Dear partners,
Thank you for your contributions to the request for clarifications of BioLife project.
The answers have been send to Mats Rune BERGSTROM and Olsson JORGEN this morning.
You will find it attached.
Moreover, François and I have seen our regional coordinator Dominique LORRETTE to talk about the shared cost model of our BioLife project.
=> There was a risk of decreasing our total budget due to the fact that we are over 500.000 € total budget.
=> We have good news that the total budget of our project seems now accepted, thanks to share cost method : this method is used for allocating a part of lead partner project management expenses on all BIOLIFE participant.
We have been told by CREATOR committee about 53.000€ to be shared on the 8 partners => It means that each of us, except AGRIA, will have a 6.625 € increasing budget
We are now waiting on the acceptance of our clarifications answers
Here is the detail:
BIOLIFE Clarification answers
1. In the application form the needs are classified in five categories (food safety, food intake, nutrition, food delivery and eating and home services) but not all of these are tackled in the project description and in the argument for contribution to regional economic development. For example, the connection between health and nutrition related to regional economic development is missing. Please clarify how your categories are connected to regional economic development?
To reach the market for regional economic development
All the items developed in the project description are related to new business opportunities. Indeed, helping to understand the needs of the market and to learn how to meet them is a real source of developpement. It helps to identify new markets oppotunities and create business.
Food safety, food intake, nutrition, food delivery and eating and home service are specific identified needs of the senior’s market. To understand and reach these needs and answer them can be source of business and even source of new companies creation.
Healthy ageing people are costless for the society
As the nutrition of the food taken is higher quality and more appropriate for the elderly people, it will contribute to the good health of the people, who are still in the labour market. They are more active, and they are liable workforce for the economy, the companies can count on them.
Their good health also prevent them being a "burden" for the society as they do not take money from the social system being ill frequently. HEALTHY NUTRITION promotes the health and well-being of ageing people decreasing their use of health care services and for that reason the costs for the healthcare system and society (=savings in the health care costs).
2. Consider the target groups: your proposal is focusing mainly on the target group 55+ when the main target CREATOR Target group is the older seniors ( 65+ or even older). Please clarify how your project can integrate both +55 and +65 or even older target group?
The seniors are divided in several groups of populaton:
- people from 50 to 60 years which represents 13,4% of the general population
- people from 61 to 75 years which represents 13% of the general population
- people from 76 to 85 years which represents 6,5% of the general population
- people from 86 years and more which represents 2% of the general population
Our project will focus mainly on the wider group from 60 to 75 years old as they represent the most important part of the senior’s market and as they have the higher purchasing power. However, our project will also target the needs of older seniors.
3. In some of the regions older seniors don’t buy the food on their own, it’s bought by the municipalities. Please explain why you haven’t chosen municipalities as a target group
In our project, we consider that public authorities includes public local authorities and by doing so municipalities (cf page 7/32 of the application form).
4. Four press releases might be too many. Two could be a more realistic amount and then you can make more if you find the subject. Please update the application.
We have noticed but in our application form, we envisage 3 press releases in semester periods 1.3 and 4. Each press release is a “light” note sent to a dedicated panel in each country.
• Semester 1 release will be on announcing BIOLIFE (creation, aim, objectives)
• Semester 3 will be on Symposium results
• Semester 4 will be on Biolife results
We need these press releases to interest our targets, in particular to announce our surveys and symposium
We think that we will have enough information to make these press releases interesting
______________________________________________________________________________
5. Are all the activities implemented in all regions?
No,
• Each partner should not be pertinent to do all the tasks.
• Our program is ambitious and is worth only by the complementarily of the partners
If yes, how to ensure that all regions have all the competences needed. If no, please specify what activities will be implemented in each region?
If no, please specify what activities will be implemented in each region?
We have 4 different components packages
Component 1 : Project management with lead on AGRIA LORRAINE
Component 2 : Communication and dissemination with lead on PRODINTEC
Component 3 : Exchange of experiences and analysis of good practices with lead on : UMU and HAMK
Component 4 : Implementation with lead on CEEI.
Component 1: Project management
• global Project management will be done by AGRIA
• Each component leader will have to make sure that the objectives are achieved according to the budget in time and finances: AGRIA, PRODINTEC, UMU/HAMK, CEEI
Component 2: Communication and dissemination
PRODINTEC will be leader on this component.
Internal communication will be done by all partners: meetings, workshop attendance
INNO8 will be responsible for web tools implementation.
Each partner, in his home language will be responsible for external communication: for example local press releases.
AGRIA will be responsible for large event (symposium) communication
Component 3: Exchange of experiences and analysis of good practices
HAMK and UMU will be leader for this component
This is the main component because It will include all the activities and tasks necessary to create the contents of the project: benchmarking, state of the art, reflexion on the tools and methodologies to be created, on the White book to be written.
It will take advantage of the diversity of the partners.
For example, when dealing with interviews and survey the ageing people living at home to clarify their needs and expectations concerning food safety, food intake, healthy nutrition, food delivery and eating and home services, the universities partners will be leading and will have to prepare structured surveys to clarify issues. Business innovation partners will have to lead when discussing about the ways to of creativity or business opportunities involved by the answers.
But we do not intend to separate activities between the 3 universities and the five business innovation entities.
It is also one of the advantages of the European programs: to allow the participant to cultivate themselves in related fields different from their usual activities and to learn.
When preparing our application, we have seen that, more or less, the ways we intend to work TOGETHER but with difference will need the same amount of time and resources
Component 4: implementation
CEEI will be leader on this component
Main activities will be
• to implement symposium and
• to develop tools and to verify their pertinence by experimenting
• to implement strategy by transferring to regional authorities/policies and
Universities will be much involved on symposium with lead partner AGRIA. Innovation and business partners will be much more focused on developing tolls and experimenting with companies
Transfer of strategies and influencing on policies will be a common work
6. If all activities have to be implemented in each participating region please justify how some participants, which are universities, will be able to involve “business support organisations”?
There are 3 universities on 8 partners. They will be very largely and mainly involved in scientific aspects of BIOLIFE. But each of them is also interested on business => some are in connection with innovation business partners: for example, HAMK is very close from AGROPOLIS which is a technology food expert in Häme. So HAMK is able to discuss and have expert advices coming from people of AGROPOLIS. That the same, but in a reverse link, for AGRIA with ENSAIA food university in Lorraine: even if ENSAIA is not involved in BIOLIFE as a partner or subcontractor, AGRIA is able to have pertinent contacts and datas with ENSAIA….
When we create the partnership, we decided that 8 partners were a maximum. That was also the reason for us not to have systematically a university/business couple in 6 countries, or we should have been 12 partners.
7. Your subject is highly related to the sustainability and you could easily get a better explanation by thinking of both social and economical aspects. Specify the environmental sustainability.
We agree that our project is linked with sustainability by the way that
• elderly are concerned by sustainability because they have more time, money and conscience of environment
• as we told in our application form, sustainability has to be addressed when considering best practices for food packaging, design and production
• and then, sustainability is one of the way to try to identify innovation opportunities (in a way we might describe as “eco design).
Thinking both social and economical is mandatory when one speaks about innovation for a target group whose social need, health and economic are different from other segments of the population
Even if we are convinced that it is a pre requisite in our project, it will be only at the end of it that we will be able to better answer your remark.
Additional comments
• In the application you refer to a project tool. Please have a look at Basecamp. It’s used by the cooperating partners and you may actually be a part of that for free. The communication officer, Mariann Holmberg could give you an introduction. Please contact the communication officer of CREATOR for more information.
We don’t know at this time what is the “basecamp” but we will contact Mariann as soon as our BIOLIFE project is chosen by your committee
• Concerning the method of “shared cost model”, please contact your regional CREATOR coordinator (Lorraine)
This is on going
Comments