Appeal (protest) against a negative assessment of a grant application – when is it worth lodging one?

It is worth lodging an appeal (protest) against a negative project assessment when there are reasonable doubts as to the correctness of the formal or substantive assessment carried out by the institution organising the call, and the applicant is able to point to specific breaches of procedures, project selection criteria or assessment rules set out in the call rules. The appeal procedure for European funds for 2021–2027 is regulated in the Implementation Act and is a real tool for protecting the applicant's interests; however, its effectiveness depends on an accurate diagnosis of the grounds for appeal and a precise formulation of the objections.

In practice, not every negative assessment provides grounds for an effective protest, which is why before lodging one, a thorough analysis of the assessment sheet, the call rules and the project documentation is necessary.

What is a protest in the appeal procedure for EU grants

A protest is a means of appeal available to an applicant whose project has received a negative assessment in a call organised by an intermediate body or the managing authority of an operational programme. The legal basis is the Act of 28 April 2022 on the principles of implementing tasks financed from European funds in the 2021–2027 financial perspective (the so-called Implementation Act).

A protest enables the project to be re-examined by the institution handling the appeal – either the same institution that carried out the original assessment or a higher-level institution, depending on the programme's implementation structure. Importantly, a protest is not a “second chance” to improve the application – it is a formal challenge to the correctness of the assessment carried out by the experts or the institution.

What a negative assessment means

A negative assessment within the meaning of the Implementation Act covers three main situations:

• failure to meet the project selection criteria, as a result of which the application cannot receive funding,
• receiving a score below the required minimum,
• failure to obtain funding because the call allocation has been exhausted, despite meeting the criteria.

Each of these situations entitles the applicant to lodge a protest, but the chances of it being upheld differ significantly depending on the grounds for rejection.

When is it worth lodging a protest – key prerequisites

The decision to lodge a protest should be preceded by an analysis that makes it possible to assess the real chances of success. Not every disappointment with the assessment result constitutes sufficient grounds for appeal.

Procedural errors by the institution

Procedural shortcomings provide the strongest grounds for a protest. If the assessing institution breached the rules set out in the call rules – e.g. applied criteria not specified in the documentation, failed to meet the required deadlines, assessed the project with an improperly composed expert panel or did not justify the assessment as required by law – the protest has a real chance of success.

This category also includes situations in which the experts carried out the assessment contrary to the methodology set out in the substantive assessment sheet, or where the assessments of two experts differed so significantly that a third expert assessment should have been carried out, which the institution failed to do.

Substantive errors in the project assessment

The second category of justified grounds for a protest comprises situations in which the assessing expert made a substantive error – e.g. found that the project does not meet a given criterion even though the documentation clearly shows that it does. In such a case, it is crucial to indicate precisely the place in the application or annexes containing the information that undermines the expert's assessment.

It is worth remembering that a protest does not serve to supplement the application with new information – the institution considers the appeal solely on the basis of the documentation submitted within the call deadline.

Inconsistency of the assessment with the project selection criteria

The third important ground is a situation in which the expert applied an interpretation of a criterion that goes beyond its wording as approved by the Monitoring Committee. Each criterion has its own definition, a description of the verification method and a list of the documents on the basis of which it is assessed. If the expert requires the applicant to meet conditions not provided for in the description of the criterion, this constitutes grounds for an effective protest.

When lodging a protest is not justified

Just as important as identifying grounds for a protest is the ability to assess situations in which an appeal has no chance of success. The most common cases of unfounded protests include:

• the wish to supplement the application, after receiving a negative assessment, with missing information or annexes that were not submitted within the call deadline,
• a subjective belief that the project is of greater value, without pointing to specific assessment errors,
• objections to an overly strict but formally correct assessment by the experts,
• dissatisfaction with the number of points awarded under the scoring criteria where the assessment falls within the limits of expert discretion.

In these cases, the protest is most often dismissed, and the applicant loses time that could have been spent preparing a new application in the next call.

Deadlines and form of the protest – key formal requirements

Under the Implementation Act, a protest must be lodged within 14 days of the date of delivery of the information on the negative assessment of the project. This deadline cannot be reinstated, and missing it results in the protest being left unconsidered.

The protest must contain certain formal elements:

• identification of the institution competent to consider the protest,
• identification of the applicant,
• the grant application number,
• an indication of the project selection criteria whose assessment the applicant disagrees with, together with a justification,
• an indication of procedural objections, if any, together with a justification,
• the signature of the applicant or an authorised person.

Formal deficiencies may be remedied once, within 7 days of the request. Failure to meet this deadline also results in the protest being left unconsidered.

Detailed information on the appeal procedure can be found on the portal funduszeeuropejskie.gov.pl, where the current guidelines of the minister responsible for regional development are also published.

How to construct an effective protest

The effectiveness of a protest depends to a large extent on how the objections are formulated. Experience shows that the most common reason for protests being dismissed is objections that are too general, emotional or not supported by specific references to the documentation.

Precise identification of the criteria

Each objection should refer to a specific assessment criterion, stating its number, name and wording. Next, you should indicate exactly what the expert's error consists of: an incorrect interpretation of the criterion, a failure to take into account information contained in the application, or the application of requirements going beyond the description of the criterion.

Arguments based on the documentation

Each objection must be supported by a reference to specific passages of the application or annexes. It is good practice to quote the relevant passages of the project documentation, stating the page number or section of the application. This allows the institution considering the protest to quickly verify whether the objection is justified.

Language and tone

A protest is a formal document, so its tone should be factual and analytical. Emotional wording, accusations against the experts or general complaints about the quality of the assessment should be avoided. Each objection should be worded neutrally and supported by substantive arguments.

The role of programme documentation and the importance of the assessment sheet

The basis for any analysis of whether a protest is justified is the substantive assessment sheet (and possibly the formal one) made available to the applicant together with the information on the assessment result. It contains the detailed justifications for the experts' decisions, which are the starting point for assessing the chances of an appeal.

In addition, it is essential to study carefully:

• the project selection rules applicable in the given call,
• the project selection criteria approved by the programme's Monitoring Committee,
• the horizontal and programme guidelines applicable to the call,
• the instructions for completing the application and other supporting documents.

Comparing the requirements arising from these documents with the content of the assessment makes it possible to judge objectively whether the expert stayed within the limits of their powers or exceeded them.

What happens after a protest is lodged

The institution considering the protest has 21 days from the date of its receipt to do so, with the possibility of extending this deadline in justified cases to 45 days. The outcome may be:

• the protest is upheld – the project then returns to assessment or is selected for funding,
• the protest is not upheld – the applicant receives a reasoned decision together with information on the possibility of filing a complaint with the voivodeship administrative court,
• the protest is left unconsidered – in the case of formal deficiencies or a missed deadline.

If the protest is dismissed, the applicant may file a complaint with the voivodeship administrative court within 14 days of delivery of the information that the protest has not been upheld, followed, if necessary, by a cassation appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court.

Cost-benefit analysis of lodging a protest

The decision to lodge a protest should be preceded by a cost-benefit analysis. You should take into account:

• the real chances of success in the light of the objections identified,
• the time needed to prepare a professional protest,
• alternative options – in particular subsequent calls in the same or a similar programme,
• the risk of losing the allocation if the appeal procedures are protracted.

In many cases, using grant advisory services makes it possible to assess the situation objectively and make a rational decision. An experienced consultant can quickly assess whether the assessment sheet provides grounds for an effective appeal, or whether applying in the next call would be a better strategy.

The most common mistakes made when lodging protests

Advisory practice shows that applicants often make similar mistakes when constructing protests. The most common include:

• failing to indicate the specific project selection criteria whose assessment is being challenged,
• formulating objections that are too general and not supported by references to the documentation,
• attempting to supplement the application with new information not submitted in the call,
• inconsistent arguments, where the applicant agrees with some of the experts' comments while contradicting them elsewhere,
• missing the 14-day deadline for lodging a protest,
• failure to observe the required form – e.g. no signature of a person authorised to represent the applicant.

Avoiding these mistakes significantly increases the chances of the appeal being considered on its merits.

Summary

A protest against a negative project assessment is a real tool for protecting the applicant's interests, but its effectiveness requires a thorough analysis of the grounds for appeal.

It is worth lodging one primarily when there are objective indications of procedural errors, an incorrect interpretation of the criteria or the omission of information contained in the application. Protests based solely on a subjective belief that the project is of greater value, or constituting an attempt to supplement the application, are unfounded.

In case of doubt, a good solution is to consult an experienced expert who will objectively assess the chances of success and help formulate the objections precisely. If in doubt, consider contacting an expert or check the available grants in upcoming calls, which may be an alternative to a lengthy appeal procedure.