Ettevalmistustoetuse taotlus - GeoEcon, AIDA, Act4H2

5873115 428625 0 0 -3810 9724390 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL Ehitajate tee 5 19086 Tallinn Rg-kood 74000323 Tel 620 2002 E-post [email protected] www.taltech.ee 0 0 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL Ehitajate tee 5 19086 Tallinn Rg-kood 74000323 Tel 620 2002 E-post [email protected] www.taltech.ee -3810 428625 0 0 Sihtasutus Eesti Teadusagentuur Soola 8 13 . 0 3 .202 6 nr 11-10/48- 10 51004 Tartu Ettevalmistustoetuse taotlemine Käesolevaga taotleb Tallinna Tehnikaülikool ( reg nr 74000323, ak EE201010052037382001 ) ettevalmistustoetust järgmistele projekti de le : AI D idactics Alliance for Knowledge Circulation and Competence Building in Widening Countries – AIDA ( 101309978 , HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01 ), vastutav täitja Slavko Rakic , IT Kolledž; Academic Cooperation and Transformation for Hydrogen Europe - ACT4H2 ( 101311263 , HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01 ), vastutav täitja Ivo Palu, elektroenergeetika ja mehhatroonika instituut; Geoeconomics , Economic Resilience , and ( Generative ) AI - GEOECON-AI ( 101310518 ; HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01 ), vastutav täitja Tarmo Kalvet, ärikorralduse instituut; Lugupidamisega (allkirjastatud digitaalselt) Marika Lunden Teadusosakond Lisa: hindamisleh ed left 284480 Riina Vilgats 620 3536 [email protected] 0 0 Riina Vilgats 620 3536 [email protected] Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2374948 - 04/03/2026 Proposal Evaluation Form EUROPEAN COMMISSION Evaluation Summary Horizon Europe (HORIZON) Report - Coordination and support actions Call: HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01 Type of action: HORIZON-CSA Proposal number: 101309978 Proposal acronym: AIDA Duration (months): 48 Proposal title: AI Didactics Alliance for Knowledge Circulation and Competence Building in Widening Countries Activity: HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01-ACCESS-01 N. Proposer name Country Total % Grant % eligible Requested costs 1 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL EE 607,875 15.21% 607,875 15.21% 2 RIGAS TEHNISKA UNIVERSITATE LV 410,125 10.26% 410,125 10.26% 3 VYTAUTO DIDZIOJO UNIVERSITETAS LT 399,500 10.00% 399,500 10.00% 4 UNIVERSIDADE NOVA DE LISBOA PT 409,125 10.24% 409,125 10.24% 5 UNIVERZITET U NOVOM SADU FAKULTET TEHNICKIH RS 330,375 8.27% 330,375 8.27% NAUKA 6 EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY OF TIRANA AL 320,125 8.01% 320,125 8.01% 7 UNIVERZITET U SARAJEVU BA 304,250 7.61% 304,250 7.61% 8 HACETTEPE UNIVERSITESI TR 308,250 7.71% 308,250 7.71% 9 UNIVERSITAT LINZ AT 454,375 11.37% 454,375 11.37% 10 International Centre for EdTech Impact NO 451,750 11.31% 451,750 11.31% Total: 3,995,750 3,995,750 Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a transformative force in education and research, yet universities in widening countries continue to face structural barriers to AI adoption, limited institutional readiness, and fragmented knowledge circulation. The AI Didactics Alliance for Knowledge Circulation and Competence Building in Widening Countries (AIDA) directly addresses these challenges in full alignment with the European Excellence Initiative (EEI) under the Horizon Europe Work Programme “Widening Participation and Strengthening the European Research Area.” AIDA’s objective is to strengthen research and innovation excellence by creating a sustainable network for AI-enhanced teaching, learning, and institutional transformation. The project will establish AI Didactics Learning Centres (AIDLCs) in eight widening countries (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Serbia, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Turkey), supported by advanced partners in Austria and Norway. These centres will serve as hubs for upskilling academic and administrative staff, piloting AI-based learning solutions, co-creating micro-credentials, and facilitating cooperation between universities, industry, and policymakers. Through a Joint Open AIDA Learning Management System (LMS) and hybrid knowledge-circulation model combining short-term secondments, mentoring, and open educational resources, AIDA will foster inclusive, human-centric and trustworthy AI competences in line with the EU AI Act (2024/1689), UNESCO’s AI and the Future of Education (2025), and the DigComp 3.0 and AI Literacy Frameworks (OECD–EU 2025). By modernising institutional practices and connecting widening regions with advanced AI ecosystems, AIDA contributes to reducing the R&I performance gap, reinforcing the European Research Area (ERA), and advancing the goals of SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 9 (Innovation and Infrastructure). It builds lasting capacity for ethical, inclusive and evidence-based use of AI across Europe’s HEI. Evaluation Summary Report Evaluation Result Total score: 13.50 (Threshold: 10 ) 101309978/AIDA-04/03/2026-11:54:14 1/3  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2374948 - 04/03/2026 Criterion 1 - Excellence Score: 5.00 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Clarity and pertinence of the project’s objectives. - Quality of the proposed coordination and/or support measures including soundness of methodology. The project’s objectives are highly pertinent to the Work Programme. The overall aim of building a sustainable ecosystem for AI-enhanced teaching, learning and institutional reform is clear and aligns with the work programme, with a centre of gravity in Widening countries. The objectives are well supported by a comprehensive set of quantitative key performance indicators (KPIs), which are largely measurable and verifiable, contributing to a solid monitoring framework of the project. The objectives are largely achievable, as they are supported by a phased and logically sequenced methodology that links activities to expected outcomes and embeds them within existing institutional structures in participating Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). The proposed methodology based on the theory of change and integrating institutional reforms, technological innovation and knowledge circulation is credible and sound. The multi-phase exchange system and mobility measures would aid in effective knowledge transfer. The combination of short-term physical mobility, online collaboration and policy dialogue is a credible approach to overcoming challenges related to uneven participation and limited long-term uptake of reforms. Open Science practices are clearly implemented as an integral part of the proposed methodology, particularly the use of open datasets, Open Educational Resources and an open-access learning management system (LMS) acting as a federated hub. The alignment with FAIR principles indicates a high level of methodological maturity in managing research and educational outputs. The proposal includes a clear commitment to develop a Data Management Plan, which includes the use of trusted repositories, persistent identifiers, standard metadata schemes and provenance documentation. Criterion 2 - Impact Score: 4.50 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts specified in the work programme, and the likely scale and significance of the contributions from the project. - Suitability and quality of the measures to maximise expected outcomes and impacts, as set out in the dissemination and exploitation plan, including communication activities. In the medium term, the project would modernize and upgrade the higher institutions in terms of artificial intelligence (AI) and the R&I dimension, both in non Widening and particularly in Widening countries, through integrated collaboration between higher education institutions (HEIs), industry and other important stakeholders. In the longer term, the project would lead to increased R&I capacity for Widening institutions and lead to the mobilisation of resources for investments. The establishment of a transnational network of hubs, combined with structured mobility, shared infrastructures and institutional reforms, well supports the mainstreaming of a culture of excellence in science and knowledge valorisation. Overall the pathways to achieve the outcomes are clearly outlined. However, it is not described in sufficient detail how modernisation and upgrade of higher education institutions will be measured. The proposed mitigation measures to potential barriers are generally appropriate and credible. The planned measures to maximise impact are proportionate to the scale and ambition of the project and adequately address the needs of diverse target groups. The dissemination strategy is solid and credible, combining high-quality scientific outputs, policy engagement and practitioner-oriented resources. Communication activities are appropriately diversified, leveraging both professional and public-facing channels to ensure broad visibility and engagement. Protection of IP that arises during the project has not been addressed in sufficient detail. Criterion 3 - Quality and efficiency of the implementation Score: 4.00 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Quality and effectiveness of the work plan, assessment of risks, and appropriateness of the effort assigned to work packages, and the resources overall. - Capacity and role of each participant, and extent to which the consortium as a whole brings together the necessary expertise. The work plan is well structured and logically sequenced, with clearly defined and interconnected work packages (WPs). The deliverables and milestones are overall sufficient and logically interlinked with the WP objectives. However, monitoring the completion of the research exchanges has not been described in sufficient detail. Moreover, the feasibility of the parallel implementation of several resource-intensive WPs during overlapping peaks of activity, particularly in the mid-project phase, was not sufficiently justified, and some milestones presented are not fully coherent. Risks in the delivery of the work packages are adequately identified, and risk mitigation measures are well described. The majority of the budget is appropriately allocated to Widening countries. The consortium is well aligned with the project's objectives, bringing together Widening higher education institutions (HEIs) and advanced partners with valid and complementary roles across AI didactics, governance reform and policy engagement. Partners have adequate access to critical infrastructure, including digital platforms, institutional facilities and policy interfaces, enabling effective implementation of hubs, learning management system (LMS) deployment and training activities. Scope of the application Status: Yes Comments (in case the proposal is out of scope) Not provided Exceptional funding 101309978/AIDA-04/03/2026-11:54:14 2/3  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2374948 - 04/03/2026 Except when explicitly allowed in the topic, any entity from a non-associated third country and International Organisations (other than IEROs) can only participate as Associated Partners in CSAs (it cannot receive funding). There is no difference between entities established in low/middle income countries and developed countries. If exceptional funding is allowed in the CSA topic, a third country participant/international organisation not listed in the General Annex to the Main Work Programme may exceptionally receive funding if their participation is essential for carrying out the project (for instance due to outstanding expertise, access to unique know-how, access to research infrastructure, access to particular geographical environments, possibility to involve key partners in emerging markets, access to data, etc.). (For more information, see the HE programme guide ) Please list the concerned applicants and requested grant amount and explain the reasons why. Based on the information provided, the following participants should receive exceptional funding: --------- N/A Based on the information provided, the following participants should NOT receive exceptional funding: --------- N/A Use of human embryonic stem cells (hESC) Status: No If YES, please state whether the use of hESC is, or is not, in your opinion, necessary to achieve the scientific objectives of the proposal and the reasons why. Alternatively, please state if it cannot be assessed whether the use of hESC is necessary or not, because of a lack of information. Not provided Use of human embryos Status: No If YES, please explain how the human embryos will be used in the project. Not provided Activities excluded from funding Status: No If YES, please explain. Not provided Exclusive focus on civil applications Status: Yes If NO, please explain. Not provided Overall comments Not provided 101309978/AIDA-04/03/2026-11:54:14 3/3  Digitally sealed by the European Commission Date: 2026.03.04 12:02:08 CET This electronic receipt is a digitally signed version of the document submitted by your organisation. Both the content of the document and a set of metadata have been digitally sealed. This digital signature mechanism, using a public-private key pair mechanism, uniquely binds this eReceipt to the modules of the Funding & Tenders Portal of the European Commission, to the transaction for which it was generated and ensures its full integrity. Therefore a complete digitally signed trail of the transaction is available both for your organisation and for the issuer of the eReceipt. Any attempt to modify the content will lead to a break of the integrity of the electronic signature, which can be verified at any time by clicking on the eReceipt validation symbol. More info about eReceipts can be found in the FAQ page of the Funding & Tenders Portal. (https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/support/faq) Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2375111 - 04/03/2026 Proposal Evaluation Form EUROPEAN COMMISSION Evaluation Summary Horizon Europe (HORIZON) Report - Coordination and support actions Call: HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01 Type of action: HORIZON-CSA Proposal number: 101311263 Proposal acronym: ACT4H2 Duration (months): 60 Proposal title: Academic Cooperation and Transformation for Hydrogen Europe Activity: HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01-ACCESS-01 N. Proposer name Country Total % Grant % eligible Requested costs 1 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL EE 898,250 17.97% 898,250 17.97% 2 VYSOKA SKOLA CHEMICKO-TECHNOLOGICKA V PRAZE CZ 716,625 14.34% 716,625 14.34% 3 SINTEF AS NO 546,560 10.93% 546,560 10.93% 4 FUNDACION PARA EL DESARROLLO DE LAS NUEVAS ES 441,250 8.83% 441,250 8.83% TECNOLOGIAS DEL HIDROGENO EN ARAGON 5 LIETUVOS ENERGETIKOS INSTITUTAS LT 379,000 7.58% 379,000 7.58% 6 NORGES TEKNISK-NATURVITENSKAPELIGE NO 655,545 13.11% 655,545 13.11% UNIVERSITET NTNU 7 UNIVERZITA PAVLA JOZEFA SAFARIKA V KOSICIACH SK 539,500 10.79% 539,500 10.79% 8 UNIVERSIDAD PUBLICA DE NAVARRA ES 393,975 7.88% 393,975 7.88% 9 SIEC BADAWCZA LUKASIEWICZ - POZNANSKI PL 427,900 8.56% 427,900 8.56% INSTYTUT TECHNOLOGICZNY Total: 4,998,605 4,998,605 Abstract: ACT4H2 – Academic Cooperation and Transformation for Hydrogen Europe brings together a diverse team of researchers from nine institutions across Estonia, Lithuania, Norway, Czechia, Slovakia, Spain, and Poland to strengthen Europe’s capacity for hydrogen innovation. Our consortium combines Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and leading R&D organizations to address two critical challenges: aging infrastructure and workforce modernization, while advancing the full hydrogen value chain—from production to storage, distribution, and end-use applications. Europe’s clean energy transition depends on resilient institutions and skilled professionals. Yet widening countries face structural gaps in research excellence and participation in EU programs. ACT4H2 tackles these disparities by fostering mutual learning and knowledge transfer between partners, introducing modern working models, and implementing digitalized systems to reduce administrative burden. Through interdisciplinary collaboration, the project will co-develop joint R&I agendas on hydrogen technologies and simulate hydrogen production systems and digital solutions to manage structural aging. Our approach integrates institutional transformation, digital innovation, and researcher upskilling. Activities include targeted mobility programs, industrial advisory boards, and a Hydrogen Knowledge Digital Hub to enable FAIR data practices and AI-supported research. By promoting inclusiveness, gender balance, and flexible work culture, ACT4H2 will make research careers more attractive and sustainable. Aligned with the European Excellence Initiative and ERA Policy Agenda, ACT4H2 aims to create a scalable model for modernization that strengthens HEIs’ role in Europe’s hydrogen ecosystem. The outcome will be a future-ready network of institutions capable of driving innovation, accelerating the Green Deal objectives, and ensuring Europe’s global competitiveness in clean energy. Evaluation Summary Report Evaluation Result 101311263/ACT4H2-04/03/2026-11:59:45 1/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2375111 - 04/03/2026 Total score: 10.00 (Threshold: 10 ) Criterion 1 - Excellence Score: 3.00 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Clarity and pertinence of the project’s objectives. - Quality of the proposed coordination and/or support measures including soundness of methodology. The objectives are aligned well with the Work Programme and relevant EU strategic priorities, notably the clean energy transition. For example, the proposal's targets are the development of a shared research and innovation working culture, the enhancement of research capacity in the HEIs and the improvement of interdisciplinary collaboration. However, the proposed objectives lack sufficient clarity. The concrete changes to be achieved within the participating institutions are not adequately defined. Furthermore, the proposal does not clearly quantify the expected outcomes, leaving several associated KPIs as weak in terms of measurability and verifiability, and consequently the achievability of objectives cannot be fully assessed. For example, SO2 refers to a reduction in non-productive costs, but no target value is clearly provided. The quality of the proposed measures and the overall methodological approach is generally sound and aligning well with the stated objectives, e.g., the integration of different disciplines such as material science and chemistry across the hydrogen-value chain. The proposal includes a broad and relevant set of coordination and support activities, such as analysis, piloting, evaluation, and guideline development, and addresses key institutional dimensions, including working culture, inclusiveness, and interdisciplinarity. However, the underlying conceptual model and methodological assumptions are not clearly articulated. Key assumptions are neither explicitly identified nor fully justified, introducing uncertainty. Furthermore, the methodological framework lacks sufficient structure, as the sequencing, interdependencies, and integration of the proposed activities are not clearly defined in relation to the intended institutional change. The proposal identifies challenges but does not sufficiently detail them or present a credible strategy to address them. Key methodological aspects, such as engaging institutional stakeholders, are insufficiently addressed, and the link between proposed activities (e.g., staff mobility and international conferences), and the creation of the hydrogen knowledge hub is also not clearly articulated. The proposal sufficiently addresses Open Science practices through a clear strategy focused on publication in high-quality peer-reviewed open access journals complemented by preprints to ensure early and broad accessibility. Furthermore, the use of open repositories such as OpenAIRE supports data persistence and availability in-line with the FAIR principles, and consortium partners commit to coordinated research data management and data sharing across institutions. However, aspects of Open Science beyond publications and data management are not adequately addressed. The proposal appropriately foresees the development of a Data Management Plan (DMP) within the initial months of the project, in-line with FAIR principles, to support the systematic management of research data and other scientific outputs. It also provides updates throughout the duration of the project, strengthening its effectiveness. Criterion 2 - Impact Score: 3.50 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts specified in the work programme, and the likely scale and significance of the contributions from the project. - Suitability and quality of the measures to maximise expected outcomes and impacts, as set out in the dissemination and exploitation plan, including communication activities. The proposal effectively aligns with the expected outcomes of the Work Programme, focusing on the modernisation of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in research and innovation dimensions, capacity building in Widening countries, and support for the Green Deal priorities related to hydrogen. The results are coherently linked to the outcomes such as a strengthened culture of excellence and improved digital skills. The proposal outlines broad contributions to the wider expected impacts, for example, strengthened HEI R&I capacity, increased participation in Horizon Europe programmes, expanded networks, and greater regional involvement, all of which align with the Work Programme objectives. However, these contributions lack sufficient detail and it is not clearly demonstrated how the results will translate into sustained change beyond the participating institutions. Consequently, the pathways to achieve long-term impacts are underdeveloped and not sufficiently credible. Furthermore, quantified indicators are only partially defined and not sufficiently substantiated; baselines, assumptions, and the attribution of impacts to project activities are not adequately explained. The impact's potential scale and significance, particularly regarding the proposed transformation measures of HEIs in using hydrogen as an energy vector for net zero targets, is high. Some relevant barriers, such as low IT skills among administrative staff, are identified and accompanied by appropriate mitigation measures. However, these measures are described only in general terms and are not strongly linked to the activities. In addition, the connection between identified barriers and their expected impacts is inconsistently articulated. Furthermore, the dependence on broader hydrogen uptake is not credibly discussed. The initial dissemination, exploitation, and communication plan describes well-defined measures to maximise impact, including scientific publications and stakeholder workshops. Quantified KPIs, such as event participation and website engagement, are provided, and communication activities are appropriate to the project's scale, using a phased approach and diverse channels to reach relevant stakeholders. However, the initial plan does not clearly specify concrete target audiences for each activity. A robust IPR management framework is presented. The framework balances protection of partners' interests with effective dissemination and exploitation and includes clearly defined mechanisms for IP management, such as patents and spin-offs, alongside a structured exploitation plan. Criterion 3 - Quality and efficiency of the implementation Score: 3.50 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) 101311263/ACT4H2-04/03/2026-11:59:45 2/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2375111 - 04/03/2026 The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Quality and effectiveness of the work plan, assessment of risks, and appropriateness of the effort assigned to work packages, and the resources overall. - Capacity and role of each participant, and extent to which the consortium as a whole brings together the necessary expertise. The work plan is effectively structured, with work packages logically integrated around the research excellence work package. The Gantt chart clearly presents the timing of work packages and their elements, and key interdependencies among partners. The descriptions of the work packages clearly define main outcomes, task leaders, and participant contributions. The milestones and deliverables align well with the work packages, enabling systematic progress monitoring. Overall, the coherence between the work packages and the deliverables is strong. However, some details are not sufficiently elaborated. For example, the scope and target beneficiaries of certain tasks are not consistently clarified, which affects their alignment with project objectives. In addition, research activities and staff participation are not always adequately described throughout the various WPs. Relevant risks have been identified with proposed mitigation measures; however, some risks are generically described and lack defined likelihood and severity levels. The proposed mitigation measures are not developed sufficiently and the partner responsibilities in the mitigation measures are not clearly specified. More than 50% of the budget is correctly allocated to Widening Partners and less than 20% allocated to R&D activities, as per the requirements of the Call. The allocation of resources is not always fully aligned with the scope and responsibilities of some partners. In addition, several resource allocation are not fully consistent, e.g., travel and services cost for some partners lack adequate justification and some internal costs for laboratory infrastructure are insufficiently described. The consortium composition aligns well with the project's objectives, bringing together the required interdisciplinary expertise, including economics and advanced materials. It includes HEIs and independent R&D organisations from both Widening and non-Widening countries, supporting institutional modernisation, capacity building and knowledge valorisation in hydrogen R&I. Partners have access to high-quality and relevant research infrastructures throughout the hydrogen value chain, covering production, materials, testing and applications. This collective access includes digital infrastructure and essential tools for modelling and testing, which adequately support planned research, training, and knowledge exchange activities. Consortium roles are clearly defined with balanced responsibilities and partners fully demonstrate the capacity to carry out their assigned tasks. Scope of the application Status: Yes Comments (in case the proposal is out of scope) Not provided Exceptional funding Except when explicitly allowed in the topic, any entity from a non-associated third country and International Organisations (other than IEROs) can only participate as Associated Partners in CSAs (it cannot receive funding). There is no difference between entities established in low/middle income countries and developed countries. If exceptional funding is allowed in the CSA topic, a third country participant/international organisation not listed in the General Annex to the Main Work Programme may exceptionally receive funding if their participation is essential for carrying out the project (for instance due to outstanding expertise, access to unique know-how, access to research infrastructure, access to particular geographical environments, possibility to involve key partners in emerging markets, access to data, etc.). (For more information, see the HE programme guide ) Please list the concerned applicants and requested grant amount and explain the reasons why. Based on the information provided, the following participants should receive exceptional funding: n/a Based on the information provided, the following participants should NOT receive exceptional funding: n/a Use of human embryonic stem cells (hESC) Status: No If YES, please state whether the use of hESC is, or is not, in your opinion, necessary to achieve the scientific objectives of the proposal and the reasons why. Alternatively, please state if it cannot be assessed whether the use of hESC is necessary or not, because of a lack of information. Not provided Use of human embryos Status: No 101311263/ACT4H2-04/03/2026-11:59:45 3/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2375111 - 04/03/2026 If YES, please explain how the human embryos will be used in the project. Not provided Activities excluded from funding Status: No If YES, please explain. Not provided Exclusive focus on civil applications Status: Yes If NO, please explain. Not provided Overall comments Not provided 101311263/ACT4H2-04/03/2026-11:59:45 4/4  Digitally sealed by the European Commission Date: 2026.03.04 12:05:14 CET This electronic receipt is a digitally signed version of the document submitted by your organisation. Both the content of the document and a set of metadata have been digitally sealed. This digital signature mechanism, using a public-private key pair mechanism, uniquely binds this eReceipt to the modules of the Funding & Tenders Portal of the European Commission, to the transaction for which it was generated and ensures its full integrity. Therefore a complete digitally signed trail of the transaction is available both for your organisation and for the issuer of the eReceipt. Any attempt to modify the content will lead to a break of the integrity of the electronic signature, which can be verified at any time by clicking on the eReceipt validation symbol. More info about eReceipts can be found in the FAQ page of the Funding & Tenders Portal. (https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/support/faq) Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2374374 - 04/03/2026 Proposal Evaluation Form EUROPEAN COMMISSION Evaluation Summary Horizon Europe (HORIZON) Report - Coordination and support actions Call: HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01 Type of action: HORIZON-CSA Proposal number: 101310518 Proposal acronym: GEOECON-AI Duration (months): 42 Proposal title: Geoeconomics, Economic Resilience, and (Generative) AI Activity: HORIZON-WIDERA-2025-01-ACCESS-01 N. Proposer name Country Total % Grant % eligible Requested costs 1 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL EE 1,037,400 40.03% 1,037,400 40.03% 2 AALTO KORKEAKOULUSAATIO SR FI 232,787.5 8.98% 232,787.5 8.98% 3 NESTA UK 300,885 11.61% 300,885 11.61% 4 UNIVERSIDADE NOVA DE LISBOA PT 466,872.5 18.02% 466,872.5 18.02% 5 BUDAPESTI CORVINUS EGYETEM HU 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION OF RESEARCH MANAGERS BE 270,210 10.43% 270,210 10.43% AND ADMINISTRATORS 7 Trade Promotion Europe AISBL BE 141,217.5 5.45% 141,217.5 5.45% 8 EIT Manufacturing North AB SE 142,072.5 5.48% 142,072.5 5.48% Total: 2,591,445 2,591,445 Abstract: Europe’s industrial competitiveness is under growing pressure from climate challenges, geopolitical rivalry and fragile global value chains. The Action addresses these challenges by strengthening excellence in research and research management within an alliance of EU higher education and research institutions investigating economic resilience. GEOECON-AI rests on three pillars: capacity building and institutional modernisation in research management, strategic scientific collaboration enhancement, and piloting through actionable tools, supported by active engagement of the stakeholders. We bring together a balanced and complementary consortium of universities (TalTech, AALTO, NOVA, Corvinus), a research-based policy organisation (NESTA), the largest European professional and policy associations (EARMA, TPE), and an innovation community representing all European countries industry and manufacturing ecosystems (EITM). The primary objective is to enable the embedding of multifaceted geopolitical perspectives into cutting edge economic complexity research, leveraging advanced data science. Research management objectives are to co-develop and institutionalise sustainable, multi-level career development and training models, and modernise institutional research management processes. These are supported by targeted R&I activities and the development of demonstrators that translate research into actionable tools for policymakers, businesses and research managers. GEOECON-AI will enhance Europe’s research excellence and industrial competitiveness by aligning academic research with the needs of policy and industry stakeholders through continuous co-creation, ensuring that research outcomes are demand-driven, widely valorised, and generate tangible societal and economic impact. The benefits are expected to extend beyond the participating institutions by raising widening-country challenges onto the European agenda and sharing solutions that other countries can adopt. Evaluation Summary Report Evaluation Result 101310518/GEOECON-AI-04/03/2026-11:45:04 1/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2374374 - 04/03/2026 Total score: 11.50 (Threshold: 10 ) Criterion 1 - Excellence Score: 3.50 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Clarity and pertinence of the project’s objectives. - Quality of the proposed coordination and/or support measures including soundness of methodology. The proposal defines a well-structured set of objectives, which are generally clear and largely pertinent to the Work Programme, as they focus on both research management modernisation and improvement of higher education support for knowledge about economic resilience. The objectives are formulated at the institutional level and are designed to be implemented through pilots and formal uptake across partners, including Widening Institutions, thereby supporting the EEI focus to strengthen excellence in Widening countries. Although the project objectives are measurable, verifiable, and achievable, not enough details are provided for those objectives aimed at AI/data integration and validation. The proposal presents a well-structured methodology based on three clearly explained elements which are logically connected: scientific collaboration, research management modernisation, capacity building, and knowledge valorisation. It demonstrates strong integration of ERA priorities, CoARA principles, RM-Comp, Open Science and FAIR data management. Methodological challenges related to institutional diversity and capacity gaps are explicitly recognised and addressed through piloting, training and adaptive governance mechanisms coordinated across partners. Additionally, the proposal identifies a relevant challenge, i.e., the integration of disciplines into coherent modelling approaches and mentions vaguely that achieving this goal is feasible only through the exploratory co-operative work carried out during proposal preparation. Another challenge regards the unequal capacity of Widening and advanced institutions in applying data-intensive methods. Challenges regarding the methodology for Scientific and Technological Objective (STO) are identified; they are thematic- and activity-driven. Some very good actions are suggested, such as mentoring and joint seminars to balance capacities across partners, but others are described at a rather general level, not providing sufficient detail. It is stated that the project aims at strengthening evidence-based policymaking and coherence within industrial ecosystems and trade-promotion bodies, particularly in Widening countries. However, only evidence-based methods are focused for decision-making to provide better support services for researchers. While the proposal does not separately identify Research Management (RM) challenges, it does explain the need for the methodology to combine top-down and bottom-up measures. The discussion of the RM field highlights a series of issues which are directly addressed. For example, research managers are identified as strategic professionals who can be supported and developed in order to harness data already available. These data collections can be leveraged to create LLM based analysis and documents. The links to RM-Comp and EARMA are a very good feature. The methodology in Research Management Objective (RMO) 3 remains mostly general, however the knowledge valorisation and demonstrators show an excellent understanding of the ethical, societal and technological issues which may arise. Offering stakeholder channels for feedback is a good plan. Moreover, the planned knowledge valorisation uses innovative and agile approaches. The proposal identifies a relevant challenge, i.e., the integration of disciplines into coherent modelling approaches and mentions vaguely that achieving this goal is feasible only through the exploratory co-operative work carried out during proposal preparation. Another challenge regards the unequal capacity of Widening and advanced institutions in applying data-intensive methods. There is a detailed and convincing description of Open Science practices and how they will be implemented. These practices are broadly appropriate for the project. A Data Management Plan that complies with GDPR, the Open Science policy, and the PSI (Public Sector Information) Directive will be developed by M6 and the principles are convincingly described. The proposed approaches addressing RMO1-2, which are guided by RM-Comp, are appropriate and sound. Criterion 2 - Impact Score: 4.00 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) 101310518/GEOECON-AI-04/03/2026-11:45:04 2/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2374374 - 04/03/2026 The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts specified in the work programme, and the likely scale and significance of the contributions from the project. - Suitability and quality of the measures to maximise expected outcomes and impacts, as set out in the dissemination and exploitation plan, including communication activities. The proposal convincingly describes the ways in which the Action will address all of the Work Programme outcomes and discusses which will have both medium and longer term impacts. It outlines six expected outcomes aligned with the Work Programme topics over the medium term and a few expected impacts, such as economic impact, social impact, etc. Although the proposal states that the Action also delivers positive climate and environmental impact through higher complexity economy that is characterised by lower GHG emissions, reduced resource intensity, and greener innovation pathways, the details given are neither sufficient nor convincing. The proposal provides a clear mapping between RMO1 and RMO2 and the EEI expected outcomes, while STO1–STO3 contribute indirectly through evidence generation and demonstrators supporting these reforms. Although most of the pathways to impact are sound, there are, however, some concerns. Institutional change pathways mostly rely on demonstrators and digital tools, without clearly specifying the governance mechanisms through which these will be adopted as binding institutional practices. Overall, the expected scale and significance of impact are reasonably substantiated through piloting and uptake across multiple institutions, including Widening, combined with dissemination through European Research Management networks (e.g. EARMA, and RM COMP). These links to networks are an excellent feature and have the potential to broaden the impact significantly by leveraging existing structures. However, the proposal provides a generally qualitative description of the expected outcomes and impacts and outlines the intended contribution of the project, e.g., increased joint publications and the generation of new Horizon-scale R&I proposals within the next years. Some of these figures are estimates based on the upper bound; the actual impact may be smaller than what is assumed in the proposal. The proposal identifies several external requirements and potential barriers that may affect the achievement of the expected outcomes. Overall, these are clearly identified and addressed very effectively. However, sustainability beyond the project duration relies partly on continued engagement through European and international networks, without evidence of binding institutional commitments across all partners. An excellent plan is given for Dissemination, Exploitation and Communication (DEC) which identifies appropriate target groups by fully considering the connections of each participant. The plan includes a tracking framework that aligns channel/format with indicators and will be reviewed several times. The DEC measures are well designed and targeted, with exploitation pathways articulated through European and international research management networks such as EARMA and ENRIO. The exploitation plan is committed to Open Science principles and explains how this will be achieved even if there are proprietary elements. Monitoring and evaluation includes commitments and qualitative data on practice changes which are both excellent features. Criterion 3 - Quality and efficiency of the implementation Score: 4.00 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Quality and effectiveness of the work plan, assessment of risks, and appropriateness of the effort assigned to work packages, and the resources overall. - Capacity and role of each participant, and extent to which the consortium as a whole brings together the necessary expertise. The work plan is detailed with clearly defined tasks, milestones and deliverables across the Work Packages (WPs). Moreover, there is an excellent explanation throughout the proposal of the role of the deliverables in relation to the WP objectives. The work packages are clearly linked to the objectives and the individual tasks are described with clarity and coherence. The PERT chart shows many complex interdependencies which are not clearly explained in the WP descriptions. While the timings in the GANTT chart are mostly coherent, it is not sufficiently clear why some tasks continue throughout the project without deliverables or milestones at the end. Additionally, piloting CoARA-aligned research assessment and recognition processes will need more than 6 months because it will involve a broad range of institutional stakeholders including Human Resources, appointment panels and university governance. Mitigations measures for this are suggested, but the timescales are still short. The number of work packages and partners involved in core activities increases coordination demands, which may affect overall implementation efficiency. Additionally, the complexity of task distribution across the consortium may decrease accountability for institutional reform outcomes, particularly where responsibilities are shared across multiple partners. Throughout, there is excellent attention to the value of linking to existing networks, other projects, and information sources to inform the WPs. The secondments plan is an excellent way to provide focused and rapid cross-pollination and upskilling and the planned use of shadow experiments to evaluate AI tools is very interesting. There is comprehensive attention to capacity building; this work continues throughout the project, which is good. The plan for developing career pathways for researchers and research managers is excellent. In general, a risk management framework identifies relevant operational and institutional risks and suggests contextually appropriate mitigation measures. The scope of work package 3 is relatively broad, exploring economic resilience and research management, combining research along two distinct directions in one task, although both are proposed to harness NLP/AI technologies. Applying AI technologies in these two increases the complexity of implementation and can introduce additional risks regarding focus. This is a shortcoming. Resources are broadly aligned with objectives and deliverables, supporting feasibility of implementation across the consortium. The fact that the proportion of R&I costs is being capped at 20% may restrict achievement of these objectives in a substantive manner. The budget allocated to R&I activities is equal or less than 20% of the overall budget. A major share of the budget (>50%) is dedicated to the Widening countries. The consortiums comprises partners with relevant, complementary expertise, most of whom are playing leading roles in their fields. Overall, there is a very broad range of expertise available in the consortium This situation provides a convincing case for successful implementation. Examples of the partners' previous experiences in relevant areas are given and linked to the implementation. Available expertise includes extensive know-how and experience in geoeconomics and AI modelling research management and governance reform, and policy engagement, bringing together research-intensive institutions and Widening institutions. Widening partners play a central role in institutional reform, training and pilot implementation activities. Each partner has a valid and meaningful role linked directly to their expertise. It is clear that the partnership has expertise in CoARA which can be more generally shared in the context of the project. Scope of the application 101310518/GEOECON-AI-04/03/2026-11:45:04 3/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)2374374 - 04/03/2026 Status: Yes Comments (in case the proposal is out of scope) Not provided Exceptional funding Except when explicitly allowed in the topic, any entity from a non-associated third country and International Organisations (other than IEROs) can only participate as Associated Partners in CSAs (it cannot receive funding). There is no difference between entities established in low/middle income countries and developed countries. If exceptional funding is allowed in the CSA topic, a third country participant/international organisation not listed in the General Annex to the Main Work Programme may exceptionally receive funding if their participation is essential for carrying out the project (for instance due to outstanding expertise, access to unique know-how, access to research infrastructure, access to particular geographical environments, possibility to involve key partners in emerging markets, access to data, etc.). (For more information, see the HE programme guide ) Please list the concerned applicants and requested grant amount and explain the reasons why. Based on the information provided, the following participants should receive exceptional funding: Not provided Based on the information provided, the following participants should NOT receive exceptional funding: Not provided Use of human embryonic stem cells (hESC) Status: No If YES, please state whether the use of hESC is, or is not, in your opinion, necessary to achieve the scientific objectives of the proposal and the reasons why. Alternatively, please state if it cannot be assessed whether the use of hESC is necessary or not, because of a lack of information. Not provided Use of human embryos Status: No If YES, please explain how the human embryos will be used in the project. Not provided Activities excluded from funding Status: No If YES, please explain. Not provided Exclusive focus on civil applications Status: Yes If NO, please explain. Not provided Overall comments Not provided 101310518/GEOECON-AI-04/03/2026-11:45:04 4/4  Digitally sealed by the European Commission Date: 2026.03.04 11:50:47 CET This electronic receipt is a digitally signed version of the document submitted by your organisation. Both the content of the document and a set of metadata have been digitally sealed. This digital signature mechanism, using a public-private key pair mechanism, uniquely binds this eReceipt to the modules of the Funding & Tenders Portal of the European Commission, to the transaction for which it was generated and ensures its full integrity. Therefore a complete digitally signed trail of the transaction is available both for your organisation and for the issuer of the eReceipt. Any attempt to modify the content will lead to a break of the integrity of the electronic signature, which can be verified at any time by clicking on the eReceipt validation symbol. More info about eReceipts can be found in the FAQ page of the Funding & Tenders Portal. (https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/support/faq) Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111