back to the numbers…
all applications for funding by the EU are public and can be downloaded. sometimes a bit difficult to find:
Some Notes about DITOs
Download full proposal:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6072669/Proposal-SEP-210282838_sm.pdf
I was involved in some of the earliest pre-discussions for this application, and thus closely followed the later process. also as a learning experience to deal with such larger H2020 grants. and yes. i did read the whole application through (a few times)…
The numbers are a bit distributed throughout the application.
although h2020 seems not yet to be ready structurally and administratively to include a more broader involvement of non-institutional / non-academic / ngo / business involvement, there is ways to include them. by kinda “rule” minimum 85% of the funding has to be paid to fully employed staff of the applicants (phd students, senior researchers etc…). but that “rule” is flexible, but needs extra explanation when this number goes below.
as a comparison, most cultural institutions have between 30-50% of their own staff cost, the rest goes to production, fees, and other external costs. most small hacker-underground organisations leave this number usually below 20%.
so, i summarized all these numbers, using the original numbers from the ditos application which shows the person-month per workpackages and the re-calculated salaries according to the eu differences in economies. that was the easy part.
then there is also the “Other Direct Costs”, which includes for example “travel of the team to team meetigs”, or “Other Services – (Website design, leaflets, logo etc)”, or “Consumables – Do It Together Bio workshops”. so that means all the money that you pay somewhere else, to a store, to a travel agency, a hotel, a webdesigner etc…
this is also where the applicant can put down some fees for workshop mentors, or spending the money on food and hotels for non-team players. which sadly is rarely done 
So i kinda tried to group these “other direct costs” into expenses that only the instition spends on themselves and what they spend for “others” and somehow i got a feeling that this “Do It Together” is more of a game amongst the applicants group, instead of “Do It With Others”. But some applicants did reserve more costs for production and fees, like medialab prado.
of course that grouping was done kinda subjectively… please do your own grouping or interpretation.
And i also want to state, that all these numbers are flexible. + / - 10% can be accounted without problems, if the numbers change more substantially, a small application for these changes have to be submitted to the h2020 office.
the main mistake that was done in this original application, was not only that these numbers didnt include enough “cash” for others… but even worse that absolutely no “third parties” could be involved.
which is in my oppinion a complete contradiction to the goals and visions of the call and the application. quote:
DITOs will create and extend a network of scientific and technical innovation hubs, including academic and research institutions, science associations, NGOs, and galleries, from which to draw expertise and capacity as well as infrastructure for our engagement strategy. However, to encourage user-led and DIY innovation we must also draw on the expertise of grassroots and DIY groups and organisations, which have a deeper understanding of local contexts. We will engage these groups in the DITOs network and advisory boards, and will support, promote, and extend their initiatives.
What means “to draw from”?
to bring toward oneself or itself, as by inherent force or influence;
The “Third Party” involvement also states, that the project cannot “draw” from in-kind contributions… eeehhhmmmm… which it massively did already. stuff like inviting grassroots activists to round-table during workdays without payment, or access to venues/hackerspaces of communities without paying rent… or just myself co-organizing biofabbing for a salary below a swiss standard for the workload i had, but i happily agreed upon in the beginning of our discussion with the team.
but then of course, this h2020 DITOs project is usually just one source of funding to execute the program. likewise for BioFabbing we could source other “overhead” money that was available in UniGe, or other partners will pay fees through another grant from the municipality or sponsors… if they have the mindset to do so!
i hope that helps to also write down some policy that future SwafS grant rules are more flexible to get money OUT of the institutions, and that 85% rules gets kicked out.
greetings from happy RandeLab and sunshine…
m
).