How to write an EU grant application: 10 mistakes that disqualify

In this article we have collected ten traps that recur in successive rounds and mean that good projects do not get funding.

The article mainly concerns the operational programmes of the 2021–2027 funding period (FENG, FENR, FEnIKS, RPO), but many of the rules discussed also apply in national competitions (BGK, the National Centre for Research and Development (NCBR), Horizon Europe).

Mistake 1: the wrong enterprise status

The most common slip is declaring yourself a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) when the company is in fact a “large enterprise” because of capital links. The European Commission requires employment and turnover to be added up with linked companies (a stake > 50%) and partner companies (a stake of 25–50%).

• You have a limited company, and your partner holds 40% of the shares in another large company: you must add up the data
• Your shareholder is an investment fund with a portfolio of other companies: adding up is necessary
• You are a joint venture of two large corporations: you are never an SME

The consequence of a false declaration: rejection of the application or, after an inspection, repayment of the whole grant with interest.

Mistake 2: no DNSH justification

The “Do No Significant Harm” principle has applied since the 2021–2027 period and is verified in every application. You must show that the project does no harm in six environmental areas: climate change mitigation, adaptation, sustainable use of water, the circular economy, pollution prevention, protection of biodiversity.

It is not enough to tick the box “project compliant with DNSH”. You must describe specifically:

• The energy used in the project (renewable energy? efficiency?)
• Materials management (recycling? reuse?)
• The impact on water (use, waste water, pollution)
• Emissions to air

Mistake 3: unrealistic indicators

Result indicators must be ambitious (because you are showing that it is worth giving you the money), but also realistic (because later you have to deliver them). Evaluation panels overlook small discrepancies (±10%), but with a 30–50% deviation they require a proportionate part of the grant to be repaid.

The most common errors: an indicator of “5 new jobs” on a budget of PLN 1 million (too many), “revenue growth of 300% in 2 years” (unrealistic), “export to 10 countries” with no sales plan.

Mistake 4: a gap in the financing structure

The project must have 100% of its financing secured. The grant covers, for example, 60%, and the remaining 40% (the own contribution) must have a specific source. A statement “we will finance it from future profits” is not enough.

1. Own funds: a bank statement as at the date of submitting the application
2. A bank loan: a commitment letter or a loan agreement
3. A loan from a partner: a contract + the source of the partner’s funds
4. A non-cash contribution: a valuation + documents of legal title

Mistake 5: inconsistency between the application and the study

The application (the descriptive part) must agree with the attachments: the feasibility study, the business plan, the schedule and the budget. If in the application you write about a 3-year project and the study says 24 months, that is a mistake.

Evaluation panels read the application together with the attachments, and every inconsistency lowers the score (and large discrepancies can lead to rejection).

Mistake 6: ineligible expenses in the budget

Every programme has a list of eligible expenses (what can be financed) and ineligible ones. Typical errors:

| Expense | Why it is ineligible | |---------|----------------------------| | VAT (when the company is VAT-registered) | The company deducts VAT, so it is not an “expense” | | A passenger car | Most often excluded from SME projects | | Purchase of land | Requires separate procedures, often restricted | | Costs from before the start date | Never: the date = signing the contract | | General marketing | Only marketing linked to the project |

Entering ineligible expenses leads to a reduction of the project budget or rejection of the application.

Mistake 7: no innovation

Programmes of the FENG type require a minimum of innovation at national level, or better, EU level. “Innovation” is not the same as “a new product on the Polish market”. Evaluators check patent databases, publications and competitors’ products.

Three kinds of innovation recognised in projects:

• Product: a new product / service that did not exist before
• Process: a new method of production, service, management
• Organisational / marketing: rarely enough on its own

Mistake 8: out-of-date documents

An application requires dozens of attachments: certificates from the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and the tax office (no older than 3 months), financial statements, extracts from the Central Register and Information on Business (CEIDG) and the National Court Register (KRS), environmental policies.

Certificates must be issued within a set period before the application is submitted. A missing document = formal rejection with no chance to supplement it (in some programmes).

Mistake 9: innovation described too vaguely

“We will use AI to analyse data” is not a project. The evaluator wants to know: exactly which model, which data, which functionalities, what business effect, what implementation plan. A specific technological description is the basis of the substantive assessment.

Good applications contain architecture diagrams, a list of functionalities, performance parameters, and data on the target market with numbers.

Mistake 10: no partnership

In projects above PLN 5 million, evaluators value cooperation with scientific institutions (universities, institutes). A letter of intent with a university of technology, or a cooperation agreement with an institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences, significantly raises the score. Stand-alone projects by micro-businesses usually get lower points for “implementation potential”.

Summary

Writing an EU grant application is a task for specialists: a grant adviser (on the project side) and an accountant (on the budget and eligibility side). Settling grants and keeping separate project records are not part of the standard accounting service – they are done only under separate arrangements and for a separate fee. See our full accounting service.

Sources: feng.parp.gov.pl, funduszeeuropejskie.gov.pl, Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council (the DNSH principle).