Loading…
Strategic Analysis
KIEM Labour-Saving AI (Dutch: KIEM Arbeidsbesparende AI) funds one-year exploratory practice-oriented research into the testing and application of AI solutions that already exist, inside the real work processes of SMEs and public organisations. The goal is a demonstrable contribution to labour saving and/or productivity improvement.
The round is run by Regieorgaan SIA (the National Governing Body for Practice-Oriented Research, part of NWO) in collaboration with Digital Holland, which is a co-funder and is responsible for the AI/Data Action Agenda under the National Technology Strategy.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Round | Submission round March to September 2026 |
| Funding ceiling (round) | € 1,800,000 |
| Maximum grant per project | € 40,000 |
| Expected number of awards | Maximum 45 |
| Project duration | Maximum 12 months |
| Consortium | Applicant + at least 2 practice partners, of which at least 1 SME registered in the Kingdom of the Netherlands |
| Co-financing | At least 25% of the grant amount, from the practice partners |
| Closing date | 15 September 2026, before 14:00:00 CEST |
| Submission portal | ISAAC |
| Language | Dutch or English |
KIEM stands for Kennis- en InnovatieMapping (Knowledge and Innovation Mapping). Its purpose is to let a network of practice partners and knowledge institutions explore an innovative practice-based question that can become the seed (kiem) for a larger research project or an innovation.
Important scope limit: this scheme funds the testing of AI solutions that already exist. Proposals aimed at developing new AI applications or concepts do not fit the scheme.
Exploratory testing of an existing or testable AI solution in a real work process
Substantiation of the labour and productivity challenge in a specific sector or organisation
Demonstration of the AI application's contribution to labour saving and/or productivity
Articulation of a practice-based question with professionals, translated into a research question
Network formation and dissemination into education and professional practice
The AI application contributes to labour saving and/or productivity improvement within the practice partner's organisation
Network formation that seeds a follow-up project or an innovation
No expected impacts identified for this destination.
Knowledge and Innovation Agenda for Digitalisation (KIA Digitalisering)
highSan Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)
highNational Technology Strategy (NTS) and the AI/Data Action Agenda
highParliamentary letter on the Productivity Agenda, with CBS and SER studies
highKnowledge and Innovation Covenant (KIC) and the Mission-Driven Innovation Policy
mediumNWO Co-financing Regulations
mediumNWO Open Access Policy Rule
mediumNWO policy on the use of generative artificial intelligence (GAI)
mediumRegieorgaan SIA strategy 'Investing in impact' and the hbo strategic research agenda 'Practice-oriented research as a knowledge accelerator'
mediumNational Knowledge Security Guideline
lowNetherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
lowNWO Grant Regulations and the 10 principles for socially responsible licensing
lowTwo distinct routes:
Persons on a zero-hours contract or a fixed-term contract other than a tenure track are excluded from submitting.
If the tenure-track contract ends before the intended completion date, or permanent employment ends on reaching state pension age, a statement from the employer must be added guaranteeing adequate supervision of the project and of all funded staff for the full duration.
Only applications meeting these conditions are admitted to the assessment procedure. Applications submitted after the deadline, or not submitted via ISAAC, are not taken into consideration.
Annexes other than those listed are not permitted.
The round works with two collection moments rather than a single deadline. Regieorgaan SIA processes all applications received in ISAAC up to that point.
| # | Collection moment | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 24 March 2026, before 14:00:00 CET | Closed |
| 2 | 15 September 2026, before 14:00:00 CEST | Open — also the closing date of the round |
There is no partial funding ceiling per collection moment. The budget remaining after the first collection moment becomes the ceiling for the second. Per collection moment, all applications with a positive assessment are awarded until the funding ceiling is reached. Applications with a positive assessment are then prioritised by submission date and time.
If the application meets the conditions for submission immediately, the moment of submission in ISAAC counts. If the application had to be amended to meet the conditions, the moment at which it was submitted completely and correctly counts instead.
If the funding ceiling is reached before the submission deadline, the round closes early and is announced in the Government Gazette (Staatscourant).
| Period | Step |
|---|---|
| September 2026 | Check against the conditions for consideration |
| September and October 2026 | Assessment by the assessment committee |
| December 2026 | Decision by the board of Regieorgaan SIA |
| January 2027 | Announcement of the decision |
The assessment committee is external and independent, appointed by the board of Regieorgaan SIA, with members from the research world and from professional practice who have knowledge of the theme. Each application is assessed on its own merits. There is no rebuttal stage and no external referees.
Within 2 weeks of the collection moment, Regieorgaan SIA may approach the applicant to make administrative corrections. The applicant gets one opportunity, within a maximum of 4 working days. If the corrected documents are again incomplete or incorrect, the application is not taken into consideration.
This round is assessed pass/fail, not on a numeric scale. Committee members assess every criterion as sufficient (pass) or insufficient (fail). Each assessment criterion carries equal weight. To receive a positive assessment, an application must score sufficient on each of the criteria. Only applications with a positive assessment can be eligible for a grant.
| # | Criterion | What is assessed |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fit within the thematic scope of this funding round | Whether the application fits the theme. In the project proposal form it is substantiated, on the basis of the description in section 2.1.1 of the call, that the application fits the thematic scope |
| 2 | Question articulation | The extent to which: the practice-based question comes from professional practice or has been tested with relevant professionals working in practice; the question is innovative and relevant for professional practice; the question has been translated into a clear, functional and well-defined research question for exploratory practice-oriented research; the research question builds on existing knowledge and skills, or addresses knowledge gaps |
| 3 | Suitability of the network | The extent to which: the necessary expertise from research organisations and professional practice is present at the outset to carry out the intended activities; attention to dissemination of the research outcomes in both education and professional practice is secured within the network. A dual role in the consortium leads directly to an insufficient on this criterion |
| 4 | Quality of the project plan | The extent to which: there is a feasible and efficient activity plan that logically contributes to answering the research question; professional practice is involved in the execution of the project; the requested resources are proportionate to the nature of the project |
A positive assessment does not guarantee funding. If the available budget is insufficient to honour all positively assessed applications, the order of receipt decides, on a first come, first served basis.
The required co-financing from the practice partners is at least 25% of the grant amount. Worked example from the call: with a requested grant of € 40,000, total project costs amount to at least € 50,000, and the minimum own contribution plus co-financing is € 10,000.
Co-financing from large enterprises does not count towards the mandatory minimum, even when the large enterprise acts as a practice partner. A grant provided by NWO is not permissible as co-financing. Non-permissible in-kind co-financing is described in the Co-financing Regulations.
The costs of consortium partners other than the applicant are not eligible for a grant — they are considered co-financing. Consortium partners confirm their co-financing by signing the application form.
| Module | Conditions |
|---|---|
| Personnel | Wage costs for personnel of universities of applied sciences, universities, UMCs and specific research organisations. Project management: maximum 10% of total project costs. Rates for universities of applied sciences follow the Government Rates Manual (HOT) Table 2, hourly rate for productive hours excl. VAT, fixed for the whole project |
| Students | Students at a research organisation named in section 3.2 may be deployed; costs are entered as material costs. No maximum number. Curricular contributions use the usual internship allowance; student assistants use HOT Table 2, scale 1 |
| Postdoc / physician-researcher / non-scientific personnel | Rates per UNL or UMCNL salary tables. A postdoc appointment of at least 12 months at 0.5 FTE qualifies for a one-time personal bench fee of € 5,000. No bench fee for non-scientific personnel |
| University (senior) lecturers and professors | HOT Table 1 rates; scale 17 for professors. Supervision of a PhD candidate or postdoc is not eligible. No bench fee |
| Material costs | Consumables, purchase of services, materials, small instruments, access to facilities, software, research resources without residual value, travel and accommodation (2nd class / economy only), workshops and symposia, data management, publications, citizen science. Audit statements max € 5,000, only for institutions outside the OCW education audit protocol |
| Investments | Equipment, infrastructure and research resources retaining economic value or reusable after the project. Only depreciation costs are eligible, pro rata to the project duration. Depreciation on investments made abroad cannot be entered |
All costs are excluding VAT, unless the VAT is non-recoverable.
The rate at the decision date applies. Regieorgaan SIA applies a one-time ex officio indexation of wage costs on award. No additional own contribution or co-financing is required against that extra amount. Indexation does not change the funding ceiling, the maximum grant that may be applied for, the co-financing requirements, or the IP rights arising from co-financing.
The applicant is responsible for the execution of the entire project and acts as lead applicant (coordinator, Dutch penvoerder). Regieorgaan SIA communicates with the applicant (the submitter in ISAAC) about the project.
In addition to the applicant, the consortium consists of at least 2 practice partners, of which at least 1 SME established in the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Practice partners are organisations that make use of the knowledge generated in the KIEM project in professional practice. A practice partner can be a private or a public party.
An SME (including self-employed persons, zzp'ers) meets all of the following:
At or above those thresholds, the organisation is a large enterprise.
Private parties, research organisations, umbrella or sector organisations, professional associations and international partners may take part in the consortium. As long as the minimum composition and co-financing requirements are met, further consortium partners may be added. Parties that are not on the budget but do contribute can be listed on the application form under other involved parties.
Consortium partners confirm participation by signing the application form, and must be included in the budget.
The applicant, the university-of-applied-sciences staff member involved in the application, and researchers from the research group involved may not simultaneously hold a paid or unpaid employment relationship with a practice partner. Staff of practice partners may only be involved in their role as practice partner, not as researcher or staff of the applying institution.
Consequence: if the assessment committee finds a dual role, this leads to an insufficient on the "Suitability of the network" criterion — which alone is enough to fail the whole application.
A research organisation can participate in either of two roles, and the choice must be substantiated in the project proposal and visible in the budget:
After award, a consortium agreement covering intellectual property and publication, knowledge transfer, confidentiality, payment of co-financing, and progress and final reports must be entered into by all consortium partners and submitted via ISAAC no later than 13 weeks after the start of the project. It is a requirement for payment of the grant; failure to submit leads Regieorgaan SIA to withdraw the grant decision. Arranging it is the lead applicant's responsibility.
The scheme does not impose a fixed backbone of work packages, deliverables or milestones. It does impose a project plan structure through the project proposal form.
The applicant must describe:
The planned activities must be recorded in a fixed table with these columns:
| Work package | Task | Task description | Intended (sub)result | Responsible | When? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | — | — | — | — | week/month – week/month |
| 2 | — | — | — | — | — |
| 3 | — | — | — | — | — |
Completing the data management paragraph is a condition for consideration. Four questions must be answered: whether reusable data will be collected or generated; where data is stored during the research; how it is stored long-term and made available for reuse by third parties, and for whom it is accessible; and which facilities (ICT, secure archive, refrigerators, legal expertise) are needed and whether they are available.
Regieorgaan SIA collects indicators on network formation (number of organisations per type, split between consortium partners and other involved parties) and on connection to education (number of teachers and students involved, per education sector). These are used to align the schemes with their objectives; they are collected for monitoring, not scored.
The project has a duration of a maximum of 12 months and must start within 3 months of the grant decision. Both are conditions for consideration.
The policy of Regieorgaan SIA regarding intellectual property is set out in the NWO Grant Regulations.
Arrangements regarding intellectual property and publication, knowledge transfer, confidentiality, payments of co-financing, and progress and final reports are laid down in the consortium agreement. The model agreement is available in ISAAC after award, is entered into by all consortium partners, signed by authorised persons, and submitted via ISAAC.
Regieorgaan SIA intends both that research results of funded projects are publicly accessible, and that further development of results is stimulated by giving parties the opportunity to exploit them. In that context it may be desirable to transfer intellectual property rights or grant a licence to one of the private parties involved in the project. The starting point is that all research results can be published, taking into account arrangements about publication procedures, as determined in the consortium agreement.
When entering into arrangements about licensing and/or transfer of research results, the 10 principles for socially responsible licensing must be taken into account.
After the end of the project, the beneficiary acquires ownership of research resources funded as investments. If the beneficiary realises profit from the economic ownership of these resources, those profits must be invested in research activities.
It is the lead applicant's responsibility to check whether an ethics statement or permit is necessary, and to obtain it in good time from the relevant institution or ethics committee. Whether or not a statement is held at the time of application has no influence on the assessment. On the application form, the applicant indicates whether approval is needed and by what date it can be supplied.
If required, a copy must be provided to Regieorgaan SIA after award and in any case before execution of the relevant part of the project begins. That part cannot be carried out until the statement or permit has been provided.
Research must be carried out in accordance with the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. In the event of a possible breach, the lead applicant must immediately inform Regieorgaan SIA and submit all relevant documents. Researchers can also file a complaint with their institution's Research Integrity Committee or with the NWO Research Integrity Reporting Point.
The National Knowledge Security Guideline provides tools for weighing opportunities against security risks in international collaboration; self-regulation by the knowledge sector is central. NWO expects applicants to comply with the knowledge security policy of their research organisation. If NWO receives signals that an application or awarded project entails knowledge security risks, it can request insight into risk-mitigating measures and may include further conditions in the award letter.
Regieorgaan SIA processes personal data in accordance with the NWO privacy statement, and uses the data on the application form solely to communicate about the grant application. For awarded projects, a summary is published in the online project database (projectenbank) and on Publinova, together with the name and email address of the project contact person — subject to the consent indicated on the form.
Researchers must take the necessary actions with regard to the Nagoya Protocol, which ensures fair distribution of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources, including traditional knowledge about them (Access and Benefit Sharing).
Open Science is the movement for a more open and participatory research practice in which publications, data, software and other forms of scientific information are shared at the earliest possible stage and made available for reuse.
Scientific publications about the project must be available Open Access in accordance with the NWO Open Access Policy Rule. The NWO website describes the options for articles, books, book chapters and dissertations, and the application of licences. Any costs for Open Access publishing must be budgeted as part of the application budget.
If the research leads to a publication or other relevant research output, the lead applicant must name Regieorgaan SIA as the funder.
The data management paragraph in the project proposal is a condition for consideration — applicants make known how data arising from the research is handled. It asks whether data suitable for reuse will be collected or generated (and if not, why the research does not lead to reusable or storable data); where the data is stored during the research; how it is stored long-term after the project and made available for reuse by third parties and for whom it is accessible; and which facilities are expected to be needed for storing data during and after the research, and whether these are available. ICT facilities here means, for example, capacity for data storage, bandwidth for data transport and computing power for data processing.
KIEM funds practice-oriented research (praktijkgericht onderzoek): research questions originate in professional practice, and the research is carried out by a network of research organisations and practice partners together. This is not an optional collaboration dimension — it is what the scheme funds.
The consortium must combine at least the research side (applicant) with 2 practice partners, of which at least 1 SME. Practice partners are defined as organisations that make use of the knowledge generated in the project in professional practice — that is, users of the knowledge, not merely observers.
Criterion 2 assesses whether the practice-based question comes from professional practice or has been tested with relevant professionals working in practice. The proposal must explain concretely how practising professionals were involved in formulating the question, naming the partners involved and describing how they contributed to gathering and/or testing it.
Criterion 4 assesses the extent to which professional practice is involved in carrying out the project, and the proposal must make this explicit per work package.
Criterion 3 assesses whether attention to dissemination of the research outcomes in both education and professional practice is secured within the network. The dual audience (education and professional practice) is explicit in the criterion, and the performance indicators separately collect the number of teachers and students involved per education sector.
The call does not impose an interdisciplinarity requirement or a mandatory social sciences and humanities component. The relevant expertise requirement is functional: criterion 3 asks whether the necessary expertise from research organisations and professional practice is present at the outset to carry out the intended activities.
The applicant is responsible for executing the entire project and acts as lead applicant (penvoerder). This person is the formal point of contact during the project unless a change is reported via ISAAC, and can authorise others to carry out administrative actions in ISAAC.
Must be submitted via ISAAC no later than 13 weeks after the start of the project. It is a requirement for receiving the grant: the grant can only be paid out after submission and approval by Regieorgaan SIA. If it is not submitted within 13 weeks, Regieorgaan SIA withdraws the grant decision.
Any change during the project compared with the awarded application and budget must be submitted in advance for approval via an amendment form in ISAAC.
Regieorgaan SIA must be informed at all times of problems in expected co-financing and own contributions. Besides financial consequences, Regieorgaan SIA may require appropriate changes to the project as an amendment request so the research can continue as well as possible.
The lead applicant submits a substantive final report in writing no later than 13 weeks after the end of the project duration. If not submitted in time, Regieorgaan SIA can reclaim the grant in whole or in part.
Digital Holland is a co-funder in this round and finances it through the PPSi surcharge of the Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO). For all honoured applications, Regieorgaan SIA shares parts of the project proposals and final reports, plus the name, email address and telephone number of the project contact person, with Digital Holland.
Digital Holland employees have only the right of inspection. Without prior written permission of the lead applicant they may not make statements to third parties about content that is not known from the publicly available summary. The contact details may be used to make contact. If additional data is needed to account for the use of resources, Regieorgaan SIA states this in the decision letter.
During the project, the lead applicant keeps Regieorgaan SIA informed of progress. After the end of the project, the lead applicant shares the results.
A substantive final report is submitted in writing no later than 13 weeks after the end of the project duration. Failure to submit allows Regieorgaan SIA to reclaim the grant in whole or in part.
Regieorgaan SIA may approach applicants for an evaluation of the procedure and/or the research programme. On both the application form and the consortium partner form, applicants and partners indicate whether a Regieorgaan SIA employee may contact them for evaluation purposes.
The performance indicators submitted with the proposal — on network formation and on the number of teachers and students involved per education sector — are used in aggregated form to give insight into the involvement of practice and education in the research that Regieorgaan SIA stimulates, and to better align its schemes with their objectives.
Everything the call asks for, seen from the call's point of view. Each line shows what answers it, and which partner carries it.
This matrix lists everything the call asks for: outcomes, impacts, scope, the requirements buried in the call text, and policy alignment. Sign up free and GrantForge tracks each line against the concept you build.
| Requirement | Covered by | Carried | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope activities | |||
| SC01Exploratory testing of an existing or testable AI solution in a real work processOne-year practice-oriented research that tests an AI solution which already exists or is testable — at minimum a proof of concept with demonstrable functioning, an AI prototype, a beta version, or a commercial/open-source solution ready for direct application — inside the realistic working environment and work processes of the practice partners. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC02Substantiation of the labour and productivity challenge in a specific sector or organisationDescription of the extent to which labour-market tightness and/or organisational productivity challenges exist within the targeted sector or organisation, including relevant trends, bottlenecks and concrete needs from professional practice, stated specifically rather than generically. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC03Demonstration of the AI application's contribution to labour saving and/or productivityEvidence of how the existing or testable AI solution makes a demonstrable contribution to addressing the identified labour and/or productivity challenges in the chosen work environment and work process(es). | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC04Articulation of a practice-based question with professionals, translated into a research questionQuestion articulation carried out with professionals working in practice, translated into a clear, functional and bounded research question that fits the duration and scale of a one-year exploratory project and builds on existing knowledge or addresses knowledge gaps. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC05Network formation and dissemination into education and professional practiceFormation of a network of research organisations and practice partners, with dissemination of the exploratory research outcomes secured in both education and professional practice. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| Expected outcomes | |||
| EO01The AI application contributes to labour saving and/or productivity improvement within the practice partner's organisationThe tested AI application thereby contributes to labour saving and/or productivity improvement within the organisation of the practice partner(s) where and with whom the research is carried out. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| EO02Network formation that seeds a follow-up project or an innovationRegieorgaan SIA subsidises both network formation and the exploration of practice-based questions that can be a seed for a follow-up project or an innovation. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| Other requirements | |||
| REQ1Data management paragraphApplicants must complete the data management paragraph in the project proposal, specifying data storage, long-term accessibility, reuse by third parties, and necessary ICT facilities. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| REQ2Ethics statement or permitApplicants must determine if an ethical statement or permit is required, declare this on the application form, and submit a copy before starting the relevant project activities. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| REQ3Acknowledgement of Regieorgaan SIA as funderThe lead applicant must explicitly name Regieorgaan SIA as the funding body in any publication or relevant research output resulting from the project. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| Expected impacts | |||
| No expected impacts in this call. | |||
| Underlying policies | |||
| POL1knowledge and innovation agenda for digitalisation (kia digitalisering)One of the 8 Knowledge and Innovation Agendas under the Mission-Driven Innovation Policy, and the framework Digital Holland used to design this scheme. The applicant selects 1 main KIA and up to 2 sub-KIAs on the application form. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| POL2san francisco declaration on research assessment (dora)NWO is a DORA signatory and applies a broad definition of scientific output. Committee members are instructed not to rely on the Journal Impact Factor or the h-index. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| POL3national technology strategy (nts) and the ai/data action agendaAI/Data is one of the 10 prioritised technological focus areas of the NTS. Digital Holland, co-funder of this round, is responsible for the AI/Data Action Agenda and finances the round through the PPSi surcharge of the Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO). | · | · | Sign up to track |
| POL4parliamentary letter on the productivity agenda, with cbs and ser studiesNational policy work identifying AI applications as one of the potential answers to labour saving and productivity, supported by recent studies from Statistics Netherlands (CBS) and the Social and Economic Council (SER). | · | · | Sign up to track |
The binding rules of this call. Items marked auto are verified by GrantForge from the call and the template. The others are yours to confirm.
The call requires you to pick or distribute several structuring elements before submission. These are locked at proposal creation time and drive the project backbone. Read-only here.
kiem-ai-kia-alignment
KIA 1. Climate and Energy
KIA 2. Circular Economy
KIA 3. Agriculture, water and food
KIA 4. Health and care
KIA 5. Security and safety
KIA 6. Key technologies
KIA 7. Digitalisation
KIA 8. Societal earning capacity
kiem-ai-research-organisation-role
Eligible research organisation
Practice partner
kiem-ai-themes-with-impact
Health and Wellbeing
Education and talent development
Resilient society: in the neighbourhood, city and region
Key technologies and sustainable materials
Built environment, sustainable and liveable
Sustainable transport and intelligent logistics
Sustainable agriculture, water and food supply
Energy transition and sustainability
Art and the creative industry
Entrepreneurship: responsible and innovative
Safety and security
Tourism and hospitality
Not applicable
kiem-ai-education-sectors
Agro and Food
Science and engineering
Healthcare
Art
Economics
Social studies
Education
kiem-ai-top-sector
Agri & Food
Chemicals
Creative industry
Energy
High Tech Systems and Materials
ICT
Life Sciences & Health
Logistics
Horticulture and Propagation Materials
Water
Not applicable
8 key insights you must internalise before writing. Each is grounded in the call text and tells you what evaluators will actually look for. Share these with your consortium before drafting.
Every criterion is scored 'sufficient' or 'insufficient', all four carry equal weight, and the application must be sufficient on each one to be eligible. There is no compensation between criteria and no numeric ranking to climb. Treat the four chapters (5, 6, 7, 8) as four independent gates and make sure none of them is thin.
Source: Call for proposals §4.1
A positive assessment does not guarantee funding. Applications with a positive assessment are prioritised by submission date and time, and the round can close before the deadline if the ceiling is reached. If the application had to be amended to meet the submission conditions, the later corrected-submission moment counts instead of the original. Submitting complete and correct the first time protects the queue position.
Source: Call for proposals §3.1.1 and §4.2.3
Only solutions at proof-of-concept with demonstrable functioning, prototype, beta, or ready-to-use commercial/open-source stage qualify. Proposals aimed at developing new AI applications or concepts explicitly do not fit the scheme. State the maturity stage of the chosen solution plainly and describe the work as testing and applying it, never as building it.
Source: Call for proposals §2.1.1
The applicant, the involved staff member and researchers from the research group may not simultaneously hold a paid or unpaid employment relationship with a practice partner. If a spin-off, student initiative or affiliated company supplies the tool being tested, verify that nobody on the research side holds a role there. The committee treats a dual role as an insufficient on the network criterion, which alone ends the application.
Source: Call for proposals §3.2.3.3 and §4.1
The word limit is shared across Introduction, Thematic scope, Question articulation, The network and Project plan, and text in tables, footnotes and figures counts. Exceeding it is not permitted. Since all four scored criteria live inside that budget, allocate words per criterion deliberately rather than writing the introduction long and running out of room for the project plan.
Source: Project proposal form, chapter 4 word limit note
Compliance with the DORA guidelines is a condition for consideration, not just an assessment preference, and these indicators may not be mentioned in the application. Describe track record through datasets, patents, software, code and practice-oriented outputs instead.
Source: Call for proposals §3.5 and §4.3.4
Criterion 3 requires that attention to dissemination in both education and professional practice is secured within the network. Naming a lecturer, a course, or a student project route, and showing which partner carries findings to the sector, converts a generic dissemination paragraph into evidence the committee can mark sufficient.
Source: Call for proposals §4.1 criterion 3
A research organisation participating as an eligible research organisation contributes an own contribution that does not count towards the mandatory 25%; as a practice partner it counts towards the 25% but becomes ineligible for grant. Large enterprises never count towards the 25%. The choice must be substantiated in the proposal and visible in the budget, so making it late forces a rewrite of both.
Source: Call for proposals §3.3.5.1 and §3.3.5.2
Talk to the Grant Coach to build your concept. There is no set order: start wherever your project starts. The sections below mirror what the conversation produces, and your coverage tracks the progress. You can refine everything once your project workspace is created.
The branch you're building for — it shapes what the call expects of you, and what your coverage is measured against.
The call requires you to pick or distribute several structuring elements before submission. These are locked at proposal creation time and drive the project backbone. Read-only here.
kiem-ai-kia-alignment
KIA 1. Climate and Energy
KIA 2. Circular Economy
KIA 3. Agriculture, water and food
KIA 4. Health and care
KIA 5. Security and safety
KIA 6. Key technologies
KIA 7. Digitalisation
KIA 8. Societal earning capacity
kiem-ai-research-organisation-role
Eligible research organisation
Practice partner
kiem-ai-themes-with-impact
Health and Wellbeing
Education and talent development
Resilient society: in the neighbourhood, city and region
Key technologies and sustainable materials
Built environment, sustainable and liveable
Sustainable transport and intelligent logistics
Sustainable agriculture, water and food supply
Energy transition and sustainability
Art and the creative industry
Entrepreneurship: responsible and innovative
Safety and security
Tourism and hospitality
Not applicable
kiem-ai-education-sectors
Agro and Food
Science and engineering
Healthcare
Art
Economics
Social studies
Education
kiem-ai-top-sector
Agri & Food
Chemicals
Creative industry
Energy
High Tech Systems and Materials
ICT
Life Sciences & Health
Logistics
Horticulture and Propagation Materials
Water
Not applicable
The problems this call frames, and who they affect. Your concept and plan address them.
Fully managed by GrantForge
Click Create proposal above to start writing this form inside GrantForge. The structure below is what we generate for you.
The project proposal is a mandatory annex uploaded as PDF in ISAAC. It uses the fixed Regieorgaan SIA format. It is not permitted to change the structure and layout of the form. The assessment criteria and writing instructions printed in blue italic in the template are guidance and must be deleted before submitting.
| # | Chapter | Assessed? |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Contents (Inhoud) | No |
| 2 | Project title (Projecttitel) | No |
| 3 | Summary (Samenvatting) — max 300 words, public-friendly | No |
| 4 | Introduction (Inleiding) | Yes |
| 5 | Thematic scope (Thematische afbakening) | Yes — criterion 1 |
| 6 | Question articulation (Vraagarticulatie) | Yes — criterion 2 |
| 7 | The network (Het netwerk) | Yes — criterion 3 |
| 8 | Project plan (Projectplan) | Yes — criterion 4 |
| 9 | Data management paragraph (Datamanagementparagraaf) | Condition for consideration |
| 10 | Performance indicators (Prestatie-indicatoren) | Monitoring only |
| 11 | References (Referenties) | No |
Chapters 4 to 8 are assessed by the review committee and together may not exceed 2,500 words. Text in tables, footnotes and figures counts toward the word count. Exceeding the word count is not permitted. The summary in chapter 3 has its own separate limit of 300 words.
Describe as concretely and completely as possible: the reason (trigger) for the intended project, indicating when the trigger is another KIEM project, from the perspective of the practice partner(s) involved; the context within which the project takes place; the practice question (praktijkvraag); and why one-year exploratory research matters for this question — how the project can "germinate" (ontkiemen).
The application form is the administrative form, completed and submitted through ISAAC. The official form is Dutch. It is signed and merged with the consortium partner form(s) into one PDF.
| # | Section | Content |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Applicant details | Either the applying university of applied sciences (signed by a member of the Executive Board or an authorised mandatee) or, if a university researcher, the applying researcher with knowledge institution, department, postal address and signature |
| 4 | Project details | Title; whether an ethics declaration or permit is needed and by what date it can be supplied |
| 5 | Financial information | IBAN, account holder, optional payment reference (max 20 characters) |
| 6 | People involved on the applicant side | Contact person for the project; publication consent; lector or senior researcher involved — only if the applicant is a university of applied sciences |
| 7 | People and parties involved externally | Consortium partner(s) with organisation name, address, Chamber of Commerce number, organisation type, authorised signatory and contact person; plus any other involved parties not on the budget |
| 8 | Other information | Themes with Impact (min 1, max 3), education sectors (max 3), top sectors (choose 1), NWA routes (1 main + max 2 sub), KIAs 2024-2027 (1 main + max 2 sub) |
A separate form used per consortium partner, and the route for non-Dutch consortium partners. By signing, the partner declares awareness of the submission, participation in the consortium, commitment to the contribution described in the proposal, and commitment to the associated costs and/or co-financing stated in the budget. Companies registered in a non-Dutch business register must attach a registration extract no older than 3 months; unregistered companies attach a deed of incorporation or other legal proof of being a legal entity.
A public summary of 50-100 words, written accessibly for a broad audience. Regieorgaan SIA may publish it in a news item about the grant awards.
For a university of applied sciences, the form must be signed by the chair or a member of the Executive Board. Signature by another person is possible provided that proof of mandate from the Executive Board is submitted once, in advance or at submission, using the mandate form available in ISAAC.
The budget is a mandatory annex and must be delivered in the provided Excel format. A budget submitted as PDF is not processed. Only the formats provided by Regieorgaan SIA may be used; other annexes are not permitted.
| Worksheet | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Samenvattend overzicht (summary overview) | Project title and applicant organisation. Pulls data automatically from the other sheets and shows the key figures: total project costs, co-financing, grant amount, and whether the budget meets the conditions |
| Dekking (funding plan) | One row per consortium organisation: name, organisation type, budgeted costs (auto-filled), in-kind contribution, cash co-financing, and the resulting grant amount per organisation |
| Loonkosten (wage costs) | Wage costs of all organisations: optional activity and intended (sub)result columns, then organisation, position, hours and rate |
| Materieel (material costs) | Description of material costs and investment depreciation, optional specification, the organisation bearing the cost, and the amount |
| Digital Holland specification | Extra sheet specific to this round showing the Digital Holland share. Not relevant to the application — on award, Regieorgaan SIA grants the full amount |
| Type | Note |
|---|---|
| Onderzoeksorganisatie (research organisation) | Per section 3.2 of the call. Does not count as a practice partner |
| Praktijkpartner (practice partner) | Includes SMEs. Per section 3.2.3.2 |
| Grootbedrijf (large enterprise) | Larger than an SME. Does not count towards the co-financing percentage, even when acting as a practice partner |
| Andere consortiumpartner (other consortium partner) | Does not count as a practice partner |
Foreign research organisations and Dutch universities of applied sciences that are not government-funded do not count as Onderzoeksorganisatie in this budget format. A research organisation acting as a practice partner is entered as Praktijkpartner.
Canonical EU Funding & Tenders Portal page for this call.
https://www.nwo.nl/en/calls/kiem-arbeidsbesparende-ai
Institutional / marketing website of the parent programme.
https://regieorgaan-sia.nl/financiering/kiem/kiem-arbeidsbesparende-ai/
Where you submit your proposal (F6S, opencalls.fund, EPSS, MS Forms…).
https://www.isaac.nwo.nl/
Official documents pack (applicant guide, templates, annexes).
https://regieorgaan-sia.nl/financiering/kiem/kiem-arbeidsbesparende-ai/