Tips & Tricks for a successful HORIZON-CL3-2026-01-SSRI-01 proposal
Opening
05 May 2026
Deadline
Keywords
technological innovations
SSRI
civil security
microfluidic chip
disruptive
TRL
supporting
security professionals
AI-powered predictions
Your microfluidic SME partner for Horizon Europe
We take care of microfluidic engineering, work on valorization and optimize the proposal with you
HORIZON-CL3-2026-01-SSRI-01: Open topic on supporting disruptive technological innovations for civil security
The Commission desires new technologies at an early stage that can transform the way civil security activities are done. Not gradual enhancements. Not TRL 6 ideas. We are discussing breakthrough ideas at TRL levels below 4 that, when developed, would transform the paradigm in preparedness, threat identification, or crisis response. It is an open topic where you choose what security challenge, you must prove to the evaluators that the potential of the disruption is real.
Download the MIC Horizon Europe 2026/2027 Calls Calendar:
Discover more!
Administrative facts: what do we know about the HORIZON-CL3-2026-01-SSRI-01 call?
Which call is it, and when is the opening and the deadline?
● Call name: Civil Security for Society 2026
● Call identifier: HORIZON-CL3-2026-01
● Destination: Strengthened Security Research and Innovation
● Topic: HORIZON-CL3-2026-01-SSRI-01
● Opening date: 05 May 2026
● Deadline: 04 Nov 2026
● Type of action: Research and Innovation Action (RIA)
What about the budget and estimated size of the project?
● Overall topic budget: EUR 3.00 million
● Number of projects expected to be funded: 2
● Budget per project: around EUR 1.50 million
What are the key eligibility and evaluation conditions?
● Standard eligibility conditions as per General Annex B.
● Subject to restrictions for the protection of European communication networks.
● Legal entities established in China are not eligible to participate in RIAs under this destination.
● Some activities may involve classified background or security-sensitive results (EUCI and SEN). Refer to General Annex B provisions.
● Synergy-building and clustering with other successful proposals in the same area is expected, in coordination with CERIS activities.
● No specific TRL target is stated. The call explicitly targets technologies starting below TRL 4.
Scientific range: what does the Commission expect from the HORIZON-CL3-2026-01-SSRI-01 grant?
In the title, the word “open” provides you with the liberty of choosing your security domain. Border control, disaster response, counter-terrorism, infrastructure protection, CBRN detection, you name it. However, the work programme is explicit on one point, which is technologies that are yet to be implemented in their operational form. What the Commission seeks is the potential to change the paradigm, not slight improvements.
What evaluators will look for, from what we’ve seen in similar calls:
● Technologies with low TRL (under 4) which provide an indication of a possible way of transforming the way in which a security operation is being conducted, whether by improving performance or by reducing costs considerably.
● A graded pathway of transition. You must demonstrate the flow of your idea out of the lab into a testable product by an end-user. Already at this early stage, the Commission would like to know that you have considered validation, safety, and interoperability.
● Actual cooperation with security professionals. Governmental and law enforcement organizations, first responders, and civil security. Not in the position of advisory boards. Being partners who create the technology itself.
● Moral competence, openness, availability. Those are not discarded paragraphs in your proposal. Cluster 3 evaluators put this into consideration.
● Europe oriented technology foresight. This has been explicitly stated in the work programme thus refer to the corresponding JRC or Europol foresight reports.
The projected results are enhanced preparedness due to tested disruptive technology, enhanced ability to reduce risks, and accelerated implementation of new tools in civil security systems. Publication lists will not suffice in this case. Even low-TRL research should be demonstrably relevant to operations that the Commission desires.
Scientific strategy: how can you enhance your chances of being funded through HORIZON-CL3-2026-01-SSRI-01?
Which scientific decisions are the most important ones?
● Choose a security challenge where the gap is apparent. Proposals to which evaluators give answers must be concrete as to the disruption, rather than vague about changing security.
● Show the paradigm shift. It is not this call to get a technology that mimics what other tools are doing, but 20% faster. Explain what is possible that was not previously possible.
● Don’t shy away from low TRL. The call specifically focuses on sub-TRL-4 concepts. Attempts to make a TRL 5 product appear disruptive are likely to backfire amongst reviewers.
● Establish your validation strategy. Even in early research, draw a testing scheme that a practitioner would believe. There are far too many cases of proposals that failed because they had validation as an epilogue.
● Look at EU foresight reports of emerging security threats. These are pushed upon you in the work programme. Disregard that warning at your peril.
● Cluster plan activities initially. Estimate a budget to coordinate with other SSRI project and with CERIS. Critics can tell when it is not there.
Consortium and proposal-writing plan: what works best with this type of Security RIA?
● EUR 1.50 million is a minor project. Have a small consortium, between five and eight partners, perhaps fewer, depending on the narrowness of the research.
● Have at least one security end-user (police, civil protection, border agency) full partner. This destination does not have enough advisory roles.
● The exploitation narrative will be further enhanced by a newer SME with technology related to the subject. Assessing the SME, in the event that the prototype platform or a sensing concept they bring feeds into the security use case, would draw attention.
● The basic research should be covered by academic partners. But not five, two or three labs only.
● Write the impact section in reverse: begin with the operational scenario, then how the technology alters it, then how the research will be required. This structure reads better for Cluster 3 evaluators than the traditional “we will progress science and will see what will happen”.
● You have a tight budget, hence you require a cut-throat work plan. No padding.
● If your topic is sensitive to the EUCI and SEN provisions, address them in the first place.
How would microfluidics contribute to this topic?
Traditional analysis is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and does not travel easily. In the case of civil security when you require responses in the field (consider CBRN events, forensic sampling at a crime scene, environmental contamination after a disaster), that delay can be life and evidence.
● Suppose you have to find a chemical agent that you do not know about during an evacuation. With a microfluidic chip running multiplexed detection on a handheld reader, you receive results as an event is occurring and not hours after in a lab truck.
● On-scene sampling: Forensic microfluidic systems can process biological evidence without extensive handling, reducing the risk of contamination. Your consortium yields uniform results on small samples, and this counts when there is little to be found.
● To screen pathogens at the border or during a disaster, you can use organ-on-chip and lab-on-chip systems to test on the spot. No cold chain. Minimal training needed.
● Platforms that have been miniaturized are naturally scalable and, in the realm of this range of TRL, perfectly suit the “disruptive” framing that the call demands.
Having a microfluidics partner will provide your proposal with a tangible technology piece that your evaluators can envisage in a security situation. And since the call is post-paradigm shifts at low TRL, a miniaturized sensing or analysis platform is precisely the sort of technology that the Commission was referring to when they wrote this topic.
The MIC already brings its expertise in microfluidics to Horizon Europe:
H2020-NMBP-TR-IND-2020
Microfluidic platform to study the interaction of cancer cells with lymphatic tissue
H2020-LC-GD-2020-3
Toxicology assessment of pharmaceutical products on a placenta-on-chip model
