Case study · Capital & Funding
EU funding for a €3.5M healthcare facility.
STEP funding application for a dermatology facility, optimized to achieve an evaluation score of 82–88 out of 100.
- Client
- Dermatology facility, Romania
- Programme
- STEP
- Project value
- €3.5M
- Evaluation score
- 82–88 / 100
- Our role
- Strategy to submission
1 · Situation
Medical expertise, but no map of the EU funding process.
A dermatology facility project in Romania needed to secure STEP funding for a €3.5 million build-out. The application required a comprehensive business plan, detailed budget allocation, equipment specifications, and a sustainability analysis — all structured to maximize the evaluation score within a highly competitive program. The client had the medical expertise but lacked the experience to navigate EU funding bureaucracy.
2 · Approach
We managed the entire application, from strategy to submission.
- 1Scoring analysisReverse-engineer the published criteria.
- 2Business planWrite the CDI sections that carry the weight.
- 3BudgetFit the cost ceilings, favour high-scoring categories.
- 4SustainabilityCalibrate jobs, environment and viability to the grid.
We began with a detailed scoring analysis — reverse-engineering the published evaluation criteria to understand exactly what evaluators prioritize and how points are allocated. This informed every decision we made.
We wrote the business plan's CDI (cercetare-dezvoltare-inovare) sections, emphasizing the facility's research and innovation components, which carry significant scoring weight.
We restructured the budget to meet construction cost ceilings while maximizing the allocation for high-scoring categories. This required detailed equipment offer structuring and supplier quotation management.
We optimized the sustainable development components of the application — job creation commitments, environmental considerations, and long-term viability metrics — each calibrated to the scoring grid.
3 · Outcome
82–88 / 100
The application achieved an evaluation score of 82–88 out of 100, placing it within the competitive range for approval. The complete submission included a fully scored business plan, optimized budget allocation across all cost categories, and documentation for all equipment and construction specifications.
4 · What we learned
EU funding applications are not won by having the best project — they're won by having the best application.
The scoring grid rewards specific things: job creation, innovation components, sustainability metrics, budget structure. Understanding the grid is more important than understanding the project. This engagement reinforced our core methodology: reverse-engineer the evaluation, then build the application around what scores highest.
Planning an EU-funded project?
Find out what funding you're eligible for.
A free 30-minute call. We'll assess your eligibility, identify the programmes that fit, and give you an honest estimate of what you could access.
Related case studies
All case studies →