Horizon-ERDF Synergy Funding Commission Notice-2

EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 5.7.2022
C(2022) 4747 final
ANNEX
Draft COMMISSION NOTICE Synergies between Horizon Europe and ERDF

programmes
ANNEX
to the
COMMUNICATION TO THE COMMISSION
Approval of the content of a draft Commission Notice on the synergies between ERDF
programmes and Horizon Europe
EN EN
Table of content
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 2
Types of synergies ............................................................................................................................... 4
1. Seal of Excellence..................................................................................................................... 4
2. Transfers .................................................................................................................................. 11
3. Cumulative funding ................................................................................................................ 17
4. European Partnerships ............................................................................................................ 25
5. Combined funding (Teaming) ............................................................................................... 38
6. Upstream and downstream synergies ................................................................................... 39
Annex ................................................................................................................................................... 41
1
Introduction
The regulatory framework for 2021-2027 governing cohesion policy funds under shared
management and funds under direct management funds allows for strengthened synergies
between these two types of EU funding1.
Relevant mechanisms include Seals of Excellence, transfers, cumulative funding (which can
also be used to support Horizon Europe (HE) Co-funded and Institutionalised European
Partnerships), and support for Teaming. This guidance document covers these mechanisms
and ‘upstream/downstream synergies’.
The purpose of this document is to outline the new opportunities available to the managing
authorities (MAs) of the cohesion policy programmes, national HE contact points and HE
project promoters/proposers. The document is also intended to make it easier to use the
relevant mechanisms mentioned in the previous paragraph. It focuses on synergies between
HE and the European Research and Development Fund (ERDF) programmes2.
The operational dimension of synergies, where a lot of progress has been made in the
legislation for 2021-2027, is equally important and complements the strategic dimension. A
regular exchange of views on synergies between Member States’ authorities involved in the
cohesion policy programmes and the implementation of HE would help raise awareness of the
possibilities offered by synergies in the Member States.
Strategic context at EU level

It is a priority for EU policy to promote innovative and smart and sustainable economic
transformation and to foster excellence in research and innovation (R&I), while also
mitigating and overcoming the persistent innovation divide (the gap between the capacity to
innovate of Member States’ private and public sectors). HE and the ERDF are key EU
instruments for delivering results on these interlinked objectives.
HE focuses on supporting excellent R&I, in line with Article 179 of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Cohesion policy aims to promote and support
the overall harmonious development of Member States and their regions, in line with Article
174 TFEU, particularly by reducing regional disparities. The figure below illustrates the main
structural elements of HE and cohesion policy support for R&I.
1
This can also apply to indirectly managed EU funds.
2
In view of the alignment of the provisions of directly managed Union programmes, e.g. HE, DEP, CEF
concerning synergies with programmes under shared management, elements of this document may be considered
as guidance for the operationalisation of synergies between such directly managed Union programmes and
ERDF programmes – while carefully considering specificities of each applicable legal base and policy
considerations specific to each such programme.
2
Bringing cohesion policy and HE closer together has therefore been an important priority for
the Commission in recent years, particularly when preparing for 2021-2027. The aim is to
reinforce the impact of both policies by creating complementarities, especially in less
developed and peripheral regions. Promoting an integrated approach and strengthening
synergies between these key EU instruments (and their respective pillars and policy
objectives) can offer new win-win situations where everyone benefits. One can for example
foster sustainable and smart regional economic development, while at the same time
improving the EU’s innovation ecosystem overall and making it better at responding to key
societal challenges and developing key strategic value chains.
This approach creates new opportunities to help foster innovation in all regions and to better
integrate less-developed and peripheral regions into the European Research Area (ERA) and
the European Innovation Ecosystem (EIE).
The Commission’s Communication on a new ERA for R&I3 marked an important step in the
ERA’s creation. The aim of the ERA is to build excellence, cross-border cooperation between
researchers, critical mass in key strategic areas, and opportunities for researchers to relocate
and ultimately create an open single market for R&I. The new forward-looking plan set out in
the Communication has ambitious set of four policy objectives – prioritise investment and
reform; improve access to excellence and strengthen R&I systems across the whole of the EU;
improve the transfer of new R&I to business; and deepen the integration of national policies.
In addition, the Commission adopted a proposal on 16 July 2021 for a Council

Recommendation on a Pact for Research and Innovation in Europe 4. The Recommendation
sets out a number of priority areas for joint action in support of the ERA. This includes
working together to respond to the challenges of the digital and green transition (for example,
in the implementation of missions and European Partnerships under HE).
3
COM(2020) 628 final, 30.9.2020.
4
COM(2021) 407 final.
3
Synergies are based on the MAs of R&I-relevant programmes knowing each other and their
programmes. They are also based on national R&I representatives knowing the HE priorities
and actions (such as new missions and partnerships) and regional smart specialisation
priorities. These priorities and actions are an excellent reference point for developing
complementarities. Synergies between the R&I framework and cohesion programmes can
maximise the amount, quality and impact of investment in R&I, by designing strategic plans
that complement each other and using different funding streams (in line with the specific
objectives of each programme/fund).
Smart specialisation strategies (S3) are crucial for synergies with smart growth-related
instruments at EU level (especially with HE). Bottom-up S3 priority-setting should make it
easier to find partners in other Member States with a view to cooperating on related topics and
value chains.
With respect to the ERDF, Article 11(1)(b)(iii) of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR)5
requires Member States to specify in their strategic partnership agreements:
‘complementarities and synergies between the funds covered by the Partnership Agreement
[…] and other Union instruments […] and, where appropriate, projects funded under Horizon
Europe’. Similarly, for each cohesion policy programme, Article 22(3)(a)(iii) CPR requires a
summary of the main challenges, considering ‘investment needs and complementarity and
synergies with other forms of support’.
In all cases, it is for the MAs to decide whether or not to use synergy mechanisms.
Types of synergies
1. Seal of Excellence
The Seal of Excellence is a quality label awarded by the Commission to a proposal which has
been submitted to a competitive call for proposals under an EU instrument and judged to
comply with the minimum quality requirements of that EU instrument, but which could not be
funded due to budgetary constraints. The Seal of Excellence indicates that a project might be
a good candidate for receiving support from other EU or national sources of funding.
5
Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down
common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion
Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules
for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for
Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy (OJ L 231, 30.36.2021, p 159).
4
A Seal of Excellence under HE recognises the value of the proposal and helps other funding
bodies take advantage of the HE evaluation process. It can for example be awarded to
proposals submitted under HE’s European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator (a former
SME Instrument), EIC Transition, Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions (MSCA), Teaming and
European Research Council (ERC) Proof of Concept.
MAs for cohesion policy in the Member States can follow a simplified selection procedure
when deciding on funding operations with a Seal of Excellence6 from ERDF programmes.
Such operations have to meet three criteria:
 Firstly, they must be consistent with the programme (and with the relevant strategies
underlying the programme) and provide an effective contribution to the achievement of
the specific objectives of the programme.
 Secondly, where they fall within the scope of an enabling condition, they have to be
consistent with the corresponding strategies and planning documents for the fulfilment of
that enabling condition.
 Thirdly, they must fall within the scope of the relevant fund and be attributed to a type of
intervention7.
Relevant legislation CPR Articles 2(45) and 73(4) and Recital (61)
HE Articles 2(23), 15(2), 24(4), and 48(7)
Related legislation General Block Articles 25a and 25b (State aid)
Exemption
Regulation
(GBER)
Policy considerations
The Seal of Excellence is a quality label awarded to project proposals submitted to HE (the
EU’s R&I funding programme until 2027) and to its predecessor programme, Horizon 2020.
The Seal of Excellence certifies that these proposals are excellent and raises their profile in
the eyes of possible funding bodies (private or public; national or regional; including MAs of
the cohesion policy funds) interested in investing in promising R&I projects. The Seal of
Excellence thereby helps these proposals find alternative funding.
6
While this document focuses on the Seals of Excellence envisaged under Horizon Europe, the possibility of
granting Seals of Excellence is also laid down in the basic acts of 14 other programmes within the EU’s
multiannual financial framework (Digital Europe, Single Market Programme, LIFE, Creative Europe, Erasmus+,
Space Programme, European Solidarity Corps, Connecting Europe Facility, Justice Programme, Citizens,
Equality, Rights and Values Programme, Euratom, Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, Integrated Border
Management Fund and Internal Security Fund).
7
See points (a), (b),(g) of Article 73(2) and Article 73(4) of the CPR.
5
Funding bodies can also take advantage of the well-established and high-quality HE
evaluation process to promote territorial development. This allows Member States and regions
to identify and benefit from a pipeline of excellent R&I project proposals in their territory that
would improve their R&I performance and capacity.
Project applicants who receive a positive evaluation in an HE call and a Seal of Excellence
may apply for possible ERDF funding if the project is aligned with the priorities of the
cohesion policy programmes of the project promoters’ Member State or region.
The Seal of Excellence certificate contains all the basic information on the proposal that is
needed by a funding body that wants to identify the proposal and understand its key features
and value (title of the proposal, reference to the call/topic, and name and address of the
proposer’s legal entity). It is digitally sealed against fraud, as are the project proposal and the
evaluation summary report (this is indicated in the documents). Finally, the signatures of the
Commissioner for Cohesion and Reforms and the Commissioner for Innovation, Research,
Culture, Education and Youth demonstrate their political commitment to mobilising
alternative funding for these projects.
The Seal of Excellence is particularly suitable for single-beneficiary HE components (such as

EIC Accelerator and EIC Transition, MSCA, ERC Proof of Concept, Teaming). While multi-
beneficiary Seals of Excellence could also be considered in the future, the current intention is
to award the Seal of Excellence only to mono-beneficiary components during the first phase
of HE. This condition will need to be specified in the relevant call. Components granting the
Seal of Excellence will be indicated in the relevant work programme.
The Commission can also award Seals of Excellence to project proposals from outside the EU
(particularly from countries associated with HE) that can use other sources of funding not
linked to cohesion policy.
Support for Seal of Excellence project funding from an ERDF programme is voluntary,
depending on the MA’s decision and in line with the programme. The certificate does not
therefore give an automatic right to obtain alternative funding. It is a possibility that the
Member State or region can decide to explore, but the final decision rests with the relevant
MA.
The following simplifications have been made to avoid unnecessary duplication of work by
beneficiaries and MAs when submitting, evaluating and selecting operations for ERDF
support.
- Member States, regions and beneficiaries can apply the HE categories, maximum
amounts and methods of calculation of eligible costs benefiting from simplifications of
applicable EU State aid rules (the GBER).
- The HE technical/content evaluation is considered valid. This means that the MA of
an ERDF programme does not need to perform a new one. However, before signing
the document setting out the conditions for support with beneficiaries, MAs need to
check that those projects meet CPR and ERDF specific requirements that are not
6
covered by the HE evaluation. This is because these projects need to be formally
selected in line with the CPR – i.e. special eligibility (SMEs in difficulty), contribution
to alternative funding programme objectives, applicable enabling conditions, and
scope of the fund (see points (a), (b) and (g) of Article 73(2) CPR).
Main steps in the process
 The annual or biannual HE work programmes specify the

calls for which Seals of Excellence may be awarded. These
HE work programmes can be viewed and downloaded on
the Funding and Tenders Portal.
(https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-
tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/programmes/horizon)
Preparation /  Member States and regions should inform the Commission
programming if they are or are not willing to allow ERDF programmes to
provide support to projects with an HE Seal of Excellence.
Member States or regions may include this information in
the partnership agreement’s section on complementarities
and synergies, and in the description of the specific
objective in the relevant ERDF programme. The MA can
decide to support Seal of Excellence project proposals even
if they are not explicitly mentioned in the partnership
agreement or programme. The MA must in any case ensure
that selected projects comply with the programme.
Awarding of Seals of  The Seal of Excellence certificate is awarded to eligible

Excellence by the proposals and transmitted together with a letter that informs
Commission the proposers of the results of the evaluation. The HE work
programmes provide more details on the conditions and the
process for receiving a Seal of Excellence.
 The Seal of Excellence holder applies directly to the given

ERDF programme.
 Seal of Excellence projects do not have to go through a
Allocation of support regular ERDF project selection process. They must
nevertheless undergo at least a simplified assessment under
the selection criteria approved by the Monitoring Committee
(compliance with applicable enabling conditions, scope of
the fund, and programme objectives together with applicable
EU State aid rules) to ensure that the operations meet the
requirements set out in points (a), (b) and (g) of Article
7
73(2) CPR, as set out by Article 73(4) CPR.
 The assessment of Seal of Excellence projects for ERDF
funding should be a simplified assessment (compliance
check), but national procedures may vary. MAs may choose
what they consider to be the best option (launching an open
call; ‘first come first served’ etc.; or directly selecting
projects when the programme provides this option, provided
that the principles of transparency and non-discrimination
are respected).
 For cohesion policy support, MAs might, using selection
criteria, set thresholds that are higher than the minimum
scores required for HE funding.
 The Seal of Excellence website contains various examples.
(https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-
innovation/funding/funding-opportunities/seal-
excellence_en#how)
 The ERDF programme is encouraged to inform DG REGIO
(relevant geographical unit) and the dedicated Seal of
Excellence community of practice (RTD-SEAL-OF-
[email protected]) of their support for Seal of
Excellence projects.
 Beneficiaries implement projects in line with cohesion

policy rules and procedures. Proposals with a Seal of
Excellence are co-financed in accordance with CPR rules
and the specific ERDF rules. Provided that it complies with
the rules of the programme, it is possible for the MA to
apply certain categories of HE rules (for example, to the
categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculating
eligible costs). The MA must state these elements in the
document setting out the conditions for support.
Implementation,
 The applied co-financing rate applied to overall public
monitoring &
funding for the project shall not exceed the funding rate
control
under the HE programme rules if support is granted in the
form of State aid under Articles 25a or 25b GBER (see the
section on State aid below).
 The same rules apply for monitoring and control as for other
operations under the relevant ERDF programme.
 The public HE dashboard provides aggregated data on the

Seal of Excellence, with visualisation of the Seal by country
and region.
8
Important to know
What about EU State aid rules?
Funding from ERDF programmes can fall under EU State aid rules if the beneficiaries are
undertakings. In such cases, the funding must be compatible with the internal market, based
on applicable EU State aid rules. For projects that have received the Seal of Excellence,
Articles 25a and 25b of the GBER8 are an option for Member States to ensure the
compatibility with the internal market. Moreover, the GBER sets out a number of general
conditions that all aid measures implemented under the GBER must meet, regardless of their
objective. The specific conditions set out in Articles 25a and 25b of the GBER permit ERDF
funding for projects that have received a Seal of Excellence – at the same funding rate and
with the same eligible HE costs – without prior formal notification to the Commission and
without the need to run another technical evaluation. The authority that grants aid is obliged
to comply with the applicable general and specific GBER conditions when awarding the
funding. In addition to its original HE application, the Seal of Excellence holder has to meet
the selection criteria applicable to Seal of Excellence projects established by the MA and must
also make sure that it complies with the applicable State aid rules.
As MA/another funding body, how can we keep informed of developments and best practices
in supporting Seal of Excellence proposals?
The dedicated Seal of Excellence community of practice will continue to allow interested
ERDF MAs and other funding bodies to exchange best practices on how to support Seal of
Excellence proposals, stay up to date on the latest developments, and access all relevant
information and data on Seal of Excellence proposals in their regions (number, funding
requested, etc.). This should make it easier to plan alternative funding schemes.
As MA/another funding body, how can we keep informed of the proposals in our
country/region that have received the Seal of Excellence?
Seal of Excellence holders are requested to give their consent for a limited set of information
(i.e. contact details such as the company name, company address and email of contact person,
an abstract of the proposal, the amount of financial support requested, and keywords that are
used) to be shared with the MAs for cohesion policy and other public or private entities that
are potentially interested in funding or supporting their company. The MAs will be able to
access this information and to contact the Seal of Excellence holder. On the Seal of
excellence dedicated website further information is provided on how to use the Seal of
Excellence and how to find the contact details of the MAs per country.
Under what conditions can MAs fund projects that applied to HE but were not selected for
HE funding and did not receive a Seal of Excellence?
8
Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal
market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty (OJ L 187 of 26.6.2014, as amended). A consolidated
version of the amended Regulation is available on the website of the European Commission, for information
purposes only: https://ec.europa.eu/competition-policy/state-aid/legislation/regulations_en
9
For cohesion policy to support a project that does not hold a Seal of Excellence, the project
must undergo the standard full assessment required under a cohesion policy programme (the
simplified assessment applies only to projects with a Seal of Excellence and to operations
selected under a programme co-funded by HE).
Practical example
A project with a Seal of Excellence from HE’s EIC Accelerator (EIC work programme
2022, p. 74, including footnotes 63 and 64):
An SME applies in response to an HE call and passes the pre-jury evaluation steps (‘GO’) set
out in the EIC’s annual work programme. Despite its high quality, the EIC jury finds that the
project proposal cannot be funded due to a lack of sufficient available funds. The SME would
normally receive a Seal of Excellence (except in specific cases set out in the EIC work
programme – for instance, where the SME does not consent to the sharing of information on
its proposal).
An SME that holds a Seal of Excellence can then approach other funding bodies – for
instance, the MAs of cohesion policy programmes. With the applicant’s prior authorisation,
the Commission can also share basic information, in particular contact details, on the
successful application. Regarding the evaluation results and other sensitive data, their
communication to interested financing authorities is subject to the conclusion of specific
confidentiality agreements. In addition, and with the applicant’s consent, the Commission
may share information with other organisations that can support the SME – for example, the
Enterprise Europe Network (EEN). The EEN can provide one-to-one support services to
SMEs that hold a Seal of Excellence in order to help them identify relevant alternative
funding sources (including ERDF-funded programmes), and to help them with any
application process (including a possible adjustment of the project proposal), capacity-
building for application processes and presentational skills, and give them links to other
relevant support services such as matchmaking and the identification of suitable business
partners. EEN’s services, tailor-made to the needs of each individual Seal of Excellence
holder, take the form of three- to five-day service packages provided free of charge to the
SME in question.
To support Seal of Excellence projects, MAs may decide that the categories, maximum
amounts and methods of calculation of eligible costs will follow HE rules provided that the
State aid compatibility conditions established under Article 25a and Chapter 1 of the GBER
are met. If so, they may apply the rules for the Accelerator set out in the Horizon Framework
Programme (‘the grant or the reimbursable advance component of the Accelerator support
shall not exceed 70% of the total eligible costs of the selected innovation action’ – Article
10
48(9) of the Horizon Framework Programme Regulation)9. Furthermore, as explained in the
Horizon Specific Programme (point 1.1.2), ‘the combination and volume of financing’ under
the Accelerator ‘will be adapted to the needs of the company, its size and stage, the nature of
the technology or innovation and the length of the innovation cycle’10.
If envisaged in the work programme, HE EIC Seal of Excellence holders can benefit from
matchmaking events organised by the EIC’s business acceleration services to connect the EIC
community of innovators – including those holding a Seal of Excellence – and investors,
partners and public buyers. The EIC’s business acceleration services also provide a range of
coaching and mentoring services, and provide innovators with access to international
networks of potential partners, including potential industrial partners, in order to complement
a value chain, develop market opportunities and/or find investors or other sources of private
or corporate finance11.
EIC accelerator Seal of Excellence proposals are promoted not only to ERDF MAs, but also
to private funding sources (e.g. through specific e-pitching and matchmaking events organised
by Seal of Excellence dedicated networks and communities, and by flagging the Seal of
Excellence in the InvestEU portal).
2. Transfers from ERDF to Horizon Europe
Under Article 26(1) CPR, Member States may request the transfer of up to 5% of their
resources under shared management to any other EU fund(s) or instrument(s) under direct or
indirect management. The 5% limit applies to the initial national allocation of a given fund
and not to a specific programme or (category of) region. Transferred resources may only be
used for future budgetary commitments (i.e. for following years). The resources must be used
for the benefit of the Member State concerned12.
Such transferred amounts do not count for thematic concentration for the ERDF.
HE allows all its parts to receive transfers of resources from shared management programmes.
Relevant legislation CPR Article 26 CPR Transfer of resources and

Recital (19)
Horizon Europe Article 15(5), (6)
Related legislation CPR Article 24 (Amendment of programmes)
9
Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing
Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for
participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1290/2013 and (EU) No 1291/2013.
10
Council Decision (EU) 2021/764 of 10 May 2021 establishing the Specific Programme implementing Horizon
Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, and repealing Decision 2013/743/EU.
11
EIC Work Programme 2022.
12
Transfers are also possible to other directly managed programmes, see for example Article 4(14) of CEF
Regulation, applicable to the digital sector, and Article 9(5) of DEP Regulation.
11
Policy considerations
MAs may use transfers to enable excellent HE proposals from their Member State/region to
participate in HE when budgetary constraints would otherwise prevent them from being
selected for HE support.
Transfers can add value when they are directed towards R&I areas that have been identified as
priorities in national and/or regional S3 and that are typically heavily over-subscribed in HE
calls. However, it is not a legal requirement that investments covered by the transferred funds
match smart specialisation priorities.
Transfers provide opportunities to, inter alia:
 strengthen participation in HE by beneficiaries from regions/Member States that have

traditionally had a low participation and success rate in HE;
 boost projects in areas identified as priorities through smart specialisation;
 preserve administrative capacity at national/regional level in the selection and follow-
up of R&I projects, because this will be done not by the MA under the CPR rules, but
by the respective agency under HE rules (especially when there are not enough
excellent projects to justify a full call at national/regional level under the CPR
programme; when there are a large number of these excellent proposals under HE; or
when the MA of the CPR programme wants to diversify its type of support).
Transfers are particularly suitable for single-beneficiary components. The first phase of HE
will allow transfer only for these components.
Transferred resources must be used for the benefit of the Member State concerned. A Member
State may limit the territorial scope of the transfer to a specific region (i.e. namely the region
covered by a cohesion policy programme from which the resources are being transferred).
Transfers may enable Member States or regions with low rates of participation in HE to build
up their R&I capacities by increasing their own legal entities’ participation in HE. This is
because a transfer may only benefit the beneficiaries from that given Member State/region.
A transfer to HE can also provide learning opportunities for project promoters such as SMEs
or universities, because they will be able to enter the HE process thanks to the extra resources
made available to HE by the transfer by their Member State or region. The project will enter
the grant preparation process, be fully subject to HE rules, including funding rates. The
relevant Commission agency will monitor the project throughout its duration.
12
 Transfers must be explicitly specified in the partnership agreement

(or in a request for an amendment to a programme if agreed by the
Monitoring Committee (MC))13. If transfers are not initially
indicated in the partnership agreement, they can still be requested
at any time later through a request for an amendment to the shared
management programme in question (including its financing plan).
 Transfers through a programme amendment require the MC’s
prior approval. Furthermore, ‘[w]here the request concerns an
amendment of a programme, only resources of future calendar
years may be transferred.’ See Article 24 and 26 CPR for more
Preparation details on the requirements.
 When requesting a transfer, the Member State/MA must explain
how the transfer would benefit the transferring Member State or
(in the case of a regional programme) specific regions, and how it
would help to achieve the objectives of the receiving instrument.
To facilitate implementation, the request could specify the HE
component (e.g. EIC Accelerator) targeted by the transfer.
 To define the component and the amount to be transferred,
Commission services may provide an estimate of the amount
likely to be absorbed in the period in question, on the basis of the
that Member State/region’s track record in the chosen component.
 The Commission must object to a request for a transfer if it would

undermine the achievement of the objectives of the programme
from which the resources would be transferred.
Assessment of
 If the Commission approves the transfer, this is officially
requests by the
confirmed in the decision approving the partnership agreement or
Commission
the programme amendment.
 The timeline for the approval of the transfer request is presented
below this table.
13
Table 4.2. of PA template (Annex II CPR) on ‘Transfers to instruments under direct or indirect management‘
provides for the identification of the specific instrument to which ERDF amounts are transferred.
13
 Once the transfer is approved, it becomes available to HE in the
following calendar year for calls of that year. From that time the
transfer can then be used for the benefit of the Member
State/region concerned. It may support proposals which are
located in the transferring regions/country and which have been
positively evaluated by independent experts, but could not be
accepted due to budgetary constraints. The transfer supplements –
rather than replaces – support from the original HE budget.
 Projects are selected on the basis of the ranking list that results
from the HE evaluation or from specific rules (while respecting
Allocation of support the national/regional ring-fencing of the transferred amount). In
the case of the EIC Accelerator, the transferred budget will be
allocated on a ‘first come, first served’ basis in accordance with
the cut-off planning (selection processes are launched every 3
months) until it is used up.
 HE rules apply to the transferred amounts, which are subject to the
same project implementation conditions as any other HE project.
 NUTS2 code level will be used to define the region. Data on
funded projects (analysed by region) are publicly available on the
HE dashboard. The dashboard will indicate that the project was
supported with transferred money.
 Following the transfer, implementation (including monitoring) is

carried out exclusively by the Commission under HE rules, no
longer by the MAs of shared management programmes. The MAs
Implementation, nevertheless have a role to play in the case of transfers back to
monitoring and cohesion policy and the submission of a programme amendment.
control
 The transfer has no direct consequences for project promoters or
beneficiaries, who follow HE rules and procedures.
14
Timeline for transfer requests
Phase 1: Request to transfer funds from a cohesion policy instrument

1.1 Transfer request via partnership agreement
1.2 Transfer request included in programme amendment.
15
Phase 2: Implementing the transferred funds through HE
Important to know
Can transferred resources be transferred back to their original fund?

If the Commission has not legally committed the transferred money under HE by 31 August
of year n+1, the corresponding uncommitted resources may be transferred back to the fund
from which they had initially been transferred. They may then be reallocated to one or more
programmes (Article 26(7) CPR, Article 15(6) HE) at the Member State’s request.
The same procedure of requesting a programme amendment applies (Article 24 CPR) and the
request must be submitted to the Commission at least 4 months before the deadline for
(financial) commitments (i.e. by 31 August of year n+1).
Resources that have been transferred back will then be reallocated to the receiving
programme(s) and be subject to CPR rules.
If the Commission needs to recover funds from HE beneficiaries who have received a transfer
from the ERDF, would these funds be returned to the ERDF programme?
No. The appropriations would not return to the original budget line (ERDF), but would
remain with the relevant programme. In this specific case, they would remain with the HE
programme (to which they had been transferred from the ERDF).
16
Practical example:
A Member State decides to transfer part of the resources of a given ERDF programme for
future calendar years to HE14 by amending the programme in line with Article 24 CPR.
The Commission agrees that the transfer has been properly justified and is in line with the
objectives of the programme from which the resources will be transferred. The Commission
approves the programme amendment, after the MC has given its agreement. The Member
States and the Commission also discuss the geographic scope (determined by the territory of
the transferring programme), intended use of the transferred resources under HE (at the level
of the HE component) and the amount to be transferred on the basis of the estimated
‘absorption capacity’ (for example, using historical statistics on participation for similar calls
of that country/region).
The Member State intends to use the transferred resources to fund SME proposals under an
EIC Accelerator HE call. It intends to do this through grant agreements that are to be
concluded at the latest by the end of year n+1 (i.e. the year following the year in which the
resources are transferred to HE).
The resources are used to fund SME proposals submitted under the EIC Accelerator that have
been evaluated after the Member State’s decision to transfer the money.
HE (at present) covers any additional administrative costs of executing the transfer. An
assessment of whether this approach can be maintained will be done as part of the
programme’s mid-term review.
The Member State can ask to transfer uncommitted resources back to the ERDF up to 4
months before the end of year n+1 (i.e. by 31 August). It does so by requesting an amendment
to the programme(s) in which these resources will be included. The request is subject to the
Commission’s approval. The decommitment rule will start to apply from the year in which the
corresponding budgetary commitments are made.
3. Cumulative funding
Cumulative funding means that an operation/project receives support from more than one
fund, programme or instrument (including both shared and directly managed funds) for the
same item of cost/expenditure. As is the case for the other synergy mechanisms, cumulative
funding is not automatic. Rather, it is an option that can be explored by MAs for cohesion
policy and the granting authority for directly managed EU programmes. Cumulative funding
14
Within the limits of Article 26(1) CPR.
17
can only be applied with the agreement of all parties involved (i.e. MAs and the granting
authority for directly managed EU programmes).
Relevant legislation CPR Article 63(9)
HE Article 15(4)
Related legislation Digital Europe Article 23(1)15

Programme
Policy considerations/potential benefits
Cumulative funding makes it possible to spread the financial burden of an operation and to
address possible budgetary constraints (e.g. those stemming from an instrument’s lower
funding rates) because it can allow up to 100% of a synergy project to be funded from the
EU’s budget, provided relevant State aid rules are complied with. It also makes it possible to
support national contributions, particularly in less developed Member States and regions.
Cumulative funding can also pool resources from different EU instruments under both direct
and shared management, and it makes 100% financing from EU resources possible.
Cumulative funding therefore provides an opportunity to strengthen the links between the
complementary R&I priorities of HE calls and ERDF programmes (and related S3).
15
It should be noted that Article 23(1) of DEP Regulation, as well as e.g. Article 19(1) of CEF.2 Regulation,
contain provisions identical to Article 15(4) of HE Regulation. This, in turn, allows for the alignment of the
implementation arrangements concerning cumulative funding between these programmes.
18
 Cumulative funding between direct and shared management
is possible for the same expenditure of an operation,
provided specific arrangements are made to ensure
compliance with Article 63(9) CPR and 191(3) of the
Financial Regulation. Programme authorities should pay
particular attention to the following interpretation of Article
63(9) CPR and Article 191(3) FR and implement
cumulative funding according to the practical steps below.
 Article 63(9) first sub-paragraph of the CPR provides a

prohibition of double declaration of expenditure under the
CPR, stating that the same item of expenditure can only be
reimbursed under a single Union funding instrument and
that there can be no duplicate Union funding linked to the
same item of expenditure. This prohibition of double
declaration applies in relation to expenditure declared in a
payment application by a managing authority to the
Commission and not in relation to a payment claim
submitted to the national authorities by a beneficiary for a
specific operation.
 This provision corresponds to Article 191(3) FR.

Preparation / Nevertheless, the Financial Regulation allows for the
programming cumulative award of grants from the EU budget, if
authorised by the basic acts. For the MFF 2021-2027, most
of the basic acts, including Horizon Europe, allow for the
cumulation of grants, provided that they do not reimburse
more than 100% of the eligible costs.
 The MA may state in the cohesion policy programme its

intention to allow cumulative funding and the areas in which
such funding would offer benefits. Even if the programme
does not refer to this mechanism, cumulative funding can
still be applied if the operations are in line with the
programme’s priorities.
 The MAs and the Commission services/granting authority

(for the directly managed EU programme in question) may
then agree to launch coordinated calls.
These calls should:
- be coordinated between the MAs and the Commission
services/granting authority and ideally be launched at the
same time;
- mention that if the applicant chooses to apply for both

instruments’ calls and if both applications are accepted, the
19
project can receive cumulative funding (i.e. support from
both instruments);
-spell out that, for each grant, the applicable procedures and
eligibility rules are to be complied with.
- define the funding rates and conditions that will apply in
the following three scenarios:
(i) if the applicant chooses to apply for both instruments’
calls and both applications are accepted;
(ii) if the applicant chooses to apply for both instruments’

calls, but only one of the applications is accepted;
(iii) if the applicant chooses to apply for only one of the two
instruments’ calls.
In addition, the calls should indicate:

- the eligibility rules (depending on the funding source, there
may be two separate sets of eligibility rules), the cost-
eligibility period, the project duration, the reporting periods,
the deadlines for approval of the two grants (the relevant
MAs and the granting authority for the directly managed EU
programme. should coordinate the deadlines in advance)
- the funding rates that will be applied under both instruments

(under the respective legal rules). The combined funding
rates must not exceed 100% of the eligible costs and must
comply with the State aid rules.
- the content that applicants should present in their proposals

(more information is provided below under ‘allocation for
support’).
20
 Proposals should include all the elements that the MA and
the granting authority for the directly managed EU
programme will evaluate in their respective selection
processes.
 The selection and evaluation of proposals will be conducted

separately for each call, according to each instrument’s
mechanisms and rules.
 Selection under one call is not a guarantee of selection

under the other.
 Proposals must indicate whether or not the applicant will

apply in response to the other instrument’s call.
If the answer is ‘yes’, the need for efficient coordination of
funding instruments means that the application must also
indicate whether or not the applicant intends to proceed with
the potentially co-funded project if the project is (i) selected
only by the MA or (ii) selected only by the granting
authority under the directly managed EU programme.
 If only one of the applications is successful, the responsible

authority (the MA or the direct management granting
authority) concludes a grant agreement with the beneficiary
Allocation of support in line with the rules of the respective fund/instrument. For
example, if the agreement is with the MA (for support under
a cohesion policy programme), CPR and EU State aid rules
apply and the document setting out the conditions for
support is issued.
 In case of application and selection under both calls, the

beneficiary should conclude two separate grant agreements
– one with the MA, so-called document setting out the
conditions for support, and another with the granting
authority for the directly managed EU programme. Each
grant agreement should (i) state the applicable rules of the
respective fund/instrument and (ii) indicate the link to the
other grant. A grant agreement under a directly managed EU
programme is flagged as a ‘synergy action’ in the Data
Sheet (either during grant preparation or during a grant
amendment) and corresponding optional provisions will be
activated.
 The respective authorities (MAs and granting authorities
for directly managed programmes) must ensure that the
combined funding rates applied at the level of operation do
not exceed 100% of eligible costs.
 Under shared management, the funding rate applied at the
level of an operation and the co-financing rate at the level of
the relevant priority may differ. In the synergy actions, the
21
co-financing rate at the priority level is to be taken into
account, but ultimately it will be the funding rate at the level
of the operation as set in the document setting out the
conditions for support that will be used for purposes of
reconciliation with the funding rate in the directly managed
programme and ensuring that not more than 100% is
covered by the Union budget.
Implementation
 In order to allow 100% financing from the Union budget in

line with the intention for synergy actions, there should be a
single declaration of expenditure made to the Commission
for the given synergy project. This single declaration should
be made from the shared management authorities to the
Commission in a payment application (and cover the
eligible costs declared by the beneficiary to the MA which
would be added as additional information by the MA in this
payment application to the Commission). In this manner, the
prohibition of double declaration of expenditure to the
Commission under Article 63(9) of the CPR will not be
infringed for the purposes of the payments under shared
management.
 The beneficiary must therefore firstly declare all eligible

expenditure to the MA in accordance with the terms of the
Implementation, grant.
monitoring &
 The MA informs the beneficiary when the expenditure is
control
included in a payment application to the Commission under
shared management. This applies to any payment
application submitted in line with Article 91 CPR: for the
ERDF programmes, the Member State shall submit a
maximum of six payment applications per programme, per
Fund and per accounting year. Every year, one payment
application may be submitted at any time in each time
period between the following dates: 28 February, 31 May,
31 July, 31 October, 30 November and 31 December.
 A copy of a declaration from beneficiary to the MA
(together with a copy of the MA information to beneficiary
confirming that the expenditure was included in a payment
application to the Commission) will then be attached as a
supporting document to the payment application introduced
in eGrants by the beneficiary.
 Under no circumstances should costs be first included in a

payment application under the directly managed grant as
22
this would render them ineligible for shared management.
 With regard to the payment application submitted by the

MA to the Commission, the contribution from the ERDF
follows the rules on the co-financing rate and maximum
support from the funds for each of the priorities set out in
Article 112 CPR (co-financing at priority level). The
contribution from the directly managed programme does not
count towards this co-financing rate and is to be presented
as a national (public) contribution.
 It is noted that payment applications under shared

management are made at the level of priorities and not per
operation. The MA should specify for each payment
application the amounts related to the synergy projects
within each priority.
 Once the expenditure is included in a payment application

to the Commission by the MA, the beneficiary/coordinator
will upload in eGrants a copy of the declaration submitted to
the MA (together with a copy of the MA information to
beneficiary confirming that the expenditure was included in
a payment application to the Commission) and provide
information on the co-financing rate applied/to be applied at
the level of operation and at the level of the priority axis by
the MA and at the same time enter all information on the
implementation of the action as required by the rules of the
directly managed programme (using the Funding and
Tenders Portal for the electronic management of EU
grants).
 This means that the beneficiary will not be able to be paid

by the direct management until this copy of the declaration
to the MA is not submitted, meaning waiting for a
maximum of 2 months.
 Both granting authorities should have sufficient information

and evidence on the other existing or planned EU financing
to avoid double-financing throughout the life cycle of a
synergy action. So long as the contributions are capped at a
certain amount on the basis of a coordinated percentage of
eligible costs, overall combined EU support will not exceed
total costs.
 The responsibility for ensuring the compliance with State

aid rules is verified.
 The implementation of this approach will not require any

additional measures to be taken by the programme
23
authorities under shared management other than informing
the beneficiary of the date when the relevant expenditure is
declared to the Commission.
Monitoring
 No exception to the rules is made for cumulative funding for

the purposes of ERDF reporting. Annex VII CPR is to be
completed and ERDF contributions are to be taken into
account.
 For the purposes of payment applications in line with Annex

XXIII CPR, ERDF contributions are to be classified as EU
funding. By contrast, contributions from the directly
managed instruments are to be presented under the public
(national) tab.
 The MA and the direct management granting authority set

the deadlines for reporting and payment according to the
applicable rules in order to allow for the sequential approach
described above (i.e. first declaration to MA (and from the
MA to the Commission) then copy to the directly managed
instrument).
 Beneficiaries must follow the rules for implementation,

monitoring and control of all the instruments/funds
involved. If the granting authority of the directly managed
programme/fund requires a certificate on the financial
statements (CFS) in the directly managed grant, the CFS
auditor may also rely on audit certificates on the shared
management expenditure (insofar as they cover the same
costs and identical eligibility conditions).
 Projects can receive pre-financing or advance payments in

line with the applicable legal rules and the pre-agreed
funding rate.
Important to know

EU State aid rules apply to the part of the project financed by the ERDF. Public funding
cumulation rules set out in the EU State aid rules establishing the total public funding possible
for the project/activity need to be also verified and correctly applied.
24
In the case of cumulative funding, are the national funding body or the beneficiaries still
required to contribute a part of the funding?
That depends on the funding rates set at project level for both funding sources. In the case of
the ERDF, State aid rules apply and determine the maximum permissible funding rate at
operational level. In order to verify compliance with the maximum permissible funding rate,
all public funding at project level must be taken into account, including support received
from, for example, the ERDF and HE and in any form whatsoever.
4. European Partnerships
The use of the ERDF as a national contribution to Co-funded and Institutionalised European
Partnerships
‘European Partnership’ means an initiative in which the EU and private and/or public partners
(such as industry, public bodies or foundations) commit to jointly supporting the development
and implementation of a programme of R&I activities. A Strategic Research and Innovation
Agenda – that all partners share and commit to – underpins every European Partnership. This
long-term vision is translated into concrete activities through annual work programmes.
European Partnerships must state their concrete objectives and targets, together with a set of
corresponding key performance indicators.
In accordance with Article 73(4) CPR, MAs may decide to directly provide support from the
ERDF to operations selected under a programme co‑funded by HE (such as a Co-funded or
Institutionalised European Partnership).
Article 15(3) of the HE Regulation states that financial contributions from ERDF
programmes16 may be considered a contribution from the participating Member State to a Co-
funded or Institutionalised European Partnership, provided this complies with the CPR rules.
Bodies implementing programmes co-funded by HE must be identified as intermediate bodies
of the relevant ERDF programme (Article 71(5) CPR). This makes it easier to coordinate and
synchronise HE, the relevant ERDF programme and national support. ERDF programmes
may cover (part of) the national contribution for participation in such European Partnerships.
A decision to contribute to a partnership must result from a selection process that has
complied with cohesion policy rules.
Furthermore and similarly to the Seal of Excellence, MAs may provide such a contribution
directly (without the need for a competitive call and a separate selection procedure) to
operations that have been selected under a programme co-funded by HE in line with Article
73(4) CPR. However, as is also the case for the Seal of Excellence, MAs should still conduct
a simplified assessment, checking that these projects comply with points (a), (b) and (g) of
16
This guidance document focuses on the synergies between HE and ERDF programmes, but a similar logic
applies to the other programmes listed in Article 15(3).
25
Article 73(2) CPR. Such operations have to (i) be consistent with the programme, including
with the relevant strategies underlying the programme, and provide an effective contribution
to the achievement of the specific objectives of the programme, (ii) fall within the scope of an
enabling condition and be consistent with the corresponding strategies and planning
documents established for the fulfilment of that enabling condition, and (iii) fall within the
scope of the relevant fund and be attributed to a type of intervention.
MAs may similarly apply the categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of
eligible costs established under HE to these operations.
Compliance with State aid rules can be ensured by respecting compatibility conditions of
Article 25c GBER which offers possibilities to apply Horizon Europe eligible costs and
funding rates to the research and development projects selected under a programme co-funded
by Horizon fulfilling conditions set out in this Article.
ERDF programme contributions to European Partnerships must comply with the rules on the
prohibition of the double-declaration of expenditure laid down in Article 63(9) CPR. The
same costs must not be declared twice to the Commission. Two types of European
Partnerships are relevant to the implementation of Article 15(3) of the HE Regulation.
 Co-funded European Partnerships (supported through a ‘programme co-funded
action’) are based on a grant agreement between the Commission and a consortium of
partners (typically national ministries or R&I funding agencies). The partners commit
for financial and in-kind contributions. These are partnerships involving EU countries
with national/regional research funders and other public authorities at the core of the
consortium. The EU provides co-funding for a programme implemented by entities
that manage and fund R&I activities. The main activities developed by Co-funded
European Partnerships include joint calls through which transnational R&I projects are
funded, and in which each partner provides the budget for its entities participating in
the projects and the EU provides top-up funding.
 Institutionalised European Partnerships are R&I programmes. They can be
undertaken by (i) several Member States (on the basis of a decision by the Council and
the European Parliament in accordance with Article 185 TFEU), (ii) bodies
established by a decision of the Council under Article 187 TFEU (for example, joint
undertakings), or (iii) European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)
Knowledge and Innovation Communities in compliance with the EIT Regulation and
the EIT Strategic Innovation Agenda. They are expected to have a long-term
perspective and to involve some integration.
Figure 1 below gives an overview of all the Co-Funded, Co-Programmed and Institutionalised
European Partnerships under the first Strategic Plan 2019-2024 of HE. The 20 Co-funded and
Institutionalised European Partnerships with Member State participation are relevant to the
application of Article 15(3) of the HE Regulation.
26
Figure 1. Overview of the four clusters of European Partnerships
Good to know
Co-programmed European Partnerships are based on a memorandum of understanding
signed between the Commission and partners other than the EU. These partnerships are
not eligible to use the ERDF as a national contribution because there is no option to
combine funding (only parallel or sequential funding is possible). For these types of
partnerships, it is possible to use the ERDF as a national contribution to the partnerships’
additional activities if these are identified in the additional activities plan. The European
Open Science Cloud is currently the only Co-programmed European Partnership with
Member State participation.
Relevant legislation CPR Articles 63(9), 71(5) and 73(4) and Recital
(61)
Horizon Europe Article 15(3)
Related legislation GBER Articles 25c and 25d (State aid)
Policy considerations/potential benefits
European Partnerships are set up to deliver on EU priorities. By teaming up with both the
public and private sectors, they make it possible to address global challenges that require
critical mass and a long-term vision that the partners agree on and commit to. Partnerships not
only launch joint calls, but also carry out a variety of additional activities to support the
societal, market and regulatory uptake of R&I results.
27
European Partnerships are a key driver for synergies because they make it possible to pool
and coordinate the use of resources available from different EU and national instruments,
programmes and funds. They also help to strengthen the ERA by stimulating cross-border
cooperation, aligning R&I plans, improving skills and increasing the absorption capacity of
European businesses. The particular goal of a European Partnership with Member State
participation is to achieve scientific, managerial, and financial integration of national research
programmes in its given field. The participation of the ‘Widening’ Member States in EU R&I
partnerships was limited in the past because of a lack of experience or available funding for
transnational collaboration. European Partnerships are intended to address EU priorities, so it
is important to strengthen the participation of under-represented countries, enhance
complementarities across the EU and share the resulting benefits. This is particularly relevant
because some HE priorities are only addressed by European Partnerships. This means that
Member States must participate if their entities are to be able to take part in the calls and other
activities launched by the partnerships.
Allowing contributions from ERDF programmes to be recognised as national contributions in
HE partnerships provides a major incentive for transnational collaboration. It also increases
the impact of R&I investments from different EU funds by aligning investment with common
EU priorities.
The new rules make it easier to pool ERDF and HE funds in co-funded Horizon Partnerships,
thereby creating opportunities for the regions to team up with other EU countries and regions
to address related smart specialisation priorities. The main gain is the opportunity to increase
the participation of less developed regions and Member States in transnational collaboration
within the partnerships framework.
The co-funding provided by the EU through partnerships can therefore create particular added
value when the priorities identified under HE and through S3 correspond to or complement
each other.
Main steps in the process - Co-funded European Partnerships
 National authorities/stakeholders should enter into dialogue

with their MA well in advance of the formal negotiation of
the programme with the Commission.
 MA and national/regional stakeholders should identify R&I
priorities in programmes in compliance with S3 priorities,
plan appropriate cohesion policy fund measures and open a
Preparation / dialogue with the Co-funded European Partnership’s
programming coordinators/contact points in order to understand the types
of activities and resources that need to be planned.
 For Co-funded European Partnerships, everything is agreed
in the context of a grant agreement – including the EU
reimbursement rate of the eligible costs and the overall
budget for the whole duration of the partnership. The annual
work plan, which must be approved by the Commission,
describes the partnership’s activities. The consortium itself
28
decides how to allocate EU funding respecting the rules
established in the document setting out the conditions of
support.
 The total EU contribution is calculated as a percentage of
the total eligible costs. The funding rate under HE for Co-
funded European Partnerships is usually 30% (50% in
exceptional cases). A consortium has complete discretion
when deciding how to allocate the EU’s contribution to the
planned partnership between the beneficiaries who are party
to the HE grant agreement – and this may result in higher or
lower funding rates for specific activities and/or
beneficiaries. If an ERDF programme provides, in line with
its objectives, support from the ERDF to a programme co-
funded by HE, the bodies implementing the activities
resulting from the programme co-funded by HE (e.g.
national funding bodies) should be designated as
intermediate bodies under the relevant programmes. In line
with Article 71(3) CPR, arrangements between the MA and
the intermediate body(ies) shall be recorded in writing.
 The contribution from an ERDF programme will be for a
specific project funded at national or regional level, and the
recipient of this contribution would be the beneficiary of
this project (the term ‘operation’ is used in the cohesion
policy context).
 Plans to contribute to the projects selected within the
European Partnerships with some national contribution
should be set out with an explanation in the ERDF
programme.
 The contribution of an ERDF programme to a European
Partnership must fall within the scope of the applicable
enabling condition (i.e. S3) and must be consistent with the
corresponding programme-specific objectives and scope.
The contribution to a European Partnership can also be
identified early on, in the relevant S3, as a measure to
enhance cooperation in priority areas with partners from
outside a given Member State.
 For operations selected under a programme of activities co-
funded by HE, the MA may decide to grant support from the
ERDF programme directly, provided that it complies with
the requirements set out in Article 73(4) CPR (relating to
compliance with the programme objectives, the scope of the
Allocation of support fund and applicable enabling conditions). MAs may also
apply the categories, maximum amounts and methods of
calculation of eligible costs established under HE (these are
to be established in the document setting out the conditions
for support).
 The financial management of a Co-funded European
29
Partnership is the same as for any other HE project (i.e.
beneficiaries from the grant agreement carry out activities
and report their costs to the Commission).
 The reported costs must comply with HE’s cost-eligibility
rules and with the specific rules for the programme’s co-
fund actions as defined in the Model Grant Agreement (e.g.
the rules for the selection of transnational projects need to
be followed). Both in kind and financial contributions are
possible, provided that they are eligible under cohesion
policy funds and Horizon Europe.
 For HE, eligible costs are reimbursed in line with the
applicable funding rate (this is usually 30% of the overall
amount raised by the consortium, which can include
‘financial contributions under programmes co-financed by
the ERDF’ in line with Article 15(3) of the HE Regulation).
 The contribution from HE is transferred via the coordinator
to the national funding body and used as additional funding
for the programme of activities.
 The consortium implementing the programme’s co-funded
actions manages the EU contribution autonomously and
decides (for instance, in their consortium agreement) how to
allocate and distribute funds to activities and beneficiaries.
Beneficiaries of the programme’s co-funded action (the
national funding bodies) report their eligible costs to the
MA. A copy of the declaration is shared with the HE
granting authority.
 The same process as for cumulative funding applies when
an ERDF programme makes a contribution (see above).
Practical example
 A Member State or region participates in a consortium of national funding bodies in a

Co-funded European Partnership.
 The Member State or region intends to use an ERDF programme to cover part of the
national contribution to the Co-funded European Partnership.
 The national funding body (i.e. the ERDF programme intermediate body) reports to
HE that it is providing financial support/funding to its beneficiaries to the value of
EUR 100 million. The national funding body receives a 30% reimbursement from HE
(EUR 30 million).
30
 The remaining EUR 70 million can be co-funded from the ERDF programme (e.g.
with a 50% co-funding rate; the co-financing rate of the programme priority must be
respected – Article 112 CPR).
 The total cost of EUR 100 million would therefore be covered as follows: EUR 30
million from HE, EUR 35 million from the ERDF and EUR 35 million from the
national budget.
 Expenditure and costs should be declared and reported in line with the rules for
cumulative funding set out above.
Figure 2. How does a Co-funded European Partnership work?
Practical examples of a transnational joint call - beneficiary selected at national

level by a national funding agency.
The following examples are hypothetical. The final decision lies with the relevant Member
State.
Each Member State involved in a Co-funded European Partnership typically funds its
participants at national level through its own national procedures and following its own
national rules.
From a Horizon Europe co-funded partnership Model Grant Agreement perspective, it will
31
be considered a recipient of ‘financial support to third party’.
From a national perspective, this national beneficiary may be one or other of the following:
1. Fully financed by a programme co-financed by the ERDF.
o The national beneficiary signs only one national grant agreement with the
national funding agency. This sets out the terms and conditions under which
the national funding agency will disburse the ERDF’s money.
o The national funding agency is considered an intermediate body (from a

CPR perspective) and reports its costs (i.e. the ERDF funding it has
provided to the national beneficiary) to both the HE granting authority[1] and
its competent MA. These then both report back to the Commission.
2. Co-financed by the ERDF and other national source(s) handled by the same
national funding agency.
o The national beneficiary signs one national grant agreement setting out the
terms and conditions under which the national funding agency will disburse
the ERDF’s money. The national beneficiary then signs another national
grant agreement setting out the terms and conditions under which the
national funding agency will disburse the other amount of nationally
sourced money.
o The national funding agency is considered an intermediate body (from a

CPR perspective) and reports both:
- the cost of providing the ERDF funding to the national beneficiary

(it reports this to the competent MA);
- the aggregated cost[2] of providing both the ERDF funding and the
other national funding that the national funding agency provided to
the national beneficiary (it reports this to the HE granting
authority[3]).
For both the above cases, the national funding agency has to follow the procedure for
cumulative funding (see section 3 above on cumulative funding), and upload onto eGrants
a copy of a declaration from beneficiary to the MA (together with a copy of the MA
information to beneficiary confirming that the expenditure was included in a payment
application to the Commission) as a supporting document to the payment application
introduced.
Under the cost category ‘financial support to third party’ in the HE Co-funded European
[1]
Partnership Model Grant Agreement
32
[2]
[3]
Important to know
How are contributions and commitments made from HE?

Commitments and contributions for Co-funded European Partnerships are made in five stages:
1. indicative up-front commitment
2. overall commitment when signing the grant agreement
3. yearly commitment when defining the annual work programme (e.g. defining budget
contribution to the call)
4. final commitment when agreeing to the ranking/selection list and signing grant
agreements
5. contribution (i.e. payment of funding).
If the partnership becomes the intermediate body in the ERDF programme in line with Article
71(5) CPR, the written arrangement (the partnership) between the MA and this intermediate
body must clearly state each party’s responsibilities regarding the execution of the tasks that
the MA has delegated to this intermediate body.
Main steps in the process - Institutionalised European Partnerships (Article

185 and 187 TFEU)
 Contributions and activities are defined in a decision of the

European Parliament and Council (Article 185 TFEU) or in
a Council regulation (Article 187 TFEU). The EU’s
Preparation / contribution must be at a minimum matched by the
programming contribution of the non-EU partner.
 Where an ERDF programme provides, in line with its

objectives, support to a partnership that is also co-funded by
HE, the MA of the relevant programme designates the joint
undertaking (Article 187 TFEU) or decentralised
33
implementing structure (Article 185 TFEU)17 as an
intermediate body in line with Article 71(5) CPR. Article
71(3) CPR requires arrangements between the MA and
intermediate body(ies) to be recorded in writing.
 The contribution from an ERDF programme is made to a

specific project. The recipient of such an ERDF contribution
is the beneficiary of the project (the project is known as an
operation in the context of cohesion policy).
 A contribution to an Institutionalised European Partnership
should be set out with a justification in the section on
synergies and complementarities of the programme.
 A contribution to an Institutionalised European Partnership

must meet the criteria of the applicable enabling condition
(i.e. S3) and be consistent with the corresponding
programme objective and scope, in line with Article 73(4)
CPR. The contribution to an Institutionalised European
Partnership can also be identified early on, in the relevant
S3, as a measure to enhance cooperation in priority areas
with partners outside a given Member State. A written
arrangement between an MA and intermediate body (the
partnership) should clearly set out the responsibilities for
carrying out these tasks.
 The MA may decide to grant support from the ERDF

programme directly, provided this complies with the
requirements set out in Article 73(4) CPR. MAs may also
apply the categories, maximum amounts and methods of
calculation of eligible costs established under HE (to be
established in the document setting up the conditions for
support).
 The funding that participating states provide to their national
entities in joint undertaking projects is counted as a financial
contribution to the joint undertaking. In line with the
Allocation of support relevant rules on the management of contributions from the
participating states18, the participating states must report to
the governing board by 31 January every year on the
indicative financial contributions to be made in that
financial year. When doing so, participating states should
specify what proportion of these contributions comes from
cohesion policy funds.
 In the case of central management of financial
contributions (where the beneficiary signs one single grant
agreement with the joint undertaking which implements the
EU and national contributions), the ERDF programme
17
In HE there is only one Article 185 TFEU initiative: the European Metrology Partnership run by EURAMET.
18
Article 12 of Council Regulation 2021/2085 establishing the joint undertakings under Horizon Europe .
34
resources are paid to the implementation structure after
proposals have been selected and national/regional
contributions have been identified. HE rules apply
exclusively in this case – at both the call evaluation and
selection, and at the payment, stages.
 In the case of the coordination of payments, the national
authority does not transfer funds to the implementation
structure, but reimburses the beneficiaries directly on the
basis of a national grant agreement. National or ERDF
funding rules apply to the entire national contribution.
However, the call, evaluation and selection are subject to
HE rules exclusively.
Regardless of the type of implementation of the
contribution, within the same call there can be actions
funded from ERDF funds together with HE or Digital
Europe Programme funds.
Main steps in the process – applicable for both Co-funded and

Institutionalised European Partnerships (Article 185 or 187 TFEU)
Preparation/  New European Partnerships are identified as part of the

programming strategic planning of HE and the related strategic
coordinating process. The Member States are fully
involved in line with Article 6(5) of the Specific
Programme of Horizon Europe.
Implementation,  Partnerships need to establish a monitoring system in line

monitoring & control with the requirements set out in Article 45, Annex III and
Annex V to the HE Regulation. This should feed into the
same database as the other HE components. The
aggregated data related to proposals and projects funded
under the European Partnerships will thus become
available through eCORDA and the Horizon Dashboard.
In addition to the HE key impact pathways, a set of
common indicators has been developed for European
Partnerships in order to monitor their performance against
the criteria set out in the legal basis, such as additionality,
openness and synergies. Monitoring should allow for an
assessment over time of achievements and progress
towards impacts, and the identification of potential needs
for corrective measures. The results of this monitoring
will feed into the biennial monitoring of all European
Partnerships and HE evaluation cycles.
 In line with Article 72(1) CPR, the MA collects data on
operations, including the supporting projects selected by
the partnerships.
35
Important to know
How much of the national contributions can the ERDF programme cover?
The contribution from an ERDF programme can cover the national contributions in line with
the rules on co-financing and with the maximum amount of support from the funds for each
priority set in Article 112 CPR and Article 190 FR, provided that the requirements of Article
63(9) of the CPR are met.
Article 25c of the GBER provides State aid compatibility conditions to apply HE-eligible
costs and funding rates to research and development projects supported through a European
Partnership.
Can an ERDF programme cover all of the national contributions to the project - given that
we programme national co-financing according to priority rather than project?
Yes. The contribution comes from the relevant programme, which is itself subject to co-
financing rules. However, since the co-financing is set at priority level and not at operational
level, the EU’s budget can cover all of the national contributions to a specific operation.
Is it possible to use ERDF programmes not for financing projects but rather for an ‘in-kind’
contribution?
ERDF programmes can be used to cover the national contributions of Member States
participating in European Partnerships. It does not matter whether such contributions are
financial or in kind. There are no in-kind contributions from the participating Member States
for Institutionalised European Partnerships.
How can the MA for an ERDF programme ensure that a co-funded operation contributes to
the indicators set out in the programme?
Projects selected by European Partnerships can be supported if they meet the requirements set
out in points (a), (b) and (g) of paragraph 2 of Article 73 CPR. They must therefore contribute
to the achievement of programme indicators.
Is it possible to use the funds for other purposes if they are not spent on the financing of
partnership projects?
36
These contributions would go to identified projects after they have been evaluated and
selected by the governing board of the European Partnership. It would therefore not be
possible to return them.

State aid rules apply if the beneficiary of public funding granted from Member State
resources, including the ERDF, is an undertaking (and if all other cumulative conditions for
the presence of State aid, spelled of Article 107 (1) TFEU are met). Under the conditions
specified in Articles 25c of the GBER, co-funded research and development projects may
benefit from HE eligible costs and funding rates. This also applies to calls launched by
Partnerships based on Article 185 or Article 187 TFEU or in calls launched under programme
co-fund actions. Projects must be transnational projects (implemented by at least three
Member States, or alternatively two Member States and at least one associated country), and
must result from centrally organized calls for proposals to which HE funding rules apply (Art
25c (3) GBER on the categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of eligible
costs). If all applicable conditions set out in the GBER are met, the authority granting the aid
does not have to carry out a separate State aid assessment nor does it have to notify the aid to
the Commission. Where funding is subject to State aid rules and is not in line with all
conditions set forth in Article 25c of the GBER, simplified treatment of these projects under
State aid rules does not apply.
What is the veto right in Institutionalised European Partnerships?
In line with Article 10(1)(c) of the HE Regulation, contributions from one participating
Member State must be used to finance the participation of entities established in that
participating Member State. The participating Member States therefore remain in control of
their national contributions because they can veto the allocation of national funds to a specific
beneficiary (on exceptional grounds and for duly justified reasons) without any impact on the
proposal’s eligibility for EU funding.
Can ERDF programmes support membership of/participation fees for other EU bodies or
networks (e.g. EIT partnerships)?
An operation co-financed by the ERDF must fall within the scope of the ERDF Regulation.
Article 5(1)(f) of the ERDF Regulation allows the ERDF to support networking, cooperation
and the exchange of experience and activities involving innovation clusters (including those
that bring businesses, research organisations and public authorities together). Such
cooperation can be promoted through an international organisation.
Pursuant to Article 63(4) CPR, all or part of an operation may be implemented outside a
Member State, including outside the EU, provided that the operation contributes to the
programme’s objectives.
37
Membership fees of international organisations do not therefore meet the above-mentioned
conditions and are not eligible for ERDF support because the objectives pursued by
international organisations are generally too broad to correspond to a specific operation that
pursues the funding programme’s objectives.
By contrast, participation fees usually correspond to more specific and concrete activities and
may therefore be eligible for ERDF support – if they correspond to a concrete action carried
out by an international organisation that falls within the scope of the ERDF Regulation and
contributes to the funding programme objective(s).
5. Combined funding (Teaming)
It is important to optimise and maximise the benefits that R&I can provide to society, the
environment and the wider economy, together with its contribution to the achievement of EU
goals. EU funding must therefore be coherent and exploit potential synergies. This is
particularly the case for a Teaming action that supports the creation or modernisation of a
centre of excellence in a widening country by teaming it up with a leading research institution
(advanced partner) in a different country. This requires complementary funding from a
national, regional, EU or private source. Such an action is therefore designated as a ‘synergy’
action in the HE work programme. Teaming actions are expected to become an influential and
meaningful bridge particularly between S3 and excellence in R&I, thereby strengthening the
ERA.
Related legislation GBER Article 25d (State aid)
The HE work programme designates Teaming actions as ‘synergy’

actions. Cohesion policy programmes may provide complementary
funding to a Teaming project for a set of eligible costs that are
Preparation/
separate from the costs covered by HE, provided the requirements
programming
of Article 73(4) CPR are met.
Two separate calls are opened (the ERDF and HE). The HE
Allocation of proposal must include a clear description of the complementary
project supported by the ERDF or other funding sources. If
support
relevant, the description should include the cost categories,
technical infrastructure specifications, preliminary planning for
38
building and installations, cost-benefit analysis, etc. This
description will also be subject to the evaluation undertaken by
independent experts according to HE rules and selection criteria.
The ERDF programme supports R&D projects that complement

HE, albeit with a different set of eligible costs. Amended GBER
Article 25d establishes compatibility conditions to grant State aid
(including from ERDF resources) to co-funded R&D projects that
complement Teaming actions (HE-eligible costs and funding rates
apply in such cases). Moreover, amended Article 25d GBER
allows public investment aid to cover as much as 70% of the
infrastructure investment made under a Teaming action (also
Implementation subject to certain conditions). The project proposal undergoes a
single evaluation that covers both of the project’s parts (i.e. the HE
part and the part relating to a chosen complementary funding
source such as a cohesion policy programme). This is required in
order to be able to apply amended Article 25(d) GBER, permitting
the managers of the complementary funding source to apply the
categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of
eligible costs established under HE to the operation in question.
6. Upstream and downstream synergies
Upstream/downstream synergies emerge when EU support provides (primarily through HE

and ERDF programmes) a coordinated and seamless framework for all steps of the R&I
innovation process (from capacity-building and basic research to commercialisation and
uptake of innovative solutions by private enterprises). Such synergies provide particular
added value when they emerge in areas that are linked to key EU policy goals and offer the
prospect of making substantial improvements to the wider economy.
The development of such synergies requires close cooperation between the relevant actors –
particularly the EU and national authorities involved in the programming and implementation
of HE and ERDF support.
For example, HE missions19 provide fresh ways to address the challenges identified in their
missions, and transformative solutions that can help accelerate the uptake of the best available
technologies. Practical examples of possibly synergies of the five EU missions with ERDF are
outlined in the Annex to this note.
19
For more detail on EU Missions in Horizon Europe: https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-
innovation/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/eu-missions-
horizon-europe_en#what
39
To boost this uptake, the new Horizon Dissemination & Exploitation strategy will promote an
integrated approach by creating and maintaining mission result portfolios, and by combining
them with an integrated ecosystem of services (e.g. the Horizon Results Platform and Horizon
Booster) and initiatives (e.g. events and workshops). This will bring clear sets of R&I results
to the attention of national and regional investors and policymakers. The new Horizon
Dissemination & Exploitation strategy also emphasises HE work programme topics, so that
call applicants will consider whether they can harness potential synergies with other EU
programmes.
The lessons learned from the fourth Interreg Central Europe call for the exploitation of the
results of existing projects under Horizon 2020 (and other EU programmes) will be taken into
account when deciding how to exploit HE’s R&I results using the Interreg programmes (as an
additional way of increasing regions’ access to high-quality R&I results). Future efforts in this
direction will benefit from the knowledge and experience gained from matchmaking
initiatives (for example, the new Horizon-Interreg synergies-mapping tool that combines
thematic and regional information in order to identify potential synergies between these two
funding streams).
These approaches and solutions can also help public administrations to develop new
capabilities and provide new services. This is particularly important for less developed and
peripheral regions, which are less able to absorb new technologies and manage systemic
transformation.
Many of these regions can therefore scale up demonstrators, innovation and technology
transfer measures using cohesion policy resources to help achieve programme objectives.
Regions that have identified priorities in the strategies related to a particular mission area may
develop synergies with that mission20 to support the development and/or downstream
deployment of new approaches to developing transformative pathways. For example, HE
missions can provide directionality; boost regional development; promote cross-disciplinary
and multi-level governance; engage the general public and local/regional stakeholders; and
publicise cohesion policy investment and access to new networks, policy learning platforms
and funding instruments.
Regions play an important role to roll-out the hydrogen economy, in particular through
Hydrogen Valleys21. They ensure hydrogen production, transportation, storage and use at
20
EU Missions are a novelty of the Horizon Europe research and innovation programme for the years 2021-
2027. EU Missions are a coordinated effort by the Commission to pool the necessary resources in terms of
funding programmes, policies and regulations, as well as other activities. They also aim to mobilise and activate
public and private actors, such as EU Member States, regional and local authorities, research institutes, farmers
and land managers, entrepreneurs and investors to create real and lasting impact. Missions will engage with the
general public to boost societal uptake of new solutions and approaches. There are five EU Missions (Adaptation
to Climate Change;Cancer; Restore our Oceans and Waters by 2030; 100 Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities by
2030; A Soil Deal for Europe).
21
Hydrogen Valleys Smart Specialisation partnership and hydrogen pilot (Hydrogen valleys - Smart
Specialisation Platform (europa.eu)
40
regional or local level, and are key to meet the REPowerEU objectives22. The Clean
Hydrogen Joint Undertaking has longstanding experience in supporting the establishment of
Hydrogen Valleys in the EU. Further roll-out of this successful concept across all Member
States will require substantial pooling of resources.
For example, renewable hydrogen will be key to replace natural gas, coal and oil in hard-to-
decarbonise industries and transport. REPowerEU sets a target of 10 million tonnes of
domestic renewable hydrogen production and 10 million tonnes of renewable hydrogen
imports by 2030. The regions play an important role to roll-out the hydrogen economy in the
EU, in particular through Hydrogen Valleys. Hydrogen Valleys ensure hydrogen production,
transportation, storage and use at regional or local level and are key to meet the REPowerEU
objectives. The Clean Hydrogen Joint Undertaking, and its predecessors, have longstanding
experience supporting the establishment of Hydrogen Valleys in the EU. Currently, there are
23 Hydrogen Valleys in the EU in ten Member States. Further roll-out of this successful
concept across all Member States will require substantial pooling of resources.
Example: Synergies in the context of the new European Innovation Agenda
Synergies can support implementing the new European Innovation agenda and in particular
flagship 3, which aims to strengthen and to interconnect regional innovation ecosystems and
to reduce the innovation divide.
22
REPowerEU (COM(2022) 230 final) sets a target of 10 million tonnes of domestic renewable hydrogen
production and 10 million tonnes of renewable hydrogen imports by 2030.
41
Annex 1
Synergies with EU Missions
EU Mission Adaptation to Climate Change
The Adaptation to Climate Change mission is intended to support at least 150 European
regions, local authorities and communities in their efforts to achieve climate resilience by
2030. It will provide general support for regions, local authorities and communities to help
them better understand, prepare for and manage climate risks and opportunities, to accelerate
their transformation toward climate resilience, and to deliver at least 75 large-scale climate
adaptation demonstrations on the ground.
The participation of Member States, regions and local authorities will play a crucial role in
implementing this mission because they are key agents of change. They can also deploy new
technologies, experiment with innovative solutions that address local needs, and help different
stakeholders achieve climate resilience.
The mission’s objectives are consistent with ERDF policy objectives 23 of a more competitive
and smarter Europe by promoting innovative and smart economic transformation and regional
ICT connectivity. It also contributes to the policy objective of a greener, low-carbon
transitioning towards a net zero carbon economy and resilient Europe by promoting clean and
fair energy transition, green and blue investment, the circular economy, climate change
mitigation and adaptation, risk prevention and management, and sustainable urban mobility.
Funding under these priorities could for instance be mobilised to scale up climate adaptation
solutions, using synergies with the funding mobilised by Horizon Europe. Regions and local
authorities can also sign the Mission Charter, to express their willingness to cooperate and
coordinate with other signatories so that they can mobilise resources and develop activities in
their respective territories with a view to achieving their climate adaptation goals.
The Mission Implementation Platform will support regions and local authorities, for example
by providing them with access to knowledge and technical assistance. Funding will be
available through the Horizon Europe work programmes for climate adaptation R&I projects
which could be executed by exploiting potential synergies with the ERDF.
EU Mission Cancer
The Cancer mission, together Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, intends to improve the lives of
more than 3 million people by 2030, through prevention, cure and, for those affected by
cancer including their families, to live longer and better. This overall goal is in line with the
ERDF policy objective of a more social and inclusive Europe.
23
Regulation (EU) 2021/1058 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 on the European
Regional Development Fund and on the Cohesion Fund, Article 3.
42
The creation of digital infrastructures is foreseen to support research and innovation (R&I) on
cancer control. The UNCAN.eu platform will collect data of different types and from different
sources. A virtual European Cancer Patient Digital Centre will enable cancer patients and
survivors to deposit their health data and receive information. Comprehensive Cancer
Infrastructures will be supported in order to address inequalities in access to high quality
cancer care e.g. by reinforcing research capacities and creating a network across Member
States and regions.
The participation of Member States, regions and local authorities is crucial in implementing
the envisaged actions as they are primarily responsible for the organisation of their health
systems. For example, improving the access to early screening or innovative cancer
treatments will require major investments into infrastructure, equipment, digitalisation, health
workforce and new care models, including telemedicine solutions to reach patients in rural
and remote areas.
The ERDF plays a significant role for improving cancer control. Many regions have smart
specialisation strategies in the area of health, including on cancer. Existing projects have a
huge potential for contributing to the mission’s objectives. Regions will be encouraged to
align with EU priorities and make further investments into R&I through orienting smart
specialisation priorities towards cancer innovation. Equally, Interreg can support cancer
patients seeking healthcare in another country by strengthening cross-border, transnational
and interregional cooperation.
Regions will be involved in the implementation through the future national cancer hubs in
each Member State. These will facilitate: (1) integration of the mission’s activities by
identifying synergies in cancer related policy initiatives and investments between EU,
national, regional and local level; (2) engagement of relevant national actors and stakeholders
going beyond the R&I and health systems to cover relevant areas in cancer control (such as
employment, education,); (3) policy dialogues on cancer; and (4) citizen engagement
activities.
EU Mission Restore our Ocean and Waters
The mission’s strategic objective is to restore the health of our ocean and waters by 2030 by
protecting and restoring marine and freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity, preventing and
eliminating pollution of our ocean, seas and waters and fostering carbon-neutrality and
circularity of the EU’s blue economy.
There is a special focus on regional engagement through area-based ‘lighthouses’. These are
conceived as research and innovation project portfolios for the development and deployment
of transformative solutions in four major European basins: Atlantic and Arctic basin; Baltic
and North Sea basin; Mediterranean Sea basin; Danube River and Black Sea basin.
The mission will be implemented in two phases: developing and piloting of solutions (2021-
2024) and deployment and upscaling (as of 2025) of these activities. While the Commission
has earmarked almost EUR 350 million from Horizon Europe for the period 2021-2023 to
43
support the first phase, the mobilisation of additional commitments and budgets from public
and private actors, including through the ERDF will be crucial for achieving the mission
objectives.
The concept of ‘associated regions’ is embedded in all relevant activities of the Mission Work
Programme. “Associated regions” are areas with ecosystems that can benefit from the
demonstration activities (e.g. neighbouring regions and/or regions in a different sea basin)
and/or less-developed regions, with the need to build capacity to implement the innovative
solutions developed under the different projects. These regions will benefit from financial
support to showcase the feasibility, replicability and upscale of innovative solutions. ERDF
could bring forward the implementation of innovative solutions at regional level. A Mission
Charter will collect pledges/actions and bring together all interested parties, from Member
States and Associated Countries to regions and local authorities, private entities, NGOs and
citizens.
EU Mission Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities
The mission aims to deliver at least 100 European climate-neutral and smart cities by 2030
and to ensure that these cities act as experimentation and innovation hubs to put all European
cities in a position to become climate-neutral by 2050.
With its city-driven approach and focus on place-based solutions, it contributes to the EU
ERDF policy objective of a greener, low-carbon transitioning towards a net zero carbon
economy and resilient Europe by promoting clean and fair energy transition, green and blue
investment, the circular economy, climate change mitigation and adaptation, risk prevention
and management, and sustainable urban mobility. It also contributes to the policy objective of
a Europe closer to citizens by fostering the sustainable and integrated development of all
types of territories and local initiatives, supporting tailor-made investment strategies at
territorial level, in cities and local communities, to address their diverse challenges, and
tapping into their development potential.
Through a Call for Expression of Interest, the mission invited cities to register their intention
to become climate-neutral by 2030. The expressions of interest were evaluated based on the
cities’ ambition, their levels of preparedness, their ongoing and planned commitment to
climate neutrality and reducing pollution, and their commitment to involving citizens and
relevant stakeholders in the city climate plan. The selected cities are invited to set-up a
Climate City Contract (CCC) with support of a Mission Platform. The CCC, not being a
legally binding instrument will be developed through an innovative process of co-creation
involving the cities, national/regional authorities, relevant stakeholders and the Commission.
It aligns with the regional smart specialisation strategy, put cities in the driver’s seat, based on
their actual needs. It will be a cross-sector, demand-based and bottom-up approach, with
specific commitments to deploy and scale-up innovative and smart solutions in relation to
climate neutrality across all relevant sectors. The CCC includes an agreed baseline; how the
city plans to implement these commitments by 2030; and an investment plan with relevant
funding and financing sources.
44
The Mission Platform will assist in particular those cities that are committing to climate
neutrality by 2030, ensure overall coherence and coordination throughout the process and
report regularly on the progress towards the CCC.
With signature of the CCC, cities receive a ‘Mission label’ acknowledging the rigorous
evaluation process and the quality and feasibility of their commitments. It will unlock targeted
funding opportunities in EU funding programmes and offers an opportunity for regions,
Member States and other public actors to support highly visible activities on climate neutrality
in pioneering cities to help carry forward efforts to meet European Green Deal targets. Since
activities under the CCC will have been already vetted as environmentally sustainable in line
with the EU framework to facilitate sustainable investment, the label will boost investor
awareness and confidence. This will make it easier for the cities to attract financing for their
climate-related activities from additional public and private investors.
EU Mission Soil Deal for Europe
The mission will pioneer, showcase and accelerate the transition to healthy soils through
ambitious actions in 100 living labs and lighthouses within territorial settings. This will be
combined with an ambitious transdisciplinary R&I programme, a robust, harmonised soil
monitoring framework and increased soil literacy and communication to engage with citizens.
The mission objectives are fully in line the ERDF policy objectives of a greener, low-carbon
transitioning towards a net zero carbon economy and resilient Europe by promoting clean and
fair energy transition, green and blue investment, the circular economy, climate change
mitigation and adaptation, risk prevention and management, and sustainable urban mobility.
The ERDF can play a significant role regarding soil health. Three-quarters of NUTS 2 regions
have smart specialisation strategies in agri-food, which means that there is a sizeable potential
for projects contributing to mission’s objectives from the research and innovation angle. The
mission will make use of the thematic smart specialisation platform on agri-food to capitalise
on cross-regional cooperation and favour the emergence of common innovation investment
projects in areas relevant to the mission.
The thematic priority “Greener, carbon-free Europe” will allow to scale up mission results.
Regions which have identified in their smart specialisation strategies priorities related to
sustainable soil and land management may capitalize on solutions developed and tested in the
Mission’s Living Labs and Lighthouses and deploy downstream at a larger scale.
Interreg can also contribute very effectively to the implementation of the mission by
establishing cooperation on the Mission’s objectives across borders (cross-border,
transnational and interregional cooperation). Examples include: pilots or demonstrations of
restoration of wetlands in cross-border or in north European transnational areas or cooperation
on water erosion in Southern European transnational areas and cross-border river basins (e.g.
Danube) or cooperation on spatial planning approaches which take due account of land/soil
management.
45
Annex 2
Example on cumulative funding for other directly managed instruments (Digital Europe
programme)
Synergy funding related to European Digital Innovation Hubs in Digital Europe Programme
EDIHs are a joint investment of the EU and the MS and the associated countries of Digital
Europe Programme. This is reflected in the two-stage selection process described in the
Digital Europe Programme (Regulation (EU) 2021/694 of the European Parliament and of the
Council). First, Member States select and shortlist candidate entities. From this list, in a
second stage, the Commission selects those entities that will make up the network of EDIHs.
The selection is based on criteria of relevance, implementation and impact, but also taking
into account geographical, sectorial and technological coverage objectives, and the available
budget per country. Digital Europe Programme co-finances selected grants with a maximum
of 50% and Member States may co-finance the remaining part through ERDF. (They may also
use other national public or private funding).
This practical example explains the main steps necessary for synergy funding of an EDIH
using Digital Europe Programme and ERDF. The estimates of the Commission are that about
70 “linked actions” implementing the EDIHs will use this. Since each EDIH will have a
regional basis, it is known which managing authority will be responsible from the shared
management side.
Step 1 – preparation. The authorizing officer (RAO) will coordinate and cooperate with the
managing authority responsible for the action under the shared management fund, in
particular to ensure the coordination of funding rates so that the combined funding does not
go beyond 100% of estimated eligible costs.
 DG CONNECT has organised a meeting with MS involved in these linked actions

and their Managing Authorities to fully explain the process.
Step 2 – linking the two actions. The direct management action will be designated a
‘synergy action’, either during grant preparation (GAP) or after the grant signature, via a grant
amendment. The shared management action will be linked to the direct management action
(via, for example, the MS-MA-Call number-Project number).
46
 This is foreseen in the Grant Preparation process and was also announced in the Call
document.
Step 3 – grant signature and pre-financing. The beneficiary will sign two separate grant
agreements24: the direct management grant and the shared management grant. The granting
authorities will ensure that the combined funding rates do not go beyond 100% of eligible
costs. The eligibility period, project duration, reporting periods and deadlines for approvals of
the two grants should also be coordinated by the granting authorities to the largest extent
possible.
 Pre-financing payments under the directly managed grant agreement will proceed as
normal. Advance payments will be done under the shared management grant, where
provided for by the applicable national rules.
Representation of the grant signature activities
Step 4 - reporting and payments. Before requesting any payments from the
Commission/Agency for the direct management grant, the beneficiary must firstly declare the
expenditure to the managing authority under the shared management grant. The MA will
inform the beneficiary of when the expenditure is declared to the Commission under shared
24
Called ‘document setting out the conditions for support’ for shared management, i.e. Article 73(3) CPR.
47
management. Under no circumstances should costs be first included in a payment application
under the directly managed grant as this would render them ineligible for the other fund.
 Only after the expenditure is declared to the Commission by the MA, the
beneficiary/coordinator will also then upload in eGrants a copy of the declaration
submitted to the MA and at the same time enter all information on the implementation
of the action as required by the rules of the directly managed programme.
 If the RAO requires a certificate on the financial statements (CFS) in the directly
managed grant, the auditor may also rely on audit certificates on the shared
management expenditure, in so far as it covers the same costs and identical eligibility
conditions.
 Both granting authorities will proceed to check the costs according to their applicable
rules, in the same way as for non-synergy actions and, if the costs are accepted, will
arrange for payment in the normal way.
Annex 3
Text of relevant legal provisions (CPR; Horizon Europe; GBER)
Seal of Excellence
CPR
Recital 61
‘(61) The synergies between the Funds and directly managed instruments should be
optimised. The provision of support for operations that have already received a Seal of
Excellence or were co‑funded by Horizon Europe with a contribution from the Funds should
be facilitated. Conditions already assessed at Union level, prior to the attributing of the Seal of
Excellence quality label or the co‑funding by Horizon Europe, should not be assessed again,
as long as the operations comply with a limited set of requirements established in this
Regulation. This should also facilitate following the appropriate rules set out in Commission
Regulation (EU) No 651/201425.’
25
Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible
with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty (OJ L 187, 26.6.2014, p. 1).
48
Article 2(45)
‘Article 2
Definitions
For the purpose of this Regulation, the following definitions apply:
[…]
(45) ‘Seal of Excellence’ means the quality label attributed by the Commission in respect of a
proposal, which shows that the proposal which has been assessed in a call for proposals under
a Union instrument is deemed to comply with the minimum quality requirements of that
Union instrument, but could not be funded due to lack of budget available for that call for
proposals, and might receive support from other Union or national sources of funding.’
Article 73(2) (4)
‘Article 73
Selection of operations by the managing authority
[…]
2. In selecting operations, the managing authority shall:
(a) ensure that selected operations comply with the programme, including their consistency
with the relevant strategies underlying the programme, as well as provide an effective
contribution to the achievement of the specific objectives of the programme;
(b) ensure that selected operations which fall within the scope of an enabling condition are
consistent with the corresponding strategies and planning documents established for the
fulfilment of that enabling condition;
[…]
(g) ensure that selected operations fall within the scope of the Fund concerned and are
attributed to a type of intervention; […]
As regards point (b) of this paragraph, in the case of policy objective one, as set out in point
(a) of Article 3(1) of the ERDF and CF Regulation, only operations corresponding to the
specific objectives referred to in subpoints (i) and (iv) of that point shall be consistent with the
corresponding smart specialisation strategies. […]
3. The managing authority shall ensure that the beneficiary is provided with a document
setting out all the conditions for support for each operation including the specific
requirements concerning the products or services to be delivered, the financing plan, the
time limit for its execution and where applicable, the method to be applied for determining
the costs of the operation and the conditions for payment of the support.
49
4. For operations attributed a Seal of Excellence, or operations selected under a programme
co‑funded by Horizon Europe, the managing authority may decide to grant support
from the ERDF or the ESF+ directly, provided that such operations meet the
requirements set out in points (a), (b) and (g) of paragraph 2.
In addition, managing authorities may apply to the operations referred to in the first
subparagraph the categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of eligible
costs established under the relevant Union instrument. These elements shall be set out
in the document referred in paragraph 3.’
Horizon Europe
Article 2
Definitions
(23) ‘Seal of Excellence’ means a quality label which shows that a proposal submitted to a
call for proposals exceeded all of the evaluation thresholds set out in the work programme,
but could not be funded due to lack of budget available for that call for proposals in the work
programme and might receive support from other Union or national sources of funding;
Article 15
Alternative, combined and cumulative funding and transfers of resources
1. The Programme shall be implemented in synergy with other Union programmes, in

accordance with the principle set out in Article 7(7).
2. The Seal of Excellence shall be awarded for calls for proposals specified in the work
programme. In accordance with the relevant provision of the Common Provisions Regulation
for 2021-2027 and the relevant provision of the 'CAP Strategic Plan Regulation', the ERDF,
the ESF+ or the EAFRD may support:
(a) co-funded actions selected under the Programme; and
(b) actions which were awarded a Seal of Excellence provided that they comply with all of the
following conditions:
(i) they have been assessed in a call for proposals under the Programme;
(ii) they comply with the minimum quality requirements of that call for proposals; and
(iii) they have not been financed under that call for proposals only due to budgetary
constraints.
3. Financial contributions under programmes co-financed by the ERDF, the ESF+, the
EMFAF and the EAFRD may be considered to be a contribution of the participating Member
50
State to European partnerships under points (b) and (c) of Article 10(1) of this Regulation,
provided that the relevant provisions of the Common Provisions Regulation for 2021-2027
and the fund-specific regulations are complied with.
4. An action that has received a contribution from another Union programme may also receive
a contribution under the Programme, provided that the contributions do not cover the same
costs. The rules of the relevant Union programme shall apply to the corresponding
contribution to the action. The cumulative financing shall not exceed the total eligible costs of
the action. The support from the different Union programmes may be calculated on a pro-rata
basis in accordance with the documents setting out the conditions for support.
5. Resources allocated to Member States under shared management may, at the request of the
Member State concerned, be transferred to the Programme subject to the conditions set out in
the relevant provisions of the Common Provisions Regulation for 2021-2027. The
Commission shall implement those resources directly in accordance with point (a) of the first
subparagraph of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation or indirectly in accordance with
point (c) of that subparagraph. Those resources shall be used for the benefit of the Member
State concerned.
6. Where the Commission has not entered into a legal commitment under direct or indirect
management for resources transferred in accordance with paragraph 5, the corresponding
uncommitted resources may be transferred back to one or more respective source
programmes, at the request of the Member State, in accordance with the conditions set out in
the relevant provisions of the Common Provisions Regulation for 2021-2027.
Article 24
Calls for proposals
4. The work programme shall specify calls for proposals for which Seals of Excellence may
be awarded. With prior authorisation from the applicant, information concerning the
application and the evaluation may be shared with interested financing authorities, subject to
the conclusion of confidentiality agreements.
Article 48
The Accelerator
1. The Accelerator shall aim to support essentially market-creating innovation. It shall support
only single beneficiaries and shall mainly provide blended finance. Under certain conditions,
it may also provide grant-only and equity-only supports.
The Accelerator shall provide the following types of support:
(a) blended finance support to SMEs, including start-ups, and, in exceptional cases, small
middle-capitalisation businesses (mid-caps), carrying out breakthrough and disruptive non-
bankable innovation;
51
(b) a grant-only support to SMEs, including start-ups, carrying out any type of innovation
ranging from incremental to breakthrough and disruptive innovation and aiming to
subsequently scale-up;
(c) equity-only support to non-bankable SMEs, including start-ups, which have already
received a grant-only support, may also be provided.
Grant-only support under the Accelerator shall be provided only under the following
cumulative conditions:
(a) the project shall include information on the capacities and willingness of the applicant to
scale up;
(b) the beneficiary shall be a start-up or an SME;
(c) a grant-only support under the Accelerator shall be provided only once to a beneficiary
during the period of implementation of the Programme for a maximum of EUR 2,5 million.
2. The beneficiary of the Accelerator shall be a legal entity qualifying as a start-up, an SME or
in exceptional cases as a small mid-cap intending to scale up, established in a Member State
or associated country. The proposal may be submitted either by the beneficiary or, subject to
the prior agreement by the beneficiary, by one or more natural persons or legal entities
intending to establish or support that beneficiary. In the latter case, the funding agreement
shall be signed only with the beneficiary.
3. A single award decision shall cover and provide funding for all forms of Union
contribution provided under EIC blended finance.
4. Proposals shall be evaluated on their individual merits by independent external experts and
selected for funding through an open call for proposals with cut-off dates, based on Articles
27, 28 and 29, subject to paragraph 5 of this Article.
5. The proposals submitted shall be evaluated on the basis of the following award criteria:
(a) excellence;
(b) impact;
(c) the level of risk of the action that would prevent investments, the quality and efficiency of
the implementation, and the need for Union support.
6. With the agreement of the applicants concerned, the Commission or the funding bodies
implementing the Programme (including the EIT's KICs) may directly submit for evaluation
under the award criterion referred to in point (c) of paragraph 5 a proposal for an innovation
and market deployment action which already fulfils the award criteria referred to in points (a)
and (b) of paragraph 5, subject to the following cumulative conditions:
(a) the proposal shall stem from any other action funded under Horizon 2020, from the
Programme or, subject to an exploratory pilot phase to be launched under the first work
programme, from national and/or regional programmes, starting with the mapping of the
52
demand for such a scheme, detailed provisions of which shall be laid down in the specific
programme referred to in point (a) of Article 1(2);
(b) the proposal is based on a project review which was carried out within the previous two
years assessing the excellence and the impact of the proposal and subject to conditions and
processes further detailed in the work programme.
7. A Seal of Excellence may be awarded subject to the following cumulative conditions:
(a) the beneficiary is a start-up, an SME or a small mid-cap;
(b) the proposal was eligible and has passed the applicable thresholds for the award criteria
referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 5;
(c) the activity would be eligible under an innovation action.
8. For a proposal having passed the evaluation, independent external experts shall propose a
corresponding Accelerator support, based on the risk incurred and the resources and time
necessary to bring and deploy the innovation to the market.
The Commission may reject, for justified reasons, a proposal retained by independent external
experts, including due to non-compliance with the objectives of Union policies. The
Programme Committee shall be informed of the reasons for such a rejection.
9. The grant or the reimbursable advance component of the Accelerator support shall not
exceed 70% of the total eligible costs of the selected innovation action.
10. The conditions for implementation of the equity and the repayable support components of
the Accelerator support are set out in Decision (EU) 2021/764.
11. The contract for the selected action shall establish specific measurable milestones and the
corresponding pre-financing and payments by instalments of the Accelerator support.
In the case of EIC blended finance, activities corresponding to an innovation action may be
launched and the first pre-financing of the grant or the reimbursable advance paid, prior to the
implementation of other components of the awarded EIC blended finance. The
implementation of those components shall be subject to reaching specific milestones
established in the contract.
12. In accordance with the contract, the action shall be suspended, amended or, if duly
justified, terminated if measurable milestones are not reached. It may also be terminated
where the expected market deployment, especially in the Union, cannot be met.
In exceptional cases and upon advice by the EIC board, the Commission may decide to
increase the Accelerator support subject to a project review by independent external experts.
The Programme Committee shall be informed of such cases.
Article 50
Monitoring and reporting
53
The Commission shall monitor continuously the management and implementation of the
Programme, the specific programme referred to in point (a) of Article 1(2) and the activities
of the EIT. In order to enhance transparency, data shall also be made publicly available in an
accessible manner on the Commission's website according to the latest update. In particular,
data for projects funded under ERC, European partnerships, missions, the EIC and the EIT
shall be included in the same database.
The database shall include:
(b) information on the level of mainstreaming SSH, the ratio between lower and higher TRLs
in collaborative research, the progress on the participation of widening countries, the
geographical composition of consortia in collaborative projects, the evolution of researchers
salaries, the use of a two-stage submission and evaluation procedure, the measures aimed at
facilitating collaborative links in European R&I, the use of the evaluation review and the
number and types of complaints, the level of climate mainstreaming and related expenditures,
SME participation, private sector participation, gender participation in funded actions,
evaluation panels, boards and advisory groups, the 'Seals of Excellence', the European
Partnerships as well as the co-funding rate, the complementary and cumulative funding from
other Union programmes, research infrastructures, time-to-grant, the level of international
cooperation, engagement of citizens and civil society participation;
Proposal for a DECISION OF THE COUNCIL on establishing the specific programme

implementing Horizon Europe - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation
1.1.3. Additional EIC activities Additionally, EIC will also implement: – Highly
recommended to all selected start-ups and SMEs, and in exceptional cases small mid-caps,
although not mandatory, EIC business acceleration services in support of Pathfinder and
Accelerator activities and actions. The aim will be to connect the EIC Community of funded
innovators, including funded Seal of Excellence, to investors, partners and public buyers. It
will provide a range of coaching and mentoring services to EIC actions. It will provide
innovators with access to international networks of potential partners, including industrial
ones, to complement a value chain or develop market opportunities, and find investors and
other sources of private or corporate finance. Activities will include live events (e.g.
brokerage events, pitching sessions) but also, the development of matching platforms or use
of existing ones, in close relation with financial intermediaries supported by the InvestEU and
with the EIB Group. These activities will also encourage peer exchanges as a source of
learning in innovation ecosystem, making particular good use of Members of the EIC Board
and EIC Fellows;
Transfers
54
CPR
Recital 19
‘(19) In order to provide Member States with sufficient flexibility in the implementation of
their shared management allocations, it should be possible to transfer certain levels of
funding between the Funds and between shared management and direct and indirectly
managed instruments. Where the specific economic and social circumstances of a Member
State justify it, that level of transfer should be higher.’
Article 26
Transfer of resources
1. Member States may request, in the Partnership Agreement or in a request for an

amendment of a programme if agreed by the monitoring committee of the
programme pursuant to point (d) of Article 40(2), the transfer of up to 5% of the
initial national allocation of each Fund to any other instrument under direct or
indirect management, where such possibility is provided for in the basic act of such
an instrument.
The sum of the transfers referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph and the
contributions in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 14(1) shall not
exceed 5% of the initial national allocation of each Fund.
Member States may also request in the Partnership Agreement or in the request for an
amendment of a programme the transfer of up to 5% of the initial national allocation
of each Fund to another Fund or Funds, except for transfers which are set out in the
fourth subparagraph.
Member States may also request in the Partnership Agreement or in the request for an
amendment of a programme an additional transfer of up to 20% of the initial national
allocation by Fund between the ERDF, the ESF+ or the Cohesion Fund within the
Member State’s global resources under the Investment for jobs and growth goal. The
Member States whose average total unemployment rate for the period 2017‑2019 is
under 3% may request such an additional transfer of up to 25% of the initial national
allocation.
2. Transferred resources shall be implemented in accordance with the rules of the Fund
or the instrument to which the resources are transferred and, in the case of transfers
to instruments under direct or indirect management, for the benefit of the Member
State concerned.
3. Requests for an amendment of a programme shall set out the total amount transferred
for each year by Fund and by category of region, where applicable, shall be duly
justified with a view to the complementarities and impact to be achieved, and shall
be accompanied by the amended programme or programmes in accordance with
Article 24.
55
4. After consultation with the Member State concerned, the Commission shall object to
a request for transfer in the related programme amendment where such a transfer
would undermine the achievement of the objectives of the programme from which
the resources are to be transferred.
The Commission shall also object to the request where it considers that the Member
State has not provided an adequate justification for the transfer with regard to the
results to be achieved or the contribution to be made to the objectives of the receiving
Fund or instrument in direct or indirect management.
5. Where the request for transfer concerns an amendment of a programme, only

resources of future calendar years may be transferred.
6. JTF resources, including any resources transferred from the ERDF and the ESF+ in
accordance with Article 27, shall not be transferable to other Funds or instruments
pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 5 of this Article.
The JTF shall not receive transfers pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 5.
7. Where the Commission has not entered into a legal commitment under direct or
indirect management for resources transferred in accordance with paragraph 1, the
corresponding uncommitted resources may be transferred back to the Fund from
which they have been initially transferred and allocated to one or more programmes.
To this end, the Member State shall submit a request for a programme amendment in
accordance with Article 24(1), at the latest 4 months before the time limit for
commitments set out in the first subparagraph of Article 114(2) of the Financial
Regulation.
8. Resources transferred back to the Fund from which they have been initially
transferred and allocated to one or more programmes shall be implemented in
accordance with the rules set out in this Regulation and the Fund‑specific
Regulations as from the date of submission of the request for programme
amendment.
9. For the resources transferred back to the Fund from which they have been initially
transferred and allocated to a programme in accordance with paragraph 7 of this
Article, the decommitment time limit as defined in Article 105(1) shall start in the
year in which the corresponding budgetary commitments are made.’
Horizon Europe
Article 15
...
5. Resources allocated to Member States under shared management may, at the request of the
Member State concerned, be transferred to the Programme subject to the conditions set out in
56
the relevant provisions of the Common Provisions Regulation for 2021-2027. The
Commission shall implement those resources directly in accordance with point (a) of the first
subparagraph of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation or indirectly in accordance with
point (c) of that subparagraph. Those resources shall be used for the benefit of the Member
State concerned.
6. Where the Commission has not entered into a legal commitment under direct or indirect
management for resources transferred in accordance with paragraph 5, the corresponding
uncommitted resources may be transferred back to one or more respective source
programmes, at the request of the Member State, in accordance with the conditions set out in
the relevant provisions of the Common Provisions Regulation for 2021-2027.
Cumulative funding
CPR
‘Article 63
Eligibility
[…]
9. An operation may receive support from one or more Funds or from one or more
programmes and from other Union instruments. In such cases, expenditure declared
in a payment application for one of the Funds shall not be declared for either of the
following:
(a) support from another Fund or Union instrument;
(b) support from the same Fund under another programme.
The amount of expenditure to be entered into a payment application of a Fund may be

calculated for each Fund and for the programme or programmes concerned on a pro rata
basis, in accordance with the document setting out the conditions for support.’
Horizon Europe
Article 15
...
4. An action that has received a contribution from another Union programme may also receive
a contribution under the Programme, provided that the contributions do not cover the same
costs. The rules of the relevant Union programme shall apply to the corresponding
contribution to the action. The cumulative financing shall not exceed the total eligible costs of
the action. The support from the different Union programmes may be calculated on a pro-rata
basis in accordance with the documents setting out the conditions for support.
57
Combined funding/Co-funded European Partnerships
CPR
‘Article 71
Programme authorities
[…]
5. Where a programme provides, in line with its objectives, support from the ERDF or the
ESF+ to a programme co‑funded by Horizon Europe, as referred to in point (b) of Article
10(1) of the Horizon Europe Regulation, the body implementing the programme co‑funded by
Horizon Europe shall be identified as an intermediate body by the managing authority of the
relevant programme, in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article.’
‘Article 73
Selection of operations by the managing authority
[…]
4. For operations attributed a Seal of Excellence, or operations selected under a programme

co‑funded by Horizon Europe, the managing authority may decide to grant support
from the ERDF or the ESF+ directly, provided that such operations meet the
requirements set out in points (a), (b) and (g) of paragraph 2.
In addition, managing authorities may apply to the operations referred to in the first
subparagraph the categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of eligible costs
established under the relevant Union instrument. These elements shall be set out in the
document referred in paragraph 3.’
Horizon Europe
Article 15
1. Financial contributions under programmes co-financed by the ERDF, the

ESF+, the EMFAF and the EAFRD may be considered to be a contribution of
the participating Member State to European partnerships under points (b) and
(c) of Article 10(1) of this Regulation, provided that the relevant provisions of
the Common Provisions Regulation for 2021-2027 and the fund-specific
regulations are complied with.
58
COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) 2021/1237 of 23 July 2021 amending Regulation (EU)
No 651/2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in
application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty
‘Article 25a
Aid for projects awarded a Seal of Excellence quality label
1. Aid for SMEs for research and development projects as well as feasibility studies awarded
a Seal of Excellence quality label under the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme,
shall be compatible with the internal market within the meaning of Article 107(3) of the
Treaty and shall be exempted from the notification requirement of Article 108(3) of the
Treaty, provided that the conditions laid down in this Article and in Chapter I are fulfilled.
2. The eligible activities of the aided research and development project or feasibility study
shall be those defined as eligible under the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme
rules, excluding activities going beyond experimental development activities.
3. The categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of eligible costs of the aided
research and development project or feasibility study shall be those defined as eligible under
the Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe programme rules.
4. The maximum aid amount shall not exceed EUR 2,5 million per SME per research and
development project or feasibility study.
5. The total public funding provided for each research and development project or feasibility
study shall not exceed the funding rate set out for that research and development project or
feasibility study under the Horizon 2020 or under the Horizon Europe programme rules.
Article 25b
Aid for Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions and ERC Proof of Concept actions
1. Aid for Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions and ERC Proof of Concept actions awarded a Seal
of Excellence quality label under the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme shall
be compatible with the internal market within the meaning of Article 107(3) of the Treaty and
shall be exempted from the notification requirement of Article 108(3) of the Treaty, provided
that the conditions laid down in this Article and in Chapter I are fulfilled.
2. The eligible activities of the aided action shall be those defined as eligible under the
Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme rules.
3. The categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of eligible costs of the aided
action shall be those defined as eligible under the Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe
programme rules.
59
4. The total public funding provided for each aided action shall not exceed the maximum level
of support provided for in the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme.
Article 25c
Aid involved in co-funded research and development projects
1. Aid provided to a co-funded research and development project or a feasibility study

(including research and development projects implemented under a European Institutionalised
Partnership based on Article 185 or Article 187 of the Treaty or a programme co-funded
action, as defined in the Horizon Europe programme rules) which is implemented by at least
three Member States, or alternatively two Member States and at least one associated country,
and selected on the basis of the evaluation and ranking made by independent experts
following transnational calls in line with the Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe programme
rules, shall be compatible with the internal market within the meaning of Article 107(3) of the
Treaty and shall be exempted from the notification requirement of Article 108(3) of the
Treaty provided that the conditions laid down in this Article and in Chapter I are fulfilled.
2. The eligible activities of the aided research and development project or feasibility study
shall be those defined as eligible under the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme
rules, excluding activities going beyond experimental development activities.
3. The categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of eligible costs shall be
those defined as eligible under the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme rules.
4. The total public funding provided shall not exceed the funding rate established for the
research and development project or feasibility study following the selection, ranking and
evaluation under the Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe programme rules.
5. The funding provided by the Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe programme shall cover at
least 30% of the total eligible costs of a research and innovation action or an innovation action
as defined under the Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe programme.
Article 25d
Aid for Teaming actions
1. Aid provided to co-funded Teaming actions, involving at least two Member States and
selected on the basis of the evaluation and ranking made by independent experts following
transnational calls under the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme rules, shall be
compatible with the internal market within the meaning of Article 107(3) of the Treaty and
shall be exempted from the notification requirement of Article 108(3) of the Treaty provided
that the conditions laid down in this Article and in Chapter I are fulfilled.
60
2. The eligible activities of the co-funded Teaming action shall be those defined as eligible
under the Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe programme rules. Activities going beyond
experimental development activities are excluded.
3. The categories, maximum amounts and methods of calculation of eligible costs shall be
those defined as eligible under the Horizon 2020 or the Horizon Europe programme rules. In
addition, investment costs in project-related tangible and intangible assets shall be eligible.
4. The total public funding provided shall not exceed the funding rate established for the
Teaming action following the selection, ranking and evaluation under the Horizon 2020 or the
Horizon Europe programme rules. In addition, for investments in project-related tangible and
intangible assets the aid shall not exceed 70% of the investment costs.
5. For investment aid for infrastructures under a Teaming action the following additional
conditions shall apply:
(a) where the infrastructure pursues both economic and non-economic activities, the
financing, costs and revenues of each type of activity shall be accounted for separately on the
basis of consistently applied and objectively justifiable cost accounting principles;
(b) the price charged for the operation or use of the infrastructure shall correspond to a market
price;
(c) access to the infrastructure shall be open to several users and be granted on a transparent
and non-discriminatory basis. Undertakings which have financed at least 10% of the
investment costs of the infrastructure may be granted preferential access under more
favourable conditions. In order to avoid overcompensation, such access shall be proportional
to the undertaking’s contribution to the investment costs and these conditions shall be made
publicly available;
(d) where the infrastructure receives public funding for both economic and non-economic
activities, Member States shall put in place a monitoring and claw-back mechanism in order
to ensure that the applicable aid intensity is not exceeded as a result of an increase in the share
of economic activities compared to the situation envisaged at the time of awarding the aid.’
61

Horizon-ERDF Synergy Funding Commission Notice-2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Horizon-ERDF Synergy Funding Commission Notice-2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Horizon-ERDF Synergy Funding Commission Notice-2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EUROPEAN

Draft COMMISSION NOTICE Synergies between Horizon Europe and ERDF

COMMUNICATION TO THE COMMISSION

Strategic context at EU level

In addition, the Commission adopted a proposal on 16 July 2021 for a Council

HE Articles 2(23), 15(2), 24(4), and 48(7)

The Seal of Excellence is particularly suitable for single-beneficiary HE components (such as

Main steps in the process

 The annual or biannual HE work programmes specify the

Awarding of Seals of  The Seal of Excellence certificate is awarded to eligible

 The Seal of Excellence holder applies directly to the given

 Beneficiaries implement projects in line with cohesion

 The public HE dashboard provides aggregated data on the

2. Transfers from ERDF to Horizon Europe

Relevant legislation CPR Article 26 CPR Transfer of resources and

Related legislation CPR Article 24 (Amendment of programmes)

Transfers provide opportunities to, inter alia:

 strengthen participation in HE by beneficiaries from regions/Member States that have

 Transfers must be explicitly specified in the partnership agreement

 The Commission must object to a request for a transfer if it would

 Following the transfer, implementation (including monitoring) is

Phase 1: Request to transfer funds from a cohesion policy instrument

1.2 Transfer request included in programme amendment.

Can transferred resources be transferred back to their original fund?

Relevant legislation CPR Article 63(9)

Related legislation Digital Europe Article 23(1)15

Policy considerations/potential benefits

Main steps in the process

 Article 63(9) first sub-paragraph of the CPR provides a

 This provision corresponds to Article 191(3) FR.

 The MA may state in the cohesion policy programme its

 The MAs and the Commission services/granting authority

- mention that if the applicant chooses to apply for both

(ii) if the applicant chooses to apply for both instruments’

In addition, the calls should indicate:

- the funding rates that will be applied under both instruments

- the content that applicants should present in their proposals

 The selection and evaluation of proposals will be conducted

 Selection under one call is not a guarantee of selection

 Proposals must indicate whether or not the applicant will

 If only one of the applications is successful, the responsible

 In case of application and selection under both calls, the

 In order to allow 100% financing from the Union budget in

 The beneficiary must therefore firstly declare all eligible

 Under no circumstances should costs be first included in a

 With regard to the payment application submitted by the

 It is noted that payment applications under shared

 Once the expenditure is included in a payment application

 This means that the beneficiary will not be able to be paid

 Both granting authorities should have sufficient information

 The responsibility for ensuring the compliance with State

 The implementation of this approach will not require any

 No exception to the rules is made for cumulative funding for

 For the purposes of payment applications in line with Annex

 The MA and the direct management granting authority set

 Beneficiaries must follow the rules for implementation,

 Projects can receive pre-financing or advance payments in

What about EU State aid rules?

Related legislation GBER Articles 25c and 25d (State aid)