Politika OP Verzija 6

[INSTITUTE] [Internal information]
Pursuant to Article 6 of Law on science and Research (Gazette RS, No. 49/2019), Director of the
Institute .................................., Belgrade, (hear in after: Institute) renders:
THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY

- Model-
Belgrade, October, 2023.

CONTENT
1. HISTORY OF DOCUMENT...............................................................................................................3
2. GLOSSARY OF TERMS....................................................................................................................4
Version 0.1 Page 1 of 47

3. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS................................................................................................6

4. GENERAL METHODOLOGY APPROACH..........................................................................................7
5. OBJECTIVES OF THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY.....................................................................................8
6. PURPOSE OF THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY........................................................................................8
7. OPEN ACCESS POLICY REQUIREMENTS..........................................................................................9
7.1 Mandatory Open Access.......................................................................................................9
7.1.1 Depositing Publications in Repositories.............................................................................9
7.1.2 Depositing Underlying Research Data.............................................................................12
7.1.3 Providing open access to the results of the publications.................................................10
7.1.4 Providing Open Access to the Certain Bibliographic Metadata.......................................11
7.2 Access Rights to The Background data..................................................................................13
7.3 Ownership of the R&D Results.............................................................................................15
7.3.1 Ownership by the Beneficiary that Generates the Results..............................................15
7.3.2 Joint Ownership by Several Beneficiaries........................................................................16
7.3.3 Joint Owners by Agreement............................................................................................16
7.3.4 Ownership Rights of Third Parties, Including Personnel, to the Results..........................16
7.3.5 Joint Research Units’ Ownership Rights on the Results..................................................17
7.4 Obligation of the Beneficiaries.............................................................................................17
7.4.1 Obligations od the Beneficiaries to Protect the Results...................................................17
7.4.2 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Exploit the Results....................................................19
7.4.3 Obligation of the Beneficiaries to Disseminate the Results.............................................19
7.4.4 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Submit Reports to the [EC/Agency]..........................21
7.4.5 Obligations of the Beneficiaries Related to the Information Security..............................21
7.4.6 Obligations of the Beneficiaries Related to Ethics and Research Integrity.......................23
7.4.7 Obligations of the Beneficiaries Related to Processing of Personal Data........................25
7.4.8 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Avoid a Conflict of Interests......................................28
8. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BENEFICIARIES.................................................................29
8.1 Roles and Responsibilities of the Beneficiaries Towards the [Commission][Agency].............29
8.2 The Beneficiaries’ Internal Division of Roles and Responsibilities..........................................30
8.3 Internal Arrangements of Responsibilities Among Beneficiaries in Consortium....................32
8. CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE GA................................................................33
9. AUTHORIZATION AND VALIDATION RIGHTS................................................................................34
ADENDUM 1 ‘TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION’.....................................................................................35
ADENDUM 2 ESTIMATED BUDGET AND BUDGET TRANSFERS..............................................................36
ADENDUM 3 THE TRUSTWORTHY REPOSITORY..................................................................................39
ADENDUM 4 MODEL OF OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING AGREEMENT.......................................................40
ADENDUM 4 ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE COSTS....................................................................................41

1. HISTORY OF DOCUMENTS
DMP version: 0.1
Research Number: [........]
Research Acronym: [........]
Research title: [Open Access Policy..]
Created by: The Consultant of the INSTITUTE, JPM
Owned by: The INSTITUTE
Used by: The Researchers of the INSTITUTE
Date: [.............2023]

2. GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Term Definition
Peer-reviewed scientific publications, encompassing articles, books, book chapters, monographs, etc.
Publications ‘Peer-reviewed publications’ means publications that have been evaluated by other scholars (e.g.
articles in scientific journals), other graphical representations, procedural manuals, forms, diagrams,
work flow charts, equipment descriptions, data files, data processing algorithms, or statistical records.
‘Gold’ route to open A scientific publication with open access provided by the publisher.
access
‘Green’ route to open A scientific publication (the published version or peer-reviewed, accepted manuscript) deposited in a
access repository.
‘Hybrid’ route to open An article published immediately under a Creative Commons 4 licence not in a fully open access
access journal. ‘Hybrid’ open access publications are also ‘gold’.
Article 29.2 The article in the Model Grant Agreement of Horizon 2020 projects that specifies the open access
mandate for peer-reviewed publications.
Article Processing The fee a publisher charges for providing ‘gold’ open access to articles or book contributions, (usually)
Charge at the time of publication. This is different from 'page charges' or 'color charges'.
Affiliated entity Any legal entity under the direct or indirect control of a participant, or under the same
direct or indirect control as the participant, or directly or indirectly controlling a participant.
Associated country Any EU-country or third country which is party to an international agreement with the
grantees under the GA, Horizon 2020.
Background Any tangible or intangible input, from data to know-how, information or rights (e.g., IPR such as
prototypes; cell lines; patents; database rights) that exists before the GA is signed and that is needed
to implement the action or to exploit its results. Background is not limited to input owned, but
potentially extends to anything the beneficiaries lawfully hold (e.g. through a license with the right to
sub-license). It also extends to input held by other parts of the beneficiary’s organization.
Beneficiary The legal entities who have signed the grant agreement (GA) with the Commission/Agency (i.e.,
participate in a project supported by an EU grant).
Book Processing The fee a publisher charges for providing ‘gold’ open access to entire books, chapters/Sections of a
Charge book, or a monograph, at the time of publication.
Coordination and Accompanying measures such as standardization, dissemination, awareness-raising and
support actions (CSA) communication, networking, coordination or support services, policy dialogues and mutual learning
exercises and studies); an action consisting primarily of accompanying measures such as
standardization, dissemination, awareness-raising, and communication, networking, coordination or
support services, policy dialogues and mutual learning exercises and studies, including new studies
design.
Coordinator The beneficiary which is the central contact point for the Commission/Agency and represents the
consortium (towards the Commission/Agency).
Creative Commons A non-profit organization that develops, supports, and stewards legal and technical infrastructure to
enable sharing of digital outputs, including by the development of a suite of licensing products.
Data Facts, measurements, recordings, records, or observations about the world collected by scientists and
others, with a minimum of contextual interpretation. Data may be in any format or medium taking
the form of writings, notes, numbers, symbols, text, images, films, video, sound recordings, pictorial
reproductions, drawings, designs or other graphical representations, procedural manuals, forms,
diagrams, work flow charts, equipment descriptions, data files, data processing algorithms, or
statistical records.
Embargo period Publishers permit ‘green’ open access often only after a certain embargo period. This embargo period
can last anywhere between several months and several years. For publications that have been
deposited in a repository but are under embargo, usually at least the metadata are openly accessible.
FAIR The guiding principles under which publications, datasets and other research output is findable,
principles accessible, interoperable and reusable.
FoS classification The classification system built for this study that assigns publications to scientific fields of study using
the OECD disciplines/fields of research and development (FORD) classification scheme as developed
within the framework of the Fractal Manual.
Innovation actions (IA) Innovation activities directly aiming at producing plans and arrangements or designs for new, altered

or improved products, processes or services (including prototyping, testing, demonstrating, piloting,

large-scale product validation and market replication); an action primarily consisting of activities
directly aiming at producing plans and arrangements or designs for new, altered or improved
products, processes or services. For this purpose, they may include prototyping, testing,
demonstrating, piloting, large-scale product validation and market replication.
Intellectual property For intellectual property rights, being understood in the meaning defined in Article 2 of the
Convention establishing the World Intellectual Property Organisation, signed at Stockholm on 14 July
1967), it suffices for beneficiaries of the GA that the application was filed before the GA is signed.
Metadata The information that describes an object. In scholarly communication terms the object could be an
article, book, dataset, etc. The basic metadata (or bibliographic data) describe the authorship,
provenance, publication location, date of publication, object type and so forth.
Open access (OA) Although there are no legally binding definitions of 'access' or 'open access' in this OAP, definitions of
the term 'access' includes not only access to basic elements such as the right to read, download and
print, but also the right to copy, disseminate, search, link, retrieval, extraction citate etc.
The practice of providing online access to scientific information should be reusable and free of charge
to the end-user.
OpenAIRE Guidelines Guidelines set by OpenAIRE to help repository managers expose publications, datasets and CRIS
metadata via the OAI-PMH protocol in order to integrate with the OpenAIRE infrastructure. 11
Participant It covers normally beneficiaries and linked third parties, and sometimes also other third parties
involved in the action.
Pre-print A journal article (or book chapter or book) that has not yet undergone peer-review or editorial
scrutiny.
Repository Repository for scientific publications: an online archive that includes the ‘payload’/full text of a
publication or dataset. Institutional, subject-based and centralized repositories are all acceptable
choices under Horizon 2020, while repositories that claim rights over and preclude access to
publications deposited within them are not. Interoperability: a repository should allow other systems
to use the data it hosts. It should therefore make such data available according to standard metadata
exchange formats (e.g. Dublin Core, Data Cite), and possibly via standard protocols (e.g. OAI- PMH).
Research and R&D aiming to establish new knowledge or explore the feasibility of a new technology, product,
innovation actions process, service or solution (including basic and applied research, technology development and
(RIA) integration, testing and validation on a small-scale prototype in a laboratory or simulated
environment).
Results of R&D The ‘results’ means any, tangible outputs (e.g., prototypes, micro-organisms) or intangible output
(e.g., know-how, formulas, data, knowledge or information), as well as related rights of the action
(e.g., patent rights, database rights, and intellectual property rights), whatever its form or nature,
whether it can be protected or not, that is generated in the action.
Scientific information In the context of research and innovation in all academic disciplines can mean: peer-reviewed
scientific research articles (published in scholarly journals, or research data such as data underlying
publications, curated data and/or raw data.

3. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Abbreviation/acronym Description
AAM Author accepted manuscript
APC Article processing charge
Beneficiary The legal entities who have signed the grant agreement (GA) with the Commission/ Agency (i.e.,
participate in a project supported by an EU GA).
CC Creative Commons
DB Database
DMP Data management plan
DPA Data Processing Agreement
DOI Digital object identifier
FAIR Findable, Accessible, Identifiable, and Reusable (research data)
GA Grant Agreement
MGA Model of the Grant Agreement, under Horizon Project
ID Identifier
IPR Intellectual Properties Rights
NSF National Science Funding
OA Open Access
OAP Open Access Policy
PID Persistent identifier
PMID PubMed identifier (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
R&D Research and Development (Fields of Science)
SSH Social Sciences and Humanities
SME Small and medium enterprises
TDM Text and Data Mining

4. GENERAL METHODOLOGY APPROACH

The main methodology approach to this Open Access Policy (OAP) followed an integrated approach
to all requirements of the Grant Agreement Model (MGA) funded program for different type of R&D
institutions. To be able to meet the requirements, the OAP is based on the following quality criteria:
 Openness and transparency: Offering a broad scope of the policy requirements to the R&D
grantees, current mandate and future recommendations are the main objectives of this policy.
To be valid for these, it was essential to openly and clearly identify any potential issues that
could misused the GA funded program (e.g., missing data). As a first step, a beneficiary has to
write the Action to Be Implemented - ‘technical implementation’ (Annex 1) and Estimated
Budget for R&D (Annex 2) as Appendix to the OAP.
 Coverage and accuracy: As detailed in this OAP, we used multiple data sources for coverage, as
much as possible, of different R&D disciplines in order to provide meaningful mandatory and
others statements in a form of recommendations, such as should or must be done.
 Clarity and replicability: As described in detail in the OAP, each item should be verified and used
by the specific scholarly an R&D community to create ongoing, current and adequate updates to
our proposed statements, thus giving the basis for evaluating any changes in the open access
mandate.
 Readiness and timeliness: This OAP have developed around well-established open databases
and already tested knowledge extraction of potential OA policy content to comply with the GA
requirements.
 Trust and robustness: The OAP also strived to be reliable, robust, and aligned to other methods
and approaches so that it can be operationalized, used and reused by different R&D institution,
in conjunction with the GA Horizon project requirements.
 Pragmatism and practicality: The statements in this OAP are intended for improving
recommendations to the current practice and specificities of the open access mandate in R&D
institution (if any) by giving incentive to beneficiaries’ compliance with the GA program and
feasibility of research data for use and reuse, compliance of FAIRification, constraints etc.).
The OAP methodology approach relied on three pillars that should be applied for the purpose of the
OAP implementation, uptake and review:
1. Using authoritative open data sources to respond to all the GA requirements for the OAP;
2. Applying extracted knowledge on potential OAP contents for different R&D institutions and
relationships between various entities among them, such as citations and affiliations, and reuse
for knowledge dissemination and extraction (e.g., classifications);
3. Including experts in order to assess and validate the processes (data, metadata, technology and
indicators) and consult/recommend on the way forward for a pragmatic help for the
implementation of the OAP in real systems.

5. OBJECTIVES OF THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY

The term “open access” (OA) refers to the practice of providing online open access to the scientific data
and information from research and innovation of all academic R&D disciplines that is free of charge to
the end-user and reusable, meaning:
1. peer-reviewed scientific research articles (published in scholarly journals), and
2. research data underlying publications (curated or owned data and/or background and raw
data).
A key objective of the OAP is to implement and use/reuse an open, transparent and re-producible
approach, as a driver to improve the operationalization of the open access to R&D scientific publications
and data, with rules that can be widely shared with and accepted by the research community
participants. A specific goal of the policy is to understand the role and the use of underlying open and
collaborative infrastructures (e.g., repositories), ensuring a continuity, robustness and, therefore, trust in
the open access process, and sharing of the scientific data and information in context of the open
science concept. As any modern R&D builds on extensive scientific information, an important goal of this
policy is to improve R&D work and to underline the central role of knowledge and innovation in
generating of the social and economic growth globally. Practical impact of R&D to the society and entire
humans’ life requires that scientific information have to be shared openly and effectively, as soon as
possible.
6. PURPOSE OF THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY

To be able to define purpose of the OAP we have to fully understand the dynamics and varieties of
the actors, scientific disciplines and thematic, and comprehensively address the main factors that
helps to implement all of R&D, innovation and coordination and support specifics, such as of:
 The research and innovation actions (RIA) aiming to establish new knowledge or explore the
feasibility of a new technology, product, process, service or solution (including basic and applied
research, technology development and integration, testing and validation on a small-scale prototype
in a laboratory or simulated environment);
 The innovation actions (IA) directly aiming at producing plans and arrangements or designs for new,
altered or improved products, processes or services (including prototyping, testing, demonstrating,
piloting, large-scale product validation and market replication), and
 The coordination and support actions (CSA), accompanying measures (such as standardisation,
dissemination, raising of awareness and communication, networking, coordination or support
services, policy dialogues and mutual learning exercises and studies).
This OAP explain the rules on open access to scientific peer reviewed publications and research data
that beneficiaries (i.e., researchers) have to follow in projects funded or co-funded under the GA. This
OAP includes necessary elements, such as: The summary description of research data and metadata,
The FAIR principles profile; Open access rules to publications; Open access rules to data; Data
Management Plans, and other research outputs. The OAP rules for broader access to scientific
publications and underlining research data will help to:
 Improve quality of R&D results and access to the R&D scientific information;
 Improve efficiency of the researchers’ collaboration and avoid duplication of effort;
 Speed up innovation and progress to market and economic growth;

 Improve transparency of the scientific process, involving citizens and society;

 Boost the benefits of public investment in R&D processes etc.
7. OPEN ACCESS POLICY REQUIREMENTS

The open access policy (OAP) requires open access to all peer-reviewed scientific publications and
underlying data, and, as much as possible, background data relating to the result of the specific R&D
project, as well as to the repositories and database of the scientific data and information. Peer-
reviewed publications are those assessed by other scholars. Additionally, the researchers are also
strongly encouraged to provide open access to other types of scientific publications (e.g., monographs,
conference proceedings, books, scientific reports, etc.).
Openness in sharing and collaboration approaches to R&D results gradually putting aside the proprietary
R&D mind-set and models of the past. As openness can relate to either the data itself or the access to it,
the subtle balance between these two approaches should be implemented. In other words, open access
is not always equivalent to open data. Open data allows open access, but open access does not
necessarily require open data. How, then, those two can closed and proprietary data allow open access?
Data owners can do so if they publish a data access metadata (see chapter 7.1.4), or an API (Application
Programming Interface). To understand advantage of the API let us compare it with the HTML standard,
well-defined, publicly available common language that any browser can decrypt and understand. These
two conditions are what essentially define open data and allowed access to the data regardless of their
internal structure. Thus, with an open API the owner of the data can achieve the same goal: allow access
to the data, or equivalently share the data for the use of humans or third-party applications.
7.1 Mandatory Open Access
Mandatory open access means ensuring that such scientific publications can be, at least, read online,
downloaded and printed, via a repository for scientific publications, a publication platform or publishing
agency site. In order to increase protection of the research data, the beneficiaries (he
researchers/authors) are encouraged to retain copyright and grant appropriate licenses to publishers
(e.g., Creative Commons - CC or similar licenses). The requirement for open access in this OAP does not
imply that the beneficiaries are obliged to publish their results; the policy only sets requirements that
must be fulfilled if the authors do decide to publish them.
Mandatory open access to the scientific publications includes four main phases:
1. Depositing, in a repository for scientific publications, a machine-readable electronic copy of the
published version of the publication or the final peer-reviewed manuscript as accepted for
publication.
2. Providing open access to publications, weather through location of the publisher or over repository
or self-archiving service (i.e., via the repository only).
3. Providing open access to the certain bibliographic metadata via repositories that identify the
publication. This is needed for visibility, traceability and monitoring.
4. Depositing underlying research data for validation of the results in the deposited publication, at the
same time wen depositing publication in the repository.

These steps may or may not occur simultaneously, depending on whether open access publishing
repository/agency use so called 'gold' open access or self-archiving - 'green' open access, and, in the
case of self-archiving, depending on the embargo period (if any).
7.1.1 Depositing Publications in Repositories
Each beneficiary must ensure free of charge online open access for any user to all peer-reviewed
scientific publications relating to its R&D results. In particular, it must:
(a) deposit a machine-readable electronic copy of the published version that can be used and
understood by a computer or final peer-reviewed manuscript of scientific publications accepted
for publication in a repository, as soon as possible, and at the latest on the date of publication;
(b) ensure open access to the deposited publication, via the repository, at the latest:
(i) on date of publication, if an electronic version is available for free via the publisher, or
(ii) within six months of publication in natural science or twelve months for publications in
the social and humanities sciences and in any other case.
(c) ensure open access, via the repository, to the bibliographic metadata that identify and describe
the underlying data in the deposited publication.
These steps apply even where 'gold' open access publishing is chosen to ensure that the article is
preserved in the long term. The publications must be stored in text file formats that are either
standardized or otherwise publicly known so that anyone can develop new tools for working with the
documents. In some cases, the final version of an article can be deposited before publication, for
example, at the time when the article is accepted by the journal. Where possible, the version deposited
should be identical to the published version (in layout, pagination, etc.).
A 'repository' for scientific publications is an online archive where researchers deposit research
publications, research data and other scientific R&D outputs, and can preserve, manage and provide
access to them. They collect and disseminate digital research outputs from individual research
organizations’ institutional repositories (e.g., the repository of the Belgrade University) or specific
research communities’ thematic/disciplinary repositories (e.g., Europe PMC for life sciences including
biomedicine and health or arXiv for physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology,
quantitative finance and statistics, etc.). They can also be centralized repositories, such as for example
Zenodo, free of cost and developed by CERN.
The beneficiaries can identify and chose the repository that suits their needs (Please see: Annex 3) in the
Directory of Open Access Repositories (Open DOAR). The Open Access Infrastructure for Research in
Europe (OpenAIRE) can help them to find such repositories. The beneficiaries are recommended to use a
repository that is compliant with the requirements of OpenAIRE and that you use the OpenAIRE
database as a point of departure. The OpenAIRE also offers support services for researchers, by
providing information on open access requirements, a general Helpdesk and country-specific helpdesks
(National Open Access Desks) that answer questions on open access and GA project. Beneficiaries should
NOT use a repository with rules that could conflict with open access requirements.
Institutional, subject-based and centralized repositories are all acceptable choices. However, repositories
that claim rights over deposited publications and preclude access, are not acceptable. Not all
repositories use an accepted and universal persistent identifier (PID) system such as DOI, URN, ARK etc.
Instead, they use a local identifier or administrative number that the repository itself maintains. This
increases the risk that the data cannot be found anymore if they are moved to another location, or if the

repository ceases to exist, reorganizes, or changes its governance. In any case beneficiaries can chose a
trustworthy repository by verification of the essential functionalities.
7.1.2 Depositing Underlying Research Data
The underlying data needed to validate the results presented in scientific publications is seen as a crucial
part of the publication and therefore an important element of scientific R&D best practice. For ease of
tracking, beneficiaries should also include the digital object identifier (DOI) for the GA project
(http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007601) in the funding acknowledgement field in their metadata.
The metadata compliance of the repository can be checked using OpenAIRE.
For health actions grantees, if foreseen in the work program (Pease see: Annex 1), the [Commission]
[Agency] may require beneficiaries to:
a. deposit digital research data, which is generated in the action and relevant for addressing a
public health emergency, in a research data repository and take measures to make it possible
for third parties to access, mine, exploit, reproduce and disseminate the data free of charge for
any user,
b. give specific access rights to third parties that need the digital research data to address the
public health emergency (including the right to access, mine, exploit ad reproduces the data free
of charge) within the deadline specified in the [Commission][Agency]’s request.
For health actions targeting public health emergencies, if foreseen in the work program:
a. the beneficiaries must deposit the digital research data generated in the action in a research
data repository, and
b. take measures to make it possible for third parties to access, mine, exploit, reproduce and
disseminate the data free of charge for any user, at the latest within 30 days after it has been
generated.
These does not change the obligation to protect the results, data confidentiality and security, and the
obligations to protect personal data, all of which still apply.
As an exception, the beneficiaries do not have to ensure open access, if the [Commission][Agency]
agrees to replace the open access obligation by special access rights for third parties that need the data
to address the public health emergency. These access rights must include the right to access, mine,
exploit and reproduce the data free of charge. `
However, not all data can be open, meaning that research data must be "as open as possible and as
closed as necessary". Partially or entirely open access to deposited research data has become the
default setting for research data generated in the GA projects. Beneficiaries can therefore opt out at any
stage of projects, either before or after signing the GA, and so free themselves retroactively from the
obligations associated with the conditions, if:
 opening access is incompatible with the obligation to protect results that can reasonably be
expected to be commercially or industrially exploited,
 opening access is incompatible with the need for confidentiality and security requirements,
 opening access is incompatible with rules on protecting personal data,
 opening access would mean that the project's main aim might not be achieved or project will not
generate / collect any research data, or there are other legitimate interest reasons (e.g., that
beneficiary can enter in a free-text box at the proposal stage for the GA and explain it).

Alternatively, any project under the GA can also choose to keep selected datasets or even all research
data closed for any of the above reasons via their Data Management Plan.
7.1.3 Providing open access to the results of the publications
After depositing publications beneficiaries must ensure open access to those publications via the
chosen repository choosing one of two main ways to meet this requirement:
1. Open access publishing or 'gold' OA : Researchers can publish in open access journals’ repository
or in hybrid journals that both options, sell subscriptions or making individual articles openly
accessible, are accepted. In open access mode an article is immediately published and the
payment of publication costs is shifted away from subscribing readers. The most common
business model is based on one-off payments by authors. These costs, often referred to as Article
Processing Charges (APCs), are usually borne by the researcher's university or research institute
or the agency funding the research. Monographs can also be published either on a purely open
access basis or using a hybrid business model. 'Article processing charges' are eligible (Please see:
Annex 5) for reimbursement during the duration of the project. The costs of 'gold' open access
publications, incurred once a project is completed, cannot be refunded from that project's
budget.
2. Self-archiving or 'green' OA: The beneficiaries or representatives can deposit the final peer-
reviewed manuscript in a repository of their choice, before or at the same time, or after
publication (within at most 6 or 12 months). Some publishers request that open access be
granted only after an embargo period has elapsed. To provide support concerning compliance
with the GA project embargo periods, the EU Commission offers a Model amendment to
publishing open access agreement (Please see: Annex 4) to be filled out by the beneficiary and
the publisher. This model is not mandatory but reflects the obligations for the beneficiary under
the GA. It can be supplemented by further provisions agreed between the parties, provided they
are compatible with the GA. The Commission/Agency takes no responsibility for the use of this
model which are often signed between authors and publishers.
7.1.4 Providing Open Access to the Certain Bibliographic Metadata
Data from researchers’ devices are usually stored and communicated in many different formats and
while technically “available”, it is hard to use them to fully benefit from the value they contained.
That is exactly where open access to data and enabling data findable, must be carefully balanced. To
find underling data, understand and use/reuse them is necessary to provide access to bibliographic
metadata.
In its most basic sense, metadata are information about data, and describes basic characteristics of the
data, such as: who created the data, what the data file contains, when the data were generated, where
the data were generated, why the data were generated, and how the data were generated. Metadata
may also be used to document technical specifications of the files, relationships between multiple files,
and rights and access information for the files. By providing metadata about the research files, you wish
to preserve, you will be making it easier for yourself and others to identify and reuse these data
correctly at a later date.

Note that there are many different metadata standards that could be used for assigning metadata to
the files. It is recommended to use the standard suggested by your funding entity or your specific NSF
directorate. If no guidelines are given, there are no standards for your scientific community, or you find
the standards inadequate, explain this situation and propose solutions or remedies. Even if standards
are not available, you should, at the very least, include with your data a text document, such as a
“readme.txt” file, that includes the relevant information described above or references a published
article that describes the data fully. Controlled vocabularies and ontologies exist for many fields of
research and can be used.
The beneficiary must deposit bibliographic metadata, needed to validate the research results
presented in the deposited scientific publications, at least at the same time as the publication. These
must be in a standard format and must include the following:
 terms ["European Union (EU)" & "Horizon ….."]and/or["Euratom" & Euratom research & training
program 2014-2018"],
 name of the action, acronym & grant number,
 publication date, the length of the embargo period (if applicable), and
 a persistent identifier (e.g. DOI - Digital Object Identifier).
The purpose of the bibliographic metadata requirement is to make it easier to find publications and
ensure that EU funding is acknowledged. Information on EU funding must be included as part of
bibliographic metadata, so that the granted project can be properly monitored, statistics produced,
and the program’s impact assessed. To monitor any embargo periods, the publication date and
embargo period must be provided. The persistent identifier, for example a DOI, identifies the
publication. It enables a link to be provided to an authoritative version of the publication.
In all cases, the EU Commission encourages authors to retain their copyright and grant adequate
licenses to publishers (e.g. , Creative Commons). This type of license is a good legal tool for providing
open access in its broadest sense. Where possible, contributors should also be uniquely identifiable,
and data uniquely attributable, through identifiers which are persistent, non-proprietary, open and
interoperable (e.g. ORCID provides a persistent digital identifier - ORCID ID), owned by beneficiary,
that can control and distinguishes one beneficiary from every other researcher, and enable her/him
to connect her/his own ID with the professional information such as affiliations, grants, publications,
peer review, and more. The beneficiary can use ORCID ID to share information with other systems,
ensuring recognition for all personal contributions, saving time and reducing the risk of errors for
contributor identifiers and for data identifiers. Data Cite is a global community of organizations and
researchers identifying and citing research outputs and resources.
7.2 Access Rights to The Background
To exercise any access rights, this must first be requested in writing via ‘request for access’ form.
‘Access rights’ means rights to use results or background data under the terms and conditions laid
down in this policy. Waivers of access rights are not valid unless in writing. Access rights do not include
the right to sub-license, unless agreed otherwise.
Agreement on access right to the background

The beneficiaries must identify and agree in writing on what constitutes background for their action, in
order to be able to give access to it. ‘‘Background’ means any tangible or intangible input, from data to
know-how, information whatever its form or rights such as intellectual property rights (e.g., prototypes;
cell lines; patents; database rights), that exists before the GA is signed and that is needed to implement
the action or to exploit its results. Background is not limited to input owned, but potentially extends to
anything the beneficiaries lawfully hold (e.g., through a license with the right to sub-license). It also
extends to input held by other parts of the beneficiary’s organization (e.g., if a university department or
consortium partners participates in the action, background could potentially be anything held by the
university or consortium partners, unless the department/consortium partners have their own legal
personalities and are the beneficiaries). Open access to the background data, although not obligatory,
beneficiaries are strongly advised to allow only if they:
(a) are held by the beneficiaries before they acceded to the GA and
(b) are needed to implement the action or exploit the results.
The agreement may take any form (e.g., positive list, negative list). It may be a separate agreement or
may be part of the consortium agreement. If access to background is subject to legal restrictions or
limits (e.g., as for intellectual property rights (IPR), it is sufficient that the application was filed before the
GA is signed), the beneficiary must inform the other beneficiaries, before signing the GA. The
beneficiaries may agree to exclude specific background temporary (e.g., to permit the adequate
protection of the background before providing access) or limited (e.g., to exclude only one or more
specific beneficiaries). As background is by definition considered to be needed for implementation or
exploitation, the impact of such exclusion on the action should be examined by the beneficiaries,
particularly regarding an exclusion which does not have a temporary character.
Rules on access right to the background data
The rules on access right to the background data, including conditions and scope of access, are generally
the same as access right for results of the R&D. The beneficiaries must give each other access right,
under ‘fair and reasonable conditions’, to the background data needed to implement their own tasks
under the action, unless the beneficiary that holds the background data has, before acceding to the GA:
(a) informed the other beneficiaries that access to its background data is subject to legal restrictions
or limits, including those imposed by the rights of third parties including their personnel, or
(b) agreed with the other beneficiaries that access would not be on a royalty-free basis.
‘Fair and reasonable conditions’ means appropriate conditions, including possible financial terms or
royalty-free conditions, taking into account the specific circumstances of the request for access, for
example the actual or potential value of the results or background data to which access right is
requested and/or the scope, duration or other characteristics of the exploitation envisaged.
Requests for access right may be made, unless agreed otherwise, up to one year after the first day of the
month following the date the GA enters into force or at starting date of the action under the GA project.
In any case, the starting date should not be earlier than the date of the submission of the grant
application.
Rules on access rights for affiliated entities to the background data
Unless otherwise agreed in the consortium agreement, access rights for affiliated entities to the
background data must also be given under fair and reasonable conditions, unless it is subject to legal
restrictions or limits, including those imposed by the rights of third parties, including personnel, to

affiliated entities established in an EU Member State or associated country, if this is needed to exploit
the results generated by the beneficiaries to which they are affiliated. Unless agreed otherwise, the
affiliated entity concerned must make the request directly to the beneficiary that holds the background
data.
Rules on trans-national access rights to research infrastructure and background data
For trans-national access to research infrastructure the access provider must, unless it is subject to legal
restrictions or limits including those imposed by the rights of third parties and their personnel, give
users royalty-free access to background data needed to implement the action. The access provider must
inform the users as soon as possible of any restriction which might substantially affect the granting of
access rights.
However, for background data there is NO or a more limited obligation to give access, if there are
restrictions or legal or otherwise limits and the beneficiary has informed the others, before acceding to
the GA or immediately when additional background is agreed on (for example, a pre-existing agreement
such as an exclusive license, which precludes the granting of access rights). By contrast, if a beneficiary
contract on background data later, it must ensure that it can comply with its access obligations under
the GA.
Moreover, the conditions for access are slightly different. Access must be given for the implementation
of action tasks: the default rule is royalty-free. However, if agreed by the beneficiaries before the GA is
signed, for background data other conditions may be applied, for example, a beneficiary owns a novel
technology needed by other beneficiaries for implementing their tasks under the action and the other
beneficiaries do not bring the same level of background data. In such case the beneficiaries may agree
that access to the novel technology to implement the action will not be on a royalty-free basis. If
beneficiaries intend to deviate from the default rule, it is recommended that this is explained in detail in
their proposal for the exploitation of results, under fair and reasonable conditions.
As for EU institutions, Member States, Euratom, joint undertakings or third parties, there are NO specific
access rights, for users of research infrastructures in actions with trans-national or virtual access to
research infrastructure, except for the option for royalty-free access. Access rights are therefore
normally limited to other beneficiaries and certain affiliated entities of other beneficiaries, unless
otherwise agreed. For example, beneficiary A used background data from beneficiary B to generate its
results. Beneficiary A would like to use its affiliated entity A1 established in an EU member state to
exploit the results. For this, affiliated entity A1 needs access rights to beneficiary B’s background data.
7.3 Ownership of the R&D Results
7.3.1 Ownership by the Beneficiary that Generates the Results
Results of the R&D are owned by the beneficiary that generates them. To avoid or resolve potential
ownership disputes, beneficiaries should keep documents, such as laboratory notebooks, notes and
other background data to show how and when they produced the results. The two or more beneficiaries
become automatic joint ownership, if they have jointly generated results and it is not possible to
establish their respective contribution or to separate them for data protection. In this case, the
beneficiaries concerned must conclude a Joint Ownership Agreement, in writing. This agreement should

cover specific conditions for granting licenses, if they are different from those already set out in the GA,
in particular:
 Criteria or principles for ‘fair and reasonable compensation’ to be provided to the other joint
owners, if a non-exclusive license is granted to a third party (if appropriate);
 The highest request for fair and reasonable compensation principles should be fixed only if the
expected results can be determined with precision already before the action starts, and
 How disputes will be settled (e.g., via a mediator, applicable law, etc.).
The automatic joint ownership has the right under the GA to grant non-exclusive licenses to third parties
against fair and reasonable compensation, without prior authorization from the other joint owners,
unless otherwise provided in the Joint Ownership Agreement. The joint owner that intends to grant the
license must give notice to the other joint owners. at least 45 days in advance, together with sufficient
information, to check if the proposed compensation is fair and reasonable. Such licenses may not
include sub-licensing. Joint owners are free to agree on different arrangements in their joint-ownership
agreement and may abandon joint ownership only after the jointly-owned results have been produced
(e.g., once the results have been produced, the joint owners may transfer ownership to a single owner
and agree on more favorable access rights or on any other fair counterpart).
To make it easier to negotiate a joint-ownership agreement, the beneficiaries should include general
principles on joint ownership already in the consortium agreement (if any). The joint ownership
agreement will usually require further fine-tuning after the jointly-owned results are produced, in
particular with regard to:
 How the ownership is divided (e.g., equally or not)?
 If and how the joint results will be protected, including issues related to the cost of protection
(e.g., patent filing and examination fees, renewal fees, prior state-of-the-art searches,
infringement actions, etc.), or to the sharing of revenues or profits, and
 How the joint results will be exploited and disseminated?
7.3.2 Joint Ownership by Several Beneficiaries
Two or more beneficiaries’ own results jointly, if they have jointly generated them and it is not possible
to establish the respective contribution of each beneficiary, or separate them for the purpose of
applying for, obtaining or maintaining their protection.
The joint owners must agree in writing (‘Joint Ownership Agreement’) on the allocation and terms of
exercise of their joint ownership, to ensure compliance with their obligations under the GA. Each joint
owner may grant non-exclusive licenses to third parties to exploit jointly-owned results, without any
right to sub-license, if the other joint owners are given at least 45 days’ advance notice and fair and
reasonable compensation, unless otherwise agreed in the Joint Ownership Agreement. Once the results
have been generated, joint owners may agree, in writing, to apply another regime than joint ownership
(e.g., transfer to a single owner with access rights for the others).
7.3.3 Joint Owners by Agreement

The beneficiaries may also become joint owners by agreement, if they specifically agree on it. For
example, a beneficiary may decide that a part of its results will be owned jointly with its parent company
or another third party. However, this requires a partial transfer of ownership, which is subject to the
GA’s rules on transferring ownership. If valuable results are not protected (e.g., if the official prosecution

or renewal fees for a patent application are not paid), the Commission/Agency may, under certain
circumstances, assume ownership of the R&D results, in order to protect them.
7.3.4 Ownership Rights of Third Parties, Including Personnel, to the Results
If third parties, including personnel, may claim rights to the results, the beneficiary concerned must
ensure that it complies with its obligations under the GA. The beneficiaries must ensure that they can
fulfil their obligations under the GA regarding results, by making arrangements (e.g., transferring
ownership to the beneficiary or granting access rights to the beneficiary with a right to sub-license) with
any third parties that could claim rights to them (e.g., subcontractors, linked third parties, international
partners, employees, etc.). For examples, third parties that may claim rights, may be: an academic
institution in countries that have a kind of ‘professor’s privilege’ system, according to which researchers
may have some rights to the results of university research; employees or students who carry out work for
the action, if they have rights under national law or their contract, or beneficiaries for which linked third
parties carry out a significant part of the work.
7.3.5 Joint Research Units’ Ownership Rights on the Results
The beneficiaries must handle some specific cases of third parties with rights on results such as joint
research units (JRUs). Where the internal arrangements of a JRU, state that any results produced by one
member are owned jointly by all members, these other members are third parties that can claim rights
on the results. In this case, the JRU member, that is the beneficiary, must ensure that it can fulfil its
contractual obligations under the GA (e.g., with regard to other beneficiaries’ access rights).
Beneficiaries that are members of a JRU should inform the other beneficiaries as soon as possible, to
give them time to make, if needed, appropriate arrangements in the consortium agreement.
7.4 Obligation of the Beneficiaries

7.4.1 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Protect the Results
Each beneficiary must examine the possibility of protecting its results and must adequately protect
them, for an appropriate period and with appropriate territorial, security and legal coverage, if:
a. the results can reasonably be expected to be commercially or industrially exploited and
b. protecting them reasonable and justified, in given circumstances, even if this requires further
research and development or private investment.
When deciding on protection, the beneficiary must consider its own legitimate interests and the
legitimate interests, especially commercial, of the other beneficiaries. Costs related to protection may
be eligible (Please see: Annex 4) (e.g., if protection is impossible under EU or national law or not
justified, in sense of the potential commercial or industrial exploitation, the action’s objective and other
relevant elements, such as potential markets in countries in which competitors are located, whether
additionally protecting a part of certain technology would bring significantly broader protection or not,
etc.)
Beneficiaries should consider seeking expert advice to help them to decide whether and how to protect
the R&D results. This obligation also applies to beneficiaries not receiving EU funding. The beneficiaries
are in principle free to choose any available standard form of protection, such as: (1) Patent; (2)
Trademark; (3) Industrial design; (4) Copyright; (5) Trade-secret, and (5) Confidentiality.

The choice of the most suitable form should be made on the basis of the specificities of the action and
the type of the R&D result (i.e., the form which offers the most adequate and effective protection).
Although important for commercial and industrial exploitation, protection of the IP address is not
mandatory. For examples a choice of protection type, according to the type of result, can be:
1. For an invention: e.g., patent, confidential information, postpone of patent application publishing.
2. For the design of a technology: e.g., industrial design, copyright.
3. For a website: e.g., industrial design, copyright, trademark.
In some cases, it may be advisable to protect the invention by keeping it confidential, or to postpone the
filing of a patent or other IPR application. For example, sometime is better not to protect for the
moment, keeping an invention temporarily confidential, allowing further development of the invention
while avoiding the negative consequences associated with premature filing (e.g., earlier priority and
filing dates, early publication, possible rejection due to lack of support or industrial applicability, etc.).
When deciding on protection, the beneficiaries must also consider the other beneficiaries’ legitimate
interests. Any other beneficiary invoking legitimate interests must show how the decision would
significantly harm it, especially commercially (e.g., the protection would lead to the disclosure of
valuable background data that is held by the other beneficiary (as a trade secret or flagged as
confidential)).
Although a beneficiary is not required to consult the other beneficiaries before deciding whether to
protect a specific result it owns, the beneficiary can foresee arrangements, either in the consortium
agreement or in separate agreements, to ensure that decisions on protection take due account of the
interests of all beneficiaries concerned.
Protection should last for an appropriate period of time and have appropriate territorial coverage, in
sense of potential commercial or industrial exploitation and other elements (e.g., potential markets and
countries in which potential competitors are located). Patent applications should identify the rightful
inventors. Errors or fraud in identifying inventors may lead to the invalidation of patents (e.g., an entity
systematically designates a head of department as one of the inventors, although it is not true).
[EU][Euratom][Agency] ownership rights to protect the results
If a beneficiary intends not to protect its results, to stop protecting them or not seek an extension of
protection, [the EU] [Euratom] [the Agency] may, under certain conditions, assume ownership to ensure
their (continued) protection. Applications for protection of results (including patent applications) filed by
or on behalf of a beneficiary must, unless the [Commission][Agency] requests or agrees otherwise or
unless it is impossible, include the following information on EU funding: “The project leading to this
application has received funding from the [EU’s funding research and innovation program] under grant
agreement No [number]”.
[The EU] [Euratom] [The Agency] may, with the consent of the beneficiary concerned, assume ownership
of results to protect them, if a beneficiary intends, up to 4 (four) years after the starting date of the GA,
to disseminate its results without protecting them, except in any of the following cases:
a. the lack of protection is because protecting the results is not possible, reasonable or justified in
the given circumstances, or because of lack of potential for commercial or industrial
exploitation, and

b. the beneficiary intends to transfer the results to another beneficiary or third party established in
an EU Member State or associated country, which will protect them.
Before the results are disseminated and unless any of the cases above under points (a) or (b) applies,
the beneficiary must formally notify the [Commission][Agency] at least 60 (sixties) days before the
protection lapses or its extension is no longer possible and at the same time inform it of any reasons for
refusing consent. The beneficiary may refuse consent only if it can show that its legitimate interests
would suffer significant harm.
If the [Commission][Agency] decides to assume ownership, it will formally notify the beneficiary
concerned within 45 (forty-five) days of receiving notification. No dissemination relating to these results
may take place before the end of this period (4 years) or, if the [Commission][Agency] takes a positive
decision, until it has taken the necessary steps to protect the results.
7.4.2 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Exploit the Results

The beneficiaries must take measures aiming to ensure exploitation (use/reuse/dissemination) of their
results, either by themselves (e.g., for further research or for commercial or industrial exploitation in its
own activities) or by others beneficiaries, or third parties (e.g., through licensing or by transferring the
ownership of results). As the best effort obligation, the beneficiaries must be proactive and take specific
measures to ensure that their results are used to the extent possible and justified. This obligation
applies only to beneficiaries receiving EU funding. Where possible, the measures should be consistent
with the impact expected from the action and the plan for the exploitation and dissemination of the
results.
If the GA provides for additional exploitation obligations, these must also be fulfilled. Such additional
exploitation obligations will already be mentioned in the work Program (Annex 1/call for the GA).
Additional exploitation obligations apply to ALL beneficiaries. For additional exploitation obligations, if
foreseen in the work program, the beneficiaries must, up to 4 (four) years after the starting date of the
GA, comply with the additional exploitation obligations set out in Annex 1). This does not change the
security and privacy obligations, which still apply.
If the GA includes the option for information on standardisation, the beneficiaries must, moreover,
inform the Commission/Agency on any results that could contribute to European or international
standards (e.g., the results are produced in an area in which standards play an important role, such as in
mobile communication, diagnostics or immunological diseases, etc.). Each beneficiary must, up to 4
(four) years after the starting date of the GA, take measures aiming to ensure ‘exploitation’ of its results,
either directly or indirectly, in particular through transfer or licensing by:
a. Using them in further research activities, outside the action;
b. Developing, creating or marketing a product or process;
c. Creating and providing a service, or
d. Using them in standardisation activities.
If results are incorporated in a standard, the beneficiary concerned must, unless the [Commission]
[Agency] requests or agrees otherwise or unless it is impossible, ask the standardization body to include
the following statement in information related to the standard: "Results incorporated in this standard
received funding from the [EU’s research and innovation program] under GA No [Number]".
7.4.3 Obligation of the Beneficiaries to Disseminate the Results

The beneficiaries’ obligations to disseminate the results
Unless it goes against their legitimate interests, each beneficiary must, as soon as possible, share
(‘disseminate’) its results by disclosing them to the public, using appropriate means, other than those
resulting from protecting or exploiting the results, including in scientific publications and in any
medium.
The beneficiaries must, as soon as possible, but not before a decision on their possible protection,
disseminate their results (i.e., make them public). Results that are disclosed too early (i.e., before the
decision on their protection) run the risk being invalidated (e.g., if a result is disclosed, in writing,
including by e-mail or orally for example at a conference, before filing for protection, even to a single
person who is not bound by secrecy or confidentiality obligations, that is typically someone from an
organization outside the consortium). Unless the [Commission][Agency] requests or agrees otherwise or
unless it is impossible, any dissemination of results (in any form, including electronic), must:
a. Display the EU emblem, and
b. Include the following text: “This project has received funding from the [European Union’s the GA
research and innovation program] under grant agreement No [Number]”.
When displayed together with another logo, the EU emblem must have appropriate prominence. For
the purposes of their obligations under the GA, the beneficiaries may use the EU emblem without first
obtaining approval from the [Commission][Agency]. This does not however give them the right to
exclusive use. Moreover, they may not appropriate the EU emblem or any similar trademark or logo,
either by registration or by any other means. Beneficiaries’ obligation to apply [Commission][Agency]
disclaimer excluding responsibility, means that any dissemination of results must indicate that it reflects
only the author’s view and that the [Commission][Agency] is not responsible for any use that may be
made of the information it contains.
The beneficiaries’ obligations for additional dissemination of the results
If the GA provides for additional dissemination obligations, these must also be fulfilled, if it is:
a. Foreseen in the work program/call (Annex 1); the beneficiaries must comply, up to 4 (four) years
after the time of starting actions;
b. Interoperability foreseen in the work program, where the beneficiaries must disseminate any
technical specifications of the results that are needed for interoperability;
c. Cross-border interoperability, if foreseen in the work program, where the beneficiaries must
disseminate the deliverables relating to cross-border interoperability and any results needed for
cross-border interoperability, in particular common technical specifications and software
components.
This does not change the obligation to protect the results, confidentiality obligations to protect personal
data, all of which still apply. If a beneficiary intends not to protect its results, it may, under certain
conditions, need to formally notify the [Commission][Agency] before dissemination takes place.
NO obligation for dissemination of the results at all, may take place, if:
a. The results need to be protected as a trade secret (i.e., confidential know-how) or
b. Dissemination conflicts with any other obligations under the GA (e.g., personal data protection,
security obligations for results that are subject to limited disclosure/dissemination in the GA and
for results that contain EU-classified information, etc.).
The beneficiaries may choose any form of standard for disseminating their results such as website,
presentation at a scientific conference or peer-reviewed publication. The dissemination measures should,

however, be consistent with the ‘Plan for the exploitation and dissemination of the results’ in the Data
Management Plan (DMP) and proportionate to the impact expected from the action.
Beneficiaries should foresee arrangements, either in the consortium agreement or in separate

agreements, to ensure that decisions on dissemination take due account of the interests of all
beneficiaries concerned and yet allow for publication of results without unreasonable delay. When
deciding on dissemination, the beneficiaries must also consider the other beneficiaries’ legitimate
interests. The beneficiary that intends to disseminate R&D results, must give the other beneficiaries,
unless otherwise agreed, at least 45 days in advance notice, together with sufficient information on the
dissemination. Any other beneficiary may object to dissemination, unless otherwise agreed, within 30
days of receiving notification, if it can show that it would suffer significant harm in relation to
background data or results (e.g., disseminating the results would lead to disclosure of valuable
background data held by another beneficiary as a trade secret or would make protecting another
beneficiary’s results more difficult). Appropriate steps could include: omitting certain data or postponing
dissemination until the results are protected). In this case, the results may not be disseminated, unless
appropriate steps are taken to safeguard the interests at stake.
7.4.4 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Submit Reports to the [EC/Agency]

The beneficiary must submit to the Commissions/Agency the technical and financial reports including
the request for payment and must be drawn up using the forms and templates provided in the electronic
exchange system.
Reporting period is from 1 month to [X] months. Requests for interim payments is not applicable.
Request for payment of the balance in final report, the beneficiary must submit within 60 days following
the end of the reporting period. This report must include explanations justifying the differences between
work expected to be carried out in accordance with Annex 1 and that actually carried out. The final
report must include the following:
1. A ‘final technical report’ containing an overview of the results. A summary for publication by the
Agency and the answers to the ‘questionnaire’ are not applicable.
2. A ‘final financial report’ containing a ‘financial statement’ which includes the request for
payment of the balance. The financial statement must declare the lump sum shares indicated in
Annex 2 (if any), for the work packages that were completed. If agreed by the Agency, the
beneficiary may exceptionally also declare work packages that were not completed. Lump sum
shares which are not declared in the financial statement will not be taken into account by the
Commissions/Agency.
The beneficiary must certify that:

a. The information provided is full, reliable and true;
b. The work packages have been completed and that the action in general has been properly
implemented;
c. The proper implementation can be substantiated by adequate records and supporting
documentation that will be produced upon request or in the context of checks, reviews, audits
and investigations.
7.4.5 Obligations of the Beneficiaries Related to the Information Security
Results with a security recommendation

If it is applicable to the GA, the beneficiaries must comply with the ‘security recommendation(s)’ of the
GA. For security recommendations restricting disclosure or dissemination, the beneficiaries must, before
disclosure or dissemination to a third party including linked third parties such as affiliated entities,
inform the coordinator, which must request written approval from the [Commission][Agency]. In case of
changes to the security context, the beneficiaries must inform the coordinator, which must immediately
inform the [Commission][Agency] and, if necessary, request for Annex 1 to be amended.
EU Classified information
If it is applicable to the GA the beneficiaries must comply with the security classification set out in Annex
1 (‘security aspect letter (SAL)’ and ‘security classification guide (SCG)’ of the GA. Information that is
classified must be treated in accordance with the security aspect letter (SAL) and Commission Decision
2015/444/EC, Euratom of 13 March 2015 on the security rules for protecting EU classified information,
and SCG of the GA, until it is declassified. Action tasks involving classified information may not be
subcontracted without prior explicit written approval from the [Commission][Agency]. In case of
changes to the security context, the beneficiaries must inform the coordinator, which must immediately
inform the [Commission][Agency] and, if necessary, request for Annex 1 to be amended.
Security activities involving dual-use goods or dangerous materials and substances
If it is applicable to the GA, activities involving dual-use goods or dangerous materials and substances
must, before carry out activities, comply with applicable EU, national and international law and
regulation (EC, No. 428/2009). Before the beginning of the activity, the coordinator must submit to the
[Commission][Agency] a copy of any export or transfer licenses required under EU, national or
international law.
Moreover, a coordinator must, before the start of the activity for which it is needed, submit a copy of
any export or transfer license. The coordinator must be aware that national/third country security
requirements (technology transfer restrictions, etc.) may affect the project implementation and even
put it at risk. It is his responsibility to avoid this and to keep your project free of such restrictions,
either by adapting your project or by obtaining all necessary authorizations to be able to comply with
your obligations under the GA. Any potential security issues should immediately be notified to the
Commission/Agency.
The beneficiaries’ general security obligations to maintain confidentiality
The parties must keep confidential any data, documents or other material, in any form, that is identified
as confidential until the time a confidential information is disclosed. As a minimum security obligation
the beneficiaries may extend the period and agree to additional confidentiality-related obligations
among themselves (e.g., for access rights or third parties involved in the action). A beneficiary may ask
the Commission/Agency to extend the period. This request must explain why and clearly identify the
confidential information.
The parties may use confidential information to implement the GA. The Agency may disclose
confidential information also to its staff, other EU institutions and bodies. The confidentiality obligations
no longer apply if:
a. The disclosing party agrees to release the other party;

b. The information was already known by the recipient or is given to him without obligation of
confidentiality by a third party that was not bound by any obligation of confidentiality;
c. The recipient proves that the information was developed without the use of confidential
information;
d. The information becomes generally and publicly available, without breaching any confidentiality
obligation, or
e. The disclosure of the information is required by EU or national law.
During implementation of the action and for 4 (four) years after the starting time of the GA action, the
parties must keep confidential any data, documents or other material, in any form, that is identified as
confidential until the time it is disclosed. If a beneficiary request, the [Commission][Agency] may agree
to keep such information confidential for an additional period beyond the initial four years.
If information has been identified as confidential only orally, it will be considered to be confidential only
if this is confirmed in writing within 15 days of the oral disclosure. Unless otherwise agreed between the
parties, they may use confidential information only to implement the GA.
The beneficiaries should inform each other and the Commission/Agency, about any laws that require
disclosing confidential information and to work together to minimize any negative effects. The
beneficiaries may disclose confidential information to their personnel or third parties involved in the
action only if they:
a. need to know to implement the GA, and
b. are bound by an obligation of confidentiality.
This does not change the security obligations regarding results protection and personal data protection,
which still apply.
The [Commission][Agency] may disclose confidential information to its staff, other EU institutions and
bodies. It may disclose confidential information to third parties, if:
a. this is necessary to implement the GA or safeguard the EU’s financial interests, and
b. the recipients of the information are bound by an obligation of confidentiality.
Under the conditions set out in the Rules for Participation Regulation (No 1290/2013) the EU
Commission must moreover make available information on the results to other EU institutions, bodies,
offices or agencies as well as Member States or associated countries.
Stricter confidentiality obligations must be applied for EU-classified information or results that are
subject to limited disclosure/dissemination in Annex 1 of the GA. The Commission/Agency will exchange
confidential information with the European Court of Auditors (ECA), the European Anti-Fraud Office
(OLAF) and other Agencies and the GA funding bodies, to check double funding, pursue fraud and avoid
plagiarism. This is part of safeguarding the EU financial interests.
7.4.6 Obligations of the Beneficiaries Related to Ethics and Research Integrity
The beneficiaries have an obligation to comply with:

a. ethical principles, including the highest standards of research integrity, and
b. applicable international, EU and national law on fundamental human rights.

Main ethical principles that the beneficiaries are obliged to pursue, are as follows:
1. Respecting human dignity and integrity;
2. Ensuring honesty and transparency towards research subjects and notably getting free and
informed consent, as well as assent whenever relevant;
3. Protecting vulnerable persons;
4. Ensuring privacy and confidentiality;
5. Promoting justice and inclusiveness;
6. Minimising harm and maximising benefit;
7. Sharing the benefits with disadvantaged populations, especially if the research is being carried
out in developing countries;
8. Maximising animal welfare, in particular by ensuring replacement, reduction and refinement
(‘3Rs’) in animal research;
9. Respecting and protecting the environment and future generations.
Funding will not be granted for activities carried out outside the EU, if they are prohibited in all Member
States or for activities which destroy human embryos, for example, for obtaining stem cells.
The beneficiaries under the GA must ensure that the activities under the action have an exclusive focus
on civil applications. This does not mean that the research results cannot peripherally be useful in a
military context. Research related to dual-use products or technologies, usually used for civilian
purposes, but with possible military applications, is not prohibited. However, activities that focus on
military applications will NOT be funded. The beneficiaries must ensure that the activities under the
action do not:
a. Aim at human cloning for reproductive purposes;
b. Intend to modify the genetic heritage of human beings, which could make such changes
heritable, with the exception of research relating to cancer treatment of the gonads, which may
be financed, or
c. Intend to create human embryos solely for the purpose of research or for the purpose of stem
cell procurement, including by means of somatic cell nuclear transfer.
Activities involving human embryos or human embryonic stem cells may be carried out, only if they are
set out in Annex 1 or the coordinator has obtained explicit approval, in writing, from the [Commission]
[Agency]
Activities raising ethical issues must comply with the ethics requirements set out as deliverables (Annex
1).
Before the beginning of an activity raising an ethical issue, each beneficiary must have obtained:
a. any ethics committee opinion required under national law, and
b. any notification or authorisation for activities raising ethical issues required under national
and/or European law needed for implementing the action tasks in question.
Activities that involve human embryos (hE) or human embryonic stem cells (hESC) can only be funded,
under the GA project, if:
a. they comply with the Statement of the European Commission related to research activities,
(Please see: Annex 6) in particular, do NOT result in the destruction of human embryos and they
are set out in Annex 1 or
b. the coordinator has obtained explicit approval by the Commission/Agency.

These activities raise ethics issues and must comply with the rules above, and in particular the ethics
requirements set out in Annex 1. To be complied with the GA the OA policy on ethics issues in R&D
institution must include all of the following:
1. Ethics self-assessment by the applicants, in their proposal;
2. Two-stage ethics review, with an ethics screening and, if necessary, an ethics assessment by the
Commission/Agency, during the selection procedure;
3. If necessary, ethics checks, reviews and audits during the implementation of the action and up
to 2 (two) years afterwards.
Activities carried out in the Republic of Serbia must comply with the national laws AND be allowed in at
least one EU Member State. The beneficiaries must confirm in the ethics self-assessment section of their
proposal that this condition is met.
The Commission/Agency may carry out ethics checks, reviews or audits, to ensure that the
beneficiaries have properly implemented the ethics requirements and obtained the
opinions/notifications/ authorizations. If the ethics review, carried out by the Commission/Agency
during the selection procedure identifies an ethics issue (e.g., involvement of patients, volunteers,
children or vulnerable populations; use of human (embryonic) stem cells; implication of developing
countries; collecting and processing of personal data; use of animals; risk of environmental impact; risk
of malevolent use or misuse of research results) the Commission/Agency will define ethics
requirements and include them as deliverables (e.g., to submit to the Commission/Agency a report on
certain ethics issues during the course of the action) in the GA (Annex 1). Other ethics requirements may
have been required already before GA signature, such as confirmation that the research data of this
study will not be transferred outside the EU.
In addition, the beneficiary must obtain, before the start of the activity for which it is needed, all the
necessary ethics opinions, notifications and authorizations (e.g., to ethics committees, data protection
authorities, dual-use authorities, etc.). When preparing the applications for such opinions/notifications/
authorizations, beneficiaries should request the assistance of ethics experts, research ethics
departments/committees and of their organization’s data protection officer (DPO).
The documents no longer need to be submitted before the start of the action, but the beneficiary must
keep them on file and provide them on request to the Commission/Agency (e.g., in case of ethics
reviews, checks or audits). The beneficiary must be able to show that the
opinions/authorizations/notifications cover the tasks to be undertaken in the context of the action. If
the documents are not in English, the beneficiary may be asked to provide an English summary. This
summary should show that the opinions/authorizations/notifications cover the action activities and
should include conclusions, recommendations and, if applicable, conditions imposed (e.g., the use of
experimental animals is authorized but limited to a certain number). Translation costs may,
exceptionally, be charged to the action at the rate of non-official translations.
In addition, the beneficiaries must respect the fundamental principle of research integrity, (as set out in
the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity of ALLEA). This implies notably compliance with the
following fundamental research integrity principles:
a. Reliability in ensuring the quality of research reflected in the design, the methodology, the
analysis and the use of resources;
b. Honesty in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting and communicating research in a
transparent, fair and unbiased way;

c. Respect for colleagues, research participants, society, ecosystems, cultural heritage and the
environment;
d. Accountability for the research from idea to publication, for its management and organization,
for training, supervision and mentoring, and for its wider impacts, and
e. Means that beneficiaries must ensure that persons carrying out research tasks follow the good
research practices and refrain from the research integrity violations described in the Code.
The Code constitutes a general reference framework and takes into account the legitimate interests of
the beneficiaries (i.e., regarding IPRs and data sharing). This does not change the other obligations
under this GA or obligations under applicable international, EU or national law, all of which still apply.
In addition, beneficiaries should rely on local, national or discipline-specific guidelines, if such
documents exist and are not contrary to the Code.
7.4.7 Obligations of the Beneficiaries Related to Processing of Personal Data
Processing of personal data according to EU General Data Protection Regulative (GDPR) and Serbian
Data Protection Act (DPA), means any activity (operation) or set of activities which is performed on
personal data, either manually, semiautomatic or by automatic means, including: collection, recording,
organisation and storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval and consultation, use, disclosure by
transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, blocking,
deleting or destruction (e.g., processing of personal data is creating a mailing list or a list of
participants; managing a database; accounting records on personnel costs; time-sheets; project
planning with names).
Under these laws, personal data must be processed according to certain principles and conditions to
ensure data quality and confidentiality, integrity, availability and resilience to the incidents. The
beneficiaries must give their staff access to the personal data only on a need-to-know basis, for carrying
out their functions under the GA, preferably data should be pseudonymised. This means, also, that the
beneficiaries must put in place adequate access controls and data retention policies or procedures for
the various categories of data they hold. The beneficiaries must inform their staff about whose personal
data are collected and processed by the Commission/Agency, the disclosure of their data to the
Commission/Agency by providing them with the relevant Funding & Tenders Portal privacy statements.
Personal data means any information, private or professional, which relates to an identified or
identifiable natural person. For examples personal data are: name, address, identification number, e-
mail, CV, bank account number, phone number, medical records. There are various potential identifiers,
including full name, pseudonyms, occupation, address or any combination of these. Individuals are
considered NOT ‘identifiable’, if their personal data are anonymised or identifying them requires
excessive effort.
Certain categories of data are more ‘sensitive’ than others (e.g., racial or ethnic origin, political opinions,
religious or philosophical beliefs, trade-union or political membership, health, sexual orientation, etc.),
and these may only be processed according to specific rules. To inform explicitly staff of R&D institution
about all processing activities in an accessible form is the basic rule, such as:
1. Before encoding personal data of their staff in the Participant Register or into a proposal, the
beneficiaries must provide the staff concerned with the Privacy statement.
2. If in an ex-post audit, the Commission requests the names, CVs, time-sheets and salaries of the

beneficiary’s staff, to check the eligibility of personnel costs, the beneficiary must inform the staff
concerned and provide them with the Privacy statement.
Processing of personal data is also part of the ethics obligations (Please see: Section 7.4.6). Both
provisions must be complied with.
Processing of personal data by [the Agency and the Commission]
The Commission/Agency will process personal data in compliance with Regulation 2018/1725 (GDPR)
and as set out in its Funding & Tenders Portal privacy statements. Any personal data under the GA will
be processed by the [Agency or the Commission] under Regulation No 45/2001 and according to the
‘notifications of the processing operations’ to the Data Protection Officer (DPO) of the [Agency or the
Commission], publicly accessible in the Register of the DPO.
Such data will be processed by the data controller of the [Agency or Commission] for the purposes of
implementing, managing and monitoring the GA or protecting the financial interests of the EU or
Euratom, including checks, reviews, audits and investigations.
The persons whose personal data are processed have the right to access and correct their own personal
data. For this purpose, they must send any queries about the processing of their personal data to the
data controller, via the contact point indicated in the privacy statement(s) (e.g., DPO) that are published
on the [Agency / Commission] websites. They also have the right to have recourse at any time to the
European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).
Personal data will be processed only for the purpose of implementing, managing and monitoring the GA
or protecting EU/Euratom financial interests, including controls on eligibility of costs, proper
implementation of the action and compliance with other obligations.
The level of detail of the data requested will be determined case-by-case and will be limited to what is
necessary for implementing, managing, monitoring and controlling the GA or protecting the EU financial
interests. When the Commission/Agency collects and processes personal data under the GA, national
data protection law is NOT applicable and will NOT be accepted as a pretext for not complying with
obligations under the GA. Disclosure of the beneficiaries’ staff data under the GA (e.g. data requested by
the Commission/Agency project officer or auditors) is automatically justified (under EC Regulation
45/2001).
The processing of personal data under the GA, manual or electronic, will be first notified to the
Commission/Agency, by Data Protection Officer (DPO) of the data controller. The notifications are
available via the Register of the DPO and describe the processing operations, legal basis, security
safeguards, retention period, possible data transfer, etc.
In addition, for processing that implies specific risks to the rights and freedoms of the data subjects ( e.g.
processing of data relating to health or automatic processing including profiling), the European Data
Protection Supervisor (EDPS) will be consulted. (Need for DPA between EC/Agent and the beneficiaries?)
Processing of personal data by the beneficiaries

The beneficiaries must process personal data under the GA in compliance with applicable EU General
Data Protection Regulation - GDPR and national on Data Protection Act - DPA, including authorizations
or Data Privacy Statement requirements and obtaining the data subjects consents, if applicable.
The beneficiaries may grant their personnel data access only to data that is strictly necessary for
implementing, managing and monitoring the GA. The beneficiaries must inform the personnel whose
personal data are collected and processed by the [Agency][Commission]. For this purpose, they must
provide them information with the Data Privacy Statement(s), before transmitting their data to the
[Agency] [ Commission].
The beneficiaries in consortium must process personal data under the GA in accordance with EU GDPR
and, in particular, the corresponding national DPA.
Right of data subject to access and correct personal data
Persons whose data is being processed by consents can contact the data controller or the DPO, via the
contact information in the Data Privacy Statement, to:
a. correct errors in the data, block access or delete their data, or
b. complain about the data collection and use, and claim compensation for any damage.
Right of data subject to complaint to the EDPS
Data subjects whose data is being processed by the Commission/Agency can lodge a complaint with the
EDPS, as the independent supervisory authority for data processing by EU institutions. The beneficiaries
should first contact the data controller, via the contact information in the Data Privacy Statement,
usually DPO, since she/he has mandatory role for data protection and might be able to solve the
problem quickly.
7.4.8 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Avoid a Conflict of Interests
The beneficiaries must take all measures to prevent any situation where the impartial and objective
implementation of the action is compromised for reasons involving economic interest, political or
national affinity, family or emotional ties or any other shared interest (‘conflict of interests’). If there is a
risk of a conflict of interests, the coordinator must inform the Commission/Agency (via the Funding &
Tenders Portal), so that steps can be taken to resolve or avoid it. This may result in the
Commission/Agency putting in place certain measures.
They must formally notify to the [Commission][Agency] without delay any situation constituting or
likely to lead to a conflict of interests and immediately take all the necessary steps to rectify this
situation. The [Commission][Agency] may verify that the measures taken are appropriate and may
require additional measures to be taken by a specified deadline. The beneficiaries must ensure that the
action is implemented impartially and objectively, as described in the GA. They must do their best to
avoid conflicts of interest. For example, a conflict of interests exists, if shared interests:
 influenced the contract’s/subcontract’s selection/award procedure (e.g., a beneficiary
subcontracts work to another legal entity at above the market prices because it is a shareholder or
has economic interests in this other legal entity);
• influenced the contract’s/subcontract’s price and this does not correspond to the market price

(e.g., a university subcontracts work to a consultancy firm owned by a professor carrying out part
of the work for the project in which the university participates), or
• affected the action’s performance, as measured by the appropriate quality standards (e.g., a
university gives a preferential subcontract to its spin-off company, but the contract is not based on
the best value for money principle due to the price is higher than the general market price for the
same type of service).
The type of interests may be:

1. Economic interests (e.g., unjustified and preferential contracts or subcontracts with connected
companies (not based on best value for money, technical merit, etc.);
2. Political or national affinity (e.g., beneficiaries or third parties are chosen, or research-related
decisions are adopted, based on political considerations, connections or national affinity or the
choice of an action’s demonstration site is based on national affinities, not on the site’s merits);
3. Family or emotional ties (e.g., contracts or subcontracts made with family members for their
benefit), for example a husband works for a beneficiary who subcontracts work to an SME
owned by his wife, and
4. Other shared interests, such as:
a. If a beneficiary or third party participates in the action not because of its technical capacity and
objective merits, but because it has a close relationship with someone else working for the action,
and this affects the action’s implementation;
b. If decisions made in the context of the action are taken not according to objective and impartial
criteria, but because of these shared interests;
c. If entities with close ties create a professional relationship with the intention of being part of the
action in order to satisfy other interests, and as a result, the quality of the implementation is (or is
likely to be) compromised.
8. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BENEFICIARIES

8.1 Roles and Responsibilities of the Beneficiaries Towards the [Commission]
[Agency]
The beneficiaries have full responsibility for implementing the action and complying with the GA
requirements and all legal obligations under applicable EU, international and national law. The
beneficiaries are jointly and severally liable for the technical implementation of the action as described
in Annex 1. If a beneficiary fail to implement its part of the action, the other beneficiaries become
responsible for implementing this part, without being entitled to any additional EU funding for doing so,
unless the Agency expressly relieves them of this obligation. The financial responsibility of each
beneficiary is given in Annex 5 of the OAP.
The beneficiaries are themselves responsible for:

1. Monitoring that the actions are implemented properly;
2. Informing the [Commission][Agency] immediately of any events or circumstances likely to affect
significantly or delay the implementation of the action;
3. Timely submitting the deliverables and reports to the [Commission][Agency];
4. Submitting to the [Commission][Agency] in good time any documents or information required by
it and may not delegate or subcontract these tasks to any third party, including linked third
parties.
5. Implementing the action and complying with the GA, meaning that:

a. Each beneficiary must ensure that it complies with its obligations under the GA;
b. Each beneficiary must ensure swift and proper implementation of the action (i.e., that there
are no delays which can be attributed to it);
c. Each beneficiary is responsible, towards the [Commission][Agency], for the tasks performed by
its subcontractors and linked third parties;
d. The [Commission][Agency] is NOT responsible for the implementation of the action and has
NO responsibility for the way in which the action is conducted or any adverse consequences.
The beneficiaries are jointly and severally liable for the technical implementation of the action:
1. This means that the beneficiaries, including any new beneficiary introduced through an
amendment, accept that they are together responsible for fully implementing the whole action,
even if one of them withdraws.
2. If one of them withdraws, the remaining members of the consortium must carry out the action
as set out in the GA, including the part that the defaulting beneficiary was supposed to carry
out, unless the [Commission][Agency] expressly agrees otherwise exceptionally only for specific
reasons (For example: Legal entities A, B and C are members of a consortium that signed a GA
with the Commission in order to carry out a research action. One year later, beneficiary C goes
bankrupt. Beneficiaries A and B, or even only A or B, must carry out the entire action as
described in Annex 1). They will have to do this without any additional funding, although, in case
of beneficiary termination, the Guarantee Fund may intervene for the defaulting beneficiary
under the GA.
3. The remaining beneficiaries may later take legal action against the defaulting beneficiary, in
order to obtain compensation. Moreover, the GA will have to be amended, in order to
redistribute the tasks, terminate the beneficiary’s participation, and/or add a new beneficiary.
4. In case of recovery, each beneficiary’s financial responsibility is in principle limited to its own
debt and undue amounts paid for costs declared by its linked third parties. It is only for the 5%
contribution to the Guarantee Fund that financial responsibility is shared.
5. If a third party generates results, the beneficiary concerned must obtain all necessary rights
(transfer, licenses or other) from the third party, in order to be able to respect its obligations as
if those results were generated by the beneficiary itself. If obtaining the rights is impossible, the
beneficiary must refrain from using the third party to generate the results.
The beneficiaries’ liabilities for eligible and ineligible costs (Please see Annex 5).
8.2 The Beneficiaries’ Internal Division of Roles and Responsibilities
The internal roles and responsibilities of the beneficiaries are divided as follows:
a. Each beneficiary must:
(i) Keep information stored in the Participant Portal Beneficiary Register, via the electronic
exchange system, up to date;
(ii) Inform the coordinator immediately of any events or circumstances likely to affect
significantly or delay the implementation of the action;
(iii) Submit to the coordinator in good time:
- individual financial statements for itself [and its linked third parties] and, if required,
certificates on the financial statements;
- the data needed to draw up the technical reports;
- ethics committee opinions and notifications or authorisations for activities raising

ethical issues;
- any other documents or information required by the [Agency or the] Commission under
the GA, unless the Agreement requires the beneficiary to submit this information
directly to the [Agency or Commission].
b. The coordinator must:
(i) Monitor that the action is implemented properly;
(ii) Act as the intermediary for all communications between the beneficiaries and the
[Commission][Agency], in particular, providing the [Commission][Agency] with the
information regarding to payment and payment arrangement, unless the Agreement
specifies otherwise;
(iii) Request and review any documents or information required by the [Commission][Agency]
and verify their completeness and correctness before passing them on to the [Commission]
[Agency];
(iv) Submit the deliverables and reports to the [Commission][Agency];
(v) Ensure that all payments are made to the other beneficiaries without unjustified delay
according to agreed payment arrangement;
(vi) Inform the [Commission][Agency] of the amounts paid to each beneficiary, when required
recovery of undue amounts or administrative and financial payments under the GA or
requested by the [Commission][Agency].
The coordinator may not delegate or subcontract the above-mentioned tasks to any other beneficiary or
third party, including linked third parties. However, when the coordinator is a secondary or higher
education establishment or public body and there is an ‘authorization to administer’ given to a third
party created, controlled or affiliated to the coordinator, then as an exception, the coordinator
delegates the tasks to [insert name of third party with an authorization to administer]. The coordinator
retains sole responsibility for the EU contribution and for compliance with the obligations under the GA,
The coordinator must submit the ‘deliverables’ identified in Annex 1, in accordance with the timing and
conditions set out in it. ‘Deliverables’ are additional outputs (e.g. information, special report, a technical
diagram brochure, list, a software milestone or other building block of the action) that must be produced
at a given moment during the action (normally not at the same time as the periodic/final reports.
‘Milestones’ are control points in the action that help to chart progress. They may correspond to the
completion of a key deliverable, allowing the next phase of the work to begin or be needed at
intermediary points. The deliverables that must be produced are listed in Annex 1 of the GA. For
example, for actions under Part III, ‘Secure, clean and efficient energy’ involving energy efficiency
measures in buildings, the beneficiaries must deliver a ‘handover certificate’ at the same time as their
periodic reports. This certificate must prove the actual specifications of the buildings constructed or
refurbished, their surface area and address. It must be signed by a member of the consortium
The project coordinator must submit deliverables at least 30 days before the expected date of
publication of the joint call:
 information on the call and its content at the end of the selection,
 information on each selected project (including data on each participant and abstracts of the
project proposal, in a format specified by the [Commission][Agency]), for publication and
evaluation purposes;
 by default, (two pre-financing payments) in month 36 a ‘progress report’ containing:
o an explanation of the work carried out by the beneficiaries,
o an overview of the progress towards the objectives of the action, including milestones and

other deliverables identified in Annex 1.

o a summary for publication by the [Commission][Agency]]
 at the end of the action:
o information on each implemented project (including data on each participant and
overview of the results, in a format specified by the [Commission][Agency]), for publication
and evaluation purposes, and
o any other deliverables identified in Annex 1, in accordance with the timing and conditions
set out in it.
This report must include explanations justifying the differences between work expected to be carried
out in accordance with Annex 1 and that actually carried out. The coordinator must, once the trans-
national projects have been selected, submit to the Commission/Agency a list of all the projects with
certain information, for example, data on each participant and abstracts of the proposals. This
information must be updated by the coordinator at the end of the action, by submitting a list of all
implemented projects, together with for example, data on each participant and an overview of the
results.
The information must be uploaded directly in the Funding & Tenders Portal. The coordinator must
submit to the Commission/Agency, on a yearly basis, information on the cumulative expenditure
incurred by the consortium. In practice, this mandatory declaration is handled as deliverable and must
be uploaded directly in the Funding & Tenders Portal. It does NOT need to be set out in Annex 1.
For deliverables that are not in writing (e.g., cell line or prototype), the beneficiaries must submit a
short-written description. The coordinator must upload them directly in the Funding & Tenders Portal.
If the deliverables contain EU classified information, the coordinator must first contact the
Commission/Agency to discuss how to submit them and get approval;
The coordinator must submit to the [Commission][Agency] the reports, according to form and means of
communication between the parties, under the GA.
8.3 Internal Arrangements of Responsibilities Among Beneficiaries in Consortium
If the GA provides for this option, the beneficiaries must have internal arrangements regarding their
operation and coordination to ensure that the action is implemented properly. These internal
arrangements must be set out in a written ‘consortium agreement’ between the beneficiaries, which
may cover:
a. internal organisation of the consortium;
b. management of access to the electronic exchange system;
c. distribution of EU funding;
d. additional rules on rights and obligations related to background and results (including whether
access rights remain or not, if a beneficiary is in breach of its obligations);
e. settlement of internal disputes;
f. liability, indemnification and confidentiality arrangements between the beneficiaries;
g. protection of personal data.
The consortium agreement must not contain any provision contrary to the GA. It should complement the
GA and must NOT contain any provision contrary to it. In principle, it should be negotiated and

concluded before the signature of the GA (i.e., each beneficiary should sign the consortium agreement
before acceding to the GA). Otherwise, there is usually a serious risk that prolonged disagreement
jeopardizes the action. Of course, the consortium agreement does not have to remain the same during
the lifetime of the action, it can be modified by the consortium at any moment.
The consortium agreement must be in writing. It may be a simple written agreement or take some other
form (e.g., a notarial deed or part of the statutes of a separate legal entity or joint venture). The
beneficiaries should carefully consider the advantages and disadvantages of the different legal forms,
and choose the one that best fits the consortium’s specific needs.
Responsibilities among complementary and collaborative beneficiaries
If the GA provides for this option, the beneficiaries must conclude a written ‘collaboration agreement’
with the complementary beneficiaries to coordinate the work under the GA and the complementary
grant agreement(s), covering for instance:
a. efficient decision-making processes and
b. settlement of disputes.
The collaboration agreement must not contain any provision contrary to the GA. The beneficiaries and
complementary beneficiaries must create and participate in common boards and advisory structures to
decide on collaboration and synchronization of activities, including on management of outcomes,
common approaches towards standardization, SME involvement, links with regulatory and policy
activities, and commonly shared dissemination and awareness raising activities. The beneficiaries must
give access to their results to the complementary beneficiaries, for the purposes of the complementary
grant agreement(s). The beneficiaries must share the technical reports and the confidentiality
obligations to be applied.
Responsibilities among participants of a joint action or coordination agreement
If the GA provides for this option, the beneficiaries in joint actions (joint call with a third country or an
international organization) must conclude a ‘coordination agreement’ with the partners of the third
country or international organization action that must not contain any provision contrary to the GA. The
agreement should cover for instance:
a. the internal organization of the beneficiaries in both actions, including the decision-making
procedures;
b. rules on intellectual property rights (for example, regarding access, protection, dissemination, use
and reuse rights);
c. the settlement of internal disputes;
d. liability, indemnification and confidentiality arrangements between the beneficiaries in both
actions;
e. personal data protection compliance with GDPR/DPA.
The coordination agreement should in principle be negotiated and concluded before any work is begun.
The work Program/call may require that proposals include a draft coordination agreement (in Annex 1)
If the GA provides for this option, the beneficiaries must conclude a collaboration agreement to ensure
a smooth and successful project implementation. The option will be inserted ONLY for complementary
actions. A ‘collaboration agreement’ is an agreement between the consortium and the beneficiaries of

another complementary GA, to coordinate their work under the different GAs. It is purely internal and
the EU/Euratom is not party and has NO responsibility for them, nor for any adverse consequences.
The beneficiaries of complementary grants must, through the collaboration agreement, create and
participate in common boards and advisory structures, to decide on collaboration and synchronisation
of the activities. These boards and advisory structures complement the governance of the project; they
do not replace the consortium and other project governance mechanisms (if any).
8. CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE GA

If a beneficiary breach any of its obligations under the GA and this OAP, the grant may be reduced as a
basic measure. Such breaches may also lead to any of the other measures in line with the beneficiaries’
condition to get the GA approved.
Conditions for reducing the grant amount
Conditions for reducing the grant amount, after the [Commission][Agency] terminate of the participation
of a beneficiary, at the payment of the balance or afterwards, may be, if:
a. a beneficiary or a natural person who has the power to represent or take decisions on its behalf,
has committed:
(i) substantial errors, irregularities or fraud or
(ii) serious breach of obligations under the GA or during the award procedure, including
improper implementation of the action, submission of false information, failure to provide
required information, breach of ethical principles, or
b. a beneficiary or a natural person who has the power to represent or take decision on its behalf has
committed, in other EU or Euratom grants awarded to it under similar conditions, systemic or
recurrent errors, irregularities, fraud or serious breach of obligations that have a material impact
on this grant (extension of findings from other grants to this grant).
Grounds for grant reduction (EU):
Grant reduction can take place at beneficiary termination, the payment of the balance or after the
payment of the balance. If the Commission/Agency finds, in particular following a check, audit, extension
of audit findings, review or EU anti-fraud office (OLAF) investigation, substantial errors, irregularities or
fraud or breach of obligations under the GA or during the award procedure (e.g., the action has not
been properly implemented), it may reduce the grant in proportion to the seriousness of the errors,
irregularities or fraud or breach of obligations as follows:
1. Substantial errors, irregularities or fraud, or serious breach of obligations (in this grant) may cover:
 all kinds of non-compliance with GA obligations, including obligations during the award
procedure (e.g., false declarations in the proposal form, in order to obtain EU funding), or
 improper implementation of the action/non-compliance with Annex 1 of the GA (i.e., if the work
performed does not correspond to the activities described in Annex 1), as the most frequent
breach in practice, including normal examination on the basis of the periodic and final technical
reports and a project review, if needed.
2. Substantial errors, irregularities or fraud or serious breach of obligations found in other grants, if:
 the other grants were awarded under similar conditions and the substantial errors, irregularities
or fraud (e.g., in case of fraud the reduction may be up to a 100%) or serious breach of obligations are

systemic or recurrent and have a material impact on this grant.
Calculation procedure of the amount of eligible and illegible costs to be reduced is explained in ANNEX 5
of the OAP.
9. AUTHORIZATION AND VALIDATION RIGHTS

No. User or group of users of the Institute Authorized rights
1 Top manager/Coordinator/Beneficiaries Reading Changing Adopting Prohibiting
2 DPO/CIO/CISO/Researchers Reading Changing Adopting Prohibiting
3 Other employees of the INSTITUTE Reading Changing Adopting Prohibiting
Belgrade, ……….. 2023. Top Manager/Coordinator
____________________________________

ANNEX 1.
INSTRUCTION FOR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION TO BE IMPLEMENTED
- ‘TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION’-
The grant is awarded for the action (project) entitled [insert title of the action] — [insert acronym] (‘action’), as described in
Annex 1.
[OPTION for complementary grants if foreseen in the work program: The grant is a ‘complementary grant’ to [the grant
agreement(s) under the call(s) for proposals [call identifier(s): H2020 — theme —]] [the following complementary grant
agreement(s) No(s):
- [insert number] [insert acronym]

- [insert number] [insert acronym]].]
[OPTION for joint actions (joint call with a third country or an international organization): The action is a ‘jointly funded
action’ which must be coordinated with the ‘joint action’ called [insert the name of the third country or international
organization action], as described in Annex 1.]
RIA, IA and CSA actions grants of the General MGA fund1:

 for research and innovation actions (RIA): R&D aiming to establish new knowledge or explore the feasibility of a new
technology, product, process, service or solution (including basic and applied research, technology development and
integration, testing and validation on a small-scale prototype in a laboratory or simulated environment)
 for innovation actions (IA): innovation activities directly aiming at producing plans and arrangements or designs for
new, altered or improved products, processes or services (including prototyping, testing, demonstrating, piloting,
large-scale product validation and market replication)2
 for coordination and support actions (CSA): accompanying measures (such as standardisation, dissemination,
awareness-raising and communication, networking, coordination or support services, policy dialogues and mutual
learning exercises and studies)3.
RIA, IA and CSA actions are mono- or multi-beneficiary actions. The term action comes from the Financial Regulation No
966/2012 and means project. (Previous EU Research Framework Program used project.) For more information on RIA, IA and
CSA actions, see the Funding & Tenders Portal Online Manual and the H2020 grants fact sheets
1 More information on the types of action can be found on the General Annexes to the Work Program.
2 For the definition, see Article 2.1(6) of the Rules for Participation Regulation No 1290/2013: ‘innovation action’ means an
action primarily consisting of activities directly aiming at producing plans and arrangements or designs for new, altered or
improved products, processes or services. For this purpose they may include prototyping, testing, demonstrating, piloting, large-
scale product validation and market replication.
3 For the definition, see Article 2.1(7) of the Rules for Participation Regulation No 1290/2013: ‘coordination and support
action’ means an action consisting primarily of accompanying measures such as standardisation, dissemination, awareness-
raising, and communication, networking, coordination or support services, policy dialogues and mutual learning exercises and
studies, including design studies for new

ANNEX 2
INSTRUCTION TO DRAFT ESTIMATED BUDGET AND BUDGET TRANSFERS

The ‘estimated budget’ for the action (drafted in Annex 1) is set out in Annex 2 of the beneficiaries’ application for the GA. It
contains the estimated eligible costs and the forms of costs, broken down by beneficiary [(and linked third party)] and budget
category. It also shows the estimated costs of the beneficiaries not receiving EU funding
Budget transfers
The budget in Annex 2 is an estimation. The estimated budget breakdown indicated in Annex 2 may be adjusted, without an
amendment, by transfers of amounts between beneficiaries, budget categories and/or forms of costs set out in Annex 2, if the
action is implemented as described in Annex 1. However, the beneficiaries may not add costs relating to subcontracts not
provided for in Annex 1, unless such additional subcontracts are approved by an amendment. Moreover, lump sums set out in
Annex 2 can never be adjusted
Estimated budget
The estimated budget of the action is calculated on the basis of the estimated eligible costs submitted by the consortium and
is annexed to the GA (Annex 2). These estimated eligible costs are used to determine the ‘maximum grant amount’ of the
action.
Costs of beneficiaries not receiving EU funding and costs of international partners will be indicated in Annex 2, but will not be
included in the total eligible costs and will not count for the maximum amount of the grant.
Budget categories
The budget categories reflected in the table in Annex 2 may include (under the general MGA):
 Direct personnel costs:
• costs for employees (or equivalent),
• costs for natural persons working under a direct contract,
• costs of personnel seconded by a third party against payment,
• costs for SME owners without salary,
• costs for beneficiaries that are natural persons without salary.
 Personnel costs for providing trans-national access to research infrastructure;
 Direct costs of subcontracting;
 Direct costs of providing financial support to third parties (if option applies);
 Other direct costs:
• travel costs and related subsistence allowances,
• equipment costs,
• costs of other goods and services,
• capitalised and operating costs of large research infrastructure.
 Indirect costs;
 Specific cost categories (if option applies).
This budget category (specific cost categories) applies ONLY where specific activities are reimbursed by unit costs or lump sum
costs. For the General MGA, this is currently the case for ‘access costs for providing trans-national access to research
infrastructure’, ‘costs for energy efficiency measures in buildings’ and ‘costs for clinical studies’. The budget categories are
relevant for the estimated budget (in Annex 2), forms of costs, cost eligibility rules and cost declarations (i.e. financial
statements).
Costs for personnel, equipment, goods or services that are in-kind contributions by a third party (for free or against
payment) can in practice simply be added to the budget category they correspond to (i.e. personnel costs or other direct
costs), if they comply with the eligibility rules.
Budget flexibility
The budget is in principle flexible (with the exceptions set out below). Be however aware that the budget table will be used for
the calculation of grant reductions. Beneficiaries may transfer budget among themselves, between linked third parties or
between budget categories (without requesting an amendment) and, at the time of reporting, declare costs that are different
from the estimated budget. The maximum grant amount can however NOT be increased.

If the incurred eligible costs are lower than the estimated eligible costs, the difference can be allocated to another beneficiary
or another budget category. The amount reimbursed for the other beneficiary (by application of its reimbursement rate) or
for the other budget category (to which the budget transfer is intended) may thus be higher than planned.
Example: The estimated budget includes personnel costs of EUR 60 000 for beneficiary A and EUR 75 000 for beneficiary B.
However, at the end of the action, the actual personnel costs of beneficiary A are EUR 75 000 due to an increase in salaries
or to the need to employ additional personnel to carry out the tasks mentioned in Annex 1 while the actual personnel costs
of beneficiary B are EUR 60 000. This may be acceptable provided the additional costs of beneficiary A fulfil the eligibility
requirements and up to the maximum grant amount (at the level of the action).
If the GA foresees unit costs, transferring amounts declared as unit costs to other categories or other beneficiaries is possible
if the actual number of units used (or produced) by the beneficiary is less than the number estimated in Annex 2, the cost per
unit cannot be changed.
Example: Total estimated unit costs for beneficiary A: EUR 10 000 (100 units x 100 EUR/unit). Total actual unit costs used (or
produced) by beneficiary A: EUR 8 000 (80 units x 100 EUR/unit). Total possible transfer to another budget category: EUR 2
000
Moreover, a beneficiary can NOT transfer budget to a form of costs that it did not set out in its estimated budget (Annex 2),
except within the personnel costs category and to costs of internally invoiced goods and services.
Example (allowed transfer): A beneficiary budget all its direct personnel costs as ‘actual costs’ in the estimated budget
(column A (a) of Annex 2). However, at the end of the first reporting period, the beneficiary declares its direct personnel costs
as ‘unit costs determined according to its usual cost accounting practices’ (average personnel costs, in column A (b) of Annex
2). This is acceptable without an amendment of the GA.
Example (not allowed transfer): A beneficiary budget all its costs as ‘actual costs’ in the estimated budget. However, at the
end of the first reporting period, the beneficiary wants to declare part of the costs by using a specific unit cost allowed in the
call (e.g. unit cost for clinical studies). This is NOT possible without an amendment of the GA.
If the budget transfer is due to a significant change in Annex 1, an amendment to the GA is needed. A significant change is a
change that affects the technical work (‘action tasks’) of Annex 1. Best practice is that the coordinator contacts the
Commission/Agency to ask whether the transfer of budget reflects a significant change in Annex 1 which requires an
amendment.
If the GA provides for a lump sum, the lump sum set out in Annex 2 cannot be transferred to another category or to another
beneficiary. Furthermore, the amount of the lump sum can never be increased, decreased or split.
Example: EUR 30 000 lump sum foreseen for travel in Annex 2 (under ‘other direct costs’) cannot be turned into a EUR 15 000
lump sum for travel and EUR 15 000 for personnel costs.
New subcontracts: The transfer of budget intended to increase the eligible costs for ‘subcontracting’ is considered to reflect
a significant change of Annex 1 normally requires an amendment (unless the beneficiary uses the simplified approval
procedure without formal amendment).
Example (amendment): Beneficiary A subcontracts an action task during the action implementation, because it decided not to
recruit additional personnel as initially foreseen, but to use a subcontractor. It requests an ex-ante approval via an
amendment.
Example (simplified approval procedure): A beneficiary wants to subcontract a task that originally it was going to carry out by
itself. It wants to transfer EUR 100 000 from personnel costs to subcontracting. In order to make sure that this new
subcontracting is possible and its cost is eligible, this will require an amendment to the GA before the subcontracting takes
place. However, the beneficiary doesn’t request an amendment, but declares the change only with the next periodic technical
report (at its own risk). Since the Commission approves the report, the costs of the additional subcontract are eligible.
Beneficiaries that rely on the simplified approval procedure bear the full risk of non-approval and rejection by the
Commission/Agency.


ANNEX 3
THE TRUSTWORTHY REPOSITORY

1. Allow data discovery and identification (e.g., ensure that PIDs are included in the corresponding metadata).
2. Enable searching, citing, and retrieval of data (e.g., consistently assign PIDs to the data it holds, allowing the corresponding
data and metadata to be found, referred to, and retrieved, even if the location where the data are stored changes).
3. Provide support for data versioning (e.g., ensure that the version of the data stored in the repository is clearly specified and
documented via a permanent audit trail in order for the provenance to be traced; ensure that community standards or best
practices for data handling are followed, if these exist. Note that repositories that are specialized in a particular research
field may have community standards regarding the data and metadata are uploaded).
4. Enable finding data (e.g., ensure interoperability and reuse of data by others by providing the data and metadata in an
accessible language, based on a well-established form. Data and metadata should be described using standard
vocabularies and formats allowing computer systems to search for them, combine them in an automatic way, and
distinguish the metadata from the research data file(s)).
5. Enable referencing to related relevant information (e.g., ensure that in the metadata information it is possible to declare
links to other relevant or associated information by providing the PID and a description of the scientific relation. One
particular kind of information is details on the associated researcher, for which permanent research IDs exist (such as
ORCID, ISNI, or DAI).
6. Provide information that is publicly available and maintained, even for non-published, protected, retracted, or deleted
data (e.g., ensure that metadata are archived for the long term and that metadata always remain retrievable, even if the
corresponding research data are not or no longer available, for example due to privacy restriction, legal obligations, or
other protective measures; ensure that retracted data due to poor research practices or misconduct are still findable
through the metadata and preserved in order to allow examination of the research record).
7. Use metadata standards that are broadly accepted by the scientific community (e.g., ensure that the metadata maintained
by the repository are machine-retrievable and use standards that are broadly accepted by the scientific community; ensure
that community standards or best practices for data handling are followed if these exist. Note that repositories that are
specialized in a particular research field may have community standards regarding the data and metadata that are
uploaded).
8. Ensure that metadata are machine-retrievable (e.g., encourage that the information contained in the metadata are
structured in a way that allows machines to retrieve it, for example by providing a form with specific fields to be
completed).
9. Enable access to data under well-specified conditions (e.g., be clear about the terms under which the data can be reused.
Such (e.g., license) information is usually included in the metadata).
10. Ensure data authenticity and integrity (e.g., ensure that the metadata contain detailed information about the provenance
of data, including how they were generated, how they were processed, in which context they may be re-used, and how
reliable they are).
11. Enable retrieval of data (e.g., allow retrieval of data or at least metadata using an open and standardized protocol (not a
proprietary communication protocol)).
12. Provide information about licensing and permissions (in ideally machine-readable form) (e.g., allow license information to
be referred to in a structured way, so that the conditions of use are clear, preferably to humans as well as to machines.
Where possible, common or broadly accepted licensing systems should be used (such as Creative Commons) which can be
referred to by URL).
13. Ensure confidentiality and rights of data subjects and creators (e.g., provide a way for authentication and authorization of
human and machine-users, allowing to set user (or group) specific access rights to account for data with confidentiality
issues and other restrictions).
14. Ensure persistence of metadata and data (e.g., ensure the preservation and continued availability and access to the data
and metadata entrusted to it by its users).
15. Be transparent about mission, scope, preservation policies, and plans (including governance, financial sustainability,
retention period, and continuity plan:
• manage the preservation of data and metadata in a documented way. In particular, it should have a preservation
policy that details the mission and scope of the repository, governance aspects, financial sustainability, outsource
partners, and retention periods (the timeframe of preservation).
• have a publicly available contingency plan and ensure preservation of data and metadata beyond the lifetime of the
repository (for example by allowing easy extraction and transfer of data and metadata to another repository).

ANNEX 4
MODEL OF OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING AGREEMENT
 Instructions and footnotes in blue should be deleted.

 For options [in square brackets]: choose the applicable option. Options not chosen should be deleted.
 For fields in [grey in square brackets]: enter the appropriate data.
ADDENDUM
(To be filled out by the beneficiary/author and the publisher. This model is not mandatory but reflects the obligations for the
beneficiary under the H2020 grant agreements. It can be supplemented by further provisions agreed between the parties,
provided they are compatible with the Grant Agreement. The Commission/Agency takes no responsibility for the use of this
model.)
This ‘Addendum’ is between the following parties:
on the one part,
1. the publisher
[full official name (short name)], established in [official address in full], represented by [….],
and
on the other part,
1. ‘the corresponding author’:
[full name], [official address in full], represented by [….] and the following
other authors
2. [full name], [official address in full], represented by [….]
3. [full name], [official address in full], represented by [….]
[same for each author].
With this Addendum, the parties agree to complement and amend the attached Publication Agreement concerning the
publication [insert name of publication] in the Journal [insert name of journal] with the following open access clause:
Open access
The author(s) retain(s) the right to:
a) eposit a machine-readable electronic copy of the published version or the final manuscript (after peer review) in
an institutional, centralised and/or subject-based repository
b) provide open access (i.e. free-of-charge access to the electronic copy to anyone) through this repository:
(i) immediately, if the publication itself is published ‘open access’ (i.e. if an electronic version is also
available free of charge to the reader via the publisher) or
(ii) within [6][12 ]1 months after publication.
In case of conflicting provisions, this Addendum takes precedence over the Publication Agreement.
All other provisions of the Publishing Agreement remain unchanged. This Addendum enters
into force on the day of the last signature.
[OPTION if addendum signed after publication: It takes effect on [insert publication date].]
SIGNATURES
For the authors: For the publisher:
name date signature date signature stamp

name date signature
name date signature
Done in two originals, in English
History of changes
Version Publication date Change
1.0 20.03.2017  Initial version
1
Choose 12 months for publications in the social sciences and humanities and 6 months for publications in other domains.

ANNEX 5.
ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE COSTS
Costs are eligible if they comply with the general above conditions and the specific conditions set out below for each of the
following budget categories:
A. direct personnel costs;
B. direct costs of subcontracting;
C. other direct costs;
‘Direct costs’ are costs that are directly linked to the action implementation and can therefore be attributed to it directly. They
must not include any indirect costs (see Point E below).
indirect costs;
‘Indirect costs’ are costs that are not directly linked to the action implementation and therefore cannot be attributed directly
to it.
A. ‘ELIGIBLE COSTS’ MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:
1. For actual costs:
a. they must be actually incurred by the beneficiary;
b. they must be incurred in the period set out in Article 3, with the exception of costs relating to the submission of the
periodic report for the last reporting period and the final report (see Article 20);
c. they must be indicated in the estimated budget set out in Annex 2;
d. they must be incurred in connection with the action as described in Annex 1 and necessary for its implementation;
e. they must be identifiable and verifiable, in particular recorded in the beneficiary’s accounts in accordance with the
accounting standards applicable in the country where the beneficiary is established and with the beneficiary’s usual
cost accounting practices;
f. they must comply with the applicable national law on taxes, labour and social security, and
g. they must be reasonable, justified and must comply with the principle of sound financial management, in particular
regarding economy and efficiency;
2. For unit costs:
a. They must be calculated as follows:
 amounts per unit set out in Annex 2 or calculated by the beneficiary in accordance with its usual cost
accounting practices multiplied by the number of actual units;
b. The number of actual units must comply with the following conditions:
 the units must be actually used or produced in the period after starting the GA;
 the units must be necessary for implementing the action or produced by it, and
 the number of units must be identifiable and verifiable, in particular supported by records and
documentation.
3. For flat-rate costs:
 they must be calculated by applying the flat-rate set out in Annex 2, and
 the costs (actual, unit or lump sum costs) to which the flat-rate is applied must comply with the conditions for
eligibility.
4. For lump sum foreseen costs:
 the eligible amount is equal to the amount set out in Annex 2, and
 the corresponding tasks or parts of the action must have been properly implemented in accordance with Annex
2.
The GA project's budget covers only eligible costs for equipment exclusively used for the action. If beneficiary use the
equipment outside the GA project scope, only the portion used on the action may be charged and the amount of use must be
auditable.
B. ‘INELIGIBLE COSTS’ MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:

a. costs that do not comply with the conditions set out above, in particular costs incurred during suspension of the
action implementation;
b. costs declared under another EU or Euratom grant (including grants awarded by a Member State and financed by
the EU or Euratom budget and grants awarded by bodies other than the Agency for the purpose of implementing the
EU or Euratom budget), in particular, indirect costs if the beneficiary is already receiving an operating grant financed
by the EU or Euratom budget in the same period, unless it can demonstrate that the operating grant does not cover
any costs of the action.

c. cost categories that are explicitly excluded in the work program [insert name of excluded cost category].
Supporting documentation
Moreover, the beneficiaries must keep adequate records and other supporting documentation to prove the number of units
declared and that the costs for recruited researchers (living allowance, mobility allowance, family allowance) have been fully
incurred for the benefit of the researchers. Beneficiaries only need to keep appropriate and sufficient evidence to prove that
the person-months declared are correct, i.e.:
 the employment contracts (or other suitable documents, e.g. fixed-fellowship agreements) and proof that:
o the eligibility conditions for the researchers were complied with (e.g. CV showing the researcher’s
seniority, copies of diplomas, documents relating to recruitment procedure),
o the researchers actually worked on the action (e.g. lab books, scientific articles, library records),
o the obligations set out in Recruitment and working conditions for researchers were complied with,
o the living, mobility and family allowances (including the employer’s compulsory social security payments)
were fully paid to the researchers.
Rejection of Ineligible Costs
The evidence must be verifiable, auditable and available. It must be correctly archived for at least 5 years after the balance is
paid (3 years for grants up to EUR 60 000) or longer if there are ongoing procedures (such as audits, investigations or litigation).
In this case, the evidence must be kept until they end. Costs that are not supported by appropriate and sufficient evidence may
be rejected (and other measures described (e.g., funding suspension etc.). Beneficiaries that throw away supporting documents
will bear the full risk of cost rejection by the EU/Agency.
The rules on rejection of ineligible costs are in principle the same as in the general MGA. However, since for SME Lump Sum
grants the main cost eligibility condition refers to ‘proper implementation of the action in accordance with Annex 1’, improper
implementation leads to the ineligibility of the costs (NOT grant reduction. If the action is not carried out as described in Annex
1, the costs will be considered ineligible and rejected proportionally to the tasks or parts of the action not implemented. Cost
rejections will be made for improper implementation of the action.
If the feasibility study is incomplete and thus does not meet the intended objective or is of insufficient quality (e.g., does not
permit to assess the quality and potential of the innovation idea), ALL costs will be declared ineligible and there will be NO EU
financial contribution.
The Agency will, at the payment of the balance or afterwards, reject any costs which are ineligible (i.e., if the action as
escribed in Annex 1 is not properly implemented, in particular following checks, reviews, audits or investigations. The rejection
may also be based on the extension of findings from other grants to this grant.
Ineligible costs will be rejected proportionally to the tasks or parts of the action not implemented. If the rejection of costs does
not lead to a recovery, the Agency will formally notify the beneficiary of the rejection of costs, the amounts and the reasons
why (if applicable, together with the notification of amounts due. The beneficiary may, within 30 days of receiving notification,
formally notify the Agency of its disagreement and the reasons why.
If the rejection of costs leads to a recovery, the Agency will follow the contradictory procedure with ‘pre- information letter’.
If the Agency rejects costs at the payment of the balance, it will deduct them from the total eligible costs declared, for the
action, in the financial statement. It will then calculate the payment of the balance.
If the Agency rejects costs after the payment of the balance, it will deduct the amount rejected from the total eligible costs
declared, in the financial statement. It will then calculate the revised final grant amount.
Calculation and Procedure of the Amount to Be Reduced
If the Commission/Agency reduces the grant based on beneficiary termination, it will calculate the reduction at beneficiary-level
and calculate the amount due to the beneficiary. If the amount is lower than the pre-financing and interim payments received
by the beneficiary, the beneficiary will have to pay back the difference.
Recovery at beneficiary termination during an ongoing action means that the beneficiary should pay back the amount to the

consortium. If it doesn’t, the Guarantee Fund will intervene and the Commission/Agency will then recover the amount for the
Guarantee Fund.
If the Commission/Agency reduces the grant based on the payment of the balance, it will calculate the reductions for each
beneficiary and for the action, if any, and calculate the balance to be paid to the consortium accordingly (i.e., final grant
amount).
If the Commission/Agency reduces the grant after the payment of the balance, it will calculate the reduction for the beneficiary
and compare the revised grant amount with its share of the final grant amount. If the revised grant amount is lower, the
Commission/Agency will recover the difference.
The detailed calculations for all cases are described in payment and payment arrangement of the GA. The amount of the
reduction will be proportionate to the seriousness of the errors, irregularities or fraud or breach of obligations. Before
reduction of the grant, the [Commission][Agency] will formally notify a ‘pre-information letter’ to the coordinator or beneficiary
concerned:
a. informing it of its intention to reduce the grant, the amount it intends to reduce and the reasons why, and
b. inviting it to submit observations within 30 days of receiving notification.
If the [Commission][Agency] does not receive any observations or decides to pursue reduction despite the observations it has
received, it will formally notify confirmation of the reduction, together with the notification of amounts due, (if applicable
under the payment and payment arrangement of the GA).
If the [Commission][Agency] reduces the grant after termination of the participation of a beneficiary, it will calculate the
reduced grant amount for that beneficiary and then determine the amount due to that beneficiary in line with the termination
of the GA provisions.
If the [Commission][Agency] reduces the grant at the time of the payment of the balance , it will calculate the reduced grant
amount for the action and then determine the amount due as payment of the balance.
If the [Commission][Agency] reduces the grant after the payment of the balance, it will calculate the revised final grant amount
for the beneficiary concerned. If the revised final grant amount for the beneficiary concerned is lower than its share of the final
grant amount, the [Commission][Agency] will recover the difference.
To reduce a grant amount, the Commission/Agency will follow a contradictory procedure:
Step 1: The Commission/Agency informs the coordinator/beneficiary concerned of its intention and the reasons why, in a pre-
information letter.
Step 2: The coordinator/beneficiary concerned has 30 days to submit observations. An extension may be granted on justified
request, if submitted within the 30 days.
Step 3: The Commission/Agency analyses the observations and either stops the procedure or confirms notification of amounts
due.
Depending on the moment the reduction takes place, this procedure will be directed either to the coordinator or the
beneficiary concerned for reductions based on the following criteria:
a. beneficiary termination, normally to the beneficiary concerned,
b. payment of the balance, normally to the coordinator,
c. reductions after payment of the balance, normally to the beneficiary concerned.
If it is directed at the coordinator, the coordinator must immediately inform the beneficiaries concerned offline, via its usual
communication channels (e.g., e-mail, registered letters with proof of delivery, etc.) and ask for their comments. It must also
inform the other beneficiaries.
If it is directed to the beneficiary, the Commission/Agency will inform the coordinator in copy, in a way that preserves
confidentiality. Beneficiaries normally do not have to inform their coordinators or ask them to submit comments. However,
they should inform them, if there is the risk of a significant impact on the action.

ANNEX 6.
INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Declarations of the Commission (Framework Program)
(2013/C 373/02)
STATEMENT BY THE COMMISSION
For the Horizon 2020 Framework Program, the European Commission proposes to continue with the same ethical
framework for deciding on the EU funding of human embryonic stem cell research as in the 7th Framework
Program.
The European Commission proposes the continuation of this ethics framework because it has developed, based on
experience, a responsible approach for an area of science which holds much promise and that has proven to work
satisfactorily in the context of a research Program in which researchers participate from many countries with very
diverse regulatory situations.
1. The decision on the Horizon 2020 Framework Program explicitly excludes three fields of research from
Community funding:
— research activities aiming at human cloning for reproductive purposes;
— research activities intended to modify the genetic heritage of human beings which could make such changes
heritable;
— research activities intended to create human embryos solely for the purpose of research or for the purpose
of stem cell procurement, including by means of somatic cell nuclear transfer.
2. No activity will be funded that is forbidden in all Member States. No activity will be funded in a Member
State where such activity is forbidden.
3. The decision on Horizon 2020 and the provisions for the ethics framework governing the Community funding of
human embryonic stem cell research entail in no way a value judgment on the regulatory or ethics framework
governing such research in Member States.
4. In calling for proposals, the European Commission does not explicitly solicit the use of human embryonic
stem cells. The use of human stem cells, be they adult or embryonic, if any, depends on the judgment of
the scientists in view of the objectives they want to achieve. In practice, by far the largest part of
Community funds for stem cell research is devoted to the use of adult stem cells. There is no reason why this
would substantially change in Horizon 2020.
5. Each project proposing to use human embryonic stem cells must successfully pass a scientific evaluation
during which the necessity of using such stem cells to achieve the scientific objectives is assessed by
independent scientific experts.
6. Proposals which successfully pass the scientific evaluation are then subject to a stringent ethics review
organised by the European Commission. In this ethics review, account is taken of principles reflected in the EU
Charter of Fundamental Rights and relevant international conventions such as the Convention of the Council
of Europe on Human Rights and Biomedicine signed in Oviedo on 4 April 1997 and its additional protocols
and the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and the Human Rights adopted by UNESCO. The
ethics review also serves to check that the proposals respect the rules of the countries where the research will
be carried out.
7. In particular cases, an ethics check may be carried out during the lifetime of the project.
8. Each project proposing to use human embryonic stem cells must seek the approval of the relevant national or
local ethics committee prior to the start of the project. All national rules and procedures must be respected,
including on such issues as parental consent, absence of financial inducement, etc. Checks will be made on
whether the project includes references to licensing and control measures to be taken by the competent
authorities of the Member State where the research will be carried out
9. A proposal that successfully passes the scientific evaluation, the national or local ethics reviews and the
European ethics review will be presented for approval, on a case by case basis, to the Member States, meeting

as a committee acting in accordance with the examination procedure. No project involving the use of human
embryonic stem cells will be funded that does not obtain approval from the Member States.
10. The European Commission will continue to work to make the results from Community funded stem cell
research widely accessible to all researchers, for the ultimate benefit of patients in all countries.
11. The European Commission will support actions and initiatives that contribute to a coordination and
rationalisation of HESC research within a responsible ethical approach. In particular, the Commission will
continue to support a European registry of human embryonic stem cell lines. Support for such a registry will
allow a monitoring of existing human embryonic stem cells in Europe, will contribute to maximise their use by
scientists and may help to avoid unnecessary derivations of new stem cell lines.
12. The European Commission will continue with the current practice and will not submit to the committee
acting in accordance with the examination procedure proposals for projects which include research
activities which destroy human embryos, including for the procurement of stem cells. The exclusion of
funding of this step of research will not prevent Community funding of subsequent steps involving
human embryonic stem cells.
Declaration on Energy
‘The Commission acknowledges the essential future role of end-user energy efficiency and renewable energy, the
importance of better grids and storage in maximising their potential, and the need for market uptake measures
to build capacity, improve governance and overcome market barriers so that energy efficiency and renewable
energy solutions can be rolled out.
The Commission will endeavor to ensure that at least 85 %, of the energy challenge budget of Horizon 2020 is spent
in non-fossil fuels areas, within which at least 15 % of the overall energy challenge budget is spent on market
up-take activities of existing renewable and energy efficiency technologies in the Intelligent Energy Europe III
Program. This Program will be implemented by a dedicated management structure and will also include support for
sustainable energy policy implementation, capacity building and mobilisation of financing for investment, as
been undertaken until today.
The remaining part will be devoted to fossil based technologies and development options, which are considered
essential for reaching the 2050 vision and supporting the transformation to a sustainable energy system.
Progress towards these targets will be monitored and the Commission shall regularly report on the progress
achieved.’
Declaration on the Article 6.5.

‘Without prejudice to the annual budgetary procedure, it is the Commission’s intention to present in the context of
the structured dialogue with the European Parliament an annual report on the implementation of the budget
breakdown set out in Annex II of Horizon 2020 by priorities and specific objectives within these priorities,
including any application of Article 6(5)’.
Declaration on Article 12
‘Upon request, the Commission will present the adopted work Programs to the responsible Committee in the
European Parliament.’
Declaration on Seal of Excellence

‘Union level intervention enables EU-wide competition to select the best proposals, thereby raising levels of
excellence and providing visibility for leading research and innovation.
The Commission considers that positively evaluated European Research Council, Marie Sklodowska- Curie, teaming
actions, phase-2 SME instrument or collaborative project proposals that could not be funded for budgetary reasons,
have still met the Horizon 2020 criterion of excellence.
Upon approval of the participants, this information can be shared with the responsible authorities.

The Commission therefore welcomes any initiatives to fund such projects by national, regional or private
sources. In this context, cohesion policy also has a key role to play through building capacity.’
Declaration on Spreading excellence and widening participation

‘The Commission is committed to set up and implement the measures to close the research and innovation
divide in Europe under the new heading “Spreading Excellence and widening participation”. The level of funding
foreseen for these measures will not be lower than the amount spent in the Seventh Framework Program on
the actions addressing “widening participation”.
The new activities of COST undertaken in the context of “widening participation” should be supported by the budget
allocated to “Spreading excellence and widening participation”. The activities of COST which do not fall thereunder,
and which should be of a equal order of magnitude in terms of budget, should be supported from the budget
allocated to “6. Europe in a changing World — Inclusive, innovative and reflective societies”.
The major part of the activities related to the Policy Support Facility and to the transnational networks of National
Contact points should also be supported by the budget allocated to “6. Europe in a changing World — Inclusive,
innovative and reflective societies”.’
Declaration on the SME instrument

‘SME support in Horizon 2020 is of major importance and represents a prominent part to achieve its objective
to foster innovation, economic growth and job creation. Therefore, the Commission will ensure high visibility of
SME support in Horizon 2020, in particular through the SME instrument in the work Programs, guidelines and
communication activities. All efforts will be undertaken that it is easy and straightforward for SMEs to identify and
use the opportunities provided for them in the Societal Challenges and LEITs.
The SME instrument will be implemented through a single centralised management structure responsible for
the evaluation and management of the projects, including the use of common IT systems and business
processes.
The SME-instrument shall attract the most ambitious innovation projects of SMEs. It will be implemented
primarily in a bottom up manner via a continuously open call tailored to the needs of SMEs as set in the specific
objective “innovation in SMEs” while taking into account priorities and objectives of LEITs and societal challenges and
allowing for cross-challenge/LEITs proposals, underpinning the bottom-up approach. This call may be
reviewed/renewed every two years, to take into account the biannual strategic Programs. Where appropriate,
calls on specific topics of strategic interest can be organised in addition to the call described above. These calls will
use the concept and procedures of the SME instrument as well as its single entry point for applicants and the
accompanying mentoring and coaching services.’

Politika OP Verzija 6

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Politika OP Verzija 6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

[INSTITUTE] [Internal information]

THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY

Belgrade, October, 2023.

Version 0.1 Page 1 of 47

3. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS................................................................................................6

Version 0.1 Page 2 of 47

Version 0.1 Page 3 of 47

Version 0.1 Page 4 of 47

or improved products, processes or services (including prototyping, testing, demonstrating, piloting,

Version 0.1 Page 5 of 47

3. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Version 0.1 Page 6 of 47

4. GENERAL METHODOLOGY APPROACH

Version 0.1 Page 7 of 47

5. OBJECTIVES OF THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY

6. PURPOSE OF THE OPEN ACCESS POLICY

Version 0.1 Page 8 of 47

 Improve transparency of the scientific process, involving citizens and society;

7. OPEN ACCESS POLICY REQUIREMENTS

Version 0.1 Page 9 of 47

7.1.1 Depositing Publications in Repositories

Version 0.1 Page 10 of 47

7.1.2 Depositing Underlying Research Data

Version 0.1 Page 11 of 47

7.1.3 Providing open access to the results of the publications

7.1.4 Providing Open Access to the Certain Bibliographic Metadata

Version 0.1 Page 12 of 47

7.2 Access Rights to The Background

Agreement on access right to the background

Version 0.1 Page 13 of 47

Rules on access right to the background data

Rules on access rights for affiliated entities to the background data

Version 0.1 Page 14 of 47

Rules on trans-national access rights to research infrastructure and background data

7.3 Ownership of the R&D Results

7.3.1 Ownership by the Beneficiary that Generates the Results

Version 0.1 Page 15 of 47

7.3.2 Joint Ownership by Several Beneficiaries

7.3.3 Joint Owners by Agreement

Version 0.1 Page 16 of 47

7.3.4 Ownership Rights of Third Parties, Including Personnel, to the Results

7.3.5 Joint Research Units’ Ownership Rights on the Results

7.4 Obligation of the Beneficiaries

Version 0.1 Page 17 of 47

[EU][Euratom][Agency] ownership rights to protect the results

Version 0.1 Page 18 of 47

7.4.2 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Exploit the Results

7.4.3 Obligation of the Beneficiaries to Disseminate the Results

Version 0.1 Page 19 of 47

The beneficiaries’ obligations to disseminate the results

The beneficiaries’ obligations for additional dissemination of the results

Version 0.1 Page 20 of 47

Beneficiaries should foresee arrangements, either in the consortium agreement or in separate

7.4.4 Obligations of the Beneficiaries to Submit Reports to the [EC/Agency]

The beneficiary must certify that:

Version 0.1 Page 21 of 47

Security activities involving dual-use goods or dangerous materials and substances

The beneficiaries’ general security obligations to maintain confidentiality

Version 0.1 Page 22 of 47

7.4.6 Obligations of the Beneficiaries Related to Ethics and Research Integrity

The beneficiaries have an obligation to comply with:

Version 0.1 Page 23 of 47