01 Blind · Evaluation Disclosure Restrictions Applicants submitting proposals for blind evaluation must not disclose their organisation names, acronyms, logos, nor names of personnel in the proposal abstract and Part B of their first-stage application. Additionally, names of proposers or their organisations should not be potentially identifiable indirectly, via links to web pages or through references to their role and previous experience. The proposal can include references to their own publications if there is no emphasis that the publication is authored by one or more of the proposers. If anonymity is not respected in the proposal abstract or Part B, the proposal will be declared inadmissible. Information on the identity of participants should be included only in proposal Part A (the structured online web forms), except in the Abstract section.
02 Page · Limit Extension for Second-Stage Proposals Not specified in the available documents. The documents indicate that the first-stage application has a 10-page limit, and full applications (second-stage) have a 40-page limit (or 45 pages for topics using lump sum funding), but no specific extension or justification for an extension beyond these limits is mentioned.
03 Proposal · Page Limits and Layout Requirements For first-stage proposals (two-stage submission procedure), the page limit is 10 pages. For full proposals (single-stage submission or 2nd stage of two-stage procedure), the page limit is 40 pages, or 45 pages for topics using lump sum funding. The title, list of participants and sections 1, 2 and 3 together should not exceed these limits. All tables, figures, references and any other element pertaining to these sections must be included as an integral part and are counted against the page limit. The reference font for body text is Times New Roman (Windows), Times/Times New Roman (Apple), or Nimbus Roman No. 9 L (Linux). Minimum font size is 11 points. Standard character spacing and minimum single line spacing must be used. Page size is A4 with all margins (top, bottom, left, right) at least 15 mm. Excess pages will be automatically made invisible and not considered by experts.
04 Eligible · Countries and Participation To be eligible for funding, applicants must be established in one of the following: EU Member States (including outermost regions), Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs) linked to Member States, or countries associated to Horizon Europe (Albania, Arab Republic of Egypt, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Faroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Kosovo, Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Republic of Korea, Serbia, Switzerland, Tunisia, Türkiye, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and other low- and middle-income countries as listed). Legal entities established in countries not listed above will be eligible for funding if provided for in the specific call/topic conditions, or if their participation is considered essential for implementing the action by the granting authority. Affiliated entities are eligible if established in one of the listed countries or in a country identified in specific call/topic conditions. Entities not eligible for funding may participate as associated partners unless specified otherwise in call/topic conditions.
05 Other · Eligibility Conditions Beyond Country Applicants must comply with several eligibility conditions: (1) Consent and accuracy - explicit consent of all applicants on participation and proposal content; confirmation that project activities have not started before submission unless authorised in call conditions; (2) Eligibility and exclusion - applicants must be fully compliant with eligibility criteria and not subject to exclusion grounds; (3) Operational capacity - applicants must have the know-how, qualifications and resources to successfully implement their tasks and contribute their share, including sufficient experience in EU/transnational projects of comparable size; (4) Financial capacity - applicants must have stable and sufficient resources to successfully implement projects; (5) Exclusion criteria - applicants subject to EU administrative sanctions or in exclusion situations (bankruptcy, winding up, affairs administered by courts, arrangement with creditors, suspended business activities or similar procedures) cannot participate.
06 Financial · and Operational Capacity Requirements Financial capacity: Applicants must have stable and sufficient resources to successfully implement projects. Financial capacity check is normally done for the coordinator if the requested grant amount is equal to or greater than EUR 500,000, except for public bodies or international organisations, and cases where individual requested grant amount is not more than EUR 60,000. The check is based on documents uploaded during grant preparation (profit and loss account, balance sheet, business plan, audit report, etc.) using neutral financial indicators (liquidity, financial autonomy, solvency, profitability) and other aspects (dependency on EU funding, deficit and revenue in previous years). If financial capacity is not satisfactory, the granting authority may require further information, enhanced financial responsibility regime, prefinancing in instalments, prefinancing guarantees, no prefinancing, or rejection. Operational capacity: Applicants must have know-how, qualifications and resources to successfully implement tasks and contribute their share, including sufficient experience in EU/transnational projects of comparable size. Assessment is based on competence and experience of applicants and project teams, operational resources (human, technical, other), or measures to obtain necessary competence. Public bodies, Member State organisations and international organisations are exempted from operational capacity check.
07 Blind · Evaluation Process for First-Stage Yes, first-stage proposals in two-stage submission procedures will be evaluated blindly. Applicants must not disclose their identity in the proposal abstract and Part B of their first-stage application. The evaluation process involves independent evaluators who assess proposals without knowing the identity of applicants. Evaluators are briefed on evaluation processes, procedures, award criteria, and the need to evaluate proposals as submitted. Individual evaluators work independently, giving scores and comments, then participate in consensus groups to agree on common positions. The evaluation panel then discusses proposals to reach agreement on scores, check consistency, and rank above-threshold proposals. For stage 1 proposals, only the criteria Excellence and Impact will be evaluated, with only the aspects indicated in bold in the General Annex considered. The threshold for each of the two individual criteria is 4. The overall threshold is set at a level ensuring total requested budget of proposals admitted to stage 2 is as close as possible to three times the available budget, and not less than two times the available budget, expected normally to be around 8 or 8.5.
08 Award · Criteria, Scoring and Evaluation Thresholds For full applications (single-stage or stage 2 of two-stage), three criteria are evaluated: Excellence, Impact, and Quality and efficiency of the implementation. Each criterion is scored out of 5. The threshold for individual criteria is 3. The overall threshold, applying to the sum of the three individual scores, is 10. For Innovation actions, the score for Impact is given a weight of 1.5 for ranking purposes. Scoring scale: 0 = fails to address criterion or cannot be assessed; 1 = Poor; 2 = Fair; 3 = Good; 4 = Very Good; 5 = Excellent. Proposals must pass both individual thresholds (3 for each criterion) AND the overall threshold (10 total) to be considered for funding. For stage 1 proposals in two-stage procedures, only Excellence and Impact criteria are evaluated with individual thresholds of 4 each, and an overall threshold expected to be around 8 or 8.5. Proposals passing thresholds are ranked and considered for funding within available budget limits.
09 Submission · and Evaluation Process Submissions: All proposals must be submitted electronically via the EU Funding & Tenders Portal electronic submission system before the call deadline. Paper submissions are not possible. Proposals must be complete with all parts and mandatory annexes. The application form has two parts: Part A (filled online) contains administrative information and budget summary; Part B (downloaded, completed, and re-uploaded as PDF) contains technical description. Evaluation process: Admissible and eligible proposals are sent to evaluation by an independent evaluation committee composed of external experts. For Horizon Europe, the committee is usually composed exclusively of external experts for all evaluation stages. The evaluation process includes: (1) Briefing of evaluators on procedures, award criteria, and need to evaluate proposals as submitted; (2) Individual evaluation - each evaluator scores each criterion with comments and prepares individual evaluation report; (3) Consensus group - evaluators meet to agree on common position on comments and scores; (4) Panel review - evaluation committee discusses proposals to reach agreement on scores, check consistency, rank above-threshold proposals, and give priority order for proposals with same score. Proposals are evaluated on their own merit, not on potential if changes were made.
10 Evaluation · Timeline and Grant Agreement Signature For single-stage calls: Information on evaluation outcome is expected around 5 months from the submission deadline. Indicative date for signing of grant agreements is around 8 months from the submission deadline. For two-stage calls: Evaluation result for first stage is expected around 3 months from the first stage submission deadline. Evaluation result for second stage is expected around 5 months from the second stage submission deadline. Grant agreement signature is expected around 8 months from the second stage submission deadline. During grant preparation, the consortium must prepare grant agreement data within 3 weeks of the grant preparation invitation letter, finalise within 2 weeks of Project Officer reply, sign declaration of honour within 6 weeks, and complete grant signature within 3 months of the invitation letter. These are indicative timelines and may vary depending on specific call conditions.
11 Results · Ownership and Transfer Restrictions The granting authority does not obtain ownership of the results produced under the action. Results are defined as any tangible or intangible effect of the action, such as data, know-how or information, whatever its form or nature, whether or not it can be protected, as well as any rights attached to it, including intellectual property rights. The owner of results is the natural or legal entity that has generated the results. Specific rules regarding intellectual property rights, results and background (if any) are set out in Annex 5 of the grant agreement. The granting authority has the right to use non-sensitive information relating to the action and materials and documents received from beneficiaries for policy, information, communication, dissemination and publicity purposes during and after the action. This right is granted as a royalty-free, non-exclusive and irrevocable licence for the whole duration of the industrial or intellectual property rights concerned. The documents do not specify a particular period during which the granting authority can object to transfer of ownership or exclusive licensing of results.
12 Lump · Sum Eligible Costs Definition For lump sum contributions, the detailed cost estimation must be an approximation of actual costs and is subject to the same eligibility rules as in actual costs grants. Cost estimations must be in line with the beneficiary's normal practices, must be reasonable and non-excessive, and must be necessary for the proposed activities. The estimated eligible costs for the action must be broken down by budget category: A. Personnel costs; B. Subcontracting costs; C. Purchase costs; D. Other cost categories; E. Indirect costs (calculated at 25% flat rate of direct costs qualifying for indirect cost calculation). The detailed cost estimation per work package and per beneficiary and affiliated entity must include only costs that would be considered eligible in an actual costs grant. Ineligible costs must not be included. Beneficiaries must declare that they have followed their own accounting practices for budget preparation. The lump sum breakdown is generated automatically showing lump sum shares per beneficiary/affiliated entity and per work package, applying the funding rate chosen. Following evaluation, lump sum shares are fixed in the Grant Agreement per beneficiary and per work package.
13 Stage · 1 Application Form Template The standard application form template for Stage 1 submissions in two-stage calls is the 'Application form (HE 1st stage RIA and IA BLIND)' version 5.1 dated 09.03.2026. This form is specifically designed for blind evaluation and includes guidance on anonymity requirements. Part A is filled in online and contains administrative information. Part B is a short proposal (10 pages maximum) that must be downloaded, completed, and re-uploaded as a PDF. The form includes sections on Excellence and Impact criteria only (not Quality and efficiency of implementation). Applicants must ensure no disclosure of organisation names, acronyms, logos, or personnel names in the proposal abstract and Part B.
14 Stage · 2 Application Form Template The standard application form template for Stage 2 submissions (or single-stage full proposals) is the 'Application form (HE RIA and IA)' version 5.1 dated 22.01.2026. This form is used for full proposals in single-stage submission procedures or at the 2nd stage of two-stage submission procedures. Part A is generated by the IT system based on information entered through the submission system. Part B is the narrative part including three sections corresponding to the three evaluation criteria (Excellence, Impact, and Quality and efficiency of implementation). Part B must be uploaded as a PDF document following the template downloaded from the submission system. The page limit is 40 pages (or 45 pages for topics using lump sum funding). The form includes sections on general information, participants, budget, ethics and security, and other questions.
15 Stage · 1 Evaluation Form Template The evaluation form template for Stage 1 blind evaluation is the 'Evaluation form (RIA IA CSA Stage 1 BLIND)' marked as SENSITIVE. This form is used by evaluators to assess first-stage proposals in two-stage submission procedures. It includes sections for project information, participants, project abstract, evaluation details, and assessment of the two criteria (Excellence and Impact) with only the bold aspects from the General Annex considered. The form includes a section for assessment of the pilot on blind evaluation, asking evaluators whether they could guess the identity of applicants despite anonymity requirements. Evaluators provide individual evaluation reports (IER) or consensus reports (CR) using this template.
16 Stage · 2 Evaluation Form Template The evaluation form template for Stage 2 evaluation (or single-stage full proposal evaluation) is the 'Evaluation form (RIA IA)' version 5.1. This form is used by evaluators to assess full proposals against all three evaluation criteria: Excellence, Impact, and Quality and efficiency of implementation. The form includes sections for project information, participants, project abstract, evaluation details, and assessment of all three criteria. Evaluators provide individual evaluation reports with scores (0-5 scale with half-marks allowed) and comments for each criterion. The form is used for individual evaluation, consensus group discussion, and panel review.
17 Model · Grant Agreement and Lump Sum Provisions The model grant agreement applicable to this call is the 'EU Grants: [PROGR Lump Sum MGA - Multi & Mono]: V1.0 - 01.11.2024'. This is a lump sum model grant agreement that applies to both multi-beneficiary and mono-beneficiary grants. The agreement includes specific provisions for lump sum funding, which simplifies financial management compared to actual cost grants. Key provisions include: (1) Form of grant: Lump sum; (2) Grant mode: Action grant; (3) Budget categories: Lump sum contributions per work package; (4) No reporting of actual costs or financial checks and audits; (5) Lump sum shares fixed per beneficiary and per work package in the Grant Agreement following evaluation; (6) Payments upon completion of work packages at end of reporting periods; (7) Pre-financing as usual; (8) Continuous reporting through Portal tool; (9) Periodic reporting with technical and financial parts. The agreement includes standard provisions on beneficiaries, affiliated entities, associated partners, intellectual property rights, communication and dissemination, and various other obligations and consequences of non-compliance.
18 Financial · Support to Third Parties Requirements Where the specific call/topic conditions allow for financial support to third parties, applicants must clearly describe in their proposal the objectives and expected results, including elements listed in the application template. The following conditions must be fulfilled: (1) Projects must publish open calls widely and adhere to EU standards of transparency, equal treatment, conflict of interest and confidentiality; (2) All calls for third parties and calls implemented by third parties must be published on the EU Funding & Tenders Portal and beneficiaries' websites; (3) Calls must remain open for at least 2 months; (4) If submission deadlines are changed, this must be immediately announced and registered applicants informed; (5) Projects must publish call outcomes without delay, including description of third-party projects, award date, duration, legal name and country of establishment; (6) Calls must have a clear European dimension. For grants, the maximum amount of financial support per third party is typically 60,000 EUR unless explicitly mentioned otherwise in the Work Programme topic. Applicants must specify: maximum amount per third party, criteria for calculating exact amount, types of activities qualifying for support, persons or categories eligible, and criteria for giving support. For COFUND actions, measures to avoid conflicts of interest and unequal treatment must be described.
19 Clinical · Studies Requirements and Deliverables For proposals involving clinical studies, applicants must provide information on clinical study description and preparedness status. Three mandatory deliverables apply to each clinical study: (1) Study initiation package (before enrolment of first participant) including: registration number in WHO Registry-meeting criteria (CTIS number for studies under Clinical Trials Regulation EU 536/2014), final version of study protocol as approved by regulator(s)/ethics committee(s), and regulatory and ethics approvals required for first participant enrolment (submission of approvals for first clinical site sufficient for multicentre studies); (2) Midterm recruitment report due when 50% of study population is recruited, including overview of recruited participants by site, any recruitment problems, and description of implemented/planned measures to compensate for delays; (3) Report on status of posting results, scheduled for when results posting is expected or last months of project, whichever earlier, confirming summary results posted in applicable registry/ies. Applicants must provide regulatory intelligence information on how consortium will ensure access to regulatory expertise for regulatory affairs management in all concerned jurisdictions and access to ethics expertise for ethics committee proceedings and documentation requirements. Ethics considerations must be addressed in appropriate proposal section; risks and mitigation measures in proposal Part B sections 3.1 and table 3.1e, not in the clinical studies template.
20 Lump · Sum Contributions Guidance and Operation Lump sum contributions considerably simplify and streamline financial management of actions for both granting authority and beneficiaries, reducing administrative burden. Key aspects: (1) Detailed budget table: Applicants provide cost estimations for each cost category per beneficiary and per work package, which must be an approximation of actual costs and subject to same eligibility rules as actual cost grants. Cost estimations must be in line with normal practices, reasonable/non-excessive, and necessary for activities. (2) Automatic breakdown: Cost estimations automatically generate breakdown of lump sum shares per work package and per participant. (3) Fixed amounts: Following evaluation, lump sum shares are defined per beneficiary and per work package and fixed in Grant Agreement. (4) No actual cost reporting: No reporting of actual costs, no financial checks and audits on actual expenditure. (5) Payments: Pre-financing as usual; payments upon completion of work packages at end of reporting periods. (6) Continuous reporting: Beneficiaries report progress (deliverables, milestones, outputs/outcomes, risks, indicators) through Portal Continuous Reporting tool. (7) Periodic reporting: Technical and financial parts; financial statement contains lump sum contributions for completed work packages. (8) Eligibility: Lump sum contributions must be declared in financial statement to be taken into account; coordinator confirms information is complete, reliable, true, contributions are eligible, and proper implementation can be substantiated by adequate records and supporting documents.