GrantWise
HORIZON EUROPE TOPIC · Widening participation and strengthening the ERA

ERA Research Managers

HORIZON-WIDERA-2027-02-WIDENING-02 — the expected outcomes as checkable statements, what evaluators look for in this topic, and the conditions that shape the proposal.

Get the free Part B working draft for this topic ↓

ForthcomingCSADeadline 14 September 2027EUR 1.5 million to EUR 2.5 million per project

GrantWise › Horizon Europe topics › HORIZON-WIDERA-2027-02-WIDENING-02

TopicHORIZON-WIDERA-2027-02-WIDENING-02
StatusForthcoming
CallHORIZON-WIDERA-2027-02 — ERA Chairs and Research Managers
DestinationWidening participation and spreading excellence (2026-27) (WIDENING-26-27)
Type of actionCoordination and Support Actions
Opening6 April 2027
Deadline14 September 2027
BudgetEUR 1.5 million to EUR 2.5 million per project · 30 projects expected · EUR 65 million in total
Part B page limit25 pages (standard application form; check your call)
TemplateWork Programme 2026–2027 application form

Expected outcomes

Projects may contribute to some of the expected outcomes; say which ones and why. The topic says: “Excellent capacities in research management are essential for institutions and national R&I systems to capitalize on their R&I activities. ERA Research Managers aim to attract experienced research managers to universities, research organisations or research infrastructures in Widening countries, establishing or upgrading institutional capacities for research management, fostering brain…”

  1. EO1 Increased international, interdisciplinary, and intersectoral mobility of research management talent towards Widening countries.
  2. EO2 Institutional reforms in research institutions and national R&I systems.
  3. EO3 Strengthened human capital with more entrepreneurial and well-trained research managers.
  4. EO4 Better communication of R&I results to society.
  5. EO5 Enhanced research capacity, competitiveness, and economic growth.
  6. EO6 Strengthened research management capacities.
  7. EO7 Increased attractiveness to top international research managers, and subsequently researchers.
  8. EO8 Establishment of a lasting, high-performing research management group with institutional benefits.
  9. EO9 Improving the institution’s global visibility and success in securing competitive funding.
  10. EO10 Promote best practices in agreed ERA priorities such as ethics, open science and data, gender equality, thus strengthening the institution’s overall research ecosystem.

Expected impacts named in the destination

The wider, long-term effects the destination seeks. Your outcomes feed them; they are not project deliverables.

  1. EI1 Increased science and innovation capacities for all actors in the R&I system in Widening countries.
  2. EI2 Structural changes leading to modernised and more competitive R&I systems with increased attractiveness and retention of research talents.
  3. EI3 Mobilisation of national and European resources for strategic investments.
  4. EI4 Higher participation in Horizon Europe and more leadership roles in collaborative projects.
  5. EI5 Stronger linkages between academia and business and improved career permeability.
  6. EI6 Greater involvement of regional actors in the R&I process.
  7. EI7 Excellent talents attracted to institutions including research infrastructures.
  8. EI8 Balanced circulation of R&I talents including intersectoral mobility, and improved gender equality and inclusiveness.
  9. EI9 Improved linkages and increased mobility between academic and business, notably by overcoming sectoral barriers.
  10. EI10 Free circulation of knowledge and expertise in line with ERA priorities.

What evaluators will look for in this topic

Expected outcomes

  • Projects may contribute to some of the expected outcomes; say which ones and why.
  • For each outcome (EO1 to EO10), 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.

  • “Research organisations in Widening countries seeking to establish an ERA Research Manager should submit a proposal aimed at establishing or upgrading research management capacities in the institution and ensuring that the conditions are in place to foster excellent research management aligned with ERA priorities.”
  • “Proposals should include a Curriculum Vitae (CV) in Europass form of the prospective ERA Research Manager, detailing their proposed managerial and technical contributions to the coordinating institution.”
  • “The CV should be uploaded as an Annex to the proposal.”
  • “Proposals should include a self-assessment of the beneficiary’s existing institutional capacities and its needs in research management and administration.”
  • “An implementation strategy should be designed to enhance the existing institutional capacities, with targeted actions and trainings.”
  • “These measures should be realistic and feasible within the duration of the project.”
  • “Proposals should also describe any alternative/additional/other relevant investments in research management capacity building, projects, staffing, facilities and infrastructures and how those will be achieved.”
  • “ERA Research Managers should be excellent research managers with international experience.”
  • “The team’s recruitment will be led by an international panel chaired by the ERA Research Manager and must follow an open, transparent and merit-based process.”
  • “The ERA Research Manager should hold a position within the organisation, allowing resource allocation, supervision, and funding applications.”
  • “A minimum 50% full-time equivalent (FTE) commitment, including on-site presence, must be ensured, at least until the appointment of a research management leader on a permanent basis.”
  • “A description of the transition phase between the research management leader and the ERA Research Manager should be provided in the proposal, explaining also their share of tasks and their role in the remaining years of the project, in case the appointed research management leader is not the ERA Research Manager.”

Conditions that shape the proposal

  • Part B, sections 1–3: 25 pages (standard application form). Text beyond the limit is not read; tables and figures count.
  • Coordination and support action: no research is funded. Evaluators look for coordination, networking, dissemination or policy support with a clear audience.
  • Other Eligible Conditions: “To achieve the expected outcomes, participation as coordinators to the call is limited to legal entities established in Widening countries, as defined in the Horizon Europe regulation.”
  • Other Eligible Conditions: “Applications may only be submitted by one legal entity (mono-beneficiary).”
  • Other Eligible Conditions: “The following additional eligibility criteria apply: As the ERA Research Manager and team is expected to operate at the level of the institute, only one proposal per legal entity can be submitted.”
  • Other Eligible Conditions: “The following additional eligibility criteria apply: To allow for the assessment of the commitment of the future ERA Research Manager and of the coordinator institution, proposals must include: 1) a letter signed by the prospective ERA Research Manager expressing their commitment to the proposal corresponding to at…”
  • Other Eligible Conditions: “2) a letter signed by the head of the coordinator institution committing to the proposal and confirming that the ERA Research Manager will receive adequate support for their tasks and duties including, for example, overseeing institutional and structural reforms, streamlining administrative processes, and…”
  • Evaluation and award: Award criteria, scoring and thresholds: “Seals of Excellence will be awarded to applications exceeding all of the evaluation thresholds set out in this work programme but which cannot be funded due to lack of budget available to the call.”

Impact pathway and traps

  • 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.
  • 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

Research organisations in Widening countries seeking to establish an ERA Research Manager should submit a proposal aimed at establishing or upgrading research management capacities in the institution and ensuring that the conditions are in place to foster excellent research management aligned with ERA priorities. The research institution will act as the sole applicant (mono-beneficiary), and the ERA Research Manager may be from any country but may not already have a contractual relationship with the research institution. Proposals should include a Curriculum Vitae (CV) in Europass form of the prospective ERA Research Manager, detailing their proposed managerial and technical contributions to the coordinating institution. The CV should be uploaded as an Annex to the proposal. Proposals should include a self-assessment of the beneficiary’s existing institutional capacities and its needs in research management and administration. An implementation strategy should be designed to enhance the existing institutional capacities, with targeted actions and trainings. This strategy may be continuously adapted throughout the project duration. This plan will include all necessary measures to introduce institutional changes in research management. These measures should be realistic and feasible within the duration of the project. Proposals should also describe any alternative/additional/other relevant investments in research management capacity building, projects, staffing, facilities and infrastructures and how those will be achieved. ERA Research Managers should be excellent research managers with international experience. The ERA Research Manager will establish/expand a research management team fully integrated in the coordinator's institution to significantly improve its overall performance in research management and R&I. The team’s recruitment will be led by an international panel chaired by the ERA Research Manager and must follow an open, transparent and merit-based process. The ERA Research Manager should hold a position within the organisation, allowing resource allocation, supervision, and funding applications. Teaching duties may be included where appropriate. The ERA Research Manager may relocate permanently or temporarily to the coordinating institution, with secondments, sabbaticals, or part-time arrangements also being possible. A minimum 50% full-time equivalent (FTE) commitment, including on-site presence, must be ensured, at least until the appointment of a research management leader on a permanent basis. A description of the transition phase between the research management leader and the ERA Research Manager should be provided in the proposal, explaining also their share of tasks and their role in the remaining years of the project, in case the appointed research management leader is not the ERA Research Manager. All contractual arrangements, time commitment and the timeline of the ERA Research Manager’s on-site presence at the coordinator should be indicated in the proposal, as well as the salary (gross amount), travel and daily allowances and/or other perks to be offered. If employment is the preferred option, contractual details must be provided. The permanent leader of the newly created or reinforced research management group should be appointed on a permanent basis within the first three years through an open recruitment process monitored by the European Commission, and to which the ERA Research Manager may apply. To ensure long-term sustainability, the ERA Research Managers team should be structured for continuity beyond Horizon Europe funding. The proposal should detail team composition, research management levels, salaries, and recruitment timelines. No more than 50% of the newly recruited team members should have any prior contractual links to the institution. The grant covers the salaries of newly recruited research management team members, recruitment, travel and equipment, as well as administrative expenses related to the ERA Chair holder and research team. Proposed structural reforms to be driven by the ERA Research Manager should be outlined in the proposal, such as improving working conditions, career prospects, HR policies, research governance, grant management, knowledge transfer, and simplifying procedures like IPR. Gender equality should be addressed in alignment with ERA objectives and institutional commitments. Proposals should quantify expected impacts, including institutional changes, increased research output (publications, IPR protection, knowledge valorisation), and improved research management. Additional relevant impact indicators are encouraged. The expected duration of the actions is 5 years. https://europa.eu/europass/en/create-europass-cv Corresponding to advanved or expert level of reserach managers careers as set out in the “European Competence Framework for Research Managers” provided at RM Comp: The European Competence Framework for Research Managers - European Commission that can be considered under the category of "other goods, works and services

Other topics in HORIZON-WIDERA-2027-02

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.