Why structure matters
Eurostars evaluators read 60-80 proposals per cut-off in 4 weeks. Your 30-page proposal gets ~45 minutes of attention. Structure is the difference between getting funded and getting lost.
The 7-section template
Section 1: Innovation (4-5 pages)
Open with the bottleneck. Not "we want to improve X" — but "the industry currently fails to do Y, costing €Z per year, because of technical constraint W."
Three sub-sections inside:
- Current state of the art (2-3 paragraphs with citations)
- Your innovation (1 page — what's specifically new)
- Technical risk (1 paragraph — what could fail and how you'll mitigate)
Avoid: marketing language. EU evaluators detect "revolutionary" and "disruptive" as red flags for unsubstantiated claims.
Section 2: Market opportunity (5-6 pages)
Open with addressable market. Not "huge market" — but "primary segment is X with €Y/year, secondary is Z with €W/year."
Bottom-up sizing required. Top-down ("1% of $10B market") is rejected. Show: number of potential customers, price point, conversion assumption, with sources.
Competition matters. EU likes to see 3-5 named competitors with explicit positioning vs them. Not "we have no competition" — that signals naivete.
Section 3: Implementation (8-10 pages)
This is the heaviest section. Includes:
- Gantt chart with all milestones (use timeline tool, not Excel)
- Work packages (typically 5-7), each with: objective, tasks, deliverables, person-months per partner
- Risk register — top 10 risks with likelihood × impact + mitigation
- Roles and responsibilities matrix (RACI)
Section 4: Consortium (3-4 pages)
- Why this combination of partners (complementarity, not just "we work well together")
- Each partner's specific contribution
- Past collaboration history (if any)
Section 5: Impact (4-5 pages)
- Commercial impact (revenue projection 5 years, jobs created)
- Strategic impact (IPR generated, position in value chain)
- Societal impact (sustainability, employment, EU policy alignment)
Section 6: Budget (1-2 pages)
- Per-partner breakdown
- Personnel costs justification (rates + person-months)
- Other costs (equipment, subcontracting, travel)
- Co-funding sources confirmed (Letter of Commitment in annex)
Section 7: Bibliography + annexes
- Cite 15-30 references — recent (last 5 years preferred)
- CVs of key personnel (annex)
- Letters of Intent / Commitment
- Optional: pilot customer agreements
Common mistakes to avoid
- Over-claiming novelty — EU evaluators are sector experts. They WILL find prior art if it exists.
- Vague work packages — every WP needs measurable deliverables, not "we'll explore X."
- Imbalanced partner budgets — 80/20 splits look like one partner is the "real" applicant.
- Missing replication plan — even commercial projects should show how knowledge spreads.
Tools we use
- Subsidievinder dossier-tool — section structure, version control, partner-shared editing
- EU Funding & Tenders Portal templates — official starting point
- NCP-NL — free Dutch helpdesk for technical EU questions
- Eureka Online Platform — submission interface