

=== PAGE 1 ===
Proposal Evaluation Form
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Horizon Europe (HORIZON)
Evaluation Summary 
Report - Research and 
innovation actions
Call: HORIZON-SESAR-2025-DES-ER-03
Type of action: HORIZON-JU-RIA
Proposal number: 101290642
Proposal acronym: STRATUS
Duration (months): 30
Proposal title: STRATUS — Safety & Transformed Resilience for high-Altitude Traffic Unified Services
Activity: ER-03-WA2
N. Proposer name Country Total 
eligible 
costs
% Grant 
Requested
%
1 EUROCONTROL - EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE 
SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION
BE 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
2 DFS DEUTSCHE FLUGSICHERUNG GMBH DE 73,235 3.56% 73,235 3.56%
3 ENAV SPA IT 73,924.08 3.60% 73,924.08 3.60%
4 LUFTFARTSVERKET SE 180,375 8.78% 180,375 8.78%
5 NATS (EN ROUTE) PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY UK 119,684.75 5.82% 119,684.75 5.82%
6 ENAIRE ES 95,975 4.67% 95,975 4.67%
7 ENTE NAZIONALE PER L'AVIAZIONE CIVILE - ENAC 
ITALIAN CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY
IT 102,268.75 4.98% 102,268.75 4.98%
8 CONSORCIO AERODROMO AEROPUERTO DE TERUEL ES 88,000 4.28% 88,000 4.28%
9 SkyNav Europe BE 253,269.75 12.32% 253,269.75 12.32%
10 ECOLE NATIONALE DE L AVIATION CIVILE FR 78,250 3.81% 78,250 3.81%
11 C.I.R.A. CENTRO ITALIANO RICERCHE AEROSPAZIALI 
SCPA
IT 53,907.5 2.62% 53,907.5 2.62%
12 STICHTING KONINKLIJK NEDERLANDS LUCHT - EN 
RUIMTEVAARTCENTRUM
NL 157,795.25 7.68% 157,795.25 7.68%
13 INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF AIR TRAFFIC 
CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATIONS
CA 63,125 3.07% 63,125 3.07%
14 INGENIERIA Y ECONOMIA DEL TRANSPORTE SME MP SA ES 97,575 4.75% 97,575 4.75%
15 CENTRO DE REFERENCIA INVESTIGACION 
DESARROLLO E INNOVACION ATM, A.I.E.
ES 59,250 2.88% 59,250 2.88%
16 INSTITUUT VOOR INFRASTRUCTUUR, MILIEU EN 
INNOVATIE
BE 33,462.5 1.63% 33,462.5 1.63%
17 OpenUTM Ltd. IE 7,237.5 0.35% 7,237.5 0.35%
18 DEUTSCHES ZENTRUM FUR LUFT - UND RAUMFAHRT 
EV
DE 153,000 7.44% 153,000 7.44%
19 SCEYE SPAIN S.L. ES 280,175 13.63% 280,175 13.63%
20 ANRA TECHNOLOGIES OU EE 84,656.25 4.12% 84,656.25 4.12%
21 HAPS Alliance US 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
 101290642/STRATUS-28/01/2026-09:52:41 1 /
4 
Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)968292 - 28/01/2026

=== PAGE 2 ===
22 UDARAS EITLIOCHTA NA HEIREANN THE IRISH 
AVIATION AUTHORITY
IE 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
  Total:   2,055,166.33   2,055,166.33  
Abstract:
STRATUS (Safety and Transformed Resilience for High-Altitude Traffic Unified Services) will define a modular and scalable framework for 
integrating Higher Airspace Operations (HAO) and Space Transport Operations (STO) into the European ATM framework. The focus is on the low-
density airspace above conventional traffic, generally above flight level FL550. This is where high-performance supersonic and hypersonic aircraft, 
automated High Altitude Platform Systems (HAPS) fleets, and sub-orbital operations are expected to multiply in the coming decade. 
Building on the exploratory CONOPS produced in the ECHO project, and taking into account the work now underway in ECHO2, STRATUS will 
expand the scope to cover a wider set of operational scenarios, vehicle types and service models. It will address the operational, functional, technical 
and regulatory foundations required for integration, in line with the priorities of the European ATM Master Plan for higher-airspace operations, 
dynamic airspace configuration, service-oriented architectures and cyber-secure digitalisation. Concentrating on the higher airspace, where traffic 
density is relatively low, provides the opportunity to mature and validate innovative concepts and technologies while limiting operational risk to 
existing ATM. 
The objectives of STRATUS follow a logical progression from establishing operational demand in higher airspace, through the development of 
concepts and supporting frameworks, to the consideration of regulatory and other relevant implications that may influence successful implementation.
Evaluation Summary Report
Evaluation Result
Total score: 10.40 (Threshold: 10 )
Criterion 1 - Excellence
Score:   (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - )4.00
The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: 
- Clarity and pertinence of the proposal: degree to which the objectives, scope and requirements set out in the call material are well understood and 
fully addressed. 
- Soundness of the proposed methodology for developing the SESAR solutions, including the underlying concepts, models, assumptions and 
interdisciplinary approaches. This criterion also includes appropriate consideration of the integration of a gender dimension into R&I content and 
the quality of open science practices, including sharing and management of research outputs and engagement of citizens, civil society and end users 
where appropriate. 
- Level of awareness of the state of the art: degree to which the proposal demonstrates knowledge of current operations and relevant previous R&D 
work (both within and outside SESAR), explains how the proposed work will go beyond the state of the art and demonstrates innovation potential.
The proposal's objectives are pertinent to the scope of the work programme responding to the identified R&I need 10. “Innovative methodologies for ATM safety, 
security, and resilience.” The proposal is focused on developing methods that will integrate higher airspace operations (HAO) and space transport operations (STO) 
into the European ATM framework. However, the objectives of the proposal are only briefly described. This is a shortcoming. 
The proposal’s discussion of automation focuses only on the service architecture framework rather than automation level 4 functions. The targeted automation 
levels of the proposed service architecture are not adequately specified. This is a shortcoming. 
The proposal includes considering and assessing the potential impact of the proposed regulatory evolutions on military aviation, in particular military operations 
and training. 
The methodology is well-structured and coherent, following logical progression from problem definition and concept development to assurance and regulatory 
analysis. It demonstrates awareness of SESAR’s expectations for Exploratory Research at TRL 2, with appropriate reliance on expert review and desk-based 
validation rather than prototypes or flight trials. 
The proposal initiates at less comprehensive TRL2 than the target TRL. So, the initial TRL is unclear lying between 1 and 2. This is a minor shortcoming. 
Research data management is briefly described and appropriately built into the methodology. The data management plan (DMP) is planned early (M3) with an 
update at M12 and is embedded in the Project Management Plan (PMP), ensuring findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR) data, repository use and 
open formats for primarily textual/desk-study outputs in line with open science practices. The gender dimension is considered: there is no gender dimension in the 
research content. 
There is a clear awareness of the state of the art, and the proposal builds on prior research in the area - SEC-AIRSPACE on cyber security, FARO on resilience 
metrics, and FCDI.
Criterion 2 - Impact
Score:   (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - )3.00
 101290642/STRATUS-28/01/2026-09:52:41 2 /
4 
Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)968292 - 28/01/2026

=== PAGE 3 ===
The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: 
- Credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts specified in the call material. 
- Suitability and quality of the measures in terms of maximising expected outcomes and impacts, as set out in the dissemination and exploitation 
(D&E) plan, including communication activities.
The proposal does not demonstrate methodological depth for ensuring credible, transferable, and measurable results within the SESAR Performance Framework. 
This is a shortcoming. 
There is insufficient indication of which Key Performance Areas (KPAs) the proposed activities address. The performance metrics and assessment methods are not 
adequately defined. This is a shortcoming. 
As a result, it is not clear how the project’s outcomes will contribute to measurable improvements in ATM performance or align with SESAR’s overarching 
performance ambitions. This hampers the credibility of the expected impact and the traceability of results within the SESAR Innovation Pipeline. This is a 
shortcoming. 
Broader societal and economic impacts are clearly articulated, even if brief. 
The proposal provides only a general outline of the dissemination, communication, and exploitation (DCE) plan. Beyond listing a project website, workshops, and 
participation in relevant events, there are insufficient details on objectives, target audiences, key messages, communication channels, or timelines. This is a minor 
shortcoming. 
The exploitation activities are not adequately described. The strategy for identifying or engaging potential users or for translating project results in concrete uptake 
pathways in unclear. The limited level of detail hampers the project’s capacity to maximise visibility, stakeholder engagement, and long-term impact. This is a 
shortcoming.
Criterion 3 - Quality and efficiency of the implementation
Score:   (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - )3.40
The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: 
- Quality and effectiveness of the work plan and assessment of risks, and appropriateness of the effort assigned to work packages, and the resources 
overall. 
- Capacity and role of each participant, and the extent to which the consortium as a whole brings together the necessary expertise.
The proposal's work plan deliverables and target dates are consistent with the SESAR 3 JU Project Handbook requirements. 
The work packages themselves do not sufficiently include any defined tasks or sub-tasks, which does not provide sufficient details on how the work will be 
organised and implemented in practice, who will be responsible for specific activities, and how effort will be distributed among partners. This is a shortcoming. 
The insufficiently described tasks hamper the traceability between objectives, activities, and expected outputs, reducing the overall credibility of the implementation 
plan and the ability to monitor progress effectively. This is a shortcoming. 
The exit maturity gate is specified at M22 with the production of the Exploratory Research Report (ERR, D4.3), although no explicit Exit Maturity Gate is identified 
at TRL-2. This is a shortcoming. 
Some of the participants have already worked together on relevant projects (i.e., ECHO and ECHO2) - this is evidence of a consortium that has the ingredients to 
collaborate well and have the necessary expertise to achieve the proposal objectives.
Scope of the application
Status:  Yes
Comments (in case the proposal is out of scope)
Not provided
Exceptional funding
A third country participant/international organisation not listed in may exceptionally receive funding if the General Annex to the Main Work Programme 
their participation is essential for carrying out the project (for instance due to outstanding expertise, access to unique know-how, access to research 
infrastructure, access to particular geographical environments, possibility to involve key partners in emerging markets, access to data, etc.). (For more 
information, see the ) HE programme guide 
Please list the concerned applicants and requested grant amount and explain the reasons why. 
Based on the information provided, the following participants should receive exceptional funding:
Not provided
Based on the information provided, the following participants should NOT receive exceptional funding:
Not provided
Use of human embryonic stem cells (hESC)
Status:  No
 101290642/STRATUS-28/01/2026-09:52:41 3 /
4 
Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)968292 - 28/01/2026

=== PAGE 4 ===
If YES, please state whether the use of hESC is, or is not, in your opinion, necessary to achieve the scientific objectives of the proposal and the 
reasons why. Alternatively, please state if it cannot be assessed whether the use of hESC is necessary or not, because of a lack of information.
Not provided
Use of human embryos
Status:  No
If YES, please explain how the human embryos will be used in the project.
Not provided
Activities excluded from funding
Status:  No
If YES, please explain.
Not provided
Do no significant harm principle
Status:  Yes
If Partially/No/Cannot be assessed please explain
Not provided
Exclusive focus on civil applications
Status:  Yes
If NO, please explain.
Not provided
Artificial Intelligence
Status:  No
If YES, the technical robustness of the proposed system must be evaluated under the appropriate criterion.
Overall comments
Not provided
 101290642/STRATUS-28/01/2026-09:52:41 4 /
4 
Associated with document Ref. Ares(2026)968292 - 28/01/2026

=== PAGE 5 ===
 
 
Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111 
 
 
  
 
This electronic receipt is a digitally signed version of the document submitted by your 
organisation. Both the content of the document and a set of metadata have been digitally 
sealed. 
This digital signature mechanism, using a public -private key pair mechanism, uniquely 
binds this eReceipt to the modules of the Funding & Tenders Portal of the European 
Commission, to the transaction for which it was generated and ensures its full integr ity. 
Therefore a complete digitally signed trail of the transaction is available both for your 
organisation and for the issuer of the eReceipt. 
Any attempt to modify the content will lead to a break of the integrity of the electronic 
signature, which can b e verified at any time by clicking on the eReceipt validation 
symbol. 
More info about eReceipts can be found in the FAQ page of the Funding & Tenders 
Portal.  
(https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/support/faq) 
 