ISRSI I3 N1 Management of the I3 - MISTI
N1
Management of the I3
Management of the Integration of Space Technologies and Infrastructures
MISTI
Total Requested Budget 1052.4 k€
Total Project Duration 48 months
Proposal acronym / MISTI
Interconnected with:
N1 / N2 / TA / JRA1 / JRA2 / JRA3 / JRA4 / JRA5X / X / X / X / X / X / X / X
Role / Name / Institution / Email Address
Coordinator / Richard Ambrosi / University of Leicester, UK /
Deputy Coordinator / Roberto Battiston / INFN – Perugia, Italy /
Contact Persons / Richard Ambrosi
Roberto Battiston / University of Leicester, UK
INFN – Perugia, Italy /
Objectives
This part of the ISRSI I3 Network proposal intends to describe the management and administrative structure of the ISRSI consortium and the links that will be made with the various management, financial and administrative components of the I3 proposal namely the Networking, Access and Joint Research Activities. Its structure establishes the links between the different groups within the network and the joint research projects and the access to the experimental facilities described.
Main deliverables
A management board that will oversee all aspects of the running of the consortium.
Strategic decisions on the actions to be taken in view of the goals of ISRSI
Financial management structure for a flexible, administration of the resources
Distribution of resources through transparent means and establishment review processes of actions undertaken
Coordination of Scientific ISRSI I3 activities
Coordination of Access ISRSI I3 activities
Coordination of Research ISRSI I3 activities
Coordination of the interconnection between all ISRSI I3 parts including outreach
N1 FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure N1-1 / Structure of ISRSI Management / page 40Table N1-1 / Description of Management substructures / page 41
Table N1-2 / Summary table of expected budget and of the Community contribution requested / page 47
Table N1-3 / Detailed N1 expenditure / page 48
Activity N1 – Management of the I3
Quality of the management of the I3
Management methodology and competence of the Participants
The ISRSI consortium intends to federate the European efforts in space detector construction. In the past, many pioneering detectors were constructed by small teams in a single country. The requirements for the next generation of instruments are largely beyond the capabilities of a single laboratory/university. The specifications are well defined, roadmap to technology development always exist and often promising ideas are at advanced R&D levels but the means to develop them requires more support and contributions from a larger number of teams at a European would catalyse success. The networking effort (N2) at the European level will reduce redundancy, will help reaching the desired critical mass, help strategic developments and present a unified European effort in a larger context where the USA and Japan are sometimes competitors and other times collaborators. The JRAs in the present I3, give five specific examples of the added value of the networking effort: they present the way we intend to tackle the construction of the next generation detectors for Xray, infrared and optical photons. The Access components will bring together facilities across Europe historically used for the experimental verification and calibration of detectors for space applications and those facilites used for the enviromentla testing of detectors and electronics components for space. These activities covered by the Access part are vital to the success of the prototyping activites of the JRAs.
Some of the major institutions involved in space detector development including ESA will form part of the Network and the JRAs. Nevertheless, the ambition of the networking activities, is to eventually federate all the European laboratories active in the field. Accretion of new participants, in accordance with the rules of the EU, will be encouraged. This philosophy has influenced the implemented management scheme. That is, the distribution of resources will be transparent and open to debate. The main bodies of the I3 management at the project level are the Steering Committee (SC), representing the institutional interests and the Peer Review Committee (PRC) giving expert advice on the technological directions to be funded. The Steering Committee takes the final decisions.
The allocation of funds to the JRAs and regular progress reviews will be carried out by the Steering Committee and will be debated in a transparent forum, for which we will use the infrastructure Peer Review Committee. The Access to part of the proposal regarding members of the consortium external to the JRAs and outside potential users will be reviewed by the Peer Review Committee. Access involving the JRAs will be reviewed byt th Steering Committee. The consortium will use the Network to consolidate the partnerships that will tackle the JRAs and will then issue a call for proposals to the consortium. Each of the JRA Management Group will present a detailed proposal for the specific JRA to the Steering Committee, giving a more detailed cost breakdown including equipment costs and staff costs and any changes given that there may be new issues to resolve or new innovative ideas to pursue emergin between the submission date of the proposal and the start date of the projects. Additional or contingency funding will be included in the Networking budget in order to address such issuses. The presentation of the proposals will be carried out in an open forum set up by the Network and the results will be disclosed to all participating members of the consortium. Funds will be allocated based on a final review of the proposals by the Peer Review Committee. If other members of the consortium are required to participate based on the Peer Review Committee recommendations, the Steering Committee will invite the relevant institution or company to participate. If a partner outside the consortium is required as recommended by the Peer Review Committee, the Sttering Committee will have a final decision on whether to co-opt these partners into the consortium. Any contract required with the industrial partners will be reviewed at the JRA Management level once the resources have been allocated.
The proposal, includes a few institutes, and even national agencies with large experience in management of large projects (IN2P3/CNRS, CEA/France, INFN, RAL) but also laboratories that have managed a large space and European project experience (University of Leicester, CESR/Toulouse, SRON, IASF).
Furthermore, both INFN and University of Leicester central services have a dedicated structure to handle the European projects, with dedicated administrative persons, secretaries and long experience in autonomous handling of resources (above €50 million per year).
Management Structure
Figure N1-1 shows a schematic of the complete management structure. To reflect ISRSI objectives the management structure shows a clear separation of scientific strategy, management and technical delivery. This is aimed to produce the optimum utilisation of resources across the collaboration and a clear definition of tasks with resources, start and end points. At the I3 project level the Coordinator is assisted on a day by day basis by the Management Board (MB) that includes the Deputy Coordinator, an Administrative Manager and the Coordinators of each Networking, Access and JR activity along with the Chairpersons of the Consortium Committees. The Management Board serves essentially as a coordinating body and consortium management body, having immediate oversight of all the I3 activities, defines the strategy of the Consortium but the executive power is in the hands of the Steering Committee (SC). All decisions have to be approved by the Steering Committee before they can be implemented. In order to maintain continuity the Coordinator and Deputy Coordinator are associated with ISRSI independent of their parent institutes, the parent institutes do not administrate the resources, allocated resources are administrated by the SC. If the SC determines that a change in their parent institute during the course of the contract were to interfere with the carrying out of their duties, the SC can elect a new Coordinator or Deputy Coordinator by majority vote. Since the MB is responsible for allocating resources and the management of unallocated resources, if the Coordinator or Deputy Coordinator were to change parent institution the and as long as the new institute were able to provide the necessary support the allocation of resources for support staff would be tranferrable. This is true for all activities outside of TA and JRAs, where a link between the Coordinators and the goals of the activity are inextricably linked.
The SC is elected by the Consortium, and includes one representative from each country participating in each of the I3 activities and includes the Management Board. The SC is headed by an elected chairperson, who reports on a 6 monthly basis to the consortium, European Commission and the MB. The SC has executive power can allocate resources and can change the nominated coordinators for the individual I3 components including the Network Working Group leaders. For these tasks and all scientific and technical issues it is assisted by the Peer Review Committee (PRC), a panel of experts also nominated by the SC to act as an advisory group. The PRC consists of representatives of the scientific and technical European communities as well as people who can offer financial advice to the consortium. The advice of the PRC is available to all elements of the I3. The SC meets twice a year, to make sure the various activities of the consortium are progressing well, to confirm or redefine the general policy and strategy of the ISRSI consortium defined by the MB, and as well as modifying any of the existing steering groups of the consortium. The SC elects its Chairperson that can act as interim replacement for the I3 Coordinator or the Deputy if required, organise voting or elections and report to the MB, including in these reports all recommendations by the PRC. The PRC Chairperson elected by the same body reports to SC on request. The SC also organises the yearly General Assembly, where task managers, PRC, laboratory directors and other potential future members are invited as observers. The SC defines the overall consortium goals and working plan. It can rely on the PRC expert group for financial advice and evaluations or internal audits. It makes the necessary recommendations to the SC which has the overall responsibility for consortium operations. The sharing of resources, as well as responsibilities between the consortium members is defined by the SC according to the general recommendations of the MB and PRC. Chairpersons of the SC and PRC will hold their posts on a biannual basis. The Networking, Access and JRA elements of the Consortium will each have a management structure, Figure N1-1 gives an overview of these and their interdependencies with the other ISRSI structures. The frequency of meetings at the sub-project level will be set by the individual management groups based on the requirements of the Working Groups or the JRAs.
ISRSI I3 N1 Management of the I3 - MISTI
Figure N1-1. Structure of ISRSI Management
ISRSI I3 N1 Management of the I3 - MISTI
Table N1-1. Description of Management substructures
Steering Committee and Coordinator / The Steering Committee (SC) has the responsibility of the application and review of the programme strategy defined by the Management Board. The SC is responsible for programme delivery, the management and oversight of allocated resources/funds. The I3 activity (Networking, Access and Research) Coordinators have the responsibility of reporting progress as well as any technical and resource issues relating to their specific activity to the SC along with offering any specific research advice during strategic decision making processes. The SC has the responsibility of reporting back to all members of the Consortium including the working groups through their respective management structures, ensuring strategic decisions are communicated within the collaboration.The terms of reference of the project Steering Committee are defined as:
· To approve the overall program strategy defined by the MB
· Setup a ad-hoc finance committee to define the financial policy of ISRSI based on EC models.
· To ensure program delivery within available resources and on schedule
· To receive reports on progress and resource requirements of working groups
· To monitor the progress of working groups
· To resolve resource issues or technical changes and to report these through the networking and joint research activities
· To disseminate strategy requirements to the activity managers
· To discuss and review new collaboration opportunities
· To discuss and review new technical opportunities
· To ensure high quality public outreach
The terms of reference for the project co-ordinator are defined as:
· To report technical progress, operational or resource issues to the I3 MB
· To report to other EU or external bodies as required
· To represent the MB and SC and report on strategy defined therein as required
· To present the program to review bodies
Peer Review Committee / The Peer Review Committee is a committee of experts nominated by the SC and is there to provide advice to the SC and any other members of the Consortium. The PRC is responsible to ensure that most areas of expertise are represented including financial, scientific and technical issues. A call for proposals will be issued at the start of the project by the PRC to signal the start of the Networking, Access and Research Activities. The PRC meets at least twice a year to make recommendations to the Steering Committee. The PRC can offer advice at the sub-project level without meeting as long as an adequate report is sent to the members of the SC if any project level decisions are required. This panel of experts is expected to have not only a role of expertise but also to stimulate new initiatives.
Management of the Network / At the sub-project level, the Network, Access and JRAs are subdivided in small management groups. Each management group is responsible for making sure that the specific tasks or objectives of the corresponding activity associated with a set of Work Packages (WPs) are carried out efficiently on time and within budget. The coordinators of these management groups can rely on both the SC and PRC for support. The coordinators are also responsible for reporting to the SC.