How Horizon Europe Simplification Measures Impact EU Project Coordinators

The European Commission has launched comprehensive simplification measures for Horizon Europe 2025-2027, targeting a reduction in administrative burden of at least 25% for all businesses and 35% for SMEs according to the Commission's simplification programme. These measures affect the entire project lifecycle from proposal preparation to final reporting across the EUR 93.5 billion programme. The simplification drive, led by Commissioner Ekaterina Zaharieva through Implementation Dialogues launched in spring 2025, aims to ensure that "researchers should focus on science, not paperwork" according to the European Commission's Implementation Dialogues framework.

The League of European Research Universities (LERU), representing leading European research institutions, has welcomed these changes while providing detailed feedback on their effectiveness through their Simplification in Horizon Europe note. The simplification measures build on lessons learned from Horizon 2020, where the European Court of Auditors found that the majority of simplification measures reduced administrative burden, though opportunities for improvement remained according to Special Report 28/2018 on Horizon 2020 simplification.

What Are the Key Simplification Areas in Horizon Europe 2025-2027?

The simplification measures target eight critical areas of the EU project lifecycle, each designed to reduce bureaucratic complexity while maintaining programme integrity. These measures affect both current Horizon Europe operations and lay the groundwork for the proposed Horizon Europe 2028-2034 programme with its proposed EUR 175 billion budget according to the Commission's programme information.

Work Programme Development has been streamlined by limiting the number of call topics that fund only one project, reducing competition inefficiencies. The European Commission now uses shorter and less prescriptive topic descriptions to allow greater flexibility and creativity in proposal approaches. This change addresses feedback that overly specific calls constrained innovative solutions to complex challenges.

Evaluation Process Enhancement includes expanded use of two-stage evaluations to reduce the burden on unsuccessful applicants while improving time-to-grant metrics. According to LERU's analysis, two-stage processes allow consortia to submit shorter first-stage proposals, receiving feedback before investing in full proposal development. This approach has proven particularly effective for competitive calls with high submission volumes.

Proposal Template Modifications have simplified the standard application forms, though specific details of template changes vary by call type and pillar. The changes aim to reduce repetitive information requests while maintaining the quality standards required for rigorous evaluation. LERU has noted that template improvements should be accompanied by enhanced evaluator training to ensure consistent assessment across simplified submissions.

How Do Portal and Grant Agreement Changes Affect Project Setup?

The Funding and Tenders Portal has undergone technical improvements to enhance user experience and reduce system-related administrative burden. These changes address long-standing concerns about portal navigation and submission processes that have created friction for applicants and beneficiaries.

Grant Agreement Preparation (GAP) procedures have been refined to accelerate the transition from successful evaluation to project launch. The GAP phase traditionally represents a bottleneck where legal and financial requirements can delay project starts by several months. Simplified GAP procedures aim to reduce this delay while maintaining due diligence standards.

The portal improvements include enhanced guidance tools and more intuitive interfaces for financial reporting. Project coordinators can now access clearer templates and automated validation features that catch common errors before submission. These technical enhancements complement policy-level simplifications to create a more efficient overall system.

What Changes Apply to Project Implementation and Reporting?

Project implementation simplification focuses on reducing ongoing administrative requirements without compromising accountability. The measures address feedback from beneficiaries who reported that excessive documentation requirements diverted resources from actual research activities.

Financial reporting has been streamlined through improved templates and clearer guidance on cost category classifications. The 25% indirect cost flat rate, established in Horizon Europe's Model Grant Agreement Article 6.2.C, remains unchanged, but reporting procedures have been simplified to reduce the administrative burden of documenting these costs.

Lump sum funding schemes have been expanded as an alternative to traditional cost-based reporting. Lump sums provide pre-agreed fixed amounts for work packages, eliminating detailed cost justification requirements while maintaining results-based accountability. This approach has proven particularly effective for well-defined work packages with predictable resource requirements.

The European Commission has also refined amendment procedures to allow faster adaptation to changing project circumstances. Simplified amendments reduce the time required for consortium changes, budget reallocations, and timeline adjustments that commonly arise during multi-year research projects.

How Effective Were Previous Simplification Efforts in Horizon 2020?

The European Court of Auditors' evaluation of Horizon 2020 simplification provides crucial context for understanding the current measures' potential impact. The audit found that most simplification measures successfully reduced administrative burden, but identified areas where improvements fell short of expectations.

Horizon 2020 introduced several successful simplifications including streamlined IT systems, reduced funding scheme complexity, and improved legal certainty through clearer guidance documents. The programme reduced the "time to grant" significantly compared to its predecessor, FP7, while maintaining rigorous evaluation standards.

However, the audit also identified persistent challenges. Frequent modifications to guidance documents created confusion and uncertainty among beneficiaries who had adapted to previous requirements. The complexity of multi-DG programme management across different Commission departments continued to create coordination challenges that affected participant experience.

The European Court of Auditors emphasized that "stability in the rules is important; beneficiaries are able to adapt to complexity but frequent modifications to guidance can cause confusion and uncertainty." This lesson has informed the current approach, which emphasizes clear communication of changes and advance notice for major modifications.

What Are University Research Managers' Perspectives on Current Measures?

LERU's detailed analysis in their Simplification in Horizon Europe note, based on feedback from EU research managers and experts at member universities, provides practical insights into the simplification measures' real-world impact. The organization represents 24 leading European research universities and has extensive experience with EU programme implementation.

University research managers particularly welcomed the move toward shorter, less prescriptive topic descriptions that allow greater proposal flexibility. They noted that overly detailed call specifications often forced artificial constraints on research approaches, potentially limiting innovation. The simplified approach better aligns with the exploratory nature of fundamental research.

However, LERU also highlighted areas requiring continued attention. Evaluator training needs enhancement to ensure consistent assessment of more flexible proposals. Without proper context, evaluators may struggle to assess proposal relevance when topics allow broader interpretation of research approaches.

The research community has also emphasized the importance of maintaining evaluation quality while reducing administrative burden. Simplified processes must not compromise the rigorous peer review standards that ensure EU funding supports excellent research. This balance requires careful design and ongoing monitoring of evaluation outcomes.

How Do These Changes Prepare for Horizon Europe 2028-2034?

The current simplification measures serve as a testing ground for the proposed Horizon Europe 2028-2034 programme, which the European Commission presented with a proposed EUR 175 billion budget. Commissioner Zaharieva emphasized that the future programme "must be stronger, bolder and more effective than ever" while remaining accessible to researchers across Europe according to The Guild's conference report.

The 2028-2034 programme proposals include maintaining the successful pillar structure while reinforcing instruments that have demonstrated effectiveness. The European Research Council (ERC) budget would double, and the European Innovation Council (EIC) would expand to accelerate disruptive innovation. These expansions require simplified administrative frameworks to handle increased programme volume efficiently.

Current simplification experiences will inform the Rules of Participation for the next programme. University associations including LERU, The Guild, EUA, and others have coordinated their input on programme design through joint amendments to the Commission's FP10 proposals to ensure that administrative requirements support rather than hinder research excellence.

The programme will also introduce "moonshot" scientific-driven projects in strategic fields such as clean aviation, space economy, and next-generation AI. These ambitious initiatives require flexible administrative frameworks that can adapt to breakthrough research timelines and unexpected developments.

Practical Implications for Project Coordinators

Project coordinators should adapt their proposal strategies to leverage the simplified framework while maintaining competitive advantage. The move toward shorter, less prescriptive topics requires coordinators to demonstrate clear understanding of underlying challenges while proposing innovative approaches that may not fit traditional research categories.

For consortium building, coordinators should emphasize the benefits of two-stage evaluation processes when recruiting partners. The reduced first-stage burden makes it easier to engage high-quality partners who might otherwise decline participation due to proposal development costs. Coordinators can use the first stage to test consortium chemistry and refine research approaches before committing to full proposal development.

Financial management requires updated procedures to take advantage of simplified reporting options. Coordinators should evaluate whether lump sum schemes suit their project structures, particularly for work packages with well-defined deliverables and predictable resource requirements. For traditional cost-based reporting, coordinators should familiarize themselves with enhanced portal features and validation tools to streamline submission processes.

Partnership agreements need updating to reflect simplified amendment procedures available through the Funding and Tenders Portal. Consortia can now adapt more quickly to changing circumstances, but this flexibility requires clear governance frameworks to manage decision-making processes. Coordinators should establish amendment protocols that balance agility with consortium stability.

Risk management strategies should account for the transition period between current and future programme rules. Projects spanning the 2027-2028 boundary will need to navigate potential regulatory changes while maintaining compliance with existing agreements. Early engagement with Commission services can help identify potential transition issues before they become critical problems.

Documentation requirements have been reduced but not eliminated. Coordinators should focus on quality over quantity in record-keeping, maintaining essential compliance documentation while eliminating redundant administrative processes. The simplified framework rewards efficient administration rather than extensive bureaucracy.

Looking ahead to the 2028-2034 programme, coordinators should prepare for expanded funding opportunities while building capabilities to handle more ambitious research challenges. The simplification measures are designed to support rather than constrain research excellence, enabling coordinators to focus resources on scientific achievement rather than administrative compliance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the target reduction in administrative burden for Horizon Europe simplification?

According to the European Commission's simplification programme, the target is to reduce administrative burden by at least 25% for all businesses and 35% for SMEs. This is part of a broader initiative to cut recurring administrative costs by EUR 37.5 billion across EU programmes by the end of the current mandate.

How do two-stage evaluations reduce administrative burden in Horizon Europe?

Two-stage evaluations allow applicants to submit shorter first-stage proposals before developing full submissions. This reduces the burden on unsuccessful applicants who receive early feedback, while improving time-to-grant metrics for successful projects. LERU particularly welcomes this approach for high-competition calls.

What are lump sum funding schemes and how do they simplify reporting?

Lump sum funding provides pre-agreed fixed amounts for work packages, eliminating detailed cost justification requirements. Instead of documenting actual expenses, beneficiaries receive payments based on achieving agreed results and deliverables, significantly reducing financial reporting complexity while maintaining accountability.

How will current simplification measures influence Horizon Europe 2028-2034?

Current measures serve as testing grounds for the proposed EUR 175 billion Horizon Europe 2028-2034 programme. Successful simplifications will be retained and expanded, while lessons learned will inform the Rules of Participation for the next framework programme, including support for ambitious "moonshot" projects.

What changes have been made to proposal templates in Horizon Europe 2025-2027?

Proposal templates have been simplified with shorter, less prescriptive topic descriptions that allow greater flexibility and creativity. Call topics that fund only one project have been limited, and template modifications aim to reduce repetitive information requests while maintaining evaluation quality standards.