NWO scores well on the 2026 evaluation, but the applicant landscape remains complex
Bureau Berenschot recently published the outcome of its five-yearly evaluation of NWO, concluding that NWO plays a substantial and unique role in the Dutch scientific landscape and carries out that role in an “agile and strategic manner”. For organisations applying for NWO funding, this is reassuring news as it signals continuity and confirms the professionalism of NWO’s procedures. However, the evaluation also flags points of attention that echo a debate NWO itself opened back in 2023, and that we as grant consultants often encounter when we support NWO grant applications.
What can be improved?
Alongside the praise towards NWO, the evaluators note that there is a need for more focus on the system-wide impact of NWO policies, including the trade-off between greater efficiency and more flexibility. This can be achieved through, for example, better-tailored procedures for inter- and transdisciplinary collaboration, improved balance between free and thematic research, and more focus on effects of application pressure and workload. However, the evaluators honestly note that it is very hard for NWO to tailor its instruments to every requirement within a research community as diverse as the Dutch one.
Several of these points are not new. In ‘A varied menu of funding opportunities’ (2023), NWO openly acknowledged that its instrument landscape had grown so broad that researchers, universities and grant offices struggle to find the right fit, and that even within NWO there is a debate about whether the “menu” should be simplified. NWO now aims for a roughly 1:1 ratio between curiosity-driven and demand-driven, thematic research, but this ratio is debated: some argue that NWO should focus mainly on the free side, given that thematic funding is also available via other funding sources. Others see thematic instruments as essential for tackling societal challenges that cross disciplinary boundaries.
What we see in practice with NWO applicants
From our daily work with NWO applicants, we recognise the points of attention named in the evaluation. Preparing a competitive proposal takes time and effort and the combination of low success rates and varied instrument requirements leads to a high workload for researchers and their organisations. At the same time, our experience with NWO itself is consistently positive: communication is open and constructive and procedures are transparent.
The complexity of NWO’s funding landscape for applicants is one of the remaining issues: a variety of instruments, different rules per call, inter- and transdisciplinary requirements, and the unresolved free-versus-thematic balance. Simplification is an ambition NWO has articulated, but has not yet delivered. The next concrete step is NWO’s strategic plan for 2027–2030, due later this year, which will contain its formal response to the evaluation. In the short term, we expect continuity, but the points of attention are the most likely places where adjustments will eventually land.
Want to know more?
As a grant consultancy firm supporting NWO applicants across disciplines, Hezelburcht helps applicants and organisations identify the right instrument, build credible consortia, and develop proposals that meet both the formal requirements and the strategic intent of a call. If you are considering applying for NWO funding, or if you are curious how the 2027–2030 strategy may affect your funding plans, please get in touch, we are happy to think along. Please contact us via info@hezelburcht.com, call 088 495 20 00 or fill in the contact form:
