Horizon 2020 vs. Federal Grants:
What Are the Key Differences?
Ryan Lankton, JD, MSI
Project Representative
Office of Research and Sponsored Projects
University of Michigan
rlankton@umich.edu
University of Michigan
• Public university
• Recipient of Horizon 2020 grant
– Opportunity: H2020-PROTEC-2014 (PROTEC-12014: Space Weather)
– Award: PROGRESS (No. 637302)
• Part of eight-member consortium coordinated
by University of Sheffield
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery
 Agreement structure
 Roles and governance
structure
 Electronic exchange
system
Agreement Structure
• Model agreements used
to craft actual
agreements
• Many models available
– Similar, but not the same
– Choice driven by grant
program type
(general vs. specific)
– Choice also driven by
number of beneficiaries
(mono- vs. multibeneficiary)
Consortium
agreement
Grant
agreement
Other
supplemental
agreements
Multi-beneficiary grant
Roles and Governance Structure
Article 41.2 & Section 6
• Formal division of roles and obligations
– Coordinator manages grant activities for all
beneficiaries and serves as the single point of contact
for the funding agency
– Consortium agreement used to create additional
rights and responsibilities among beneficiaries
• Consortium agreement imposes a pre-established
governance structure on the beneficiaries
Electronic Exchange System
Articles 17 & 52
• Electronic exchange system used for all
formal communication with agency and
all financial and legal administration of
the grant by beneficiaries
• Access to system requires registration and
validation of the organization and of the Legal
Entity Appointed Representative (LEAR)
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery
 Promoting the grant
action and results
 Protecting the results
 Open access
dissemination of
results
Promoting Grant Action and Results
Article 38
• Must implement a strategic and effective
plan to promote the grant action and its
results
• Plan must ensure the visibility of EU’s
funding for grant action and results
Protecting the Results
Articles 26 & 27
• For four years after the project ends, must
take adequate steps to protect the results
• Protective measures include coordinating with
funding agency and other grant beneficiaries
before licensing or disseminating results
• Failure to protect may result in assumption of
ownership by the funding agency
Open Access Dissemination
Article 29
• Must provide free and online access to
scientific publications, data, and bibliographic
metadata
• Must also report on compliance with this
obligation
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery
 Joint and several
liability for
implementation
 Financial statements
and payments made
in euros
 Potential financial or
administrative
penalties
Joint and Several Liability
Article 41.1
• Consortium members are jointly and severally
liable for the technical implementation of the
grant action
• The grant action will be described in Annex 1
of the grant agreement
Financial Statements and Payments
Articles 20.6 & 21.6
• Financial statements must be drafted
in euros
• Payments to grant beneficiaries will
be made in euros
Potential Penalties
Articles 43 & 45
• Funding agency may reduce the grant award
for improper implementation or for breach of
the agreement terms
• Funding agency may also impose financial or
administrative penalties for substantial errors
or serious breach
– Agency will follow contradictory procedure
outlined in grant
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery
 European law and
jurisdiction
 Other obligations
rooted in EU law
European Law and Jurisdiction
Article 57
• Grant agreement is governed by applicable EU
law, supplemented by Belgian law where
necessary
• Jurisdiction for adjudicating disputes resides
with the General Court, or the Court of Justice
of the European Union on appeal
Other Obligations Rooted in EU Law
Articles 32 & 33
• Some obligations are based on EU law
• Grant recipients must comply with and report
on their adherence to these obligations
– Recruitment and working conditions
– Gender equality
• Failure to comply may result in grant
reduction
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery
 Access rights to
results and
background IP
Access Rights to Results and Background IP
Articles 25 & 31
• Must authorize use of results or background
technology identified to the project when needed
to implement actions under the project
– This use must be authorized on a royalty-free basis
• For one year after the project ends, access must
also be granted when needed to exploit results
– This use shall be under fair and reasonable conditions
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery
 Capped rate of
indirect cost recovery
Capped Rate of Indirect Cost Recovery
Article 6.2 E
• Entitled to recover a flat rate of 25% of the
eligible total direct costs, minus any
– Costs for subcontracting
– Costs of in-kind contributions incurred by third
parties not used on the beneficiaries’ premises
– The costs of providing financial support to third
parties
Added Complexity
More Responsibility
Questions?
Ryan Lankton, JD, MSI
rlankton@umich.edu
(734) 764-4750
Increased Risk
Foreign Law
Greater IP Exposure
Reduced Cost Recovery