Innovation Fund application rejected? How to prepare a stronger resubmission

Receiving a rejection after months of preparing an Innovation Fund application can be disappointing. But an unsuccessful proposal does not necessarily mean the end of your project’s funding journey.

If your project was not selected in the latest Innovation Fund call, you may be wondering whether it is worth resubmitting, what needs to change and how to improve your chances in the next funding round.

At PNO Innovation, we have supported companies whose initially unsuccessful projects went on to secure funding following a second or even third submission.

The key is to understand why your application was unsuccessful and turn the evaluation feedback into a concrete improvement plan.

Is it worth resubmitting an Innovation Fund application?

Resubmitting an Innovation Fund application can be worthwhile, provided your project has the potential to address the weaknesses identified during evaluation.

A rejected application is an opportunity to reassess your project’s positioning, strengthen its technical and financial foundations, and demonstrate progress since the previous submission.

The starting point is your Evaluation Summary Report (ESR), which provides feedback against the Innovation Fund evaluation criteria.

Rather than simply updating the previous application, companies should use this feedback to identify where substantial improvements can be made.

How to improve your Innovation Fund resubmission

Depending on your evaluation results, there are five key areas to assess before preparing a new Innovation Fund proposal.

1. Degree of innovation: Demonstrate what makes your technology different

The Innovation Fund supports innovative technologies with significant potential to contribute to industrial decarbonisation.

If your proposal received a lower score for innovation, consider:

• Have you sufficiently demonstrated how your technology advances beyond the current state of the art?
• Could you provide stronger evidence of your technology’s competitive advantages?
• Is there an opportunity to adjust your technological design to incorporate more innovative approaches?

A successful resubmission should clearly communicate why your solution is innovative and what differentiates it from existing alternatives.

2. GHG emission avoidance: Strengthen your environmental impact

Greenhouse gas emission avoidance is a central consideration in Innovation Fund applications.

If your evaluation identified weaknesses in this area, ask yourself:

• Could your project design be adjusted to increase relative GHG emission avoidance?
• Are the assumptions and calculations supporting your estimated emissions reductions sufficiently robust?
• Would independent third-party verification help strengthen the credibility of your calculations?

Improving the quality and transparency of your GHG emission avoidance assessment can help evaluators better understand the project’s potential environmental impact.

3. Project maturity: Show how your project has progressed

One of the advantages of resubmitting is the opportunity to demonstrate tangible progress since the previous application.

Consider whether your project has become more mature in the following areas:

• Have you completed additional technical or commercial preparatory work?
• Is your feasibility study or business case more detailed?
• Have you secured additional project partners, suppliers or off-takers?
• Can you provide stronger evidence supporting the project’s readiness for implementation?

Demonstrating concrete progress can make your proposal more credible and better prepared for evaluation.

4. Replicability: Strengthen the wider impact of your project

Innovation Fund projects are also assessed on their potential to generate benefits beyond the initial implementation.

Before resubmitting, consider:

• Could changes to your project design improve efficiency or environmental performance?
• Does your Do No Significant Harm (DNSH) assessment need further development?
• Could you better explain how your project contributes to EU competitiveness?
• Can you demonstrate more clearly how your technology could be replicated or deployed at a larger scale?

A stronger replicability argument can help demonstrate the broader value of your innovation.

5. Cost efficiency: Reassess your funding request

Cost efficiency is another important consideration in the evaluation process.

Review whether your project’s financial structure and requested grant are appropriately justified.

In particular:

• Is there scope to reduce your requested grant without compromising project viability?
• Could changes to project scope or financing improve the proposal’s cost efficiency?

The objective is not simply to request less funding, but to develop a credible financial proposal that remains aligned with the project’s implementation needs.

From evaluation feedback to a stronger Innovation Fund proposal

An effective Innovation Fund resubmission requires more than responding to individual evaluator comments.

It involves reviewing the overall project, identifying opportunities for improvement and determining whether changes to its scope, technical design, financial structure or implementation strategy could make the next application more competitive.

This assessment should take place before starting the application-writing process.

By addressing the underlying weaknesses of the previous submission, companies can build a stronger foundation for their next funding attempt.

How PNO Innovation supports Innovation Fund resubmissions

We support industrial companies throughout the Innovation Fund journey, from initial project assessment and development to application preparation and implementation following a successful award.

Our Innovation Fund experience includes:

• 116 Innovation Fund projects supported
• 48 Innovation Fund proposals funded
• 41% Innovation Fund success rate
• More than €4.8 billion in funding secured for our clients
• More than 75 Innovation Fund consultants involved each year

Our approach to resubmission begins with a thorough assessment of the rejected proposal.

We analyse the evaluation feedback, assess the project’s performance against the relevant criteria and identify opportunities to strengthen its competitiveness.

Based on this assessment, we help companies redefine their project scope and prepare an improved Innovation Fund application.

Ready to strengthen your Innovation Fund application?

An unsuccessful Innovation Fund application does not have to be the end of the road.

If you are considering resubmitting your project, now is the time to determine what needs to improve and whether your proposal could become more competitive in the next funding round.

Our Innovation Fund experts can help you review your previous application, identify potential improvements and assess the best way forward.