Guide · 10 min read

NWO Open Competition, Vidi & Vici: Application Guide for Researchers in the Netherlands

NWO is the Dutch Research Council and the main route to bottom-up research funding in the Netherlands. Two programmes account for most individual-led grants: the Open Competition (collaborative research projects) and the Talent Programme (Veni / Vidi / Vici, career-stage personal grants). This guide covers the eligibility, the proposal structure, the evaluation, and what reviewers actually weigh.

1. The NWO landscape in one paragraph

NWO funds research across all disciplines. Bottom-up calls flow through two main lines: Open Competition (project-level, typically 4–5 years) and the Talent Programme (Veni for postdocs, Vidi for senior researchers, Vici for established leaders). Both have annual or biennial calls, single-stage or two-stage (depending on the year and panel), and consistent success rates around 15–20% for Talent and slightly higher for Open Competition.

2. Veni / Vidi / Vici (Talent Programme)

• Veni — up to €320,000 over 3 years. For researchers who completed their PhD within 3 years of the deadline. Personal grant: salary + research costs.
• Vidi — up to €850,000 over 5 years. For researchers 3–9 years post-PhD who have already established themselves. Allows building a small team.
• Vici — up to €1.5M over 5 years. For senior researchers with a track record of supervising and leading. Supports a substantial group.

All three are personal awards. The PI must hold a position (or have an offer) at a Dutch institution at the time of award. International applicants are eligible if they secure a Dutch host.

3. Open Competition (M and L)

• Open Competition M — up to €750,000 over 4 years. Single PI or small consortium.
• Open Competition L — €750,000 to €1.5M over 5 years. Larger consortium, ideally with industry or societal partners.

Open Competition is open across disciplines, runs annually, and requires a PI affiliated with a Dutch institution. International collaborators are welcome.

4. The proposal

Talent (Vidi shown as example) proposals are typically 15 pages. Open Competition L can run to 25 pages. Standard structure across both:

• Vision and ambition — What is the question? Why is it important? Why now?
• Approach — Methodology, work packages, deliverables, milestones.
• Innovation and risk — What is novel? What are the risks and how are they mitigated?
• Knowledge utilisation — How will outcomes reach society, industry, policy?
• Implementation — Team, host environment, timelines, budget.

For Talent grants, the “applicant” section is also weighted heavily — trajectory, vision for own career, leadership development.

5. Evaluation

Two-stage process for most calls:

• Stage 1: written reviews (2–4 reviewers).
• Stage 2: rebuttal (you respond to reviewer comments) followed by an interview with the panel.

The interview is decisive for Talent grants. Top ~30% from Stage 1 are interviewed; success rate at interview is roughly 60% (translating to overall ~15–20% award rate).

6. What reviewers actually score

• Scientific quality and relevance — novelty, methodological rigour, fit to the field.
• Quality of the researcher (Talent only) — track record, vision, leadership potential.
• Knowledge utilisation — concrete plans, not just channels.

Knowledge utilisation is the dimension where many strong scientific proposals fail. NWO wants more than conferences and publications — reviewers look for engagement with end-users, policy makers, industry, patient organisations, depending on the field.

7. The interview

15–30 minutes. Panel mixes discipline-specific experts with cross-disciplinary leaders. Common questions:

• What is the one risk that would kill this project?
• How will you know in year 2 if you’re on the right track?
• What does this work change for the field if it succeeds?
• Where do you see your career in 5 years?
• Why this host institution?

8. Common reasons for decline

• Vision section indistinguishable from a project description.
• Methodology described in technique-by-technique format with no logical chain.
• Knowledge-utilisation section listing channels without naming users or beneficiaries.
• Risks are project-aim-restated rather than concrete (a method has high variability, a model species hard to source).
• Track record reads as breadth without depth — many publications, few that connect to the project.

Track every NWO call automatically

Grant Radar tracks NWO (Open Competition, Talent Programme, all sub-programmes) and 23 other funders worldwide. New NWO calls are ranked against your ORCID profile and emailed to you only if relevant. Free during the public beta.