Author: Julien Sudre, Horizon Europe grant writing, project management and communication specialist, founder of Grant 360 and Innotrope
An effective Horizon Europe communication strategy explains why a project matters, identifies the audiences it needs to reach, and uses suitable channels - such as a project website, partner networks, social media and events - to deliver clear, accurate messages throughout implementation. It also defines responsibilities, measurable objectives and a process for complying with European Union (EU) funding visibility requirements. Communication should begin early and evolve as the project produces evidence and results.
This guide provides a practical framework for coordinators, communication work package leaders and beneficiaries, from initial planning to the project's final conference and post-project legacy. The examples and suggested indicators below are management recommendations, not universal contractual requirements.
What is communication in Horizon Europe, and how is it different from dissemination and exploitation?
Communication promotes the project and its activities to relevant audiences, including people beyond its specialist field. Dissemination makes project results available to audiences that may use them, while exploitation is the actual use of those results in research, policy, products, services or other applications. One activity can serve more than one purpose: a public demonstration may communicate the project's mission, disseminate validated findings and initiate discussions with prospective users.
The three activities answer different questions:
- Communication: why does this project matter, and what is happening? Illustrative output: accessible website story, short video or local media interview.
- Dissemination: what results are available, and who can use them? Illustrative output: scientific paper, technical webinar or policy brief.
- Exploitation: how will results be used? Illustrative output: research uptake, licensing, standardisation or policy adoption.
For a detailed comparison, see What Is the Difference Between Communication, Dissemination and Exploitation in Horizon Europe?.
The distinction matters operationally. A social media announcement about a new research finding does not by itself establish that the finding has been disseminated to all relevant professional users or that it has been exploited. Conversely, a technical workshop may need a public-facing summary to make its significance understandable beyond the participants.
Primary source: EU Grants Annotated Grant Agreement, Article 17.
How do you define the communication objectives and target audiences?
Start with the change in awareness, understanding or engagement you want to achieve, then identify the people whose attention or participation is needed. Avoid treating "the general public" as one homogeneous audience. Segment audiences by their interests, location, language, prior knowledge and preferred channels.
For example, a project testing energy-efficient building solutions could address residents in pilot neighbourhoods, municipal decision-makers, building professionals, local journalists and students. Residents may want to know how demonstrations affect their homes; municipalities may want an accessible explanation of the public problem and emerging evidence. These audiences need different messages even when the underlying project is the same.
A useful planning matrix includes:
- Pilot-area residents: communication objective: explain activities and invite questions. Core message: what will happen locally and why. Channels: community meeting and local webpage. Evidence of progress: attendance, questions and feedback.
- Public authorities: communication objective: build awareness of the project's relevance. Core message: which challenge the project addresses. Channels: briefing and targeted event. Evidence of progress: follow-up requests.
- Wider public: communication objective: make research understandable. Core message: what researchers are investigating. Channels: website story and partner social media. Evidence of progress: qualified visits and engagement.
Make messages accurate about the difference between expected benefits and demonstrated results. An anticipated environmental improvement should not be presented as a measured achievement before validation.
How do you turn a project proposal into a workable communication plan?
Translate the communication commitments in the Description of Action (DoA), Annex 1 of the Grant Agreement (GA), into a calendar with named owners, audiences, deliverables, budgets, approval procedures and measurable objectives. The plan should connect communications to actual project activities rather than rely on a fixed stream of generic announcements.
For each major activity, record its purpose, target audience, channel, lead beneficiary, proposed publication date, evidence to retain and approval requirements. Link the calendar to scientific milestones, demonstrations, consultations and reporting periods. Review it regularly: a delayed pilot may require postponing a planned results announcement, while a new stakeholder opportunity may justify an additional event.
Illustrative operating rhythm, not an EU requirement: review the editorial calendar monthly, request short updates from work package leaders before each review, and hold a more substantial audience-and-results review every quarter. For a small consortium, partner channels and a focused website may be more manageable than several new social media accounts.
What should a Horizon Europe project website contain?
A useful project website should explain the problem, objectives, activities, consortium, EU funding and available results in language that visitors can understand without reading the proposal. It should also give interested visitors a clear next step, such as reading a results summary, registering for an event or contacting the consortium.
A practical information structure includes an accessible project overview; objectives and expected outcomes; partners and their roles; news and events; a results and resources area; contact information; and the applicable EU funding acknowledgement. As results become available, publish plain-language summaries alongside links to the relevant publications, deliverables or repositories where public release is permitted.
A dedicated project website is not an automatic requirement for every Horizon Europe grant. Check the signed GA and DoA. A well-maintained project page on a beneficiary's institutional website may be appropriate where it meets the project's commitments and visibility obligations. If the consortium does build a standalone website, agree who will host, update and maintain it, including after funding ends.
Design for real users: use descriptive headings, readable text, accessible navigation, alternative text for meaningful images and clear contact routes. Where the site uses analytics, mailing lists, registration forms or photographs of identifiable people, assess the applicable data-protection requirements before collecting or publishing personal information.
Practical example: instead of publishing only "Deliverable D3.2 submitted", add a short article explaining what was tested, what the evidence currently shows, what remains uncertain and where the public deliverable can be found.
Which social media channels should a Horizon Europe project use?
Choose channels according to audience fit, partner reach and available editorial capacity - not because every project is expected to maintain accounts on every platform. Institutional channels may provide a stronger starting audience than newly created project profiles. Dedicated accounts are useful only when the consortium can maintain them and the DoA supports that approach.
LinkedIn may suit professional and institutional audiences; video platforms can host explainers and recorded demonstrations; local community channels may be more appropriate for pilot-area residents. The relevant choice depends on the project, audience and language. Test the approach against actual engagement rather than assumed platform popularity.
Build posts around a clear message and next step: explain a challenge, introduce a researcher, invite participation, share a validated result or direct readers to a fuller resource. Give each account an owner and establish a light approval process for sensitive findings, confidential material and potentially identifiable images.
Illustrative example: a pilot launch can produce one accessible website article, a short partner-ready social post and a local event invitation. These three outputs should use consistent facts but need not repeat identical wording.
How do you organise project events that create meaningful engagement?
Design each event around a defined audience and outcome, then select the format, speakers and follow-up accordingly. A scientific workshop, public exhibition, stakeholder roundtable and final conference may all be valuable, but they serve different purposes.
Before the event, decide what participants should understand, discuss or do afterwards. Choose speakers able to address that purpose; plan accessibility, language, logistics and any recording or photography notices; and prepare materials that explain EU support correctly. If the event will communicate sensitive or unpublished findings, obtain the necessary internal clearance first.
During the event, capture relevant questions and feedback rather than counting attendees alone. Afterwards, share a concise account of the discussion, permitted slides or recordings, and agreed follow-up actions. Record attendance and audience categories only to the extent appropriate under applicable privacy rules.
Example: a public demonstration of an urban mobility prototype might combine a five-minute accessible explanation, a supervised demonstration and a feedback session. The resulting report can distinguish between attendance, questions raised and subsequent requests for further information.
How should communication materials acknowledge EU funding?
Apply the EU emblem, the correct funding statement and the required disclaimer in accordance with Article 17, Annex 5 and the project's signed GA. Make visibility checks part of the normal publication workflow for websites, event materials, presentations, videos and other relevant outputs.
The European Commission explains that the EU emblem must be displayed correctly and prominently alongside the applicable "Funded by the European Union" or "Co-funded by the European Union" statement. The emblem must not be modified or merged into a project logo. The correct statement and any programme-specific exceptions should be checked against the grant and official guidance. Do not automatically reuse older Horizon 2020 acknowledgement wording for Horizon Europe.
Where required, include the disclaimer explaining that the views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the EU or the granting authority. Use the wording applicable to the grant, rather than inventing a shortened substitute. The granting authority must also be informed before communication or dissemination activities expected to have a major media impact, as provided in Article 17.
Primary sources: European Commission: Communicating and raising EU visibility; EU Grants Annotated Grant Agreement, Article 17 and Annex 5; CINEA: What are the communication requirements?.
How can you communicate research results without compromising intellectual property or confidentiality?
Review the proposed content before publication to ensure it does not disclose confidential information, personal data or results whose protection would be undermined by premature release. Public communication and formal dissemination are related but not identical, so their approval and notification requirements should not be conflated.
For example, a project developing a patentable sensor could communicate the problem it addresses, the partners involved and the general research approach without publishing enabling technical details before the consortium has considered protection. Once the relevant results can be disclosed, the communication team can prepare an accessible summary and link to authorised technical material.
Establish a simple review route: the technical lead checks scientific accuracy; the relevant result owner or intellectual property (IP) contact checks disclosure constraints; and the communication lead checks clarity, permissions and EU visibility. Follow the consortium agreement and the GA's applicable dissemination, confidentiality and results-protection provisions.
For more detail, see How Is Intellectual Property Managed in Horizon Europe? and How Do You Write an Effective Exploitation and Dissemination Plan in Horizon Europe?.
How do you measure whether project communication is effective?
Measure whether the intended audiences were reached and whether they understood, engaged with or acted on the information - not only how many outputs the consortium produced. Choose indicators before activities begin, and compare results with the communication objectives and commitments in the DoA.
Useful indicators include:
- Explain the project to residents: activity indicator: number of community events. More informative outcome evidence: relevant questions, feedback and requests for updates.
- Make project information discoverable: activity indicator: website articles and visits. More informative outcome evidence: visits to key explanatory pages and useful enquiries.
- Engage stakeholders: activity indicator: event invitations and attendance. More informative outcome evidence: follow-up meetings, contributions or requests.
- Share emerging findings accessibly: activity indicator: results stories and videos. More informative outcome evidence: relevant reuse, feedback and referrals to public outputs.
Illustrative calculation: if 80 people register for a public webinar and 52 attend, the attendance rate is 52/80 = 65%. That describes participation, not comprehension or impact. A short feedback question and a record of follow-up requests provide additional context. Do not present this example as a Horizon Europe benchmark.
Maintain a communication log with the date, audience, activity, link or supporting evidence, responsible partner and relevant results. Use it to support periodic reporting, but avoid claiming that web traffic or social media impressions alone demonstrate societal impact.
For the broader reporting workflow, see How Do You Manage Continuous Reporting in Horizon Europe?.
What should happen to communication after the project ends?
Before closure, decide which public information and results must remain accessible, who will maintain them and how stakeholders can find subsequent developments. An archive or maintained institutional project page may be more realistic than an indefinitely active standalone website.
Document ownership of the domain, hosting, social accounts, mailing lists and published resources. Agree what happens to contact forms and personal data when active communication stops. Keep links to publicly available outputs functional where feasible, and direct interested users to the partners or repositories responsible for continued access.
Communication after funding is not identical to the separate post-project obligations concerning exploitation, record retention or other grant conditions. Verify each obligation in the signed GA rather than assuming that every project must maintain the same communication channels for a fixed number of years.
Conclusion: What makes Horizon Europe project communication effective?
Effective communication starts with a clear purpose, defined audiences and accurate messages. A project website or institutional page provides an accessible reference point; carefully chosen social media channels and events extend its reach; and an editorial calendar, publication checks and meaningful indicators keep activities consistent with the project as it evolves.
The most useful communication does more than announce meetings or deliverables. It helps people understand the problem being addressed, what the consortium has learned, what remains uncertain and how they can engage with the project or its publicly available results. Combine that approach with the contractual EU visibility requirements and a realistic post-project handover to create a communication programme that remains useful beyond individual reporting deadlines.
About the author
Julien Sudre is a Horizon Europe grant writing, project management and communication specialist. Through his work on collaborative European research and innovation projects and the development of Grant 360, he helps consortia connect proposal commitments with practical implementation, reporting and communication activities.