The Sustainability Smokescreen: Horizon Europe Grant Proposal Reality Check
Why "Future Funding" sections in Horizon Europe and grant proposal templates are fiction everyone recognizes but nobody acknowledges
You know that moment. You're cruising through your Horizon Europe grant proposal, feeling good about your methodology, your preliminary data is solid, and then—bam. The sustainability plan section. Your fingers freeze above the keyboard. Time to write fiction, and everyone knows it. This critical proposal section trips up even experienced researchers.
Here's what's actually happening in 2024: NSF engineering grants have a 23% success rate. NIAID's R01s? Down to 18.5%. ERC Starting Grants hover around 13%. Your reviewer just spent their weekend writing their own desperate grant proposal template. They're not buying your "we'll just get more grants" story about future funding. Why? Because they wrote the exact same lie last month.
We need to stop this nonsense. Not because honesty is virtuous (though it is), but because the fiction actively hurts your chances. Whether you're working on a research proposal sample for Horizon Europe or crafting an NIH R01, there's a smarter way to handle sustainability—one that actually impresses reviewers instead of insulting them. These grant writing tips will transform how you approach this challenging section.
The Numbers Don't Lie
When your sustainability plan says "we'll secure more grants," reviewers see these numbers flash before their eyes.
The Taxonomy of Fantasy in Sustainability Plans
I've catalogued the greatest hits of sustainability fiction across Horizon Europe, ERC Starting Grant applications, and NIH R01 proposals. You've probably written at least one. I certainly have. Time to retire these classics and learn better grant writing tips for the future funding section.
The "More Grants" Fallacy
"We will sustain this project by seeking additional funding from NSF, NIH, and private foundations..."
Look, this isn't a plan. It's like answering "how will you pay rent?" with "I'll get money." Your reviewer is sitting there, coffee-stained shirt, having just submitted their third grant this month. They know the odds. Twenty percent success rate if you're lucky. Saying you'll get more grants is basically admitting you've got nothing.
The "Spontaneous Commercialization" Dream
"Our innovative tool will be commercialized through licensing agreements and potential spin-off ventures..."
Ever tried to commercialize academic software? It's brutal. You need market analysis, a business plan, probably a co-founder who actually knows what "customer acquisition cost" means. The gap between your Python script and a sellable product? It's massive. Unless you've got an MBA on your team or a signed letter of intent from a company, reviewers aren't buying it.
The "Institutional Absorption" Myth
"Upon successful completion, our institution will integrate this project into its operational budget..."
Your reviewer literally works at a university. They've watched their department argue for three months over buying a $500 printer. You think they believe your institution will suddenly find $200K per year to keep your project running? Without a signed letter from the Provost (with actual budget codes), this is pure fantasy. Everyone knows university budgets don't work like this.
The Trust Cascade
A weak sustainability plan doesn't just fail on its own merits—it triggers a cascade of doubt that infects your entire proposal:
Remember: Your reviewer isn't a naive outsider to be fooled. They're a peer to be persuaded.
Four Honest Frameworks for Your Sustainability Plan
Stop writing fiction. Start planning for real, achievable sustainability in your Horizon Europe applications and grant proposal templates. Here are four frameworks that reviewers actually respect—because they acknowledge reality while demonstrating strategic thinking. Whether you're using AI for researchers to draft proposal sections or working from research samples, these strategies work.
Framework 1: The Graceful Conclusion
Strategic Sunsetting for Maximum Impact
The most intellectually honest approach for Horizon Europe applications? Plan for your project's conclusion from day one. This isn't failure—it's strategic design. Think of it like a well-crafted research paper that doesn't just stop, but concludes with purpose. Many successful funded proposal samples use this exact framework.
The 4 R's of Strategic Sunsetting:
Sample Language:
"This five-year project culminates in creating durable, publicly accessible resources. Year 5 is dedicated to structured conclusion: validated datasets deposited in Zenodo (CC0 license), comprehensive toolkit published online, and novel protocols integrated into our graduate curriculum—ensuring knowledge persists beyond funding."
Which Framework Fits Your Project?
Discrete investigation with defined endpoint?
→ Choose Graceful Conclusion
Creating a tool or platform for others?
→ Choose Community Ownership
Building foundational resource for the field?
→ Choose Open Infrastructure
Aiming to change practice or policy?
→ Choose Knowledge Transfer
Note: Large projects can combine multiple frameworks. A center grant might plan graceful conclusions for sub-projects while building community ownership around a platform.
Real Horizon Europe Grant Proposal Examples: Fiction vs. Reality
| Scenario | Common Fiction | Credible Alternative |
|---|---|---|
| Software Tool Development | "We will commercialize through licensing agreements" | "We'll transition to community governance via GitHub, with clear contribution guidelines and gradual handoff to maintainers" |
| Clinical Research Study | "Institution will absorb costs after grant ends" | "Year 5 dedicated to knowledge transfer: train-the-trainer programs at 20 hospitals, decision support tools for EMR integration" |
| Database Creation | "We'll apply for renewal grants indefinitely" | "Following PDB model: FAIR principles, federated governance, positioning as critical infrastructure for the field" |
| Methods Development | "Dissemination through publications and conferences" | "Graceful conclusion with permanent deposits: protocols in protocols.io, code in GitHub, datasets in Zenodo, integration into graduate curriculum" |
A Call to Funders: Rethinking the Sustainability Plan Requirement
The responsibility doesn't rest solely with applicants. Funders perpetuate this cycle by requiring generic sustainability plans without guidance on what makes them credible. The sustainability paradox affects both sides. Here's how to break the pattern:
- Explicitly welcome graceful conclusion plans in funding announcements
- Update review criteria to value credible lifecycle planning over perpetual funding promises
- Provide framework examples in proposal guidelines
- Train reviewers to assess sustainability credibility, not just presence
Time to Drop the Smokescreen in Your Horizon Europe Grant Proposal
Your reviewers aren't fools. They're your peers, sitting in the same funding trenches, writing the same Horizon Europe grants and ERC Starting Grant applications with the same dismal success rates. They've seen every sustainability plan fiction in the book because they've written them too.
What they're looking for isn't a promise of immortality. They want evidence that you've thought seriously about your project's lifecycle and its lasting impact. They want to see strategic thinking, not wishful thinking. This applies whether you're using a grant proposal template or working with AI grant writing tools.
Choose your framework. Be specific. Be honest. Show them you understand the difference between a project and its legacy. Whether you're crafting a Marie Curie fellowship application or a major Horizon Europe consortium proposal, the most sustainable thing you can do is plan for real impact, not fictional future funding. And don't forget that your sustainability plan connects directly to your budget narrative and post-award management.
Remember:
A credible plan for a three-year impact beats a fictional promise of ten-year funding every time. Your reviewers know this. Now you do too.
Related Grant Writing Tips
The Sustainability Paradox
Understand the deeper tensions between short-term grants and long-term science
The Budget Narrative Blindspot
Connect your sustainability plan to credible budget justifications
Impact Sections That Matter
Learn to write compelling impact statements that align with sustainability plans
Ready to Write Credible Sustainability Plans?
Stop writing fiction. Start winning funding with sustainability plans that respect your reviewers' intelligence. Proposia.ai helps you craft honest, strategic grant proposals using AI-powered grant writing tools.