Innovative healthcare interventions for non-communicable diseases

Expected outcomes

• Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
• For each outcome (EO1 to EO5), 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.

• “Innovative and effective healthcare interventions are required to provide treatment and disease management solutions and assure best quality of care for patients suffering from NCDs when prevention strategies have failed.”
• “Proposals should address all the following aspects:.”
• “Whenever relevant, existing co- and multimorbidities should be addressed in the trial design.”
• “Clinical trial(s) should be supported by completed proof-of-concept of clinical safety and efficacy.”
• “Both preclinical research and the draft clinical trial protocol should be completed at the time of submission of the proposal.”
• “Proposals should also demonstrate evidence of preliminary consultations with ethics and regulatory authorities at the time of submission.”
• “A sound feasibility assessment, including an appropriate patient selection and realistic recruitment plans, justified by publications or preliminary results should be provided.”
• “Hardware and software should be interoperable in line with internationally accepted standards.”
• “Exploit existing data, health data infrastructures, biobanks, registries and/or cohorts, together with the generation of new data that should be managed in line with the FAIR principles and contribute to emerging research infrastructures established in the framework of the European Health Data Space (EHDS), when relevant.”
• “The participation of start-ups, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is encouraged with the aim of strengthening their scientific and technological foundations, enhancing their innovation potential, and exploring possibilities for commercial exploitation.”
• “This topic requires the effective contribution of social sciences and humanities (SSH) disciplines and the involvement of SSH experts, institutions as well as the inclusion of relevant SSH expertise, in order to produce meaningful and significant effects enhancing the societal impact of the related research activities.”
• “All projects funded under this topic are encouraged to participate in networking and joint activities, as appropriate and explore potential synergies with projects funded under the EU4Health Programme (2021-2027) in the area of NCDs.”

Conditions that shape the proposal

• Part B, sections 1–3: 45 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.
• Two-stage submission: the first stage uses a shorter proposal and is assessed on Excellence and Impact only. Check the page limit and sections in the stage-one form of your call.
• Admissibility Conditions, proposal page limit and layout: “Applicants submitting a proposal for a blind evaluation (see General Annex F) must not disclose their organisation names, acronyms, logos nor names of personnel in the proposal abstract and Part B of their first-stage application (see General Annex E).”
• Other Eligibility Conditions: “In recognition of the opening of the US National Institutes of Health’s programmes to European researchers, any legal entity established in the United States of America is eligible to receive Union funding.”
• Other Eligibility Conditions: “Subject to restrictions for the protection of European communication networks.”
• Evaluation and award: Award criteria, scoring and thresholds: “The first-stage proposals of this topic will be evaluated blindly.”
• Evaluation and award: Submission and evaluation processes: “For the first stage, the thresholds for each criterion will be 4 (Excellence) and 4 (Impact). The overall threshold applying to the sum of the two individual scores will be set at a level that ensures the total requested budget of proposals admitted to stage 2 is as close as possible to three times the available…”
• Evaluation and award: Submission and evaluation processes: “For the second stage, the thresholds for each criterion will be 4 (Excellence), 4 (Impact) and 4 (Implementation). The cumulative threshold will be 12.”

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 scope expects pilots or demonstration. Name the sites, the partners who run them and what is measured there.
• 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.
• The gender dimension is named in the topic. Show how sex and gender analysis enters the research content, not only team balance.
• Policy or regulation is in scope. Name the policy owners you will reach and what you will give them.
• Keep outputs, outcomes and impacts apart: what you deliver, what changes when others use it, and the long-term effect.
• For each destination impact you claim, show which of your outcomes feeds it. 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.