| Topic | HORIZON-NEB-2027-01-BUSINESS-02 |
|---|---|
| Status | Forthcoming |
| Call | HORIZON-NEB-2027-01 — Innovative models for neighbourhoods that integrate beauty, inclusiveness and sustainability |
| Destination | Innovative funding and new business models for transformation of neighbourhoods (2026-27) |
| Type of action | Research and Innovation Actions · lump sum |
| Opening | 5 May 2027 |
| Deadline | 1 December 2027 |
| Budget | around EUR 3.5 million per project · 3 projects expected · EUR 10.5 million in total |
| Part B page limit | 45 pages (standard application form; check your call) |
| Template | Work Programme 2026–2027 application form |
Expected outcomes
Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes. The topic says: “Project results are expected to contribute to all of the following expected outcomes:”
- EO1 Community stakeholders co-create and participate in innovative community investment and community ownership models.
- EO2 Community stakeholders benefit from increased local democratic participation, social equity and cohesion, a sense of place and belonging, and local economic development.
Expected impacts named in the destination
The wider, long-term effects the destination seeks. Your outcomes feed them; they are not project deliverables.
- EI1 Better understanding of the contextual local conditions that drive or hinder sustainable neighbourhood developments and the uptake of NEB-aligned solutions and projects, such as capital and real estate market dynamics and socioeconomic, cultural, demographic, and climatic changes.
- EI2 Anticipation and consideration of future needs, functions and inhabitants (including more-than-human perspectives) of neighbourhoods and their developments towards the future.
- EI3 Demonstrated socioeconomic, financial, environmental, cultural, and aesthetic value of NEB-aligned solutions and projects driving the revitalisation of the built environment in neighbourhoods.
- EI4 Increased investment in the transformation of neighbourhoods in line with NEB through alternative, innovative, and community-based investment and ownership approaches.
- EI5 Community and place-based approaches that adopt a systemic perspective and use co-creation approaches with diverse local stakeholders, including marginalised or underrepresented groups or those in a vulnerable situation, and contribute to addressing pressing community challenges and needs such as homelessness and housing.
- EI6 Circular manufacturing, renovation, and reuse approaches in the built environment contribute to the sufficient use of resources and space.
What evaluators will look for in this topic
Expected outcomes
- Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
- For each outcome (EO1 to EO2), 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.
- “Proposals are expected to address all of the following:.”
- “This should include considerations of the influence of local capital and real estate market dynamics, and the long-term financial viability of the developed model.”
- “Proposals are expected to follow a participatory and transdisciplinary approach through the integration of different actors and disciplines.”
- “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.”
- “Proposals are expected to allocate at least 0.8% of their budget for engaging with the Horizon Europe-funded 'New European Bauhaus hub for results and impact' to share their intermediate and final results, findings and learnings, as well as to contribute to impact assessment.”
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.
- Evaluation and award: Award criteria, scoring and thresholds: “To ensure a balanced portfolio covering the two thematic options described in the scope below, grants will be awarded to applications not only in order of ranking but at least also to one proposal within the option A that is the highest ranked and one proposal within the option B that is the highest ranked, provided…”
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.
- 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.
The scope, as published
Collective community investment and ownership models can empower diverse local community stakeholders to collectively invest in, own, manage, and benefit from local commercial, housing, transitional, or mixed-use assets. By directly engaging community stakeholders, such bottom-up and place-based approaches respond to local community needs and preferences and create local agency and long-term stewardship in the revitalisation of neighbourhoods. Proposals are expected to address all of the following: Develop a collective community investment or ownership model that involves diverse community stakeholders, including marginalised groups or those in a vulnerable situation, in the co-creation and revitalisation of neighbourhoods in line with the New European Bauhaus by focusing on one of the following options: Option A: A community equity investment model that offers community stakeholders the ability to acquire shares in local cooperative and community-based commercial or service-oriented assets to profit from and participate in their further development without necessarily working there. Option B: An occupant equity model through which community stakeholders build equity via their occupancy and participation in the development of a local cooperative and community-based housing or mixed-use asset where they typically live or work. Develop and validate the model in at least three neighbourhoods in different Member States and/or Associated Countries. Assess the socioeconomic and environmental impacts of the model on the targeted neighbourhood(s) and their surrounding environment, including long-term affordability, accessibility, and local community and public interest outcomes. Identify potential systemic challenges to the uptake of the model and formulate solutions to overcome them. This should include considerations of the influence of local capital and real estate market dynamics, and the long-term financial viability of the developed model. Consider and leverage existing relevant investment and ownership regulations and legal aspects at the local, regional, and national levels. Provide recommendations to scale up and adapt the model in different local and cultural contexts. Proposals are expected to follow a participatory and transdisciplinary approach through the integration of different actors and disciplines. 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. Proposals are expected to allocate at least 0.8% of their budget for engaging with the Horizon Europe-funded 'New European Bauhaus hub for results and impact' to share their intermediate and final results, findings and learnings, as well as to contribute to impact assessment. See definition in the Glossary section of the NEB part of the HE WP26-27. See definition in the Glossary section of the NEB part of the HE WP26-27. See definition of ”participatory process” in the Glossary section of the NEB part of the HE WP26-27. Mixed-used assets refer to assets that combine different functions, e.g. housing, community services, etc. European Commission, ’NEB Investment Guidelines’, New European Bauhaus, accessed 5 August 2025, https://new-european-bauhaus.europa.eu/tools-and-resources/neb-investment-guidelines_en.Sections of particular relevance for applicants to consider include: 1. Introduction; 2. Mapping the NEB; 4.4 Project risks; 5. Making the NEB case; and 6. Conclusions. See definition in the Glossary section of the NEB part of the HE WP26-27. See definition in the Glossary section of the NEB part of the HE WP26-27. See definition in the Glossary section of the NEB part of the HE WP26-27.
Other topics in HORIZON-NEB-2027-01
- HORIZON-NEB-2027-01-BUSINESS-01 — Mass customisation of offsite manufactured modular construction components to…
- HORIZON-NEB-2027-01-REGEN-04 — Enabling environments for a sustainable and circular construction sector
Source and attribution
Topic text from the official topic page on the EU Funding & Tenders Portal, retrieved 19 October 2026. © European Union, reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (CC BY 4.0). Changes: the expected outcomes and impacts are split into numbered statements, long passages are shortened, and the evaluator checklist is GrantWise's own commentary. Your call and the Work Programme always win; check them before you submit. GrantWise is independent and not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of the European Commission.