How Do You Write an Effective Exploitation and Dissemination Plan in Horizon Europe?

Author: Julien Sudre, Horizon Europe grant writing and project management specialist, founder of Grant360 and Innotrope

An effective Horizon Europe exploitation and dissemination plan identifies the project's expected results, the people and organisations that can use them, the routes through which they will be shared or taken up, and the partners responsible for making that happen. Start planning in the proposal, develop a complete plan early in implementation where required, and update it as evidence, stakeholders and results evolve. The plan should connect each important result to a specific audience, action, owner, timetable and measurable outcome - not merely list conferences and social-media posts.

The European Commission distinguishes dissemination (sharing results with those who can use them), exploitation (using results in further research, products, services, standards or policy) and communication (raising awareness of the project and its activities). These activities complement one another but are not interchangeable. European Research Executive Agency (REA): Dissemination and exploitation.

When should you write and update the exploitation and dissemination plan?

Start in the proposal and refine the plan throughout the project. Unless the call conditions provide otherwise, Horizon Europe proposals describe planned communication, dissemination and exploitation activities. For successful projects, a complete plan is normally due within the first six months of the action and should subsequently be updated. Check the actual deliverable deadlines and any action-specific exceptions in your signed Grant Agreement (GA) and Description of Action (DoA). Horizon Europe Programme Guide; Annotated Grant Agreement (AGA).

At proposal stage, map likely results and their intended users, assign provisional exploitation responsibilities and reserve resources for validation, stakeholder engagement and intellectual property (IP) advice. At project start, test those assumptions with the beneficiaries. During implementation, update the result inventory, evidence of demand, protection decisions, activities and indicators. Before closure, confirm the organisations, resources and agreements needed to sustain uptake after funding ends.

Practical example: A consortium expects to develop a decision-support tool. In the proposal it identifies municipal authorities as potential users. By month six it interviews several authorities and documents their operational requirements. At the next update it revises the tool's deployment plan and assigns a partner to organise pilot testing. The plan becomes more specific as evidence accumulates.

What is the difference between communication, dissemination and exploitation?

Communication builds awareness of the project; dissemination makes its results available to potential users; exploitation puts those results to use. A single activity may support more than one objective, but the plan should identify what each activity is intended to achieve. REA guidance.

The three activities answer different questions:

Communication: who should know about the project? For example, explain its purpose through a website or public event. Evidence to monitor: relevant audiences reached and engaged.
Dissemination: who needs access to the results? For example, publish a method, dataset or technical briefing. Evidence to monitor: downloads, requests, citations or qualified follow-up.
Exploitation: who will use the results, and how? For example, integrate a method into a service or adopt guidance in an organisation. Evidence to monitor: signed agreement, operational deployment or documented reuse.

A press release announcing a new algorithm is communication. A technical publication explaining it is dissemination. Incorporating the algorithm into a clinical or industrial workflow, subject to applicable validation and regulatory requirements, is exploitation.

How do you identify the project's key exploitable results?

Create a living inventory of results and prioritise those with a credible route to use. A Key Exploitable Result (KER) is a project result with identifiable potential for use beyond the activity that produced it. KERs are not necessarily products or patents: they can include datasets, software, protocols, training materials, scientific methods and policy recommendations. Horizon Europe Programme Guide.

For each candidate result, record what it does, what problem it addresses, its maturity, the generating beneficiary or beneficiaries, relevant background knowledge, prospective users, barriers to uptake, and the next validation step. Do not assume that the deliverable list is a complete inventory: one deliverable may contain several exploitable results, while a useful method may emerge without being a standalone contractual deliverable.

Illustrative result register:

Open-source analysis tool: potential user: research laboratories. Proposed route to use: adoption in further research. Next evidence needed: external usability test. Responsible partner: software developer.
Industrial sensor prototype: potential user: equipment manufacturer. Proposed route to use: licensing or product integration. Next evidence needed: performance validation and commercial interest. Responsible partner: technology owner.
Policy guidance: potential user: public authorities. Proposed route to use: incorporation into local procedures. Next evidence needed: consultation with decision-makers. Responsible partner: policy partner.

Prioritisation is a management decision: a promising result with no committed owner or realistic adoption pathway needs further work before the plan can describe its exploitation as secured.

For a broader overview, read Exploitation and Intellectual Property in Horizon Europe.

How do you identify target audiences and choose dissemination activities?

Start with the people who can act on a specific result, then select the message, format and channel they need. "Industry", "policymakers" and "the public" are often too broad to support an actionable plan. Identify the relevant type of company, public body, research group or community and explain why the result matters to it.

For each audience, describe its problem, the evidence it needs, the action you want it to take and how you will reach it. Researchers may need a reproducible method and a repository; procurement officers may need performance and cost information; policymakers may need a concise briefing linked to an existing decision process. A conference presentation alone does not demonstrate that a potential adopter has understood or used the result.

Practical example: For a new water-treatment process, the consortium publishes scientific validation data for researchers, arranges a technical demonstration for utilities and prepares a short implementation briefing for local authorities. Each activity addresses a different barrier to uptake.

How should the plan address intellectual property and open science?

Specify who generates and owns each result, which background and access rights are needed, and when protection or confidentiality must be considered before disclosure. The Grant Agreement and Consortium Agreement (CA) govern relevant ownership, access-right and dissemination arrangements. Beneficiaries should check whether publication could prejudice legitimate interests and coordinate any protection decisions before making potentially patentable information public. European IP Helpdesk: Horizon Europe FAQs; Annotated Grant Agreement.

The plan should identify an internal disclosure-review process, the partner responsible for IP decisions, any necessary joint-ownership arrangements and the intended licensing or access approach. It should also align with the Data Management Plan (DMP) and the grant's open-access obligations. Open science does not mean that every dataset or result must be disclosed without restriction: the applicable rules recognise legitimate interests and other constraints. REA: Open science.

Practical example: Before presenting a novel sensor design at a conference, the generating partners assess whether patent protection is appropriate and follow the consortium's notification and objection procedure. They can then decide what technical information can be disseminated and when.

For the underlying rules, see Intellectual Property in Horizon Europe.

How do you turn each result into a credible exploitation pathway?

For every priority result, name a prospective user, the intended form of use, the partner driving uptake, the remaining barriers and the next funded or resourced action. Exploitation can be commercial, scientific, societal or policy-oriented; a credible plan does not assume that every result should become a product. REA: Dissemination and exploitation.

An exploitation pathway should explain the starting maturity, validation requirements, route to users, ownership or licensing dependencies, necessary partners, resources, milestones and post-project responsibilities. Where market uptake is proposed, include evidence of demand and the relevant regulatory or procurement pathway rather than asserting that commercialisation will occur automatically.

Practical example: Instead of writing "the software will be exploited after the project", specify that the developing beneficiary will maintain a documented release, test it with three prospective institutional users, decide on a licensing model and seek a maintenance partner before the project ends. The numbers here illustrate a possible internal target, not a Horizon Europe requirement.

The EU offers support resources, including the Horizon Results Platform and the European IP Helpdesk. Select services that address a real gap in the project's route to uptake rather than listing support tools without a planned use.

Who should implement and monitor the plan?

Assign one accountable lead for the overall plan and a named result owner or exploitation lead for each priority result. Work Package (WP) leaders should report emerging results, while communication and dissemination leads coordinate audiences, channels and evidence. The governance arrangement can be simple for a small project; an exploitation committee may be useful where several beneficiaries own interdependent results.

Use a shared action register with the result, target audience, activity, responsible beneficiary, deadline, dependency, expected outcome and evidence. Review it alongside technical progress so that the plan changes when results change.

Monitor more than activity counts. Website visits, events and downloads describe reach, but they do not establish uptake. Combine them with indicators such as qualified user enquiries, completed pilots, documented reuse, licensing discussions, integration into services or references in policy documents. Clearly distinguish a prospective outcome from one already achieved.

What should the plan say about exploitation after the project ends?

Identify which results will remain available or be further developed, who will take responsibility, and how the necessary resources and rights will be secured. Under the standard Horizon Europe rules, beneficiaries must take measures aiming to ensure exploitation of their results for up to four years after the end of the action, unless the grant conditions provide otherwise. This is a best-efforts obligation to take appropriate measures, not a guarantee that every result will reach the market. Annotated Grant Agreement, Annex 5.

For software, specify hosting, maintenance, licences and documentation. For a research dataset, identify its repository and access arrangements. For a prospective product, identify the organisation responsible for follow-on validation, financing and regulatory steps. Record any unresolved ownership or funding dependencies rather than presenting them as settled.

Practical example: If a project develops a training programme, a university partner may commit to incorporating the material into an existing course, while another partner maintains the openly available teaching resources. The plan should record those commitments and how uptake will be checked after project closure.

What structure should an effective exploitation and dissemination plan follow?

Organise the document around results, users, actions and evidence, with enough governance detail to make the strategy executable. A practical structure is:

Purpose, scope, project objectives and relevant contractual requirements.
Definitions and the distinction between communication, dissemination and exploitation.
Result inventory and selection of priority KERs.
Target audiences, user needs and stakeholder engagement.
Dissemination activities, channels, timetable and responsibilities.
Exploitation pathways, result owners, validation steps and resources.
IP, access rights, confidentiality and alignment with the DMP.
Governance, monitoring indicators, evidence and update procedures.
Post-project exploitation, maintenance and sustainability arrangements.
Annexes containing the result register, action calendar and indicator definitions.

Use the format required by the project's DoA and grant conditions if a specific template or deliverable structure has been agreed. The list above is a recommended editorial structure, not a mandatory European Commission template.

Conclusion: What makes an exploitation and dissemination plan effective?

An effective plan links each significant result to a specific user, a realistic route to uptake, a responsible beneficiary, a timetable and evidence of progress. It starts early, evolves with the project and coordinates dissemination, IP decisions and post-project exploitation rather than treating them as separate administrative exercises.

The most useful test is straightforward: can a partner read the plan and understand what must happen next for a particular result to reach someone who can use it? If not, replace generic promises with a concrete next action, owner and decision point.

About the author

Julien Sudre specialises in Horizon Europe proposal development, project management, communication and dissemination. Through Grant 360, he develops practical resources and tools to support organisations throughout the European research and innovation project lifecycle.