How to Write a Competitive Horizon Europe Proposal

Why Structure Matters More Than You Think

Horizon Europe is the EU's key research and innovation programme with a budget of EUR 93.5 billion for 2021–2027 (European Commission). Competition is fierce, and proposals are evaluated strictly against three criteria, each scored on a 0–5 scale. Understanding what evaluators look for is the single biggest lever you can pull.

This guide walks you through the structure and strategy behind each criterion, based on the official Horizon Europe Programme Guide.

The Three Evaluation Criteria

Every Horizon Europe proposal under Pillar II (Global Challenges and European Industrial Competitiveness) is assessed on:

1. Excellence — the quality of your scientific and technical approach
2. Impact — the expected outcomes and benefits to society, economy, and science
3. Implementation — the feasibility of your work plan, consortium, and management

Each criterion is scored from 0 (absent) to 5 (excellent). A proposal must score at least 3 out of 5 on each criterion to pass the evaluation threshold. The three criteria carry equal weight in the overall score.

Criterion 1: Excellence

This is where evaluators judge what you want to do and why it matters scientifically.

What Evaluators Look For

• Clarity and credibility of the objectives: Are they measurable and realistic?
• Novelty of the approach: Does it go beyond the state of the art?
• Soundness of the methodology: Is the research design rigorous?
• Interdisciplinarity where relevant: Does the approach combine disciplines effectively?

How to Score High

• Start with the problem, not the solution. Frame your objectives around a clearly defined gap in current knowledge or technology. Reference specific limitations of existing approaches.
• Be explicit about novelty. Don't assume the evaluator knows your field. Write a dedicated paragraph explaining exactly what is new about your approach compared to the state of the art.
• Define measurable objectives. Vague objectives like "improve sustainability" score poorly. Prefer "reduce energy consumption by X% compared to current methods" — but only if you can justify the target.
• Include a clear methodology section. Break down your approach into logical steps. Explain why each step is necessary and how it connects to the next.

Common Pitfalls

• Listing technologies without explaining why they're the right choice
• Citing your own prior work without acknowledging competing approaches
• Over-promising results without justifying feasibility

Criterion 2: Impact

Impact is about who benefits and how much. This criterion trips up many technically strong proposals.

What Evaluators Look For

• Credible pathways to impact: How will results reach end users?
• Scale of expected benefits: Who benefits and at what magnitude?
• Dissemination and exploitation plans: Concrete activities, not generic lists
• Communication strategy: How will results reach non-specialist audiences?

How to Score High

• Quantify where possible. If your technology could reduce costs in an industry, estimate the addressable market. Reference industry reports or official statistics.
• Distinguish outputs, outcomes, and impacts. An output is a publication or prototype. An outcome is adoption by a target group. An impact is the societal change that follows. Evaluators want to see all three levels.
• Name specific end users or stakeholders. "Industry partners" is vague. "Automotive OEMs in the EU, specifically Tier 1 suppliers" is specific and credible.
• Include a realistic exploitation plan. If you plan to commercialise, describe the business model. If the result is a policy recommendation, describe the pathway to policymakers.

Common Pitfalls

• Confusing dissemination (spreading awareness) with exploitation (creating value)
• Listing generic channels ("we will publish papers and attend conferences") without concrete targets
• Ignoring open access and data management requirements

Criterion 3: Implementation

This criterion tests whether your consortium can actually deliver.

What Evaluators Look For

• Quality of the work plan: Clear work packages with defined deliverables and milestones
• Management structure: Governance, decision-making, risk management
• Consortium composition: Complementary expertise, geographic spread, sector balance
• Resource allocation: Justified budget across partners

How to Score High

• Design work packages around objectives, not partners. Each WP should have a clear purpose tied to one or more project objectives. Avoid "Partner A does WP1, Partner B does WP2" structures.
• Include a Gantt chart. Visual timelines help evaluators assess feasibility at a glance.
• Address risks explicitly. Identify technical, commercial, and organisational risks. For each, describe the mitigation strategy.
• Justify every partner's role. Evaluators check whether each consortium member has a clear, non-redundant role. If a partner's contribution is unclear, it weakens the entire proposal.

Common Pitfalls

• Allocating budget evenly across partners regardless of effort
• Missing or vague milestones ("Project meeting" is not a milestone)
• No contingency plan for key risks

Funding Rates to Know

The funding rate depends on the type of action:

• Research and Innovation Actions (RIA): Up to 100% of eligible costs
• Innovation Actions (IA): Up to 70% of eligible costs (except for non-profit organisations, which can receive up to 100%)

Source: Horizon Europe Programme Guide

Consortium Requirements

Most Horizon Europe collaborative calls require:

• Minimum 3 independent legal entities from 3 different EU Member States or Horizon Europe Associated Countries
• A balanced mix of research organisations, industry, and end-user organisations (depending on the call)

Source: Horizon Europe Programme Guide

Before You Submit: A Checklist

• Does each section clearly address one evaluation criterion?
• Are objectives specific, measurable, and achievable within the project timeline?
• Is the novelty of the approach explicitly stated?
• Does the impact section quantify benefits with credible references?
• Are work packages structured around objectives, not partners?
• Is every partner's role clearly justified?
• Are risks identified with concrete mitigation strategies?
• Does the budget match the described effort per partner?

Next Steps

Before submitting, benchmark your proposal against previously funded projects in your topic area. You can explore funded projects from Horizon Europe and H2020 in our Project Explorer to understand what evaluators have funded before — including consortium compositions, funding amounts, and research themes.

Want quantitative feedback on your proposal? Try a free evaluation and get an AI-generated scorecard in under 30 seconds.