Frequently Asked Questions

The rebuttal allows applicants to respond to the evaluation of a previously rejected proposal and explain what has changed in the current application. It's a crucial section as it's prominently displayed and can heavily influence the reviewers' assessment.

The first step is to carefully read the Evaluation Summary Report (ESR). The score obtained will indicate whether a rebuttal can make a positive impact. A narrow rejection is more likely to be overturned by a strong rebuttal than an overwhelming rejection.

If your proposal received positive remarks, especially from evaluators with insider knowledge, highlight these in the rebuttal. Emphasize how these evaluators understood the project's impact, contrasting it with any misinformed comments from others.

Rejections are common due to the program's high selectivity and a degree of subjectivity in the evaluation process. Evaluators may not always be experts in the specific field or may not have sufficient time to thoroughly review the entire application, leading to potentially inaccurate criticisms.

For close rejections (7-8 GOs out of 9), you can likely leave the majority of the proposal as is and make minor adjustments based on the feedback. Introduce new deliverables, milestones, data, or case studies to address specific points raised by the evaluators.

Maintain a professional and polite tone in your rebuttal. Objectively address what was missing in the original proposal and the changes you've made. Clarify any misunderstandings or criticisms encountered in the ESR while remaining fair, even to critical evaluators.

If your application received a low score, substantial changes are likely needed. This may involve reshaping key sections of the application, such as the features & use cases, competitors, value chain, market, and work plan.

Prioritize the criteria set by the EC and EIC: high-risk, DeepTech, and non-bankability. Clearly demonstrate how your project aligns with these priorities. Also, be prepared to address how you will overcome the challenges associated with a high-risk, non-bankable venture.

For the EIC, 'non-bankability' often translates to a desire to be the primary funding source, especially for DeepTech companies lacking access to capital. If you raise substantial funding right before the interview, it could negatively impact your chances. Emphasize your difficulty in securing other financing.

The jury makes a funding decision based on a 45-minute interview, without extensive due diligence beforehand. While they have access to application documents, there's no guarantee they've thoroughly reviewed them. Make your pitch concise, compelling, and easy to understand within that limited timeframe.

Assume the jury is largely unfamiliar with your project's details, potentially lacking expertise in your specific technology or industry. Pitch your project as if they are assessing it for the first time, clearly explaining the problem, solution, and market opportunity. Avoid technical jargon.

Unlike typical investors, EIC jury members might lack specialized knowledge of your technology or industry. They also aren't investing their own money, which can influence the types of questions they ask. Focus on clearly explaining your project's value proposition to a general business audience.

The EIC uses a multi-step due diligence process, starting with Step 1 and continuing through Step 2 and the interview (Step 3). While the remote evaluation provides some due diligence, the jury's pre-interview review is likely less extensive than a VC firm's. Post-approval, a more detailed due diligence is performed for the equity component.

The EIC Accelerator pitch interview is the final step in the EIC Accelerator blended financing application process. It's a chance for SMEs and startups to present their project to a jury of business experts before a funding decision is made. Think of it as a crucial opportunity to convince the jury of your project's potential.

The EIC uses the term 'high-risk' to encourage ambitious, cutting-edge projects to apply, even if they've faced rejection from other investors. They aim to create a space for projects that are riskier than what investors typically pursue. Be prepared to articulate how you'll mitigate those risks.

The EIC prioritizes 'non-bankability' and 'high-risk' projects, seeking companies that struggle to secure funding elsewhere. This means they're looking for innovative, DeepTech ventures that might be too risky for traditional investors. Highlight why your project fits these criteria, even if you've had some success raising funds.

Given the high quality of applicants reaching the interview stage, the jury's primary task is essentially to reject a significant portion of them due to budget constraints. Approach the interview with the mindset that you cannot give the jury any reason to reject your project. Be prepared to address potential weaknesses proactively.

Clear and transparent communication from the EASME and EIC is crucial. They should provide real-time updates on 'YES' and 'NO' counts and thresholds, and explain how evaluation steps are repeated if necessary.

The EIC Accelerator is the updated version of the SME Instrument under the Horizon Europe program. Key changes include the evaluation process and the introduction of blended financing (grant and equity).

Previously, the EIC Accelerator used a scoring system to rank proposals. This allowed them to set funding thresholds and prioritize the highest-scoring applications. The new 'YES/NO' system lacks this ranking mechanism.

The EIC Accelerator uses a 'YES' or 'NO' grading system for Step 1. Unlike previous scoring systems, there's no ranking of proposals. A 'YES' theoretically guarantees advancement to Step 2, provided there are available slots.

The 'freezing period' refers to a time when applications are not accepted or evaluated. Applicants might want to postpone their application to avoid this period and potentially increase their chances of success.

Applying early to Step 1 could secure your spot for the Step 2 evaluation. With a continuously open call, a high volume of early 'YES' evaluations might lead to increased competition and stricter evaluations for later applicants.

Step 2 involves a more in-depth evaluation of the full proposals from applicants who passed Step 1. Successful completion of Step 2 leads to consideration for Step 3 and potential funding.

If the EIC and EASME receive too many 'YES' grades in Step 1, they might increase the strictness of the 'YES/NO' evaluations for later applicants. This could make it harder for those who apply later to pass Step 1.

The EIC Accelerator, formerly known as the SME Instrument Phase 2, offers blended financing (grant and equity) to startups and SMEs under the Horizon Europe program. It supports innovative companies looking to scale up and bring their innovations to market.

Applicants can choose less competitive EIC Accelerator topics to improve their chances. Check the official EIC website for a list of available topics and their specific requirements.

You should plan at least 2 weeks for the interview preparation. This should include extensive practice calls (at least 5) and a detailed analysis of all proposal materials to ensure familiarity with the content.

No, the EIC Accelerator videos are not graded on production quality. While some minimal editing is recommended, it's sufficient to record a simple video call. You can also use existing footage like advertisements or interviews if you have them available.

Applicants should allocate at least two months for the preparation of the EIC Accelerator Step 2 application. This step is the most difficult and lengthy, requiring a comprehensive business plan and several supporting documents.

The Step 2 application requires several annexes, including Letters of Intent (LOI), a Freedom to Operate Analysis (FTO), a Data Management Plan (DMP), a financial spreadsheet, a pitch deck, and a free 10-page overview document.

If you have a good understanding of your company and technology, and are an efficient writer, the Step 1 proposal text can be prepared in under a week. However, if the project requires significant research or adjustments to the market, technology, or narrative, plan for at least two to three weeks.

Letters of Intent (LOI) are important for the Step 2 application. Obtaining LOIs from relevant stakeholders can take weeks or even months, so it's advisable to send out requests as early as possible to meet the deadline.

The evaluation of the Step 1 proposal can vary, but generally, you should expect a duration of around 3 weeks. If you have all the necessary templates ready, you can start preparing for Step 2 while waiting for the Step 1 results.

The 10-page annex acts as a visual guide to the proposal, a company overview, and a reference library. It's a place to include images and photographs, as the main proposal text is devoid of any images.

A company obtaining the Step 3 GO grading (funding approval) within 6 months is considered fast, and this is generally only possible if no rejections occur. Obtaining at least one rejection in Step 2 or Step 3 is common, and timelines for most applicants are often significantly longer than 6 months.

The Step 1 proposal requires three main documents: a written proposal text, a pitch deck (limited to 10 slides), and a short pitch video. It's generally recommended to start with the written proposal to frame the application, then create the pitch deck, and finally record the video.

Active involvement from the CEO, CTO, and CFO is crucial for a successful grant application. Their combined expertise ensures a comprehensive and well-aligned proposal. Proposals that are rushed or outsourced at the last minute often lack the necessary depth and strategic focus, significantly reducing their chances of success.

Lack of experience can be overcome by studying successful examples, practicing with business plans, and focusing on storytelling. Consider seeking guidance from experienced grant writers or consultancies. The key is to learn from available resources and dedicate time to improving your skills.

Grant writing storytelling isn't about fiction; it's about creating a compelling narrative that connects the problem your innovation addresses to the solution you offer. This narrative should align with EU policies and highlight the social and environmental impact of your project. Scientific articles, especially in fields like chemistry or biology, can provide examples of how to weave such narratives.

Many consultancies, business accelerators, and investment companies offer free business plan examples. Search online for resources tailored to your industry or stage of development. These examples can provide valuable insights into structuring your own business plan and grant application.

Successful EIC Accelerator applications are often confidential, but you might try contacting past beneficiaries directly, offering to sign an NDA in exchange for reviewing their proposal. Another option is to explore working as a freelancer for consultancies that specialize in grant writing, as they often have access to examples. Some consultancies also provide examples to prospective clients.

Business plans provide a solid framework for your grant application, covering key aspects like market analysis and financial projections. While they may lack the storytelling element crucial for EIC Accelerator, they offer a valuable foundation. Look for free business plan examples from consultancies, accelerators, or investment firms to get started.

Illustrations help communicate complex ideas quickly and effectively, especially given the limited time evaluators have to review each application. Clear and appealing graphics can enhance the evaluator's understanding and improve their overall experience. Consider using tools like Adobe Illustrator or Corel Draw to create visuals that support your narrative.

Focus on studying business plans to build a strong foundation, mastering storytelling to connect with evaluators, using illustrations to communicate effectively, and ensuring the active involvement of your management team. These elements, combined with grant writing experience, greatly increase your chances of success.

A strong narrative, compelling visuals, and a clear connection to EU priorities are essential. Ensure your application is well-structured, easy to read, and highlights the impact of your innovation. Most importantly, demonstrate a deep understanding of the problem you're solving and the market opportunity.

Platforms like YouTube and Udemy offer a wide range of tutorials for graphic design software such as Adobe Illustrator and Corel Draw. These resources can help you learn the basics of creating visuals for your grant application. Focus on creating clear, concise, and visually appealing graphics that support your narrative.

The SlideBean approach omits aspects like company mission and risk mitigation, focusing instead on telling a captivating story. It prioritizes clarity and engagement over overwhelming the audience with facts.

Entertainment value, including a good storyline, eloquent speakers, and clear communication, is crucial. Even the best business idea will fail if the jury is bored or not captivated by the pitch.

The EIC template can be overcrowded with information, potentially turning the pitch deck into a text-heavy document. This can make it difficult to convey a simple, inspiring message to the jury.