The NEOTEC program, managed by the Center for Technological and Industrial Development (CDTI), represents one of the main lines of public funding in Spain for the creation and consolidation of technology-based companies.

‍

With non-refundable grants of up to 325,000€, this aid has become a priority objective for hundreds of technology startups every year.

‍

However, the reality is demanding: the NEOTEC 2025 call was one of the most competitive in its history, with a cut-off score of 79 points out of 100. In 2024, this figure reached 83.5 points. In addition, in previous editions, approximately 15% of applications were directly rejected because they did not meet basic requirements or submit incorrect documentation.

‍

In most cases, the non-concession does not respond to a single specific error, but rather to a structural mismatch between the submitted project and the official evaluation criteria of the call. In this article, we analyze these criteria in depth, explain the most common reasons for exclusion and provide practical keys to substantially improve the chances of success in future editions.

What is NEOTEC and what does the CDTI actually evaluate

NEOTEC is not a generalist aid for startups. On the contrary, it is an instrument specifically designed to finance young companies, intensive in R+D+i activities, with a differential technological base and a real and demonstrable technological risk.

‍

From the perspective of the CDTI evaluator, the central question is not only whether the startup has market potential, but whether the company develops its own technological knowledge, which is not trivial and difficult to replicate, and whether it has the real capacity to turn that knowledge into a viable and scalable business project.

‍

It is essential to understand that NEOTEC is aimed at financing projects whose business strategy is based on the development of its own technology. Therefore, those projects in which the business model is mainly based on the provision of services to third parties, without this implying the development of proprietary technology, will be beyond the scope of the program.

‍

Official evaluation criteria: the scoring system that makes the difference

NEOTEC's regulatory bases and official calls establish an evaluation structured in several blocks. Although the relative weight may vary slightly between calls, the criteria remain stable over time, thus allowing strategic preparation.

‍

Critical aspect: although all criteria are evaluated, the proposal must exceed a minimum threshold in each of them. If this threshold is not reached in any of the blocks, the application is considered ineligible, regardless of the total score obtained.

‍

For an application to be eligible, it must achieve a minimum final grade of 50 points and exceed the minimum thresholds in each criterion. However, since NEOTEC operates on a competitive basis, exceeding this threshold does not guarantee funding: it is necessary to obtain a high enough score to be above the cutoff score, which has historically been between 75 and 83 points.

‍

1. Technological excellence and innovation: the determining criterion

This is the most important criterion in the evaluation and acts as the first eligibility filter.

‍

The CDTI analyzes, among other aspects:

• The degree of technological innovation of the project compared to the current state of the art
• The existence of real technological risk, beyond commercial or market risk
• The strength of the scientific, technical or engineering base that underpins the project
• The difficulty of replication by third parties and the barriers to entry generated by technology
• The technological need that justifies the project and its technical viability

‍

Common reasons for non-selection:

• Projects well executed from a business point of view, but with incremental technology that does not represent significant progress
• Confusion between product development, process engineering or the digitization of operations and real R+D+i activities
• Lack of clarity when defining what technological uncertainties are intended to be resolved
• Absence of a clear methodology to address the technological challenges posed

‍

Keys to improvement:

• Define with absolute precision which specific elements of the project constitute R&D activities according to the criteria of the Frascati Manual
• Explain in detail what specific technological uncertainties are intended to be resolved and why there are no solutions available in the market
• Clearly differentiate between product innovation (improvements over what exists) and technological innovation (development of new knowledge)
• Provide evidence of the novelty through analysis of the state of the art, scientific references or technological surveillance reports

‍

2. Business plan and business model: strategic coherence

Although NEOTEC exclusively finances R+D+i activities, the CDTI rigorously assesses the coherence and viability of the business project as a whole.

‍

It specifically evaluates:

• The clarity and soundness of the proposed business model
• The coherence between technological development and the value proposition for the customer
• The strategy for growth, scalability and internationalization capacity
• The calendar of commercial milestones and their alignment with the technological roadmap
• The strategy for the protection of intellectual and industrial property

‍

Common reasons for non-selection:

• Generic business plans, not very credible or with unrealistic financial projections
• Lack of alignment between the technological development calendar (technical roadmap) and the commercialization schedule (commercial roadmap)
• Absence of a clear go-to-market strategy or accurate identification of the target customer segment
• Insufficiently defined markets or without demonstrated growth potential

‍

Keys to improvement:

• Present realistic financial projections, based on verifiable assumptions and concrete metrics
• Demonstrate in-depth knowledge of the target market through data, competitive analysis and prior validations
• Explain how developed technology translates into sustainable competitive advantages

‍

3. Promoting team: execution capacity

The team is fundamentally evaluated in terms of its ability to successfully execute a complex technological project and, simultaneously, build a viable company.

‍

It is analyzed in detail:

• The complementarity between technical profiles (R&D capacity) and business profiles (management and marketing capacity)
• The effective and demonstrable dedication of team members to the project
• Relevant previous experience in similar projects, both technological and business
• Sectorial knowledge and networks of contacts in the field of application of technology

‍

Common reasons for non-selection:

• Excessively technical teams without demonstrated business or commercial management skills
• Teams with a predominantly business profile but without strong internal technological leadership
• Lack of full-time dedication of at least a significant part of the promoting team
• Absence of relevant track record in the sector or in the development of similar technologies

‍

Keys to improvement:

• Evidence the complementarity of the team through detailed CVs that show technical, management and commercial capabilities
• Specify the time commitment of each member of the team and their expected evolution during the project
• Include, if possible, the incorporation of doctors or highly specialized profiles. The presence of research staff with a doctorate degree increases the intensity of the aid (up to 70% of eligible costs), making it easier to reach the maximum ceiling of 325,000€

‍

4. Budget and implementation plan: technical and economic coherence

The budget is not a mere formal requirement, but an evaluable element that reflects the maturity and realism of the project.

‍

It is carefully reviewed:

• The coherence between the technical activities described and the associated costs
• That the expenditure is predominantly allocated to R+D+i activities eligible under Regulation (EU) 651/2014
• The execution schedule and the intermediate technical milestones
• The justification for the most relevant budgetary items

‍

Common reasons for non-selection:

• Unrealistic budgets, either due to undervaluation or unjustified overvaluation of costs
• Budgets misaligned with the technical plan, with no clear correspondence between tasks and expenses
• Excessive spending on items not directly linked to R&D activities (for example, excessive marketing weight or general expenses)
• Lack of detail in the justification of the main budgetary items

‍

Keys to improvement:

• Ensure that the budget mostly reflects R+D+i activities, clearly differentiating them from other business activities
• Justify each relevant budget item in detail, especially personnel costs and external collaborations
• Include a realistic execution schedule with verifiable technical milestones

‍

Important note: although there is no legal minimum percentage of spending on R+D+i, a low proportion of these activities may negatively affect the score on the criteria of technological excellence and suitability to the instrument.

5. Economic Impact and Growth Potential

NEOTEC is actively looking for companies with the capacity to generate a significant economic impact in the medium term and to contribute to the development of the Spanish technological ecosystem.

‍

It specifically evaluates:

• The size and dynamics of the target market (TAM, SAM, SOM)
• The company's growth potential and its scalability
• The ability to generate qualified employment with high added value
• The impact in terms of trade balance, especially if the project has an export vocation

‍

Common reasons for non-selection:

• Markets that are insufficiently defined, too small or without clear growth prospects
• Lack of ambition in the growth projection or absence of an internationalization strategy
• Projects aimed exclusively at the local market without prospects for scalability
• Projects with limited or difficult to quantify socio-economic impact

‍

Keys to improvement:

• Correctly size the target market with verifiable data from reliable sources
• Explain the growth strategy and scalability mechanisms of the business model
• Highlight, where applicable, the potential for internationalization and the strategy for geographical expansion

6. Adaptation to the NEOTEC instrument: strategic fit

An implicit but absolutely decisive criterion is the fit of the project with the specific purpose of the NEOTEC program.

‍

NEOTEC is specifically aimed at:

• Companies incorporated less than three years ago compared to the closing date of the filing deadline
• Projects whose core is the development of their own technology through genuine R+D+i
• Technologies in the maturation or validation phase, no longer commercially consolidated

‍

Common reasons for non-selection:

• Startups in stages that are too mature, with established technology and significant commercial traction (for these companies there are other more suitable CDTI instruments, such as CDTI Innvierte or Innovation Lines)
• Projects focused primarily on services, consulting or digitalization without a significant differential technological component
• Companies that exceed the seniority limit established in the terms of the call

‍

Keys to improvement:

• Carefully verify compliance with all formal requirements before starting the preparation of the report
• Honestly evaluate if NEOTEC is really the most suitable instrument for the current state of maturity of the company and the technology

‍

Relevant news: the NEOTEC Seal

Since the 2025 call, the CDTI has introduced a significant innovation: the NEOTEC Seal. All proposals that achieve a score equal to or greater than 65 points in the evaluation will receive this badge, regardless of whether they finally receive funding or not (since the budget is limited and is awarded in order of score).

‍

This seal officially certifies that the company has passed the evaluation of the call and that it meets the conditions to be considered an “innovative company” as defined in Regulation (EU) 651/2014 of the European Commission.

‍

Advantages of the NEOTEC Seal:

• It facilitates access to other public aid (many autonomous communities and state programs require an innovative company certificate, which usually costs 2,000—3,000 €)
• Validate the project before private investors, accelerators and other stakeholders
• It can be used as an element of credibility in due diligence processes

‍

Lead qualifier: Should you apply to NEOTEC again?

Before preparing a new application, an exercise in strategic honesty should be carried out by answering the following questions:

• Is there currently a relevant technological risk that justifies the aid?
  If the technology is already developed and validated, NEOTEC is probably not the right instrument.
• Is the core of the project R+D+i and not just product development or engineering?
  It is essential to differentiate: product development optimizes what exists; R+D+i generates new knowledge.
• Does the team have sufficient internal technological leadership and dedication?
  Technical execution capacity must be internalized and not rely exclusively on external collaborations.
• Does the budget mostly reflect R+D+i activities?
  Although there is no minimum percentage required, a low proportion can negatively affect the evaluation.
• Is the company still a good fit for the program due to its seniority and maturity?
  NEOTEC is designed for early-stage companies. If the company is more than three years old before the deadline or has already reached an advanced level of technological and commercial maturity, there are other more suitable instruments.

‍

If the answer to several of these questions is negative, it is probably more efficient to evaluate other public funding instruments or, where appropriate, to substantially reformulate the project before being submitted to NEOTEC again.

‍

Conclusion: Non-selection does not imply a lack of value

Not being selected in a NEOTEC call does not at all imply that the startup has no value or potential for success.. In many cases, it simply means that the project did not meet the specific criteria of the program at that particular time or that, being a good project, it did not score enough to pass a particularly demanding cutoff.

‍

NEOTEC's competitiveness is high. With cutoff scores ranging from 75 to 83 points, many solid and well-founded projects are inevitably left out of funding for purely budgetary reasons.

‍

An in-depth understanding of how the CDTI evaluates, what it is really looking for in each criterion and what are the most frequent errors allows us to make more informed strategic decisions: if it makes sense to re-present itself by optimizing the proposal, if it is appropriate to adjust the approach of the project, or if it is more appropriate to explore alternative public funding channels that are better aligned with the current state of development of the company.

‍

How Intelectium can help you

At Intelectium, we accompany technological startups in analyzing their fit with NEOTEC and in preparing projects that are meticulously aligned with the real evaluation criteria of the CDTI. Our goal is to maximize the chances of success by optimizing each of the evaluable sections.

‍

We work under a completely success-oriented model: we don't charge initial setup fees to start working, but we assume the risk of the project and only charge if we get funding for the company.

‍

If you are considering applying to NEOTEC or have received a non-award in previous calls and want to understand why, contact us for expert advice and an initial evaluation of your project through dealflow@intelectium.com.