FAQ - Call no. 2 - Open Science II Mini-Projects

Yes. The option to create and edit applications in IS Věda was launched on 1 September 2026. However, applications can only be formally submitted from 23 November 2026 at 9:00 a.m. The submission period will close on 30 November 2026 at 1:00 p.m.

The reserve list in the 1st call will remain active approximately until the end of September 2026, when we expect the process of concluding the Cooperation Agreements to be completed. Applicants placed on the reserve list will be informed of this step through a status change notification in IS Věda. 

We recommend submitting an application for a Working Group (WG) Opinion in the 2nd call. This step does not in any way commit the applicant to subsequently submitting a mini-project application. 

Mini-project outputs must generally comply with the requirements specified in the Output Catalogue (Annex No. 2 of the Call Documentation). For outputs in the form of datasets, the following applies: 

1. Method of providing evidence of the output: “Functional link to dataset in repository with assigned PID (e.g. DOI)”
2. Output characteristics: “Dataset must be provided with freely available metadata and comply with FAIR principles, must be assigned an internationally recognized persistent identifier (e.g. DOI) and must have a complete record in the NMA”

At the same time, the supported activities specified in the Call must also be respected. 

Within a mini-project, only the staff categories Expert 1–5 are eligible. These positions are defined in more detail in the Methodology for Applicants and Participating Institutions, Section 4.9, Project Budget. 

The total amount of eligible mini-project expenditure is calculated as the sum of the lump-sum amounts assigned to the mini-project outputs, determined using the lump-sum calculator based on the involvement of the defined staff categories in delivering a given output. 

Therefore, if a planned activity is necessary for the successful creation of the intended output and the position performing the activity corresponds to one of the staff categories defined in the Methodology, the activity may be included in the mini-project. 

The assessment considers whether the same activity/output is already financed, even partially, from other sources. Therefore, applicants must distinguish their project from all projects and funding schemes, not only OP JAK projects.

The process will be the same as in the 1st call. Each mini-project must fall within the limit of at least CZK 300,000 and no more than CZK 4.5 million. 

There is no limit on the number of mini-projects that may be submitted by a single institution. 

An application in IS Věda may be created either by the Principal Investigator or, for example, by a member of the project office. The system also allows additional authorized persons to be entered. 

However, it should be noted that the application must be created under the login of the relevant institution. This means that if the person creating the application has access to IS Věda under, for example, a Charles University login, but the application is being submitted on behalf of another institution, access under that institution’s login must first be established for that person.

Yes. A single output type from the catalogue may be delivered multiple times. 

If, for example, several distinct datasets are being created within one mini-project, each dataset must be listed separately as a separate output. For each such output, a separate Lump-Sum Calculator must also be provided. 

The same applies to the Application for an EOSC CZ WG Opinion. A single application document will be created, containing the mini-project title and applicant information at the beginning, followed by a separate form for each output. The completed application must then be signed with a valid electronic signature by the applicant’s statutory representative. 

The information that voting by EOSC CZ Working Groups is preceded by a meeting of the relevant EOSC CZ Working Group (in person or online), where applicants may present the outputs of their mini-projects, is stated in the Methodology for Applicants and Participating Institutions (Section 4.8.1).

Presenting outputs is not a requirement for receiving an Opinion and is not part of the evaluation process. Therefore, presentations are not mandatory for applicants. Applicants will be informed by the relevant EOSC CZ Working Group about the date of the meeting and the opportunity to present outputs well in advance. These dates will also be published on the EOSC CZ website: https://www.eosc.cz/en/projects/open-science-ii/the-request-for-a-wg-statement

These meetings must take place within the period allocated for output assessment (45 calendar days) so that all opinions from the relevant EOSC CZ Working Groups can be issued to applicants no later than 7 November 2026.

All applicants across disciplinary and thematic clusters will receive the Working Group Opinions simultaneously, ensuring equal time conditions for any necessary modifications and completion of mini-project applications before the IS Věda submission period opens.

The described method of demonstrating the output is listed in the Output Catalogue as one of the acceptable forms of evidence and may therefore be used.

However, if the software module is not integrated into a repository connected to the NDI, it will not meet the requirements of the Call, which stipulates that every output must, among other things, satisfy NDI requirements.

If it is a single piece of software, i.e., one output that fulfills multiple characteristics, then this output must be assigned, in accordance with the Call, to only one output type from the Output Catalogue.

We therefore recommend assigning it according to the characteristic that is the primary one for the software.

For the text fields in the form, the following character limits apply: 

• Project title: 500 characters 
• Statutory representative: 250 characters 
• Other fields: large text fields with hundreds of thousands of characters 

From a practical perspective, however, if you enter, for example, 40,000 characters, the application will generate successfully, but it will produce many difficult‑to‑read pages. Therefore, we recommend entering approximately 4,000 characters in the text fields, and if you need a more extensive description, also include the complete text as an attachment (as stated in the Methodology for Applicants and Participating Institutions, Section 4.10). 

 Yes.

Yes, provided the minimum and maximum duration of the Mini‑project as defined by the Call is respected.

The determining factor is which institution will own the output and draw the funds. If it is not CU, the applicant must register under the other employer and apply as an external applicant.

The number of outputs within a single Mini‑project is not limited by this Call. However, it is necessary to comply with the maximum total amount of eligible expenditures for the Mini‑project. 

The outputs of the 1st Call must be linked to the planned outputs and/or supported activities of the Open Science II project and must substantially extend the planned outputs and/or supported activities of the OS II project. It is necessary to base these on Annex No. 7 of the Call – Annex 7 – Extract from the Feasibility Study, where the project’s activities and outputs are described. The outputs submitted under this Call must build on or extend these outputs/activities. At the same time, the planned outputs must correspond to the Output Catalogue. 

No, a single schedule will be attached to the mini-project application. However, it will be necessary to add additional rows to the schedule according to the number of outputs. 

Yes, a separate calculator is required for each output. Therefore, for example, if four outputs are planned within a single Mini‑project, four separate annexes/calculators must be attached. 

No. There may be only one Request for an Opinion for each Mini‑project, with the relevant section of the Request for an Opinion form duplicated for each individual output, as well as the sections concerning the relevant disciplinary/thematic cluster of the planned outputs and the assignment of the given output to the corresponding output type from the Output Catalogue. 

Unfortunately, an ELN cannot be classified independently according to the Output Catalogue. However, if the Mini‑project includes a planned output of a “dataset” (meeting the FAIR principles), for which the implementation of an ELN would be a prerequisite, the ELN could be incorporated under this planned output. 

The explanatory note in the Request for an Opinion form states: “The applicant must list 1-3 criteria for the functionality/scope of the output and then provide a brief description of these in relation to the characteristics of the output type in the Output Catalogue.” 

The essence is very simple: the Output Catalogue contains only general characteristics of output types. The functionality/scope criteria of the planned output, defined by the applicant, should take the form of a brief specification of these general characteristics in relation to the planned output. 

Therefore, no template is available (the basic framework is represented by the general characteristics of the output types in the Output Catalogue, which will be very briefly specified for individual planned outputs).

The NDI requirements are defined in the Methodology for Applicants and Participating Institutions, specifically: 

• In Chapter 2:
  • National Data Infrastructure (NDI): Federated distributed data infrastructure for the needs of the EOSC in the Czech Republic built in connection with the European EOSC data infrastructure. It incorporates, in particular, the National Repository Platform, repositories of research and domain clusters and the National Metadata Directory. The design of the NDI concept is based on the framework architecture for the implementation of the EOSC in the Czech Republic and also on the outputs of the work of the EOSC Working Groups supervised by the CC EOSC in the Czech Republic. 
  • NDI Open Access: For the purposes of this document, NDI Open Access means that the NDI infrastructure is made available under clearly formulated non-discriminatory conditions to any researcher, research group or institution, or even to interested members of the public, in accordance with the licensing conditions. There are number of open access models depending on the nature of the repository within the NDI or specific datasets, but in general, all researchers have the opportunity to utilise the NDI infrastructure under clearly defined non-discriminatory conditions. In accordance with the EOSC principles, non-commercial access is free of charge at the level of specific end users/researchers. 

• In Chapter 4.7 - NDI requirements are defined in the following documents: 
  • NDI Architecture;
  • Conditions for creating new and modifying existing repositories

No, the Request for Opinion does not include any calculations, costs, or financial information. 

No. 

No. The Request for Opinion must bear a valid electronic signature of the statutory representative; no alternative signature method is acceptable under the given conditions. 

Yes, it will be, and it will be available on these websites. 

Mini‑projects will be financed ex‑post. Reimbursement occurs after approval of the Final Report. The detailed procedure is provided in the Methodology for Applicants and Participating Institutions, including the relevant annexes, in particular Annex No. 8, which sets out the conditions between the Mini‑project applicant and Charles University.

The institution pays costs upfront and is reimbursed after submission and approval of the output. 

All information is included in the Methodology for Applicants and Participating Institutions and in the Agreement on Cooperation Template, which forms Annex No. 8 of Methodology. 

The Methodology for Applicants and Participating Institutions, in Chapter 4.11 Ex‑post financing, state that: “In the case of ex-post financing, the eligible expenses incurred for the realization of the mini-project are reimbursed retroactively to the participating institution. Participating Institutions pay for expenses incurred during the realization of mini-projects from their own resources. When realization is completed, it documents the created output of the mini-project according to the declared method of documentation in the Catalogue of Outputs. Eligible expenses are reimbursed retroactively following approval by CU.” 

All documents can be found here. 

No, it will not.

Logging in via CAS or bank identity works only for internal CU users. If you are not an internal person - that is, you do not have any active employment at CU — and you wish to submit a Mini‑project application, you must first register using the registration form available here: Mini‑projects: Registration for contact persons outside CU. Your registration must then be approved by the grant scheme officer. 

After your registration is approved, continue following the procedure described in the IS Věda Manual for the Mini‑projects Open Science II Call.

They must request a new registration. 

This is correct. Select a CU workplace. 

After the application is created, only the owner/main contact person has editing rights. If it is necessary to grant editing rights to additional persons, we recommend listing all of them as representatives of the contact person. Once they approve their participation in the project, they must also be added under the “Authorized Persons” tab, where their rights will likewise need to be granted.

The implementation and organization of voting will follow the established practices  
of each WG (including the tools used), which may be adjusted for this purpose. The basic framework is defined in the Methodology for Issuing an Opinion of the EOSC CZ WG on Mini‑Projects (https://www.eosc.cz/en/projects/open-science-ii/the-request-for-a-wg-statement). 

The vote is preceded by a meeting of the relevant EOSC CZ WG (in person or online), at which the applicants present the outputs of individual mini-projects with regard to the evaluation criteria. The meetings for each of the Open Science II Mini-Projects Call must take place separately and within the period (one month) designated for the evaluation of outputs. 

We can imagine creating some online space (Forms, Slido, etc.) where comments and suggestions on individual requests could be collected prior to the actual vote. The specific setup of this process is up to each EOSC WG based on its usual practice. 

It can be assumed that comments on the criteria will be rare (they would have to arise from discrepancies between the description of the planned output and its summary - i.e., the main concrete characteristics of the planned output). 

We recommend that if more than half of the votes are “YES without comments” and participation is at least 30%, the remaining comments should not be discussed further. 

If any comments arise from the Opinion of the EOSC WG, the applicant is obliged to incorporate them into the mini‑project application, and the evaluators will assess whether they have been adequately addressed. 

Any comments are entered in the Request for Opinion of the EOSC CZ WG form (https://www.eosc.cz/media/4219038/annex-no-4-request-for-opinion-of-the-eosc-cz-wg.docx) under point 2, in the “NO” option as justification, thus making the WG’s consent conditional. 

A requirement to revise criteria (NO + comment in point 2) does not mean that the overall Opinion is negative; the decisive part is point 1 of the Opinion (point 2 represents a reservation with an obligation to modify the application). 

A negative opinion must always be justified. See the form section: 

The planned output does not meet this criterion ......... and this is due to .........

The applicant must remove any planned output that was not recommended and submit the application accordingly. All other planned outputs that receive a positive opinion may be included in the mini‑project application.