The EIC Accelerator funding (grant and equity, with a blended financing option) by the European Commission (EC) and European Innovation Council (EIC) awards up to €2.5 million in grants and €10 million in equity financing per project (€12.5 million total) and is designed for startups and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs), often supported by professional writers, freelancers, or consultants.

This article explores the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in EIC Accelerator grant proposal evaluations.

With AI tools becoming more capable, the number of grant submissions is expected to increase drastically. The creation of content, especially in written form, has never been easier, and it is a natural conclusion that nearly every applicant will use AI within just a few years (see ChatEIC).

This raises questions about the current EIC Accelerator evaluation process since it now faces a significant asymmetry between the number of submissions and the manual work done by the expert, remote evaluators. While it is likely that the EIC has already created a dam to stop the wave by integrating AI in Step 1 proposals (i.e., the first hurdle for applicants), it is only a matter of time until the workload caused by AI submissions will exceed all of their capabilities.

Out With The Old, In With AI

The future of proposal evaluations will be AI-driven, whether in a fully automated fashion or by simply automating 80% of the process and only using human assessments for the final scoring. Europe is notoriously behind in adopting new technologies, especially in government, but it is likely that it will be forced to move due to the sheer explosion in workload for its staff.

According to the Red Queen Hypothesis, organisms that are in direct competition with others have to evolve to avoid extinction. This arms race is not optional but mandatory since, even if you stay still, the other side will move rapidly.

In the same way, the EIC has no choice but to adapt, and it will be interesting to see how they will try to meet the challenge when any European company will be able to generate a proposal in under 10 minutes, and send a customized application to 50 different grant agencies, which will be as easy as writing an email (see ChatEIC).

Currently, the EIC receives thousands of submissions every year, and the number of interviewees for the EIC Accelerator’s Step 3 pitch week is rapidly growing, but how will it handle 10,000 or even 100,000 applications a year?

Redundant Redundancies

With the shift towards AI, there are new questions that need to be considered regarding the current evaluation process and criteria. The EIC has not shied away from making bold changes in the past, but it might have to make its boldest changes yet, focusing on what actually matters: the company and the technology.

As mentioned in a previous article, any proposal section that is generic should be removed since it does not require input from the applicant; thus, it is simply bloated text to appease the EIC. Core examples for such proposal sections are:

Mission and Vision

It seems counterintuitive that such important parts, such as the mission and vision, would be generic, but they certainly are. They are neither graded in an impactful way nor are they relevant to the project. The commercial strategy, global impact, and technology roadmap cover these segments much more clearly and are much more likely to impact the perception of the project.

Gender and Diversity

This is an obvious drop from the evaluation and proposal in general. The EIC is a public institution, which is why it is subject to policy targets and has to stick with whatever the political winds bring along with them, but from a proposal perspective, this section is entirely irrelevant. Why? Because it does not match its purpose. Many engineering and DeepTech businesses are mostly male. Gender ratios are usually 90%+, with women often being in entry positions. That is not a reflection of the evil nature of engineers, but it is a reflection of the applicant ratios.

The reason why this section is irrelevant is that it is too easily bypassed, independent of the gender ratio. A company can have a 51% female team with very diverse ethnicities and score the same way as a 5% female team with only pale German engineers. That is because there is a certain way to write this section that makes it impossible for evaluators to complain (as is done by ChatEIC). Thus, it is redundant and should be removed.

Need for the EIC

This is another counterintuitive opinion since arguing for the need a company has for EIC grants and EIC Fund equity should be very nuanced and specific to every single company. Yes, it should be – but it is not. In fact, this is one of the most generic sections in the proposal. That is because evaluators cannot handle real explanations or do not understand the reality of startups.

Startups will raise money with or without the EIC. Many funded EIC companies, if not all of them, raise money during the 12-month submission and evaluation process, which is a fact that is not often talked about simply because it destroys the EIC’s narrative. Companies cannot write that they will raise €5M in 4 months in their proposal because evaluators would immediately criticize them for it.

“Well, you have access to private markets, so you do not need the EIC.”

That is why applicants have to put realism aside and just tell the evaluators what they want to hear. It is an unfortunate part of the evaluation process, but it is also obvious considering ChatEIC has some of the most restrictive instructions in this section. There are about 5 phrases that must be mentioned there, and that pretty much bulletproofs it as much as humanly (or artificially) possible.

Technology Readiness Levels (TRL)

The EIC got hung up on TRLs a long time ago, which shows its alignment with the US and how it repeatedly tries to follow in its footsteps. Considering the recent tensions between the EU and the US (i.e., tariffs, Ukraine, NATO), it might be time for the EU to take a deep breath and emancipate itself from the concept of TRLs. On the surface, TRLs might seem like a great way to assess technologies, but they are way too subjective to be anything but a way to confuse applicants and make the evaluation even more random than it already is.

Based on experience, evaluators often see TRL validation differently, and jury members will likewise assess a TRL in a very different way due to a more commercial focus. For the EIC Accelerator, it is usually sufficient to identify the starting point (TRL6) as a prototype or prototype component, ideally tested by an end-user. Everything else, including obscure terms such as scaling, market-ready, validation, and demonstration, is just semantics. Here is how the EIC could restructure its technology levels for its flagship programs:

EIC Pathfinder: Create your prototype.
EIC Transition: Refine your prototype.
EIC Accelerator: Scale your prototype.

Simple and clean.

Why Generic Sections Must Go

For a human-written proposal that is also evaluated by a human, generic sections are fine since evaluators know the deal. They know that they cannot reject an amazing technology and team just because they have zero female or diverse members. They will look away and give it a go, so to speak. That is the current reality. Everybody knows that these are lofty policies and not a reality.

But the AI does not know that. If the assessment of diversity and gender ratio is a serious part of the AI criteria, then it will be part of the criteria. And that would significantly degrade the quality of the applications since companies would just hire temporary contractors or add future team members that happen to be the right demographic to rig the system, then drop them after they got the grant.

The EIC continuously tries to improve the quality of applicants, but the quality of applicants directly correlates to the quality of the EIC’s evaluation process. If the process is poor, the applicant quality will be poor. Using AI in grant evaluations is a matter of survival for the EIC but it is also a significant opportunity to streamline its process and decide on what really matters.

But how should an AI evaluator assess proposals then? This will be discussed in Part 2.

This article was last modified on Apr 2, 2025 @ 09:02

These tips are not only useful for European startups, professional writers, consultants and Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SME) but are generally recommended when writing a business plan or investor documents.

Deadlines: Post-Horizon 2020, the EIC Accelerator accepts Step 1 submissions now while the deadlines for the full applications (Step 2) under Horizon Europe are:

Step 1
- Open now: Apply as soon as possible to be eligible for the next Step 2 submission deadline
Step 2 (closing 17:00 Brussels Time)
- 1^st cut-off 2025: -
- 2^nd cut-off 2025: March 12^th 2025
- 3^rd cut-off 2025: -
- 4^th cut-off 2025: October 1^st 2025
Step 3
- 1^st cut-off 2025: -
- 2^nd cut-off 2025: TBD
- 3^rd cut-off 2025: -
- 4^th cut-off 2025: TBD

The Step 1 applications must be submitted weeks in advance of Step 2. The next EIC Accelerator cut-off for Step 2 (full proposal) can be found here. After Brexit, UK companies can still apply to the EIC Accelerator under Horizon Europe albeit with non-dilutive grant applications only - thereby excluding equity-financing.

Contact: You can reach out to us via this contact form to work with a professional consultant.

AI Grant Writer: ChatEIC is a fully automated EIC Accelerator grant proposal writer: Get it here.

EU, UK & US Startups: Alternative financing options for EU, UK and US innovation startups are the EIC Pathfinder (combining Future and Emerging Technologies - FET Open & FET Proactive) with €4M per project, Thematic Priorities, European Innovation Partnerships (EIP), Innovate UK with £3M (for UK-companies only) as well as the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) grants with $1M (for US-companies only).

Any more questions? View the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section.

Want to see all articles? They can be found here.

For Updates: Join this Newsletter!

Get ChatEIC - The EIC Accelerator Grant Writer here:

by Stephan Segler, PhD
Professional Grant Consultant at Segler Consulting

General information on the EIC Accelerator template, professional grant writing and how to prepare a successful application can be found in the following articles:

A Quick FTO Guide for EIC Accelerator Applicants in a Rush

2023 Budget Allocations for EIC Pathfinder, Transition and Accelerator

Developing the Unique Selling Points (USP) for the EIC Accelerator

Explaining the Resubmission Process for the EIC Accelerator

A Short but Comprehensive Explanation of the EIC Accelerator

EIC Accelerator Success Cases

Deciding Between EIC Pathfinder, Transition and Accelerator

A Winning Candidate for the EIC Accelerator

EIC Accelerator Interview Preparation Process: Scripting the Pitch (Part 1)