Consolidation of the research infrastructure landscape – individual support for evolution, long-term sustainability and emerging needs of pan-European research infrastructures

Expected outcomes

• Projects may contribute to some of the expected outcomes; say which ones and why.
• For each outcome (EO1 to EO6), 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 proposed action should justify the specific objectives and focus on activities that are critical for the sustainability and optimised use of the ESFRI Landmarks or ERICs, such as activities aiming at several of the following objectives:. enlargement of the membership or broadening of the base of participating countries, notably widening countries and candidate countries;. addressing critical aspects raised following an assessment or…”
• “In case of reorientation or evolution of the research infrastructure scope, activities should fill gaps in the research infrastructures landscape, enabling the research infrastructure to address new research or societal challenges and/or serve new user communities, increasing and improving service capacity and/or integrating new resources/facilities.”
• “Due attention must be given to related EU initiatives, strategies and priorities and, when relevant, to complementarity and relevance to activities in other parts of Horizon Europe, such as better addressing SRIAs of Horizon Europe partnerships.”
• “Proposals should explain any synergies with previous or current EU grants notably under the research infrastructures part of the Horizon Europe work programme e.g. INFRADEV and INFRATECH grants.”
• “Given the funding rate, proposals should ensure a minimum adequate backing by the beneficiaries, who should provide the remaining share for the activities covered by the Grant Agreement and foster the sustainability of the ESFRI Landmark or ERIC.”
• “Specific attention should be given, where relevant, to the greening of technologies and methodologies used by the research infrastructure, to the interaction with industry/SMEs, to the fostering of the innovation potential of the infrastructures, and to their integration into local, regional and global innovation ecosystems.”
• “Although the action aims at individual support to a pan-European research infrastructure, applicants should consider the ESFRI Landscape Analysis and liaise during the action with other relevant ESFRI/ERICs to ensure complementarity.”

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.
• Other Eligible Conditions: “Due to the scope of this topic, proposals must include at least one of the ESFRI Landmarks[[See the list of ESFRI 'Landmarks' in the 2021 ESFRI Roadmap on https://roadmap2021.esfri.eu/ For ESFRI Landmarks that are not an ERIC or an international European research organisation, the beneficiary must be the legal entity…”
• Legal and financial set-up of the grants: “The funding rate is 80% of the eligible costs.”

Impact pathway and traps

• International cooperation is part of the scope. Explain what the non-EU partners add and how the cooperation is organised.
• 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.
• Life-cycle or safe-and-sustainable-by-design assessment is expected. Name the method and where in the work plan it runs.
• 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.