Group 1: In-Kind why and what
The what and why of in-kind
- What are the in-kind models of different big science facilities?
- Relationship between members and institutes
- Towards a global in-kind model (see also: group 2, legal aspects)
- How to really achieve joined-up approach in IK contracting?
- What are the limits of in-kind? Are there limits?
- How to address in-kind contributions with travelling detectors?
- History, previous contributions
- How to unite in-kind and €-procurement?
- Technical interdependency of IKC
Session 1 - protocol
: Gareth, Sonia, Marek, Martin, Sylvie, Tuomas, Felix
review of different in-kind models (ESS, XFEL, FAIR)
- Ministry/funding agency relations concerning money are difficult - leverage?
- In-kind rules should be well established
- Contract models: host<>povider (bilateral) host<>shareholder<>provider<>host (trilateral)
1 person from each member country (ministry, institute) --> ESS council.
Council decides everything.
Council is advised by
- SAC (scientific advisory committee)
- TAC (technical)
- IKRC (In-kind review commission)
- AFC (Finance)
- CEC (employment conditions)
FAIR is similar, but no SAC or CEC.
ESS: bilateral IKCA.
FAIR: trialateral IKCA. Member state and shareholder are sometimes the same. Shareholder and provider are sometimes the same
- Equal treatment to all partners
- Comprehensive vs. minimalist
- Functional technical/scientific specification
- Geographical return (countries profit from the project proportional to thier contribution)
- Correction factor: CB-value x sexy factor (say, 0,8) for sexy topics, CB-value x boring factor (say, 1,3) for dull contributions