By Julien Sudre, grant writer and founder of Grant360 and Innotrope. Originally published 24 November 2025. Updated: 23 September 2026.
Horizon Europe beneficiaries must communicate their project and its results to relevant audiences, disseminate results under the applicable grant rules, and acknowledge European Union (EU) funding on project-related communication and dissemination materials. Article 17 of the Grant Agreement (GA) sets out communication and visibility duties; Article 16 and Annex 5 address important rules on results, intellectual property, dissemination and exploitation. The signed GA, including its Annex 1 (Description of Action) and Annex 5, determines the obligations applicable to each project.
For coordinators and communication managers, compliance means more than adding a logo to a website. It requires a coherent strategy, appropriate review of results before publication, correct funding acknowledgement, accurate information and traceable evidence of activities.
What is the difference between communication, dissemination and EU visibility?
Communication promotes the project and explains its objectives, activities and benefits to selected audiences; dissemination makes project results available to audiences able to use them; EU visibility acknowledges the origin of the funding. These activities overlap, but they are not interchangeable.
The three activities have different purposes:
- Communication: main purpose: explain the project and engage audiences. Illustrative outputs: project news, an accessible website or a public event.
- Dissemination: main purpose: share results with potential users. Illustrative outputs: scientific article, technical workshop or policy brief.
- EU visibility: main purpose: acknowledge financial support. Illustrative output: EU emblem with the appropriate funding statement on project materials.
A project may announce that it is developing a new diagnostic method (communication), publish validated performance results for clinical researchers (dissemination), and display the EU emblem and funding statement on both outputs (visibility). Exploitation is a further, distinct activity: putting results to use, for example through clinical adoption, standardisation or commercialisation.
For a broader strategic overview, read How Do You Build an Effective Communication Strategy for a Horizon Europe Project? and What Is the Difference Between Communication, Dissemination and Exploitation in Horizon Europe?.
What does Article 17 of the Horizon Europe Grant Agreement require?
Article 17 requires beneficiaries, unless otherwise agreed with the granting authority, to promote the action and its results strategically, acknowledge EU support, provide accurate information and include the prescribed disclaimer. Specific requirements may also appear in Annex 5 and in the project's Description of Action.
In practice, the consortium should identify target audiences, choose appropriate channels, allocate responsibilities and maintain evidence that agreed activities took place. Before a communication or dissemination activity expected to have a major media impact, beneficiaries must inform the granting authority.
Article 17 is not a universal requirement to create a separate website, post daily on social media or organise a fixed number of events. Such commitments may nevertheless become binding when included in the signed GA or its annexes.
Primary source: EU Corporate Model Grant Agreement, Article 17.
How must a project display the EU emblem and funding statement?
Use the official EU emblem prominently, accompanied by the funding statement appropriate to the grant, on relevant project communication and dissemination outputs and on grant-funded infrastructure, equipment, supplies or major results where applicable. Check the signed agreement and the guidance of the responsible granting authority for project-specific requirements.
The usual statements are "Funded by the European Union" and "Co-funded by the European Union". Select the appropriate version for the funding arrangement; do not improvise a project-specific replacement. The emblem must remain distinct, must not be altered or merged into the project logo, and must be at least as prominent as other logos displayed alongside it. The European Commission's institutional logo is not a substitute for the EU emblem.
Practical implementation examples:
- Project website: place the official emblem and funding statement visibly, ideally in a consistent site-wide location.
- Social media: include funding acknowledgement in the account presentation and ensure relevant project materials comply with the applicable guidance.
- Presentations and posters: use the emblem and funding statement on a clearly visible slide or area of the material.
- Publications and reports: include acknowledgement in the document in accordance with the publication format and grant rules.
- Videos and event materials: include a readable funding acknowledgement in the relevant visual materials.
For visual implementation, see How Do You Design a Visual Identity for a Horizon Europe Project?.
Primary sources: European Commission guidance on EU visibility and European Research Executive Agency communication guidance.
What disclaimer must communication and dissemination materials include?
Article 17.3 requires a disclaimer making clear that the views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the EU or the granting authority. Use the wording prescribed by the signed agreement, including the appropriate authority name and translation where relevant.
A standard formulation in the model agreement reads:
Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or [name of the granting authority]. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
The funding statement accompanying the emblem and the disclaimer serve different purposes. A project should not assume that one replaces the other. For formats with limited space, consult the responsible granting authority's guidance rather than silently omitting required text.
Primary source: EU Corporate Model Grant Agreement, Article 17.3.
Must partners approve results before they are published?
Beneficiaries should review proposed dissemination for confidential information, intellectual property and other partners' legitimate interests before making results public. The applicable prior-notice and objection procedure comes from the dissemination provisions of Annex 5 and the Consortium Agreement, not from Article 17 alone.
Under the standard Horizon Europe rules, a beneficiary planning to disseminate results gives other beneficiaries advance notice, normally at least 15 days beforehand unless otherwise agreed; another beneficiary may object within the applicable period, normally 15 days after receiving notice, if its legitimate interests concerning results or background would be significantly harmed. The consortium should verify the precise contractual wording and any agreed alternative procedure.
For example, before a conference presentation reveals a potentially patentable sensor design, the presenting partner should coordinate with the relevant result owners, assess protection options and follow the consortium's publication review process. This does not mean that every result must be patented or that dissemination must be delayed indefinitely.
For the underlying rules, see Intellectual Property in Horizon Europe and How Do You Write an Effective Exploitation and Dissemination Plan in Horizon Europe?.
Primary source: Horizon Europe Annotated Grant Agreement, Annex 5, dissemination and exploitation provisions; always check the latest version and signed agreement.
Does open access mean every project result must be published freely?
No. Horizon Europe imposes specific open-science and open-access obligations, particularly for peer-reviewed scientific publications, but it does not require unrestricted publication of every project result. Beneficiaries must reconcile applicable open-access duties with confidentiality, personal-data protection, security, intellectual-property protection and legitimate exploitation interests.
For research data, the programme generally follows the principle "as open as possible, as closed as necessary", subject to the applicable GA and Data Management Plan (DMP). A public-facing project news item, a peer-reviewed article, a dataset and a commercially sensitive technical specification therefore require different publication decisions.
For example, a consortium may openly publish a paper describing a validated methodology while restricting access to identifiable patient data and protecting confidential implementation details.
How can coordinators document compliance without creating unnecessary administration?
Maintain a shared activity register and a simple pre-publication review workflow. Evidence should show what was communicated or disseminated, to whom, when, through which channel and with what observable result.
Useful records include:
- Activity and audience: date, purpose, target group and responsible partner.
- Published output: stable URL, document copy or archived screenshot.
- EU visibility: approved template or copy showing the emblem, funding statement and disclaimer.
- Results review: relevant internal clearance, notification and objection records.
- Performance: attendance, downloads, engagement, enquiries or documented uptake.
- Follow-up: decisions, actions, owner and deadline.
Metrics should match the objective. Website visits may indicate reach, while a documented request from a public authority to use a policy brief may provide stronger evidence of result uptake. Neither metric should be presented as proof of societal impact on its own.
A quarterly internal review is one practical option, not a universal Horizon Europe requirement. It can identify missing evidence or non-compliant templates before the next reporting period.
For operational planning, see How Do You Design a Strong Communication Work Package in Horizon Europe? and How Do You Manage a Horizon Europe Project from Grant Signature to Final Review?.
What happens if a beneficiary fails to meet visibility requirements?
Non-compliance can lead to corrective requests and, under the conditions of the Grant Agreement, a grant reduction or other contractual measures. Article 17.5 refers to the consequences of breaching communication and visibility obligations; the outcome depends on the circumstances and the applicable grant rules.
For example, a missing funding acknowledgement on a project brochure should be corrected promptly and the revised version retained as evidence. A systematic failure to carry out agreed communication activities requires a broader assessment of the unmet contractual commitments and remedial action.
The simplest preventive measure is to use approved templates and assign a named reviewer before publication. Do not rely on the overly broad rule that every public item, regardless of context, must carry identical text: apply the contractual obligations to the relevant activity and format.
Primary source: EU Corporate Model Grant Agreement, Article 17.5.
Which obligations continue after the project ends?
Post-project responsibilities depend on the type of obligation and the signed Grant Agreement; communication, dissemination and exploitation do not all have one identical end date. The consortium should distinguish the preservation of published materials and records from the specific post-project rules governing results and their exploitation.
Before closure, agree who maintains public resources, preserves supporting evidence, responds to enquiries and follows up on exploitable results. If a website is scheduled to close, assess whether required outputs can remain accessible through an appropriate repository or beneficiary website, subject to the applicable obligations.
For the separate exploitation requirements, see Why Is Exploitation Mandatory in Horizon Europe?.
Conclusion: How can a consortium make visibility compliance part of everyday project management?
Start with the signed Grant Agreement, translate its communication and dissemination commitments into a realistic work plan, and use approved visibility templates across project outputs. Review results before dissemination, keep accurate records and distinguish communication performance from the longer-term use of results.
The objective is not to produce the greatest possible volume of publicity. It is to communicate accurately, reach relevant audiences, make suitable results available for use and acknowledge EU funding consistently while protecting the consortium's legitimate interests.
About the author - Julien Sudre
Julien Sudre is a Horizon Europe grant-writing and project-management specialist working on collaborative research and innovation projects, including project communication and dissemination. Through Grant 360, he develops practical resources and tools for organisations preparing and implementing European projects.