Pillar: Food, Bioeconomy Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment
Opening Date:
Deadline: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:00:00 (Brussels local time)
Modification Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024
Latest information:
CALL UPDATE: EVALUATION RESULTS
EVALUATION results
Published: 07/12/2022
Deadline: 28/02/2024
Available budget: EUR 133.50 million
The results of the evaluation for each topic are as follows:
| HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-1 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-2 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-3 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-5 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-6 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-7 |
Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls) | 1 | 7 | 9 | 1 | 8 | 28 |
Number of inadmissible proposals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of ineligible proposals |
|
| 1 |
|
|
|
Number of above-threshold proposals | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 18 |
Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals | 31.519.166,00 € | 17.465.691,78 € | 14.917.894,21 € | 18.999.999,25 € | 19.985.077,50 € | 89.756.069,75 € |
Number of proposals retained for funding | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
Number of proposals in the reserve list |
| 2 | 1 |
| 2 | 3 |
Funding threshold[1] | 12.5 | 15 | 14.5 | 10 | 14.5 | 13.5 |
Ranking distribution | ||||||
Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14 |
| 3 | 2 |
| 3 | 2 |
Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13 |
| 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 3 |
Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 13 |
| HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-8 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-9 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-10 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-11 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-12 | HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01-13 |
Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls) | 5 | 14 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
Number of inadmissible proposals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of ineligible proposals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of above-threshold proposals | 4 | 8 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals | 7.942.065,49 € | 23.994.325,83 € | 7.749.329,18 € | 11.693.924,17 € | 3.999.982,04 € | 3.999.999,06 € |
Number of proposals retained for funding | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Number of proposals in the reserve list | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
|
|
Funding threshold1 | 13.5 | 14 | 14 | 15 | 12.5 | 13 |
Ranking distribution | ||||||
Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
|
|
Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
|
| 1 |
Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10 | 2 | 3 |
| 3 | 1 |
|
Summary of observer report:
An independent observer assessed the evaluation of the call and its topics, in particular focusing on: 1) the quality and correctness of information and guidelines provided to experts; 2) the efficiency and fairness of the evaluation phase; 3) the suitability of the support available throughout the evaluation process. The overall quality of the evaluation was found to be very good, fully meeting the high standards expected by the European Commission and by the applicants. Thanks to the careful organization of manpower, the evaluation proceeded without any difficulty in terms of workload. The evaluation was conducted in a fully transparent and fair way. All experts, rapporteurs, REA staff and independent observer were at each stage of the evaluation process entirely able to review and work with proposals relevant to each individual stage of the process by role. The procedures were applied in a uniform and consistent manner and in accordance with the evaluation protocols for all proposals under consideration in this evaluation, throughout the various phases that were conducted entirely remotely. The experts were provided with clear procedures. All the involved actors were fully available in the allotted timeline, while being focused, cooperative, supportive and, when required, proactive. The evaluation was fully compliant with the applicable rules, including the guidance documents that were made available to all people involved in the evaluation. These documents were all quite clear and included helpful examples for a successful evaluation. Several remarks for further improving the evaluation process were provided by the independent observer at the end of the evaluation.
We recently informed the applicants about the evaluation results for their proposals.
For questions, please contact the Research Enquiry Service.
[1] Proposals with the same score were ranked according to the priority order procedure set out in the call conditions (for HE, in the General Annexes to the Work Programme or specific arrangements in the specific call/topic conditions).
Author: Programmes & Funding Calls (Source: https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/topic-search;programCode=HORIZON;callCode=HORIZON-CL6-2024-GOVERNANCE-01)
