TOPIC : Call for proposals to monitor, prevent and counter hate speech online
|Publication date:||30 January 2018|
|Types of action:||REC-AG REC Action Grant|
|DeadlineModel: Opening date:||single-stage 25 April 2018||Deadline:||11 October 2018 17:00:00|
|Time Zone : (Brussels time)|
10 October 2018 09:58
An updated version of the Questions and answers document has been added under Topic conditions and documents - Additional documents.
01 August 2018 17:41
The Republic of Serbia joined the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme on 16/07/2018 and is an eligible country under Call for proposals REC-RRAC-ONLINE-AG-2018.
01 August 2018 11:36
Questions and answers document has been added under Topic conditions and documents - Additional documents.
Priorities and activities to be co-financed
The Commission is committed to curb the trends of online hate speech in Europe. For that purpose, on 31st May 2016, the Commission agreed on a Code of Conduct on countering illegal hate speech online (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-1937_en.htm). The call is thus aimed at supporting projects in the field of countering hate speech online, including projects aimed at contributing to better understand, monitor, prevent and counter hate speech online. The call for proposals to monitor, prevent and counter hate speech online will support the following priorities:
- Projects aimed at development, studies and analyses of the sociological landscape and trends on hate speech online;
- Projects on developing online alternative and counter-narratives and promoting the development of critical thinking by Internet users;
- Projects aimed at countering illegal hate speech online on social platforms/Internet companies (As defined under national laws transposing the Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA, on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law) and enhancing transparency on how manifestations of hate speech are addressed in the online world.
Proposals building on the activities relating to the implementation of the Code of Conduct on countering hate speech online are of particular interest.
Projects aimed at research and analysis of the sociological landscape relating to the origin and spread of hate speech on social media platforms are expected to build on prior studies and focus on analysis (including through the quantitative analysis of publicly available datasets) of current or new trends of forms of intolerance online and its path of dissemination, such as extremist ideas leading to violence or hatred against minorities.
Projects aimed at development of online alternative and counter-narratives and its dissemination are expected to build on existing best practices and target the specificities of particular forms of intolerance. Projects aimed at developing automatic technologies/responses as means of counter-narratives to racist and xenophobic speech are of particular interest. While proposals do not need to be transnational, the added value of projects involving organisations from more than one participating country is of particular interest.
Projects aiming at tackling online hate speech against journalists, collecting data related to online abuse against media actors and analysing its effects on the democratic debate (as a follow-up of the 2016 Annual Colloquium on Fundamental Rights) are also one of the priorities of the call.
Projects tackling intersectionality and multiple grounds of hatred including misogyny online and hate speech based on gender-related grounds will be regarded as having an added value, as a follow-up to the 2017 Annual Colloquium on Fundamental Rights on "Women's rights in turbulent times" (http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=115277).
While projects may focus only on one of the priorities of the call, projects combining different priorities will be regarded as having an added value. Moreover, while projects can be national and only cover one Member State, projects covering several countries or which may, in the future, be transferable to other countries will be considered to have an added value.
2. Description of the activities
In relation to the above mentioned priorities, the call will fund projects focused on one or more of the following activities:
- development of technology and innovative web tools preventing and countering illegal hate speech online and supporting data collection. This will include development of online repositories of court jurisprudence and/or concrete cases of manifestations of illegal hate speech online notified to online platforms.
- studies analysing the spread of racists and xenophobic hate speech in different Member States, including the source and structures of groups generating and spreading such content, the volume and the frequency of content upload, the networks and networking activities, platform choices, as well as its reach-out to mainstream society and the appeal of racists and xenophobic material that incites to violence.
- development, dissemination and online awareness raising activities, in particular: development of online narratives promoting EU values, tolerance and respect to EU fundamental rights and fact checking activities enhancing critical thinking and awareness about accuracy of information (These activities should be targeted to hate speech online and complementary to the 2017 Commission Directorate General Communications Networks, Content and Technology’s call for proposals “Call for Proposals for a pilot project on Media Literacy for All”).
- mutual learning, exchange of good practices, including identifying best practices which may be transferable to other participating countries or organisations.
- capacity building and training activities. This includes activities aimed at training stakeholders on EU and national legal framework criminalising hate speech online.
3. Expected results
- Curbing increasing trends of illegal hate speech on the Internet and contributing to better understanding how social media is used to recruit followers to the hate speech narrative and ideas;
- Improving data recording and establishment of trends, including on the chilling effects of illegal hate speech online, including when addressed to key democracy players, such as journalists;
- Strengthening cooperation between national authorities, civil society organisations and Internet companies, in the area of preventing and countering hate speech online;
- Empowering civil society organisations and grass-root movements in their activities countering hate speech online and in the development of effective counter-narratives;
- Increasing awareness and media literacy of the general public on racist and xenophobic online hate speech and boosting public perception of the issue.
Topic conditions and documents
Please read carefully all provisions below before the preparation of your application.
(a) Applications must be submitted no later than the deadline for submission as indicated on the Participant Portal
2. Eligibility criteria
The applicant and partners must be public entities or private organisations, duly established in one of the countries participating in the programme, or international organisations. Organisations which are profit-oriented must submit applications in partnership with public entities or private non-profit organisations.
(a) The project can be either national or transnational;
(b) The application must involve at least two organisations (applicant and partner);
(c) The EU grant requested cannot be lower than EUR 75 000.
3. Exclusion criteria
(a) the applicant is bankrupt, subject to insolvency or winding-up procedures, where its assets are being administered by a liquidator or by a court, where it is in an arrangement with creditors, where its business activities are suspended, or where it is in any analogous situation arising from a similar procedure provided for under national laws or regulations;
(b) it has been established by a final judgment or a final administrative decision that the applicant is in breach of its obligations relating to the payment of taxes or social security contributions in accordance with the law of the country in which it is established, with those of the country in which the authorising officer is located or those of the country of the performance of the contract;
(c) it has been established by a final judgment or a final administrative decision that the applicant is guilty of grave professional misconduct by having violated applicable laws or regulations or ethical standards of the profession to which the applicant belongs, or by having engaged in any wrongful conduct which has an impact on its professional credibility where such conduct denotes wrongful intent or gross negligence, including, in particular, any of the following:
(i) fraudulently or negligently misrepresenting information required for the verification of the absence of grounds for exclusion or the fulfilment of selection criteria or in the performance of a contract, a grant agreement or a grant decision;
(ii) entering into agreement with other applicants with the aim of distorting competition;
(iii) violating intellectual property rights;
(iv) attempting to influence the decision-making process of the Commission during the award procedure;
(v) attempting to obtain confidential information that may confer upon it undue advantages in the award procedure;
(d) it has been established by a final judgment that the applicant is guilty of any of the following:
(i) fraud, within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, drawn up by the Council Act of 26 July 1995;
(ii) corruption, as defined in Article 3 of the Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of Member States of the European Union, drawn up by the Council Act of 26 May 1997, and in Article 2(1) of Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA, as well as corruption as defined in the law of the country where the contracting authority is located, the country in which the applicant is established or the country of the performance of the contract;
(iii) participation in a criminal organisation, as defined in Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA;
(iv) money laundering or terrorist financing, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council;
(v) terrorist-related offences or offences linked to terrorist activities, as defined in Articles 1 and 3 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA, respectively, or inciting, aiding, abetting or attempting to commit such offences, as referred to in Article 4 of that Decision;
(vi) child labour or other forms of trafficking in human beings as defined in Article 2 of Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council;
(e) the applicant has shown significant deficiencies in complying with main obligations in the performance of a contract, a grant agreement or a grant decision financed by the Union's budget, which has led to its early termination or to the application of liquidated damages or other contractual penalties, or which has been discovered following checks, audits or investigations by an authorising officer, OLAF or the Court of Auditors;
(f) it has been established by a final judgment or final administrative decision that the applicant has committed an irregularity within the meaning of Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95.
(g) for the situations of grave professional misconduct, fraud, corruption, other criminal offences, significant deficiencies in the performance of the contract or irregularity, the applicant is subject to:
(i) facts established in the context of audits or investigations carried out by the Court of Auditors, OLAF or internal audit, or any other check, audit or control performed under the responsibility of an authorising officer of an EU institution, of a European office or of an EU agency or body;
(ii) non-final administrative decisions which may include disciplinary measures taken by the competent supervisory body responsible for the verification of the application of standards of professional ethics;
(iii) decisions of the ECB, the EIB, the European Investment Fund or international organisations;
(iv) decisions of the Commission relating to the infringement of the Union's competition rules or of a national competent authority relating to the infringement of Union or national competition law.
(v) decisions of exclusion by an authorising officer of an EU institution, of a European office or of an EU agency or body.
3.2 Remedial measures
If an applicant declares one of the situations of exclusion listed above (see section 3.1), it should indicate the measures it has taken to remedy the exclusion situation, thus demonstrating its reliability. This may include e.g. technical, organisational and personnel measures to prevent further occurrence, compensation of damage or payment of fines. The relevant documentary evidence which illustrates the remedial measures taken must be provided in annex to the declaration. This does not apply for situations referred in point (d) of section 3.1.
3.3 Rejection from the call for proposals
A grant shall not be awarded to an applicant who:
(a) is in an exclusion situation established in accordance with section 3.1 ;
(b) has misrepresented the information required as a condition for participating in the procedure or has failed to supply that information;
(c) was previously involved in the preparation of calls for proposal documents where this entails a distortion of competition that cannot be remedied otherwise.
Administrative and financial penalties may be imposed on applicants who are guilty of misrepresentation
4. Selection criteria
4.1 Financial capacity
Applicants and partners must have stable and sufficient sources of funding to maintain their activity throughout the duration of the grant and to participate in its funding. Organisations participating in several projects shall have sufficient financial capacity to implement multiple projects.
The financial capacity shall consist of a financial viability check performed by the Research Executive Agency (REA) and completed by the Commission.
For the purpose of demonstrating its financial capacity, and if the total amount of the grant requested exceeds EUR 60.000, the applicant must provide the most recent closed and signed financial statements of its organisation containing the balance sheet and profit & loss accounts, for the last two closed financial years (a single financial document containing comparative data of the annual accounts of the two years under assessment is acceptable. The same applies to the statutory audit report which may cover the two financial years). In case of an application submitted on behalf of a consortium, the Commission reserves the right to verify every member of the consortium to submit this information, with the exception of public bodies, higher or secondary education establishments and international organisations. If the share of a grant requested by an organisation (applicant or partner) exceeds EUR 750.000, this organisation must also provide an audit report produced by an approved external auditor certifying its accounts for the last closed financial year. Both financial statements and the audit report must be uploaded in the Beneficiary Register when uploading the application package.
Start-up entities which do not have closed accounts at the date of request for financial assessment are requested to submit prospective financial data for one year only
Recently created entities which have closed annual accounts for one year only will be assessed based on the documents for the sole closed financial year
The REA will assess the organisation’s financial viability by checking that it:
• Has sufficient liquidity - is able to cover its short-term commitments;
• Is financially autonomous;
• Is solvent - capable of covering its medium and long term commitments;
• Is profitable – generating profits, or at least with self-financing capacity
The REA will then propose to the Commission a ranking of each organisation’s financial viability based on a qualification: insufficient, weak, acceptable or good.
The methodology used by the REA to assess the financial viability may be found at:
The Commission will assess further elements if they are available/relevant such as:
• Auditor’s findings on previous projects,
• Weak financial viability results from other projects or sources
• Involvement in case of serious administrative errors or fraud
• Pending legal procedures or judicial proceedings for serious administrative errors or fraud
• Due recovery orders
In view of the above, if the Commission considers that the financial capacity is weak, it may request further guarantees or impose risk mitigation measures (e.g. reduced or no pre-financing, bank guarantee covering the amount of pre-financing payment; replacement of the weak organisation), or reject the application in case the Commission considers the financial capacity as insufficient.
4.2 Operational capacity
The applicant and the partners must have sufficient operational and professional capacities to implement the activities for which co-funding is requested. Organisations participating in several projects shall have sufficient operational capacity to implement multiple projects.
For the purpose of demonstrating its operational capacity, the applicant must upload:
- CVs of key staff involved in the project (employed by the applicant and the partners), who must have the necessary education, skills, experience and capacity to carry out the tasks that are assigned to them during the project
- its annual activity report for the last available year. The requirement to provide such a report does not apply to public bodies (i.e. a body governed by public law, e.g. public authorities at local, regional or national level) and universities
Applicants may not be awarded a grant if they fail to demonstrate that they have the capacity, the experience and the expertise necessary for the successful implementation of the proposed activities.
5. Declarations on honour referring to points 2, 3 and 4
The applicant must provide the following declarations on honour by ticking appropriate boxes in Part A of the submission system, some of them on behalf of the partner(s). The applicant has to check with all the partners before clicking those boxes.
1) The coordinator declares to have the explicit consent of all partners on their participation and on the content of this proposal. Or the single applicant confirms the content of this proposal.
2) The information contained in this proposal is correct and complete. None of the actions foreseen in the proposal have started prior to the date of submission of the current application.
3) The coordinator hereby declares that
• he is fully compliant with the exclusion and eligibility criteria set out in the call for proposals/topic, and has the financial and operational capacity to carry out the proposed actions.
• each partner has confirmed that they are fully compliant with the exclusion and eligibility criteria set out in the call for proposal/topic, and they have the financial and operational capacity to carry out the proposed action.
Or the single applicant declares that
• he is fully compliant with the exclusion and eligibility criteria set out in the call for proposal/topic, and has the financial and operational capacity to carry out the proposed actions.
6. Award criteria
The award criteria are set in order to evaluate the quality of proposals. On the basis of these criteria, grants will be awarded to applications that best address the objectives and priorities of the present call for proposals in a cost-effective manner. Synergies and complementarities with other Union instruments and programmes shall be sought and overlaps and duplications with existing activities avoided.
(a) Relevance to the priorities of the call (25 points):
Relevance of the action and its objectives to the priorities of the call for proposals, as described under each topic notice on the Participant Portal, relevance of the issues addressed by the project, contribution of the proposal to the priorities, and complementarity with other Union activities, avoiding duplication with projects funded by other Union programmes. Every proposed action has to be based on a reliable needs assessment.
(b) Quality of the proposed action (30 points):
Quality shall be assessed in terms of the proposed methodology for implementing the activities; the organisation of work, the allocation of resources and the time schedule; the appropriateness of the envisaged activities.
The evaluation of the project's quality will also asses the strategy for monitoring the project implementation and the identification of risks and the measures to mitigate them; the proposed evaluation, including measures to assess the success of the activities and the indicators to be used; the identification of ethical issues and the proposed action to address them.
(c) European added value of the project (15 points):
The European added value of the project shall be assessed in the light of criteria such as its contribution to the consistent and coherent implementation of Union law and policies and to wide public awareness about the rights deriving from it, its potential to develop mutual trust among Member States and to improve cross-border cooperation, its transnational impact, its contribution to the elaboration and dissemination of best practices or its potential to create practical tools and solutions that address cross-border or Union-wide challenges.
(d) Expected results, dissemination, sustainability and long-term impact (20 points):
How appropriate are the expected results to achieve the objectives of the action? Is there a long-term impact of these results on the target groups and/or the general public? A clear, targeted and appropriate dissemination strategy, which will ensure that the results and/or lessons learnt will reach the target groups and/or the general public? Is sustainability of the activities after the EU funding ensured?
(e) Cost-effectiveness (10 points):
Financial feasibility of the proposed activities by means of a realistic and reasonable budget. Appropriateness of the amount requested in relation to the scale and type of the activities, to the expected results and to the size of the partnership.
As a result of the evaluation carried out against the above award criteria the proposals will be ranked according to the points attained. The list of awarded projects will be established based on the amount of budget available.
Proposals not attaining a score of 18 points for the relevance criterion will not be considered for the award of a grant. Proposals not attaining an overall score of 70 points will not be considered for the award of a grant even in case the available budget is not consumed fully.
The maximum time for the European Commission to inform all applicants is six months from the final date for the submission of complete proposals as specified in the call. The maximum time to sign grant agreements is within three months from the date of information of the successful applicants.
Those time limits may be exceeded in exceptional cases, in particular for complex actions, if there is a large number of proposals or due to delays attributable to the applicants.
The abstracts of the successful proposals will be published on the relevant topic's page after the signature of their grant agreements.
8. Budget available
The indicative maximum amount earmarked for this call is EUR 1 500 000. The Commission reserves the right not to distribute all the available funds.
9. Duration of the projects
The initial duration of the projects should not exceed 24 months. No grant may be awarded retrospectively for actions already completed. A grant may be awarded for an action which has already begun only where the applicant can demonstrate the need to start the action before the grant agreement is signed. In such cases, costs eligible for financing may not have been incurred prior to the date of submission of the grant application.
10. Other practical information
10.1 Co-financing rate
The grant will be defined by applying a maximum co-financing rate of 80% to the eligible costs actually incurred and declared by the beneficiary (ies). The beneficiaries should ensure that the outstanding balance is covered from sources other than the EU budget such as:
- the beneficiary's own resources,
- income generated by the action,
- financial contributions from third parties.
10.2 Flat rate for indirect costs
The flat rate for indirect costs is set at 7%. However, indirect costs may not be claimed at the final payment stage, by beneficiaries/co-beneficiaries receiving operating grants from the EU budget.
10.3 Financial support to third parties
Projects through which the beneficiaries use the budget of the project to award grants to other organisations under their own procedures and authority (financial support to third parties) are not allowed.
10.4 Multi-beneficiary projects
Based on our experience with multi-beneficiary agreements, and to support our aim to co-finance efficient, practical and targeted projects, we encourage the applicants to limit the size of the proposed partnerships to a maximum of 6 organisations (applicant and co-applicants).
11. Financial provisions
Information related to the financial provisions in relation to this topic is available in the Annex on financial provisions (which forms an integral part of the topic conditions) under the below point.
12. Provisions, proposal templates and evaluation forms for the type(s) of action(s) under this topic
- Annex on financial provisions
- Guide for applicants
- Standard proposal template
- Detailed budget template to facilitate the planning of your project
- Model grant agreement for mono-beneficiary grants
- Model grant agreement for multi-beneficiary grants
- Legal basis indicators
Members of consortium are required to conclude a consortium agreement, in principle prior to the signature of the grant agreement.
- Questions and answers en
No submission system is open for this topic.
Contact the REC Programme helpdesk for further assistance related to the call, topics and the content of proposals EC-REC-CALLS@ec.europa.eu.
Participant Portal FAQ – Submission of proposals.
IT Helpdesk– contact the IT helpdesk for questions such as forgotten passwords, access rights and roles, technical aspects of submission of proposals, etc.
H2020 Online Manual - Please use the manual with caution and only for the Participant Portal tools guidance, i.e. Submission service and Beneficiary register, because it is H2020 specific and does not cover the Justice Programme rules. Some aspects of the Justice Programme are different from the provisions of the H2020 programme.