Good morning,

We received today the result of our proposal, which was rejected.

If you are available, it would be great to meet before the Christmas break to comment and make plans for the future. We could meet Friday the 20th at 9AM Brussels time  : https://zoom.us/j/4849138791?omn=99707763735

If you would like to propose a different time, or have quick exchanges, please use our discord channel : https://discord.gg/XpAeCCX2

Thank you again for the commitment and work. It's maybe difficult now to overcome the disappointment but I do think we have something special cooking, let's keep it alive!

Alessandro

_____________________

The reviewers commented on many positive points, however there were weak points.

The key weakness:

Quality and efficiency of the implementation
"- Subcontracting a core element of the technical development work (90000€ for subcontracting costs) necessary for the proposed platform is insufficiently justified and it is not credibly explained why the core digital components are not being developed by a partner." 
 

Other weakness:
Excellence

- The underpinning semantic model of the knowledge base has not been sufficiently defined to demonstrate the knowledge management capacity of the proposed hub, including its interfacing with the sense making tool. In addition, the proposal does not define sufficiently clear methods and comparative standards for knowledge collection.
- The monitoring system to measure the effect of future projects is insufficiently elaborated and not convincingly suited to measure the results of such projects by the NEB Facility and the quantitative progress from the 2024 baseline. For example, the research and innovation gaps, bottlenecks, and future needs are insufficiently addressed.
- Back-office accessibility and facilitation of the hub transfer after the end of the proposed project are not sufficiently demonstrated. In particular, an open API to enable seamless accessibility and transferability is not sufficiently defined.

Impact
- The proposed project insufficiently provides a coherent pathway to effectively engage with the construction ecosystem. For example, the proposal insufficiently provides evidence that the actionable insights provided by the NEB Hub will lead to the generation of credible best practices and standards in the construction sector.
- The potential scale of project result contributions to develop a sense of belonging to the NEB initiative by the proposed project at a European level is not convincingly evidenced. For example, it is not sufficiently demonstrated how the results from the local chapters will be effectively scaled up across Europe.