Innovative Advanced Materials (IAMs) for conformable, flexible or stretchable electronics (RIA) (Innovative Advanced Materials for Europe partnership) -

EVALUATION results

Published: 15.05.2025

Deadline: 02.10.2025

Available budget: EUR 359.1 million

The results of the evaluation for each topic are as follows:

DATA-08

DATA-09

DATA-10

DATA-11

DATA-12

DATA-13

Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls)

18

3

1

4

3

76

Number of inadmissible proposals

0

0

0

0

0

3

Number of ineligible proposals

14

1

0

0

0

13

Number of above-threshold proposals

3

2

1

3

3

38

Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals

225,328,342.50 €

4,997,875.00 €

2,500,000.00 €

29,995,930.85 €

5,838,061.00 €               

310,159,620.22 €

Number of proposals retained for funding

1

1

1

1

1

5

Number of proposals in the reserve list

1

1

0

1

1

1

Funding threshold1

14.5

14.5

11.5

14

12

13.5

Ranking distribution

Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14

1

1

0

1

1

2

Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13

1

1

0

1

1

6

Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10

1

0

1

1

1

30

DIGITAL-EMERGING-01

DIGITAL-EMERGING-02

DIGITAL-EMERGING-03

DIGITAL-EMERGING-04

DIGITAL-EMERGING-07

DIGITAL-EMERGING-08

Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls)

4

18

40

4

28

2

Number of inadmissible proposals

1

0

1

0

1

0

Number of ineligible proposals

0

0

0

4

0

1

Number of above-threshold proposals

3

12

30

1

20

1

Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals

13,486,849.50 €

59,729,108.00 €

80,814,339.75 €

2,498,857.25 €

804,393,845.50 €

1,000,000.00 €

Number of proposals retained for funding

1

2

3

1

2

1

Number of proposals in the reserve list

1

1

2

0

2

0

Funding threshold1

13.5

14.5

14.5

13.5

15

14

Ranking distribution

Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14

0

6

6

0

5

1

Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13

1

3

11

1

2

0

Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10

2

3

13

0

13

0

HUMAN-14

HUMAN-15

HUMAN-16

HUMAN-17

HUMAN-18

HUMAN-19

Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls)

59

46

34

3

4

6

Number of inadmissible proposals

0

0

0

1

0

1

Number of ineligible proposals

0

1

2

0

0

0

Number of above-threshold proposals

44

35

27

1

1

2

Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals

256,818,668.15 €

169,733,280.30 €

78,286,154.25 €

2,546,117.50 €

2,998,504.92 €

5,999,006.25 €

Number of proposals retained for funding

8

4

4

1

1

1

Number of proposals in the reserve list

3

4

3

0

0

1

Funding threshold1,2

14.5

14

13.5

12.5

13.5

15

Ranking distribution

Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14

12

5

3

0

0

1

Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13

6

5

7

0

1

1

Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10

26

25

17

1

0

0

MATERIALS-46

MATERIALS-47

Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls)

17

70

Number of inadmissible proposals

0

0

Number of ineligible proposals

0

0

Number of above-threshold proposals

9

58

Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals

44,109,108.00 €

283,995,317.95 €

Number of proposals retained for funding

2

3

Number of proposals in the reserve list

1

1

Funding threshold1

14.5

14

Ranking distribution

Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14

2

4

Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13

1

14

Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10

6

40

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). To determine the ranking for ‘Innovation actions’, the score for ‘Impact’ is given a weight of 1.5.

2 According to the specific conditions of HUMAN-14 and HUMAN-16, to ensure a balanced portfolio coverage, grants are awarded to not only in order of ranking [see the specific condition for each topic in the topic page]. Therefore, additional proposals are retained for funding to fulfil this condition.

Summary of observer report:

The efficiency of the procedures in this call is very good. The tools such as IER, CR, ESR and cross- reading are well suited and the usability is very effective. Harmonisation and calibration procedures are excellent. This is thanks to the superior performance of the moderators and co-moderators in panel meetings with sometimes more than 40 experts under nightmarish conditions of unstable meeting connections, failing in access and interoperability of SEP and WebEx platform. Overall, the evaluation was fair and consistent, with full compliance with the applicable rules.

We recently informed the applicants about the evaluation results for their proposals.

For questions, please contact the Research Enquiry Service.