Most Horizon Europe proposals are rejected not for a weak idea but for predictable failures: drifting from the topic scope, unmeasurable expected results, a consortium duplicating expertise instead of complementing it, and a work plan that does not match the narrative. Learning this list beats waiting a year for the next call.
- Most common formal
- Consortium composition
- Most common substantive
- Drift from the topic
- Inflated budget
- Lowers the score
- Good but unfunded
- ~70%
Horizon Europe proposals are rarely rejected for a weak scientific idea. Far more often it is for mistakes visible before substantive assessment, or ones that systematically cost points.
Formal: rejected unread
Consortium composition. Three partners from three associated countries do not satisfy the condition: at least one must be from an EU Member State. Affiliated entities and associated partners do not count towards the minimum three.
Exceeding the page limit. Excess pages are automatically made invisible after the deadline – and a section pushed there counts as unaddressed.
Missing the deadline. 17:00 Brussels time, with no exception for technical trouble.
Substantive: costing points
Drifting from the topic scope. The commonest cause of a low Excellence score. The evaluation form has a dedicated scope question, and partial mismatch is reflected in the score directly.
Unmeasurable results. "Increased awareness" is not a result – a baseline and a target value are needed.
A consortium duplicating expertise. Partners must complement, not repeat. Evaluators can tell when an organisation's role is not backed by any task.
A work plan that does not match the narrative. Deliverables without packages, packages without deliverables, a budget unconnected to the team.
An inflated budget. The mechanics matter here: experts are forbidden to recommend modifications. They will not advise cutting the amount – they will lower the implementation score.
A mistake of expectations
And the one that hurts most: believing that passing the thresholds means funding. Thresholds only admit you to consideration within the call budget. Officially, around 70% of proposals judged good enough go unfunded. A rejection at 12 out of 15 does not mean the proposal was bad – and resubmitting is worth it.
Frequently asked questions
We were rejected with a score of 12. What does that mean?
That the proposal is good, but it did not fit within the call budget. Around 70% of proposals above the threshold are left without funding. That is a reason to apply again, taking the comments into account, rather than to abandon the idea.
Will our budget be corrected during grant preparation?
No. Experts are not allowed to recommend changes, so an inflated budget simply lowers the score under the implementation criterion. Substantially changing the content, the budget or the composition of the consortium after selection is no longer possible.
Official materials
Read on GetGrant
Sources
- Evaluation form HE RIA/IA V4.0 ec.europa.eu · checked 27.07.2026
- General Annexes WP2026-2027 ec.europa.eu · checked 27.07.2026
Data current as of 27.07.2026. Verify the terms with the donor’s official portal before applying.
Updated 27.07.2026 · Reviewed by: GetGrant editorial team
