Horizon 2020: What's it Worth?

Plans for Horizon 2020 (which, as I don't need to remind you, is the new name for FP8) are coming on a pace, and UKRO reported today that the EC is currently grappling with the Gordian knot of what the Commission should pay successful applicants. The obvious answer would be, 'well, what they ask for,' but it's not that simple. Most European funding is given on a part funding or 'co-financing' basis, often calculated on an algorithm that makes the calculation of Easter look simple.

The current 'reimbursement rates' for FP7 are here (thanks, EUResearch, 'your Swiss guide to European research'). It all looks so simple, doesn't it? However, it's not as straightforward as the Swiss would have us believe, because these figures need to be cross referenced against an indirect cost rates matrix, which varies between institutions, and can be the 'simplified (ha!) method', 'standard flat rate', or 'special transition flat rate'.

Anyway, looking forward, UKRO has read the runes and it looks like the EC might propose Horizon 2020 reimbursement rates as follows:

• up to 75% for research activities,
• 50% for innovation activities, and
• 60% for combined research and innovation activities.
• Marie Curie and ERC would be up to 100%, as at present.

These would be for all participants (both academia and industry) and would apply to an entire project, so there wouldn't be the distinction for non-profit public bodies, secondary and higher education establishments, research organisations and SMEs, or for different activities within a project.

Indirect costs would be a flat rate 75% of personnel costs, again for all participants. No 'real' indirect cost system would be available. ERC would have indirect costs of 25% of personnel costs, and support actions (CSAs) 7% of personnel costs.

UKRO has already had feedback on these proposals from a handful of institutions, most of whom are worried that the rates would work out worse than those currently being offered. They weren't sure that having a single rate was all it was cracked up to be, and were particularly worried that management costs would be less than 100%, making coordination a lot less attractive. Also, the lower reimbursement rate for mixed activity projects (including research and innovation, which the EC is particularly keen to encourage) might actually discourage organisations from participating in such activities. As to indirect rates, most would prefer the current 'special transition flat rate' (of 60%) to continue.

Those institutions that have done some modelling believe that only projects that are personnel-heavy would be better under the new regime. In addition, the ERC might be badly hit, with a move from a 20% flat rate for indirect costs to 25% for personnel-only costs could be significant. There might be some savings made in the cost of managing the grants, but these, it was thought, would be outweighed by the losses.

The full UKRO analysis is available here (you have to be a subscriber to access this) and they would welcome other feedback by 9 September. So get your calculators out and get modelling!

And the Winner Is...

News has come through on the wires from our Brussels correspondent: the EC has announced the winner of the 'Name FP8' competition. Hurray! Get ready with the party poppers, but don't touch the twiglets and low alcohol cava til I say.

As I'm sure you remember, the EC was looking for a snappier title for the new, all encompassing Framework Programme. Something that summed up the brave new world of funding. Something aspirational and forward looking, European and twenty-first century. Something better than the 'Common Strategic Framework for Research and Innovation.' They selected three suggestions from the general public, and put these to a vote.

I can now announce the winner. In reverse order:

• 'Discover 2020', with 2478 votes;
• 'Imagine 2020', with 2785 votes;
• 'Horizon 2020', with 3055 votes.

And I therefore declare 'Horizon 2020' the new FP8. The full and official name will apparently be 'the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation'. Now call me an old cynic, but if that's the full name I bet it will get shortened to 'the Framework Programme' rather than 'Horizon 2020'. But we'll see. I wish it all the best, and hope it has more luck than it's close namesake, Deepwater Horizon. Or indeed the Talbot Horizon. Or the crew of 'Event Horizon.'

Hmm. Not an auspicious group. Is it too late to change my vote to 'Monster Raving Loony 2020'?

Interestingly, it turns out that there is already a European initiative called 'Horizon 2020'. Ah, only in Europe. A zillion Euro budget, an army of bureaucrats, some of the greatest minds in the Western world, and they still don't know what's going on down the corridor.