Erasmus+ application checklist 2026: everything before you submit

📋 Key Takeaways

• Applications submitted after the deadline — even by one minute — are automatically rejected with no exceptions
• An invalid or unvalidated OID is one of the most common reasons for non-admissibility rejection
• The Programme Guide identifies six grounds for rejection before evaluation even begins
• For KA210 and KA220, the lump sum tier must be proportionate to the described activities — a mismatch triggers low Quality of Project Design scores
• All partners must have valid OIDs and must be established in an eligible programme country
• Incomplete application forms — mandatory fields left empty — cannot be corrected after the deadline except for clerical errors

OID checklist — for every organisation in the consortium

• ☐ Every participating organisation (coordinator and all partners) has a valid OID registered on the EU Organisation Registration System (ORS)
• ☐ OID registration was completed at least 10 working days before the deadline — to allow processing time
• ☐ The OID is validated — not just created. Unvalidated OIDs are not accepted
• ☐ The organisation’s legal name, address and registration number in the ORS exactly match the legal documents on file
• ☐ An Identification Form has been uploaded to the ORS for each participating organisation (required for all consortium members)
• ☐ Banking details have been provided in the ORS for the coordinator organisation
• ☐ If your organisation’s OID was registered under a previous name or address, the ORS record has been updated
• ☐ For HEIs: the institution holds a valid Erasmus Charter for Higher Education (ECHE) and the ECHE number is correctly recorded in the ORS

⚠ High-risk error

An invalid or unvalidated OID is one of the most common causes of non-admissibility rejection. The National Agency cannot correct this after submission. Check OID status in the ORS portal at least 5 working days before the deadline — not the day before.

Eligibility checklist

• ☐ The coordinator organisation is legally established in an EU Member State or third country associated to the programme
• ☐ All partner organisations are legally established in EU Member States or third countries associated to the programme
• ☐ For KA210 and KA220: minimum 2 (KA210) or 3 (KA220) partner organisations from different programme countries are confirmed and have valid OIDs
• ☐ For KA220: the coordinator organisation was established at least 2 years before the application deadline
• ☐ For KA122-VET: this is not the organisation’s 4th or subsequent short-term project grant within any 5-year consecutive period (maximum 3 grants per 5-year period)
• ☐ For KA210: the same organisation (one OID) is not involved in more than 5 KA210 applications overall in this deadline (as coordinator or partner)
• ☐ For KA220: the same organisation is not involved in more than 10 KA220 applications in this deadline (as coordinator or partner)
• ☐ The organisation is not a National Agency or a structure hosted by a National Agency (conflict of interest)
• ☐ No organisation in the consortium is established in Belarus or Russia (specific exclusion under current EU restrictive measures)
• ☐ No organisation in the consortium appears on the EU Sanctions Map (sanctionsmap.eu)
• ☐ The project duration selected is within the allowed range for the action (KA210: 6–24 months; KA220: 12–36 months; KA122: 6–18 months)
• ☐ All activities take place in countries of participating organisations (not in non-programme countries, unless specifically justified)

Admissibility checklist

• ☐ The application has been submitted electronically via the correct system — Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps website for NA-managed actions, EU Funding and Tenders Portal for EACEA-managed actions
• ☐ The application has been submitted before the deadline: 12:00:00 Brussels time for NA-managed actions (KA1, KA210, KA220) and 17:00:00 Brussels time for EACEA actions
• ☐ All mandatory fields in the application form are completed — no section left blank
• ☐ All required annexes and supporting documents are uploaded where required by the action
• ☐ The application is readable and accessible — no corrupted files, no locked PDFs
• ☐ Part B of the application (project description) does not exceed the page limit — 40 pages for KA210 (low value grant ≤€60,000), 70 pages for KA220 standard actions. Evaluators will not read pages beyond the limit
• ☐ The application has been formally submitted — not just saved as a draft. Check the submission confirmation email
• ☐ A submission confirmation reference number has been recorded

⚠ High-risk error

Deadlines are absolute. An application submitted at 12:00:01 Brussels time is automatically rejected. Do not submit in the final hour — technical problems with the submission system in the minutes before the deadline are common, and the National Agency will not accept them as justification for a late submission. Submit at least 2 hours before the deadline.

Lump sum and budget checklist

• ☐ KA210: The lump sum selected (€30,000 or €60,000) is proportionate to the activities described — estimated staff costs and activity costs align with the selected tier
• ☐ KA220: The lump sum tier selected (€120,000 / €250,000 / €400,000) is proportionate to the work packages and outputs described
• ☐ For KA220: the budget table is completed per work package with realistic staff day estimates and unit costs — not rounded figures that look estimated rather than calculated
• ☐ The budget narrative (where required) explains the rationale for major budget lines — particularly staff costs and transnational meetings
• ☐ Work Package 1 (project management) is budgeted separately and does not exceed approximately 15% of the total grant for KA220
• ☐ Transnational meeting costs are proportionate — 2–3 meetings for KA210, 3–6 for a 36-month KA220, each with a justified purpose in the work plan
• ☐ No costs are included for activities that are not described in the project narrative

Priority checklist

• ☐ The application addresses at least one horizontal priority or one sector-specific priority relevant to the field (mandatory for KA210 to be considered for funding)
• ☐ Priority alignment is integrated throughout the project design — not listed in a single paragraph disconnected from activities
• ☐ Your National Agency’s published European priorities in the national context for the 2026 call have been checked and addressed where applicable
• ☐ If the project addresses inclusion and diversity — the strongest priority signal — this is stated clearly in the Relevance section opening, not buried in a later paragraph
• ☐ The inclusion dimension (if claimed) is backed by specific activities, adapted content or inclusion support measures — not just a general statement
• ☐ The digital dimension is present and specific — not just “we will use email and video calls” but a named digital tool or methodology that is part of the project’s work
• ☐ Green travel is addressed — particularly for trips under 500km where the 2026 Programme Guide expects low-emissions transport as the default

Project description checklist

• ☐ The needs analysis names a specific problem, identifies a specific target group and cites at least 2–3 external sources — not just one EU-level report
• ☐ Project objectives are written as specific, measurable outcomes — not themes or general intentions
• ☐ Each objective connects to at least one activity and at least one output
• ☐ Every activity in the work plan has: a clear purpose, named responsible partner(s), a timeline, a location (country) and a defined output or milestone
• ☐ The EU added value argument explains why results cannot be achieved in one country alone — not just “European cooperation enriches our work”
• ☐ The partnership rationale explains why each partner is in this consortium specifically — their relevant expertise, target group access or methodological contribution
• ☐ Task allocation is roughly balanced — the coordinator does not carry more than 60% of the total workload
• ☐ A specific evaluation plan is included: at least 2–3 measurable indicators linked to objectives, a timeline for measurement and a named responsible person
• ☐ Dissemination includes specific channels beyond social media — EPALE, European Youth Portal, sector networks, professional events or authority bodies as appropriate
• ☐ Sustainability describes specifically how each main output will continue to be used after the grant period ends
• ☐ The Erasmus+ Results Platform has been checked — no closely overlapping funded projects in the last 2 calls that undermine the innovation or needs claims

KA1 mobility checklist (KA122-SCH, KA122-VET, KA122-ADU, KA152, KA153)

• ☐ Total participants do not exceed 30 for short-term project actions (KA122)
• ☐ For KA122-VET and KA122-SCH: Courses and Training budget does not exceed 50% of the total project grant
• ☐ Each planned activity has a receiving organisation confirmed and a letter of intent or agreement in place
• ☐ Travel distances have been calculated using the official EC Distance Calculator (straight-line km) — not Google Maps routing distances
• ☐ Individual support rates used are the correct 2026 Programme Guide reference rates for each destination country
• ☐ Travel days (up to 2 standard, up to 6 green travel) are correctly included in individual support calculations where applicable
• ☐ Green travel flag: trips under 500km are planned using train or low-emissions transport as the default (or justified exception documented)
• ☐ For KA152: participant age range (13–30) is met, minimum 10 participants confirmed, Youthpass issuance is planned for all participants
• ☐ For KA121/KA121 accredited actions: Erasmus Accreditation is valid and the activities are consistent with the approved Erasmus Plan
• ☐ Organisational support amounts are correctly calculated (€500 per participant for first 100, €200 for additional)

Final review checklist

• ☐ Every claim in the Relevance section is substantiated by the project design that follows it — no claims unsupported by activities
• ☐ Activities described in the narrative match the budget — no activities budgeted that are not described, no activities described that are not budgeted
• ☐ Timeline is realistic — a 12-month project with 6 outputs produced, piloted and disseminated is almost always not realistic; check timing against available staff days
• ☐ Partner descriptions are consistent across all sections — names, roles and contributions match between the partnership rationale, the work plan and the budget
• ☐ Page limit is within bounds — print to PDF and count pages before final submission
• ☐ No contradictions between sections — objectives stated in Section A that are not addressed in Section B, or outputs described in the work plan that do not appear in the Impact section
• ☐ Language is clear and direct — no untranslated acronyms, no jargon that evaluators from different sectors may not recognise, no sentences requiring re-reading to understand
• ☐ All partner organisations have been informed of the final version they are consenting to — last-minute changes without partner agreement create governance problems after funding
• ☐ Submission system is tested — login credentials are working, the project has been saved and all sections show as complete in the system dashboard
• ☐ A colleague or external reviewer who was not involved in writing the application has read the Relevance and Quality of Project Design sections and confirmed they are clear to a reader with no prior context

Not Sure Your Application Is Ready?

GrowthProjects.eu provides pre-submission review and full proposal development for KA1, KA210 and KA220 applications. If you have a draft, we can assess it against the evaluation criteria and identify the highest-risk sections before you submit.

Free initial consultation · March 2026 deadline

Get a Pre-Submission Review →

Need a second pair of eyes before you submit?

GrowthProjects.eu provides pre-submission application reviews — we read your draft against the evaluation criteria and identify the highest-risk sections before you submit. Available for KA1, KA210 and KA220. Contact us for a free initial consultation.