What’s new in the ERC Work Programme 2026-2027? Strategic implications for applicants.

ERC offers funding opportunities across all career stages

The European Research Council (ERC) continues to fund investigator-driven frontier research on the sole basis of scientific excellence. Through the ERC Work Programme for 2026 and 2027, it maintains funding opportunities across all career stages: from the Starting Grant for early-career researchers, the Consolidator Grant for those consolidating independence, to the Advanced Grant for established leaders. In addition, collaborative frontier research is supported through the Synergy Grant, the recently introduced ERC Plus Grant targets exceptionally ambitious, transformative projects, and the Proof-of-Concept Grant enables ERC awardees to explore the innovation and societal valorisation potential of their ground-breaking research. Click here for more information. However, the context in which researchers apply is changing and makes strategic preparation more critical.

Developments in the ERC Work Programme

The 2026–2027 Work Programme introduces several structural and strategic adjustments that ERC applicants should consider carefully, of which the key updates are explained below (note: ERC Work programme 2026 published, and ERC Work Programme 2027 to be launched.)

Novel funding scheme introduced supporting ambition beyond the scope of existing ERC programmes

The most prominent innovation is the launch of the ERC Plus Grant. You might ask yourself “why should I apply for the novel ERC Plus Grant?” With funding of up to 7 million EUR for a duration of four to seven years, it operates at a significantly larger scale research, supporting bold ideas and vision which go beyond traditional ERC schemes. However, only about 30 grants will be awarded across all domains and career stages, making it exceptionally competitive. As the ERC Plus Grant can be applied for only once during your career, and applicants may not hold another ERC grant or apply in parallel, the timing in your career is critical. The expectations are correspondingly high: proposals must demonstrate transformative potential at scale, supported by clear scientific leadership and a groundbreaking vision.

Restructuring of the ERC proposal format

The revised proposal structure and reduced page limits in the new Work Programme further emphasise the strategic distinction between Part B1 and Part B2, now called Part I and Part II. Part I, limited to five pages, must concisely present the overall project vision and breakthrough idea, while Part II, ranging from 7 to 10 pages depending on the scheme (individual versus Synergy Grant). is dedicated to the implementation and feasibility of the research. This clearer separation requires a well-considered writing strategy (see further reflections in the section on lessons learned).

Additional funding and resubmission rules

From 2026 onwards, applicants for Starting, Consolidator and Advanced Grants can request up to 2 million EUR in additional funding when relocating from outside Europe (or up to 1 million EUR if already based in the EU or an associated country). In parallel, resubmission rules, particularly for the Synergy Grant applicants, have been adapted as applicants receiving a Score B are no longer eligible to resubmit the following year. In addition, ERC applicants holding an ongoing ERC grant may apply for a new 2026 grant only if their current project is due to end within two years of the call deadline, with post-deadline extensions not affecting eligibility in exceptional cases. These changes reinforce the importance of a thorough assessment and eligibility check before submission.

Extension of eligibility window

In the 2026 Work Programme, applicants who have experienced gender-based or other forms of violence may receive an extension of their post-PhD eligibility period for Starting and Consolidator Grants, and parental leave is now explicitly recognised alongside maternity and paternity leave as grounds for such extensions. Additionally, from the 2027 Work Programme onwards, eligibility windows will be extended for i) Starting Grant applicants up to 10 years post-PhD defense and ii) Consolidator Grant applicants between 5 and 15 years post-PhD defense. At the same time, researchers may receive a maximum of one Starting and one Consolidator Grant in their career. This creates additional flexibility but also calls for deliberate long-term career planning.

In summary, these recent developments maintain the ERC’s core principle of scientific excellence while introducing new strategic considerations for applicants in the coming years.

Lessons learned from the first ERC applications under the 2026 Work Programme

The first experiences with applications under the new Work Programme highlight several important considerations for future applicants. Based on these early rounds, we outline our key lessons emerging for those preparing an ERC proposal.

Focus on a clear, concise and convincing narrative in the proposal

The revised structure of Part I and Part II requires deliberate distinction. In part I, applicants must articulate the ‘what’, ‘why’ and broader impact of the research project, while demonstrating that you are uniquely positioned to deliver. In part II, the reviewers must be convinced about the feasibility of the project explaining ‘how’, ‘who’ and ‘when’ the project will be executed. When drafting each section, it is helpful to consider the reviewers’ perspective, in other words what is relevant and essential information they need to know about your project in each part to evaluate the excellence of the scientific project idea and your position as principal investigator?

To prevent repetition, our suggestion is to keep Part I high-level and visionary, clearly defining the research gap, the urgency of the problem, and the project’s transformative potential, and avoid technical details that belong in Part II. In turn, Part II could begin with a short recap of the core aims and paradigm shift before moving into structured implementation, detailing the methodological approach and risk mitigation. A clear alignment between knowledge gaps, objectives and work packages will help to create logical flow and reinforce credibility.

Finally, despite the shift away from explicitly evaluating the ‘high-risk/high-gain’ nature of ERC proposals towards the criteria of ‘ambitious, creative and original’ (REF), it remains essential to clearly articulate the disruptive and groundbreaking character of your research, highlighting it’s transformative potential within your project narrative.

Select your panel strategically

Many frontier projects are inherently interdisciplinary, yet submitting to multiple panels is not automatically advantageous. While submitting to a secondary panel is possible, only take this into consideration if your project genuinely requires expertise from more than one panel, as focusing on a single panel helps you better tailor your proposal to a specific audience. In addition, reviewing previous panel compositions can provide useful insight into how a proposal may be received. In summary, choose the panel where your project stands out most strongly.

Preliminary data and references, use them purposefully

Although there is often a tendency to describe preliminary work extensively, applicants should make considered choices about what to include and where. Avoid repeating preliminary results in both Part I and II. In Part I, preliminary findings should primarily serve to strengthen the rationale and credibility of the breakthrough idea, while more detailed methodological and ‘how’ focused elements can be introduced in the opening of Part II. Be selective and concise as preliminary data should support feasibility, but the main emphasis in Part II must remain on what you aim to achieve in the proposed project.

Similarly, references should be carefully selected and actively reinforce the project’s scientific innovation and timeliness. The bibliography is most effective when integrated into the core argument, situating the proposal within recent high-impact developments and demonstrating how it advances the field. In practice, around 30 references in Part I and circa 30–50 references in Part II are generally sufficient to support a focused and convincing narrative.

Taken together, these early lessons show that applicants should prioritise clear narrative positioning, strategic structuring of Part I and II, careful panel selection, and purposeful integration of relevant literature to strengthen their competitiveness under the future ERC Work Programme.

Preparing your ERC proposal strategically and in time

Before starting the application process, our advise is to critically assess the urgency of the problem, the original and ground-breaking nature of your approach, the level of ambition, as well as your unique positioning and the strategic timing to apply for an ERC within your career trajectory. As drafting an ERC proposal is the result of iterative development, starting preparation at least three to five months before the deadline allows time to refine the conceptual framing, sharpen the narrative, and ensure coherence in the description between ambition and feasibility (see figure below). The 2026–2027 Work Programme offers new opportunities, but also demands strategic clarity for which early reflection and careful positioning remain decisive in the pursuit of ERC excellence.

At PNO Innovation, our ERC Excellence Group, consisting of expert consultants, is driven to support principal investigators across all domains of Life Sciences, Physical Engineering and Social Sciences and Humanities. We support you in assessing the strategic fit and timing of your application, co-developing and challenging your project concept, strengthening your scientific vison and proposal narrative to meet the competitive ERC standards and helping you prepare for Step 2 interviews. Please feel free to contact us to explore how we can support you in this endeavour. Call +31(0)88 838 13 81 or send us a message.

Our expert

Christy Tulen is consultant at PNO Life Sciences & Health in the Netherlands.