In the ever-evolving landscape of Horizon Europe’s Cluster 6, where the bioeconomy and agrifood sector converge, strategic insights based on the available data are instrumental for securing funding in a competitive environment. By inspecting the latest call figures from 2023 and 2024, applicants can learn crucial lessons to enhance their competitiveness and improve their prospects of success.
In our earlier blog post, we delved into the success rate and average budget of the first 2024 call for proposals within Cluster 6, whose last deadline for submission was on 28th February. In this post, we provide constructive recommendations for prospective applicants for the upcoming calls under the European funding framework.
Proposals in numbers 2023/2024 Q1
Comparisons with previous years offer valuable insights into funding trends and resource allocation strategies. For 2023, € 798 million were available for Cluster 6 while in the calls for 2024, their budget available was 9% lower (€ 730 million). The average budget per granted project is lower in 2024 (€ 5,024,368.32) compared to the average in 2023 (€ 5,656,371.41).
CALL FIGURES | 2023 | 2024 Q1 |
---|---|---|
No. of topics | 106 | 75 |
No. of grants available | 142 | 135 |
Total budget | € 798.000.000 | € 730.000.000 |
Average budget / grant | € 5.656.371,41 | € 5.024.368,32 |
No of submitted proposals | 452 | 1333 |
Success rate | 31,4% | 10,1% |
Understanding the Shifts
The transition from single-stage to two-stage calls in 2024 has significantly impacted the application process within Horizon Europe’s Cluster 6. This change has led to an influx of proposals at the initial submission stage, boosting participation rates but slightly lowering the overall success rate. The shift to two-stage calls has introduced new dynamics, compelling applicants to refine their strategies to navigate the evolving evaluation landscape effectively.
Analysis of Success Rates: Single-Stage vs. Two-Stage Proposals
Breaking down the success rates into single-stage and two-stage proposals across various destination areas within Cluster 6 offers insightful perspectives on the competitiveness and efficacy of submissions. While single-stage proposals demonstrate a comparatively higher success rate at 25%, two-stage proposals exhibit a lower average success rate of 6%. This disparity underscores the nuanced evaluation criteria and heightened competition faced by applicants engaging in the multi-stage assessment process. A notable contrast between single-stage and two-stage proposals!
The breakdown across destination areas underscores the varying success rates across different thematic domains within Cluster 6. Understanding the landscape can guide applicants in tailoring their proposals to align effectively with the specific evaluation criteria and objectives of each destination area.