The European Commission has adopted the Horizon Europe Work Programme for 2026–2027, the final two years of the current framework programme. With a total budget of over €14 billion, this phase is less about launching new directions and more about consolidation: simplifying procedures, reducing administrative burden, and aligning funding more tightly with a limited number of cross-cutting strategic objectives.

For research organisations, SMEs, industry partners and project coordinators, the message is clear: fewer opportunities, but larger ones; less prescription, but higher responsibility. Below we unpack what is changing, what is new, and what this means in practice when preparing proposals and managing projects.

1. A more focused and strategic Work Programme

1.1 Fewer topics, bigger ambitions

Compared to the 2023–2024 Work Programme, the 2026–2027 edition introduces substantial structural simplification:

• 35% fewer call topics, aiming to reduce fragmentation and overlap.

• Shorter and less prescriptive topic descriptions, giving applicants more freedom in how they design their approach to achieve the expected outcomes.

• A clear move towards larger funding opportunities, with a 50% reduction in topics designed to fund only a single project. The intention is to build critical mass around key priorities rather than dispersing resources across many small actions.

In practice, this means stronger competition per topic, but also more room for strategic positioning, consortium design and system-level thinking.

1.2 The introduction of “Horizontal Calls”

One of the most significant novelties of the 2026–2027 Work Programme is the introduction of Horizontal Calls. These calls explicitly cut across clusters, pooling resources around shared EU-level objectives instead of remaining within thematic silos.

Two horizontal calls stand out:

Clean Industrial Deal

• Indicative budget: €540 million

• Focus: decarbonisation of energy-intensive industries and deployment of clean technologies

• Key characteristics:

  • Strongly industry-led

  • Explicitly bottom-up

  • Emphasis on solutions that are fit-for-deployment, not just proof-of-concept

This marks a clear shift towards projects closer to real-world implementation and industrial uptake.

AI in Science

• Indicative budget: €90 million

• Context: complements around €775 million invested elsewhere by the EU

• Focus: development of trustworthy AI tools that accelerate scientific discovery and help address societal challenges

This call reinforces the Commission’s intention to embed AI as a horizontal enabler across disciplines, while maintaining a strong emphasis on trust, robustness and responsibility.

1.3 “Choose Europe for Science”: talent and careers matter again

Beyond projects and technologies, the Work Programme also includes targeted measures to strengthen Europe’s attractiveness for researchers:

• Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA):
  Around €50 million dedicated to improving postdoctoral career stability and offering relocation incentives.

• Research Infrastructures:
  An additional €50 million to strengthen Europe’s research backbone.

• ERA Chairs:
  A substantial €240 million to attract and retain high-level researchers in less research-intensive regions.

This reflects a growing recognition that sustainable research ecosystems depend as much on people and careers as on funding volumes.

2. Implementation and procedural changes: less paperwork, stricter rules

Alongside strategic shifts, the 2026–2027 Work Programme introduces important procedural changes that directly affect proposal preparation and project execution.

2.1 Lump sum funding becomes the norm

The Commission plans to implement 50% of the total call budget through lump sum funding, particularly for grants below €10 million.

What this means in practice:

• Payment logic:
  Payments are linked to the completion of Work Packages (WPs). If a WP is not fully completed by the end of a reporting period, the corresponding interim payment may be withheld.

• Reporting:
  No reporting of actual costs and no financial audits. The focus shifts almost entirely to technical implementation and delivery.

While this reduces administrative burden, it also increases the importance of:

• realistic work planning,

• well-defined WPs and deliverables,

• and disciplined internal project management.

2.2 Shorter and simpler proposal templates

The standard application forms (Part B) have been revised to enforce conciseness:

• Page limits reduced:

  • RIA & IA: 40 pages (previously 45)

    • 45 pages for lump sum topics

  • CSA: 25 pages (previously 30)

    • 28 pages for lump sum CSAs

• Impact section simplified:

  • The requirement to describe the “scale and significance” of impact in Section 2.1 has been removed, as it proved difficult to quantify meaningfully.

  • Section 2.3 (Impact Summary) is now optional.

• Budget tables streamlined:

  • In Section 3.1, explanations for purchase costs are only required if equipment costs exceed 15% of personnel costs.

  • Tables for “other cost categories” and “in-kind contributions” have been removed altogether.

The underlying message: say less, but say it better.

2.3 Blind evaluation: no room for accidental mistakes

For 41 two-stage calls (notably in Cluster 1 and Cluster 6), the first stage will use a blind evaluation process.

Key rules:

• Strict anonymity:
  Proposals must not contain any direct or indirect reference to:

  • participating organisations,

  • acronyms,

  • logos,

  • personnel names.

• Zero tolerance:
  Any breach of anonymity, for example linking to a specific project website or referring to “our previous research”, will render the proposal inadmissible.

This requires careful internal coordination and disciplined proposal writing, especially for experienced consortia used to showcasing their track record.

2.4 Guidelines on the use of Generative AI

For the first time, the Commission has issued explicit guidance on the use of Generative AI tools in proposal preparation.

The key principles are:

• Transparency:
  Applicants must disclose if and how AI tools were used, including the tool name and version, in the methodology section.

• Full responsibility:
  Applicants remain fully liable for all content, including:

  • plagiarism,

  • invented or incorrect citations (“hallucinations”),

  • bias.

• Data protection and IP:
  Applicants are warned against uploading sensitive, confidential or unpublished material into external AI systems due to risks of IP leakage or unintended model training.
  AI use is explicitly discouraged for sensitive tasks such as peer review.

AI can be a support tool but not a substitute for expertise, judgement and accountability.

What this means for applicants

The 2026–2027 Work Programme confirms a clear direction of travel:

• Strategic alignment matters more than ever.

• Proposal quality outweighs volume.

• Implementation realism is critical, especially under lump sum funding.

• Administrative simplification comes with stricter admissibility rules.

For organisations preparing to engage in this final phase of Horizon Europe, early positioning, strong consortia, and disciplined proposal design will be decisive.

Key takeaways

• Expect fewer calls, larger projects, and tougher competition.

• Horizontal calls reward cross-sectoral thinking and deployment-ready solutions.

• Lump sums simplify finances but raise the bar on planning and execution.

• Blind evaluation and AI guidelines require extra procedural care.

If you want to explore how these changes affect your proposal strategy or ongoing projects, MATICAL can help you pragmatically and effectively.