Frequently Asked Questions

The added steps, like video submissions, require skills that many DeepTech startups may lack (e.g., video production, storytelling). This increases their dependence on consultants who possess these skills, counteracting the EIC's goal of simplifying the application process.

The EIC aims to be more entrepreneur-friendly by adopting VC-like approaches. However, the application process is becoming more complex with added evaluation steps, potentially increasing reliance on consultants.

The EIC faces a challenge: it wants to attract excellent companies but has a limited budget. To manage the high volume of applications, it's increasing the evaluation barriers, making the process more complex.

The EIC Accelerator process is evolving to include video submissions in addition to the existing in-person pitch interviews. This creates a 3-step evaluation process, increasing the workload and skill requirements for applicants.

The article mentions a 'less transparent evaluation process', suggesting that the timing of your application may not significantly impact your chances of success. Focus on creating the strongest possible application.

Many applicants find the official EIC documentation unclear and policy-focused, rather than providing practical guidance on building a strong business case. This lack of transparency leads them to seek help from consultants who understand what the EU evaluators are looking for.

Beyond a strong business plan, applicants now need skills in video production, storytelling, and marketing to effectively present their innovation in the required formats. Consider if you need external help to fill these gaps.

EIC Accelerator applications are reviewed by individuals with varying expertise and interests. An evaluator might not be an industry expert or understand the business model. This inherent variability makes it difficult to predict how an application will be received.

Involve a diverse team in assessing your project before starting the writing process. Include VC's, former EASME evaluators, industry representatives, and technical experts. This helps identify potential issues from various viewpoints.

Assessing EIC Accelerator projects is complex because it requires a deep dive into many factors. Even if a project seems eligible, a professional needs time to uncover potential barriers. These barriers can significantly impact the application's success, making quick assessments unreliable.

Be realistic and back up your claims with solid data and evidence. Don't exaggerate market size or downplay competition. Ensure your patent status is clear and that your team structure is accurately represented.

A successful EIC Accelerator application requires strong writing, pitching, and video production skills. It's difficult to assess all these areas without extensive evaluation. An applicant's performance in pitching and video creation can greatly impact the outcome.

While optimism is good, overly optimistic statements without solid evidence can hurt an application. Claims like "no competitors" or inflated market size need careful scrutiny. Consultants often can't fully verify every claim before writing, so accuracy is crucial.

Thoroughly research and document all aspects of your project before starting the application. The more information you gather upfront, the less you'll need to learn during the writing process. This will lead to a more comprehensive and compelling application.

Often, the full scope and implications of a project only become clear during the grant proposal writing process. The work needed to prepare a full application is so extensive that pre-assessments can't cover everything. While minimizing uncertainty is possible, it's impossible to eliminate it completely before writing.

Active collaboration and feedback from the management team are essential. If the team isn't engaged, the application can become shallow and lack crucial details. A lack of involvement can significantly weaken the proposal.

Projects aligned with strong EU policies and targets have a higher chance of success. Even if a project seems beneficial, a lack of supporting policies can weaken its appeal. Analyzing the EU policy landscape is crucial, but often can't be fully done before starting the application.

Assess whether your company's innovation aligns with the EIC's priorities, particularly DeepTech and EU policy goals. Evaluate your funding situation and determine if you truly need the EIC's blended financing. If you can easily secure funding elsewhere, the EIC might not be the right fit.

While the EIC prioritizes certain industries, a strong business model is crucial regardless of the sector. Focus on demonstrating the potential for wealth creation, job growth, and positive impact within the EU, regardless of whether it's a 'favored' industry.

If your innovation's impact isn't immediately obvious, you need to clearly articulate the benefits for the EU. Focus on how your project will contribute to wealth creation, job growth, or other positive economic outcomes. A strong business model is key.

It might be more difficult to secure EIC Accelerator funding if you've already raised substantial VC. The EIC looks for companies that struggle to get funding elsewhere. Having significant prior funding can weaken your argument for needing their support.

Alignment with EU values and policies is crucial. If your innovation directly contradicts key EU targets, such as the fossil fuel phase-out or gender equality, your application is likely to be rejected. Make sure your project supports, or at least doesn't undermine, EU goals.

The EIC Accelerator targets startups and SMEs with highly innovative ideas that have the potential to scale rapidly. They are particularly interested in companies that need substantial funding and are considered 'non-bankable,' meaning they can't easily secure traditional loans.

While the official proposal template and manuals can be helpful, they may not provide a comprehensive overview of the EIC's priorities. Research successful EIC Accelerator projects and review the EIC Accelerator keywords to better understand their focus.

Raising a significant VC round during the EIC Accelerator evaluation process can negatively impact your chances. Be transparent about any new funding during the Step 3 pitch interview, as it could lead to exclusion from grant financing.

The new EIC Accelerator is likely to use a simple YES or NO grading system for each evaluation step, instead of detailed scores. This change may lead to a less transparent evaluation process, as the specific reasons for acceptance or rejection may be less clear.

The application process is expected to have three main steps: a short application with a pitch video, a long application detailing the project and business plan, and a jury interview. The short application and video are new additions, requiring applicants to showcase their innovation effectively in a concise format.

The new process could lead to a less transparent evaluation and potential bottlenecks if too many projects receive a YES in the initial stages. It's also unclear how projects will be ranked if only YES/NO criteria are used, potentially creating a 'black box' decision-making environment.

The official details will be published in the EIC Accelerator 2021 Work Programme. Keep an eye out for its release, as it will provide answers to the most pressing questions about the new application process and requirements.

The pitch video should likely focus on the founders, the innovation itself, and the business model. While the exact requirements aren't yet known, it's crucial to present a compelling and concise overview of your project's potential.

Focus on creating a compelling pitch video and a well-structured long application. Clearly articulate your project's innovation, business plan, and potential impact. Also, stay updated on the official publication of the EIC Accelerator 2021 Work Programme for detailed guidelines.

Freezing periods are restrictions on the number of times you can resubmit your application. While the exact details are still unknown, it's anticipated that applicants will have at least two opportunities to submit a successful grant application, even if initially rejected.

Yes, thematic topics with specific budgets and goals will be reintroduced. Applicants can choose which topic aligns best with their project. These topics will likely vary in competitiveness, evaluation criteria, and budget, so careful planning is essential.

Yes, the Seal of Excellence (SoE) is likely to remain part of the evaluation results. However, it's currently unclear how they will be awarded, given the shift to a YES/NO grading system instead of numerical scores.

Round 1b is an optional internal round where the remaining applicants are matched up and evaluated again. It's used when the initial number of applications is exceptionally high (e.g., 6,000) to further narrow down the pool.

Instead of individual scoring, three keyword-matched applications are compared. Evaluators rank the projects, and the superior one receives a 'YES' while the others receive a 'NO'. This speeds up the evaluation process.

Applicants would submit a one-page executive summary (300-word limit), fill out information on costs and other details in submission forms, and upload a 10-minute pitch video. This simplifies the initial evaluation and reduces the writing burden.

By focusing on a concise executive summary and pitch video in the initial round, applicants can communicate their innovation in market-relevant terms, rather than getting bogged down in EU terminology like 'TRL' or 'impact'.

The EIC doesn't provide sufficient feedback or successful proposal examples, forcing applicants to rely on expensive consultants. This creates an uneven playing field and makes the EIC a 'black box' for many SMEs and startups.

Allowing applicants creative freedom in their pitch videos encourages them to present their innovation in the most compelling way possible. This can range from a simple slide presentation with voiceover to a professionally produced video.

The selected applicants (approximately 11% of the initial pool) are awarded the Seal of Excellence. They also receive cumulative feedback, building upon the feedback from previous rounds.

The current EIC Accelerator application process places a heavy workload on both applicants and evaluators. Restructuring the process can improve the overall experience, from the written application to the final interview, making it more efficient and accessible for all stakeholders.

Dynamic feedback would allow evaluators to directly ask applicants questions and receive responses within a limited timeframe. This allows for more informed decisions and provides valuable data to identify qualified evaluators, improving the matching process.

All applicants, regardless of the outcome, would receive a 300-word feedback summary (100 words from each evaluator). This provides valuable insights for improvement, even for unsuccessful applications.

The EU struggles to balance application complexity. A complex process deters companies focused on product development, while an oversimplified process risks funding unsuitable projects. Finding the right balance is crucial for attracting innovative companies while ensuring responsible funding allocation.

This article is part of a series. You can find more information and proposed solutions in Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4 of this blog post series, which delve deeper into optimizing the EIC Accelerator application process.

EIC Accelerator applications are complex and require significant time and effort. Many startups lack the in-house expertise or time to perfect their applications, leading them to hire consultants to navigate the process effectively and increase their chances of success.

A convergent approach allows the EIC to directly identify the 'more worthy' companies instead of assessing the absolute 'worthiness' of each applicant. This saves time and resources by focusing on relative merit, which is ultimately what determines funding decisions.

Adding more steps, such as additional interviews or pre-applications, can discourage startups. The increased complexity can lower their confidence in success and make them less likely to apply, potentially reducing the pool of innovative projects.

A knock-out round involves comparing applications against each other and eliminating a portion of them based on relative merit. This approach aims to quickly narrow down the pool of applicants and reduce the workload on evaluators by focusing on comparative worth.