Contains: - 1m-brag - tem - VaultMesh_Catalog_v1 - VAULTMESH-ETERNAL-PATTERN 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
12 KiB
PQC Integration — KPI Dashboard
Proposal: €2.8M HORIZON-CL3-2025-CS-ECCC-06 Version: 1.0 Date: 2025-11-06 Owner: VaultMesh Technologies B.V. (Coordinator)
Overview
This dashboard defines quantitative and qualitative Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) aligned with Horizon Europe evaluation criteria (Excellence 30%, Impact 30%, Implementation 40%).
Measurement approach:
- Baseline: Current state (TRL 4, existing VaultMesh node)
- Target: End of project (M24, TRL 6)
- Verification: How we prove the target was achieved
- Frequency: How often we measure during project
Excellence KPIs (Technical Innovation & Methodology)
E1: Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Progression
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TRL Level | 4 (Lab validation) | 6 (Pilot validation) | Independent TRL audit by external evaluator | M12, M24 |
| PQC Algorithms Integrated | 0 | 3 (Kyber, Dilithium, SPHINCS+) | Code repository tags + unit test coverage | Monthly |
| Receipt Throughput | 1,000 receipts/day | 10,000 receipts/day | Benchmark tests (D2.2) | Quarterly |
| Merkle Tree Depth | 5 levels (36 manifests) | 8 levels (256 manifests) | Compaction efficiency metrics | Monthly |
Success Criteria: TRL 6 achieved if ≥2/3 pilot sites validate system in operational environment.
E2: Scientific Publications & Dissemination
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peer-Reviewed Publications | 0 | 10+ (top-tier venues: IEEE S&P, ACM CCS, Usenix Security) | DOI links in D5.3 | M12: 3, M18: 7, M24: 10+ |
| Conference Presentations | 0 | 5+ (invited talks at ETSI TC CYBER, IETF CFRG) | Presentation slides + recordings | Quarterly |
| Technical Reports | 0 | 3 (D2.3, D3.3, D4.3) | Submitted to EU Open Research Repository | Per deliverable |
| Open-Source Contributions | 1 repo (vaultmesh-core) | 5+ repos (sealer, verifier, psi-field, router, pilots) | GitHub stars (target: 500+), forks (target: 50+) | Monthly |
Success Criteria: ≥8 publications in top-tier venues (h-index ≥30) by M24.
E3: Standards Contributions
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standards Drafts Submitted | 0 | 5+ (ETSI, IETF, ISO/IEC) | Draft IDs + submission confirmations (D5.2) | M18: 2, M24: 5+ |
| Working Group Participation | 0 | 3+ (ETSI TC CYBER, IETF CFRG, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27) | Meeting attendance records | Quarterly |
| Reference Implementation Adoption | 0 | 3+ organizations test VaultMesh PQC sealer | Community feedback + GitHub issues | M18, M24 |
Success Criteria: ≥3 standards drafts accepted for working group review by M24.
Impact KPIs (Societal & Economic Value)
I1: Compliance Cost Reduction
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Audit Hours Saved per Incident | 0% (no baseline) | 30% reduction vs. manual audit | Pilot benchmarks (D5.1): time to verify receipt chain vs. manual log review | Pilot phase (M12-M24) |
| Receipt Verification Time | N/A | <5 seconds per receipt (Merkle proof) | Performance benchmarks (D2.2) | Quarterly |
| Cost per Receipt (€) | €0 (no TSA/blockchain yet) | <€0.01 per receipt (batched anchoring) | Monthly TSA/blockchain invoices | Monthly |
| Audit Trail Completeness | 85% (current VaultMesh node) | 99%+ (LAWCHAIN + TSA anchoring) | Pilot assessments (D5.1) | Pilot phase |
Success Criteria: ≥2/3 pilot sites report ≥25% audit cost reduction vs. their current systems.
I2: Incident Response Improvement
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incident Detection Time | N/A (no Ψ-Field yet) | 50% faster vs. manual monitoring | Pilot logs (D5.1): time from anomaly to alert | Pilot phase |
| False Positive Rate | N/A | <10% (Ψ-Field tuned thresholds) | Pilot feedback + precision/recall metrics | Monthly (pilot phase) |
| Forensic Query Speed | N/A | <10 seconds (LAWCHAIN indexed queries) | Benchmarks (D4.2) | Quarterly |
Success Criteria: ≥1/3 pilot sites demonstrate ≥40% faster incident detection with <15% false positive rate.
I3: Adoption & Dissemination
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open-Source Downloads | ~100/month (current vaultmesh-core) | 500+ post-M24 (cumulative over 6 months post-project) | GitHub Insights, Docker Hub pulls | Monthly |
| Pilot Participants | 0 | 15+ peers (5 per pilot site: France, Czech, Greece) | Pilot deployment reports (D5.1) | M12: 5, M18: 10, M24: 15+ |
| Training Workshops | 0 | 3+ (1 per pilot region) | Attendance lists + materials published | M15, M18, M21 |
| Media Coverage | 0 | 5+ articles (tech press, cybersecurity blogs) | Links collected in D5.3 | M12: 1, M18: 3, M24: 5+ |
Success Criteria: ≥400 downloads and ≥12 pilot peers by M24.
I4: Sovereignty Enhancement
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cross-Border Federation Nodes | 0 | 15+ (across 3 countries) | Federation testbed logs (D4.2) | M12: 5, M18: 10, M24: 15+ |
| Sovereign Data Exchange (no third-party cloud) | 0% | 100% (mTLS peer-to-peer) | Architecture review (D1.2) + pilot deployments | Pilot phase |
| GDPR Compliance | Partial (current node) | Full (GDPR Art. 5(1)(f), Art. 25 compliance) | Legal review + ethics assessment (D5.3) | M10, M24 |
Success Criteria: ≥12 federation nodes operational with 100% peer-to-peer exchange (no third-party intermediaries).
Implementation KPIs (Management & Execution)
IM1: Deliverable Completion
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deliverables Submitted On-Time | N/A | 100% (13/13 deliverables by deadline) | EU portal submission confirmations | Per deliverable |
| Deliverable Quality (EU Review) | N/A | Average ≥4/5 stars (if EU provides feedback) | EU reviewer comments | M12, M24 |
| Public Deliverables | N/A | 9/13 deliverables (DMP, reports, standards drafts) | Open access repository | Per deliverable |
Deliverable List (13 total):
- WP1: D1.1 (M3), D1.2 (M6)
- WP2: D2.1 (M8), D2.2 (M11), D2.3 (M14)
- WP3: D3.1 (M10), D3.2 (M14), D3.3 (M16)
- WP4: D4.1 (M12), D4.2 (M16), D4.3 (M18)
- WP5: D5.1 (M20), D5.2 (M22), D5.3 (M24)
Success Criteria: ≥12/13 deliverables on-time, ≥8/9 public deliverables accessible via Open Access.
IM2: Budget & Resource Management
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Budget Burn Rate | 0% | Linear burn (±10% variance per quarter) | Financial reports to EU | Quarterly |
| Person-Months Allocated | 0 PM | 104 PM total (VaultMesh: 44, Brno: 24, Cyber Trust: 30, France: 18) | Timesheet reports | Monthly |
| Contingency Budget Used | 0% | <50% (€140K of €280K contingency) | Steering committee approvals | Monthly |
| Cost Overruns | N/A | 0 WPs exceed budget by >15% | Partner financial statements | Quarterly |
Success Criteria: ≤10% variance from planned budget per WP, <50% contingency used.
IM3: Consortium Coordination
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steering Committee Meetings | 0 | 24+ (monthly for 24 months) | Meeting minutes | Monthly |
| Partner Attendance Rate | N/A | ≥90% (all 4 partners attend ≥22/24 meetings) | Attendance logs | Monthly |
| Conflict Resolution Time | N/A | <2 weeks (escalations resolved within 2 weeks) | Conflict log (internal) | As needed |
| Knowledge Transfer Events | 0 | 6+ (workshops, joint debugging sessions) | Event reports | Quarterly |
Success Criteria: ≥90% attendance, no unresolved conflicts lasting >1 month.
IM4: Risk Mitigation Effectiveness
| Metric | Baseline (M0) | Target (M24) | Verification Method | Measurement Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High Risks (Score ≥6) | 0 | 0 (no critical blockers by M24) | Risk register updates | Monthly |
| Risks Closed | 0 | ≥5/15 risks closed as mitigated/irrelevant | Risk register | Quarterly |
| Risks Escalated to EU | N/A | 0 (all handled internally) | EU correspondence | As needed |
Success Criteria: No high-risk items at M24, ≥5 risks closed, 0 escalations to EU.
Summary KPI Table (For Part B Section 2.1)
| Category | KPI | Baseline | Target (M24) | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excellence | TRL Level | 4 | 6 | External TRL audit |
| Excellence | Publications | 0 | 10+ (top-tier) | DOI links |
| Excellence | Standards Drafts | 0 | 5+ (ETSI/IETF/ISO) | Draft IDs |
| Impact | Audit Cost Reduction | 0% | 30% | Pilot benchmarks (D5.1) |
| Impact | Incident Detection | N/A | 50% faster | Pilot logs |
| Impact | Open-Source Downloads | ~100/mo | 500+ post-M24 | GitHub Insights |
| Impact | Federation Nodes | 0 | 15+ (3 countries) | Testbed logs (D4.2) |
| Implementation | Deliverables On-Time | N/A | 100% (13/13) | EU portal confirmations |
| Implementation | Budget Variance | N/A | ≤10% per WP | Financial reports |
| Implementation | Steering Attendance | N/A | ≥90% | Attendance logs |
KPI Dashboard Access
During Project:
- Consortium Portal: Real-time KPI tracking via Mattermost/NextCloud dashboard
- Monthly Steering Calls: Review 3-5 priority KPIs per call
- Quarterly Reports: Full KPI table in EU periodic reports
Public KPIs (Post-M24):
- Open-source downloads (GitHub Insights public)
- Publications (DOI links in Open Access repos)
- Standards contributions (ETSI/IETF public drafts)
Reviewer Notes
For Part B Section 2.1 (Pathways to Impact):
"The project defines 18 quantitative KPIs across Excellence, Impact, and Implementation dimensions. Key targets include: TRL 4→6 progression validated by external audit; 10+ top-tier publications; 5+ standards contributions; 30% audit cost reduction in pilots; 50% faster incident detection; 500+ open-source downloads post-project; 15+ federation nodes across 3 countries; 100% deliverable on-time completion; ≤10% budget variance. Monthly KPI tracking via consortium portal ensures proactive management and timely course corrections."
For reviewers evaluating Impact (30% of score):
- Shows concrete, measurable outcomes (not vague "we will contribute to...")
- Demonstrates realistic targets (30% cost reduction, not 90%)
- Proves systematic measurement plan (verification methods specified)
- Indicates impact beyond project (open-source downloads post-M24)
Document Control:
- Version: 1.0-KPI-DASHBOARD
- Date: 2025-11-06
- Owner: VaultMesh Technologies B.V. (Coordinator)
- Classification: Consortium Internal (will become Part B Section 2.1)
- Related: PQC_Risk_Register.md, PQC_Work_Package_Gantt.mmd