How-to guides
Citizen engagement that evaluators score, and the decorative kind
In Horizon Europe, the engagement of citizens, civil society and end users is scored as part of the methodology under the Excellence criterion, where it is appropriate for the project. The official guidance asks for engagement whose results are used in the project, and it names the opposite directly as "window dressing".
Where engagement sits in the criteria
Annex D of the General Annexes 2026-2027 lists the aspects experts assess. For Research and Innovation Actions and Innovation Actions, the second aspect under Excellence is the soundness of the methodology. It includes the quality of open science practices, and those include engagement of citizens, civil society and end users "where appropriate". Open science is the Commission's term for open, cooperative research with early and wide sharing of knowledge.
Three details matter:
- Experts give one score per criterion, not per aspect. Engagement is one of several elements behind the Excellence score.
- The criteria for Coordination and Support Actions do not name open science or engagement. They refer to the quality of the proposed measures and the soundness of the methodology.
- The Programme Guide (version 5.1, September 2025) states that open science practices are also considered under Quality and efficiency of the implementation, and that the European Research Council does not evaluate them.
What the proposal template asks
Section 1.2 of the application form (version 5.1, January 2026) asks you to describe, in about one page, how open science practices are an integral part of the methodology and how they fit the nature of the work. If no practice is appropriate, the template asks for a justification. The Programme Guide says that if the experts accept the justification, open science is left out of the assessment.
The template draws one line clearly. This question is not about outreach planned as communication, dissemination and exploitation. Those activities belong under Impact. An information event for residents is communication. Residents who help set the research questions are part of the methodology.
Section 3.2 then asks you to show that the consortium has expertise in open science practices.
Mandatory and recommended practices
The Programme Guide separates mandatory practices, such as open access to publications and data management plans, from recommended ones. Involving citizens and other knowledge actors is a recommended practice. According to the Guide, a clear explanation of how recommended practices will be adopted leads to a higher score, and weak treatment of mandatory ones leads to a lower score.
What the Guide means by engagement
The Guide defines engagement as involving citizens and civil society in three ways:
- Co-design: workshops, focus groups or similar formats that shape research agendas, roadmaps or policies.
- Co-creation: citizens or end users take a direct part in producing knowledge or innovations, as in citizen science.
- Co-assessment: they help monitor and evaluate the project's progress and outputs.
"Citizens" means individuals acting on their own initiative, not for an employer. The Guide adds that engagement needs resources and expertise, that it is often run by organisations which already have the trust of the groups concerned, and that inclusiveness, compensation for participants and feedback to them should be considered.
Built in or mentioned in passing
The table below is a reading of the documents above, not an official checklist.
| Part of the proposal | Built in | Mentioned in passing |
|---|---|---|
| Methodology (1.2) | States who is engaged, at which stage, and what their input changes | One sentence that the project will use co-creation |
| Work plan (3.1) | Engagement is a task with quantified activities, and later tasks use its outcomes | Appears only in the communication work package |
| Deliverables | A deliverable records the outcome of the engagement | No deliverable depends on it |
| Resources | Person-months and other costs match the task, for example venues or participant compensation | No effort or cost assigned |
| Consortium (3.2) | A partner with engagement expertise leads the task | No partner has a record in it |
The template's instruction for section 3.1 supports the middle rows: each task should quantify its activities, say who does the work, and have resources in line with its objectives and deliverables. The Commission's briefing for experts (version 14.0, April 2026) asks them to check whether open science practices are an integral part of the methodology.