Support to the SET Plan stakeholders’ groups in geothermal energy

Expected outcomes

• Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
• For each outcome (EO1 to EO4), name who will use or adopt your results (a specific group, not “industry” or “society”), how they get them, and the indicator that shows the change, with baseline, target and date.
• Use the topic's own words for each outcome, so the evaluator can tick it off.

What the scope asks for

Evaluators check the proposal against these sentences of the scope. Answer each one visibly, in the call's own words.

• “The project is expected to support the ETIP and IWG in the sector of geothermal energy, taking into consideration the specific needs of the sector, the emerging European policy priorities, and the coordination with other initiatives (to avoid overlaps).”
• “In line with the Recovery Plan for Europe and the latest EU climate and energy related policies (notably the National Energy and Climate Plans), geothermal stakeholder fora are expected to develop research and innovation roadmaps and/or analyses (e.g., strategic research and innovation agendas, strategic reports, industrial strategies, analyses of market opportunities and funding needs, studies on innovation barriers, assessments of their…”
• “Special attention should be given, as appropriate, to the key challenges of the European Green Deal, the Green Deal Industrial Plan and the Net Zero Industry Act, including (but not limited to) energy security, technological pushback, industrial production and competitiveness, supply chain security and dependencies, access to market, circularity, advanced materials, digitalisation, societal transformation, skills, and just transition.”
• “Moreover, as appropriate, the project is expected to address the contribution to the goals of the European Research Area in the field of energy, in particular the achievement of the 3% GDP target of public and private spending on research and innovation.”
• “The geothermal stakeholder fora should ensure the participation of industrial players (including SMEs), research and civil society organisations, universities and European associations representing relevant sectors (as applicable) across several SET Plan countries, establishing links with national authorities.”
• “To maximise impact, the projects are encouraged to develop and implement robust outreach approaches to widen participation from across the EU and associated countries.”
• “As appropriate, societal needs and interests should be considered in the activities of the fora, so that inequalities and employment issues are addressed.”
• “Where applicable, the geothermal stakeholder fora should establish synergies with relevant Horizon Europe European Partnerships.”
• “The project is encouraged to implement dissemination and networking activities with other relevant projects (e.g., joint workshops, thematic conferences, webinar series, regular exchanges, etc.).”
• “As appropriate, the project should provide data and analysis tracking the progress of the different technologies towards the EU targets, for instance those set out by the Net Zero Industry Act (e.g., the implementation of non-price criteria), the Critical Raw Materials Act, and the Renewable Energy Directive (e.g., the target for innovative renewable energy technologies to represent at least 5 % of newly installed renewable energy capacity by…”
• “Data should be accessible and reusable according to the FAIR data principles (Findable, Accessible, Reusable, Interoperable).”
• “The projects are expected to contribute to the reporting of the SET Plan to the European Parliament and the Council.”

Conditions that shape the proposal

• Part B, sections 1–3: 28 pages (standard application form). Text beyond the limit is not read; tables and figures count.
• Lump sum: the budget is fixed per work package and paid when each work package is completed. Every work package needs activities and deliverables an evaluator can verify, and the effort must match the money.
• Coordination and support action: no research is funded. Evaluators look for coordination, networking, dissemination or policy support with a clear audience.
• Evaluation and award: Award criteria, scoring and thresholds: “The granting authority can fund a maximum of one project.”

Impact pathway and traps

• The topic asks for social sciences and humanities (SSH) expertise. Evaluators look for SSH partners with a real role in the methodology, not a token task.
• Users or citizens are part of the scope. Show how they take part in the design and testing, not only that they are informed.
• The topic expects cooperation with other projects or initiatives. Reserve effort and budget for it in the work plan.
• Open science or data practices are named. Make the data management plan concrete: which data, which repository, when.
• Keep outputs, outcomes and impacts apart: what you deliver, what changes when others use it, and the long-term effect.
• Link your outcomes to the destination's expected impacts in the Work Programme. Destination impacts are long-term effects, not project deliverables.
• Name the barriers outside the project (regulation, markets, user behaviour) that could block uptake, and what you will do if they do.
• Section 2.3 (the summary canvas) is optional on this call; the old split into scientific, economic and societal impact is no longer required.