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.
1,058 disclosures
-
Request received: 17 March 2023
I hope you are well. Please see below the below request for information under the Freedom of Information Act:
* Please can you provide me with any research/risk assessments that UKRI has completed into BGI Group and its subsidiary BGI Genomics, which has previously been contracted by the UK government around Covid-19.
* Government minister George Freeman recently made comments in parliament (https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-03-08/debates/3F7E5903-596F-492A-B130-A4503928CA7F/GenomicsAndNationalSecurity) that UKRI has completed "a detailed assessment of all the China research and innovation links across our system". As part of this FOIA request, I am not requesting the full detailed assessment of all threats, only elements that are related to BGI Group and BGI Genomics.
If there are any questions or clarifications, I am happy to answer them.Published: 10 July 2023
-
Request Received: 9 June 2023
For Innovate UK's Biomedical Catalyst 2023 Round 1: Industry-led R&D competition (both the >£500k and <£500k streams]), please could you release the following information:
1. The number of applications.
2. The number of assessed applications.
3. The number of successful applications.
4. The success rate.
5. The minimum successful score.
6. The maximum successful score.
7. Maximum score of failed applications.
8. Average grant fund value per project.
9. Average score of funded projects.
10. The score distributions of the applications (e.g. % (or number) of applications which scored <70, 70.1-75, 75.1-80, 80.1-85, 85.1-90, 90.1-95, 95.1-100).
11. The count of assessed applications by innovation area.
12. The count of successful projects by innovation area for each strand.
13. The count of assessed applications by research category (industrial research, experimental development).
14. The count of successful projects by research category.
15. The number of unsuccessful applications, if any, which scored above the minimum funded score.
Published: 7 July 2023
-
Request Received: 8 March 2023
FOI Act 2000 Request
Anecdotal evidence suggests that overseas full-time PhD students in receipt of PhD scholarship funding from foreign governments / industry and self-funded, home (UK domicile) full-time PhD students make strenuous efforts to ensure that their PhD theses are delivered promptly. Having individually invested large sums of money, or having been funded by foreign governments, who in turn have a lien on the students post-PhD completion, there is a deep personal commitment to ensuring completion of the PhD programmes that may be missing within (some) other PhD scholarship funded students.
Recent FOI Act enquiries sent to several UK universities has uncovered concerns that UK universities are not keeping detailed or adequate records of PhD drop-out rates and completion rates. Without such records being kept, and analysed by the universities and the scholarship funding bodies, concerns then arise over future PhD scholarship allocations by the UKRI / Councils.
There is I suggest growing evidence that within some universities and some academic disciplines, PhD students supported by UKRI / UKRC funding grants of approximately £60,000 have failed to complete their PhD research projects and have (a) withdrawn from the PhD research programmes after drawing down all scholarship funds but without having submitting their PhD theses for examination, and (b) other PhD students having received 3 years PhD funding fail to deliver their completed PhD until 6-7-8 years. Data provided by the Department of the economy within Northern Ireland in 2018 indicated that within NI, 15% of all PhD students withdraw from their PhDs and only 15% of students completed their PhDs within four years. If evidence within NI and the anecdotal evidence provided by some other PhD students is confirmed by statistical data, then concerns materialise in relation to the adequacy of the administration, management and supervision of large tranches of UK treasury / taxpayer's funds and in relation to the monitoring of the PhD awards process, the selection of PhD scholarship students and the adequacy of the supervision provided by the UK universities who are recipients of some £14,000 in fees from the UKRI / UKRC PhD scholarship packages.
FOI Act Question 1
How many full-time Home (UK domicile) and overseas PhD students undertaking PhD research in UK universities funded by each of the research councils (named below) have withdrawn or dropped-out of their PhD programmes without submitting their PhD theses for examination in each of the following years:
FOI Act Question 2
How many full-time Home (UK domicile) PhD students undertaking PhD research within UK universities, funded by the Research Council (named below) have failed to deliver their PhD theses for examination within four-years of commencing their PhD) over the last ten years)?
FOI Act Question 3
How many full-time overseas (UK domicile) PhD students undertaking PhD research within UK universities, funded by the Research Council (named below) have failed to deliver their PhD theses for examination within four-years of commencing their PhD (over the last ten years)?
FOI Act Question 4
Please provide links to all generic, statistical details of PhD drop-out and completion rates included within any annual reports or other reports within which the UKRI / individual Councils have investigated PhD value-for-money / best value practices / drop-out rates over the last ten academic years.
Sent to the following Institute / Research Councils for FOI Act replies:
1 - UKRI
2 - AHRC
3 - ESRC
4 - STFC
5 - EPSRC
6 - RE
Published: 3 July 2023
-
Request Received: 5 April 2023
Could you inform me who won this competition?
Artificial intelligence-supported early fracture diagnosis: SBRI competition
https://apply-for-innovation-funding.service.gov.uk/competition/365/overview?_ga=2.229811480.508369811.1679920187-366219826.1679920187Published: 30 June 2023
-
Request Received: 3 April 2023
For the SMART October 2022 competition, for both the <18 month (<£500k) and >18 month streams:
1. The number of applications
2. The number of successful applications
3. The success rate
4. The minimum successful score
5. The maximum successful score
6. Maximum score of failed applications
7. Average grant fund value per project
8. The score distributions of the applications (e.g. % (or number) of applications which scored <70, 71-75, 76-80, 81-85, 86+)
9. The count of successful projects by innovation area for each strand.
10. The number of 1) applications and 2) successful projects with total project cost within £100k increments across both Streams.
11. The total amount of funding allocatedPublished: 30 June 2023
-
Request Received: 8 March 2023
1. Number of MFDs (Multi-functional devices) & photocopiers at UK Research and Innovation / Research Councils UK
2. Name of incumbent
3. Start/end date of contract (if expired, WHEN do you expect to revisit the marketplace)
4. Details of any extension options
5. What framework / Route to market used
6. Number of regular/desktop printers (in addition to above)
7. Is there a support contract on above, if yes please state start/end date
8. Do you have a Print Room
9. If yes, name of supplier, number of devices and start/end date of contract, also details of any extension options
10. Total annual print/copy volumes including, if applicable your Print Room, for (a) mono (b) colour
11. What Print software do you run
12. Your total annual spend on print
13. Name of person responsible for the running of MFDs and, if applicable, your Print Room
Published: 30 June 2023
-
Request Received: 13 April 2023
For the Innovate UK Smart Competitions in 2022 (January, April, July and October), and where the relevant statistics are available, could you provide.
-Total number of applications
-Total number of winning applications
-Threshold for funding
-Total complaints about proposal assessment by companies
-Total complaints about proposal assessment by companies that were upheldPublished: 30 June 2023
-
Request Received: 28 March 2023
We are concerned with the following public disclosure:
"Dr Elizabeth Dalgarno, University of Manchester. received funding from UKRI to investigate the health impacts of family court proceedings with mothers in England and Brazil. These mothers worked with Dr Dalgarno, Dr Donna Bramwell, Steph Mitchell, Greg Williams and Prof Verma in collaboration with SHERA Research and expert by experience group, an advisory group of legal and health professionals and several partners including Dr Adrienne Barnell, Dr Emma Katz, Natalie Page, Paola Motosi, Dr Sonja Ayeb-Karlsson, CPI Voz Materna, Survivor Family Network and THECOURTSAID, to release the first combined output from this study."
We note that many of the named people engage with unscientific 'critical theory' 'ways of knowing', and many have publicly expressed sexist views.
The SHERA group claim that this video is a product of the UKRI's funding: https://youtu.be/ZNWa1os47C0
The video contains factual misinformation and unfounded sexist assertions.
Request for information:1. Please provide details of the grant provided:
a. Name of grant and reference number
b. Grant recipients
c. Scope of Work
d. Value of grant
e. The grant application document
f. The UKRI grant document, including restrictive covenants such as those governing research practice standards, compliance with sex equality and publication controls.
2. Please advise whether the video was vetted by UKRI before its publication, and/or whether permission was provided to use UKRI's name in it.
3. Please provide the details of the UKRI's vetting process for acceptance of this grant application, in particular the determination of whether the application satisfied the UKRI's public sector duty pursuant to the Equality Act 2010.
4. Please provide details of UKRI's own restrictions to their provision of funding for research projects, in particular those controls that would prevent UKRI funds being applied to generate mis/ disinformation and for political campaigning purposes.
Additional request received 18th April
In the meantime, would you please add to the FOI the disclosure of the ethical standards of conduct attached to the grant.
Published: 30 June 2023
-
Request Received: 8 March 2023
I am currently running a survey about printing within public sector to get an understanding of the attitudes towards print, the types of technology used, and also any trends in ownership of print. I am making the following Freedom of Information Request to gather the relevant data.
1. How many employees do you have?
2. How many printers (A4, A3 single function or multi-function) do you have?
3. How many print servers do you have?
4. Do you use any print management software (Equitrac, SafeQ, PaperCut, PrinterLogic etc)?
5. Who supplies your printers, software and servers?
6. If so, which do you use?
7. What is the job title of the person responsible for printers within your organization?Published: 30 June 2023
-
Request Received: 18 April 2023
I am trying to better understand the funding process and portfolio approach of Innovate UK. Specifically, for the Innovation Loans Future Economy competitions in 2022 - Rounds 1 to 6:
• Round 11 (Competition opened: Thursday 10 March 2022, Competition closes: Wednesday 20 April 2022)
• Round 22 (Competition opened: Thursday 14 April 2022, Competition closes: Wednesday 11 May 2022)
• Round 33 (Competition opened: Thursday 12 May 2022, Competition closes: Wednesday 8 June 2022)
• Round 44 (Competition opened: Thursday 9 June 2022, Competition closes: Wednesday 13 July 2022)
• Round 5 5(Competition opened: Wednesday 20 July 2022, Competition closes: Wednesday 14 Sept 2022)
• Round 66 (Competition opened: Tuesday 20 Sept 2022, Competition closes: Wednesday 9 Nov 2022)
Could you kindly provide the following application information, split by Rounds 1 to 6:
1. Total number of applications.
2. Total number of applications ineligible for assessment.
3. Total number of successful applications.
4. Total number of applications considered a resubmission of a previous application
5. Total number of successful applications which were considered a resubmission of a previous application.
6. The score of the lowest scoring funded project.
7. The score of the highest scoring funded project.
8. The score of the highest non-funded project.
9. The average (mean) score of funded projects.
10. Average loan value for funded projects.
11. The number of assessed applications by theme area: Net Zero, Health and Wellbeing, Next generation digital technologies, Technology families.
12. The number of successful applications by theme area: Net Zero, Health and Wellbeing, Next generation digital technologies, Technology families.
13. The number of projects invited to a detailed credit analysis check.
14. The number of projects invited to detailed credit analysis check (as in Q9) but not funded due to credit analysis results or a failure to meet loan offer conditions.
15. The number of applications progressed to detailed credit analysis but not funded due to withdrawal.
Published: 28 June 2023