Revision of the management report

0
ID: 
1.3
Workpackage: 
Management
Task leader: 
aarne.ranta
Assignees: 
aarne.ranta
Assignees: 
emilia.rung
Assignees: 
olga.caprotti
Relevant Deliverables: 
Periodic management report 1
Status: 
Completed
Timeframe: 
May 2011 - Jul 2011
Completed on: 
21 June, 2011 - 18:00

The commission requested the following:

Session Submitted on Verified on
5.2 Apr 26, 2011 2:40:36 PM May 3, 2011 2:33:02 PM

You are kindly requested to clarify the issues raised in this letter and submit a revised periodic report and Forms C through NEF at the latest on 16th of May. Should you require more time, please contact us. However, should we not have heard from you by the deadline we will proceed with the information at hand. Please note that in such case, this may lead to all or part of the costs being rejected.

Please note that according to Article II.5 of the grant agreement, the period for the execution of the payment has been suspended pending receipt of the additional information and the revised Periodic Report through NEF.

Please clarify the following points in the revised periodic report, and revise the Forms C if necessary:

  • Reports – general: Please add a list of conferences and meetings you attended, including who participated, venue and for what purpose.
  • Please provide in more detail the activities carried out by each partner according to the template which can be found on EC/Cordis home page (http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/find-doc_en.html).
  • Beneficiary 1 – There is a discrepancy between average personnel cost compared to the budget. Could you please clarify why average personnel costs are more then 15 % higher then budget?
  • Beneficiary 2 – There is a marked difference between the use of MM (compared to budget) and funding for personnel in the 1st period. The average personnel cost is lower than budgeted for. Could you please explain these discrepancies?
  • Beneficiary 3 – Please justify coffee breaks under subcontracting considering that you anticipated as subcontracting only the auditing costs (p. 45 of the Annex I of the Grant Agreement).
  • Beneficiary 4 - Please specify more accurately use of MM per WP. From your explanation it is not clear enough how many MM you used. Could you please correct the table in the Management of the use of resources part of the report where the total costs seem to appear under indirect costs while the item indirect costs differs from that reported in the form C.
AttachmentSize
MOLTO (247914) _ Periodic Report and Cost Claim submission in NEF.pdf77.56 KB
Cost Claim overview MOLTO (247914) 2011-06-22.pdf74.59 KB
D1 3R (amended).docx232.74 KB

Comments

New revised management report

Olga produced the integrated management report fighting silly editing problems with section numbers and such trivia. In addition, the NEF requires 3 separate PDFs to be produced: this caused a lot of headaches as the middle section is in landscape mode and the PDF generator gets confused.

Olga asked Kristina to generate the PDFs. Apparently Kristina's editor messed up all section numbers (which looked fine of Olga's editor).

In the end, Olga generated the PDFs (not without a fight).

Revision of the management report

Kristina sent a document with answers to comments and was asked to integrate the revision to the management report (note that the original source was on Olga's laptop that was stolen in NY):


Dear Mrs. Orbán Meunier,

thank you very much for the financial information you sent to us.

After review of your answers I would please you if you can;

  • incorporate clarifications for each benefeciary under the table in Project management report,
  • replace the old version of Project management report with a new one in NEF.

Thank you very much for your co-operation. Kind regards,

Andrej Fister