Receiving the email confirming that your project has been awarded EU funding rarely (never) happens by accident. Behind every successful Horizon Europe proposal is a structured process that starts long before the actual writing begins. From developing a strong project idea and building the right consortium to organising the writing process, planning the budget, and navigating the evaluation phase — each step plays a crucial role.
This article walks through the key stages of the EU proposal writing timeline, showing how ideas evolve into funded projects.
01 Project idea development
Every successful EU project begins with a clear and well-defined idea. At this stage, organisations identify a challenge, innovative concept, or research objective that could potentially fit within EU funding priorities.
Key activities in this phase include:
- defining the core problem and proposed solution
- analysing how the idea aligns with EU policies and programme priorities
- identifying the most relevant call for proposals within the EU work programme
- identifying and analysing previous similar project that have been implemented
This stage often requires strategic reflection, as even strong ideas may need adjustments to match the objectives and expected outcomes of a specific call.
Understanding the existing landscape
Before investing significant time in developing a proposal, it is essential to analyse previously funded projects and existing research or innovations in the same field. EU evaluators expect proposals to demonstrate awareness of the current state-of-the-art and of earlier projects funded under programmes such as Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe.
In some cases, organisations discover that their idea has already been implemented in a previous project. While this may initially seem discouraging, it is actually valuable information. It helps avoid developing proposals that evaluators might consider insufficiently innovative or redundant.
At the same time, analysing previously funded projects often reveals opportunities rather than obstacles. Many successful proposals build on earlier work by advancing technologies, applying research results in new contexts, or addressing gaps that previous projects did not cover. Demonstrating how your project extends or complements existing work can significantly strengthen the credibility of the proposal.
Reviewing past projects can also help identify potential consortium partners. Organisations that participated in earlier projects often have relevant expertise, infrastructure, and experience with EU-funded collaboration. Working with partners who already understand the topic and funding framework can strengthen the consortium and improve the feasibility of the proposed project.
In this way, analysing previously funded initiatives is not only about avoiding duplication — it is also about positioning your project within the broader European research and innovation ecosystem and demonstrating how it contributes to the continuous advancement of knowledge and innovation in Europe.
Preparing a Concept Note
Once a suitable call for proposals has been identified, it is highly recommended to prepare a short concept note describing the core idea of the project. This document does not need to be long — typically 2–3 pages are enough — but it plays an important role in structuring the project and preparing for consortium building.
A concept note helps clarify what your organisation intends to achieve within the selected call. It should outline the problem the project addresses, the proposed solution or research direction, the expected impact, and the main activities that could be implemented.
Equally important is identifying what is missing. At this stage, organisations should reflect on the competences, infrastructure, technical expertise, or sectoral knowledge that are not available internally but are necessary for the successful implementation of the project. This helps determine the types of partners that should be invited to join the consortium.
The concept note also facilitates communication with potential partners. When approaching organisations that may join the consortium, a clear and concise description of the project idea allows them to quickly understand the objectives, the potential role they could play, and the expected contribution. This significantly improves discussions and helps build a consortium more efficiently.
In addition, the concept note can serve as the first internal alignment tool for the future consortium. It provides a shared reference point that can be refined as partners join the project and contribute their expertise. Over time, this initial concept often evolves into the foundation of the full proposal.
Preparing a concept note early in the process therefore helps structure the idea, identify the right partners, and facilitate discussions that will ultimately shape a stronger and more coherent project proposal.
02 Consortium building
Most collaborative EU funding programmes require a consortium of organisations from several countries. Once the project idea is sufficiently defined, the coordinator begins identifying partners who can contribute complementary expertise.
The goal is to create a balanced consortium that includes:
- research organisations or universities
- private companies or innovative SMEs
- public authorities or stakeholders relevant to the project topic
During this phase, partners discuss the project concept, potential roles, and expected contributions.
Preparing for consortium building
Building a strong consortium is one of the most important steps in preparing a successful EU funding proposal. Before approaching potential partners, it is essential to clearly present your organisation, your expertise, and the project idea you would like to develop together.
A well-prepared organisation presentation can be a very useful tool in this process. If your organisation does not already have one, it is worth creating a concise document or presentation that explains who you are, what your organisation does, your main competences, and your experience in relevant projects or activities. This presentation is usually used during the online meeting where potential consortium partners discuss collaboration, complementarity and contribution to the project.
In addition to presenting your organisation, it is important to provide clear information about the project idea. This includes the main objectives of the project, the expected impact, and the type of expertise or capabilities you are looking for in partners. Being transparent about what you expect from consortium members — such as technical contributions, research expertise, pilot implementation, or dissemination activities — helps potential partners assess whether their participation would be meaningful.
Preparing this information in advance makes the partner search process more efficient and professional. It allows discussions with potential partners to focus on the substance of the collaboration and helps build a consortium where each partner clearly understands their role and contribution to the project.
How to identify potential consortium partners
Professional networks and personal contacts play an important role. Existing collaborations, previous project partners, conferences, and industry events can help identify trusted organisations with whom cooperation may be easier and more efficient.
Online research – using search engines such as Google can help identify organisations, research groups, companies, or public institutions active in the field relevant to your project. Reviewing their websites, publications, and ongoing projects can provide useful insight into their expertise and potential interest in collaboration.
Another valuable sources are EU Funding & Tenders Portal and CORDIS database, which provide detailed information about projects funded under EU programmes such as Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. By analysing previous projects related to your topic, you can identify organisations that already have experience in the field and may be interested in continuing their work through new initiatives.
Increasingly, organisations are also using AI tools and research platforms to identify potential partners. These tools can analyse research publications, project databases, and organisational profiles to suggest institutions with relevant expertise.
In addition to these methods, partner searches can also be conducted through professional networks such as LinkedIn, innovation clusters, and thematic research networks, including NCP networks. Combining several of these approaches often leads to the best results when building a balanced and competent consortium.
03 Proposal preparation and writing
This is usually the most demanding phase of the process. The consortium works together to prepare the proposal according to the official structure required by the programme.
The proposal typically includes sections on:
- scientific or technical excellence
- expected impact and societal benefits
- project implementation and management
Coordination is essential at this stage, as multiple partners must contribute to different sections while ensuring that the proposal remains clear, consistent, and aligned with the call requirements.
Clear proposal development process
Before the writing begins, the coordinator should define the workflow, responsibilities, and communication structure for all partners.
Topics to cover:
- defining roles early
- selecting writing tools (shared documents, proposal platforms)
- creating a proposal roadmap
- timeline and milestones
Establishing a realistic proposal timeline
EU proposals typically involve multiple partners, work packages, and sections, which makes a clear and well-structured timeline essential for an efficient proposal preparation process.
- Internal deadlines vs. official call deadline
Although the official submission deadline is fixed by the call, it is strongly recommended to set internal deadlines well in advance. Ideally, the full proposal should be ready at least two weeks before submission. This provides time to address unexpected delays, incorporate final improvements, and ensure the proposal is polished and complete. - Phases of proposal development
Proposal preparation is usually organised into several phases, such as concept finalisation, partner contributions, first draft preparation, internal review, and final revision. Defining these phases early helps partners understand when their contributions are expected and encourages the consortium to respect internal deadlines. - Buffer time for review and revision
Allocating buffer time before submission is critical. A period of around two weeks is often sufficient for a final review, consistency checks, and corrections. It can also be beneficial to organise intermediate reviews during the proposal writing process, rather than waiting until the final stage. Identifying and addressing important issues early helps maintain coherence across the proposal and reduces the risk of major revisions close to the deadline, when time pressure may lead to inconsistencies or clerical errors.
Organising regular consortium meetings
Regular meetings are essential to keep the proposal development on track and ensure that all partners remain aligned. Bi-weekly meetings are often ideal, as they are frequent enough to monitor progress while still allowing partners sufficient time to work on their assigned sections.
These meetings facilitate quicker decision-making and help maintain a shared understanding of the project’s objectives, methodology, and work plan. In many cases, a short discussion during a meeting can replace multiple email exchanges, reducing the risk of misunderstandings and helping the consortium resolve issues more efficiently.
For more complex projects, it can also be useful to establish smaller working groups that focus on specific aspects of the proposal, such as methodological development, work package design, or task planning. These groups can work more intensively on particular sections and then present their progress to the wider consortium for discussion and alignment. This approach allows for deeper technical input while keeping the overall proposal development process efficient and coordinated.
Planning the project budget carefully
The budget is a critical component of any EU funding proposal and must be carefully aligned with the planned activities described in the work plan. Evaluators expect the financial resources requested to be realistic, well justified, and clearly linked to the tasks and responsibilities of each partner.
A typical project budget includes several key categories, such as personnel costs, which usually represent the largest share of the budget and correspond to the effort required to implement the project tasks. Additional costs may include travel and meetings necessary for consortium coordination and project activities, as well as equipment or infrastructure required to conduct research, testing, or demonstrations.
Projects may also require subcontracting or external services for specialised activities that cannot be performed by the consortium partners themselves. Finally, other direct project costs may cover materials, consumables, or specific operational expenses needed for project implementation.
A well-designed budget should accurately reflect the real effort and resources required for each task and remain fully consistent with the project’s objectives, work packages, and partner responsibilities. Careful budget planning not only strengthens the credibility of the proposal but also ensures that the consortium has the necessary resources to successfully implement the project once funded.
Budget planning in Lump Sum projects
In Horizon Europe lump sum projects, budget preparation is supported by the Horizon Europe Personnel Cost Dashboard, a tool developed by the European Commission to provide indicative personnel cost ranges across different countries, organisation types, and staff roles.
This tool can be useful when estimating personnel costs and ensuring that the proposed budget appears reasonable from an evaluation perspective. However, it should primarily be considered indicative rather than definitive. In practice, the data used in the calculator may not always reflect current salary levels, as there is often a gap between the data collection and the moment when proposals are prepared. In addition, if the project is supposed to last 4 years, for example, the gap between the costs submitted and actual costs will increase even more. Taking into consideration the annual salary indexation.
In addition, salary levels vary significantly between organisations. SMEs, universities, and research centres within the same country may have very different salary structures depending on their size, funding models, and internal policies. As a result, the averages presented in the calculator do not always represent the real costs incurred by individual organisations.
The intention behind the tool is understandable: it allows evaluators to verify whether proposed personnel costs are reasonable and not excessively inflated. However, if organisations feel compelled to artificially reduce their personnel costs simply to match the indicative values shown in the calculator, the gap between the actual costs and the recognised costs will never disappear. Instead, it creates a structural mismatch that persists across projects.
This situation can be particularly problematic for co-funded projects, where beneficiaries are already required to contribute a portion of the project costs themselves. If the personnel costs included in the proposal are unrealistically low, organisations may find themselves covering an even larger share of the real expenses with their own resources.
Such a situation can disproportionately affect organisations from Widening countries, SMEs, and institutions with more limited financial capacity, which often do not have the resources to absorb additional unfunded costs. For these organisations, the requirement to co-finance larger portions of project activities may create barriers to participation in EU research and innovation programmes. Over time, this could reduce the diversity of participants and limit the involvement of organisations that the European programmes are specifically designed to support.
For this reason, while the Personnel Unit Cost Calculator can serve as a useful reference point, organisations should carefully consider their real internal cost structures and the actual effort required to implement project tasks when planning the budget.
Internal Review and Proposal Pre-Evaluation
Before submitting the proposal, a complete internal review is essential to ensure that the application is clear, coherent, and fully aligned with the requirements of the call. At this stage, the consortium should carefully verify that the proposal responds directly to the call objectives, that the different sections are logically connected, and that the work plan, tasks, and budget remain fully consistent with one another. It is also important to confirm that all required sections of the proposal have been completed and that the information provided is clear and sufficiently detailed.
This review can be carried out internally by the consortium partners, as they are familiar with the project concept, methodology, and technical details. Partners can check whether the description of their roles, tasks, and contributions is accurate and realistic. However, relying solely on internal review may sometimes overlook certain weaknesses, as the authors of the proposal are already deeply involved in its development.
For this reason, it is often beneficial to combine internal review with an external proposal evaluation. An external expert can review the proposal from a perspective similar to that of an evaluator and may identify elements that have been unintentionally overlooked or considered self-evident by the proposal writers. This external perspective can help highlight gaps in logic, unclear explanations, or areas where the proposal may not fully demonstrate its strengths.
Importantly, proposal reviews do not need to take place only once the full document is completed. Conducting intermediate reviews during the proposal writing process can be highly beneficial. Early feedback allows the consortium to address potential issues while there is still sufficient time to make improvements. When major concerns are identified early, they can be corrected more easily, without requiring extensive revisions across multiple sections of the proposal close to the submission deadline.
A structured review process — combining internal expertise, external feedback, and sufficient time for revisions — can significantly improve the quality, clarity, and competitiveness of the final proposal.
04 Proposal submission
Once the proposal is finalised, it must be submitted through the EU Funding & Tenders Portal before the official deadline defined in the call. This step requires careful verification to ensure that the application is complete and compliant with all formal requirements.
Before submission, coordinators should confirm that:
- all required documents are complete
- administrative forms are correctly filled in
- the proposal follows the call requirements and respects the page limits
Any missing information, inconsistencies, or formatting issues at this stage can negatively affect the evaluation of the proposal.
It is also considered good practice to submit a first version of the proposal before the official deadline, even if the consortium still plans to make improvements. Early submission helps avoid potential technical issues with the submission platform or last-minute complications that could jeopardise the application.
Importantly, the EU Funding & Tenders Portal allows coordinators to replace a submitted proposal with a revised version at any time before the deadline. This means that the consortium can continue refining the document, correcting minor issues, or incorporating final improvements while already having a submitted version secured in the system.
For this reason, submitting an initial version early — and updating it if necessary — is a simple but effective way to reduce risk and ensure that technical issues do not compromise months of preparation.
05 Evaluation and Grant Agreement preparation
After the proposal is submitted, the consortium enters a waiting period while the European Commission organises the evaluation process. Independent experts review the proposals based on the official evaluation criteria: Excellence, Impact, and Quality and efficiency of implementation. Only the highest-scoring proposals are selected for funding, and the evaluation process typically takes several months.
If the proposal is successful, the consortium enters the grant agreement preparation phase, during which the coordinator and partners work with the European Commission to finalise administrative, financial, and legal aspects of the project. This includes confirming partner roles, validating the budget, finalising the work plan, and signing the grant agreement. Once this process is completed, the project can officially start.
06 Learning from the evaluation
If the proposal is not selected for funding, the process is still far from wasted. The European Commission provides evaluation feedback from the experts, which can be extremely valuable for future proposals.
Carefully analysing the evaluators’ comments helps the consortium understand which aspects of the proposal were strong and where improvements are needed. This feedback can often serve as a solid foundation for preparing stronger proposals in the future.
In some cases, the consortium may decide to revise and resubmit the proposal in a future call, particularly if the topic is expected to reopen in the following year. Alternatively, the project concept can sometimes be adapted to fit another relevant call for proposals. Many successful EU projects have been funded after improving and resubmitting proposals that were not successful on the first attempt.