Official sources: ERC Work Programme 2026 (§1.4) — ERC Rules of Submission and Evaluation — Information for Applicants StG/CoG 2026.

Principal Investigator (StG-specific)

• Eligibility window: PhD awarded between 2 and 7 years before the call deadline (the "PhD reference date"). For StG-2027 with indicative deadline 14 Oct 2026, PhD reference date should fall between 14 Oct 2019 and 14 Oct 2024.
• PhD certificate is MANDATORY annex (only StG and CoG, not AdG). A scan of the original + translation if needed. The PhD-awarding institution may use the official ERC template to confirm the defense date.
• Track record: excellent supervised research output (publications, preprints, datasets, etc. — typically ~5 representative outputs for StG vs ~10 for CoG/AdG).
• Nationality / Age: No restriction.
• Working time commitment: ≥50% of working time on the ERC project + ≥50% of working time in an EU MS or Associated Country during the grant.
• Host Institution: single legal entity in EU MS or Associated Country.

Eligibility window extensions

The 2-7 year window can be extended in documented cases. Per WP 2026:

• Maternity leave: 18 months per child (or actual length if longer, with justification).
• Paternity / parental leave: actual length taken.
• Long-term illness: ≥90 days continuous, supported by certificate.
• Military / civilian service: actual length.
• Gender-based violence or any other form of violence (NEW WP 2026 category): extension documented with appropriate evidence.
• Natural disasters, war, conflict, displacement: case-by-case justification.

Extensions must be requested via the official template (Part A Section 5 — Other questions) with supporting documents uploaded as annex.

Resubmission restrictions

• PIs who scored B at Step 1 or Step 2 of a previous ERC main grant call may be ineligible (check the WP edition table).
• PI cannot hold more than one active ERC StG/CoG/AdG/SyG/Plus simultaneously.

Submission

Single submission deadline. Proposals submitted via the EU Funding & Tenders Portal Submission System (electronic).

Evaluation — 2-step peer review on the SAME submission (no resubmission between steps)

Scoring scale (Step 2 individual reviews)

• Research Project — numerical mark (integers or halves), full range encouraged.
• Principal Investigator — qualitative: Outstanding / Excellent / Very Good / Good / Non-competitive.
• Remote Referees — 3-option recommendation: highly recommended / recommended / not recommended.

Post-award

Grant agreement preparation starts immediately after Step 2 results. Project start: 1–6 months after approval (longer if ethical clarifications needed; up to 12 months exceptionally). Grant Agreement signature target: 16 November 2027 (per WP 2026).

Official source: ERC Guide for Peer Reviewers 2026 (StG/CoG — AdG version forthcoming). The AdG Guide for Peer Reviewers may differ slightly; check the F&T portal for the AdG-specific version.

Sole evaluation criterion: Scientific Excellence

Applied to the proposal as a whole, examining two dimensions:

1. The Research Project — ground-breaking nature, ambition, feasibility of the scientific approach, methodology robustness, work plan coherence, resources justification.
2. The Principal Investigator — intellectual capacity, creativity, scientific expertise and capacity to successfully execute the project, track record commensurate with stage of career.

The detailed sub-elements are described in the applicable ERC Work Programme (Section 1.6) and operationalised in the Guide for Peer Reviewers (Annex 1 evaluation questions).

Step 1 — Panel-only review on Part B1

• Each proposal reviewed by ≥3 Panel Members (individual remote reviews) followed by panel meeting.
• Outcomes: Score A (passed to Step 2) or Score B (rejected — Evaluation Report with panel comment + individual reviews returned).
• Score C is not used at Step 1; proposals scored A-but-borderline may receive panel-flagged comments.
• Information letter ~5 months after the call deadline.

Step 2 — Panel + external Remote Referees on Part B1 + Part B2

• Same panel + external Remote Referees with deep field expertise (3-option recommendation: highly recommended / recommended / not recommended).
• Panel Members + Remote Referees review the FULL proposal including budget and Funding ID.
• Budget analysis at Step 2: panel may recommend grant reduction if items not fully justified (case-by-case, never across-the-board).
• Some proposals may be invited to a panel interview in Brussels.
• Final outcomes: A-invited (recommended within funding budget), A-not-invited (above quality threshold but above budget cut-off — eligible for "Seal of Excellence" transfer to national funders), B (not recommended), C (well below threshold).
• Final results ~7 months after the call deadline.
• Ranking consolidation across panels uses the normalised accumulated budget (NAB) method to ensure consistency.

Scoring scale (individual)

• Research Project: numerical mark, integers or halves. Full range of marks recommended.
• Principal Investigator: 5-option qualitative — Outstanding / Excellent / Very Good / Good / Non-competitive.
• Remote Referees only: 3-option recommendation as above.
• The proposal mark and PI qualitative assessment are NOT communicated to the applicant — only the final panel score (A invited / A not invited / B / C).

Funding model: Actual costs (NOT lump-sum). Indirect costs flat-rate 25%.

Maximum grant: EUR 1 500 000 for 5 years. Additional funding above ceiling: up to EUR 1 000 000 normally, or up to EUR 2 000 000 if the PI is relocating to EU/AC from elsewhere. Additional funding categories: (a) start-up costs, (b) major equipment, (c) access to large facilities, (d) other major experimental/fieldwork costs. Each must be justified.

Pre-financing: typically ~50% at grant start.

Audit certificates: required if cumulative EU contribution to a beneficiary ≥ EUR 430 000.

Ineligible costs (examples — non-exhaustive)

Source: StG/CoG Information for Applicants 2026. Contact: email pattern erc-2027-stg-applicants@ec.europa.eu (to be confirmed when call opens).

• VAT when deductible
• Audit fees (Certificate of Financial Statement)
• Depreciation of equipment beyond the project duration
• Office supplies (desks, chairs, etc.)
• Teaching buyouts
• Moving costs for family members / furniture / storage
• Retreat costs (teambuilding)
• Academic fees (PhD fees) when not part of the student salary contract

The PI may include a team (postdocs, PhD students, technicians, senior collaborators) — these are NOT formal co-applicants. Team members may be hosted at the same or different institutions, but only the Host Institution is a beneficiary of the grant.

For multi-PI collaborative frontier projects, see the ERC Synergy Grant (2-4 PIs, up to 4 distinct host institutions). For collaboration on existing ERC results' commercialisation, see ERC Proof of Concept.

No imposed project backbone. The PI defines work packages, milestones, deliverables, and risk management freely in Part B2 Section b.

Mandatory PI working time commitments (verified in Part A & Host Institution Commitment Letter):

• Starting Grant: ≥50% of working time on the project + ≥50% of working time in an EU MS or Associated Country.

Comparison: CoG ≥40%/≥50%, AdG ≥30%/≥50%, SyG ≥30%/≥50% per PI.

ERC follows the standard Horizon Europe Model Grant Agreement (MGA) provisions on IPR:

• Ownership: Each beneficiary owns the results it generates. For ERC = the Host Institution owns the results, while granting the PI rights as the scientific lead.
• Access rights: Other beneficiaries (rare for ERC; mostly a single beneficiary scheme) and the EU have access rights for implementation, exploitation, and dissemination.
• Exploitation obligation: Beneficiaries must use results or take measures to ensure their use (commercially or otherwise).
• Patents: Standard EU rules on protection of background and foreground IP apply. Strong recommendation to file patents before disclosing in publications when commercial exploitation is intended.
• Open access (see Open Science section) does not exempt from IP protection — embargo periods on data are allowed if justified.

Ethics review is integral to the evaluation process.

• Ethics Issues Table (Part A Section 4): 9 categories (hESC/embryos; Humans; Human cells/tissues; Personal data; Animals; Non-EU countries; Environment/health/safety; AI; Other) — each Yes/No.
• Ethics Self-Assessment (mandatory if any Yes): 2 free-text fields ≤5000 chars each, addressing (1) ethical dimension of objectives/methodology/impact and (2) compliance with ethical principles and legislations.
• Excluded research activities (Article 4 of Horizon Europe Regulation): human cloning for reproductive purposes, modification of human genetic heritage, creation of embryos solely for research.
• Civil applications only — military focus excluded. Dual-use activities require justification per Regulation 428/2009.
• Personal data processed in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 (EU institutions) and GDPR for beneficiaries.
• Confidentiality: all submission, evaluation, and review materials are confidential. Peer reviewers sign a Conflict of Interest and confidentiality undertaking before accessing proposals.

Mandatory commitments:

• Open access to publications (Plan S compliant): all peer-reviewed publications resulting from the project must be deposited in a trusted repository with open access upon publication, ideally with a CC BY license or equivalent.
• Research data management: Data Management Plan (DMP) is a project deliverable due by Month 6. Data must follow FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) where applicable. Justified opt-out is allowed (e.g. for confidentiality, IP, ethical concerns).
• Software/code: open-source preferred where feasible.
• No additional Open Science criterion within evaluation — but failure to comply post-award triggers grant management consequences.

Multi-actor approach: NOT required. ERC is a single-PI scheme; the team is the PI's research group. Non-academic stakeholders may be involved as collaborators if scientifically justified.

Interdisciplinarity: NOT required but welcomed. Proposals that cross panel boundaries should use a Secondary Panel and justify the cross-disciplinary nature (max 1000 chars in Cover Page). Panel Members will explicitly assess whether the proposal's scope is genuinely interdisciplinary.

Transdisciplinarity: NOT required.

SSH integration: NOT required (PE/LS panels) unless the proposal itself is SSH (SH1-SH6 panels).

• Horizon Europe Model Grant Agreement (MGA) — version applicable to ERC actions. Available on the F&T Portal Reference Documents.
• Host Institution Commitment Letter (mandatory, uploaded with submission) — confirms the HI's commitment to sign a Supplementary Agreement with the PI guaranteeing scientific independence, administrative support, working conditions per the European Charter for Researchers, and portability.
• Supplementary Agreement (HI ↔ PI) — signed before Grant Agreement signature. Specifies internal arrangements (budget management, publication authority, team supervision, leave, insurance).
• Equipment Table (Excel format) — mandatory annex if equipment depreciation costs are claimed.
• Ethics Self-Assessment (PDF, free text) — if ethics issues flagged in Part A.
• Eligibility Extension documents (birth/paternity certificates etc.) — StG/CoG only.
• PhD certificate — MANDATORY for StG (and CoG). Scan of original + translation if needed. PhD-awarding institution may use the official ERC template.

• Periodic reporting: Scientific report + Financial report typically at Month 30 and Month 60 (project end).
• Project officer (PO): ERCEA assigns a Scientific Project Officer for grant monitoring. Site visits possible.
• Mid-term review: not systematic for ERC (unlike some Pillar 2 calls).
• Final report: within 60 days of project end, including a summary suitable for public dissemination (open access).
• Ex-post evaluation: ERCEA may commission impact studies on completed grants 3–5 years after project end.
• Amendments: requested via F&T Portal — duration extension up to 12 months possible if scientifically justified; budget shifts within categories typically allowed.
• Portability: the grant may be transferred to a new Host Institution if requested by the PI and provided the objectives remain achievable (Article 41 MGA).

• Can the PI work part-time? Yes, provided the working time commitment thresholds (AdG ≥30% on project, ≥50% in EU/AC) are met.
• Can a non-EU national apply? Yes — nationality is not a criterion. The Host Institution must be in an EU MS or Associated Country.
• Can a previously rejected B-scored proposal be resubmitted? Depends on which step the B was received — see Resubmission restrictions in Eligibility. A "B at Step 1 or Step 2" of an ERC main grant call blocks re-application to AdG 2026.
• Can I apply with the same proposal in parallel to another EU call? No — declaration of single submission is mandatory in Part A page 4.
• Is the abstract confidential? No — the 2000-character abstract is used in evaluation communications and may be shared with potential reviewers/national agencies. Do not include confidential information.
• What happens if I score A-not-invited? Your proposal is above the quality threshold but above the funding budget. You may receive a Seal of Excellence label (subject to availability) which national/regional funders use as a signal.

Part B = Research Proposal (Part B1 + Part B2)

Part B1 — 10 pages — evaluated at Step 1 and Step 2

• Cover Page (1 page): PI name + Host Institution + duration + abstract (max 2000 characters) + cross-panel/cross-domain justification if Secondary Panel used (max 1000 characters).
• Section a. Extended Synopsis (5 pages, references not counted): concise presentation of the scientific proposal; ground-breaking nature; state of the art; objectives; methodology overview; work schedule; feasibility; impact; risk management.
• Section b. CV and Track Record (4 pages): Personal details + Researcher unique identifiers (ORCID, etc.) + Education + Current and previous positions + Research achievements (up to 10 outputs: publications, preprints, books, data sets, software, patents, start-ups) + Peer recognition (prizes, awards, fellowships, invited talks) + Additional information (career breaks, diverse paths, other contributions to the research community).

Part B2 — 14 pages — evaluated at Step 2 only

• Section a. State-of-the-art and objectives.
• Section b. Methodology.
• Appendix: Funding ID (current grants + ongoing/submitted applications, with clear statement of scientific overlap if any — does not count towards page limit).

Formatting constraints (NON-NEGOTIABLE — auto-rejected if violated)

• Font: Times New Roman or Arial, size ≥11pt
• Margins: 2.0 cm sides, 1.5 cm top and bottom
• Line spacing: single
• Language: English
• Do NOT split Part B1 / Part B2 / Funding ID into separate uploads.
• Each Part uploaded as a single PDF in the submission system.

Part A — Administrative Form (5 sections, online)

1. General Information: Acronym + Proposal title (≤200 chars) + Duration months + Primary ERC Review Panel + Secondary Panel + ERC Keywords + Free keywords + Abstract (max 2000 chars) + Resubmission declaration.
2. Participants: Host Institution (organisation data, GEP, departments, address) + Principal Investigator (personal details, ORCID, contact info, career stage) + Main contact person.
3. Budget: Cost table (PI / Senior staff / Post-docs / Students / Other staff PM & cost; Subcontracting; Travel; Equipment; Consumables; Publications; Other direct; Internal; Indirect) + 6 narrative justifications (Personnel ≤2500 chars; Subcontracting ≤1000; Purchase ≤3500; Internal ≤1000; Additional funding ≤1000; Other sources ≤1000).
4. Ethics & Security: Ethics Issues Table (9 categories: hESC/embryos; Humans; Cells/Tissues; Personal data; Animals; Non-EU countries; Environment/health/safety; AI; Other) + Ethics Self-Assessment (2 free-text fields, ≤5000 chars each) + Security Issues Table (EUCI; Misuse; National security; Other) + Security Self-Assessment.
5. Other Questions: PhD reference date + Medical degree status + Extension Requests (eligibility window, StG/CoG only — N/A for AdG) + Working time commitment (% in EU/AC + % on project) + ERC eligibility acknowledgment + Consent declarations + Data sharing consents + Excluded reviewers (up to 3).

Embedded in Part A Section 3 — no separate budget template Part C. Costs are listed per cost category in the online form (eligible categories: Personnel; Subcontracting; Travel & subsistence; Equipment; Consumables/fieldwork/animal; Publications/dissemination; Other direct; Internally invoiced; Indirect at flat 25%).

An additional Equipment Table (Excel) must be uploaded if equipment depreciation is claimed: one row per equipment item with purchase cost / depreciation time / % usage for grant / use months. The total Column G must match the Equipment line in the budget table (Part A C.2).