Structure of a successful application: Excellence, Impact, Implementation

The structure of Part B is not arbitrary: its three sections mirror the three award criteria. The evaluator reads a section and scores the corresponding criterion, so anything written in the wrong place is not credited.

1. Excellence

Two subsections: objectives and ambition – how clear and pertinent the objectives are, how the work goes beyond the state of the art; and methodology – soundness of the approach, the gender dimension and open science practices.

This is the largest block after the work plan.

2. Impact

Pathways towards impact – how credibly your results lead to the changes the topic expects. Measures to maximise impact – the plan for dissemination and exploitation together with communication.

There is also a subsection summarising impact through a canvas – it is not mandatory: a proposal is admissible and complete without it. But the evaluator reads it, so "not mandatory" does not mean "not worth doing".

3. Quality and efficiency of the implementation

Work plan and resources – work packages, effort allocation, risk assessment, budget. Capacity of participants – why this consortium and what each partner's role is.

Three things that decide it

Fit with the topic. A proposal drifting from the scope earns an out-of-scope finding, and quality does not compensate.

Internal consistency. The work plan must match the narrative, the budget the team, the deliverables the packages.

Length. Forty pages for a research or innovation action; whatever does not fit becomes invisible to the evaluator.