Freedom of information (FOI) releases from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)

This is a disclosure log of UK Research and Innovation's responses to freedom of information (FOI) or environmental information regulations (EIR) requests that might be of wider public interest.

If you can't find the information you're looking for, you can make a new FOI request.

Filters

Clear filters
  • Keywords filters

  • Year filters

  • Month filters

1,486 disclosures

  1. Request Received: 14 August 2026

    I would like to make a Freedom of Information request about the AHRC grant AH/S001654/1 of £202,250 to Birkbeck, University of London, 2019 to 2021.

    In the budget submitted with the funding application, how much money was allowed for transcription services?

    Published: 7 October 2026

  2. Request Received: 28 July 2026

    Thank you for your response to FOI2026/00102, setting out the breakdown of the STFC budget from FY 2018-19 to FY 2025-26.

    I would like to request a breakdown of 'STFC Grants Programme - Other' over the same period, specifically the amounts spent on Talent Fellowships, Studentships, innovation grants, and DSIT Managed Programmes including the Isambard AI and International Science Partnership Fund (ISPF).

    Published: 7 October 2026

  3. Request Received: 30 July 2026

    I would be very grateful if you could please provide information on the above scheme for all of the following rounds:

    1. Innovate UK Innovation Loans round 23

    2. Innovate UK Innovation Loans round 24

    3. Innovate UK Innovation Loans round 25

    For each/all rounds please can you share data on the following:

    1. The total number of loan applications submitted

    2. The total number of applications sent for business loan suitability assessment

    3. Minimum scores required to be sent for business loan suitability assessment

    4. The number of applications progressed to detailed credit analysis

    5. The total number of applications that were offered a loan

    6. The total number of applications within each theme and sub-theme and the number of those that were offered a loan in each theme and sub-theme

    7. The average loan size request awarded

    Published: 7 October 2026

  4. Request received: 27 July 2026

    A copy of all documentation, including but not limited to, bid application, spending, receipts, emails, expense claims, connected to the UKRI funding of the Nuclear Justice Project at the University of Liverpool


    By way of explanation, I understand this project was funded to the tune of about £40,000 via AHRC and Research England's Policy Fund, in a grant awarded at the back end of 2025.


    The project was run by the Centre for People's Justice at the University of Liverpool, administered by Prof Helen Stalford and Dr Jon Hogg.


    For the avoidance of doubt, I am looking for a release of all documentation UKRI or its agencies holds about the project, and any provisos, rules or requirements under which the money was released.

    Published: 7 October 2026

  5. Request Received: 25 March 2026

    Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I am requesting the following information:

    1. Copies of the business case summary documents submitted by UKRI to DSIT and/or HM Treasury as part of the latest Spending Review (SR2025).

    2. Any supporting documentation detailing the economic impact assumptions or cost-benefit analyses, particularly relating to societal impacts, employment growth, and productivity.

    3. Internal or external documents explaining the modelling methodology behind such impact estimates.

    4. Correspondence between UKRI and DSIT or HMT that discusses or supports these figures

    If parts of this request are withheld under any exemption, please provide a justification for each, and consider partial disclosure where possible. Please note, I did request this last year, but it was refused on the grounds of confidentiality associated with discussion and negotiations at the time around UKRI's internal allocations process.

    This process is now complete and CEO Sir Ian Chapman has been in front of the SITC to discuss the allocations and implications of the decision made. As such, I trust sufficient time has now elapsed to enable UKRI to fulfil this FOI request.

    Published: 6 October 2026

  6. Request received: 29 July 2026

     

    Freedom of Information request relating to UKRI's Open Access policy, which was adopted in 2021.  
     
    In particular, I have three questions arising from the associated Equality Impact Assessment:  
     
    1. Pursuant to question 5 of the first table (page 5), what evaluation, if any, has been made of "unintended EDI consequences"? 
     
    2. What sources informed the row in the second table about early-career researchers (pages 9–10)? (For example, footnote 2 gives an FCDO source for the row relating to race, but no reference is given for early-career researchers.) 
     
    3. Further to the explanation/justification given on page 15, what evaluation, if any, resulted from UKRI's resolution to "monitor the policy through its implementation" with respect to "the precise degree to which author choice may be affected"? 

    Published: 6 October 2026

  7. Request Received: 29 July 2026

    I’m making the following request under the Freedom of Information.

    Please share the number of equivalent full time postdoctoral research assistant roles funded by UKRI in 2025-2026 HESA reporting year ending on the 31st of July, and the previous years 2024-25, 2023-24, 2022-23, 2021-22, 2020-21, 2019-20, 2018-19, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2015-2016. This is not to ask the number of individuals in post, or number of individuals who have held those posts, but the total number of equivalent full time roles that could be funded across that year. Where the funding for postdocs is provided as, for example, a four year grant, this can be understood as the average funding per year across the four year grant, represented as an equivalent number of full time post doctoral research assistant roles. For each year, please share the breakdown of how many equivalent full time roles in a given year were funded for each research council. If some of the funding does not fit under a research council, please provide this under ‘other’ with a description of the funding.

    Published: 5 October 2026

  8. Request Received: 25 July 2026

    I request the following information. Where a full response would exceed the cost limit, I ask that you advise which elements can be provided within it and prioritise items 1–4.

    For the 2025-2026 financial year:

    1) The total value of your department's non-consolidated performance pay pot (the non-consolidated pay remit).

    2) The amount and the proportion (%) of that pot allocated to (a) in-year Reward and Recognition scheme (also sometimes known as discretionary recognition awards) and (b) end-of-year Performance Related Payments (PRP).

    3) For R&R and for PRP separately: the total number of awards made, total expenditure, and the mean and median award value.

    4) The figures in items 2 and 3 broken down by grade.

    5) The figures in items 2 and 3 broken down by directorate / business area.

    6) The figures in items 2 and 3 broken down by the protected characteristics if recorded (e.g. sex, age band, ethnicity, disability status).

    7) Copies of the policy, guidance, and eligibility or assessment criteria governing R&R awards and PRP awards, including any changes to those criteria over the period.

    8) Any internal analysis, board or committee papers, or Equality Impact Assessment concerning the allocation of funds between PRP and R&R, or the equality implications of either scheme.

    Please treat each numbered item as a separable element.

    Published: 5 October 2026

  9. Request received: 29 July 2026

    I would like to request information relating to the Innovate UK competition: Funding competition: Future offshore wind technologies: industrial research

    https://apply-for-innovation-funding.service.gov.uk/competition/2433/overview/4458acff-f0d2-4e2d-836c-c151ebd82a1d

    Specifically, I would be grateful if you could provide:

    1. The total number of applications submitted.

    2. The total number of applications funded.

    3. The overall score distribution for all assessed applications (grouped by score bands).

    4. The score of the lowest-ranked application that was ultimately successful (i.e. the effective funding threshold for funding).

    5. Details of any formal minimum score threshold (in any) that applications were required to achieve in order to be considered for funding.

    Published: 5 October 2026

  10. Request Received: 27 February 2026

    Clarification Received: 13 April 2026

    Please note that the clarifications you provided in your email of 13 April 2026 have been included in line with the relevant points in your request.

    Recent UKRI communications indicate a period of substantial reprioritisation across research infrastructures:

    • On 1 February 2026, UKRI Chief Executive Professor Sir Ian Chapman issued a public letter1 outlining major changes to UKRI’s investment approach, including pressures on STFC and a shift toward focused prioritisation.

    • On 28 January 2026, Professor Michele Dougherty, Executive Chair of STFC, informed the PPAN community of significant reprioritisation in the PPAN portfolio, including reductions in grants and a transition to a more concentrated set of priorities.

    • In a letter dated 19 December 2025, Professor Sir Ian Chapman informed UK collaborators in the LHCb Upgrade II project, the LHCb Collaboration management and the Director General of CERN that the LHCb2030+ Infrastructure project proposal had been deprioritised following a UKRI-wide assessment of Infrastructure Fund proposals after the government spending review. The letter states that this decision was taken by the UKRI Executive Committee to ensure alignment with UKRI’s strategic investment priorities.

    Given the central role of the Infrastructure Advisory Committee (IAC) in these processes, I request the following.

    1. IAC Recommendations (1 Jan 2025 – Present) Please provide the full text of all:

    • IAC recommendations, advice papers, reports, or submissions to the UKRI Executive Committee, Executive Chairs, or UKRI Board;

    Clarifications: I request all IAC papers relating to all areas. This includes both all IAC papers relating to the 2025 LHCb Upgrade decision and all IAC papers relating to discussions not relating to the 2025 LHCb Upgrade decision. Although focus is on LHCb, it is important to see how these papers fit into overall picture of advice from IAC.

    • Recommendations relating to:

      • Cross‑UKRI infrastructure prioritisation

      • The reprioritisation processes described in the public UKRI letters cited above

      • STFC/PPAN infrastructure modelling

      • Decisions affecting CERN‑associated or other international infrastructures

    Clarifications:

    The requested information relates to the IAC reprioritisation of bids and reprioritisation process in 2025.

    The request is to cover IAC discussions on the specific impacts of the reprioritisation on both STFC-wide and STFC-PPAN areas (where STFC-PPAN is not limited to LHCb). Request is to cover IAC discussions that have an impact on CERN-associated or other international infrastructures

    2. Inputs Used by the IAC

    Please provide all evidence and materials used by the IAC in forming its recommendations, including:

    • Evidence packs, briefing papers, financial projections, cost/risk models and data tables;

    • Submissions from UKRI directorates, research councils (including STFC), external reviewers, or facilities;

    • Options analyses, feasibility studies and impact assessments;

    • Meeting papers, slide decks and preparatory documentation circulated to IAC members;

    • External consultancy reports or benchmarking studies.

    Clarification:

    Scope of request is to include anything used by the IAC in any meeting that was in any way connected to the communications issued on 19 December 2025. This may cover inputs to more than one IAC meeting.

    3. Inputs and Advice Relating Specifically to the LHCb Upgrade II Decision

    With reference to the decision communicated on 19 December 2025, please provide:

    • All IAC assessments, comments, scoring matrices, advice notes, or recommendations relevant to LHCb Upgrade II;

    • All inputs considered by the IAC or UKRI concerning LHCb Upgrade II, including:

      • Business-case assessments or reviews,

      • Cost and risk analyses,

      • Prioritisation or ranking models comparing LHCb Upgrade II with other

      • Infrastructure Fund proposals,

      • Documentation from the “exercise to review and reconsider all Infrastructure Fund proposals” referenced in the 19 December letter.

    4. Minutes, Notes and Covering Documents

    Please provide:

    • Minutes or summaries of IAC meetings where infrastructure prioritisation was discussed;

    • Covering notes or internal UKRI papers accompanying IAC advice when passed to decision‑making bodies;

    • Papers considered by the UKRI Executive Committee relating to infrastructure reprioritisation (including decisions on LHCb Upgrade II).

    Clarifications:

    Scope of request is to include:

    • IAC meetings leading up to the communications of 19 December 2025

    • IAC advice arising from any meetings leading up to the communications of 19 December 2025

    • The December 2025 ExCo meeting considering the outputs of the most recent IAC (may be more than one meeting)

    5. Timing and Communications Strategy Concerning the 19 December 2025 Letter Given that the 19 December 2025 LHCb Upgrade II letter was issued immediately before the Christmas period, I request:

    5.1 Timing of the decision and letter

    The internal timeline for:

    • When the LHCb Upgrade II decision was taken,

    • When it was approved for communication,

    • When the communication was drafted, finalised and authorised for release.

    5.2 Communications strategy and policy compliance Any internal guidance, instructions, policy documents, or analyses considered by UKRI in deciding:

    • The timing of the 19 December 2025 communication,

    • Whether issuing the letter immediately before the Christmas break was evaluated in terms of public transparency obligations.

    5.3 Consistency with government communications principles Any documents relating to:

    • UKRI’s obligations under UK Government communications standards, including principles against attempting to “bury bad news” through timing of releases,

    • Communications advice received from UKRI’s communications directorate, BEIS/DSIT, or Cabinet Office communications teams, where relevant,

    • Assessments of whether the timing of the 19 December communication was consistent with these standards.

    5.3 Clarifications:

    Scope of request is to include:

    • Any specific documentation and how it was applied/compliance checks relevant to the recent infrastructure decisions communicated late afternoon on Friday 19 December 2025.

    • Any specific communications on the recent Infrastructure decisions

    For clarity, this request is not asserting impropriety: it seeks documentation of the process, reasoning and compliance checks underlying the timing of the communication.

    6. Guidance from ExCo to UKRI

    I would like to obtain all advice, briefings, reports, communications, meeting notes, recommendations, or decision‑related documents provided by the Cabinet Office Executive Committee (ExCo) to UKRI.

    Clarification: request is for UKRI Executive Committee, not Cabinet Office. Please include any such material:

    • Provided directly by ExCo members, the ExCo secretariat, or officials acting on behalf of ExCo

    • Sent to UKRI as written advice, guidance, direction, or policy interpretation

    • Shared during meetings, consultations, correspondence, or cross‑government working groups

    Published: 30 September 2026