Scope of the programme

• Countries impacted: Ireland, the Netherlands, Poland, Estonia, Italy and Spain, with results designed for replication across cultural heritage institutions across Europe
• Thematic axis: Participatory cultural heritage, community engagement, resilient business models, and digital and on-site transformation of cultural heritage institutions
• Funding programme lineage (EU, national, regional): EU

Description of the project

• Project objective(s):
  - Reinforce community participation as a source of economic and social value for cultural heritage institutions
  - Develop and test participatory business models that help diversify funding sources for cultural heritage organisations
  - Strengthen the museum’s institutional capacity to participate in and manage European projects at a higher level
• Duration: 1 October 2022 – 30 September 2025
• Main activities:
  - Lead one of the largest work packages within the project
  - Manage nine cultural heritage Living Labs across Europe
  - Run its own Living Lab to test new participatory business models for cultural heritage
  - Build local community engagement processes and connect the museum with local organisations and companies
  - Participate in wider European project exchanges, events and collaborative experimentation around participatory heritage models
• Outputs:
  - Contribution to participatory business model development for cultural heritage institutions
  - Delivery of Living Lab activities and cross-European experimentation
  - Strengthened community engagement structures at local level
  - A network of local companies willing to support the museum
  - A community co-created sculpture trail linked to museum objects and local stories
  - Contribution to broader RECHARGE outputs such as practical tools, knowledge resources and replicable models for the sector

Type of application

• Single applicant: No
• Consortium members: Erasmus University Rotterdam (Coordinator), Centrum Cyfrowe Foundation, Creativity Lab, Estonian Maritime Museum, European Fashion Heritage Association, The Hunt Museum, Netherlands Institute for Sound & Vision, Platoniq Foundation, Textile Museum of Prato, and University of Valladolid
• Subcontractor: No

Success Factors

• Strategic fit with call priorities: The project aligned strongly with the museum’s profile and mission. As a cultural heritage institution with a strong focus on community engagement, The Hunt Museum was well positioned to contribute to a project centred on participatory business models, resilience and innovation in the cultural heritage sector.
• Previous experience with funding: The museum had already participated in a number of European funding applications and had gradually built experience with programmes such as Horizon / Cluster 2, Digital Europe and Creative Europe. This previous exposure increased confidence, familiarity with requirements, and internal capacity to contribute effectively.
• Team design & resources: A critical enabling factor was the existence of staff members who had specialised over time in European project work, including a dedicated role focused on European projects. This made it possible to absorb the complexity of proposal writing and consortium coordination.
• Effective Partnership Building: The museum’s growing network played a decisive role. Invitations to join consortia increasingly stemmed from previous collaborations, earlier proposal-writing processes and relationships developed through conferences and project activities. This helped position the museum as a trusted and useful partner.
• Access to information: Access to opportunities came mainly through professional networks and consortium contacts, although the museum also monitored the EU Funding & Tenders Portal and occasionally used it proactively to identify opportunities and approach potential partners.
• Use of support ecosystems: The main support ecosystem was the museum’s European network of cultural heritage organisations, previous consortium relationships and project-related networking spaces. Participation in conferences and transnational activities also created further opportunities for collaboration and visibility.

Barriers & Challenges

• EU applications require a very specific language and logic: the museum described European proposals as operating almost in a different language from national or regional calls, making them harder to navigate.
• Heavy speculative time investment: preparing proposals demands a large amount of staff time, often with no guarantee of success, which is particularly challenging for a small organisation.
• Difficulty in defining a clear role in technical consortia: one of the challenges was finding a convincing and meaningful place for a cultural institution within highly technical projects.
• Dependence on dedicated internal capacity: this type of success would have been much more difficult without someone able to focus specifically on European projects.

Lessons learned

• EU funding capability can be built gradually: organisations do not need to start as experts; they can become strong applicants through repeated participation and practical exposure.
• Networks are part of the funding strategy: conferences, previous collaborations and visibility within European project circles directly influence future access to opportunities.
• The best projects are those that reinforce the organisation’s identity: success is stronger when the project genuinely supports the institution’s existing mission rather than pulling it in an artificial direction.

This best practice shows how a small cultural heritage and tourism stakeholder can successfully access direct EU funding by combining thematic alignment, progressive institutional learning, and strong European networking. The Hunt Museum’s experience demonstrates that funding success is not only about winning a single project, but also about using that opportunity to strengthen internal capabilities, expand international partnerships, increase reputational visibility, and generate lasting value for local communities. It represents a highly relevant example for tourism and heritage stakeholders seeking to move from occasional participation in funding calls towards a more strategic and capacity-building approach to European funding.