European Commission
DRAFT
PRIORITY 1: LIFE SCIENCES, GENOMICS AND
BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR HEALTH
RESULTS OF EVALUATION
1st CALL 2003
OJ Reference: OJ C315 of 17/12/2002
Closing date: 25 March 2003
CONFRONTING THE MAJOR
COMMUNICABLE DISEASES LINKED
TO POVERTY
DRAFT
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
OVERVIEW OF THE EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS TO THE FIRST CALL CONCERNING
PRIORITY 1: “CONFRONTING THE MAJOR COMMUNICABLE DISEASES LINKED TO
POVERTY”
1. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
This First call for proposals for the Priority 1 “Life Sciences, Genomics and Biotechnology for Health”
was published in the Official Journal of 17 December 2002 (identifier 2002/C 315/01) with a closing date
of 25 March 2003, in accordance with the 2002 edition of the QoL Work Programme. The indicative
budget available for the call was € 75 million. The call was open only for the new instruments (Integrated
Project and Network of Excellence) and for the specific topics indicated in the call (HIV vaccine, HIVMicrobicides, TB Vaccine, biology and pathology of malaria and Mucosal vaccines).
2. ANALYSIS OF RECEIVED PROPOSALS
A total of 12 proposals, requesting a Community contribution of € 183 million, were received in response
to the call. All proposals were eligible and met all the requirements necessary to be evaluated by
independent experts. As a result of the evaluation procedure, a priority list of 6 proposals has been drawn
up.
3. ANALYSID BY TOPIC
For the most part the Call for Proposals had been successful in attracting the leading groups and projects,
both as NoEs and IPs. In particular excellent projects were identified on TB, microbicides , mucosal
vaccines and on malaria. In the HIV field 3 IPs and 1 NoE were submitted. 1 project on HIV vaccines
was selected whereas the NoE did not pass the threshold of the degree of integration and the Joint
Programme Activities (criteria 4) and the 2 other IPs failed the threshold in scientific and technical
excellence (criteria 3).
The selection of two projects on HIV-microbicides was based on the very distinct nature of the activities
proposed in both. One is a discovery project designed to identify new microbicides from a range of
candidates, the second is directed to bringing a specific group of microbicides to the clinic. The
complementarity of these proposals is key to placing Europe in a strong strategic position globally in
what is a new and important field.
Two NoEs were proposed on malaria. One was clearly of higher quality and involved many of the leading
groups in Europe. However, the panel proposed that some key teams from the NoE that failed to meet the
threshold had expertise that might bring an even greater added value to the selected NoE.
The two proposals on mucosal vaccines were of high quality although both projects had limited
involvement of DC Partners. The selected proposal was extremely well-focused on using three known
2
The only major weak points in the proposal is insufficient attention to safety and toxicity issues and lack
of SMEs in the project group.
A single proposal was received under TB vaccination, but this proposal was submitted by a large
consortium comprising virtually all prominent European researches in this field. Although the size and
management structure of the proposal was criticised, the proposal contained very excellent component
that, if genuinely integrated, can position Europe in the forefront of TB research.
3