EVALUATION RESULTS
Published: 06.05.2025
Deadline: 02.10.2025
Available budget: EUR 132,000,000.00
The results of the evaluation for each topic are as follows:
HORIZON-CL4-2025-04-DATA-02
HORIZON-CL4-2025-04-DATA-03
HORIZON-CL4-2025-04-DIGITAL-EMERGING-01
HORIZON-CL4-2025-04-DIGITAL-EMERGING-04
HORIZON-CL4-2025-04-DIGITAL-EMERGING-05
HORIZON-CL4-2025-04-DIGITAL-EMERGING-07
HORIZON-CL4-2025-04-HUMAN-08
Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls)
73
56
88
28
19
22
214
Number of inadmissible proposals
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
Number of ineligible proposals
0
2
0
1
0
0
27
Number of above-threshold proposals
54
35
72
20
9
14
96
Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals
402,251,546.25 €
190,942,541.75 €
386,232,598.39 €
75,210,521.75 €
81,866,208.67 €
202,070,329.08 €
198,618,189.25 €
Number of proposals retained for funding
4
3
4
2
2
2
3
Number of proposals in the reserve list
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
Funding threshold[1]
14.50
14.50
15.01
14.50
14.15
14.00
15.00
Ranking distribution
Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14
9
6
10
7
3
2
9
Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13
12
4
15
6
0
2
14
Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10
33
25
47
7
6
10
73
[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). For HE, to determine the ranking for ‘Innovation actions’, the score for ‘Impact’ is given a weight of 1.5.
Summary of observer report:
Seven topics of the digital theme in Cluster 4 of the Horizon Europe Programme, specifically under the call HORIZON-CL4-2025-04, were evaluated during the period of November 10 – 28, 2025.The evaluations of these topics took place both on-site and remotely.
Organisation, communication and process adherence were excellent, and the EC Staff effort was highly professional and commendable. Experts showed a high level of engagement, and their work is commendable. Technology involved was functioning well and, in most cases, matching the tasks involved. The whole evaluation process was fair, transparent and confidential. As a result, out of 500 proposals, the 20 best ones were selected, which could be considered as of top quality and deserving of EUR 132M financing in total.
While some improvements may always be possible, the whole formal part of the process has achieved a desirable high level of efficiency, an exemplary, almost a plateau of possible evaluation performance. Hence, all the interested parties could and should be satisfied with the adherence to the EC guidelines and outcomes of this work.
This level of execution should be locked-in, meaning becoming a part of the standard knowledge and skill management within the EC agencies in charge of evaluation. In conclusion, this makes the observers' job almost obsolete, and the whole text of this report is only a reflection, sort of systematic review from our side.
If any recommendations could be voiced, they are minor e.g. an ideal time point is reached to turn to increasing the depth of evaluation quality in terms of implementation analysis, while at the same time securing the current level of scientific and impact discussions.
We recently informed the applicants about the evaluation results for their proposals.
For questions, please contact the Research Enquiry Service.
