Guide · 9 min read

ANR France Funding 2026: AAPG, JCJC, PRC — Application Guide

ANR’s Appel à Projets Générique (AAPG) is the main bottom-up research-funding route in France. Roughly 16% of submitted proposals are funded across five instruments. This guide covers the eligibility, the proposal structure, and the differences between the five AAPG instruments most researchers will use.

1. The five AAPG instruments

• JCJC (Jeunes Chercheuses et Jeunes Chercheurs) — for researchers up to 8 years post-PhD. Single-PI projects, €100k–€400k over 3–4 years.
• PRC (Projet de Recherche Collaborative) — collaborative project, 2–5 partners, €200k–€800k over 3–4 years.
• PRCE (Projet de Recherche Collaborative — Entreprises) — PRC with a private-sector partner.
• PRCI (Projet de Recherche Collaborative Internationale) — bilateral collaboration with a partnered national agency (DFG, FWF, JST, etc.).
• Bridges with Tremplin-ERC — consolation grant for ERC StG/CoG applicants who scored A on Step 1 but were not funded.

2. Eligibility

The Coordinator must be employed at a French research organisation (university, EPST, EPIC) at the time of submission. International collaborators are welcome on PRCI; for other instruments, foreign partners can join without ANR funding (host-country pays their share).

Career-stage rules (JCJC): no more than 8 years post-PhD as of 1 January of the call year (extensions for parental leave, illness, military service).

3. Submission cycle

AAPG runs annually. Two-stage:

• Pre-proposal (5 pages) — deadline typically October.
• Full proposal (20 pages) — deadline typically March, only for invited applicants.
• Decision — July, funding starts October.

4. The pre-proposal

5 pages, written in French or English. Sections:

• State of the art (1 page)
• Hypotheses and objectives (1.5 pages)
• Methodology (1.5 pages)
• Team and feasibility (0.5 page)
• References (0.5 page)

The pre-proposal is the most decisive document. Review-board members typically read 30–40 pre-proposals each; clarity and a sharp argument for novelty matter more than detail.

5. The full proposal

20 pages. Builds out the pre-proposal with full methodology, work-package breakdown, risks and mitigations, dissemination, ethics, and detailed budget. Most successful full proposals reuse the pre-proposal structure but add specifics and figures.

6. Evaluation

Disciplinary panels (Comités d’évaluation scientifique, CES) score on three criteria with equal weight:

• Scientific quality and ambition
• Methodology and feasibility
• Impact and openness

Funding cut-line typically lands at A on all three (highest-tier rating). Mixed AB scores can fund depending on panel competition and budget.

7. Common reasons for decline

• Pre-proposal that reads like a literature review with the project tacked on at the end.
• Hypothesis stated as “we will study” rather than “we hypothesise that”.
• Methodology described technique-by-technique without binding to objectives.
• JCJC track record showing strong but heavily co-authored papers — independence questioned.
• PRC consortium where one partner does 80% of the work.

8. Tips

• Submit in English unless the panel is Humanities. English helps ANR’s international reviewers.
• Pre-proposal is what gets you to Step 2 — spend more time on it than on Step 2 prep.
• For JCJC, the single most important thing is independence evidence: corresponding-author papers, novel methodology, thesis lab not in your team.
• Budget realistically. Padded budgets are flagged at panel discussion.

Track every ANR call automatically

Grant Radar tracks ANR (AAPG, JCJC, PRC, PRCE, PRCI, Tremplin-ERC) and 23 other funders worldwide. New ANR calls are ranked against your ORCID profile and emailed to you only if relevant. Free during the public beta.