Main · Videos; El internado 7x06 online dating schmuckhandel online dating · plazo presentacion igic dating · persona 4 dating yosuke x · free dating sites . Tipo de interés Euribor 6 meses + 2,95% Plazo De 1 a 5 años. . IVA(Impuesto sobre el Valor Añadido) o IGIC(Impuesto General Indirecto Canario). . FASE III - AYUDAS PARA LA FINANCIACIÓN 17 Alquiler € Luz € Agua € Teléfono e Criterios de evaluación: Para la presentación a dicha ayuda debemos. En la carta de presentación se indicará de forma notoria la solicitud de Artículo Preferente. Igic R. de León May ME. .. Efectividad y Seguridad a Largo Plazo del Bypass Gástrico en ¨Y¨ de Roux y de la Gender: F() M() Age: ______ Date: _____/______/______ You are receiving a encoded sample of ( product).
InCalmeil introduced the term "absences", and inEsquirol for the first time used the term petit mal.
Calaméo - Ayudas para la financiación JEL APs - UM
Reynolds instead used the term "epilepsia mitior" milder epilepsy and provided a comprehensive description of absence seizures InDelasiauve ranked absences as the seizure type with lower severity and introduced the concept of idiopathic epilepsy.
Otto Binswanger discussed the role of cortex in the pathophysiology of "abortive seizures", whereas William Gowers emphasized the importance of a detailed clinical history to identify nonmotor seizures or very mild motor phenomena which otherwise may go unnoticed or considered not epileptic. At the beginning of the 20th Century, the term pyknolepsy was introduced, but initially was not universally considered as a type of epilepsy; it was definitely recognized as an epileptic entity only inbased on electroencephalogram EEG recordings.
Hans Berger, the inventor of the EEG, made also the first EEG recording of an atypical absence his results were published only inwhereas the characteristic EEG pattern was reported by neurophysiologists of the Harvard Medical School in The discovery of EEG made it also possible to differentiate absence seizures from so called "psychomotor" seizures occurring in temporal lobe epilepsy.
Penfield and Jasper considered absences as expression of "centrencephalic epilepsy". Typical absences seizures are now classified by the International League Against Epilepsy among generalized nonmotor absence seizures. PubMed Central Background A considerable number of individuals suffer from oral allergy syndrome OAS to apple, resulting in the avoidance of apple consumption.
Apple cultivars differ greatly in their allergenic properties, but knowledge of the causes for such differences is incomplete. Mal d 1 is considered the major apple allergen. Irrespective of any page limits specified in annex 4 to this Guide, there is an overall limit of 10 Mbytes to the size of proposal file Part B. It is advised to limit the size of the proposal to 2 Mbytes.
There are also restrictions to the name given to the Part B file: You are advised to clean your document before converting it to PDF e. Check that your conversion software has successfully converted all the pages of your original document e. Check that your conversion software has not cut down landscape format pages to fit them into portrait format.
Check that captions and labels have not been lost from your diagrams Please note that the Commission prints out proposals in black and white on plain A4 paper. The printable zone on the print engine is bounded by 1. No scaling is applied to make the page "fit" the window. Printing is done at dots per inch. Completing the Part A forms in the Electronic Submission Services and uploading a Part B does not yet mean that the proposal is submitted.
Only the coordinator is authorised to submit the proposal. At this point the service performs a limited automatic validation of the proposal. A list of discovered problems, such as missing data, is given on the last page of the proposal submission forms. Therefore you are strongly advised, when preparing your proposal, to regularly click on 'validate' at the bottom of any page of the Part A to obtain updated validation messages and to review them on the last page of the proposal submission forms.
When errors or omissions are corrected, the coordinator must then repeat the above step to finally achieve the proposal submission. When the proposal has been successfully submitted, the service will proceed to Step 6 where the coordinator sees a message that indicates that the proposal has been received. This automatic message is not the official acknowledgement of receipt - see Section 5.
It does not mean that the proposal is valid, complete, eligible in all respects or that it will be funded. In Step six you can: It is advised to download the proposal once submitted to check that it has been correctly sent. The downloaded proposal will be digitally signed and time stamped.
After re-editing the proposal any data in the forms or a modified attachmentmodifications have to be resubmitted. The coordinator may continue to modify the proposal and submit revised versions overwriting the previous one right up until the deadline. If the proposal is withdrawn, it will not be considered for evaluation. A reason for the withdrawal will be requested by the service. Your proposal draft is not deleted from the server and this withdrawal action can be reversed, but only before the deadline, by simply submitting it again.
Use of the system by the other participants In order to access the proposals, all contacts need to have an ECAS ID that is necessary for the login of the Participant Portal.
Those contacts, who have been invited by the coordinator, can access the proposal via the 'My Proposals' tab after login. About the deadline Proposals must be submitted on or before the deadline specified in the call fiche. It is your responsibility to ensure the timely submission of your proposal. Please note that the deadline established in the call refers to the sharp time, no extra seconds allowed for example, call deadline at After this moment, the proposal can no longer be modified.
It is however visible in a read-only version. Do not wait until the last moment before submitting your proposal! Call deadlines are absolutely firm and are strictly enforced.
Please note that successive drafts of the proposal can be submitted with the Electronic Submission Services. Each successive submission overwrites the previous version. It is a good idea to submit a draft well before the deadline. Do not wait until the last moment to attempt the submission of the proposal. Internet access issues and proposal verification issues must be detected well before the submission deadline if help is to be requested from the service desk. Such issues are never accepted as extenuating circumstances for failure to submit in time.
Submission is deemed to occur at the moment when the proposal coordinator completes the submission sequence described above. It is not the point at which the upload of the part B is started.
If you wait until too near to the close of the call to start uploading your proposal, there is a serious risk that you will not be able to submit in time. It will therefore be classified as ineligible because of late arrival.
The submission of a proposal requires some knowledge of the Electronic Submission Services, a detailed knowledge of the contents of the proposal and the authority to make last-minute decisions on behalf of the consortium if problems arise. You are advised not to delegate the job of submitting your proposal! In the unlikely event of a failure of the Electronic Submission Services due to breakdown of the Commission server during the last 24 hours of this call, the deadline will be extended by a further 24 hours.
This will be notified by e-mail to all proposal coordinators who had registered for this call by the time of the original deadline, and also by a notice on the Call pages on the Participant Portal. Such a failure is a rare and exceptional event; therefore do not assume that there will be an extension to this call. If you have difficulty in submitting your proposal, you should not assume that it is because of a problem with the Commission servers, as this is rarely the case. Contact the Electronic Submission Services help desk if in doubt see the address given in annex 1 of this Guide.
In all circumstances, you should aim to submit your proposal well before the deadline to have time to solve any problems. A small number of calls operate a continuous submission procedure. These calls are open for an extended period, during which proposals will be evaluated in batches after fixed cut-off dates. The call fiche will show whether intermediate cut-off dates apply to his call.
The last version of your proposal submitted before the deadline is the one which will be taken into consideration; no later version can be substituted and no earlier version can be recovered.
Unless specified in the call, any hyperlinks to other documents, embedded material, and any other documents company brochures, supporting documentation, reports, audio, video, multimedia etc. Withdrawing a proposal You may withdraw a proposal before the call deadline by simply submitting a revised version with an empty Part B section, and with the following text in the abstract field of form A1: It should not be evaluated by the Commission".
You may also withdraw a proposal, either before or after the call deadline, by accessing the 'My Proposals' tab when you log in to the participant portal.
With the action 'view submitted' the coordinator will move to Step 6, where the proposal can be withdrawn. A withdrawn proposal will not be subsequently considered by the Commission. Through systematic registration of financial and other risks the EWS enables the Commission services to take the necessary precautionary measures to ensure sound financial management5.
EWS registrations are not publicly disclosed. However, registrations will be transferred to the Central Exclusion Database CED if they relate to entities that have been excluded from EU funding because they are insolvent or have been convicted of serious professional misconduct or a criminal offence detrimental to EU financial interests.
European institutions, national agencies or authorities in Member States, and, subject to conditions for personal data protection, to third countries and international organisations. Check that your proposed work does indeed address one of the topics open in this call. See the current version of the work programme. Check that you have applied for the right call and one of the funding schemes open for your chosen topic see the work programme 8.
The eligibility criteria are given in the work programme. See also annex 2 of this Guide. In particular, make sure that you satisfy the minimum requirements for the makeup of your consortium.
sobre um mal: Topics by draktbutikk.info
Have any additional eligibility criteria been set for this call? Check that you comply with any budgetary limits that may have been fixed on the requested EU contribution. Any proposal not meeting the eligibility requirements will be considered ineligible and will not be evaluated. Proposals must comprise a Part A, containing the administrative information including participant and project cost details on standard forms; and a Part B containing the scientific and technical description of your proposal as described in this Guide.
A proposal that does not contain both parts will be considered ineligible and will not be evaluated. Proposals should be precise and concise, and must follow exactly the proposal structure described in this document see annex 4 of this Guidewhich is designed to correspond to the evaluation criteria which will be applied.
Omitting requested information will almost certainly lead to lower scores and possible rejection. Clearly indicate any potential ethical, safety or regulatory aspects of the proposed research and the way these will be dealt with prior and during the implementation of the proposed project.
Proposals may be rejected on ethical grounds if such issues are not dealt with satisfactorily. There will be strong competition. Therefore, edit your proposal tightly, strengthen or eliminate weak points. Put yourself in the place of an expert evaluator; refer to the evaluation criteria given in annex 2 of this Guide. Arrange for your draft to be evaluated by experienced colleagues; use their advice to improve it before submission. You are strongly advised to inform your National Contact Point of your intention to submit a proposal see address in annex 1 of this Guide.
Remember also the Enquiry service listed in annex 1 of this Guide. If, after the close of the call, you discover that you have submitted your proposal to the wrong call, notify the Participant Portal Submission Service Helpdesk. The Participant Portal Submission Service will automatically block the submission of any file containing a virus. What happens next Shortly after the call deadline or batch date in the case of continuously open callsthe Commission will send an Acknowledgement of receipt to the e-mail address of the proposal coordinator given in the submitted proposal.
Please note that the message received on reaching step 6 within the Participant Portal Submission Service after each submission is not the official Acknowledgement of receipt. The sending of an acknowledgement of receipt does not imply that a proposal has been accepted as eligible for evaluation.
If you have not received an Acknowledgement of receipt within 12 working days after the call deadline or cut-off date, in the case of a continuously open callyou should contact the FP7 Enquiry Service see annex 1 of this Guide. However, first please check that you are the person named in the proposal as contact person for partner no.
The Commission will check that your proposal meets the eligibility criteria that apply to this call and funding scheme see the work programme and annex 2 of this Guide. The evaluation criteria and procedure are described in annex 2 of this Guide. If hearings are planned in this call see annex 2 of this Guideyou will receive an invitation if your proposal is highly rated in the initial stages of the evaluation. In this case, you will be asked by the evaluation panel to provide further details on the proposal.
The letter of invitation will specify the date and time and the particular arrangements. It may also list a number of specific questions concerning the proposal, which you should be prepared to respond to at the hearing. The letter will explain how to reply if you cannot attend in person. Soon after the completion of the evaluation, the results will be finalised and all coordinators will receive a letter containing initial information on the results of the evaluation, including the Evaluation Summary Report giving the opinion of the experts on their proposal.
However, even if the experts viewed your proposal favourably, the Commission cannot at this stage indicate if there is a possibility of EU funding. The letter will also give the relevant contact details and the steps to follow if you consider that there has been a shortcoming in the conduct of the evaluation process "redress procedure".
The Commission also informs the relevant programme committee, consisting of delegates representing the governments of the Member states and Associated countries. Based on the results of the evaluation by experts, the Commission draws up the final list of proposals for possible funding, taking account of the available budget. Official letters are then sent to the applicants. If all has gone well, this letter will mark the beginning of a negotiation phase.
Due to budget constraints, it is also possible that your proposal will be placed on a reserve list. In this case, negotiations will only begin if funds become available. In other cases, the letter will explain the reasons why the proposal cannot be funded on this occasion.
Negotiations between the applicants and the Commission aim to conclude a grant agreement which provides for EU funding of the proposed work. The officials conducting these negotiations on behalf of the Commission will be working within a predetermined budget envelope. They will refer to any recommendations which the experts may have made concerning modifications to the work presented in the proposal, as well as any recommendations arising from an ethical review of the proposal if one was carried out.
The negotiations will also deal with gender equality actions, and, if applicable to the project, with gender aspects in the conduct of the planned work, as well as the relevant principles contained in the European Charter for researchers and the Code of Conduct for their recruitment. Where relevant, security aspects shall be considered also. Members of the proposal consortium may be invited to Brussels or Luxembourg to facilitate the negotiation. As a result the number of audits and participants audited will increase significantly and the Commission's services will assure appropriate mutual exchange of information within its relevant internal departments in order to fully coordinate any corrective actions to be taken in a consistent way.
More information can be found here: For additional information on RSFF see: They have no legal authority, and do not replace any official definitions set out in the Council decisions. A Acknowledgement of receipt: Applicants are informed by email shortly after the deadline that a proposal has been successfully submitted but not that it is necessarily eligible. Contact the FP7 Enquiry service urgently if you do not receive such an acknowledgement within a few days of the close of call or batch, for continuous submission calls.
Applicant The term used generally in this guide for a person or entity applying to a call for proposals. Associated countries Non-EU countries which are party to an international agreement with the Community, under the terms or on the basis of which it makes a financial contribution to all or part of the Seventh Framework Programme. In the context of proposal consortia, organisations from these countries are treated on the same footing as those in the EU.
The list of associated countries is given in the body of this guide. C Call fiche The part of the work programme giving the basic data for a call for proposals e. It is posted as a separate document on the Participant Portal web pages devoted to a particular call. Call for proposals or "call" An announcement is published, usually in the Official Journal, inviting proposals for research activities in a certain theme.
Full information on the call can be found on the Participant Portal web-sites. Consensus meeting The stage, in the proposal evaluation process, when experts come together to establish a common view on a particular proposal. Consortium Most funding schemes require proposals from a number of participants usually at least three who agree to work together in a consortium.
Continuous submission Some calls are open for an extended period, during which proposals may be submitted at any moment. In these cases, proposals are evaluated in batches after fixed cut-off dates.
Ayudas para la financiación JEL APs - UM
Coordinator The coordinator leads and represents the applicants. He or she acts as the point of contact with the Commission. See also Participant Portal. Cut-off date An intermediate date in the context of a call operating a continuous submission procedure.
Proposals are evaluated in batches after each cut-off date. D Deadline For a particular call, the moment after which proposals cannot be submitted to the Commission, and when the Participant Portal Submission Service closes for that call.
Deadlines are strictly enforced. Deliverable A deliverable represents a verifiable output of the project. Normally, each workpackage will produce one or more deliverables during its lifetime. Deliverables are often written reports but can also take another form, for example the completion of a prototype etc. Direct costs Direct costs are all eligible costs which can be attributed directly to the project and are identified by the participant as such, in accordance with its accounting principles and its usual internal rules.
Eligibility committee An internal committee which examines in detail cases of proposals whose eligibility for inclusion in an evaluation is in question Eligibility criteria The minimum conditions which a proposal must fulfil, if it is to be retained for evaluation. The eligibility criteria are generally the same for all proposals throughout FP7, and relate to submission before the deadline, minimum participation, completeness and scope.
However, additional eligibility criteria may apply to certain calls, and applicants should check the work programme, and annex 2 to this Guide.
The African Union | Economy of Africa - wwx
Ethical issues table Research activities supported by the Framework Programme should respect fundamental ethical principles. The main issues which might arise in a project are summarised in tabular form in a checklist included in the proposal Evaluation criteria The criteria, against which eligible proposals are assessed by independent experts.
Relevance is also considered. However, additional evaluation criteria may apply to certain calls, and applicants should check the work programme, and annex 2 to this Guide. It normally contains both comments and scores for each evaluation criterion. Contact details are given in annex 1 to this Guide.
Funding scheme The mechanisms for the Community funding of research projects. The funding schemes have different objectives, and are implemented through grant agreements. H Hearing Applicants whose proposals have been evaluated are sometimes invited to provide explanations and clarifications to any specific questions raised by the experts.
These questions are transmitted to the applicants in advance. I Indirect costs Indirect costs, sometimes called overheadsare all those eligible costs which cannot be identified by the participant as being directly attributed to the project, but which can be identified and justified by its accounting system as being incurred in direct relationship with the eligible direct costs attributed to the project.
Individual evaluation The stage in the evaluation process, when experts assess the merits of a particular proposal before discussion with their peers. Information Days Open events organised by the Commission to explain the characteristics of specific calls, and often as well, a chance for potential applicants to meet and discuss proposal ideas and collaborations. Initial information letter The letter sent by the Commission to applicants shortly after the evaluation by experts, which includes the report from the experts on the proposal in question the Evaluation Summary Report.