• Search
  • Basket
    You have no items in your basket

Board Policy

Alignment with Mission

ASTP is willing to participate in EU projects relating to Knowledge Transfer as long as there is an alignment with its missions (as set out in Art 3 of its Articles of Association) and where there is a clear benefit for the members. Examples of such benefit include:

  1. enhancement of the impact of public research on society, particularly economically, by promoting and professionalizing knowledge and technology transfer from and with European universities and research institutions, including knowledge and technology transfer professionals and technology users in the broadest sense;
  2. increasing the number of participants attending ASTPs existing events;
  3. promoting the engagement of members as experts in Work Packages or Tenders for Services or other means of direct involvement, including sub-contracting, advisory and consulting bodies;
  4. providing members with a greater opportunity to be recipients of any services, trainings, tools or policy development aimed at enhancing the innovation landscape, all being developed or delivered under said EU project(s).

Role of ASTP

Depending on the alignment between ASTP’s mission, capacity and competencies and the core objectives of the EU project, ASTP may take a partner, coordinating, sub-contractor or consultant role.

Unless acting as the Co-ordinator, ASTP will not guarantee exclusive participation in consortia, thus ASTP could participate in several applications.

No leading responsibility for project management and application expertise ( including the writing process) shall be provided by ASTP. Should ASTP be the coordinator, then it shall procure such expertise from external providers.

In cases where the objectives and expected outcomes of the project are fully aligned with ASTP’s mission and potentially providing a significant benefit of our members, ASTP may take a role, as long as:

  • the committed expenditure of EU project funding per annum from collective EU projects should never be more than 25% of the budgeted annual expenditure (excluding EU subcontractor fees to be paid out by ASTP), unless special Board decision has been taken, so as to minimise the financial risk that ASTP would become dependent upon such EU funding.

Quality of the Consortium and Proposed Scope of Work

  • ASTP should only participate in credible plans with strong and inclusive consortia.
  • ASTP is a “quality stamp” so should always align with high quality projects and always seek to deliver its own role without jeopardising the credibility of ASTP.
  • Participation in sounding board/advisory board of a project should preferably be delivered by active Board members or HQ General Manager, if appropriate.
  • ASTP should be in a position where it can approve main deliverables, particularly those to be publicly disseminated, such as policy papers, recommendations, final reports.

Competences of HQ

Activities to be carried out by ASTP in EU projects should take advantage of core competencies of the HQ, such as: organising events; organising training; identifying experts, mentors, coaches within the membership base; execution of surveys; dissemination of content/results (newsletters, website, etc).

Capacity to deliver

  • Operational involvement by HQ or Board should reflect in-house capacity/expertise fields, where additional resources can be “bought in” using the EU funding awarded. Additional expertise and capacity can be provided by sourcing members who can act as consultants in a close collaboration with HQ, with the respective funding included in the EU project budget.
  • Realistic budgets and resource requirements shall be requested in any bid and if additional staff or subcontractors are to be appointed within HQ, their positions must be clearly directly linked to and dependent upon the relevant EU project.
  • Any custodianship role for project results post-termination of a project should only be accepted by ASTP in circumstances where ASTP has had an influential role in the ultimate quality of the results, and remains comfortable that the quality reflects ASTP standards of quality.
  • The budget has to reasonably foresee the number of hours expected to deliver the outputs, and the cost per hour be aligned with ASTP direct and indirect costs;

Conflict of Interest and Volunteer Roles

Board members must be aware that if they are providing input to the preparation of potential role of ASTP in a potential EU project, such tasks will be pro bono as part of their Board functions. Volunteer board and committee members who may play a role in a working group submitting a proposal shall not be entitled to receive payment for such involvement, unless if considered board duties in which case standard ASTP expenses may be paid, such as travel costs.

Any Board member whose employing institution intends to become actively involved in submission of a bid under the same call, cannot be involved in voting or decision processes related to the submission of the proposal.

In the event that any Board and Committee members ( usually working on voluntary basis for ASTP events) are ultimately appointed in a formal capacity to deliver specific tasks under a Work Package, EU subcontract or EU service agreement, they shall be entitled to receive relevant EU payment tariffs in delivering outputs of agreed WPs.

Review and Submission Protocol

  • Confidentiality of information between the different consortia/dedicated board member for every consortium shall be respected by Board and Committee members.
  • The Board shall always review proposed participation and set out parameters, identifying the members of a working group responsible for actively evolving a finalproposal
  • In addition to checking the alignment with mission and capacity to deliver, potential legal or financial liabilities together with any risks which may be identified in the planning stage should be reviewed and discussed by the Board and relevant decisions taken.
  • The recommendations of the relevant working group and final proposals shall be ultimately reviewed and approved by the Board prior to any project submission