question reply

RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
MSCA STAFF COSTS
See Art. 6.2.A(c) of the grant agreement: "Costs for the recruited researcher
(A.1 Living allowance, A.2 Mobility allowance and A.3 Family allowance) "
Marie Curie (IF): what is the correct option?
We add up the living allowance, mobility allowance and family allowance and
the result is the cost of hiring the person
OR
The remuneration is the salary, social security contributions, taxes etc.; then
the mobility allowance, plus the family allowance , with all three elements
constituting the costs of the beneficiary of hiring the person.
Therefore, in principle the living allowance is the gross salary from which to
deduct social security contributions, taxes etc. to arrive at the net salary.
We add up only living allowance and family allowance and the result is the
cost of hiring the person,
From which we deduct the part of the social security contribution paid by the
entity and the result must be the gross salary upon which we add the
mobility allowance?
However, in practice it depends on the tax system in every country what will
constitute the gross salary and what will be taxed – in some Member States
the mobility and family allowance are automatically considered as taxable
salary.
-1-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
MSCA STAFF COSTS
The family allowance is an entitlement of the researcher, consequently
beneficiaries have to pay the full amount of the allowance to all researchers
eligible for family allowance.
We coordinate an ITN MSC. In the proposal we calculated the family
allowance by using half of the amount to be paid to the fellow.
Can the consortium re-allocate the funding depending on the family status of
the fellows which are eventually hired?
If so, how this should be reported in the financial statement?
Can we ask 100 % of the allowance although in theory was not indicated in
the budget of the individual beneficiary?
The estimated budget breakdown is an estimation therefore if the family
situation of the fellows change the consortium can adjust the estimated
budget breakdown by transfers of amounts between beneficiaries (Art. 4.2
MSC TN GA) according to the number of MSC researchers with family
recruited by each beneficiary.
Regarding the financial statement, each beneficiary should claim the family
allowance that they paid to each fellow and each beneficiary should report
according to the implemented person-months.
The beneficiaries may re-distribute person-months between them (as
compared with the original planning set out in Annex 2). This re-distribution
can be done without requesting an amendment provided that it does not
imply a substantial change to the action as described in Annex 1.
Taking this into account the individual beneficiary can ask for 100% of the
allowance, since beneficiaries may reallocate the budget in such a way as to
account for the number of fellow months they have to pay.
-2-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
MSCA STAFF COSTS
According the Annex 3 for Marie Curie Actions: Criteria of eligibility: Duration
The ESR can be involved under the project to benefit from the initial training
activities for a duration at least 3 months up to a maximum of 36 months This
does not mean that he/she could not leave the project within a month, is not
it? And if we have ok of officer we could proceed with the new recruitment
for the rest of month, are not we? All costs are elegible, are not?
Yes, if the researcher leaves the project before the 3 months (e.g. the
researcher resigns), these costs are still eligible if the intention of the
beneficiary had been to recruit him/her for a longer period of time provided
the costs are eligibility in accordance with Article 6 of the GA.
Please have a look at the Annotated Grant Agreement (i.e. page 377):
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/a
mga/h2020-amga_en.pdf
In this case the beneficiary can then proceed with the recruitment of a new
researcher.
-3-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
MSCA STAFF COSTS
According to the grant agreement (Art. 6.2.A), the beneficiary is responsible for
recruiting the researcher under a contract including social security coverage that also
covers the period of secondment to a partner organisation abroad:
Dear Mr/Ms I would like to clarify the following regarding the 24 months Outgoing
Phase of the Individual Fellowships.
Art. 6.2.A:
Even though the beneficiary of the Member State/Associated Country is the one that
employs the researcher during the whole fellowship duration (2412 months), it is not
clear to me who has to pay the Social Security costs while the fellow is in the Third
Country (e.g. USA). Could you please clarify what is the most common scenario? It is
quite common that the fellow needs to pay medical insurance in USA in order to be
covered there (Spanish social security does not cover USA). What would be the best
scenario for the fellow taking this into account? Thank you.
…(b) the recruited researcher complies with the following conditions:
(i) be recruited by the beneficiary under an employment contract (or other direct
contract with equivalent benefits, including social security coverage) or — if not
otherwise possible under national law — under a fixed-amount-fellowship
agreement with minimum social security coverage, including for a period of
secondment to a ‘partner organisation’.
Therefore, the beneficiary will need to ensure that the researcher is covered by social
security also for the outgoing phase abroad.
If additional social security costs are incurred during the outgoing phase, these
should be covered in principle by the "mobility allowance". However, where
appropriate due to the high healthcare contributions requested by the country of the
outgoing host, the interested parties (beneficiary, host organisation and the fellow)
may also agree to use the contribution for "management and indirect costs" to cover
(in part or in full) these additional costs.
For this purpose, the beneficiary can either transfer the required funds to the
outgoing host or directly to the fellow. The REA proposes and strongly recommends
that this issue is resolved between the partners and the fellow in advance while
negotiating their internal arrangements to implement the action.
In addition, regarding the often very high costs of social security coverage in the USA,
some Member States have bilateral social security agreements with the USA. It may
be worth checking in each specific case if such an arrangement exists as it might
remove the need to pay into the health insurance schemes of both countries.
-4-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
MSCA & THIRD PARTIES
Please specify the nature of a CEI in order to be able to provide a
substantiated reply.
MCSA: in the frame of the participation of a CEI (Campus de excelencia
internacional?) in a MSC action, could it be the proposer the CEI and hire the
researcher considering that the work will be carried out in the premises of
the Universities participating in the CEI.
MSCA: Networking Action costs
The rules for MSC actions indicate that in the consortium agreement we can
agree on re-allocation of the funding for management and training (B.1 an
B.2) differently from the distribution indicated in the budget
In this context we wonder how the costs are to be justified in these actions.
Let´s imaging that it is decided that the coordinator will receive 90% of the
management costs although he will just host 20 researchers/month. What
management cots has to declare each beneficiary in its financial
statement? Those corresponding to the number of researchers/month that
they hosted or rather those according to the agreement in the consortium
agreement?
In the example above; what the coordinator has to declare in its financial
statement? (90 % of the management costs as agreed in the CA or what
corresponds to the researcher/month that it hosted?
In the MSC actions, the beneficiary (the specific legal entity carrying out the
action; “participant” according to Art.2(15) RfP) needs to recruit, host and
train the researchers.
In H2020 MSC actions all the costs are reimbursed on the basis of unit costs,
and the unit costs are only eligible if: “the number of units declared
corresponds to the actual number of months spent by the person on the
project activities”.
Beneficiaries have to their own costs in accordance with the provisions of the
grant agreement (i.e. for the person-months hosted), and are reimbursed in
accordance with their cost claims.
However, the consortium agreement may provide for a distribution of the
funding which is different from the costs claimed.
In these actions therefore beneficiaries have to justify the costs not with
regard to what is agreed in the consortium agreement, but with regard to the
number of researchers/months that they have hosted.
-5-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
MSCA: Networking Action costs
What is meant by "networking costs". Is durable equipment eligible under
networking costs?
REPLY
In MSC actions beneficiaries must declare the costs in the form of unit costs
under "costs for recruited researchers" and as "institutional costs".
The "institutional costs" are defined in the MSCA Unit Cost Decision C(2013)
8194:
"Costs related to the training and research expenses of researchers as well as
to the costs related to the transfer of knowledge and networking".
The "networking costs" are therefore part of the costs that the beneficiary
can claim under the institutional unit costs.
In accordance with the MSC Work Programme "networking activities" are
linked to workshops, seminars, conferences and similar events incurred by
the beneficiaries to facilitate sharing of knowledge, new skills acquisition and
the career development of researchers or for research and innovation staff
members.
See MSC MSC Work Programme can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/
main/h2020-wp1415-msca_en.pdf
The objective of these funds allocated to "networking" is therefore to fund
these activities in which of the researchers or staff members participate. It is
not excluded to buy with these funds equipment which is needed for
research, but it needs to be clear that such equipment is necessary for the
research needs of the researchers. The purchase of such equipment cannot
impair the foreseen research, training and networking activities. Therefore, it
is best to specifically discuss this with the PO responsible for the specific
project in order to see if this is possible, and if this was not foreseen in the
beginning, if an amendment to the grant agreement would be needed
-6-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
H2020 General: Staff Costs
Una entidad que participa en proyectos europeos tiene 1 person/month para
tareas administrativas del proyecto aunque NO es coordinador. ¿Pueden
cargarse horas del personal del departamento de administración de la
entidad?
H2020 General: Staff Costs
Una entidad que participa en proyectos europeos tiene 1 person/month para
tareas administrativas del proyecto aunque NO es coordinador. ¿Pueden
cargarse horas del personal del departamento de administración de la
entidad?
Administrative costs, particularly those not related to the specific tasks of the
coordinator, are typically considered as indirect costs. As such, they are
covered by the 25 % indirect costs flat rate. Only exceptionally can those
costs be declared as direct costs for the action. That may be the case if the
usual cost accounting practice of the beneficiary is to consider (part of) the
administrative staff as direct costs and provided that they keep reliable time
records for the hours dedicated by that staff for the Horizon 2020 action. In
any other cases the administrative costs are to be covered by the 25 % flat
rate.
Administrative costs, particularly those not related to the specific tasks of the
coordinator, are typically considered as indirect costs. As such, they are
covered by the 25 % indirect costs flat rate. Only exceptionally can those
costs be declared as direct costs for the action. That may be the case if the
usual cost accounting practice of the beneficiary is to consider (part of) the
administrative staff as direct costs and provided that they keep reliable time
records for the hours dedicated by that staff for the Horizon 2020 action. In
any other cases the administrative costs are to be covered by the 25 % flat
rate.
-7-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
H2020 Other Costs: Clinical Trials
In the case of Clinical Studies in collaborative projects:
In cases where there are many centres which will provide patients
recruitment (for instance 40) ¿is it okay if they all become full beneficiary
Yes. It is up to the consortium to assess if this is the best solution.
In cases where not all of them cannot become full beneficiary or linked third
party (Art. 14), two options remain: 1) Use of in-kind contributions provided
by third parties against payment (Art. 11 Model Grant Agreement), 2)
Subcontractor (Art. 13 Model Grant Agreement). Is it possible in any of these
cases not to include in the submitted proposal what exact centres will
participate in the Action?
Finally, if we want to use the Agreed Reimbursement payment mode: 1) do
we have to follow Art 11 or 13?, 2) how do these costs have to be
demonstrated and justified in the proposal?
In the proposal it is not strictly necessary to include the names of the third
parties but it has to be done at the latest during the grant preparation, when
the description of the action becomes Annex 1 of the Grant. The name of the
subcontractors is no required neither in the proposal nor in the Grant
Agreement, only the description of the tasks that must be subcontracted and
the estimation of the costs. The selection of the subcontractors must be done
according to the rules of best value for money and avoiding any conflict of
interest.
The reimbursement of the costs by the EC to the beneficiary will be always
based on the eligible costs that are declared (actual costs or unit costs
according to the rules).
If the entity participates as a third party providing in-kind contributions
(Article 11), then the third party must report to the beneficiary either its real
costs by providing an invoice detailing the actual time spent, the purchased
consumables, etc. or the use of unit cost if requested and agreed with EC.
Those would be the eligible costs for the beneficiary. However the payment
by the beneficiary to the third party may be as they particularly agree (total,
partial, or a fixed amount).
In the case of subcontracting the price is fixed in the subcontract by the
parties.
-8-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
H2020 GENERAL SUBCONTRACTING AND THIRD PARTIES
En el Anexo 5 (MODEL FOR THE CERTIFICATE ON THE FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS) se dice explícitamente que los beneficiarios deben disponer de
3 ofertas para la compra de bienes y servicios (Art. 10) y el auditor, según los
procedimientos, debe verificar este hecho y en caso de no existir, reportarlo
como excepción en su informe. ¿Realmente deben obtenerse 3 ofertas para
cualquier compra de bienes o servicios con independencia de su importe?
¿deben los auditores reportar excepciones para cada uno de estos casos,
incluso la compra de un tornillo de 0,50€ por ejemplo?
As explained in page 128 of the AGA (see
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/a
mga/h2020-amga_en.pdf ) competitive selection procedures are not required
in all cases; i.e. the best value-for-money principle does not require
competitive selection procedures in all cases. However, if a beneficiary did
not request several offers it must demonstrate how best value-for-money
was ensured (as explained right afterwards in the AGA). The Commission
needs, therefore, to obtain additional information to assess how best-value
for money was ensured when there are no different offers. This is one of the
objectives of the related procedures in the CFS and the main purpose of
reporting an exception.
Below you may see the actual wording of the conditions and the instructions
provided to the auditor in the Certificate 'when different offers were not
collected'.
COSTS OF OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES (see D.3 of the form)
58. Procurement rules, principles and guides were followed. There were
documents of requests to different providers, different offers and
assessment of the offers before selection of the provider in line with
internal procedures and procurement rules. The purchases were
made in accordance with the principle of best value for money.
(When different offers were not collected the Auditor explains the reasons
provided by the Beneficiary under the caption “Exceptions” of the Report. The
Commission will analyse this information to evaluate whether these costs
might be accepted as eligible)
-9-
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
COSTS OF SUBCONTRACTING (see B of the form)
39. There were documents of requests to different providers, different
offers and assessment of the offers before selection of the provider
in line with internal procedures and procurement rules. Subcontracts
were awarded in accordance with the principle of best value for
money.
(When different offers were not collected the Auditor explains the reasons
provided by the Beneficiary under the caption “Exceptions” of the Report. The
Commission will analyse this information to evaluate whether these costs
might be accepted as eligible)
In your question you stated that ' En el Anexo 5 (MODEL FOR THE
CERTIFICATE ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS) se dice explicitamente que los
beneficiarios deben disponer de 3 ofertas para la compra de bienes y
servicios' . However, as you can see above the model the CFS does not imply
such obligation.
In contrast, in order for the Commission to be able to conclude on the
eligibility of the related costs it needs to obtain the explanations requested
from the auditor in the model CFS. The Commission assess the findings
reported by the auditor, considers the representations made by the
beneficiary, evaluates any other relevant information (e.g. the explanations
provided in the exception) to finally draw conclusions regarding the eligibility
of the costs claimed. In this sense, the meaning of an exception in the report
is often misunderstood. It has to be noted that an exception in the report
does not automatically mean non-compliance/ineligibility of the costs. It
actually indicates a deviation from the standard situation. In the specific case
the standard situation is that of having different offers for the provision of
goods and services and for subcontracts.
- 10 -
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
H2020 – Indirect Cost
Under Horizon 2020 an internal invoice can only refer to the use/dedication
of specific resources for the project (e.g. a researcher, a piece of equipment,
etc.). The use and the usage (number of hours) of those resources for the
action must be specifically recorded and mentioned in the invoice. The costs
must be declared under the budget category that corresponds to the
invoiced resource (e.g. personnel, equipment, consumable, etc.) and must
fulfil the eligibility criteria set out in Article 6.1 and 6.2. They may not include
indirect costs elements or profit margin or mark-up. It is therefore not
possible to calculate an all-in average cost of internally invoiced equipment
including, for instance, allocated indirect costs (e.g. maintenance). More
information on internally invoiced costs for H2020 can be found on pages 8182
of
the
Annotated
Model
Grant
Agreement
(http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/a
mga/h2020-amga_en.pdf).
In the Annotated Model Grant Agreement (article 6.D.3) foresees the
justification of certain services with internal invoices. I clearly understand
that this situation only can be used in those cases where the beneficiary is
able to prove that the rates used to issue the internal invoice are properly
calculated and they not include neither overhead cost nor mark-up. For
example, if a beneficiary, following its internal rules, has calculated one
microscope hourly rate using actual direct cost (that includes, for example,
personnel, depreciation, direct electricity cost and maintenance) and this
rate has been multiplied by the number of hours devoted to the project, I
understand that this internal invoice could be declared in an H2020 project.
Could you confirm that my interpretation is correct? What category of
expenses should be declared?
H2020 General: Indirect Costs
Respecto a la subcontratación, las empresas, en especial las PYMES, no
tienen el conocimiento ni las herramientas para determinar el best value for
money (a menudo tiene más valor la confianza y la experiencia previa que lo
que pueden ofrecer otros). ¿Que herramientas utilizan los auditores para
evaluar este punto? ¿Podrían hacerse disponibles al público en general? Por
otro lado, el subcontractor aplica un precio comercial por un trabajo
realizado. ¿Qué tipo de auditoría se realizaría? ¿El subcontractor está
obligado a presentar timesheets y justificar un determinado número de
horas?
The beneficiaries must base their purchases and subcontracts on the ‘best
value-for-money’ considering the quality of the service, good or works
proposed (also called ‘best price-quality ratio’) or on the lowest price. This
requirement is the mere application of the general cost eligibility condition
set out in Article 6.1(a)(vii) (i.e. that costs must be reasonable and comply
with the principle of sound financial management) to the costs of the
purchase of goods, works or services, as well as for subcontracting. The best
value-for-money principle does not require competitive selection procedures
in all cases. However, where a beneficiary did not even request several offers
it must demonstrate how best value-for-money was nevertheless ensured. In
case of audit on the beneficiary the auditor will request the supporting
documents showing how the entity selected the provider/subcontractor (e.g.
offers received, basis on which the choice was made, etc).
Regarding a possible audit on the subcontractor, this audit would not be
aimed at reviewing the actual costs for the subcontractor since, as you
advance in your query, the service is rendered against a commercial price.
- 11 -
RTD-CLSS-LEGAL-QUESTIONS. Communication campaign, Madrid 25h March 2015
QUESTION
REPLY
Thus, the subcontractor does not have to keep time-records unless the price
agreed is based on a number of working hours (e.g. X € per hour of
engineering). Typically the audits on subcontractors would chiefly address
the technical aspects of the subcontracted task.
Legal and financial helpdesk
Disclaimer: the answer or information contained in this message is based on the information provided by you, which may not be sufficiently detailed or
complete to provide a full and correct answer or response to your question.
The Commission is committed to providing accurate information through the enquiry services, however, the information provided has no binding nature. The
Commission cannot be held liable for any use made of this information or for its accuracy.
- 12 -