EIC Accelerator writer

Allocating Financial Resources to Catalyze Groundbreaking Technological Innovations through the EIC Accelerator Program

by

Understanding the European Innovation Council Accelerator: A Comprehensive Overview of Its Purpose, Features, and Opportunities for Visionary Entrepreneurs The European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator represents a pivotal component of Horizon Europe’s comprehensive suite of funding initiatives, meticulously designed to underpin cutting-edge companies that are at the forefront of exploiting radical technological advances or path-breaking scientific insights, collectively known as Deep Technology (DeepTech). With a financial framework that encompasses up to €2.5 million in the form of non-dilutive Grant funding and the potential for up to €15 million in Equity investment per individual project, the EIC Accelerator orchestrates a robust mechanism for propelling high-risk, high-impact innovations from concept to market realization. This strategic infusion of capital aims to catalyze the growth trajectories of start-ups and SMEs as they navigate the challenging phases of product development, scale-up, and market deployment. Comprehensive Overview of Targeted Technologies Eligible for Funding through the EIC Accelerator Program Since its inception in 2021, the European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator program has supported over 400 pioneering enterprises, spanning a diverse spectrum of sectors. This includes ventures engaged in the development of capital-intensive hardware solutions as well as those focused exclusively on the innovation and deployment of sophisticated software products, with a particular emphasis on Deep Technology (DeepTech) domains. The EIC Accelerator maintains an open stance towards a wide array of technological advancements and does not impose overarching technological constraints on its applicants. However, to remain consistent with EU directives, technologies with potential military applications are exempt from consideration. In addition to this broad scope for innovation, the EIC Accelerator program identifies and promotes a set of Technology Challenges on an annual basis. These challenges are designed to spotlight and incentivize progress in specific technological areas that are deemed strategically important and have high potential for societal impact within the European Union. Assessing the Maturity Level Required for a Technology to Qualify for the EIC Accelerator Program The European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator program specifically targets innovations that have achieved a minimum of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5, a stage characterized by the validation of the technology within an environment that closely mirrors real-world conditions. At this level, the innovation is expected to have progressed beyond theoretical stages, embodying a tangible prototype or a demonstrable proof-of-concept that substantiates its efficacy and potential. Applicants seeking financial support from the EIC Accelerator can apply for Grant funding if their technology has advanced to TRL 6 or TRL 7. At TRL 6, the technology must have been demonstrated in a relevant environment, showcasing its ability to function under conditions similar to its intended use. Further progression to TRL 7 indicates that the prototype has undergone system prototype demonstration in an operational environment, offering a more comprehensive validation of its performance and suitability. For technologies that have reached TRL 8, where the actual system has been completed and qualified through test and demonstration, the EIC Accelerator offers the opportunity to apply for pure Equity investment. This funding option is designed to support the final stages of technology development and scaling, facilitating the transition from an innovative concept to a market-ready product or solution. Exploring the Range of Financial Support Offered Through the EIC Accelerator Program The European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator provides robust financial support tailored to the needs of companies poised for growth and market expansion. Qualified enterprises can access substantial funding through three distinct instruments: 1. Grant Financing: The EIC Accelerator offers non-dilutive grant funding of up to €2.5 million, allotted as a lump sum to support activities such as proof of concept, prototyping, system development, piloting, validation, and testing in real-world environments, as well as market replication. 2. Equity Financing: For ventures seeking a more substantial funding mechanism, the EIC Accelerator may provide equity investments reaching up to €15 million. This equity component is facilitated through the EIC Fund or its affiliates and involves a calculated exchange of capital for a strategic ownership stake in the applicant’s company. This allows for a more substantial financial backing, enabling scaling and significant growth without the need to repay the investment like a traditional loan. 3. Blended Finance: Companies that require a synergy of grant and equity backing can benefit from Blended Finance, featuring a combination of both types of funding, up to an aggregate ceiling of €17.5 million. This hybrid financing model is structured to leverage the advantages of grant funding together with the sizable capital infusion that equity financing offers, thus providing a comprehensive financial package. Applicants possess the flexibility to determine the financing model that most aptly aligns with their strategic goals and the scale of their innovation project. They can tailor their request to include the desired funding type (grant, equity, or blended finance) and specify the amount that reflects their needs. Moreover, in circumstances where the scope and ambition of the innovation project justify a larger investment, the EIC Accelerator is open to considering requests that exceed the standard funding ceilings. These exceptional cases are evaluated on their individual merit, ensuring that the most groundbreaking and disruptive companies have access to the capital required to reach their full market potential. Detailed Overview of EIC Accelerator Applicant’s Business and Innovation Background Eligibility Criteria and Types of Entities That Qualify for EIC Accelerator Funding Entities seeking funding through the European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator program must primarily be for-profit Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) that are legally incorporated within a member state or associated country that is deemed eligible for participation. However, the framework also accommodates applications from individual entrepreneurs and investors, with the stipulation that a qualifying company must be established prior to the formal execution of the Grant Agreement Contract. To qualify as an SME under the EIC Accelerator’s guidelines, the enterprise must be autonomous, not linked to or partnered with larger firms that fall outside the SME categorization. The SME should have a workforce of fewer than 250 persons, and it must exhibit either an annual turnover not exceeding €50 million or a balance sheet total … Read more

Financing Pioneering Breakthroughs through the EIC Accelerator

by

An Overview of the European Innovation Council Accelerator Programme The EIC Accelerator, an esteemed funding initiative under the auspices of the European Innovation Council (EIC) and integral to the Horizon Europe framework, is dedicated to providing substantial financial support to pioneering enterprises. This program focuses on organizations that are at the forefront of advancing technological innovations or harnessing the potential of scientific breakthroughs within the realm of Deep Technology (DeepTech). Eligible projects may receive up to €2.5 million in the form of grants, complemented by the option of equity financing up to €15 million, fostering the growth and scalability of groundbreaking ventures. Overview of Funded Technologies under the EIC Accelerator Program Since its inception in 2021, the European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator has supported a diverse array of over 400 enterprises, spanning a multitude of sectors. These beneficiaries include ventures engaging in capital-intensive hardware operations as well as those dedicated to purely software-driven initiatives, with a strong emphasis on Deep Technology innovations. The EIC Accelerator maintains a broad technological scope with no overarching restrictions, provided that the proposed technologies adhere to European Union directives and do not support military applications or related fields. Furthermore, the EIC Accelerator underscores its commitment to advancing pioneering technologies by emphasizing specific Technology Challenges annually, thereby spotlighting areas of strategic interest and potential growth within the innovation ecosystem. Assessing the Technological Readiness Level for EIC Accelerator Eligibility The European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator provides financial support for the advancement of technologies that have attained a minimum of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5, which is characterized by the validation of the technology within a pertinent operational environment. To qualify for funding, applicants are typically expected to have developed a prototype or established a proof-of-concept that substantiates the technology’s efficacy. Additionally, entities whose technologies have progressed to TRL 6 or 7 may seek grant funding to further their development. For technologies that have advanced to TRL 8, the EIC Accelerator may offer pure equity investment options to facilitate their market entry and scale-up. Overview of Available Funding Streams through the EIC Accelerator The European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator provides financial support to enterprises via three distinct funding mechanisms: Grants of up to €2.5 million, which are non-dilutive and disbursed as lump sum payments; Equity investments of up to €15 million made by the EIC Fund or its affiliates in return for shares within the company; and Blended Finance, which amalgamates both Grant and Equity financing up to a maximum of €17.5 million. Prospective applicants have the discretion to select their preferred funding type and the corresponding amount that aligns with their business requirements. Under extraordinary circumstances, applicants may be considered for funding allocations that exceed the standard thresholds. Profile of the Applicant for the EIC Accelerator Programme Eligibility Criteria for EIC Accelerator Funding Recipients Eligible entities for the EIC Accelerator include for-profit small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that are duly registered within a qualifying country. Furthermore, individuals or investors may also submit applications under the premise that they establish a company prior to the execution of the Grant Agreement Contract. To qualify, these companies must adhere to the SME definition of the European Union, which includes maintaining a workforce of fewer than 250 persons and either an annual turnover not exceeding €50 million or an annual balance sheet total not surpassing €43 million, thereby ensuring the independent nature of the business entity. Eligibility Criteria: Participating EU Member States for the EIC Accelerator The EIC Accelerator programme extends its eligibility to entities and entrepreneurs across the entire European Union, encompassing all 27 member states, which include Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden, as well as their affiliated territories. This comprehensive accessibility ensures equitable opportunities for innovation and enterprise development throughout the Union. Eligibility Criteria for Non-EU Country Participation in the EIC Accelerator Program The European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator confirms the existence of association agreements with Horizon Europe that enable entities and individuals from an established set of third countries to participate in the program. Eligible applicants from the following associated countries may seek funding: Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Faroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Kosovo*, the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Norway, Serbia, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, Morocco, and the United Kingdom (which is eligible for grant-only participation). * This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. Determining Suitability for the EIC Accelerator Programme: Is It the Right Fit for Your Enterprise? Analysis of the EIC Accelerator’s Success Metrics and Approval Ratios The EIC Accelerator ensures transparency and fairness in its evaluation processes; however, precise success rates for each of the three distinct evaluation stages are not routinely published. Nonetheless, it is estimated that the cumulative success rate for projects advancing from Step 1 through Step 3 is at or below the 5% threshold. It is important to note that this rate is subject to fluctuation, influenced by factors such as the EIC Accelerator’s annual budget allocations, the volume of submissions per designated cut-off date, and the specific nature of the Call—whether it is an Open or Challenges call. Consequently, applicants may experience variable success rates in line with these parameters. Assessing Your Company’s Eligibility for the EIC Accelerator Program The EIC Accelerator prioritizes the endorsement of ventures that are at the forefront of innovation, characterized by disruptive technological advancements with a profound DeepTech foundation, or those of a significant scientific or technical nature. The EIC Accelerator’s mandate is to champion high-risk, high-potential enterprises that exhibit a clear strategy for market deployment. Historically, the EIC Accelerator has provided financial support to a diverse array of scientific breakthroughs, as well as software enterprises, Software as a Service (SaaS) platforms, and even robustly capitalized firms with comparatively lower risk trajectories. Eligibility and Assessment Criteria … Read more

Accelerating EIC Accelerator Applications: The Advantages of Rasph Training for In-House Team Collaboration

by

Introduction For startups and SMEs aiming to apply for the EIC Accelerator, the Rasph training program offers a strategic advantage. By equipping an in-house team with the necessary skills and knowledge, the program enables companies to write their applications collaboratively and efficiently. This approach can often lead to a faster final result compared to relying on a single writer or outsourcing the task. The Benefits of Rasph Training for In-House Application Writing Team Collaboration and Efficiency: Training an in-house team creates an environment of collaboration, where different members can contribute their specific expertise to the application. This collaboration can significantly speed up the writing process compared to relying on a single writer. Comprehensive Understanding of the Business: An in-house team, well-versed in the company’s operations and strategy through the Rasph training, can effectively translate the business’s nuances into the application. This deep understanding ensures a more coherent and compelling proposal. Rapid Response and Iteration: With an in-house team, revisions and iterations can happen quickly. Direct communication and immediate feedback loops enable the team to adapt and refine the application promptly, responding to evolving needs and insights. Cost-Effective Approach: Training an in-house team is often more cost-effective in the long run compared to outsourcing. While there’s an initial investment in training, it eliminates the recurring costs associated with hiring external consultants for each application. Building Long-Term Capacity: The Rasph training program builds long-term grant application skills within the team. This capacity remains within the company, benefiting future applications and reducing dependency on external sources. Implementing the Rasph Training Effectively Selecting the Right Team Members: Choose team members with diverse skills – including technical, business, and writing expertise – to undergo the Rasph training. This diversity ensures a well-rounded approach to the application. Integrating Training with Application Development: Align the training schedule with the application timeline. Apply learnings from the training directly to the application process, ensuring real-time benefits. Encouraging Cross-Departmental Collaboration: Foster a collaborative environment where team members from different departments can contribute their insights, leading to a more comprehensive and multifaceted application. Leveraging Digital Tools and Resources: Utilize digital tools for project management, document collaboration, and version control to streamline the application writing process and enhance team efficiency. Conclusion Using the Rasph training program for preparing EIC Accelerator applications empowers companies to harness their in-house capabilities, leading to faster and more effective application writing. This approach not only accelerates the application process but also builds a sustainable skill set within the organization, proving beneficial for both current and future funding opportunities.

Balancing Scale and Quality: The Challenges Faced by Large EIC Accelerator Consultancies

by

Introduction In the realm of EIC Accelerator applications, the largest consultancies often face a paradoxical challenge: maintaining high-quality services while managing a vast pool of freelance writers. This article examines how the scale of operations in these consultancies can impact quality control and the implications of their need to take on a broad range of applicants. The Quality Control Dilemma in Large Consultancies Diverse Freelance Writers: Large consultancies typically employ numerous freelance writers to handle the volume of work. While this allows for handling a large number of applications, it introduces variability in writing quality and expertise. Challenges in Maintaining Consistency: Ensuring consistent quality across a wide array of freelancers can be daunting. Quality control becomes more challenging as the number of writers and projects increases. Difficulty in Specialization: Large consultancies, due to their size, might struggle to match writers with specific industry expertise to relevant projects. This lack of specialization can affect the depth and accuracy of the applications. The Pressure to Accept Diverse Applications Volume-Oriented Business Model: Many large consultancies operate on a volume-based model, where taking on a high number of clients is necessary to sustain the business and provide work for their large pool of writers. Compromise on Applicant Fit: This model can lead to consultancies accepting applicants who may not be the best fit for the EIC Accelerator program. The focus shifts from quality and suitability to quantity. Impact on Success Rates: Accepting a wide range of clients without thorough vetting can lead to lower success rates, as not all projects may align well with the EIC’s objectives and criteria. Strategies for Overcoming These Challenges Rigorous Quality Control Processes: Implementing strict quality control measures and regular training sessions for freelance writers can help maintain a high standard of applications. Selective Client Onboarding: Adopting a more selective approach in client onboarding, focusing on the suitability and potential of the projects for the EIC Accelerator, can enhance the overall success rate. Fostering Specialization: Encouraging or requiring writers to specialize in certain industries or sectors can lead to more informed and tailored applications. Balanced Growth Strategies: Large consultancies should balance their growth strategies with a focus on quality, ensuring that scale does not compromise the effectiveness of their services. Conclusion While large EIC Accelerator consultancies benefit from the ability to handle a high volume of applications, they face significant challenges in quality control and client fit. By focusing on rigorous quality processes, selective client onboarding, writer specialization, and balanced growth strategies, these consultancies can overcome these challenges, ensuring that their size becomes an asset rather than a liability in delivering high-quality grant application services.

Navigating the Grant Writing Landscape: The Critical Need for Specialization in EIC Accelerator Applications

by

The landscape of grant writing, particularly for highly competitive and prestigious programs like the European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator, presents a unique challenge for companies seeking funding. Most professional grant writers do not specialize in a single grant program due to the inherently low success rates of such grants. However, given the complexity and specificity of the EIC Accelerator, there is a compelling argument for seeking a writer who specializes in this particular grant. The Generalist Approach in Grant Writing Diversified Expertise Many grant writers choose to diversify their expertise across various grant programs rather than specializing in one. This approach is largely driven by practical reasons: it mitigates the risk associated with low success rates of highly competitive grants. By broadening their scope, these writers increase their chances of success in securing funding for their clients across different programs. Challenges for Applicants For companies applying to the EIC Accelerator, working with a generalist grant writer can be a double-edged sword. While these writers bring a wealth of experience in grant writing, their broad focus might mean less familiarity with the intricate details and specific demands of the EIC Accelerator program. This lack of specialization could potentially affect the quality and competitiveness of an application. The Value of Specialization in EIC Accelerator Applications Navigating the Complexity The EIC Accelerator is known for its rigorous and complex application process, which requires a deep understanding of the program’s objectives, criteria, and nuances. A grant writer who specializes in the EIC Accelerator will have a more thorough understanding of these elements and be better equipped to navigate its complexities. Tailored Strategies Specialist writers are likely to have developed tailored strategies and insights that are particularly effective for the EIC Accelerator. Their experience with the program’s specific requirements, such as the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) criteria, the pitch deck, and the interview process, provides them with a nuanced understanding that can significantly benefit an application. Higher Quality Applications Applications crafted by specialists tend to be of higher quality and more aligned with the EIC Accelerator’s expectations. This specialization can lead to a more persuasive and compelling grant proposal, potentially increasing the likelihood of success. Considering the Investment Cost-Benefit Analysis While hiring a specialized grant writer might come at a higher cost, companies must weigh this against the potential benefits. The increased chances of securing funding through a well-crafted, specialized application can justify the investment, especially considering the significant financial support offered by the EIC Accelerator. Long-Term Impact Securing funding from the EIC Accelerator can have a transformative impact on a company, providing not just financial support but also validation and exposure. The long-term benefits of this success can far outweigh the initial cost of investing in a specialized grant writer. Conclusion In the competitive realm of grant funding, particularly for a program as challenging as the EIC Accelerator, the expertise of a specialized grant writer can be invaluable. While most grant writers opt for a generalist approach, the complexities and specific demands of the EIC Accelerator make a strong case for seeking a specialist. For companies aspiring to secure EIC funding, the decision to invest in specialized grant writing expertise could be a pivotal factor in their application’s success.

The Pitfalls of Large Writing Teams in Grant Applications

by

Introduction The grant application process, particularly for prestigious programs like the European Innovation Council’s (EIC) Accelerator, is a complex task often undertaken by large writing teams. However, this approach can inadvertently hinder the application’s effectiveness, primarily due to the diffusion of responsibility among team members. The Challenge of Diffused Responsibility In large writing teams, no single individual holds full responsibility for the application. This diffusion can lead to a lack of cohesive vision and strategy. Without a central figure guiding the narrative, the application may suffer from inconsistencies in tone, style, and content, weakening its overall impact. The Importance of a Unified Voice A grant application needs a singular, compelling voice to effectively communicate its purpose and value. Large teams, with diverse writing styles and perspectives, can struggle to maintain this unified voice. The resulting document might read as disjointed, making it difficult for evaluators to grasp the core message. Coordination and Communication Challenges Large teams face logistical challenges in coordination and communication. Ensuring that all members are aligned with the latest updates and changes can be an arduous task, often leading to information gaps and inconsistencies in the application. The Risk of Overcomplication With multiple contributors, there’s a tendency to overcomplicate the narrative. Each writer may add layers of detail and technical jargon, believing it adds value. However, this often leads to an overly complex application, detracting from the main focus and making it less accessible to evaluators. The Solution: Streamlined Teams and Clear Leadership To mitigate these risks, it’s crucial to streamline the writing team and establish clear leadership. A lead writer or project manager should be responsible for maintaining the application’s vision, ensuring consistency, and overseeing the contributions of each team member. This approach fosters a more coherent and effective grant application. Conclusion While large writing teams bring diverse expertise to the grant application process, their effectiveness is hampered by diffused responsibility and the challenges of maintaining a unified narrative. Streamlining the team and appointing clear leadership can significantly enhance the quality and coherence of the application, increasing the chances of success in competitive grant programs like the EIC Accelerator.

The Consultancy Hive: Navigating the World of Freelance Writers in Grant Applications

by

Introduction In the competitive realm of grant funding, particularly within programs like the European Innovation Council’s (EIC) Accelerator, the reliance on consultancy firms that utilize a network of freelance writers is becoming increasingly prevalent. This article explores the dynamics of how consultancies are employing a hive of freelance writers to meet the growing demand for expertly crafted grant applications, especially for startups and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) seeking significant funding. The Consultancy-Freelancer Nexus Grant consultancy firms have become crucial players in the landscape of funding applications, offering strategic guidance and writing expertise to enhance the chances of success. To meet the diverse and voluminous needs of applicants vying for opportunities like the EIC Accelerator’s total financing of up to €17.5 million, many consultancies have turned to outsourcing their writing tasks. This approach involves building a network of skilled freelance writers who bring a range of expertise and perspectives to the table. Why Outsourcing Writing is Common Diverse Expertise: Freelance writers often specialize in various fields and industries, enabling consultancies to match the specific needs of a project with a writer who has relevant expertise. Scalability: The use of freelancers allows consultancies to scale their operations up or down based on the flow of applications, ensuring efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Quality and Fresh Perspectives: Freelancers bring fresh eyes and new ideas to each application, enhancing the quality and creativity of the proposals. Meeting Tight Deadlines: The flexibility of freelancers is key in meeting tight application deadlines, a common scenario in grant funding processes. The Challenges of the Hive Model While the hive model offers numerous benefits, it also presents challenges. Ensuring consistency in writing quality and maintaining a cohesive voice throughout the application can be difficult when multiple writers are involved. Furthermore, managing a network of freelancers requires effective coordination and clear communication to ensure that all aspects of the application align with the funding program’s criteria and objectives. The Role of Consultancies in Quality Assurance Consultancies play a pivotal role in quality assurance, overseeing the work of freelance writers to ensure it meets the high standards required for successful applications. This involves thorough editing, alignment with the official proposal template, and strategic refinement to meet evaluative criteria. Consultancies also ensure that the unique vision and voice of the applicant are preserved, even when the writing process is outsourced. The Importance of Expert Guidance The complexity of grant applications, especially in prestigious programs like the EIC Accelerator, necessitates expert guidance. Whether it’s understanding the nuances of the funding program or crafting a compelling narrative, the expertise provided by consultancies and their network of freelancers is invaluable. They help transform innovative ideas into fundable proposals, navigating the intricacies of the application process with professionalism and strategic insight. Conclusion The trend of consultancies employing a hive of freelance writers to manage the demands of grant applications reflects the evolving landscape of funding acquisition. This model brings together diverse expertise and flexibility, crucial for crafting high-quality applications. As the competition for funding like the EIC Accelerator intensifies, the role of consultancies and their network of talented freelance writers becomes increasingly vital. Their collective effort not only aids startups and SMEs in securing essential funding but also contributes significantly to the advancement of innovation and progress in various sectors.

Presenting ChatEIC: The AI Co-Pilot for EIC Accelerator Applications

by

Imagine you could simply generate an entire EIC Accelerator application based on a single company file and a few prompts. ChatEIC, a custom AI based on GPT-4, is able to do exactly just that. EIC Accelerator Modules The EIC Accelerator Training Program utilizes a Module-based approach to grant writing where specific sections are combined into Modules to facilitate the learning and writing process. Using the same approach for teaching companies how to write a grant application and apply for the EIC Accelerator, ChatEIC is able to learn how each section must be structured and can simply apply its learnings to any company. In this scenario, the user has to provide only minimal input, if any. Ideally, the user only needs to upload an investor deck or a long pitch deck and ChatEIC will take it from there. The Case Study: Generating Proposal Sections As an example, one can use publically available data such as an investor deck by the publically-traded synthetic biology company Ginkgo Bioworks. While this deck is by no means complete, it contains 66 pages of valuable information and, most importantly, describes a DeepTech project that is very much aligned with the EIC Accelerator. Ginkgo Bioworks, while it is a US business, is an excellent case study to test the capabilities of AI-generated grant proposal sections since the main performance standard for any AI grant writer is minimum input. Using an AI text generator is only useful if it reduces the workload which makes minimal prompt work a must. Now, let’s see how well ChatEIC will perform with its general knowledge regarding the writing of EIC Accelerator proposals. A major challenge is to turn general knowledge into specialized knowledge since each company, market and industry are different. So, is ChatEIC able to create specialized sections or will it end up being generic? Example: Market, Abstract and Risks Note: The modules contain pre-defined context that ChatEIC will recognize and use to write for this project. ChatEIC does not need to be reminded what each Module means since it knows them by heart and just needs to hear the number. In this case, the first input prompt only contains the Ginkgo Bioworks Investor Deck as a PDF attachment. The following chat conversation represents the entire conversation, prompts and information exchanged with ChatEIC without any edits or omissions. ChatEIC has no prior knowledge regarding grant applications for Ginkgo Bioworks or specialized knowledge of synthetic biology companies outside of the GPT-4 base. Input: Write Module 56 (Ginkgo.PDF attached) ChatEIC: After reviewing the document provided, I didn’t find specific information related to Market Size & Growth (Module 56) for Ginkgo. However, based on the nature of Ginkgo’s work and industry, I can draft a generic Module 56 for your review. Module 56: Market Size & Growth Market Size and Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) Ginkgo operates in the rapidly evolving biotechnology sector, focusing on cell programming and bioengineering. The Total Addressable Market (TAM) for the global biotech industry is estimated to be over €XX billion, driven by increasing demand for innovative healthcare solutions, sustainable agricultural practices, and novel bio-based products. Serviceable Addressable Market (SAM) Within this broad market, Ginkgo’s SAM can be segmented into specialized areas like synthetic biology, genome engineering, and biosecurity, totaling around €XX billion. This segment is characterized by a robust growth trajectory due to technological advancements and increasing adoption of bioengineered solutions across various industries. Serviceable Obtainable Market (SOM) Ginkgo’s SOM, considering its current product and service offerings, is projected to be in the range of €XX million to €XX million. The company is well-positioned to capture a significant portion of this market, given its innovative platform, strategic partnerships, and advanced capabilities in cell programming. Market Trends and Future Outlook The market is witnessing a significant shift towards sustainable and environmentally friendly solutions, where Ginkgo’s expertise in bioengineering is highly relevant. Upcoming regulatory changes, increased investment in biotech research, and a growing focus on personalized medicine and sustainable practices are likely to further drive market growth. Ginkgo’s ability to adapt and innovate positions it favorably to leverage these trends for sustained growth. This module is a general depiction based on the typical market environment for companies like Ginkgo. For a more accurate and detailed module, specific market data and growth projections related to Ginkgo’s products and services are required. Do you have any additional information or specific data points that you would like to include in this module? Input: Use Bing to search for market reports for the SAM and SOM as well in the broader synthetic biology space ChatEIC: Based on a quick search, here’s what I discovered. The search for specific market reports on the Serviceable Addressable Market (SAM) and Serviceable Obtainable Market (SOM) in the synthetic biology space for 2024 didn’t yield precise results. The available information primarily covers the overall Synthetic Biology Market. Here’s what I found: The Synthetic Biology Market size is estimated to be USD 79.39 billion in 2024 and is expected to reach USD 145.49 billion by 2029, growing at a CAGR of 12.88% during the forecast period (2024-2029)​​.[ref] According to another report, the Synthetic Biology Market was valued at USD 13.1 billion in 2022 and is projected to expand at a significant growth rate​​.[ref] A different source mentions that the global synthetic biology market size was valued at USD 13.09 billion in 2022 and is expected to expand at a CAGR of 18.97% from 2023 to 2030​​.[ref] One more report supports the estimation of the Synthetic Biology Market size at USD 79.39 billion in 2024, with a growth forecast up to USD 145.49 billion by 2029​​.[ref] Lastly, another study valued the Synthetic Biology Market at USD 9.4 billion in 2022 and expected it to reach USD 47.4 billion by 2029, with a CAGR of 26% during the forecast period 2023-29​​.[ref] These findings provide a broad overview of the market size and growth rate in the synthetic biology sector. However, for a more precise estimation of SAM and SOM for Ginkgo … Read more

On Hiring a Consultant or Grant Writer for the 2021 EIC Accelerator (SME Instrument)

by

The EIC Accelerator blended financing (formerly SME Instrument Phase 2, grant and equity) has introduced a new stage to the application process in 2021 which acts as a mini-proposal termed Step 1 (read: Re-Inventing the EIC Accelerator). It includes materials such as a written grant application, a video pitch and a pitch deck which must be submitted to the European Innovation Councils (EIC) AI platform (read: AI Tool Review). With this change, the EIC Accelerator now has three Steps that must be passed, namely Step 1 (short application), Step 2 (full application) and Step 3 (face-to-face interview) (read: Recommendations for the EICA) but many startups and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SME) are unsure what these Steps mean and what deadlines and timelines are associated with them. As a short guide, applicants can refer to the following notes: Step 1 is a short application that can be prepared in less than 30 days and can be submitted any time without a fixed deadline (read: Pitch Video Workflow) Step 2 is a very long application that can only be submitted if (i) Step 1 has been approved and (ii) the EIC has published a fixed deadline. In 2021, there were two cut-offs, namely June and October. The minimum time to prepare the Step 2 application should be 60 days but more is recommended. Step 3 is a face-to-face interview that uses the pitch deck submitted in Step 2. It is only available to projects that have been approved in Step 2 and the dates for this Step are fixed to be right after the Step 2 evaluations are released (i.e. the pitch week). The preparation for this Step can be performed in 14 days. What to Develop Alone and What to Outsource There is no general rule as to when a consultant or professional writer should be hired or if one is needed at all. The official proposal templates, work program and guidelines (i.e. for the EIC fund and the AI tool) are publically available which means that every company is technically able to apply on their own. Considerations must be made regarding the resources available and the timing of the grant writing. For Step 1, the effort is comparatively small: Benefits of Developing Step 1 In-House Step 1 requires comparatively little time-effort Step 1 is relatively easy to develop No money is wasted in case the project is not suitable for the EIC Accelerator (i.e. some consultancies will onboard low-success cases) Full control over the outcome Benefits of Hiring a Consultant A consultant can shape the project and make it more impactful as well as avoid red flags Being part of Step 1 will simplify the Step 2 process Optimize the automated scoring on the AI platform based on experience Time savings Close contact with the EIC to be prepared for unexpected changes Consultants will re-submit a proposal if rejected while a rejected project will have a difficult time hiring a consultant The downsides of each approach are the reverse of each other meaning that what is a benefit of hiring a consultant will be the downside of preparing an application alone. For Step 2, the comparison would be as follows: Note: The comparison for Step 2 assumes that applicants have successfully applied for Step 1 by themselves and are considering hiring a Step 2 partner. Benefits of Developing Step 2 In-House Cost savings Full control over the outcome Benefits of Hiring a Consultant A consultant can shape the project and make it more impactful as well as avoid red flags Organizing the project development and collaboration between the management team to meet the deadline Time savings Close contact with the EIC to be prepared for unexpected changes There are a variety of considerations to be made alongside the general tradeoffs of hiring a consultancy listed above. One of these is the way companies assess their own capabilities and the way they judge their performed effort. It is not uncommon for a consultant to be contacted by a client who wants to apply to Step 1 by themselves while casually mentioning that they have scored B or C in all AI tool segments even though the project is highly qualified for the EIC Accelerator. Just because Step 1 is relatively easy to prepare does not mean that it is a low hanging fruit. One must place significant effort into the preparation of the application regardless of its simplicity. Yes, the EIC wants to make it easy for applicants to apply and wants to avoid them wasting their time on a long application if there is no chance for them to succeed. But this does not mean that evaluators will get a project with minimal input or read between the lines. Companies that are very busy often think that preparing a quick application will be good enough but this does not apply to EIC grants. A company should be prepared to go the extra mile with the application and fill out every section with a maximum amount of attention and effort. Conclusion The best way to answer the question as to when a consultant should be hired would be to first decide if an in-house proposal preparation is an option at all (i.e. time availability, skilled staff). Secondly, the company should talk to consultancies to identify if the project has appropriate chances for success (i.e. multiple opinions are recommended since some consultancies are not selective enough). Thirdly, the company must weigh the tradeoffs of in-house proposal writing which are the intense time requirements, especially for Step 2, but also the workload on the management team which might be better-advised focusing on business-relevant tasks instead of writing.

Keyword and Evaluator Selection for EIC Accelerator Applications (SME Instrument)

by

The EIC Accelerator blended financing (formerly SME Instrument Phase 2, grant and equity) allows all applying startups and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SME) to add keywords into the platform which will be used to select expert evaluators (read: AI Tool Review). In the past, this feature was a black box function since professional writers and consultancies did not know how different evaluators would grade an application or if it made a difference at all (read: Re-Inventing the EIC Accelerator). The common approach was to select the most relevant keywords that reflect the project (i.e. battery technology, machine learning, biomass) and hope for the best. While this is still a proven way to follow, this article presents an opinion on how keywords could be selected to maximize the success chances of a submission. Evaluator Pool and Keywords The total evaluator pool contains thousands of experts who will be selected based on availability and, importantly, the keywords entered into the platform. These keywords are selected from a dropdown list whereas multiple parent keywords contain multiple child keywords while a total of 3 parent- and child-keyword-pairs are selected for a project in a specific order. In addition, free keywords can be added to supplement the initial keyword selection. When selecting keywords, there are usually multiple options since an AI-battery startup can lead with Energy followed by Battery and then Machine-learning or could reverse this order. But what if the market is PropTech or real estate in particular since the project provides energy storage solutions for backup systems in commercial buildings? Then keywords could also focus on the real estate industry, certain customer segments (i.e. utility companies) or similar aspects. There are many different options to choose from but, thus far, it was unknown how they would affect the evaluation of the application since trial and error were hindered by the non-transparent evaluations, the randomness of reviews and the scarce deadlines in 2020. Evaluators’ Feedback The European Innovation Council (EIC) has introduced a feedback feature into the evaluation process which allows reviewers to leave comments for the applicants in a very detailed manner. While their identity and background are unknown to the applicant, the specific comments of evaluators often reveal the angle from which an evaluator is looking at the innovation. If it is someone who has a scientific perspective, a technical view or is embedded into the industry then comments will often focus on this aspect. For better or worse, the type of evaluator can have a significant impact on how the proposal is reviewed. After having studied multiple Step 1 evaluations, it is evident that evaluators have very different perspectives. The same aspect of a project can be praised or criticised in the same review which makes the viewpoint, not just the project quality, critical. From experience, positive Step 1 reviews were often praising the impact, feasibility and vision of the project if evaluators saw that there is a strong potential for disruption while critical reviews tended to be focused on isolated technical or commercial aspects. A Different Approach Instead of asking oneself: What keywords describe my project best? It seems to be a better approach to ask: What background does an evaluator need to be the most impressed? Very often, a machine-learning scientist might not be impressed with a certain AI application while someone from the industry it targets would immediately see the benefit and have a positive view. But the opposite could also be true if the industry impact is more difficult to imagine than the cutting-edge nature of the technology which would make a scientist have a better impression compared to an industry participant. The aim of selecting evaluators should be to pick experts who will understand the vision the company has and will view the innovation in a positive light. What should be avoided are thoughts such as: The back-end is sophisticated, follows a unique approach and disrupts a market but I do not think that it is cutting-edge enough from a scientific perspective The product is scientifically sound but how will you convince me to buy it? Especially when it comes to software solutions, there can be purists who neglect the EIC’s focus on industry disruption and new business models just to criticise an isolated aspect of the project. Conclusion It makes sense to think deeply about the keywords one chooses prior to submission and to make sure that the potential background an evaluator will have matches the scope and focus of the application. This approach is not a proven method of getting good evaluators but can clearly impact what the evaluation result will be. Every professional writer has seen applications with evaluations that are contradictory and lack consensus. Often, the reason as to why this is the case is very obvious from the evaluator’s comments and it always comes down to their perspective as defined by their background. Unfortunately, this approach will likely be very short-lived. The EIC is already collecting keywords throughout Step 1 of the EIC Accelerator and manually selecting additional keywords does seem redundant at this stage. Still, as long as the selection of evaluators can still be influenced, it should be done carefully.

Workflow for Creating an EIC Accelerator Pitch Video (SME Instrument)

by

The EIC Accelerator blended financing (formerly SME Instrument Phase 2, grant and equity) has gained a mandatory video pitch in 2021 and many applicants are uncertain as to how such a video should look or be prepared. While the official proposal templates and guidelines by the European Innovation Council (EIC) do not give an answer to this question, the following article aims to present a simple workflow that can be used by prospect applicants, professional writers or consultancies. Since many Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SME) and startups have some experience with video creation or editing due to social media platforms like YouTube, Facebook or Twitter, this article will omit tools like Adobe Spark or Loom which are used to simply record a speaker on top of a slideshow. This article will focus on video cutting and effects tools as well as a simple workflow to bring all essential parts together in an efficient manner. The software that is discussed is exchangeable for the most part but, due to their compatibility, we focus on Adobe Premiere Pro, After Effects and Illustrator. Note: There are excellent tutorials on YouTube for each of these steps and the following article aims at giving an overview of the workflow without detailing the exact mechanics of video editing in Adobe CC. 1. Adobe Premiere Pro (PP) Premiere Pro (PP) is used as the main video creation dashboard and cutting tool. Here, everything is prepared, brought together and will be finalised for export. The most important tasks to be done are: Note: A simplified version of this software is available under the name Adobe Rush. 1.1 Importing the Video Footage Once the video has been recorded, it will need to be imported into PP. What needs to be considered is that every video might have different resolutions and frame rates which will appear different in the respective timeline. The way PP works, a timeline is created that has a defined frame rate and resolution. The frame rate or Frames Per Second (FPS) defines how many frames (or images) are present in each second of video footage. Standard FPS’s are 23.976, 24 or 30. The former two FPS’s yield more of a natural motion blur while the latter (or higher FPS) will appear sharper during motion. For an EIC Accelerator video, using 23.976 or 24 will be sufficient. For the resolution, the video should be at least Full HD which translates to dimensions of 1920×1080. If no FPS or resolutions are specified prior to importing the clips, the sequence will automatically adapt to the clip’s original settings once it is dragged into the timeline. It is advisable to already decide on FPS and the resolution prior to the shooting. 1.2 Synching the Video to the External Audio (optional) If the video has been recorded separately from the audio (i.e. with an external microphone that was not connected to the camera during the recording) then the audio must be matched to the video in post-production. This is optional and not needed in cases where a shotgun microphone is mounted and connected to the camera or a wireless condenser microphone is used. To sync the external audio clips to the built-in audio of the video, they must be placed into the same timeline in PP and the two can be matched with the synchronisation feature. This usually works well but, especially for shorter clips, it can be necessary to manually adjust the positioning. For this, it is always advisable to have an orientation point in the video and in the audio to simplify matching. This can simply be in the form of clapping hands at the beginning of the recording so that the built-in microphone and the external microphone pick up the same sound which can be used as a matching point in post-production. To finalise the linking of the external audio with the video clip, the two can be linked (not grouped) so that all cutting and moving is always applied to audio and video as a joined unit. 1.3 Cutting to 3 Minutes The next step after the video and timeline have been prepared is the cutting to 3 minutes in total which means that all videos must be trimmed to that time. This is also an opportunity to already plan where certain video clips can be inserted to demonstrate the product, showcase the office or related parts. Cutting down the footage is a challenge in and of itself but thoughts on this process can be found here: Why an EIC Accelerator Video Editor Should be a Proposal Writer or Story Teller To circumvent the difficulty of this step, it is also possible to only record exactly 3 minutes of footage but this might be more difficult than the cutting process itself. 1.4 Colour Grading the Footage After the footage has been prepared and trimmed, it should be colour graded by using Lumetri colour or a similar effect. The general goal is to make the lighting and shadows look well contrasted and to have sufficient saturation and balanced skin tones in the final video. As there are plenty of high-quality tutorials out there on colour grading so it will not be detailed here. Note: Adobe Photoshop can be used to create Lookup Tables (LUT) based on a video screenshot which can be directly imported into Lumetri colour inside PP. The LUT’s act as a filter for the video footage inside PP which can use the benefits of the image editing features native only to Photoshop. Note 2: If multiple clips require identical colour grading, an “Adjustment layer” can be placed on top of the respective clips. The effect can then be applied to the adjustment layer alone which will apply it to all clips below in the timeline. 1.5 Audio Enhancement Depending on the source of the audio and the microphone settings, it is usually advisable to perform a voice enhancement. There are a variety of tutorials and guidelines on YouTube but examples of general enhancements are: … Read more

Rasph - EIC Accelerator Consulting
en_US
fr_FR de_DE el it_IT es_ES pl_PL et pt_PT da_DK sv_SE fi bg_BG hr cs_CZ nl_NL hu_HU lv lt_LT ro_RO sk_SK sl_SI uk he_IL tr_TR is_IS sr_RS ka_GE nb_NO en_US