-ScienceTalk, while all the products are already established, and the initial effort-intensive period of starting them up has been completed, the nature of cutting edge online dissemination channels such as GridCafé, GridGuide, GridCast, the Real Time Monitor and iSGTW mean that constant redevelopment is needed to keep pace with new software, standards, applications and tools. The wide programme of work already initiated by GridTalk will be maintained during e-ScienceTalk. In the new EGI era of grid computing, a number of highly desirable extensions and expansions to this programme have been identified for e-ScienceTalk, and have been outlined in this document. In order to carry out these extensions and expansions effectively, e-ScienceTalk proposes to add an additional amount of funded effort to the original GridTalk team as detailed below. Partner GridTalk E-ScienceTalk Comments
Resources to be committed. Added description of additional contributions in the form of hardware, software and services (e.g. the PPT application used to manage the project effort) Done 21 Detail the time shifts of deliverables and milestones compared to the original proposal DNA1.4 - EMI Roadmap and DCI Collaborations, added new at PM5 MJRA1.1 - Security Workshop: new milestone at PM2 (the numbering of following deliverables is shifted by one, e.g. the old MJRA1.1 is now MJRA1.2). This milestone replaces the old MJRA1.9 – Agreement on one common security infrastructure, which was at at PM9 MJRA1.4 🡪 MJRA1.5 - Agreement on common security methods for data systems: number shifted, time shifted from PM6 to PM5 MJRA1.9 – Agreement on one common security infrastructure, removed and Done replaced by new MJRA1.1 MJRA1.8 🡪 MJRA1.9 - AAI requirements of DCIs, shifts from PM6 to PM7 22 Add mention of participation to the SIENA Standardization Roadmap Added to section B3.2 Done 23 Add clarification of cost categories Added at the top of section B2.4 as instructed Done PART B COMBINATION OF COLLABORATIVE PROJECT & COORDINATION AND SUPPORT ACTION Table of Contents B1. CONCEPT AND OBJECTIVES, PROGRESS BEYOND STATE-OF-THE-ART, S/T METHODOLOGY AND WORK PLAN 11 B1.1 CONCEPT AND PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S) 11
Resources to be committed. Other direct costs (table 3.4b)
Resources to be committed. The coordinator will require an academic employee and a part-time secretary (24 PM, and 18 PM, respectively) and the assistant coordinator will be supported by one part- time academic employee (18 PM). WP1 requires the appointment of a full-time Executive Manager with pertinent management experience in industry or international organizations. Budget for such an expert are is foreseen for 27 PM. This person will be supported by an academic employee (24 PM) and part-time secretary (18 PM). Costs for office and secretarial expenses (stationery, computers, communication) are also foreseen. The Associate Coordinator as well as the responsible person for global integration require support by a part-time academic employee (18 PM each). For travel costs for the coordinator, executive manager and assistants to support international cooperation, 3 journeys per month are budgeted (for one of these persons in turn). The Associate Coordinator will require a travel budget for one monthly journey as well as the partner for global integration. Several meetings have to be organized by WP1 and are budgeted according to the number of estimated participants per event. Two Governance Council meetings (60 PE each), four Steering Committee meetings (10 PE each), and two Coordination Committee meeting with 20 participants each (40 PE) are budgeted. In addition, an international conference will be organised in combination with the Stakeholder Forum meeting, to save on cost. Conference organization is budgeted and will be outsourced. Within WP1, there will be subcontracting costs for the legal advice and contracting and public relations activities to be outsourced to professional agencies. For the Chair of the Scientific and Ethical Advisory Board an academic part-time assistance (6 PM) is required. To cover travel costs for the international board members (9 persons) for two journeys (to cover the increased expenses of overseas flights) is budgeted. For the Chair of the Stakeholder Forum, part-time assistance (6 PM) and contributions to travel cost for the Stakeholder Forum (ca. 250 participants) are required. A travel budget for global integration (Coordination Board) will be required to support the necessary international contacts (travel expenses for incoming experts and for traveling to other organaisations, respectively). WP1 will keep a budget for travel, subcontracting or other cost, which is not allocated to a specific work package, in order to allow new experts or organiz...
Resources to be committed. The substantial resources requested overall for EURO4M reflect the ambitious scope of the project. Even with a budget of this magnitude, partner institutions will need to contribute significant additional resources. More importantly, EURO4M needs to use to the largest extent possible existing capacities. The expertise and experience of the beneficiaries in each WP, together with the degree of European and international co-operation, make the work feasible within the level of resources available. The total grant requested from the EU is 4 million Euros (M€), broken down as shown in Table B.2.4a. WP Name K€ 1 Regional observation datasets 1470 2 Regional reanalysis 1710 3 User-oriented information and climate change products 540 4 Project management, coordination and sustainability 280 Table B.2.4a. Breakdown of total grant requested amongst EURO4M WPs. Most of the budget is used to hire personnel; a small fraction is for computing and travel. From the total budget of 4 M€ roughly 80% will be spent on science to make available high quality ECV datasets in WP1 and WP2. The other 20% will be spent on integrated products (at the required level of aggregation and processing) and management. We believe this breakdown is justified, because European climate change monitoring requires a firm scientific basis. Focusing on existing datasets and systems only, would result in products and services that are far from the forefront of scientific developments. About 7% of the overall budget is dedicated to management. This small amount implies that a large part of the support needed will come from either the Coordinators home institute (e.g. for hosting the EURO4M website) and from the home institutes of the WP-leaders. Data storage and dissemination A huge amount of observational and reanalysis data will be produced in WP1 and WP2. These data will be analysed within the project and used for the multi-purpose products developed in WP3. WP3 will make an inventory of raw data needs by users outside the project as part of the CLT activities. We anticipate the need for EURO4M data after the end of the project. Therefore, the main datasets will be secured for at least 5 yr after the project ends. This is possible with the allocated resources only by virtue of exploiting existing infrastructure to the full, and capitalising on the benefits associated with an adherence to standards and interoperability. Data sharing within EURO4M will follow a service-oriented approach adopting co...
Resources to be committed. The HOPSA consortium aggregates the corresponding personnel and equipment capable for realising the scientific and technological plan described in section 1.3 and ensuring its impact on the European community. The partners already have personnel with the required expertise, to ensure a quick start of the project. Besides, all partners will put the required effort on contracting the additional personnel required for the project. The additional staff resources not covered by the amount requested to the EC will be covered by the partners from different sources, depending on the nature of the institutions. The needed resources are essentially human effort, travel, hardware and software for the developers and for demonstration purposes. The five partners will bring an overall total effort of 191 person- months over 2 years. The overall budget of the project is 1,925,138 eout of which a contribution of the EC of 1,399,966 eis requested. RTD and management The main costs of the project are personnel costs, as can be observed in the table WT8. These costs are split between RTD and management activities. The management is kept to a minimum, but adequate for efficient and lean management. The majority of the management effort has been allocated to the project coordinator. Travel costs Direct costs are totally devoted to cover travel expenses of partners to review meetings, project meetings and attendance to conferences and other dissemination-related activities. The following project meetings are planned:
Resources to be committed. The effort table appears as a separate Annex. Human resources The original total size of MOLTO is 390 person months, of which • 20 (5.2%) for management • 37 (9.6%) for dissemination and exploitation • 348 (85.2%) for research and technology development Partners 1–4 are roughly equal in terms of person months: UGOT 107 (97 without management costs related to coordination), UHEL 82, UPC 102, Ontotext 98. Mxw is smaller, originally 36 months but they left after 1 month. In addition to the personnel paid by MOLTO, research staff from each partner will participate in meetings, supervision, etc.
Resources to be committed. The costs indicated on form A3 are further detailed in this section. In the following tables, the gross figures include indirect costs, and the third column reports the requested EC contributions. Most of the budget is dedicated to human resources, with research positions and management positions distributed according to the detailed work description of section 1.3. All partners have computing and prototyping facilities that will be exploited by SkAT-VG and further expanded with project-specific purchases of hardware and software equipment. All partners have software frameworks, largely developed in previous projects, that will be made avail- able to the consortium. These include software and databases for sound and gesture analysis, sound synthe- sis, and vocal tract morphology. Mobility of researchers is considered to be important for effective intra-project communication and for effective out-of-lab assessment of research results. Description Resources Cost Gross Request IUAV Personnel 57 person-months for research position 12 person-months for management position 338400 56400 541440 90240 406080 90240 Equipment Computers 13000 20800 15600 Software licenses 5000 8000 6000 Audiovisual equipment 13000 20800 15600 Fabrication costs for prototypes 4000 6400 4800 Travel 6 conference trips (3 persons, 2 per year) 27000 43200 32400 6 project meetings (3 persons, 2 per year) 27000 43200 32400 Organization of research workshop 10000 16000 12000 Research missions (4 PMs across partners) 8000 12800 9600 Dissemination Publications and promotion 5000 8000 8000 Subcontr. Audits 5000 5000 5000 Total 511800 815880 637720 Description Resources Cost Gross Request IRCAM Personnel 90 person-months for research position 451890 813402 610052 3 person-months for management position 15063 27113 27113 4 master students 10800 19440 14580 800 subjects for perception tests 10000 18000 13500 Equipment Computers 10400 18720 14040 Software licenses 8000 14400 10800 Audio equipment 800 1440 1080 Travel 6 conference trips (4 persons, 2 per year) 36000 64800 48600 6 project meetings (2 persons, 2 per year) 18000 32400 24300 Organization of research workshop 5000 9000 6750 Research missions (visits/invitations) 0000 0000 0000 Dissemination Publications and promotion 5000 9000 9000 Total 578953 1038915 789215 KTH Personnel 65 person-months for research position 3 person-months for management 20 expert subjects for production tests 417200 24400 4000 667520 39040 6400 500640 39040 4800 Equi...
Resources to be committed. The budget table as copied from the Part A is shown in Table 5. Table 5: Budget breakdown Partner Country RTD (€) MGT+OTH (€) Total (€) EUcontr. (€) EUcontr. (%) FMI FI 370795.2 96052 466847.2 374148.4 21.4 UH FI 424569.6 0 424569.6 318427.2 18.2 UJ FI 93280 0 93280 69960 4.0 DLR DE 333220 0 333220 249915 14.3 ÅSTC SE 280800 0 280800 210600 12.1 Nanospace SE 346032 0 346032 173016 9.9 Tartu EE 189235.2 0 189235.2 141926.4 8.1 Pisa IT 80000 0 80000 60000 3.4 Alta IT 199200 0 199200 149400 8.5 TOTAL 2317132 96052 2413184 1747393 100 The country shares are Finland 43.6%, Sweden 22%, Germany 14.3%, Italy 11.9%, Estonia 8.1%. The share of Finland is high, consisting of FMI, UH and UJ. FMI is the inventor group of Esail technology and thus has necessarily a role in many work packages. FMI is also coordinator and has most of the the management budget. Tether bonding is the the most crucial part of the work and UH is the only group in the world capable of doing it. The rather minor UJ part (tether testing) could in principle be done somewhere else also, but UJ is a natural partner because of its proximity to the tether producer, because it is an ESA approved radiation effect laboratory and because it is already working with FMI, UH and DLR in the ESTCube1 Esail test mission project (which is not funded from this project). Costs indicated in the ESAIL partner budgets as other direct costs are described in Table 6. Travel to project meetings has been estimated by assuming 1000 € cost per trip per person for international travel, 500 € for domestic travel and 0 € for sametown meetings. It was also assumed that one person from each group will attend each project meeting which is relevant to them. The project meeting plan with venues and group relevance assignments were given in Table 4 above. Table 6: Descriptions of the “Other direct costs” in the ESAIL budget estimate. Partner short name Cost (€) Description FMI 30037.5 Travel to project meetings 22037.5 €, material and sample procurement costs 8000 € for WP 2x (polyimide etc. candidate auxtether samples for evaluation and testing, possibly perforation service) UH 30006 Travel to project meetings 6000 €, conferences 6000 €, material and equipment costs 18006 € (6 km bonding wire 5000 €, 6 sets of bond wedges 4800 €, tether factor parts such as clamps, solenoids, motors, translation stages and automation electronics 4000 €, lasers, sensors and other parts for automated optical/photoacoustic quality control of ...
