Frequently Asked Questions

The success rates for the EIC Accelerator are quite competitive. With around 9,700 applications received in a single year, the average success rate is only about 2-3%. Factors like the COVID-19 pandemic and the popularity of specific calls, such as the Green Deal, can further lower the success rate, potentially to 1% or even lower.

For companies awarded blended financing (grant with equity option) in 2019 and 2020, the overall budget was €278 million in grant financing and €583 million in equity. The average financing amount for these companies was approximately €6.5 million. This blended approach provides both grant support and equity investment to help companies scale up.

The majority of companies funded by the EIC Accelerator follow a Business-to-Business (B2B) model. Around 77% of funded companies target other businesses as their primary customers. Only 23% focus on end-users through Business-to-Consumer (B2C) products.

The jury members who evaluate the pitch week interviews have a strong investor-oriented background. They typically include innovation and industry specialists, venture capitalists, serial entrepreneurs, and business angels. This ensures that the selected projects are not only innovative but also have strong commercial potential.

The Seal of Excellence (SOE) is a quality label awarded to companies that have received a high score (above 13) in the EIC Accelerator evaluation process but were not selected for funding due to budget limitations. Receiving the SOE demonstrates the high quality of your proposal and can help you attract funding from other sources.

The European Commission actively promotes gender equality within the EIC Accelerator. They have made efforts to increase the share of women-led companies receiving funding. For example, during the Green Deal deadline, the percentage of beneficiaries with female CEOs rose to 34% due to dedicated efforts. The gender balance of jury members is also considered to ensure fairer results.

The EIC Accelerator shows a preference for younger SMEs. The share of companies older than 10 years has decreased, while the share of startups younger than 5 years has increased. This indicates the EU's focus on supporting breakthrough innovation and achieving faster time-to-market for new technologies.

The Funding and Tenders Portal is the main platform used by the European Commission for managing grant applications and providing feedback. It's crucial to create an account and regularly check it for updates and notifications regarding your EIC Accelerator application.

In addition to the main notification area, check the document upload and communication area under "My Organizations" and the messaging section under the "Follow Up" section for an approved grant project. These areas may contain important messages and updates from the EC.

The list of beneficiaries includes key details about the funded companies, such as their name, website, acronym, project title, and the type of funding they received (grant or blended financing). It also includes the country of origin and city of residence for the applying entities.

The EC publishes regular reports on the EIC Accelerator's performance. These reports contain valuable statistics and key figures, information on the types of projects funded, and overall changes in budget, proposal template, gender contributions, and industries.

CORDIS (Community Research and Development Information Service) is a database where projects selected for EIC Accelerator funding are published after signing the Grant Agreement Contracts (GAC). You can find details like project timing, budget, coordinator name, and participating entities on CORDIS.

If you haven't received an email, check the Funding and Tenders Portal (F&TP) periodically. Look for notifications highlighted as badge counts. The EC uses the F&TP to communicate important updates and news to applicants.

If you're unsure about when to expect communications, check the EIC's Twitter account. They often provide information on the timing of future announcements and updates. This can help you stay informed and prepared.

Yes, you can find information on social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Search for the hashtag #EICAccelerator to find companies sharing their experiences with the grant application process. The EC also publishes information on these platforms.

The European Commission publishes a regularly updated list of beneficiaries on the EIC Accelerator call page. This list includes the company name, website, acronym, project title, and type of funding received. It's a great resource for seeing who has been successful.

The primary way you'll be notified is via email from the Funding and Tenders Portal. This email will inform you if you're invited to the EIC Accelerator interview week. Make sure to check your email regularly after submitting your application.

The EIC Accelerator program, run by the European Commission and European Innovation Council, offers funding to startups and SMEs. It provides up to €2.5 million in grant funding and up to €10 million in equity financing, totaling a potential €12.5 million per project. This funding supports innovative projects with high growth potential.

The EIC should prioritize using a European LLM or an open-source LLM operated by a European company. This approach minimizes the risk of data breaches and ensures compliance with European data protection regulations. It also supports the development of European AI capabilities.

The proposed system is designed to be comprehensive and easy to incorporate. The architecture allows for easy updates and additions of new AI modules. For systems like ChatEIC, the integration would be relatively straightforward since the architecture is already present.

The EIC is aiming to improve its Step 3 interview success rate. This metric reflects how well the current evaluation process filters applicants in the earlier stages. By using AI, the EIC hopes to refine the selection process and ensure that only the most promising projects advance to the interview stage.

The 'good cop, bad cop' approach involves using two AI models with opposing objectives. One AI (the good cop) focuses on identifying positive aspects of a proposal, while the other (the bad cop) seeks out potential weaknesses. This ensures a balanced assessment before a final judgment is made.

The EIC can use AI to identify and reject low-quality or unsuitable proposals early in the process. By analyzing proposals that reach Step 3 but should not have, the AI system can learn to avoid similar mistakes in the future. This saves time and resources for both the EIC and applicants.

EIC Accelerator proposals contain sensitive IP, so confidentiality is crucial. Using non-EU-based AI models poses a risk to this confidential information. The EIC needs to prioritize using European LLMs or open-source LLMs operated by European companies to mitigate this risk.

The 'judge AI' receives input from both the 'good cop' and 'bad cop' AIs. It then uses a weighted assessment system to provide a final score for the proposal. The EIC can customize this weighting to reflect its priorities, such as favoring domain expertise over industry experience for DeepTech founders.

Integrating web search functionality allows the AI to access and analyze external information relevant to the proposal. This can help the AI verify claims, assess market trends, and identify potential competitors. Systems like ChatEIC already have web search functionality that can be easily integrated.

To reduce the risk of AI inaccuracies, the EIC can use multiple iterations of AI evaluations. Averaging the results from these repeated evaluations can enhance accuracy and reduce randomness. This approach is cost-effective compared to using human evaluators or consultants.

The old process had two steps: a long application (Step 1) and a pitch interview (Step 2). Step 1 had very low success rates (below 10%), while Step 2 had much higher success rates (around 50%). Startups found that their chances of getting funding improved as they progressed through the steps. Many applicants used professional writers to help with the application.

Applicants should stay informed about the latest updates and guidelines from the EASME and EIC. They should also focus on crafting a compelling mini-application and video pitch that effectively communicate their innovation and potential. Consider seeking professional advice to optimize your application strategy.

Thematic topics are separate funding arms within the EIC Accelerator that focus on specific areas. They have their own budgets, evaluator pools, and levels of competitiveness. This increases the complexity of the evaluation process and can affect the effort-to-success ratio for each step's selection.

The worst-case scenario is when applicants invest a significant amount of effort into the initial application stages, only to face a very low success rate in the final step. This leads to a considerable waste of time and resources, making the entire process feel unproductive and frustrating for those who are ultimately rejected.

Applicants should carefully consider the effort required for each application stage and weigh it against their chances of success. If the initial steps require minimal effort and offer a reasonable chance of progressing, it may be worth pursuing. However, if the effort-to-success ratio seems unfavorable, it may be better to explore alternative funding options.

Remote pitch evaluations could allow the EIC to screen more companies at scale. This could potentially lower the success rates for the interview and pitch evaluation stage. It could also change the dynamics of the application process, requiring applicants to adapt their pitch strategies.

The best-case scenario is a low-effort first step with a high success rate, followed by more selective steps that require more effort. This allows startups to quickly determine if the EIC Accelerator is a good fit for them without wasting significant time and resources. This approach reduces the entry barrier for startups.

The EIC Accelerator is adding a third step: a video pitch and mini-application. This new step could significantly change the success rates and effort required for each stage. The overall impact will depend on how the European Agency for SME's (EASME) and the European Innovation Council's (EIC) score and rank proposals.

One potential direction is to remove the full application (Step 2) altogether. In this scenario, all applicants who pass the mini-application in Step 1 would directly proceed to a remote evaluation. This is particularly feasible for equity applicants, as the due diligence process can replace the in-depth financial documentation of Step 2.

The effort-to-success ratio is crucial because it determines whether the time and resources invested in the application are worthwhile. If applicants spend a lot of time on an application stage with a low success rate, it can be frustrating and discouraging. Ideally, the effort required should be proportional to the chances of success.

The sub-criteria are graded on a scale. 'Very Good to Excellent' is 4.5-5, 'Good to Very Good' is 3.5-4.49, 'Fair to Good' is 2.5-3.49, 'Insufficient to Fair' is 1.5-2.49, and 'Insufficient' is 0-1.49. These ranges help you understand the strengths and weaknesses of different aspects of your proposal.

The ESR helps you decide whether to rework or abandon the application. It highlights the weakest sections and why they are lacking. It also emphasizes the balance between sub-criteria scores. Finally, it offers a shortlist of improvement strategies based on experience and score ranges.

When resubmitting, start by thoroughly analyzing the ESR. Identify the weakest areas based on the scores and evaluator feedback. Then, focus on making targeted improvements to those specific sections. Remember to address the overall presentation and narrative to create a strong, cohesive proposal.

The overall impression is crucial because evaluators are influenced by the initial presentation. Issues like cut-off text, unreadable graphics, or inconsistent font use can significantly lower the score. Addressing these superficial elements can have a surprisingly positive impact on the overall evaluation.

A score in the 12-13 range suggests an average proposal. Improving the narrative, such as the EU impact, quantifying sections better, and creating clearer roadmaps, can be sufficient to achieve a higher score. Re-assess the narrative, consistency, and design of the application, and ensure the innovation is presented effectively.

If your proposal scores are consistently 'Good to Very Good,' focus on enhancing the overall presentation. Improving the writing quality, quantification, consistency, design, and narrative can elevate the overall impression. This can potentially raise the base score to 'Very Good to Excellent' without needing to overhaul each sub-criterion.

Receiving the Seal of Excellence (SOE) means your proposal has been evaluated as high-quality and meets the EU's standards. While it doesn't guarantee funding from the EIC Accelerator, it makes you eligible to receive grant funding from other sources. It's a strong validation of your project's potential.

A score of 13-14 is excellent and qualifies for the EU's Seal of Excellence. Improvements at this level are usually minor and detailed. Focus on maintaining consistency throughout the application and identifying any areas that might 'throw the reader off.' Also, emphasize the impact of the innovation and its relevance to EU priorities.

A score below 11 indicates significant issues with the proposal. It likely means the template wasn't properly addressed, answers were too brief, or the innovation doesn't align with EU criteria. The writing, design, and overall quality are probably insufficient, so consider working with a professional writer or grant consultant for a comprehensive overhaul.

The sub-criteria scores provide a more granular view of the evaluation. Focus on the relative values of these scores. Identifying which areas stand out as significantly lower than others is key. It's more beneficial to balance the sub-criteria scores than to try and maximize each one individually.

Yes, the EIC aims for 40% of Step 3 interviewees to have female CEOs and 35% of funded businesses to meet this criterion. Additionally, each EU member state and associated country must be represented in the Step 3 interview stage, proportionate to their application numbers, introducing geographic restrictions.

Companies now have a limited number of attempts to succeed in each evaluation step. If rejected twice at the same step, they'll be blocked from further submissions for at least 12 months, potentially impacting their ability to secure funding for that specific project. This encourages applicants to seek professional help earlier in the process.

The EIC Accelerator is evolving from a pilot phase into a fully-fledged investment arm of the European Commission. This includes changes to the application process, evaluation steps, and technical aspects. The program now offers blended financing (grant and equity) and is part of the Horizon Europe initiative.