• PhD window: PhD obtained during the three years preceding the reference date of 1 January 2026, or obtained between 1 January 2026 and 1 September 2026 (so between 1 January 2023 and 1 September 2026). The date the applicant may use the title of Doctor applies (the defence date if more than six months separate the two); with two PhDs, the second counts. No age limit.
• Extension clause: the window can be extended by up to five years in total for long-term leave (illness, parenthood, pregnancy, care), parental responsibility, part-time work with care duties, or clinical specialist training. Contact NWO before requesting it.
• Host: a Dutch university, university medical centre, KNAW or NWO institute, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Naturalis, ARCNL or the Princess Máxima Center. Researchers of any nationality, also employed abroad, may apply.
• Appointment: a paid position at the host for the full project duration, at least 0.4 FTE on the project.
• Limits: individual applications only; one pre-proposal per round; no applications to two Talent Programme instruments in the same calendar year; a Veni proposal may be submitted only twice; no second grant from the same instrument.

Two separate submissions

The pre-proposal and the full proposal are two distinct submissions, months apart, with a selection in between. Only applicants with a positive decision on their pre-proposal are invited to submit a full proposal (converted from the pre-proposal in ISAAC).

Pre-proposal stage

The committee gives positive advice to no more than approximately three times the number of grants expected to be awarded.

Full proposal stage, Science

Consideration and administrative corrections

NWO may request administrative corrections up to two weeks after a deadline; the applicant has one opportunity, within five working days. Late proposals are not considered.

Pre-proposal: Quality of the researcher (100%)

• Fit with the target group: is the researcher at the stage of transitioning to independence, and to what extent will the Veni contribute to the researcher's development in this area?
• The extent to which the researcher's qualities clearly exceed what is customary within the international peer group, as evidenced in the CV by the quality and impact of the key output and by other academic achievements (theories and methods, independence, Open Science, academic citizenship).
• The extent to which the researcher's work is clearly positioned with respect to scientific and (where possible) societal themes or questions.
• The quality of the (inter)national network, collaborative abilities and visibility.
• The capability of generating innovative ideas, as shown in the CV.
• Whether the key output and academic profile clearly align with the research idea, or a convincing vision of how this alignment will be achieved.

Full proposal

1. Quality and innovative character of the research proposal (75%)

• Potential to make an important contribution to the advancement of science.
• (Elements of) scientific innovation in theory, methods and/or topic.
• Going beyond a gradual evolution of the applicant's current research.
• An equitable balance between challenging and feasible.
• Alignment with the researcher's expertise, or a convincing vision of how it will be achieved.
• Appropriateness of the proposed approach.
• Clarity of the proposal, including the question(s) and objectives.

2. Scientific and/or societal impact (25%)

• Scientific impact: an ambitious vision and appropriate strategy for disseminating and/or implementing the results in the own discipline, related disciplines and the broader field.
• Societal impact: added value for societal impact, short- and long-term potential, and an ambitious vision and appropriate strategy for how the research may lead to it.
• Whatever the focus: a convincing motivation for the chosen focus, proportional attention to (unforeseen) opportunities for the other type of impact, and sufficient attention to the key risks of undesirable societal impact and their mitigation.

Scoring

Each criterion is scored on the NWO scale from 1 (excellent) to 9 (unsatisfactory); the full proposal gets a weighted average. Committee members' scores are standardised on the median and average deviation. A proposal needs a final rating of at least 'very good' to be eligible for funding; final scores are rounded to two decimals, with ex aequo rules favouring female applicants at the funding limit.

Who assesses in Science

An external, independent, multidisciplinary assessment committee appointed by the Domain Board: proposals must be accessible to members from other disciplines within the desk. At least two external referees review the full proposal; the applicant may submit a rebuttal on the anonymised referee reports within five working days. Interviews can change the assessment and score. The data management section is not assessed.

• Maximum NWO grant EUR 320,000; request only what is needed.
• Materials: up to 50% of the grant; the call states that no more than 25% of the material budget may pay for work by third parties (section 3.3), while Annex 7.1.1 states 50%.
• Investments: max. EUR 500,000, only at the eligible research organisations.
• Knowledge utilisation: max. 5% of the grant, optional; activities must fit the EC definition of knowledge transfer.
• Not eligible: overhead and organisational infrastructure, regular teaching, user committee members; travel at second class or economy fares.
• Double funding is not permitted: a project partly funded elsewhere is not funded.
• An external auditor's report is required when the beneficiary is not under the OCW/EZ Education Audit Protocol and the grant exceeds EUR 125,000.
• Salary rates are indexed once at the award; the grant cap is unchanged.

Applications are submitted by individual researchers; joint applications by two researchers or groups are not permitted. The quality of the researcher's (inter)national network, collaborative abilities and visibility is assessed at the pre-proposal stage.

Co-funders may be included (in cash or in kind) but are not required; co-funding above 49% of total project costs is not considered, and parties eligible to apply cannot co-fund.

No imposed backbone

The call imposes no work packages, deliverables or milestones. The applicant designs the research plan, which is assessed for feasibility: logical and technological framework, planning and timeframe, and resources (human resources, data, tools, expertise, network, institutional support). NWO is open to high-risk, high-gain projects.

Team and resources

The Veni budget covers the applicant's own salary for the part of the appointment devoted to the project, non-scientific personnel (total FTE not exceeding the applicant's own), students (as material costs; students plus non-scientific personnel not exceeding the applicant's FTE), materials, investments and knowledge utilisation. No additional scientific personnel can be budgeted. The minimum appointment on the project is 0.4 FTE.

The applicant must hold a paid position at the host organisation for the full duration of the project; part-time applicants must show the project can be delivered and staff supervised.

NWO's IP policy is set out in the NWO Grant Rules 2024. The project is executed during the project leader's employment with the beneficiary; non-beneficiary employers must waive IP rights arising from the project. The basic premise is that all results may be published.

Where co-funders are involved, a consortium agreement covers IP, publication, knowledge transfer, confidentiality and co-funding payments. Licensing follows the ten principles of socially responsible licensing.

The project leader determines whether an ethical statement or licence is needed. Its presence at application does not affect the assessment; if needed, a copy goes to NWO before the relevant work starts.

Research follows the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2018). The National Knowledge Security Guidelines apply and the award letter may add conditions. The ethical aspects section of the full proposal form must be completed.

Everyone involved in assessment follows the NWO Code for Dealing with Personal Interests. Only a public summary is published at award; no scientific summary is published, for intellectual property reasons.

The full proposal contains a data management section (re-use of existing data, data suitable for re-use, long-term storage and availability, costs). It must be completed but is not assessed; referees and the committee may advise on it.

Before the project starts, it is elaborated into a data management plan, checked by a data steward at the host and approved by NWO; the award is conditional on that approval. Data are to be made FAIR.

Scientific publications must be Open Access under the NWO Open Access Policy Framework; Open Access costs should be included in the budget.

Single-researcher instrument: no multi-actor, interdisciplinary or SSH composition is required. The researcher's network and collaborative abilities are assessed as part of the quality of the researcher. Interdisciplinary proposals should contact the programme before choosing a submission desk, and write for a multidisciplinary committee.

The applicant becomes the project leader; the host is the main beneficiary and grant administrator. Before the start: start form, data management plan, final budget and, where applicable, consortium agreement. The grant is paid in instalments. Changes to the approved proposal or budget require a prior change request.

Awarded grants can move abroad under the Money Follows Researcher scheme (at least one year of project runtime with six months or more remaining).

Research output is reported in the online system. A substantive and a financial final report are due within three months of the end of the project; late or missing reports can reduce or withdraw the grant. NWO may ask for an evaluation of the procedure.

Official FAQ: FAQ Talent Programme (NWO). Key answers:

• No age limit; eligibility runs from the PhD conferral date.
• Pre-proposal submissions count towards the maximum number of attempts; full proposal submissions do not.
• Only PDF annexes, without encryption. Publications and recommendation letters are not forwarded to assessors.
• The title and, within the described idea, the topic may still change after the pre-proposal stage.
• 'Net academic research time' in the form counts months actually spent on research since the PhD, in full months and FTE.
• Veni: only the applicant's own salary, no additional scientific personnel; part-time research extends the duration (min. 0.4 FTE).
• Questions: talent@nwo.nl or enw-veni@nwo.nl.

Pre-proposal form (ISAAC form)

Word counts include all text in a section (tables, figures, footnotes). Publications and letters of recommendation cannot be added. The pre-proposal is in English.

Full proposal form

The 2026 full proposal form is only downloadable from the online application system once the pre-proposal is converted; limits above come from the 2026 call page, structure from the 2025 form. Hyperlinks extending the page limit are not allowed.

Submission in ISAAC through the applicant's own account. The applicant enters personal details (including gender, used for the female-researcher measures), NWO research fields and, for the full proposal, the public summary in Dutch and English. Organisations missing from the system can be registered until five working days before the deadline (relatiebeheer@nwo.nl).

Mandatory annex with the pre-proposal: Embedding Guarantee, completed with the prospective host institution and signed by the dean. Not assessed, but its absence makes the application ineligible.

Annexes with the full proposal: budget; Embedding Guarantee again if the host changed; if applicable, statement exceeding maximum funding and co-funding declarations. All annexes as unprotected PDF (budget as Excel in ISAAC). No other annexes are permitted.

The budget uses the NWO format with the most recent rates (UNL/UMCNL salary tables, HOT rates for students and in-kind hours) and is submitted as an Excel file in ISAAC. The budget forms part of the assessment and the final budget must stay consistent with it.

If the total budget exceeds EUR 320,000, the host organisation covers the excess through a 'Statement exceeding maximum funding'; third-party co-funders sign a co-funding declaration.