PROJECT REVIEW REPORT June 21st, 2007

Contract No.
ETEN GAN C517381

Project Acronym: SELIS Project title: Secure Electronic Invoicing Service Project Co-ordinator Despina Polemi (UPRC) Signature.................................... Date ..21..../...6.../......2007..

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS

CONTENT
PART A. PROJECT SELF-ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................3 A1 OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................................................................3 A2 RESULTS..........................................................................................................................................................3 A3 DEPLOYMENT..................................................................................................................................................3 PART B. ASSESSMENT OF WORK DONE ....................................................................................................4 B.1 ACHIEVEMENTS..............................................................................................................................................4 B.2 SHORTCOMINGS..............................................................................................................................................5 B.3 CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN................................................................................................................5 PART C ASSESSMENT OF THE REMAINING WORK ................................................................................5 C.1 MAIN REMAINING WORK................................................................................................................................5 C.2 CHANGES TO THE FUTURE PROJECT PLAN ....................................................................................................6 PART D ASSESSMENT OF PLANS FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND DEPLOYMENT ..........................6

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS

Part A.

Project self-assessment

In this section, the project co-ordinator should summarise his perception of the progress of the project. A1 Objectives

Do the project objectives (both the long-term objectives of the project overall and the short term ones of the feasibility/validation phase) remain valid or is there a need for change? Given the current progress on the project, does the project co-ordinator believe that these objectives can be achieved within the available budget and timeframe?1 SELIS is a cross-border service for the secure exchange of eInvoices. SELIS is based on an innovative architecture that adopts the most advanced standards for the secure provision of interoperable services (Web services, XML and PKI) in line with the general requirements of the EU framework. The goal of SELIS is to conduct a market validation analysis at a pan European level with a projected initial deployment in 2006 and an expected full deployment by 2009. Both the long and short-term objectives of the feasibility/validation phase remain valid and there is no need for change. These objectives, as described in the Technical Annex (TA) of the SELIS project, have been achieved within the available budget and the estimated timeframe. The additional requirements (interoperability with other ERP systems and creation of .pdf format of the e-invoices) provided by the reviewers in the first review meeting were found very interesting by the consortium. Technical solutions addressing these requirements were provided by UPRC and Expertnet (these additional technical modifications had not been foreseen in the TA of SELIS and as a consequence UPRC involved additional personnel, overspending its original budget).

A2

Results

Is the project co-ordinator globally satisfied with the feasibility/validation results? Does the quality of the work and of the deliverables meet the partners expectations? The feasibility/validation results are more that satisfying. The SELIS service presents increased feasibility, while the validation results fully support the development of a successful business plan, which will lead the SELIS service to adoption by the European market. The quality of the work that took place during the reviewing period was controlled by a detailed quality plan. The deliverables development process was fully compliant to the specifications of the quality plan. The internal reviews of the deliverables indicated all the necessary actions for improvements, leading to final versions that met the partners expectations.

A3

Deployment

Is the project strengthening the partners' commitment to proceed with deployment and commercial exploitation of the proposed service? The validation results are very promising and as a result the interest of the partners in exploiting the results of the project remains at an high level. The commercialization of the SELIS service is a priority for the partners who are willing to invest at the creation of a complete product, which will be successful in the market, according to the projections of the business plan. Thus, the SELIS partners remain committed in deploying a commercial version of the SELIS service. Various partners already have had contacts for further exploitation.

) If changes in project objectives, project management or any other vital aspect of the project are suggested, these should be outlined here. They should be described in further detail in B3. 3

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS

Part B.

Assessment of work done

B.1 Achievements
Highlight the major results obtained so far should be highlighted. Outline the objectives met so far (e.g. launch of the pilot service, number of users connected etc., and not a list of deliverables.

The major validation achievements so far are the following: The prototype has been customized and tried in the respective pilot sites. 1. It has been tried in a closed user group involving the three chambers of commerce and the technology providers in the first round of the technical evaluation. 2. Based on this evaluation several improvements have been performed on the prototype. 3. The second round of the pilot (full scale pilot) started in the beginning of August 2006. the following thirteen (13) SMEs, coming from three different countries, participated as trials users testing and evaluating the implementation:
France: Ysentis http://www.ysentis.com/, Sisteer http://www.sisteer.com/, Combbase http://www.combbase.fr/, Air Glass http://www.aireglass.com/ o Greece: ELSOP http://www.elsop.gr, d.d.synergy Hellas S.A http://www.ddsynergy.gr, Protech Information Systems S.A http://www.protech.gr, Teletel http://www.teletel.gr/, Sigular Logic http://www.singularlogic.eu/greek.jsp o Romania: International Trade Center http://www.itcbv.ro, Cand I.T. Solutuons http://candit.idilis.ro, Attract Trading Company htpp://www.activ.ro, Sistem http://www.sistem.ro 4. In order to accomplish an extensive test of the SELIS implementation providing adequate results for the final evaluation report additional user groups participated in the trial phase. The user groups can be sub-divided in the following: o Several Greek SMEs that are members the eBusiness Forum Working Group dedicated in einvoicing services participated in the trials phase. The SELIS platform was evaluated by 30 senior IT students in the laboratories of UPRC. These students were active members of the academic community of the university without any specific educational background concerning financial issues. SELIS was presented in the CEN eInvoicing Phase 2 workshop on interoperability of electronic invoices in Europe (https://www.cen.eu/cenorm/businessdomains /businessdomains/isss/activity/einvoicing_2.asp) that took place in Brussels on 7th May 2007. After this presentation, Infocamere S.c.p.a. (www.infocamere.it), from Italy was interested in installing and testing the SELIS implementation participating in the trials phase. The SELIS consortium contributed a report describing SELIS which was reviewed and approved by the CEN e-invoincing working group members. 5. SELIS cooperated also with other groups within different projects: o TENUTA http://www.etenuta.org/: Selis partners participated in the TENUTA training session on usability. They presented the SELIS project and received comments on the user interfaces of SELIS. In addition, Tenuta participated in the SELIS pilot phase in order to provide a more extensive and detailed feedback regarding the usability and accessibility of SELIS implementation. o GENESIS http://www.genesis-ist.eu: GENESIS representatives participated in SELIS pilot phase as trials users, exploring the offered SELIS functionality and providing their comments. An essential cooperation between the members of the SELIS and GENESIS projects was created, giving the possibility to exchange ideas about issues and concerns related to the SMEs.

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS o SWEB http://www.sweb-project.org: The SELIS service will be used in the SWEB project in order to test the functionality of the SWEB platform which is an e/mgovernmental platform delivering Web based e/m-services to European and non EU Municipalities of the West Balkans.

B.2 Shortcomings
This section should mention the objectives that should have been met but that the project failed to achieve. The description should stress the implications (if any) that these failures may have on the overall project (rather than the reasons for their occurrence). For each of the shortcomings mentioned, the co-ordinator should outline the solution identified or, in case he has not identified any, indicate why he believes that the project objectives could be met without such a solution. There were no shortcomings. The the technical problems encountered during the design and implementation phases were solved promptly by the members of the consortium. The consortium did not address only one of the comments of the first review meeting which was the validation of the VAT number in an invoice. This is a European problem since harmonisation on VAT issues has not yet been achieved.

B.3 Changes to the original plan

Changes made to the original plan need to be indicated here. Changes may relate to the workpackage definitions, the deliverables, project management or the project schedule. Each of these changes needs to be duly justified in case this has not been done via the project monitoring reports

The SELIS project did not face any major problems and no major changes to the original planning took place. However several improvements occurred (e.g. interoperability and presentation of SELIS). Moreover, due to the enthusiasm of all the partners involved in the trials the number of trial users is much larger than the one foreseen in the TA. Besides, all partners put additional effort in dissemination and standardisation activities. Finally, extra effort was spent in the final tuning phase in which the technical partners addressed the two important requirements (interoperability of ERPs and .pdf formats) imposed by the reviewers. A transformation mechanism has been developed in order to transfer the SELIS .xml schema to an ERP .xml schema.

Part C

Assessment of the remaining work

C.1 Main remaining work

For Mid Term Reviews Give an assessment of critical work that remains to be done, listed by project partner and related to overall project objectives. For Final Reviews: Description of the work that remains to be done (if any) by the different project partners. Relate this outstanding work to the overall project objectives. Two more dissemination activities are planned until the end of the project. The comments of the reviewers and the PO that will be gathered in the final review will be addressed. The last QMR (QMR 6) will be provided in mid-July. Since the final review is on June 21 st, 2007 and the official end date of the project is June 30 th, 2007 the partners can not provide financial data for the month of June so the PO has asked the consortium to deliver the last QMR in July.

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS

C.2 Changes to the future project plan

If appropriate Report proposed changes on the structure, composition and sequence of work packages, based on the project programme. Changes shall respect the contractual conditions and costs. No further changes are foreseen.

Part D Assessment of plans for implementation and deployment

The purpose of this section is to provide an assessment of the critical aspects and challenges related to the deployment of the services. This section should not repeat the analysis and information already presented in other deliverables, but merely refer to it. Please complete the sections below. If you have provided the information elsewhere, please simply indicate where this information can be found in each case (i.e. the reference number of the deliverable and page number). D.1 The Services: D1.1 Describe the services that will be provided including the information content. The SELIS service provides a suitable interface to the authorised user for inputting the necessary data for the invoice fields that have been defined to comply with the Directive 2001/115/EC. The resulting invoice document is then signed by the authorised user, who accesses his credentials from a smart card. As soon as the outgoing eInvoice document is reviewed and signed, the remaining steps of the procedure are automated. These steps include the dispatch and reception of the electronic invoice by means of a Web Services-based mechanism and its storage for further processing by accounting systems and management operations, as well as the return of a signed receipt stored by the issuers part of the service. The identification of the transacting Web Services endpoints is accomplished by means of one UDDI registry hosted by UPRC. The product mechanism and architecture as well as the pre-requisites for using the platform are defined below. User interaction with the SELIS platform
Request of a certificate:

The end user sender of an invoice has a direct interface to place a request for a certificate with a certification authority (authentication or non-repudiation). The ability to manage multiple certificate requests for more than one actor within a single organisation is offered by the platform.
Validation of the certificate:

The recipient of a signed invoice will access directly the validation information for authentication or non-repudiation. Generation and dispatching of an e-invoice
Creation of an invoice:

The creations process is divided into two cases, as follows: a. PDF Invoice. b. XML Invoice. In both cases, the creations process is initiated by an employee who authenticates himself by means of his smart card and PIN through the User Interface, which is a signed applet. The User Interface enables the employee to complete the necessary data in order to create an invoice. The data input is

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS automatically checked to prevent any errors. a. PDF Invoice In the first case, PDF electronic invoices are generated and signed (as usual) by accessing the users credentials stored in the users smart card. The signed PDF documents are stored locally in the users file system in a predefined directory.
Dispatching of invoice:

The produced PDF invoices are distributed offline without using the underlying SELIS infrastructure. The user is able to dispatch the invoices using other electronic means, such as email. b. XML Invoice In the second case, the User Interface transparently gathers the time stamps and the revocation status information data from their respective sources. Then, a XAdES signature is formulated based on the cryptographic primitives in the smart card, the employees certificate and the invoice data. Finally, the invoice document is signed using the qualified certificate of the employee, which is located in the smart card. After the successful creation of the signed invoice document, the invoice document is packaged in a SOAP message employing the WS Security extensions and it is dispatched to the Issuers Web Service.
Dispatching of invoice:

The issuers Web Service is hosted in a Server controlled either by:

The Issuer organisation, or The Chamber of Commerce

UDDI Operator
UDDI

Issuer

Receiver

Secure Browser

e-Invoicing Service

e-Invoicing Service

Secure Browser

PKI

TTP

Figure: SELIS architecture The Web Service receives the SOAP message, decrypts it and verifies the WS security digital signature. Then, it extracts the invoice, stores it in the XML database and queries the Registry in order to receive the Privacy Policys and the WSDLs documents of the Receiver. The query is based on the VAT prefix of the Receiver that corresponds to the country code. The Issuer Web service parses the Receivers WSDL document and retrieves the Receivers Web Service endpoint. Then, the invoice is packaged in a new SOAP message in which the Issuer Web Service applies the acceptable Privacy Policy, employing the WS Security extensions. Finally, the protected SOAP message is dispatched over HTTP to the Receiver. Reception, validation and processing of an e-invoice
a. PDF Invoice Reception of invoice: 7

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS The sent PDF invoices are received via the used electronic means. The verification of the signature can be performed using a free downloaded PDF Reader or any other suitable software.
Storage of invoices:

The PDF invoices are stored locally in the recipients file system.
b. XML Invoice Reception of invoice:

The receiving Web Service is hosted in a Server controlled either by:

The Recipient organisation The Chamber of Commerce

The Web service receives the invoice and follows a fully automated process that requires no human intervention. The SOAP message containing the invoice is decrypted and it verifies the WS security digital signature, so that the point of origin is validated. Then the invoice document itself is extracted. The validation of the embedded cryptographic information firstly requires communication with a CA for verification of the credentials that were used to sign the e-Invoice as well as for verification of any timestamp that was included in the document. Finally the XAdES signature is validated. The next step is to form a signed SOAP reply containing an Acknowledgement notification about the reception status of the particular invoice. The Receiver WS stores the invoice and the receipt in the Receivers XML Database and it dispatches the SOAP receipt to the Issuer Web service. The SOAP receipt is encrypted with the Issuers public key, and digitally signed with the Receivers server private key. At last step, the Issuer Web Service receives the signed SOAP receipt, it decrypts it and it verifies the WS security digital signature. Then, it stores it in its XML database along with the sent invoice.
Processing of received invoices:

New unchecked invoices appear in the managing application inbox. After checking the status of the reviewed invoices is updated to checked, they remain stored in the XML database for the time length specified by the applicable legislation. The received invoices can also be transformed in the local schema using a transformation engine that enables the transformation between various text formats (XML, text). The transformed invoices can be imported by the used ERP and accounting systems in order to be used for further processing.
Storage of invoices:

The electronic invoice document is stored in an XML database in order to satisfy the requirement for storage in the format in which the invoice was sent and received. The invoice is stored at both the issuers and the receivers sides. Both parties have in their possession indisputable tokens, which are the signed invoices and their replies to prove that the exchange has actually occurred. To enable cross-border eInvoice exchange, the issue is to locate the Web Service. That is done via the VAT number that is its unique identifier due to its country prefix. D1.2 Provide a technical and functional description of the infrastructure needed. A high level presentation of the overall SELIS architecture is depicted in the figure that follows:

UDDI

Secure Browser

Interface to other architectures

Administration & orchestration

User interface

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS

D.2 The Market: D2.1 Describe the users of the services that will be using/paying for the services. The target market for the SELIS service comprises all types of enterprises, such as SMEs or larger organizations, but the initial focus will be on SMEs. Emphasis will be put on membership with the respective Chambers of Commerce (CoCs). The predicted size of this part of the market is in the order of many thousands around Europe. During the project initial deployment the candidate indicative market size can be estimated in the region of 200.000 companies, which approximates the sum of the members of the three CoCs that participate in the project. The long-term goal is to increase the participation and the independence of all types of companies and people, through low prices and high availability of the services. D2.2. Describe how the services will be marketed, including the pricing approach. For this section we refer the reader to D. 5.2 Final Business Plan D2.3 Describe the expected competition and the expected market share. Solutions for the Electronic Bill (Invoice) Presentment and Payment - EBPP (or EIPP), are provided by companies dedicated on this particular market segment as well as by large software companies offering a complete spectrum of business solutions as shown below:.
Editor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
ADP GSI Agresso Atos origin Basware B-Process Captiva Docubase Esker Influe Illicon Deskom

Product
Clear invoice Agresso invoice manager Worlwide invoice Basware Bill Manager Bwize Docubase enterprise Esker deliveryware Tradexpress Freemind Invoice manager Readsoft allegro a connect

Nationality
USA Netherland France Finland France USA France France France France France Swedish France Greece

10 Itesoft 11 Prologue 12 Readsoft 13 Seres 14 a connect

From the overall population of companies, both public and private, less than 5% of the companies with more than 10 employees have a real experience of dematerialization. If we focus though on fiscal dematerialization, this percentage falls down to around 2%. As a matter of fact, there is a great disparity between the SMEs which are new entrants in this market and the principal orders givers and invoicers which, as a general rule, impose their own decisions, mostly EDI-based. We can observe today that EDI represents the major part of exchanged fiscal invoices, as it benefits from a 10-year precedence in the implementation of order-processing and directly ERP-connected

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS applications (ERP: Enterprise Resource Planning) In order to analyse the maturity of the market, it is necessary to observe how well-prepared to switching to e-invoicing are the enterprises. For further analysis we refer the reader to D. 2.1 Market Analysis Study D.3 The Key Actors: D3.1 Identify the key actors (public and private) needed to deploy and operate the services. European Chambers of Commerce cluster The Chambers of Commerce of Athens, Brasov and Paris will act not only as market providers but as resellers of the service as well. Most of the identified barriers are based on misunderstanding or fear. Both can be countered by providing easy to comprehend relevant information, training and examples of successful implementations. At a European level it would be strongly recommended that the public authorities should consider using e-invoicing themselves on one hand, for cost saving, and on the other hand for stimulating and promoting the uptake of electronic invoicing throughout Europe. This is the reason why, once the deployment phases will be launched, the consortium expects to extend the initial project to the European Chamber of Commerce Network. A partnership will be established and proposed to have an agreement to undertake the sales efforts. Any CoC that wishes to offer the SELIS service should strongly consider adding to its organisational structure an eInvoicing Services Office (eISO). A proposed structure of an eISO will consist of: a Head of Office one or two infrastructure administrators one or two persons concerned with data entry one person involved with cross-border relationships One secretary of the Office. A possible layout is shown in the following diagram

The Head of Office will be responsible for the overall provision of the service as well as for

promoting the service to new customers. The Cross border relationship person will be responsible for establishing the legal and operational links in a CoC to CoC level. He/she will also be responsible for making the necessary agreements with all the other CoCs. The Infrastructure Administrators will be responsible for the technical support as well as the maintenance of the hardware and software components of the system. They may be persons
10

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS coming from the IT department of the CoC, outsourced persons or even personnel shared with other CoCs. The particular choice is dependent on the number of customers. As the number of customers increases, an eISO may consider hiring full time employees for these positions. The Data entry personnel will be involved in the entering of any data coming from the COC and the customers that need to be stored in the systems database. It may be one or more people, depending on the amount of data that is managed.
A secretary is also necessary to provide assistance in all operations.

In a more evolved version of this organisational structure, an eISO may consider to hire some help desk people to provide some first level assistance to customers. Software integrators These large companies, having a national or international coverage, will be able to bring technical competencies to the SMEs on demand, at an acceptable rate, in order to propagate the SELIS solution. They will be asked to interface and bundle the SELIS platform with their own solution in order to resell the package. Four to five entities could be selected, in order to cover geographically each country, with primary and secondary priorities on specific industrial sectors. The objective is to avoid, conflicts and, at the same time, a lack of presence in each territory. These integrators will have a strong ERP system knowledge, enabling them to install connectors on the customers site, in cases the customers are willing to directly extract the invoices from their ERP. Resellers These companies will complete Chambers of Commerce actions by providing technical assistance on the field, once SELIS has been chosen as the platform of choice. They could also resell the software on their own. D3.2 Report on the need to involve other partners in the operational phase of the project.

As explained in the previous section, the involvement of software integrators and resellers is necessary in order for the SELIS service providers to be compliant with the business plan and have a successful market adoption of the SELIS product.
D3.3 Report on the planned initiatives to prepare deployment (e.g. joint ventures, contractual arrangements between partners). UPRC and Expertnet have already agreed on exploiting SELIS through UPRC. Further agreements will be investigated.

11

D.4 Investment in the Overall Project: D4.1 Describe the physical investment such as servers, workstations, PCs etc. The platform server components may run on 1 PC with the following characteristics: Minimum requirements Processor RAM Disk space Operating System Internet connection 1000 Mhz 512 MB 1 GB Windows 2000 SP4 or Linux Broadband connection Recommended requirements At least 3000 Mhz 1 GB 1-2 GB Windows XP Pro SP2 384 ADSL or better

Any client that needs to access the server components should have the following characteristics: Minimum requirements Processor RAM Disk space Operating System Internet Browser Internet connection Smart card or USB security token 1000 Mhz 256 MB 200 MB Windows 2000 SP4 Internet Explorer 6.0 SP1, Mozilla Firefox 1.5, Mozilla Broadband connection Support for PC/SC & CTAPI Support for ISO7816compatible processor smart cards Recommended requirements 3000 Mhz 512 GB 500 MB Windows XP Pro SP2 Internet Explorer 6.0 SP1, Mozilla Firefox 1.5 384 ADSL or better (More specific smart card readers or products shall be defined shortly)

D4.2 Describe the non physical investment such as software tools, training, technical assistance, etc. D4.3 Provide a provisional time table of the project for the deployment and operation of the overall project.

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS

Year 2006
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1

Year 2007
Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1

Year 2008
Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1

Year 2009
Q2 Q3 Q4

Installation servers CoCs CoCs tests Customers tests Resellers recruitment Launch Athens, Brasov, Paris Platform SELIS Generalisation in Europe

D.5 Risks and Dependencies: Identify critical risks and dependencies to the implementation of the project, including regulatory issues, property rights, cost of communications etc. There are two kinds of risks related to the deployment of SELIS: one is internal to the product and lies mainly on not answering expectations of the market, as listed above (see market requirements for success). As already stated, acceptance by users is the real condition for a wider deployment, which means, simplicity of use, interoperability and a substantial return on investments the second one is external and deals with the evolution and speed of opening of the market. As usual in these technology-driven markets, when a service like electronic invoicing becomes progressively more popular, the time to market for new customers decreases and the commercial cost to approach them and take them on board decreases as well. The pioneering companies have to be able to survive in this period and, then, they have to face a revivified competition, attracted by a market which is now demand-driven.

Specific risks and associated actions are presented in the table below, where a project scenario is developed, listing task by task the potential risks and providing, wherever relevant, its mitigation plan:

Task To evaluate the market features (size, state of development, type of customers and competitors)

Risk Size of market in a period of 12 months following the end of SELIS might not justify the investment

Mitigation plan Consider extending the period to 24 months. Seek alternative deployment plans. Consider entering in similar areas (e.g. billing) or shifting geographical focus (e.g. beyond EU) Consider developing different versions of the platform based on the requirements of a group of countries or individual countries.

Likelihood MEDIUM

To quantify the needed investment costs, both for launch and maintenance of the service

There are differences among the countries represented in SELIS that might call for different levels of investment. Discrepancies might be too large to maintain one single platform offering the same level of service.

MEDIUM

13

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS To calculate the expected profitability and the users fees scheme Profits might not necessarily justify the effort and investment required Consider extending the period to 24 months. Seek alternative deployment plans. Consider entering in similar areas (e.g. billing) or shifting geographical focus (e.g. beyond EU) Consider modifying the business model of SELIS Take project management measures to ensure timely delivery MEDIUM

To define the business models suitable for each customer typology To implement a final business plan, including accounting and payment procedures Definition of the expected results to be achieved and of criteria and thresholds to evaluate the trial Study of national specificities (including eventual competition if any), collection of the available information and adaptation of the Business Plan Setting up the conditions needed for the start up of the trial To identify the services procedures to be implemented in the trial (required functions and utilities) Dry run of the pilot sites, operational tests To monitor the users reaction to the implemented services To collect data concerning the users satisfaction To provide an overall assessment of the trial run To implement the necessary adjustments to the system in order to improve the system

Business models might require a model not currently supported by SELIS Delays in implementing a definitive business plan

LOW

LOW

Delays in producing results and assessment criteria

Take project management measures to ensure timely delivery

LOW

Evolving requirements and specifications that might put deployment at risk of delay

Focus on the faster growing markets first (pick first the lower hanging fruits)

LOW

Delays in implementing the start up trial Delays in implementing procedures

Take project management measures to ensure timely implementation Take project management measures to ensure timely implementation of procedures

LOW

LOW

Delays in the dry runs at the pilot sites Delays in user involvement

Take project management measures to ensure timely implementation Take project management measures to ensure timely involvement Take project management measures to ensure timely collection Take project management measures to ensure timely assessments Take project management measures to ensure that misunderstandings and delays are averted

LOW

LOW

Delays in data collection

LOW

Delays in trial assessments

LOW

Misunderstanding and delays of what needs to be enhanced

LOW

14

ETEN GAN C517381 SELIS To start promoting the service across Europe. Market validation Barriers and challenges analysis Financing requirements to launch the service on a European base European law compatibility and sustainability Delays, or lack of funds to immediately start service promotion Wrong/not appropriate sample selection Overestimation of different relevant parameters Temporary lack of funds Involve the management of the Consortium partners to ensure support Refocus and expand to an additional geographic area Refocus and expand to a more appropriate area Involve the management of the Consortium partners to ensure support Timely liaise with the relevant member state authorities to ensure proper relay of requirements and updates thereof. Involve the management of the Consortium partners to ensure support Involve the management of the Consortium partners to ensure support MEDIUM

LOW LOW MEDIUM

Shifting consideration of legislative constraints

LOW

Design of the dissemination activities Dissemination activities implementation

Limited dissemination target definition Absence of or limited follow up

MEDIUM

MEDIUM

The project management risks are the following: Task Insufficient time allocated to tasks Change of key persons in project partners Change of strategic orientation of partners Limited investment resources to be dedicated to SELIS and the after SELIS investment Delays in fine-tuning of components Risk Risk of delaying delivery Risk of delays from transfer of knowledge Risk is pertinent to commercial partners and it might result in SELIS becoming redundant Risk of delaying deployment Mitigation plan Consider updating the delivery deadlines Keep close contacts with respective partners Coordinate with the European Commission and propose alternative strategy Seek commitment of partners Likelihoo d LOW LOW LOW

LOW

Delays of deployment

Keep up with documented timetable

LOW

15

ETEN GAN C517381 D.6 Finance:

SELIS

D6.1 Describe how the overall project for the first two years of operations will be financed, i.e. combination of private and public funds, equity financing, loans, grants, cash from operations, promoters own funds or other financial instruments. The following table provides the financing plan for the overall project
Cost category Operation expenses Personnel consumables Travel Subcontracting Other specific costs Overhead Legal support Advertising and marketing Training Capital expenditure Durable equipment Set up costs Technology infrastructure Total investment Year 1 (18m.) 841 546 560 099 0 34 400 0 8 000 209 047 10 000 20 000 0 167 560 7 560 0 160 000 1 009 106 Year 2 645 000 250 000 5 000 30 000 0 15 000 110 000 5 000 200 000 30 000 345 000 25 000 200 000 120 000 990 000 Year 3 980 000 400 000 10 000 20 000 0 20 000 160 000 10 000 300 000 60 000 330 000 80 000 0 250 000 1 310 000 Year 4 922 000 450 000 12 000 20 000 0 20 000 190 000 0 170 000 60 000 430 000 80 000 0 350 000 1 352 000 Total 3 388 546 1 660 099 27 000 104 400 0 63 000 669 047 25 000 690 000 150 000 1 272 560 192 560 200 000 880 000 4 661 106

D6.2 Provide an analysis of the revenue generated by the services. The sales forecast below has been constructed for each country using , in each category, a number of small, medium and large size enterprises. It is not dependent on the number of resellers that have an unknown progression, but on the capacity of each country to respond to the market, once the platform is in a recurrent process. It should be noted that these figures include software sales only, including maintenance for the integrated model and the site licensing if any. As the product will be delivered in a plug-and-play approach, the training hasnt been taken into account. It is supposed that the customer training regarding the connection with existing systems would be realised by the reseller channel, rather than by SELIS which will not intend to have the appropriate resources internally. D6.3 Provide a profit and loss statement and a cash flow analysis covering the first two years of operations. The analysis per country is provided in D.5.2 Final Business Plan.

Project Review Report

Page 16 of 16