²ÝÁñÂÛ̳

The non-confidential summary will not be used for pre-selection. It is intended for the information of the experts, to confirm that they agree to evaluate the project

With regard to the limits and indications of the number of pages indicated, the minimum expected font size is Arial 11 or equivalent.

The official project leader must have a formal link with a PSL laboratory at the time of the application; the young doctor may be involved in the project afterwards. 

A non-permanent researcher can be the project leader.  If the director of the unit signs the application form, then it is implicit that the candidate will be able to be employed by the institution during the project, thanks to the funding granted. 

Yes.

It is possible for a candidate to apply even if he or she has already been a laureate in a previous edition. It is also possible for a project leader to submit several applications for different projects during the same call for projects.

These criteria are quite broad (PAA description), but applicants are not obliged to specify if they consider their project to be in the field of quantitative biology, the selection committee will decide this. In addition, a life science project that would not be considered as quantitative can be funded on the FNV part of the call.

Yes, such a project is eligible 

PSL pays the funding to one of the guardians of the main research team, who is the manager of the agreement and funding; it is usually the one who validated the application file. The other supervisors may or may not be signatories to the agreement, depending on the mandates or agreements in force for the unit. A consultation between the supervisors and other stakeholders takes place at the time of the agreement, as necessary and in particular in relation to pre-existing intellectual property, if any.

The start-up can be a partner in the project, but the funding is intended for the project leader's team and the other SLP teams involved, if any; it cannot be paid to the start-up. On the other hand, the financing agreement may indicate that the stakeholders wish to grant the start-up exploitation rights on the project results.

Yes, the valorisation of the results can be carried out by a technology transfer to a company whatever its location.

No, the impact on the economic and/or societal level is a major criterion, but not the short-term profitability, nor the financial return for PSL. Projects of an associative and/or non-profit nature can be financed.

The Selection Committee will evaluate the risk and the potential impact of the projects, as well as their feasibility; high-risk / high-impact projects are not disadvantaged, on the contrary.

PSL does not take management fees; the funding is paid to one of the laboratory's supervisors, who can take management fees up to a maximum of 3% (except for projects funded by Qlife, for which this maximum is set at 2.5%).

The projects expected at the pre-maturation stage are upstream (or early stage) projects, and therefore have not yet reached a high degree of completion and detail in terms of both technological maturity and transfer/market approach. They must nevertheless be based on a preliminary proof of concept, indicating the last technological locks to be lifted, and/or validations. technologies expected during the project. Applicants should also ensure that they provide an overview, even if only a summary, of the applications envisaged and the associated users and markets. They will describe the possible mode(s) of transfer, and the planned process for developing a more complete market vision, value proposition and business model. The innovative character and added value of the proposed solutions compared to competing alternatives, and where appropriate the associated intellectual property issues, will be important evaluation criteria. 

There are no prerequisites in terms of TRL; typically projects expected in a pre-mature call would be at around TRL 3, and would aim to reach TRL 5 by the end of the project, but these figures are indicative only. The most important criterion is that the progress of the project and its configuration allow a credible approach to the transfer and market approach aspects. If the R&D programme absorbs almost all the resources and/or the technological uncertainties make contacts with potential users or partners too difficult, the project will probably be judged unconvincing from this point of view, even though its scientific level would be excellent.

No, the pre-maturation process of a recently filed patent application is quite common, but other configurations are quite legitimate: project based on software, know-how, and/or aiming at developing IP later on in the form of a patent or other. Projects based on an application linked to a market need, and aiming at developing or aggregating the necessary technological building blocks are encouraged, as long as they demonstrate a potential impact.

First, the pre-existence of a patent is not a prerequisite for the project to be financed. The financing of this project has no impact on the existing IP, but the pre-existence agreement provides that PSL owns rights on the results of the project and therefore on potential patents for improvements. 

Under QLife, the consortium agreement does not define a general rule for sharing intellectual property. The question will be examined on a case-by-case basis depending on the project.

No, such studies may be a plus for the application, and should be mentioned if they exist, but they are by no means a prerequisite. 

It is not a business plan or detailed financial projections, but rather a qualitative description of what will enable the development and impact of the project: possible application(s), users of the proposed solution, products or services provided, method of remuneration of the start-up or licensee company, etc.

The project's field of application is the area of use or application, whereas the economic sector is the type of industry activity that may be interested in the project. For example, for a project of encapsulation of a molecule, its field of application is encapsulation, whereas its economic sector can be health, cosmetics, etc.

The opinion of the head of establishment and the laboratory director can take a very simple form by indicating whether they are in favour of the project or not. They may at their discretion add a sentence to recommend the project. It is therefore not necessary for them to write a letter to formulate their opinion on the project. 

The fact that a project involves several institutions is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage. An application can be submitted by only one partner. Inter-disciplinarity will be more valued than plurality of partners. 

The code of the laboratory is the number o Laboratory RMU (or equivalent).

Funded projects will benefit from the support of a perimeter valorisation service (PSL Valorisation or service of the institution or supervisory body); if a pre-existing relationship exists between the project team and one of these services, the continuity of this relationship will be encouraged as much as possible. The management and valorisation of the project results, and where applicable of pre-existing IP, will aim to promote their transfer (to a start-up, whether or not it is being created, or to another industrial partner), to maximise the socio-economic impact of this transfer and to ensure an adequate financial return to the institutions and organisations concerned, and to PSL.

In the first edition in 2018; there were about 30 responses, and in 2019 about 20. 

This committee is made up of investors, incubation and transfer professionals and business innovation managers; its exact composition is not yet known for this year.

As far as possible, all eligible applications will be evaluated, subject however to the number of applications.

The success rate of this call for projects is between 30 and 50%.

Yes, as in previous years, a summary of the opinion of the experts and the Selection Committee will be sent to the applicants, who will also have access to the anonymised opinions of the experts. 

An activity report at the end of the project, plus financial reporting according to the payment schedule.