In April, UKRO facilitated an online focus group meeting about participation in MSCA Doctoral Networks (DN) and Staff Exchanges (SE) as an Associated Partner, funded by the UK Horizon Europe Guarantee.
Participants discussed several topics and exchanged institutional approaches to the two schemes. The UKRI Guarantee team also attended the meeting and provided clarification where possible. UKRO would like to thank all attendees for their contributions which have fed into this summary report.
UK partners’ contributions to the central project management budget (DN and SE)
Using UKRI funding to cover project-wide activities is allowed under the Guarantee. Proof of payment must be available and UKRI would expect organisations to keep an adequate record for their own internal auditing.
Since the coordinator of a project typically deducts contributions from the beneficiaries in advance, directly from the MSCA grant, the UK Associated Partners (UK APs) need to agree with their consortia how their contribution is managed (UKRI funding comes in arrears).
Practice can vary across projects. It is a novelty for UK participants and the following approaches were shared during the meeting:
- Payment modalities for UK APs are often included in the consortium agreement. Sometimes they seem to be agreed bilaterally only with the coordinator (via an email or during a kick-off meeting). It is recommended to keep written proof of the arrangements for audit purposes.
- Most UK APs seem to have been able to negotiate staggered payments throughout the project’s duration (e.g. 60/20/20%) to avoid a one-off advanced payment.
It is especially important in SE projects, where the risk of not completing all of the planned secondments is high (final funding for institutional costs depends on delivered person-months). It is advisable to discuss recovery routes for APs in case of any overpayments. - Most consortia expect associated partners to contribute to the management budget at the same rate as beneficiaries (normally between 50-80%, depending on the consortium decision), but examples of lower rates for APs were also reported.
- In practice, making the transfer to the coordinator can cause some confusion within a UK organisation regarding supporting documents. Many universities make transfers based on the consortium agreement only. Some finance offices would rather expect an ‘invoice’’, but given that the MSCA rules exclude “invoicing” among the consortium members, an alternative “request for a payment’”document or an official email from the coordinator seems to be satisfactory. Some organisations are using dedicated internal forms for non-standard payments. In order to comply with the UKRI Guarantee T&C, it is advisable to ensure that the usual institutional policies are followed and necessary evidence is collected.
Staff Exchanges – secondments management
Consistent with MSCA SE rules, UK organisations need to ensure that the top-up allowance for the seconded staff member is paid in full. It is intended to contribute to travel, accommodation and subsistence costs related to the secondment.
The following points on the top-up allowance payments were exchanged by the group:
- The majority of institutions represented at the meeting pay the top-up allowance via reimbursements of travel and subsistence costs against receipts, in line with their usual policies. It is likely that, in the majority of cases, the costs of secondment will be equal to or higher than the allowance. However, if not, the remaining amount will be paid directly to the seconded staff member at the end of the secondment, subject to taxation rules.
- One institution is currently testing the use of prepaid cards given to outgoing and incoming secondees to simplify the reimbursement process.
- One participant found the wording in the UKRI MSCA SE Guarantee guidance unclear on whether the top-up allowance can be spent via the ‘travel & subsistence’ route and opted for direct payments of the full amount to the secondees. Considering the tax implications, it is seen as a less favoured payment method. Following the meeting, UKRO clarified with the UKRI Guarantee team that, in line with MSCA practices, UK participants have the flexibility to spend the allowance according to their usual practice, provided the full allowance is spent. A relevant clarification will soon be added to the UKRI Guidance to avoid any confusion in the future.
- UKRI funding covers UK-based secondments from low and middle-income third countries (TC) not directly receiving EC funding. Projects with such secondments planned, need to agree modalities for payments with the sending institution, preferably in a written contract. In practice, this might mean that the UK organisation pays the total allowance to the TC sending institution (which is then responsible for payment to the researcher) or covers the costs of hosting the TC secondee directly (reimbursement to the hosted researcher). Both options seem to be in use across projects and it is important to retain the evidence of the total amount paid to the secondees. It was noted that the second option may work better in the case of less experienced sending organisations without an appropriate system in place.
- UKRI funding covers all originally planned outgoing secondments from the UK, including those to other counties not in the list of participating counties in Horizon Europe.
Other SE considerations
There seems to be a mixed level of awareness that doctoral candidates are eligible to participate in MSCA SE secondments (under the MSCA SE rules, PhD students are regarded as “staff members”, provided they fulfill other SE conditions, e.g., seconded staff need to be committed full-time to the MSCA project during the secondment).
Based on the European Commission’s practice under H2020 RISE projects, UKRO understands that an employment contract is not necessary for PhD fellows and that enrollment in the university’s PhD programme suffices as a “legal link” with the secondee. For audit purposes, it is strongly recommended to keep records of the fellows’ role in the SE project (e.g. project assignment letter; secondment agreement).
The UKRI team confirmed at the meeting that PhD students are eligible to participate in SE secondments under the Guarantee T&Cs. Related clarifications in the Guarantee guidance will be considered.
The focus group participants tend to apply practices from the H2020 MSCA RISE to the renewed Staff Exchanges scheme. Project coordinators often provide partners with templates for secondment agreements between sending and hosting organisations and for secondment reports. If that is not the case, it’s advisable for UK participants to set up a system for evidencing the delivery of secondments and other project activities. The UKRI Guarantee T&Cs remain general regarding reporting and audit requirements, relying on usual organisational practices.
Doctoral Networks – recruitment, PhD fees and visa issues
- In general, UK host institutions participate in the project-wide recruitment campaign, while including relevant information for UK-based fellows in their vacancy notice (UKRI HE Guarantee specificities, funding rules, etc.). Anecdotally, there has been a lower interest in UK offers and it is harder to recruit strong candidates compared to H2020 ITN projects.
- No major visa issues have been reported at the meeting. The Global Talent scheme seems to work well for MSCA fellows. On the other hand, projects representing security-sensitive research disciplines or cases, when chosen candidates need an ATAS certificate (Academic Technology Approval Scheme), encountered significant delays, impacting the project start date. As reported by some attendees, it appears advisable to have a backup plan (reserve list) in case the selected candidate cannot enter the UK.
- There seems to have been some misunderstanding around the mobility and employment requirements under the UKRI Guarantee. UKRI reiterated the Guarantee conditions which fully respect the general MSCA mobility rule and the obligation to offer all PhD candidates an employment contract rather than a stipend. A relevant Q&A has recently been added to the UKRI Guidance.
- In the Industrial Doctorates scheme, with the requirement for candidates to spend min. 50% of their time in the non-academic sector, universities with industrial partners located abroad tend to use split employment contracts to overcome visa and double-taxation implications.
- On a positive note, the exchange rate set for the duration of the project has facilitated salary calculations and payments to fellows.
- As was the case under the H2020 ITN projects, institutional approaches to charging PhD fees do vary across universities. These costs are eligible under the MSCA rules and under the UKRI Guarantee, but if charged to the project in full they put a major burden on the project budget, (while research and training activities must remain a priority). Some organisations charge a reduced tuition fee, given that the fellows are their employees, whilst some opt to waive the fees altogether.
Other DN considerations
- A tailored consortium agreement model would have been helpful at the grant agreement stage. Many have been working with the DESCA model, which is not suitable for DN projects and required a lot of work from APs and coordinators. UKRO understands that an association of German universities is currently working on a MSCA DN-specific CA model, which will be based on the DESCA template.
- The Joint Doctorate scheme’s requirement for a min. two of the awarding bodies to be located in an EU or HE Associated Country, have made the scheme less popular in the UK given the UK association delay.