HE Training

Webinar's FAQ

Will the recording of this webinar be available?

Access the slides

Watch the recording

Is there something similar to the H2020 online manual for Horizon Europe?

Horizon Europe reference documents

Program Guide of Horizon Europe

Annotated Model Grant Agreement (AGA)

ERC Managing your project > Open Science

MSCA Work Programme

MSCA Financial Guide

EC Participant Portal – 'Continuous reporting' guide

Is there a DMP template for Horizon Europe? / Is there a model or questionnaire to help creating the DMP?

Horizon Europe reference documents > Templates & Forms > Project reporting templates (direct download of a docx file)

You can also use a DMP creation tool to help you in the process. For instance, in Argos the template is included with guidance. You will find a short and a long version of the template. You can join the Argos community call if you need more information.

Are you planning to create a DMP catalogue with good examples?

There is no such plan yet.

In Horizon Europe I cannot publish with an embargo period, right?

No. Any peer-reviewed publication must be deposited on a repository at the latest on the day of publication. Note that when publishers have two publications dates (e.g. online and per issue), the earliest date should be taken into account (usually the online release).

If only "no embargo period" is required does it mean that paying APCs is supported, most scientists think that is the case, and they see paying option as the only publishing option.

There is not restriction in where you publish and how you make your work available in Open Access. As long as either the Author Accepted Manuscript and/or the Version of Record is under a CC-BY licence, you can chose any publishing venue.
Repositories safeguard against the long-term causes of digital loss (e.g. human error, website migration, economic or organisational failure), provide free and permanent access (the content itself might not be publicly available), and ensure integrity and authenticity of the resources (i.e. upon later retrieval, it is the same as it was when it was originally uploaded.
This means you can pay APCs to publish in Open Access (including in hybrid journals), or go the 'free' route by applying the Rights Retention Statement. The only restriction is what is covered by the grant (e.g. hybrid APCs are not eligible for reimbursement).

What about publications in different non-academic outlets (e.g. newspapers), can we or do we have to deposit them in trusted repositories?

The mandate for publications only applies to peer-reviewed work. You therefore do not have to deposit it on a trusted repository. It is however strongly recommended to do so, as it will make your work easier to discover and access. It will also help when reporting to the European Commission about all the public engagement or other types of outputs you did as part of the project.

How do we report on a working paper which is openly available on a website but has not been peer-reviewed? Does it also have to be deposited in a repository

(see previous question)

A talk or poster presentation (without a subsequent published conference article) should only be reported as a Dissemination?

(see previous question)

What about extended abstracts or just abstracts of a publication? Or do we just report the talk as Dissemination?

(see previous question)

How about conference articles? Sometimes, only the submitted abstracts go through peer-review, and the full article published online is not peer-reviewed anymore. Sometimes, the paper is reviewed, but only by the conference scientific committee, so it's not the same as blind peer-review in journals.

The European Commission specifies that "Peer review is the assessment of manuscripts or publications by researchers with relevant expertise. An article is considered to be peer-reviewed when it has been scrutinized and approved by expert researchers. The number of the positive assessments required is set by each publishing venue." (Annotated Grant Agreement v1.0, Annex 5.6).
It is unclear to us whether it would be considered as 'formally' peer-reviewed. We would say that a conference abstract or article isn't being peer-reviewed if there is no iterative process of refining the work based on the reviewers' comments and submitting the new version for review again. The conference manuscript would be more of a selection process by the committee to be included in the conference. However, if the organising committee does actively review your article, then it should be considered as being peer-reviewed.
In any case, it is recommended to make all of your work available in Open Access, and in doubt, you can also ask your Project Officer.

What about for a full paper for a conference? Some conference series only publish the proceedings on a website, not an "official" publication channel with an ISBN or ISSN (such websites usually don't have the necessary metadata such as the PID of published version).

If the paper was peer-reviewed (see previous question), then it would fall under the mandate. It is not an issue if the publisher doesn't apply a DOI to the paper. What is important is to retain your rights on one version of the paper by applying a CC BY licence. This will allow you to deposit it on a repository (e.g. Zenodo) which will attribute you a DOI and provide all the required metadata.
If the paper wasn't peer-reviewed then it isn't a requirement. But doing this step will also help for the Dissemination reporting since you will have a DOI with all the metadata attached to it, which will save you some time.

How do we report on a peer-reviewed article that has been published in an online encyclopedia which does not offer the possibility of open access at all?

It is a requirement to retain your rights on at least one version of your work. This ensures you can upload it in Open Access on a trusted repository. If you cannot apply a CC BY licence to one version of your work, then you cannot publish in that venue. We recommend that you discuss this directly with the publisher to see if an exception can be made, stating that it is a requirement from your funder.

For data sharing, is it mandatory to deposit in a repository at least the data underpinning research papers published during the project (it was the case for H2020).

You should deposit all of the data generated/collected during the project, irrespectively of whether it was used in a publication or not.
If data is linked to a publication, it should be made available at the latest on the date of publication (following the principles of "as open as possible, as closed as necessary"). When uploading the data, it is important to mention the persistent identifier (usually a DOI) provided by the publisher, so links can be made between the two. If possible, you should also mention the DOI of the dataset on the publication/publisher's website.
Please note that some publishers might require you to also deposit the underlining data on their website. Most of those do not follow the requirements of trusted repositories and are therefore not compliant. You would still need to upload your data separately on a trusted repository.

Is it mandatory to publish the metadata even if the associated data are not yet open? / Should the metadata be published at several instances during the project as soon as a dataset has been generated?

Yes. You must differentiate between uploading your data to make it discoverable versus making it available for others to access and reuse. In most cases you will not (and sometimes should not) be making your data open when it is generated/collected. But you are now required to inform of its existence online through a repository, at the latest before the end of the project. This helps withdiscoverability because it will be referenced earlier, could help with citation, lead to new partnerships/networking opportunities, etc.
At a later stage, you will then make the data openly available for others through the repository (following the principles of "as open as possible, as closed as necessary").
Note that 'data' includes raw data, to the extent technically feasible, but especially if it is crucial to enable re-analysis, reproducibility and/or data reuse.
If you use DMP tools such as ARGOS, you can update the different versions you are producing during the project.

When should data be published at the lastest? Publication date of an article?

(see previous two questions)

About the enforcement of the data requirements. Based on the results of a report it shows compliance rate is below 50%

"Monitoring the open access policy of Horizon 2020" (p.50)

Horizon2020's requirements were different than the current Horizon Europe. At the time, open data was an optional opt-out element. Horizon Europe is different since it is mandatory for all grantees.

The disclaimer is quite long and it is common to have little space in the acknowledgement part, is it possible to reduce it?

“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.”

From a pure requirements point of view, the disclaimer must be added word-to-word to any disseminations part of the project. We would recommend talking directly with your Project Officer and/or the publisher to see if a solution can be arranged on a case-by-case basis.

Are there specific formulations to include the acronym and GA number? In H2020, this was included in the GA itself, but now no further mention of acronym / GA number is stated.

There is currently (14/03/25) no precise sentence mentioned in the official documents. As long as the grant project name, the project number, the acronym and the mention of "Horizon Europe funding" are included, you are alright.

Please note that these must appear in the metadata (i.e. the fields describing the publication/dataset). Many 'trusted repositories' will give you the option to search for and select your project. If so, you do not need to add the sentence in the acknowledgment, although it is a better practice to do so for readers to easily identify the project.

Suggested sentence: "This project has received a Horizon Europe funding under the [ACRONYM] grant agreement Nº [number]"

Regarding the Acknowledgement requirement: "Scientific publications must also acknowledge the EU support and display the European flag (emblem) and funding statement in line with the provisions set out in Article 17 and, where applicable, the special logos set out in Annex 5." (AGA v1.0, Annex 5.6). It is not common to add logos to scientific publications. Is the EU emblem/flag a requirement in scientific publications?

Based on the documentation of the Annotated Grant Agreement (v1.0), there is no mention of exceptions to this rule. But in practice, since it is not automatically possible, we would recommend both talking to the publisher to see if it cannot be added (mentioning your obligation as set by your funder), and your Project Officer to see if you could be exempt of that rule for those publications. It would have to be on a case-by-case basis.

Should the funding statement also be mentioned within the README files?

A README file should provide all the essential information about a dataset, including its purpose, content, structure, format, usage instructions, licensing, attribution, and any relevant metadata or funding details.

(see also the previous question)

Is there a list of trusted repositories available?

For publications, you can select a subject-specific repository by looking at [OpenDOAR](https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/opendoar/) For data, you can select a subject-specific repository by looking on [re3data](https://www.re3data.org/) or [OpenAIRE Explore](https://explore.openaire.eu/). Alternatively, you can use a generic repository such as [Zenodo](https://zenodo.org/) (Update - 14/03/2025) Currently only 5 trusted repositories are ‘ready’ for compliance (HAL, AUSSDA, intR²Dok, DANS Data Station Archaeology, Zenodo). There was a study done, which you can check to see if your repository is ‘trusted’ and has the essential metadata criteria ([Lazzeri 2024](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13919642), Annex 1). Many are “close to essential” and currently making changes, so check even if it is not in the list yet. In doubt deposit on Zenodo (fully compliant) and on another subject-specific/institutional repository (for relevance in your field, better visibility and discoverability, better community engagement). Follow these steps: 1. Deposit on the subject-specific/institutional repository to get attributed a DOI; 2. Deposit on Zenodo and under the section "Do you already have a DOI for this upload?" put the DOI that was created by your repository; 3. Fill-in all the fields as much as possible on Zenodo (which your other repository might be missing).

Is it possible to use another repository than those you listed in your presentation? There are guidelines on where to deposit and what is considered a trusted repository, should I use a [comparison chart](https://zenodo.org/record/7946938) to chose a good one?

The links presented in the presentation are provided to help you discover and chose a suitable repository. You should always try and chose a repository that is widely used or accepted by your research community. Note that the current technical guidelines set by the European Commission are very demanding, and most repositories do not yet meet its mandatory requirements. Check the previous question for details.

Can we deposit the AAM in more than one repository (e.g. Zenodo and the insitution’s)?

Yes, there are no restrictions in how many repositories you can self-archive your work onto. The deposit on Zenodo does not prevent you from also uploading it on your institutional repository, and vice-versa. It might actually event boost its discoverability. Although, the number of views and downloads will be diluted over the different repositories, so it depends if that figure is important to you. Remember to always mention the persistent identifier provided by the publisher so connections can be made with your institutional repository. (Update - 14/03/2025) We now recommend the following steps: 1. Deposit on the subject-specific/institutional repository to get attributed a DOI; 2. Deposit on Zenodo and under the section "Do you already have a DOI for this upload?" put the DOI that was created by your repository; 3. Fill-in all the fields as much as possible on Zenodo (which your other repository might be missing).

Are arXiv, biorxiv, psyXiv, etc. trusted repositories?

Those are pre-print servers where you upload your work before being peer-reviewed. The requirement is for the peer-reviewed version (i.e. Author Accepted Manuscript or Version of Record) to be made Open Access. If the pre-print server allows you to update your pre-print to the AAM/VoR once it has been published, then you would be compliant (Update - 14/03/2025: currently none of the pre-print servers fullfil the technical requirements imposed by the EC, so you would still need to upload it on another repository. See previous two questions). If not, you would still need to upload on a different repository.

What are other general repositories like Zenodo?

You can browse other repositories by looking on [re3data](https://www.re3data.org/) or [OpenAIRE Explore](https://explore.openaire.eu/)

Are articles uploaded on Academia or ResearchGate considered archived?

While Academia and ResearchGate are useful social networking tools, they are not considered as 'trusted' repositories. They do not have a long-term preservation policy like repositories have, and do not always provide a free, unrestricted and permanent access to the resources. Find an adequate subject-specific repository by looking at [OpenDOAR](https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/opendoar/) or [OpenAIRE Explore](https://explore.openaire.eu/) Alternatively, you can use a generic repository such as [Zenodo](https://zenodo.org/)

Is it necessary to upload the electronic file (PDF) in the repository or is indicating, on the repository, the DOI link given by the journal where the file can be downloaded sufficient?

You need to upload the PDF file of the work itself, as well as the DOI from the journal. Repositories safeguard against the long-term causes of digital loss (e.g. human error, website migration, economic or organisational failure), provide free and permanent access (the publication on the website of the journal might be behind a pay-wall), and ensure integrity and authenticity of the resources (i.e. upon later retrieval, it is the same as it was when it was originally uploaded). It is therefore important to share the file itself, while also indicating where it was published.

Regarding repositories, there is a requirement which indicates "use of PID" - what does this mean exactly? Is it required that the repository produces PIDs? Or is it sufficient that the institutional repository incorporates the PIDs of the publishers in the recorded metadata?

The publication/dataset itself must be given its own persistent identifier on the repository (see below for some exceptions). This is to ensure its long-term preservation. You should still mention the PID from the publisher to creation links between the two. For instance on Zenodo it is under "Alternative identifiers" or "Related/References" section. (Updated 14/03/2025) While DOI is nowadays the most common PID, any other type of PID is accepted (e.g. handle).

If I upload the VoR on Zenodo it asks "Do you already have a DOI for this upload?". Do you confirm that If Zenodo accepts the DOI already provided by the publisher, then there is no need for another DOI to be provided by Zenodo ?

If you are uploading the same version of your manuscript (i.e. VoR with a CC BY licence) on the repository, you should put the DOI from the publisher. The repository will then be considered a secondary location by indexers. If you are uploading the AAM, it is not considered as the same version as the one accessible on the publisher's website, and therefore you should create a new DOI through the repository. But you should always mention the publisher's DOI. For instance on Zenodo it is under "Alternative identifiers" or "Related/References" section.

Regarding data repositories, in Horizon Europe documentation you often find the clause that, if required in the call conditions, the repository must be federated in the EOSC in compliance with EOSC requirements. Which repositories are EOSC federated?

A list of the services offered by EOSC, including for storage and processing of research data, can be found on the [EOSC EU Node](https://open-science-cloud.ec.europa.eu/) (Updated 14/03/2025, previously the EOSC Hub was used).

What is the difference between self-archiving and publishing in terms of Open Access to publications?

Self-archiving is the process of depositing a version of your work on a trusted repository. It is not part of the publishing process, it happens after your work has undergone peer-reviewing. You work might be available in Open Access directly on the publisher's website, but irrespectively of where you publish (e.g. full OA, hybrid journal), you still need to deposit a version on a repository (except if you publish in Open Research Europe). The Author Accepted Manuscript and Version of Record might therefore be available under different licences, e.g. signing a Copyright Transfer Agreement on the VoR but retaining your rights (under a CC-BY licence) on the AAM, allowing you to share it openly. It is about where you make it available in OA, not where you publish.

Is there a way, via API for example, to connect our open access repository or our CRIS with EOSC to feed it? It would be useful for our researchers not to have to create the article in several repositories manually.

You will probably be interested in the [OpenAIRE Graph](https://graph.openaire.eu/), which is a collection of interlinked research objects that aggregates metadata records from thousands of scholarly communication sources from all over the world for researchers, service providers, research managers and policy makers, by following a participatory approach. It has various public APIs: https://graph.openaire.eu/docs/apis/home/

Safe School Environments

Foster an atmosphere of acceptance and belonging for all
Implement measures to ensure physical and emotional safety.

Horizon Europe Open Science Resources

by OpenAIRE

Helpdesk

Links

Newsletter