Expected Outcome:

This topic aims at supporting activities that are enabling or contributing to one or several expected impacts of destination “Staying healthy in a rapidly changing society”. To that end, proposals under this topic should aim to deliver results that are directed at, tailored towards and contributing to all the following expected outcomes:

• Strengthened capacity of life sciences actors in science communication, risk communication, public outreach, and citizen engagement.
• Strengthened awareness of risks and benefits of life sciences by the public, by showcasing the latest Research and Innovation (R&I) developments in the life sciences, and their societal impact.
• New and innovative approaches developed to engage the public in R&I activities in the life sciences, with an emphasis on inclusive and participatory approaches, involving relevant stakeholders (e.g. researchers, research funders, policymakers, publishers, civil society organisations, business, and citizens).

Scope:

Life science innovations significantly contribute to peoples’ daily life and to individual and social well-being. To foster public trust, people must understand how life sciences work and how these technologies may impact people’s lives.

This trust is not guaranteed. It is increasingly threatened by the rapid spread of mis- and disinformation and by insufficient outreach to and involvement of people to address their concerns and expectations. To maintain and deepen trust, especially among young people, R&I policymakers, researchers and industry players must be better equipped to engage with the public and to pursue responsible research and innovation.

Citizen engagement is particularly critical in areas like agriculture and food technology, where innovation intersects with health and sustainability considerations and values. Furthermore, citizen participation is key to build trust in the life sciences and ensure that they meet societal needs. By engaging citizens early on, we can ensure that research and innovation align with their values, concerns and expectations. This involves designing research and innovation processes that incorporate citizen input, such as setting research priorities, and create outcomes that are responsive to their needs.

To this end, proposals should address all the following activities:

• Provide advisory support and training to life science stakeholders, in order to upskill them in science communication and risk communication.
• Produce, publish and advertise to the relevant actors, guidance to engage citizens upstream in the development, co-production, and co-design of life sciences innovation.
• Produce, publish, and advertise to the relevant public an accessible repository of tools for life science stakeholders on risk communication.
• Design and run community engagement activities in the life sciences, in partnership with relevant local actors, such as science museums, R&I organisations, and/or community organisations.

Regarding advisory support and training, proposals should present how they will engage bilaterally with life science stakeholders to advise them and train them on science communication and risk communication in the life sciences. The proposal selected for funding should also establish links with the European Competence Centre for Science Communication[1] currently being created by the COALESCE[2] project and expected to be launched in 2027[3].

Regarding engagement of citizens in the development, co-production and co-design of life sciences innovations, proposals should focus on advising and training life science actors in deliberative citizen participation and co-design with citizens, including tools that allow discussions about values and ethical considerations of innovations in this sector. Proposals should set out the ways in which they will support life science actors to involve citizens in co-design, and also set out how they will evaluate the impact of the citizen engagement activities that they have supported. The consortium selected for funding is encouraged to use the tools and methods developed under previous research and tailor them to the life sciences.

Regarding the repository of tools and support for risk communication, such tools already exist and have been developed, notably the EU funded projects listed in the CORDIS Results Pack “Science communication: Empowering citizens in the public discussion of science”[4], the CORDIS Results Pack “Ethics and integrity: Building bridges for trust and excellence in research and innovation”[5] and the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for emergency risk communication[6]. Proposals should present what tools they will gather, how they will publish them, and what publicity and outreach they will conduct to raise awareness of this repository among the relevant life science actors (policymakers, researchers, industry, civil society organisations), tailoring tools and trainings to the life sciences. Proposals should present a long-term strategy for how the repository of tools will continue to be accessible beyond the lifecycle of this Coordination and Support Action (CSA).

Regarding community engagement activities, proposals should experiment with new and engaging formats across the programmed activities. Proposals should promote both science education, and multiple forms of public engagement with science, focusing on the life sciences. Proposals should focus on any areas within the life sciences, but at least one community engagement activity should focus on agriculture and food technology. The consortium selected for funding is encouraged to make use of findings and tools for stakeholder engagement developed by other Horizon Europe projects, including projects funded under topic HORIZON-CL6-2023-GOVERNANCE-01-6: “Co-creation and trust-building measures for biotechnology and bio-based innovation systems”. The consortium selected for funding is also encouraged to establish links with the projects funded under topic HORIZON-WIDERA-2026-07-ERA-05: “Pillar III: Fostering citizen engagement for more responsible and democratic R&I”, that will develop tools and guidelines on public engagement in R&I, and to tailor these tools and guidelines to applications in the life sciences. Proposals should explain how they will partner with relevant local actors, such as science museums, R&I organisations, and/or community organisations, to run innovative community engagement activities on the life sciences.

Proposals may consider involving the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) to participate in the advisory board of the consortium selected for funding, notably to benefit from the expertise of the JRC's Competence Centre on Participatory and Deliberative Democracy[7], regarding the engagement of citizens in the design of life sciences innovations and community engagement activities. Any such collaboration should be established after the proposal’s approval.

AI Based Application Success Predictor

1️⃣ Strong, Mission-Aligned Impact (Most Important Across EC Calls)

The EC is impact-driven: proposals must show how the project will:

Solve a major European or global societal challenge

Deliver measurable, lasting benefits for EU citizens

Produce outputs that can be used by policymakers, industry, or society

Align with Horizon Europe missions, priorities, and strategic agendas

Predictor: Clear, quantifiable, EU-level impact → strongest scoring factor.

2️⃣ Clear, Ambitious, but Achievable Objectives

Successful proposals show:

2–4 well-defined objectives linked to the Work Programme call text

Clearly articulated research questions or innovation goals

Logical, realistic expected outcomes and deliverables

Feasible scientific and technical approaches

Predictor: Balanced ambition + feasibility.

3️⃣ Excellent, Cutting-Edge Science or Innovation

For RIA/IA/CSA or ERC-level grants, reviewers expect:

High novelty and innovation

Strong grounding in current state-of-the-art

Clear advancement beyond existing approaches

Solid theoretical or experimental foundations

Robust methodological design

Predictor: Scientific excellence is essential for competitive scoring.

4️⃣ Strong Consortium with Complementary Expertise

EC proposals are consortium-driven (except ERC/EIC Accelerator).

High-scoring consortia:

Cover all needed competencies (science, industry, policy, ethics, dissemination)

Include SMEs, industry partners, NGOs, and public bodies when relevant

Are geographically diverse across EU Member States and Associated Countries

Demonstrate strong leadership and communication structures

Predictor: Well-constructed consortium with clear roles.

5️⃣ Clear Pathway From Outputs → Outcomes → Impact

Evaluators look for a credible trajectory showing:

How research leads to specific outputs (data, tools, prototypes)

How outputs lead to uptake or use

How use produces societal, economic, scientific, or policy impact

Strong Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and impact metrics

Predictor: Clearly mapped impact pathway.

6️⃣ Strong Implementation Plan (Work Packages, Deliverables, Gantt Chart)

Winning proposals have:

Well-designed Work Packages (WPs) with clear scope and responsibilities

Interdependencies identified and risk-mitigation strategies

Detailed milestones and deliverables

Feasible budget aligned with tasks

Strong project management plan

Predictor: High implementation quality boosts the “Excellence” and “Implementation” scores.

7️⃣ Policy Relevance and Contribution to EU Strategies

Especially critical for health, climate, digital, and social calls.

Proposals score higher when they link to:

EU Cancer Mission

EU Green Deal

Digital Europe strategy

EU Biodiversity Strategy

EU Health Union & One Health

Open Science & FAIR data mandates

Predictor: Clear alignment with EU policies.

8️⃣ Strong Stakeholder & Citizen Engagement (Especially in Social & Health Missions)

EC values inclusivity:

Patient groups

Civil society organizations

Public sector bodies

Regulatory agencies

Citizen science components

Stakeholder letters of intent or commitment strengthen credibility.

Predictor: Engagement adds impact and relevance.

9️⃣ Robust Data Management, Open Science, and Ethics

Mandatory components include:

FAIR Data Management Plan

Open access publications

Ethics self-assessment

GDPR compliance

Data security, governance, and ethical approvals

Animal-use reduction and justification (if applicable)

Predictor: Clear compliance with ethical and data obligations.

10️⃣ Well-Justified Budget and Resource Allocation

Budget must be:

Proportional to tasks

Transparent and reasonable

Efficiently distributed among partners

Free from padding or unjustified costs

Predictor: Realistic budgets improve Implementation scores.

🚫 COMMON PITFALLS THAT LEAD TO EC GRANT REJECTION