Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research eu-horizon-guide
Navigate EU Horizon Europe funding programs and proposal writing
git clone https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/43-wentorai-research-plugins/skills/research/funding/eu-horizon-guide" ~/.claude/skills/brycewang-stanford-awesome-agent-skills-for-empirical-research-eu-horizon-guide && rm -rf "$T"
skills/43-wentorai-research-plugins/skills/research/funding/eu-horizon-guide/SKILL.mdEU Horizon Europe Guide
A skill for navigating the EU Horizon Europe Framework Programme, identifying relevant funding calls, understanding eligibility rules, building consortia, and writing competitive proposals. Covers the three-pillar structure, key instruments (ERC, MSCA, collaborative projects), budget planning, and the evaluation process.
Horizon Europe Structure
Three Pillars
Horizon Europe (2021-2027) has a total budget of approximately EUR 95.5 billion, organized into three pillars plus a horizontal component.
Pillar I - Excellent Science (~EUR 25B): - European Research Council (ERC): frontier research - Starting Grants: 2-7 years post-PhD, up to EUR 1.5M - Consolidator Grants: 7-12 years post-PhD, up to EUR 2M - Advanced Grants: established leaders, up to EUR 2.5M - Synergy Grants: 2-4 PIs, up to EUR 10M - Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA): researcher mobility - Postdoctoral Fellowships: individual mobility - Doctoral Networks: structured PhD programs - Staff Exchanges: inter-sector mobility - Research Infrastructures: access to facilities Pillar II - Global Challenges and European Industrial Competitiveness (~EUR 53.5B): - Six clusters: 1. Health 2. Culture, Creativity and Inclusive Society 3. Civil Security for Society 4. Digital, Industry and Space 5. Climate, Energy and Mobility 6. Food, Bioeconomy, Natural Resources, Agriculture, Environment - Missions: Cancer, Climate Adaptation, Oceans, Cities, Soil Pillar III - Innovative Europe (~EUR 13.6B): - European Innovation Council (EIC) - European Innovation Ecosystems - European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)
Finding Relevant Calls
Step-by-step call identification: 1. Funding and Tenders Portal (primary source): https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/ - Search by keyword, cluster, instrument type - Filter by open calls, upcoming deadlines - Subscribe to email alerts for your topics 2. Work Programme documents: - Published every 2 years (2023-2024, 2025-2027) - Detailed topic descriptions with expected outcomes - Specify eligible participants, budget, project duration - Read the FULL topic description, not just the title 3. National Contact Points (NCPs): - Each EU member state has NCPs for each cluster - Free advice on eligibility, partner search, proposal review - Often organize information days and matchmaking events 4. Partner Search: - CORDIS Partner Service - Enterprise Europe Network - NCP matchmaking events - Conference networking sessions
Proposal Writing
Structure of a Collaborative Proposal (RIA/IA)
Part A: Administrative forms (online) - Participant information - Budget tables - Ethics issues table - Call-specific declarations Part B: Technical description (PDF upload) Section 1 - Excellence (scored): 1.1 Objectives and ambition 1.2 Methodology 1.3 Interdisciplinary/intersectoral approach (if relevant) Section 2 - Impact (scored): 2.1 Project results and expected impacts 2.2 Communication, dissemination, exploitation 2.3 Summary of measures to maximize impact Section 3 - Implementation (scored): 3.1 Work plan: work packages, tasks, deliverables, milestones 3.2 Management structure, milestones, critical risks 3.3 Consortium composition and partnership Note: Page limits are STRICTLY enforced. Typical limits: 40-50 pages for Part B.
Writing Tips for High Scores
Excellence section: - Start with the specific call topic text, show exact alignment - State objectives as SMART goals (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound) - Methodology: explain WHY this approach, not just WHAT you will do - Include a Gantt chart showing work package timing - Describe beyond-state-of-the-art contributions explicitly - Use the exact terminology from the call topic Impact section: - Use the Impact Canvas framework: outputs -> outcomes -> impacts - Quantify impacts where possible (publications, patents, jobs, policy changes, training beneficiaries) - Name specific stakeholders who will use your results - Include a credible exploitation plan (not just "we will publish") - Show knowledge of the Target and Expected Impacts in the call Implementation section: - Work packages should have clear, non-overlapping scope - Each partner should lead at least one work package - Include a dedicated management WP (WP1) and dissemination WP - Risk register with likelihood, impact, and mitigation measures - Pert chart or Gantt chart is expected
Consortium Building
Partner Selection
Ideal consortium characteristics: Composition: - 5-15 partners for a standard RIA (Research and Innovation Action) - At least 3 partners from 3 different EU member states - Mix of universities, research institutes, SMEs, industry, CSOs - Include at least one partner from a widening country (bonus) Partner roles: - Coordinator: strong project management track record - Scientific leads: top researchers in the field - Industry partners: exploitation and market access - SMEs: agility, innovation, close to market - End users: validation, real-world testing - CSOs/NGOs: societal engagement, responsible innovation Red flags: - Partners who do not respond to emails promptly - Partners with no relevant publications or experience - Duplicate competencies (no justification for overlap) - Partners from the same country as the coordinator (too many) - Partners who cannot provide co-funding if required
Budget Planning
Eligible Costs
Budget categories in Horizon Europe: A. Personnel costs: - Actual salary costs or unit costs (daily rates) - Include employer social charges - Personnel must be directly working on the project - Time sheets or equivalent time recording required B. Subcontracting: - Must be justified and identified in the proposal - Cannot subcontract core scientific work - Subject to best value-for-money procurement C. Purchase costs: - Travel and subsistence - Equipment (depreciation during project period) - Other goods, works, and services D. Other cost categories: - Financial support to third parties (cascading grants) - Internally invoiced goods and services E. Indirect costs: - Flat rate of 25% of eligible direct costs - No need to justify or document Funding rates: - RIA (Research and Innovation Action): 100% of eligible costs - IA (Innovation Action): 70% (100% for non-profit) - CSA (Coordination and Support Action): 100% - MSCA: unit costs (fixed amounts per researcher-month) - ERC: 100% + 25% indirect
Evaluation Process
How Proposals Are Scored
Evaluation criteria and weights: Criterion Weight Threshold Score Range ----------- ------ --------- ---------- Excellence varies 3/5 0-5 Impact varies 3/5 0-5 Implementation varies 3/5 0-5 Overall - 10/15 sum of above Score descriptors: 5 = Excellent: successfully addresses all relevant aspects 4 = Very good: addresses the criterion very well but has a small number of shortcomings 3 = Good: addresses the criterion well but with a number of shortcomings 2 = Fair: broadly addresses the criterion but with significant weaknesses 1 = Poor: fails to convincingly address the criterion 0 = Not applicable or missing Process: 1. Individual remote evaluation (4-5 evaluators per proposal) 2. Consensus meeting (evaluators discuss and agree scores) 3. Panel review (ranking, budget allocation) 4. Ethics review (if flagged) 5. Grant Agreement preparation (6-9 months after deadline) Typical success rate: 10-15% for most calls ERC success rate: 10-12% for Starting Grants
Horizon Europe proposals require significant investment of time and resources. Starting preparation 6 to 12 months before the deadline, engaging National Contact Points early, and assembling a balanced consortium with complementary expertise are the strongest predictors of success, alongside the scientific quality of the proposed research itself.