
Evaluation of actual Contact
Point’s structure of MPCs
Latest developments (September 2008)

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
Background
The MIRA project aims at developing platforms of dialogue to
improve the S&T cooperation; addressing training activities
to improve the quality of participation and the management
of the partners of FP7 from MPC; discussing and
monitoring the content of FP7; creating an observatory of
EU and MPC Cooperation in S&T, which will agree
indicators for monitoring of RTD cooperation activities;
creating networks of research institutions and technology
transfer services that can provide a reference element for
the development of the Euro-Mediterranean Innovation
Space .
|
2

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
.
The assessment has been drafted on the basis of
Questionnaire sent to all MPC.
Parts of the assessment are:
a-General considerations based on the replies to the
Questionnaires sent to the ICPC CPs (IP or CP).
b-Specific comments for every IP that participated in the
survey.
c-Condensed raw data from the received Questionnaires.
|
3

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
a-General considerations
.
.
Sustainability, size, performance and financing
Which are the critical
sustainability of the IPs?
parameters
determining
the
BENEFIT
The setting up and sustainable IPs reflects first of all a
political willingness to cooperate with the EU in S&T.
In addition, there are concrete benefits envisaged, in terms
of participations in EU funded research projects and hence:
exchange of expertise, development of products and
processes, financing of research teams.
./.
|
4

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
COSTS
They mainly consist of the salaries of the staff dedicated to the IP,
in expenses for missions, information days and other activities,
equipment and office space, printed material, etc.
Which is the optimum size for a IP? Are the IPs understaffed?
Among the parameters:
The size of the scientific community of the country and its potential
to participate in the FP.
The organizational model: if everything has to be organized
centrally: more staff, if a network of (national) contact points is set
up, then the central CP (or IP) plays mainly a coordinating role
and needs fewer but also more qualified staff.
|
5

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
What kind of performance indicators could be developed
for the IPs?
Among the parameters:
A1. Number of Researchers in the IP’s database.
A2. Percentage (%) of the estimated country’s research
community in the database.
B1. Number of events organized annually and in total.
B2. Number of researchers that attended the events.
C1. Number of visitors of the IP;
C2. Number of visitors of the web site;
C3. Number of contacts by email;
D1. Number of proposals submitted to the FP from the country;
D2. Number of funded proposals with that country’s participation
and total amount of funding.
|
6

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Funding
Two main sources:
 The hosting country (allocation of permanent staff;
office space, equipment and telecommunications;
contribution to the organization of some events or
missions, etc.)
 The European Union, through several FP projects
(EUROMEDANET 1&2, ERAMED, MIRA) contributed
to the training and networking activities of the CPs, as
well as to the organization of several of their activities
(Info days, brokerage events, etc.).
|
7

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
Role, characteristics and organizational models
ROLE
There are two distinct functions/roles for the implementation of the
cooperation between the EU and every MPC, in the field of S&T
The institutional contacts under the responsibility of the Ministries
for Research (negotiation and implementation of the S&T
Cooperation Agreement with the EU, the representation of the
country at the Monitoring Committee of the Euro-Mediterranean
Cooperation, etc ).
 The stimulation of the participation of the research community of
the country in the FP.
|
8

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
MODEL OF FUNCTIONING
Open to the research community, encouraging the contacts of the
researchers with the IP staff by any means (face to face
meetings, e-mails, etc.).
 Pro-active towards the potential participants in the FP activities
even outside the mainstream research institutions (i.e. in the
industrial sector)
ORGANIZATIONAL MODEL
Even if a single well-structured and equipped central unit can be
very efficient, a more decentralized structure through the setting
up a network of (local) contact points/multipliers may have a
better knowledge of the local research landscape, the more
efficient organization of local events, etc.
(It should be noted that in EU MS the CP (‘NCP’) system is more
and more decentralized).
|
9

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
How to motivate the ‘institutional networking’ i.e. the
contact persons in Institutions?
Frequent invitations to events organized by the IP (central
structure), organization of events locally, periodic contacts, etc.,
could act as incentives. Even more important could be the
acknowledgement of the role of the contact person in the
preparation of a successful project.
|
10

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
Possible role of CP in MoCo (or other policy fora)
In recent years there has been a demand from the MoCo
for discussion and implementation of more and more
concrete actions and of a monitoring of its decisions.
Hence, CPs role in the MoCo could be very important
The same could be valid for other policy fora between the
respective country and the EU (e.g. in committees in
charge of the monitoring of the cooperation
agreements).
|
11

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
SICA, topics with “recommended” participation and
“core” activities of 7FP
Besides the topics of privileged participation to the FP , that are of
particular interest for MPCs, the necessity to collect and study
all the FP7 Work Programmes is among the core obligations of
the CPs in order to be in a position to disseminate the
information and to provide advice to the research community.
Moreover, the CPs should keep in mind that the real challenge is to
stimulate the participation in the ‘core’ activities of the FP and
not to restrict their activities to the relatively rare SICAs and
topics with ‘recommended participation’.
In this context, a deep knowledge of the overall 7FP is needed.
|
12

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
Web sites
All the ICPC-CPs report that they have developed specific web sites.
However, when looking at the updating of these web sites the
situation is actually not satisfactory: most of the web sites are
updated ‘rarely’ but even an updating ‘every two months’ is not
sufficient for timely information on new calls.
The possibility to update the content (e.g. new calls, news, etc. but
not the structure) of the web site should be investigated as a first
priority. At a second stage, the online services should be
developed, as well as the possibility to count the visitors.
|
13

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
b-Notes for each IP that participated in the survey
ALGERIA
It operates within a Research Center, where a team of few
persons working on a part-time basis is set up.
The IP is active in the typical expected activities (Info days,
training, dissemination, etc.) and participates in EU and national
projects.
It operates as a single point, i.e. for the time being there is no
network at national level.
It has developed an on-line registration capability.
Among the goals: the creation of Thematic contact points (Health,
Energy, etc.) is reported.
|
14

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
EGYPT
The IP is hosted by the Ministry responsible for Research.
It has more the characteristics of an administrative structure.
However, the existence of networks of thematic contact points and
of Institutional contact points are reported.
It takes part in many EU projects but it seems under-staffed and
reports weaknesses in its equipment.
The IP makes reference to a EU Programme dedicated to
Research, Development and Innovation in Egypt, which can
support ‘multipliers’ for FP7. This is very positive for the country
itself and could also serve as good practice for other MPCs.
|
15

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
JORDAN
The IP is hosted by a Governmental Organization (Agency). It
was set up as a small central unit and is currently coordinating a
network of 32 persons in various Institutions of the country.
It receives support from a National Programme and participates
also in several EU projects related to the IP activities.
the IP is proactive, also in statistics.
The mobilization of the researchers is reported as a problem.
(many reasons can exist: complicated structure and procedures
of the FP, false expectations, etc).
Among promising initiatives: effort to join the network of EU
NCPs.
|
16

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
LEBANON
The IP operates within a University/Research Center,
where a small team of few persons is set up.
It is active in the typical expected activities (Info days,
training, dissemination, etc.) and provides some
statistics.
It has developed an on-line registration capability.
|
17

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
MOROCCO
The IP is hosted by the Ministry, with a small unit
involving several staff.
It has a considerable networking with Institutions.
It is very active, reporting a considerable number of
activities and a strong participation in FP projects.
Despite of that, financial problems are reported.
Among the good practices: participation in policy fora as
the MoCo and the Maroc–EU Committee in S&T
It plans to organize national thematic networks.
|
18

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
.
PALESTINE
The IP is hosted by the Ministry for Research, where a
small team of few persons has been set up. There is no
network.
Among some initiatives: awareness raising activities and,
occasionally, assistance to researchers.
SYRIA
The IP operates in the University with a small team (on a
limited part time basis), and as a single point.
Info Days and participation in some EU projects is
reported. It developed an on-line registration capability.
The need of an interlocutor for S&T within the EU
delegation in the country is reported as important.
|
19

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
.
TUNISIA
The IP is hosted by the Ministry responsible for Research.
It reports the participation in several EU projects but
nevertheless is relatively under-staffed with limited
equipment and communication facilities.
|
20

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
b-Some of the raw data from the Questionnaires
Type of host institution- Mission of host organisation (*)
AL
EG
JO
University/
Education
Research C.
Public Body/
Administration
x (*)
(*)
x (*)
LE
MO
PA
SY
x (*)
(*)
x (*)
x (*)
(*)
(*)
x (*)
x
TU
x (*)
Company
Other (specify)
GOV Ag./
* Science
policy.
|
21

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Date of creation of ICPC-CP/ officially nomination
AL
EG
JO
LE
MO
Date of set up
2004 Feb07 Apr05 Feb04 Jul05
Officially
recognised.
Mar
07
Feb07 Jan07 Mar07
Oct
06
PA
SY
TU
Jan
08
Sep
06
Apr
05
2007
-
Nov
06
|
22

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
How is ICPC-CP organized?
 Network of thematic CP / Network of Institutional contact
points / Only central CP
Staff composition:
 N. of persons/Category of staff/ part time or full-time
Have any person in the office been involved as evaluator
during FP5/FP6?
ICPC-CP missions:
 According to the guiding principles for setting up systems
of NCP edited by EC, see the last version of 12-12-2007.
Please classify the tasks that represent your activities:
Informing, awareness/ Advising, assisting, training/
Signposting and feedback (i.e. Inform EC on problems
and/or activities)
 Provide statistics? What kind of statistics?
|
23

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Mission:
 Are there any national incentives to encourage
participation to the FP? (Yes/No) If yes, explain…
 Are there any other organizations in your country
providing information about FP? If yes, please list them.
Means:
 Please describe your infrastructure situation: Is your
ICPC CP well equipped (PC, printers, internet , fax,
phone, international line, photocopy, etc )?
 Is it easily accessible to visitors (near universities,
location in the city center)?
 Day to day assistance to FP participants: please indicate
the frequency of using: phone, e-mail, meetings.
|
24

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Info on Web Sites:
 Address/hosted in website of host institution or
separate URL
 Main sections on home page
 Are there any “under construction” sections?” if yes,
since when? Do you know when they will become
accessible?
 Electronic services (Online registration, forum of
exchange for information, possibility of mass mailing to
participants)
 Is your web-site updated regularly? If yes, precise the
frequency.
 Do you have a visitor counter?
|
25

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
ICPC-CP activities (description):
 Organisation of info-days (Number/ Target
audience/Content)
 Dissemination tools (leaflets, reports, newsletters,
guidelines, other)
 Participation in NCP thematic meetings
 Participation in EU projects
 Participation in EU events
 Participation in RD national projects
 Participation in national events
|
26

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Networking
 What type of contacts and international network do you
maintain?
At national level (ministries, R&D institutions, etc,); At
regional lev. (other CP, ministries, R&D institutions,
etc,); At international lev. (EC, ministries, R&D
institutions, etc,)
 National Information Flow
From where and to whom you provide information
 International Information Flow
From where and to whom you provide information
|
27

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
ICPC CP Knowledge and needs
 Degree of knowledge of General FP7 issues, partners
search for FP proposals, Financial issues, Cost
models, Legal issues, IPR issues, Management.
 What kind of capacity building would you prefer
among:
-Good practise examples of the work of European
Organisations dealing with FP
-Lectures by EC officials/ Lectures by invited experts
-Workshop-type training by invited external trainers
-Small group discussion of selected topics
-Practical exercises
|
28

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Main Difficulties (with answers)
 Understanding of FP7
 Understanding of EC administrative and financial rules
(AL/EG/ MO/ PA/TU)
 IP internal organisation (MO/TU)
 Contact with researchers (EG)
 Mobilize research community in FP events
(AL/EG/JO/PA/SY/TU)
 Human potential (MO/PA/SY/TU)
 Financial means (MO)
 Administrative and financial mgmt of FP projects (MO)
 Others (JO: need for strengthening contacts with EU
NCP / SY: Complexity in taking part as coordinator in
FP7)
|
29

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Improve cooperation between ICPC-CP and
Commission services (with answers)
AL
Do you have
regular
contacts with
EC officers
Yes
EG
JO
Yes, but Some
few
times
statistics
provided
LE
Yes
MO
PA
SY
Yes
NO
with
INCO
direct
NO
TU
Rare,
in
NCP
meeti
ngs
Some of means to improve cooperation between EC&CP
-Nominate contact persons for CP in EC for all thematic and
horizontal priorities of FP7
-Provide timely information on work-programs, roadmaps, so on
-Support, where appropriate, additional costs related to special
measures, activities and events of transnational dimension.
|
30

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Improve cooperation between ICPC-CP and Commission
services (with answers)
Other suggestions from:
- Morocco/Tunisia:
Need for:
- information on the WP draft and of calls before publication;
- a summary of the thematic calls encouraging the participation
of third country in one document from INCO directorate
- information on unselected projects
- suggestions on how to motivate the institutional contact point
or thematic NCP in MPCs (Mo)
- suggestions on how to improve (Mo)
- implementation of the thematic CP and ensuring the
sustainability of the institutional contact point (Tu)
- Improvement of the national contact point management (Tu)
|
31

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Improve cooperation between ICPC-CP and
Commission services (with answers)
Other suggestions from:
- Syria:
Need to define an important role for Delegations of EC in
third countries in regard of FP7, with the presence of an
expert in each delegation who represents the EC Research
Directorate. This expert can be of great help to update
information concerning rules, giving advises to the CP.
|
32

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
ICPC-CP’s perspectives:
Algeria:
Create Thematic Contact Points (health, energy….) as other
countries.
Morocco/Tunisia:
To continue working on MIRA and other projects favouring CP and
capacity building
To Implement the thematic CP and ensure the sustainability of the
institutional contact point
To Improve the national contact point management
|
33

Evaluation of actual Contact Point’s
structure of MPCs
Thanks you
For further information:
http://www.miraproject.eu/
marilena.rossano@cnr.it
|
34