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 January 2023
As per my records, Workday and TotalMobile contracts have expired. I would like to know whether these contracts are still valid or replaced by any other supplier.
If all the information besides the contract dates are the same, I am happy to just receive an update on the contract dates.
Published: 20 March 2023
-
Date Received: 20 February 2023
Please provide a list of any and all contact your organisation and/or staff have had with British American Tobacco, Imperial Brands, Japan Tobacco International, Philip Morris International, as well as any other domestic or transnational tobacco companies or anyone representing the tobacco industry including subsidiaries of tobacco industry.
I would like this information for the period from 1 April 2021 to 20 February 2023.
Contact would primarily include attending or arranging meetings or functions, and responding to correspondence or phone calls.
Please break down the information by:
* Tobacco company or representative's name
* Date of contact(s)
* Type of contact (meeting, email, letter, phone call, text/app message or video call, e-card or any other form of electronic communication)
* Place of contact, if relevant
* Purpose of contact
* Outcome of contact, including if no action takenPublished: 16 March 2023
-
Request Received: 14 December 2022
Please consider this email as a Freedom of Information Act request for a copy of the minutes of the meeting where the [MRC] panel allocation decisions were taken. Or if the meeting did not have minutes, then for a copy of the scoring sheets or similar that were used to make the decision.
Published: 15 March 2023
-
Request Received: 10 February 2023
1. Telephony and UC/ Collaboration
a. Please confirm the manufacturer of your telephony system(s) that are currently in place
b. When is your contract renewal date?
c. Who maintains your telephony system(s)?
d. Do you use Unified Communications or Collaboration tools, if so which ones?
2. Microsoft
a. What Microsoft 365 licence do you have across the business e.g. E3, E5
b. Which partner looks after your Microsoft tenant?
c. Where do you host your applications? Do you have on-premise infrastructure or do you host your applications in public or private cloud? Which?
3. Storage
a. Does your organisation use on-premise or cloud storage or both?
b. Please confirm the on-premise hardware manufacturer
c. Please confirm your cloud storage provider
d. What is your annual spend on cloud storage? e. How do you back up your data and with who e.g. Backup as a Service
Published: 15 March 2023
-
Request Received: 23 December 2022
For Innovate UK's 'Innovation in Professional and Financial Services - single applicants' projects competition (which closed on 9 November 2022), please could you release the following information:
[Part 1]
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. Average score of failed applications.
8. Average grant fund value per project.
9. Average score of funded projects.
10. Total funds allocated
11. 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).
12. The count of assessed applications by innovation area.
13. The count of successful projects by innovation area.
14. The count of assessed applications by research category (feasibility studies, industrial research, experimental development).
15. The count of successful projects by research category.
16. The number of unsuccessful applications, if any, which scored above the minimum funded score.
17. The number of external assessors who assessed the applications.
18. The number of internal assessors who assessed the applications.
19. The average score awarded per question, split by each assessor.
20. The selection method used e.g. applications were recommended for funding descending from the top score until all funding was utilised or a selective portfolio approach whereby certain lower scoring applications have received funding?
21. What constitutes an outlier when moderating assessor scores and what calculation threshold was used to determine valid outliers?
22. The number of applications where one or more outliers in scores were identified during the moderation process?
23. The number of applications where one or more outliers in scores were removed and scores updated? Is it UKRI's policy to inform applicants of these occurrences?
24. The largest change in an individual question score (across all applications) following the removal of an outlier in connection with any question?
25. The number of applicants who were notified that outlier scores have been removed in connection with their application?
26. When an outlier score is removed, how is the relevant score updated? Is this calculated based on the average of the remaining assessor's scores excluding the outlier score?
27. Where outliers are identified, what are the main reasons for not removing them and updating the relevant score(s)?
28. Could you kindly provide 1) the number of applications and 2) successful projects with total project costs within the following divisions and 3) the lowest and highest successful application scores for each division, as shown in the table below:
Finally, I would be extremely grateful if you could provide the following information in relation to the above competition:
[Part 2]
1. In relation to question 2 (Need or challenge), did the proposed solution offered by applicants need to be a brand new discovery or could it utilise existing technology in a new way and/or for a different problem / use case?
2. With regards to question 3 (Approach and Innovation), could the innovation proposed by applicants utilise existing technology but in a different way / use case to what is currently being used?
3. With regards to question 3 (Approach and Innovation), can individual assessors decide on what proposals they believe will work (or won't work) and can proposals be deemed to be 'bad' ideas at this stage i.e. prior to user research being carried out?
4. In respect of question 4 (Team and resources), are smaller UK businesses without large in-house teams at a disadvantage when applying i.e. does Innovate UK prefer / score companies with larger in-house teams?
5. Does question 4 (Team and resources) relate to the applicant's strategy or their team selection and skillset? Could applicants be marked down here if the assessors did not like the applicant's plan of action?
6. In respect of question 5 (Market Awareness), could applicants / businesses at an early stage of development (TRL2) that have not worked within a wide range of different industries be marked down? Could applicants who proposed to start by working with a single sector (before exploring other sectors) be marked down / disadvantaged?
7. With regards to question 6 (Outcomes and routes to market), were the assessors looking for innovative routes to market? And could applicants with more innovative routes be scored more highly?
8. With regards to question 6 (Outcomes and routes to market), does your innovation framework recognise researching, learning, pivoting and iteration as part of innovation development?
9. With regards to question 8 (Project Management), did the applicants' project plan need to have interdependencies and milestones?
10. With regards to question 9 (Risks), were applicants scored in respect to their project's ability to gain long-term mass adoption, or could projects with a more short-term and/or narrow niche score equally highly even if there is a risk of customers eventually migrating to more established market participants with a stronger market position?
11. With regards to question 10 (Added value), were applications scored on their long-term versus short-term competitive advantage?
12. In question 11 (Costs and value for money), are applicants scored down for paying themselves a market rate salary? Is there an expectation that salaried staff members who are working on the project should not incur eligible costs?
Published: 14 March 2023
-
Request Received: 4 August 2022
Under the Freedom of Information Act, please could I request the following information:
1. Please can you provide a list of all grants distributed between 2020/2021 and 2021/2022, including information on the following:
a. Name of grant
b. Type of grant
c. Grant value
d. Volume of grants awarded
The table below is an example of the information required:
2. How many Full Time Equivalents (FTE's) did you employ to administer and process grants, and what was the cost in 2020/2021 and 2021/2022?
3. What technology system/s do you use to administer/process grants, and how much was spent on this technology in 2020/2021 and 2021/2022?
4. What was the development time required to create your most recent grant product/scheme? (probably don't track - how much time does it take to grant take). (how agile providers are - and we need to be).
Clarification Received: 25 August 2022
Regarding part 1 of my request, I am referring to all grants distributed between 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 - they may be active or not active.
Question 4 is related to actually setting up (development time) a new entire scheme (from the point a policy decision has been taken) in order to make it available for users. Not the time taken to process a single application.
Published: 13 March 2023
-
Response Received: 11 November 2022
1. On what grounds are you giving Envigo, an American company operating in the UK, British tax payers money amounting to almost £700 000.
2. What EXACTLY is this money to be used for? Nutritional diet supplies? Please explain why anyone would be allocated public money for this.
3. Did you not take into account when awarding this money that a) Envigo is an extremely wealthy company that does not need UK tax payers money b) that you are funding a company with an horrific record in animal mistreatment which led to their facility in Virginia being shut down and 4000 Beagle dogs being rehomed.
4. How will you monitor the terms of the Grant?
5. Will Envigo facilities be subject to inspection as a result of being given tax payers public money.Published: 13 March 2023
-
Request Received: 10 November 2022
Clarification Received: 19 December 2022
The present FOI is a request to disclose the paperwork of the approved MRC Centre for Medical Mycology to function at University of Exeter, Director Professor Gordon Douglas Brown. My FOI request refers to UKRI MRC/ MRC CMM/UoE approved support roles.
Published: 7 March 2023
-
Request Received: 8 February 2023
1. Contact Centre - target to organisations we know have a CC
a. Do you have a customer/ citizen facing contact centre? If not please skip these questions.
b. Do you employ and manage your own agents, or do you outsource to a third party? If you outsource who to?
c. How many contact centre agents do you have?
d. Do agents work from home? Or just your offices?
e. Please confirm the manufacturer of your contact centre system(s) that are currently in place?
f. When is your contract renewal date?
g. Who maintains your contact centre system(s)?
2. CRM
a. Do you use a CRM in the contact centre? What platform is used?
b. Do you use the same CRM for the rest of the organisation? What platform is used?
c. Do you use a knowledge base / knowledge management platform? What platform is used?
3. AI & Automation
a. Does your organisation have a customer or citizen facing chatbot? If so, who provides this chatbot technology?
b. Does your organisation utilise RPA technology? If so which RPA technology provider do you use?
Published: 7 March 2023
-
Request Received: 3 February 2023
For Innovate UK's Biomedical Catalyst 2022 Round 2: Industry-led R&D competition (both the <18 month <£500k and >18 month 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 (feasibility studies, 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: 2 March 2023