RURBANIVE

1) Can the lead partner be a SME?

Thank you for your interest in the RURBANIVE Open Call.

With regards to your question, according to section 2 Proposal submission of the Applicants' guide, the proposal is submitted by the Consortium Leader, on behalf of all participating parties. There is no requirement by the OC for the selection of the Lead partner of the consortia applying.

It is important to note that proposals and all corresponding documents need to be submitted once by the consortium Lead Partner. Please pay attention to section 2.4 that describes the application process.

Thank you,

The RURBANIVE Open Call Team

2) Subject: Question Regarding Technologies Developed Under the Open Call RURBANIVE I would like to ask whether the technologies to be developed by the consortia under the Open Call must exclusively focus on immersive technologies (such as mixed and augmented reality) or if there is flexibility to develop other technological solutions that contribute to the project's objectives. Thank you in advance for your response.

Dear Madam/ Sir,

Thank you for your interest in RURBANIVE’s Open Call.

“§1.5. Open Call Expected Outcome” of the RURBANIVE Applicant’s Guide specifies that: “Applicants are expected to propose RUEs, meaning digital solutions or other types of advanced technologies, based on the six identified domains of RURBANIVE as presented in Table 1 and other than the RUEs already developed within the project, exemplified in Chapter 1.3. Each consortium must propose a RUE selecting only one of the pre-defined domains.”. In addition, “§1.7. Specific requirements for the sub-projects” also specifies that: “All of RURBANIVE’s 12 RUEs (6 developed by RURBANIVE Partners and 6 developed by the selected consortia of the OC) will be integrated into the Community Store, which is a key outcome of RURBANIVE, integrating enablers, practices, models and other results of the project to be access and visualise through Rural-Urban Immersiveness (RUI). RUI will utilise immersive technologies (such as, mixed and augmented reality). This immersive digital environment will allow vivid realisations, what-if scenarios, and experimentation techniques in the rural-urban settings generating rural-urban synergies.”.

As such, technologies to be developed through RURBANIVE’s Open Call must not exclusively be focused on immersive technologies. Other technological solutions can be proposed provided that they contribute to the Open Call Objectives. However, please note that all Open Call RUEs must have a digital element that can be “integrated in the Community Store”.

The RURBANIVE Open Call Team

3) Dear Sir/Madam, Could I ask you to advice if the UK University can lead that project without SME? In addition, could the UAV / Drone be used to investigate the approach which could help to address the challenges? Many thanks.

Dear Mr. Shpanin,

Yes, according to §2.2.2 "Definition of Eligible Countries" in the RURBANIVE Applicant’s Guide, UK institutions (such as Universities) are eligible to participate in the Open Call, as the UK is associated with Horizon Europe. However, all other eligibility criteria must be met, including the required consortium composition and project implementation location.

SME Involvement and Financial Contribution

• According to §1.4.1 "Purpose and Objectives of the Open Call", all consortia must include:
• At least one technology & service provider (e.g., SME, research institution, technological spin-off, private for-profit or non-profit organization).
• At least one end-user (e.g., local/regional administration, cooperative, NGO, Local Action Group).

An SME is not mandatory but can be included as a technology provider or service-provider, depending on its role in the project.

3 As far as the use of Drones or UAVs to adress rural-urban please be aware that this is an evaluation element and, as such, it wil be evaluated by an independent registry of evaluators.

4) Is the TRL 5 mandatory for this call given that our project hasn't this type of technology planned - rather a social innovation not applicable to the TRL scale?

Dear Madam,

As stated in Ch. 1.5 "Open Call Expected Outcome" of the Applicants' Guide "RUEs are expected to start at minimum TRL5 and reach a maximum TRL81 (for all domains) by the end of the project. ".

5) Is the TRL 5 mandatory for this call given that our project hasn't this type of technology planned - rather a social innovation not applicable to the TRL scale?

Dear Madam,

As stated in Ch. 1.5 "Open Call Expected Outcome" of the Applicants' Guide "RUEs are expected to start at minimum TRL5 and reach a maximum TRL81 (for all domains) by the end of the project. ".

6) Can equipment/materials be purchased through the grant?

Dear Madam,

please be informed that Equipment purchases are eligible under depreciation costs (see Section 2.3. Eligible Costs of the Applicant’s Guide).

7) What are the communication activity obligations for this call?

Dear Madam,

as it is stipulated in Ch. 2.3. "Eligible costs" of the Applicant's Guide "[...] A minimum 7% of the funding will be allocated to the deployment of dissemination activities such as organisation of info days, workshops and informal events to promote the RURBANIVE results.".

8) We are building a consortia that has 2 technology and service providers and 1 end-user as partners. In the case of the end-user partner, it's an organisation that was created as an outcome of a previous project. The organisation is in the process of being officialised, and soon will have a provisional VAT code. We are aiming to get a provisional PIC for the submission of the proposal. Would this be an issue? Thank you!

According to §2.2.1 "Overall Eligibility Criteria" and §2.2.2 "Definition of Eligible Countries", all consortium partners must be legally established entities at the time of proposal submission. This means that:

✔ The organization must have legal status and be officially registered before the contract agreement phase.

✔ If the entity is still in the process of being officialized, it may face eligibility concerns if its status is not finalized before submission.

The final eligibility of the consortium and its partners will be determined during the eligibility check process.

9) We would like to clarify the distribution of the required minimum budget for dissemination activities. The open call guidelines state that "A minimum of 7% of the funding will be allocated to the deployment of dissemination activities such as organisation of info days, workshops, and informal events to promote the RURBANIVE results." Could you confirm whether this 7% requirement applies to the total project budget or to each partner individually? For instance, in a hypothetical project with two partners and a total funding of €100,000: - Would it be acceptable for one partner to allocate the full 7% of total funding (€7,000) to dissemination activities, while the other partner assigns €0 to this category? - Or is each partner required to allocate at least 7% of their respective budget to dissemination activities, e.g., Partner 1: 7% of €40,000 (€2,800 allocated to dissemination) + Partner 2: 7% of €60,000 (€4,200 allocated to dissemination)? Additionally, we have noticed a potential issue in the provided budget Excel file. The conditional formatting in cell C23 seems to be failing, as it remains highlighted in red regardless of the amount allocated for dissemination activities. Could you confirm if this is an error? Thank you in advance for your clarification.

Dear applicant,

1. The second option is true, i.e. the 7% requirement for dissemination activities applies both on a partner and a project level.
2. You may proceed with your submission as long as the numerical value entered meets or exceeds 7% of the total requested funding, and this is clearly documented in the relevant section. The evaluation team will assess your compliance based on the actual figures provided, not the color formatting of the cell.

The RURBANIVE Open Call Team

10) Is it accepted if we propose a RUCL in the same region but different domain? We want to add Larissa which is in the same region of Trikala, Greece. Please note that our RUCL refers to different domain from Trikala. Trikala is for mobility domain, but our proposed RUCL in Larissa will be for circular economy domain. Is same region excluded in this case as well?

According to §2.2.1 "Overall Eligibility Criteria" and §1.5 "Open Call Expected Outcome" of the Applicant’s Guide:

“Proposed solutions must be applied in rural areas, different from those covered by the existing RUCLs areas as described in Section 1 of the Applicants Guide.”

In this context, "different from" refers not only to the domain, but also to the geographical area at the NUTS 2 or NUTS 3 level, depending on how each RUCL is defined. Please check Table 2 "RUCL NUTS Regions" of the Appicant's Guide to see which regions already host a RURBANIVE RUCL. 

Other than the above, please be aware that proposed RUEs should fall within one of the six (6) RURBANIVE Domains. 

The RURBANIVE Open Call Team

11) Could you please confirm that the Bank account forms are not requested to be submitted at the proposal submission stage?

We confirm that the Bank Account Information form (Annex 9) is not required at the proposal submission stage.

As stated in the Open Call documentation, this form is only applicable for selected consortia and will be requested at the contracting stage, after the evaluation process is completed.

The RURBANIVE Open Call Team

12) Where exactly would the 15-page maximum start? From section 2. Proposal description?Thank you!

Dear applicant,

as stated clearly in the Proposal Template: "The entire proposal must not exceed the length of 15 pages. Budget tables do not count against the page limit of 15 pages. The cover page and the ToC are not included in the limit of the 15 pages. Removing explanatory text in the proposal template, located below the paragraph sub-titles is allowed. External evaluators are instructed to dismiss the pages after the 15th page from the evaluation."

The RURBANIVE Open Call Team

13) Clarification on Potential Adjustment to Project Timeline:As part of our ongoing work , we have a well-established plan, existing assets related to our proposal, and experience that may enable us to proceed with the design work more quickly and give more time to the development and validation phase. Could you kindly provide some clarity on whether shortening the Design Phase is possible?

Yes. While the total duration of RURBANIVE sub-projects is fixed at 12 months, there is flexibility in how individual phases (Design, Development, Validation) are structured. Applicants may propose a shortened Design Phase if justified by prior work or existing assets. However, all mandatory deliverables must still be submitted on time (Activity Plan – Month 4, RUE Demonstration – Month 9, Market/Community Report – Month 12). An independent registry of evaluators will assess the feasibility of the proposed work plan.

14) Clarification on Potential Adjustment to Project Timeline:As part of our ongoing work , we have a well-established plan, existing assets related to our proposal, and experience that may enable us to proceed with the design work more quickly and give more time to the development and validation phase. Could you kindly provide some clarity on whether shortening the Design Phase is possible?

Yes. While the total duration of RURBANIVE sub-projects is fixed at 12 months, there is flexibility in how individual phases (Design, Development, Validation) are structured. Applicants may propose a shortened Design Phase if justified by prior work or existing assets. However, all mandatory deliverables must still be submitted on time (Activity Plan – Month 4, RUE Demonstration – Month 9, Market/Community Report – Month 12). An independent registry of evaluators will assess the feasibility of the proposed work plan.

15) Is it possible forthe end-user to pay for the use of the pilot? (e.g. through a ticket), and is there any guidelines on this pay-per-use situation of the pilot/s between technology provider and end-user?

Charging the end-user for access to the RUE during the pilot phase would conflict with both the project’s funding structure and the expected TRL maturity.

To elaborate:

1. The RURBANIVE Open Call funds the end-user’s participation:

• Each partner (including the end-user) receives their own allocated budget to participate in the pilot.
• Therefore, the end-user should not be charged to access a pilot that they are already co-developing and co-funding.

2. The TRL target is 8 — system complete and qualified

• At TRL8, the solution is expected to be tested and validated in a real operational environment, with results used to evaluate scalability, impact, and adoption.
• The purpose is validation, not commercialization.
• Therefore, cost recovery mechanisms such as ticketing may be explored as future business models, but not implemented during the funded pilot.

What is allowed:

You can design a pricing model or simulate payment processes as part of your Market/Community Report or Business Impact analysis, but real revenue generation from the end-user partner is not compatible with the RURBANIVE Open Call rules.

16) I haven´t found tips for "2.4 Team" on the proposal - it refers to 3.5.2 from and is doesn´t exist on "Open Call Applicants Guide",

Indeed the reference is a typographical error, please refer to §2.5.2. Remote Evaluation and key points and, in particular, "Organisational capacity and sufficiency in the team’s background".

17) Dear Rurbanive team, We would like to involve two key end-users in our proposal to support the development, co-creation, and testing of our RUE. However, we face a challenge: while we can justify the cost for one key end-user at 20,000 EUR (the minimum budget per partner), we cannot justify the cost for the second key end-user, as it would be less than 10,000 EUR. We would appreciate your guidance on how to address this situation. Is it possible to subcontract the second key end-user? If so, what is the maximum allowable share of subcontracting costs in relation to the partner or project budget? Thank you in advance for your assistance. Kind regards,

ANSWER

Please be informed of the following:

1. Minimum Budget Per Partner

As stated in §1.6 "Approach & Planned Open Call Realisation" of the Applicant’s Guide:

✔ Each partner in the consortium must receive a minimum of €20,000.

✔ Proposals with partners allocated less than €20,000 will be deemed ineligible.

This rule applies uniformly to all official consortium members, including end-users.

2. Involving Additional Stakeholders via Subcontracting

Yes, it is possible to involve a second key end-user as a subcontractor, provided that:

✔ The role of the subcontractor is clearly defined in the proposal.

✔ The subcontracting cost is justified as essential for the execution of the RUE.

✔ The subcontracting arrangement complies with national and EU procurement rules.

✔ The budget line for subcontracting is properly filled out in the financial template.

3. Subcontracting Thresholds

According to §2.3 “Eligible Costs” of the Applicant’s Guide:

✔ Subcontracting is allowed for up to a maximum of 25% of the total proposed project budget, when properly justified.

Exceeding this threshold would render the proposal non-compliant.

✅ Summary

A second end-user cannot be listed as a full partner unless allocated ≥ €20,000.

You may involve them via subcontracting, provided their cost does not exceed 25% of the overall project budget.

Keep subcontracting proportionate, justified, and clearly documented.

18) In the budget table under 'Direct Personnel Costs', are we required to specify the number of PMs or can we simply provide the total estimated cost without breaking it down?

In the Applicants' Guide §2.3. Eligible costs it is stated "[...] Personnel costs – Costs of the personnel realising the work and preparing the deliverables/reports during each of the 3 phases. Applicants must calculate personnel costs according to the rules and regulations of their country and real labour market data regarding the relevant positions. For the proposal template, only the final amount allocated to personnel costs is necessary.

19) In the budget table under 'Direct Personnel Costs', are we required to specify the number of person-months (PMs), or is it sufficient to provide only the total estimated cost without a breakdown? Also, in the Excel table, the total PM is listed as 19 — does this refer to the combined total across all partners, or is it meant to represent the PMs for a single partner?

In the Applicants' Guide §2.3. Eligible costs it is stated "[...] Personnel costs – Costs of the personnel realising the work and preparing the deliverables/reports during each of the 3 phases. Applicants must calculate personnel costs according to the rules and regulations of their country and real labour market data regarding the relevant positions. For the proposal template, only the final amount allocated to personnel costs is necessary."

The value "19 PM" shown in the template is only an example for illustration purposes.

It is not a fixed requirement or a recommended number.

✔ The actual number of PMs should be tailored to your project, your team size, and the scope of work described in your proposal.

✔ Each partner must enter their own estimated PMs and associated costs in the appropriate row.

20) For the 'Other Direct Costs: Travel Costs' section, should we include travel expenses for the project's general assembly meeting? If so, how many travels should we plan for?

Eligibility of Travel Costs

Yes — travel costs related to the implementation and coordination of the RUE, including those for a project General Assembly (GA) meeting, are eligible under the “Other Direct Costs - Travel Costs” category.

Number of Travels to Plan

The Open Call does not impose a fixed number of General Assembly or coordination meetings.

In conclusion:

-Travel for a General Assembly or similar coordination meetings can be included.

-Justify these costs clearly in the proposal and budget.

Important Notice: In §2.5.2. Remote Evaluation and key points of the Applicants' Guide it is mentioned that the "[...] Organisational capacity and sufficiency will be evaluated according to the following criteria: [...] comprehensive budget definition including the amount of funding requested and how it will be spent, the implementation steps and consequently the value/benefit.".

21) Dear Sir or Madam we have some questions: 1. As digital/IT solutions we will develop dynamic QR codes (tracking, declarations, promotion, digital transfer...) and online portal (online orders - promotion intermediary, online business cards for stakeholders). Regarding TRL- is a description sufficient, or is it necessary to provide any evidence such as screenshots...? 2. Part of the project is the establishment of community logistics HUB for small farms that do not have the resources or their own capacities. Is the purchase of equipment, such as a refrigerator or ripening chamber, justified? 3. In application form we have to describe how the digital RUE enhances RURBANIVE’s Community Store. Where can we get more info what a community store is? Thank you. Dane

1. You don't need to provide explicit evidence of the TRL level of the technologies you will incorporate in your proposal, a description is sufficient. If you feel, however, that providing additional elements (e.g. screenshots) will strenghthen your proposal you can do so, provided you adhere to the 15-page limit.
2. Equipment costs are eligible. However, and in §2.3. Eligible costs of the Applicants' Guide it is stated: "Equipment costs – Borrowing or loaning of the necessary equipment is not eligible, only depreciation costs for purchased equipment are eligible." We cannot comment, however, on the appropriatness or the suitabilty of the equipment you mention as this is part of the evaluation process, which will be carried out by an independent registry of Evaluators.
3. Each micro-consortium funded by the RURBANIVE Open Call will develop and host their own solutions. It is up to the Consortia to describe in their proposal which part of the RUE will be integrated to RURBANIVE's virtual hub (the Community Store website). The RUEs will be included/integrated to the Community Store via an iFrame and guidelines will be provided to ensure a consistent look and feel across the store's user interface.

22) Hi Rurbanive team, You mentioned that all annexes should be submitted in PDF format. Does this include Annex 8 - Budget table which is in Excel file format?

In §2.3. Eligible costs of the Applicants' Guide it is clearly state that "[...] In the submitted proposals, costs must be described by each participating party in the consortium. The budget must be filled in for each proposal using the excel template available. Applicants will then save the excel sheet as pdf and upload it on the opencalls.fund platform."

23) www.BusinessModelGeneration.com is mentioned, but site is not available

The address has changed, but automatically redirects by itself: https://www.strategyzer.com/library/the-business-model-canvas.

24) If the domain of our participation is different from Trikala Region, but is from the same NUT 3, can we participate?

According to §2.2.1 "Overall Eligibility Criteria" and §1.5 "Open Call Expected Outcome" of the Applicant’s Guide: “Proposed solutions must be applied in rural areas, different from those covered by the existing RUCLs areas as described in Section 1 of the Applicants Guide.”. As such proposed RUEs must be implmeneted in an area, at the NUTS 2 or NUTS 3 level, other than those described in Table 2 "RUCL NUTS Regions" of the Appicant's Guide.

25) Dear Rurbanive team,I hope this email finds you well. I just wanted to kindly follow up and ask if you received my previous email with the question. We would greatly appreciate your response at your earliest convenience, as we would like to complete our application. Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Dear applicant,

if you are reffering to the email with the following content:

"Hi Rurbanive team, You mentioned that all annexes should be submitted in PDF format. Does this include Annex 8 - Budget table which is in Excel file format?"

then it has been adddressed as follows:

"In §2.3. Eligible costs of the Applicants' Guide it is clearly state that "[...] In the submitted proposals, costs must be described by each participating party in the consortium. The budget must be filled in for each proposal using the excel template available. Applicants will then save the excel sheet as pdf and upload it on the opencalls.fund platform."

26) Is it feasible the application of the solution to be in two rural ares, the one of the end-user to be in a same NUT3 with one RURBANIVE case, and the other one to be the technology provider's area?

According to §2.2.1 "Overall Eligibility Criteria" and §1.5 "Open Call Expected Outcome" of the Applicant’s Guide: “Proposed solutions must be applied in rural areas, different from those covered by the existing RUCLs areas as described in Section 1 of the Applicants Guide.”. As such, proposed RUEs must be implmeneted in an area, at the NUTS 2 or NUTS 3 level, other than those described in Table 2 "RUCL NUTS Regions" of the Appicant's Guide.

In §2.2.1. "Overall eligibility criteria" of the Applicants' Guide it is clearly stated: "[..]Proposed solutions must be applied in rural areas, different from those covered by theexisting RUCLs areas as described in section 1 of the Applicants Guide. [...] Only proposals that comply with these criteria are eligible to move on to the evaluation round.".

Please read the Applicants' Guide for greater detail.