We're not a list of grants.
EU portals already list every grant. Access isn't the problem — knowing which ones are wasting your time is.
A decision system for founders of pre-seed and seed startups in Europe. Your company's machine-readable profile, screened against 2,813 active EU + national + regional programs by 7 formal eligibility criteria. The rest you don't see.
EU portals already list every grant. Access isn't the problem — knowing which ones are wasting your time is.
Writing the proposal is your call. We tell you which programs are worth writing for in the first place — and which ones won't pass admissibility no matter how well you write them.
€149/month, billed monthly. Cancel in two clicks. No retainer. No project fee. No “let's hop on a call to scope the engagement”.
Nobody can promise that, and anyone who does is selling hope. We promise you'll know if applying makes sense at all — in minutes, not weeks.
Picture your last 8 weeks. You spotted a Horizon Europe call that looked like a fit. You spent 6 evenings reading the work programme. The CTO drafted a technical narrative. Your CFO ran budget scenarios. Your BizDev chased two academic partners for letters. You lost a Tuesday to consortium structure debates.
Then, two weeks before submission, you found out you'd been looking at the wrong call. You weren't the country lead the call required. The whole stretch wasn't admissible.
Reading work programmes. Comparing your stage to what the call expects. Trying to translate dense EU language into "yes, we qualify" or "actually, we don’t".
Cutting your full company story down to the specific piece of work this grant funds. Translating R&D into work packages and milestones. Hunting for partner letters. Re-writing the impact section three times.
The part everyone thinks is the hard part. It isn’t.
The damage isn't just the hours. It's six to twelve weeks where your team's attention was on a grant instead of the product. And the worst part — most of those hours were avoidable. Whether your company qualifies for that call could have been answered in four minutes, before any of the work started.
If you skip this entirely and continue without a check — best case, you spend 24–51 hours every month on manual search that may or may not end somewhere. Worst case, you spend the next 6–12 weeks on a wrong-route attempt before noticing. Doing nothing isn't safer. It's the same risk, distributed differently.
Most grant search tools rank programs by how "relevant" they look to your project — keyword overlap, topic similarity, AI-generated "fit scores" that don't mean anything concrete. A relevance score of 87% can hide the fact that the program requires a consortium of 5 partners across 4 countries — and you're a single applicant in France. You'll find that out three hours into reading the call. That's where 24–51 wasted hours per month go.
Eligibility doesn't work like that. Every EU grant and most national programs have formal admissibility conditions published in the call text. If you fail any one of them, your application is rejected before evaluation — no matter how strong the proposal. So we don't rank programs. We screen them, against the rules the program actually uses.
A founder named Marc — running a six-person hardware startup in Lyon, working on industrial sensors — spent eleven evenings reading a call he eventually didn't pass condition 7 on. (His company would have needed a consortium with two German partners. He had none.) Eleven evenings — and the answer was machine-checkable in under a minute, against the call's own published rules. That's the gap we close.
Eligibility tells you if you can apply. It doesn't tell you if you should apply now. Even programs you're eligible for can fail at submission because of missing evidence — and that's the second check we run.
For every program you pass eligibility on, Grant Fund maps what's missing for a clean application. We group it into five buckets — each gap shown with what it would take to close, time-estimated, with templates linked where they exist.
You either close the gap and apply, or you skip the program for this cycle. Both are valid outcomes.
Grant Fund's check is only as good as the official call text it reads. We cannot:
That depends on proposal quality, evaluator panel, and competitive landscape we can’t see.
Some calls informally favor certain regions, certain language, certain sector framings. We can’t read minds.
But we re-scan every 7 days and you get a Monday email when something opens.
If you have an LOI but it’s from a friend’s startup with no real traction, we’ll log it as "present" — but a real evaluator will not.
What we do is reduce the cost of deciding whether applying makes sense at all — from 4–8 hours of reading per program to 4 minutes for your full eligibility report. The decision is still yours.
Here's what Grant Fund returns when an early-stage hardware startup in France — let's call it Lumen Sense, working on industrial sensors, pre-seed, 8 people — runs its first check this week. The same logic runs for your company when you build your Passport.
You're one condition away from 7 more programs.
View full list →Top reasons your company doesn't fit them:
You will not see these in your dashboard. They're filtered out so your time isn't wasted reading them.
The example above is for Lumen Sense — a French hardware company you've never heard of, because we made it up. To see this report for your actual company — your country, your stage, your sector — build your Passport. Free, 4–7 minutes, no credit card. Your real fit count will probably look different from Lumen Sense's, and that's exactly the point.
This is the part most grant tools won't show you. Below is a "no, not for this cut-off" memo on a program many early-stage founders consider — and the math on what knowing this in 4 minutes saves compared to discovering it 6 weeks in.
International collaborative R&D projects between SMEs and partners in 2 or more Eurostars countries. Up to €500K per partner.
If you tried to make this work for Cut-off 22:
| CEO and CTO time | 60–120 hours | over 4–6 weeks |
| Ops | 20–40 hours | on partner outreach and admin |
| External advisor time | 10–20 hours | |
| Total | 90–180 hours | €9,000 to €18,000 of work that wouldn't produce a submitted application. |
Plus: 6 weeks of distraction from product, delayed customer pilots, and eroded team focus.
You have 5 single-applicant programs in your fit list that don’t require consortium structure. Three offer higher per-applicant funding than Eurostars (EIC Accelerator, France 2030, EIC Pathfinder Open).
The next Eurostars cut-off opens March 2027. If international partnerships fit your roadmap anyway, start partner search in Q3 2026. Cut-off 23 becomes a real option then.
We can flag potential partners from past Eurostars-funded projects in your sector. View partner intelligence in your dashboard.
This is what we mean by "honest answer". Sometimes the best result is "not this one, not now, here's why, and here's what you can do instead". Most grant tools won't tell you this, because they're trying to keep you on the platform. We tell you because keeping your time is the whole point.
The first scan tells you where you stand today. Grant Fund's job after that is to keep your view current as programs change, deadlines move, and new calls open. Here's what one week of monitoring looks like for Lumen Sense, our example company from above.
Your stated TRL 4 still passes (you're at the upper edge).
Logged from your April 27 email forward. Verified against EIC Accelerator's LOI requirements.
One email. Six bullets in the 60-second read at the top. The rest is there if you want detail. Tied to your specific company profile, not a generic newsletter. We send it Monday between 6:30 and 8:30am local time, so it's the first thing on your desk — not the fortieth.
Each one connects to something you can verify in the sample reports above.
Most tools cover one layer — usually the central EU programs (Horizon Europe, EIC, Digital Europe). Or they cover one country in depth. Grant Fund covers all three layers in one place: EU central programs, 27 national innovation agencies (Bpifrance, BMWK, RVO, CDTI, and others), and ~120 regional programs across member states. None of the other tools we know cover all three layers in one self-serve product.
Most grant tools assume a grant writer or full-time consultant in the loop — someone whose job is grants. Grant Fund assumes a founder with three other priorities and one hour for this. Every program has a one-glance verdict. Every email is six bullets, not three pages. The Passport walks you through TRL definitions you'd otherwise need to look up. The eligibility audit links to the original call text so you can verify our reading in the same window.
Most tools rank programs by keyword similarity — and that produces 50 "matches" you'll never qualify for. We screen against 7 formal admissibility conditions (country, entity type, TRL window, stage, sector, size, participation format). If your company doesn't pass any one of them, the program doesn't appear in your fit list. Each verdict is traceable to the exact line in the program's official call text — the same text the program will use to evaluate your application.
Eligibility tells you if you can apply. It doesn't tell you if you should apply now. For every eligible program, Grant Fund shows what's missing for a clean submission: customer letters of intent, peer-reviewed publications, financial projections, partner letters, ethics approvals, gender equality plan. Each gap shows what it would take to close — concrete, time-estimated, with templates linked where they exist. Most tools stop at "eligible". The actual founder question — "eligible and ready?" — gets answered here.
Programs open. Eligibility windows narrow. Deadlines move forward two weeks without warning. Most ways of staying current — newsletters, RSS feeds, manual portal-watching — produce noise without prioritization for your specific situation. Grant Fund's Weekly Radar lands Monday morning with six bullets in the 60-second read: new programs that fit your Passport, eligibility changes on programs you're tracking, deadline approaches. The example above (Lumen Sense, May 4) shows what one week looks like.
First step is free. Decide whether to subscribe after you see the first scan.
Your Passport is your company described in 18 fields: country, legal entity type, founding date, employee count, revenue, balance sheet, sector, TRL, IP status, prior funding, planned consortium structure, and a few more. The system explains each field as you go — what TRL 4 vs 5 means for hardware, what counts as "lead applicant" vs "partner". You can edit any field anytime.
Your first scan runs against 2,813 active programs: programs that fit you (with what's missing for a clean submission), programs that need 1–3 things to unlock, and a summary of what was filtered out and why. Each fit links to the official call text. Each readiness gap shows what would close it. Each next step has a time estimate.
Subscribe to keep the view current. Every Monday, you receive a Weekly Radar email — six bullets max in the 60-second read, with new programs that fit your Passport, eligibility changes on programs you're tracking, and deadline approaches. Tied to your specific company, not a generic newsletter. Cancel in two clicks at end of month — no retention loops.
That's the whole flow. Step 1 has no cost or commitment. Step 2 is your free first scan. Step 3 is the recurring product if you want it.
Four ways to handle European grants. Different time, different cost, different verdicts.
Three things you should know before signing up. All three are on this page.
24–51 hours / month of manual grant search. At founder-time rates of €100/hour, that’s €2,400–€5,100 of your time, every month, redirected from the product to portal-reading.
Hiring an EU grants consultant on retainer. €1,500–€4,000/month for ongoing eligibility, monitoring, and document tracking — plus €5,000–€15,000 per submitted application.
The risk of one wrong-route attempt costing your team 120–260 hours (€12,000–€26,000) over six to twelve weeks before someone notices the call wasn’t admissible in the first place.
Writing the actual proposal. You do that, or you hire a specialist when you’ve decided which programs are worth writing for.
Making the strategic call on whether to apply at all. We give you the eligibility verdict, the readiness gaps, and the deadline math. The decision stays yours.
Cancel any time from your dashboard. Cancellation takes effect at the end of the current month — your access continues until then. No retention loops, no “are you sure?” pop-ups, no offers to lower the price if you stay.
If you want your last month’s payment back, book a 20-minute call with our founder. We promise this is not a retention pitch — we won’t try to convince you to stay, lower the price, or extend the trial. We just want to understand what didn’t work, because we learn faster from churn calls than from churn dashboards. Refund processed within three business days of the call.
If you’d rather not have the call, that’s also fine. Cancel without the conversation — you keep your access until end of month, the cancellation goes through, and your last month’s payment stays with us. We picked this structure because most refund policies are either “no refund, ever” or “automatic refund, no questions asked” — and neither one gives a small team a chance to learn. We chose the middle path.
The honest answer: at €149/month, Grant Fund pays for itself if it saves you four hours a month, or if it stops one wrong-route application before it starts. If you’ve never spent founder time on EU grants — you’ll never need it. If you have, you already know the math.
Hi — I'm Aleks Novak.
Before Grant Fund, I was the Head of R&D at Helix Robotics — a deeptech company building autonomous warehouse picking arms for mid-size logistics operators. Over four years, we won 5 EU grants and lost 9 that we shouldn't have applied to in the first place. Each lost attempt cost us 6–11 team weeks. Most of those weeks were spent on programs that — when I went back and read the original call texts — we were never going to pass.
The pattern was always the same. We'd see a call that looked relevant. We'd spend two evenings reading it. We'd start drafting. Three weeks later, somewhere in section 4 of an annex, we'd find a single condition we didn't meet — and the whole stretch was inadmissible. By then we'd lost an entire product milestone — our pilot integration with a Tier-1 retailer slipped from Q2 to Q4.
I built Grant Fund because I didn't want another founder to spend a quarter on a grant they could've ruled out in 4 minutes.
The 7 conditions we screen are not exotic. They're in every published call. The hard part is the discipline to check all 7 before doing any other work. We built that discipline into software so you don't have to.

We publish our pricing on the landing because we'd rather lose a curious visitor than waste their hour on a sales call that could've been a price card. We refund through a 20-minute interview because we learn faster from churn calls than from churn dashboards. We don't promise we'll win you a grant because nobody can.
If any of this is the kind of company you'd want to work with — build your Passport below.
We're collecting our first round of testimonials from pilot users through Q1 2026. They'll appear here when they're real and signed off by the founders.
Until then — this space stays honest about being empty.
“Grant Fund ruled out 6 of the 9 EU programs we had on our list — in 4 minutes — because of trivial things we'd missed. Saved us a quarter we were about to throw at Eurostars.”
“The negative-match memo is the most useful thing I've read about EU funding. It's the artifact I always wished consultants would produce — and never did.”
We'd rather show empty cards than fabricate quotes. The three above are real pilot users, with text signed off by each founder before publication. If you're a deeptech founder using Grant Fund right now and you'd be open to a 20-minute conversation about what's working and what isn't — write to founder@grantfund.eu.
If your question isn't here, email founder@grantfund.eu — typical response time under 24 hours, from the founder, not a support tier.

"Grant Fund showed me in 4 minutes that 11 of the 14 EIC-related programs I had on my radar were ineligible due to TRL or consortium structure. I cancelled three planned applications and redirected the time to finalising our patent filing. The 4 minutes saved us approximately 6 weeks."
It happens, especially for very early-stage companies (pre-TRL 3) or companies in geographies with thinner program coverage. We tell you exactly which conditions you don't pass and what would change to unlock programs — for example: "reach TRL 5 from current TRL 3", or "add 1 customer LOI to qualify for EIC Accelerator". For some founders, the most useful outcome of Grant Fund is finding out that grants aren't the right path right now — that saves 6 to 12 weeks of misdirected effort on the wrong route.
If your first scan returns zero or only "not yet" programs, you can cancel before paying anything. The Passport itself is free. We've seen a few cases where founders thanked us for the "no, not yet" verdict — they would have spent the next quarter pursuing a program that wasn't admissible, and our 4-minute check let them redirect that quarter to product.
Every "yes/no" in your fit report links to the exact text of the program's official call. You can verify each check yourself in the EU portal — and we recommend you do for the first three programs. A consultant gives you opinions that depend on their reading of the call. We give you a deterministic check against published criteria. Both have value.
The difference: consultants cost €1,500–€4,000/month and start with a sales call. We cost €149 and start with a 4-minute Passport. If you eventually decide you need a consultant for proposal writing, that's a separate decision — we can refer you to specialists we trust.
Within 60 seconds of submitting your Passport, you see your first scan: a fit report with eligible programs, "not yet" programs (with what would unlock them), and a summary of why ineligible programs were filtered out. The fit report is fully visible and exportable. There's no paywall on the first scan.
You decide afterward whether to subscribe for ongoing access — weekly Monday Radar, readiness tracking on each program, full Negative Match Memos. If you don't subscribe, you keep your Passport export and the first scan. We don't email you to upgrade.
Yes for all 27 EU member states (national agencies + ~120 regional programs). We currently don't cover UK Innovate, Switzerland Innosuisse, Israel Innovation Authority, or non-EU jurisdictions — those are on the public roadmap for Q3 2026.
If your country is missing or thinly covered, write to founder@grantfund.eu. We prioritize coverage based on demand from real users, not country size.
No. Your Passport is private. We don't use it to train models, share it with third parties, or sell it. It's EU-hosted (Frankfurt). You can export everything we hold on you as JSON or PDF anytime from your account page, and deleting your account takes effect immediately — access is revoked at once and all personal data is permanently erased within 90 days. Technical IP and location logs are anonymised on a rolling schedule, not kept indefinitely.
If you have specific data residency or compliance requirements — for an investor or due-diligence process — email us, and we'll send our DPA and security overview.
No. Grant Fund stops at "you're eligible, here's what's missing for a clean submission". For proposal writing, you have three options:
We can refer you to vetted EU grant writers we've seen produce strong work. We don't take referral fees.
Group4Grant and GrantsFinder start at €29–65/month — search engines that rank programs by keyword relevance. Subsidies.io starts at $99/scan or $500/year for Netherlands-focused coverage. Grantable starts at $50/month for US foundation grants. Each does one piece well. None do all three of: 7-criteria formal eligibility check + readiness tracking + 3-layer EU coverage (EU central + 27 national + ~120 regional) in one self-serve product.
Closest comparable in scope is Cogrant — hybrid consultancy with algorithmic screening — but they don't publish prices and start with a sales call. €149 is what it costs to keep Grant Fund self-serve, sales-call-free, and run by a team small enough to know every customer. If you're already paying for a consultant or losing 4+ hours a week to manual search, €149 is the smaller bill, not the bigger one.
Then you cancel without it. Cancellation goes through normally: your access continues until end of month, no retention loops, no calls, no emails. Your last month's payment stays with us. The 20-minute call is the path to a refund — it's not a path to keeping your subscription. If the conversation isn't interesting to you, the cancellation works the same way without it.
Both options exist on purpose. We picked this structure because we'd rather lose €149 to learn what didn't work than refund automatically and stay confused about why people leave.
The Passport walks you through the standard EU TRL definitions (TRL 1–9), with a one-line description and one example for each level. If you're between two levels, set TRL to the lower one — most programs anchor eligibility on the lower bound, so the conservative setting expands your options rather than narrowing them.
You can edit your TRL anytime; rescans are unlimited and free for subscribers. If you're truly unsure (TRL 4 vs 5 is a common confusion for hardware founders), we have a free TRL self-assessment guide built into the Passport flow — no signup beyond the Passport itself.
Full public roadmap with current development progress and a feedback form is at grantfund.eu/roadmap. We don't promise dates we can't hit. If something is on the roadmap, it's because we're building it — not because it's a marketing line.
You probably have a specific situation in mind — a deadline you're considering, a call you've been reading, a consultant proposal you're weighing.
Whatever path you're on right now is the status quo. The 4-minute Passport tells you whether that path is worth continuing. That's the only reason we built it.
Free to start. €149/month if you keep it past the first scan. €99/month with annual prepay. Cancel in two clicks at end of month.
If grants aren't worth your time right now — you'll know that too, in the same 4 minutes.
We built this so the answer comes in minutes, not weeks. The rest of your runway should be on the product.