EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Directorate-General Information Society

 

Information Society Technologies: Content, Multimedia Tools and Markets

Linguistic applications

 

 

M4 Meeting

04 December 2001

Jean Monnet Building, room C3/126

Luxembourg

Participants:

Domenico Perrotta, European Commission, Negotiating Project Officer

Mats Ljungqvist, European Commission

Steve Renals, USFD

Herve Bourlard, IDIAP

Wessel Kraaij, TNO TPD

Gerhard Rigoll, GMUD/TUM

Minutes

Introduction

The meeting was opened and the agenda approved.

Information session

The first half of the day was held jointly with the project M4 Multimodal Meeting Manager (IST-2001-34485) and consisted of a general briefing given by Mr. Mats Ljungqvist and of project presentations given by the project coordinators Mr Steve Renals (M4) and Mr. Niels Ole Bernsen (NICE).

M4 negotiation meeting: opening

The representatives of the consortium declared themselves empowered to negotiate for the consortium as a whole and did not object to project officer (PO) Mats Ljungqvist and  PO Domenico Perrotta representing the Commission. The latter is the consortium’s contact point in the Commission.

The commencement of negotiations does not guarantee funding. Expenses relating to such negotiations in preparation of a possible contract are not eligible costs and consequently not covered or co-funded by the Commission. The consortium is reminded of the definition of eligible costs as quoted during the meeting and specified in Article 22 on the General Conditions of the contract.

Administrative Framework

·        The consortium had familiarised itself with the contract and negotiation documents quoted in the invitation and is aware that these standard documents are non-negotiable.

·        The Consortium will use the Electra tool for the producing the Contract Preparation Forms (CPF). The use of Electra is a prerequisite for the automatic contract generation.

·        The Consortium will not provide the coordinator with Letters of Mandate.

·        For the Commission to establish the legal identity of the partners, the consortium may be asked to provide the PO with the statutes/by-laws/articles of association of the partner plus extracts of the public company register (comprising also the legal registration no.). As general rule, the partners concerned by this legal verification are limited to those who never participate in projects of the 5th Framework Programme. All M4 partners are participating in the IST programme: the legal documents should be therefore unnecessary.

·        The Consortium is formed by 4 public bodies, by 2 private non profit organisations of which one is a University under the AC funding scheme (USFD) and the other is a research institute funded by the Swiss government (IDIAP), and finally by a public commercial organisation (TNO) for which supporting financial documents for the last three years seem to be already in the Commission's archive. In principle the Commission has not to acquire additional documentation to check the financial viability of such organisations. The Annex 2 of the Contract Preparation Forms (CPFs) is therefore not applicable.

·        The negotiating PO informed the Consortium about the Audit Certificates. The co-ordinator will be provided by email with the following documents: (1) text which will be inserted in Article 6 (special conditions) of the main contract; (2) text which will be added as an Annex to the main contract; (3) model for the Audit Certificate that is required from the Auditor and which each contractor needs to submit with the final (and if applicable also with the first) cost claim; (4) working notes for contractors and external auditors, which are also available on the Cordis web site (http://www.cordis.lu/ist/manage.htm).

Consortium Composition

The partner Gerhard Mercator Duisburg University (GMUD) will be replaced by the Technical University of Munich (TUM), since the key person of GMUD, Prof. G. Rigoll, will move to TUM in spring 2002. A letter in which GMUD ask the Commission to adopt the replacement has been handed over by Mr. Rigoll.

Project content: general issues

 

·        Evaluation and Assessment will be integrated in the workpackages and the necessary resources and personnel to these tasks will be allocated.

·        A Dissemination and Use Plan Deliverable will be added (delivery date: no later than 6 months after the possible project start).

·        Likewise the Technology and Implementation Plan Deliverable, which is already in the proposal, will be also part of the Annex 1.

·        Activities in Clustering and Concertation will be mentioned in the work packages.

·        English will be used in communications with the Commission (including deliverables and reports).

Project content: specific issues

·      Discussion regarding reviewers' comments/recommendations and the Project officer's questions/remarks. Conclusions:

–          The processing of meetings will be off line. However, the feasibility of on line processing will be thought-out in the course of the project and the final report will look into the issue.

–          An early deliverable or management report will describe the Industrial Advisory Board.

–          The co-ordinator will provide details on the American subcontractor (ICSI) and its role in the project. The CPF forms A.8.1 and A.8.2 specific on subcontracts are required.

–          Deliverable D2.2 will be removed and some others will be made public.

–          Quarterly, semestrial and annual management reports are not to be included in the deliverables list.

–          The consortium will verify with LDC the possibility of providing the databases to the research community and address problems of privacy and confidentiality of the persons recorded.

–          In producing deliverables, the consortium will adopt some quality control procedure.

–          The Project Presentation deliverable mentioned in the Appendix X to Annex 1 can be related to the creation of the public Annual Report, which will be available on the project web site.

·      The Consortium agrees to accommodate the project as described and comprising the elements contained in the contract/negotiation documents and these minutes within the indicative budget envelope of 1400 Keuro.

·      The co-ordinator will check if the partners have a preference for payments based on a 12 months period instead of the canonical 6 months period. This would reduce the administrative workload for the consortium and the Commission as well.

 

Conclusions and Next Steps

The Consortium agreed to provide all contractually relevant documentation for the contract preparation before December 14, 2001. These documents include (and may be not limited to) Electra CPFs, signed CPFs forms A7.1, Annex 1, co-ordinator's letter on the American subcontractor, legal and financial documents if requested by the negotiating PO.

 

The negotiations will be closed on January 4, 2001 by which date the negotiation file must be completed and final.

Remarks on these minutes/conclusions should reach the PO no later than 8 December 2001.