Frequently Asked Questions

The remaining 30% of the grant co-financing must be sourced by the applicant. Your proposal needs to convincingly demonstrate how you'll cover this portion, whether through revenues, investors, or other funding sources.

The overall project costs are the sum of three components: the grant (up to 70% from the EC), the grant co-financing (at least 30% from the applicant), and the equity financing (from the EIC). Make sure your proposal clearly outlines how these pieces fit together.

The grant budget needs to be detailed in Part A of the administrative forms. This includes a breakdown of personnel, indirect, direct, and subcontracting costs. Remember, the grant amount cannot exceed 70% of the total project costs you outline for the grant-funded activities.

The grant contribution cannot exceed 70% of the total project costs for the grant-funded activities. If your initial calculation exceeds this limit, you'll need to adjust your budget or secure additional co-financing to meet the requirement.

Total project costs represent the entire budget needed for your project. Total financing requested is the sum of the grant and equity you're seeking from the EIC. The difference is the co-financing you need to secure from other sources.

Equity financing is requested as a flat sum in the administrative forms. While you don't need to provide a detailed breakdown like the grant, you should briefly define its purpose in the equity section and relevant work packages of your proposal.

The EIC Accelerator budget is divided into two components: a grant and equity financing. The grant covers up to 70% of eligible project costs, while the equity financing is a separate investment. Understanding this separation is key to structuring your application effectively.

'Non-bankability' doesn't mean your company is unable to raise any funding. It means the specific project you're seeking funding for is too high-risk for conventional financing sources like banks or VCs. You need to demonstrate why the project requires EU support due to its current technological maturity and risk profile.

The EIC Accelerator, formerly SME Instrument Phase 2, is a European Commission program offering grant and equity financing to innovative startups and SMEs. For-profit companies can apply directly through the Funding & Tenders Portal. It's a competitive program designed to support companies close to market introduction of their innovations.

There are typically four EIC Accelerator deadlines (cut-offs) per year. Keep in mind that multiple resubmissions can easily span over 15 months. Plan your application strategy accordingly, considering your overall financing needs and timeline.

The EIC Accelerator is looking for innovations that are relatively close to market introduction. Aim to be within 1 to 2 years of launching your product or service. Demonstrating a proven market need is essential for a successful application and pitch.

The EIC Accelerator typically looks for projects at TRL 5 or 6. This means your innovation should have already undergone significant development and testing. You should have a functional prototype or proof-of-concept to demonstrate real-life application and market need.

The jury pitch is stricter because it's the final stage of evaluation where you directly present your project to a panel of experts. They'll scrutinize your current stage, financing status, and market potential. Ensure your pitch aligns with the EIC Accelerator's vision and demonstrates a clear need for their support.

The EIC Accelerator assesses your past financing achievements, your project's non-bankability, and whether you've raised major financing rounds. They want to see that you've secured seed funding, can't obtain conventional financing for the specific project, and haven't raised VC rounds that would make the EIC funding unnecessary.

Raising substantial funding rounds comparable to or exceeding the EIC Accelerator grant can raise concerns. Evaluators may question why you need EU support if you can already secure significant private investment. Avoid major financing rounds while applying, unless a rejection won't negatively impact your company's financial health.

If you're planning a major financing round before applying, decide if the EIC Accelerator grant is essential or just a bonus. A potential rejection could impact your company's financial health if you're relying on the EIC funding. Weigh the risks and benefits carefully before proceeding with both the financing round and the EIC application.

The EIC Accelerator prefers applicants who have already secured seed funding, angel investments, or similar support. This demonstrates that your idea has progressed beyond the concept stage. Having some commercial traction and a functioning prototype are also crucial.

Robustness is more important than fancy features for an AI EIC grant writer. The EIC's frequent changes require the AI to be versatile and adaptable. A simplified, robust base allows the AI to evolve and remain effective despite disruptions.

ChatEIC 2.0 is a standalone web app that creates complete EIC Accelerator proposals in under 10 minutes. It utilizes AI APIs in the backend to combine user input with effective prompts, generating high-quality output. It also allows for the embedding of placeholders and generates a Word file for later edits.

Different AI interaction types include chatbots, AI agents, and diverse integrations. Chatbots offer conversational interfaces, while AI agents can perform complex tasks with access to files and screens. The best format depends on the user's knowledge, desired output, and need for adjustments.

The EIC Accelerator, offered by the European Commission and the European Innovation Council, provides funding to startups and SMEs. It offers up to €2.5 million in grant funding and up to €10 million in equity financing per project, totaling a potential €12.5 million.

Applicants often struggle with the EIC's frequent changes due to outdated information on Europa.eu pages. This can lead to confusion regarding TRLs, templates, deadlines, and rules. These contradictions make it difficult for applicants to navigate the process effectively.

The user base for EIC grants is relatively small compared to other AI applications, limiting the potential return on investment. Additionally, the EIC's frequent changes to its processes and templates create an unstable environment for AI development, making complex integrations less justifiable.

The future of ChatEIC, potentially as version 3.0, could involve agentic AI. This would allow the AI to not only draft proposals but also re-evaluate and enhance sections for improved cohesiveness and quality. This is not currently possible due to limitations but is a foreseeable advancement.

A pragmatic approach involves an AI interface that accepts input data and generates an entire proposal with a single button. This simplifies the process, requires minimal user knowledge, and allows for easy editing and regeneration of proposal sections. ChatEIC exemplifies this approach.

AI has introduced new possibilities for grant writing, with tools like chatbots and AI agents emerging. These tools can assist with research, content generation, and proposal structuring. However, the effectiveness of AI depends on choosing the right type of AI interaction for the specific task and user needs.

The best approach is to simplify the grant writing process as much as possible and be versatile enough to adapt to the EIC's frequent changes. A robust base allows the AI grant writer to evolve and remain a targeted and focused tool despite disruptions.

Consider these questions: Are there close competitors offering something similar? Does your product have unique selling points that address customer pain points? Are you creating a new market or disrupting an existing one? If you can answer 'yes' to most of these, your project likely has strong innovation potential.

The EIC Accelerator favors innovative businesses with high-risk, high-reward products or services. They're particularly interested in projects that create new markets, disrupt existing ones, or establish new value chains. While not strictly mandatory, these factors are crucial for achieving a competitive score in the application process.

If a large company could replicate your product or service quickly, it weakens your application. The EIC Accelerator prefers projects that are difficult to imitate, requiring significant time and resources to copy. This suggests a strong competitive advantage and long-term market potential.

Yes, the innovative nature of your project is absolutely central to your EIC Accelerator application. Without a strong element of innovation, your chances of success are very low. The evaluators are looking for projects that offer something truly new and different.

Having direct competitors can weaken your application. The EIC Accelerator prioritizes projects that are truly novel and don't have close substitutes in the market. Focus on highlighting what makes your product or service fundamentally different and superior.

While a patent isn't strictly required, it significantly strengthens your application. Intellectual property protection, whether through a patent or other means, demonstrates that your product is difficult to copy. This makes your project more attractive to the EIC Accelerator.

Customer pain points are specific problems or frustrations that your target customers experience. Your USPs should directly address these pain points by offering a solution or improvement. Demonstrating a clear understanding of customer needs and how your product solves them is crucial for a successful application.

Creating a new market demonstrates a high degree of innovation and potential for significant growth. It suggests that your project is not just competing in an existing space but is pioneering a completely new area. This is highly attractive to the EIC Accelerator, as it aligns with their goal of supporting groundbreaking innovations.

Market disruption means that your project fundamentally changes how an existing market operates. It could involve introducing a new technology, business model, or approach that renders existing solutions obsolete or less relevant. This demonstrates a significant potential for impact and growth.

USPs are very important. You should be able to clearly articulate at least one USP that sets your product or service apart from competitors. Make sure these USPs directly address customer pain points and aren't just superficial features. Strong USPs demonstrate the value and differentiation of your offering.

The evaluation is based on the proposal, not the project itself. A well-written proposal that effectively communicates the project's merits can significantly improve your score, even without substantial project changes. Focus on clearly articulating your project's value and addressing all evaluation criteria.

Before submitting, thoroughly review your proposal against the evaluation criteria outlined in the ESR. Ensure that you have clearly addressed each criterion and provided sufficient evidence to support your claims. A final check can help identify any gaps or areas for improvement.

A common mistake is forgetting that reviewers evaluate the proposal, not the project itself. Even a fantastic project can receive a low score if the proposal doesn't effectively communicate its value and address the evaluation criteria. Invest time in crafting a clear, compelling, and well-structured proposal.

The official proposal template doesn't explicitly mention the evaluation criteria. Therefore, it's essential to consult the ESR criteria alongside the template to ensure you address all critical information and angles that reviewers will be looking for. This helps you avoid missing important aspects that could impact your score.

The ESR is a document you receive after submitting a grant proposal, outlining how reviewers evaluated your application. It's crucial because it reveals the specific criteria used to assess your proposal, allowing you to understand its strengths and weaknesses and improve future submissions.

The blog post includes a link to a PDF document that lists all of the evaluation criteria as they are presented in the Evaluation Summary Report (ESR). This resource provides a valuable reference for understanding the specific aspects that reviewers will be assessing.

Often, the difference between a low and a high score is only a week of extra writing work. This emphasizes the importance of dedicating sufficient time to refining your proposal, ensuring it effectively addresses all evaluation criteria and presents your project in the best possible light.

Analyze the ESR to identify areas where your proposal scored lower. Focus on strengthening those sections by providing more detailed information, addressing specific reviewer concerns, and aligning your content more closely with the evaluation criteria. This targeted approach can significantly enhance your proposal's overall quality.

The evaluation criteria are presented in the Evaluation Summary Report (ESR) that you receive after submitting your proposal. You can also find a PDF document listing these criteria, which is linked in the blog post, to help you prepare your proposal.

Reviewers grade proposals based on pre-defined micro-criteria across different sections. Each reviewer provides individual scores, which are then averaged (excluding the highest and lowest) to determine the final score for each section. This highlights the importance of addressing each criterion effectively.

The European Green Deal deadline is a specific cut-off date for the EIC Accelerator program, dedicated to funding innovations that positively impact the targets outlined in the Green Deal. This provides a focused opportunity for startups working on environmentally friendly solutions to secure funding.

The Green Deal deadline mentioned in the blog post is May 19th. Be sure to check the official EIC website for the most up-to-date information on deadlines and application procedures, as these may change.

If the 25% threshold for women-led companies is not met after the initial selection, the EU reserves the right to invite additional companies with women in leadership positions to the second evaluation step. This ensures a greater representation of women-led startups in the final selection.