Opportunities for high-risk research: New call for "Pioneering Projects – Exploring the Unknown Unknown"

Who is the 'Pioneering Projects – Exploring the Unknown Unknown' funding scheme aimed at?

Pavel Dutow: We are looking for creative researchers who have the courage to pursue innovative and high-risk research ideas that lie outside the mainstream. Applications are open to researchers holding a PhD from German universities and research institutions, regardless of their discipline. International collaborations are possible.

What is the foundation’s aim in running such an open-topic funding programme?

Theresa Kratzsch: Open-topic funding creates the freedom for something truly new to emerge. When research is not constrained by trends, short-term expectations of commercialisation or narrow thematic guidelines, researchers can pursue radical and unconventional ideas that have the potential to transform entire fields of research.

Pavel Dutow: It is precisely these early, high-risk steps that are often crucial for later breakthroughs, yet are too rarely facilitated in the day-to-day routine of traditional funding. With the Pioneer Projects, we therefore aim to deliberately open the door to curiosity-driven and courageous exploration of the 'unknown unknown'.

Selection of draft proposals via Distributed Peer Review (DPR)

You revised the programme following the last call for proposals. What has changed?

Theresa Kratzsch: The existing two-stage selection process, involving a short proposal and a full application, has proven effective in selecting pioneering ideas and will remain in place. What is new is that the first stage of the process, the selection of the short proposals to be invited to submit a full application, will in future be carried out via Distributed Peer Review (DPR).

In DPR, applicants review the anonymised short proposals submitted by other applicants. We have already had positive experiences with this procedure in another funding programme. We believe that DPR is particularly well-suited here, too, for identifying pioneering ideas. After all, in the first stage of the selection process, the focus is on the idea itself, not the person who submitted it. And DPR has further advantages: it also means a broader spectrum of expertise among the reviewers, as well as a greater number of reviews per short proposal. Last but not least, all applicants receive valuable feedback on their outlines, regardless of the outcome of the review. This was not previously possible due to the large number of submissions.

How does Distributed Peer Review work in practice?

Pavel Dutow: All applicants who submit a short proposal automatically agree to act as reviewers in the DPR. In practice, this means:

• Each applicant reviews up to 8 short proposals (4-page documents).
• The review takes place within six weeks, using standardised questionnaires.
• The process is double-blind: applicants and reviewers are anonymised.
• The allocation of short proposals to the respective reviewers is based on the specialist areas specified at the time of application. Potential conflicts of interest are taken into account.
• Each application is assessed by 8–10 reviewers.

Around 30 of the submitted outlines are selected for the second stage of the process on the basis of these assessments. We invite the successful applicants to submit a full proposal. These full proposals are reviewed by an international, interdisciplinary panel of experts.

How does the Foundation ensure the confidentiality of the short proposals and prevent strategic behaviour within the DPR?

Theresa Kratzsch: We are aware that applicants have significant concerns regarding the confidentiality of the outlines, and we take this very seriously. The protection of intellectual property is a key priority for us. The risk of idea theft in peer review processes cannot be completely ruled out, but we strive to minimise it. All DPR participants are bound by a confidentiality agreement. The content of the proposals must not be disseminated, stored or used for personal purposes. We expect all participants to conduct the review in accordance with the rules of good scientific practice and to respect intellectual property.

Pavel Dutow: Furthermore, all submissions are divided into two randomised groups to reduce strategic evaluation behaviour. Applicants receive only proposals from the other group for review. This prevents them from exerting any direct influence on the ranking of the proposals with which they are competing.

Applications, deadlines and tips

How do I submit a short proposal?

Theresa Kratzsch: The short proposals are submitted via the Foundation’s funding platform. There, as well as on our website, you will find a template and a 'guidelines' document setting out the criteria for pioneering projects and all other 'rules of the game'. The most important basic requirements are:

• an innovative and high-risk research idea,
• willingness to participate in the DPR process,
• submission of the short proposal in English, and
• complete anonymisation.

Pavel Dutow: Very important dates for all interested parties are the online consultation hours and the deadline:

• Online consultation sessions will take place on 11 June and 16 July 2026, during which we will answer questions regarding the formal application requirements and the DPR.
• The deadline for submitting short proposals is 27 August 2026 at 2 pm.

Invitations to submit full proposals will then be sent out in early 2027. The full proposals will be reviewed by an international, interdisciplinary panel of experts, and the approved projects are expected to be announced in autumn 2027.

What else would you like to share with interested researchers?

Theresa Kratzsch: We ask all interested parties to carefully review the programme criteria. A look at our grants database can also help you get a feel for what constitutes a pioneering project in the search for the 'unknown unknown'. However, the examples should not necessarily be understood as a 'blueprint'.

Pavel Dutow: It is also important to critically reflect on your own project idea: what objections might there be to your proposal – and how would you respond to them? This perspective can help you assess whether the idea fits the programme. In the past, collaborative projects have often been successful, particularly those with an interdisciplinary approach. However, we are explicitly open to any type of project design.