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

1,435 disclosures

  1. EIR2026/00588: Newdigate earthquake swarm and new academic research (BGS Ref - IDA 310242)

    Request received: 12 July 2026

    On 3rd October 2018 an NSTA workshop was held with the British Geological Survey regarding the Newdigate, Surrey earthquake swarm. The conclusion of the workshop was that there was no causal link between the seismic events and oil and gas activity.

     

    Since that workshop new academic research has been published which raises questions regarding that conclusion, notably the Fox and Meredith paper published in Geological Magazine on 10th January 2025 ("Were the Newdigate Earthquakes, Southern England, of 2018-2019 triggered by oil extraction?"): https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/geological-magazine/article/were-the-newdigate-earthquakes-southern-england-of-20182019-triggered-by-oil-extraction/22A5EF8F9934D79FBFED062112DA0611

     

    In light of this new publication please could you provide:

     

    - Information held regarding any internal assessments which have been made of the Fox and Meredith paper.

    - Any correspondence between individuals within the BGS which mention the Fox and Meredith paper.

    - Any correspondence between the BGS and the NSTA, UCL, Horse Hill operators, or other individuals, which mention the Fox and Meredith paper.

    - Information regarding any discussions or correspondence which have taken place regarding plans to revisit the potential causes of the Newdigate earthquakes, since the Fox and Meredith paper was published.

     

    Communications may include (but is not limited to) emails, records of telephone conversations, letters, or Whatsapp type messenger chats.

    Published: 7 August 2026

  2. FOI2026/00563: Horizon Europe 2020 deliverables

    Request received on the 5 July 2026

    Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I request the following information relating to Horizon Europe and Horizon 2020 projects involving the German Aerospace Center (DLR) and UK-based participants.

    This request specifically concerns the following projects:

    * FlyECO – Grant 101138488
    * HEAVEN – Grant 101102004
    * EXACT – Grant 875006
    * ATM4E – Grant 769713
    * HyQuality Europe – Grant 101101447

    For each project, please provide:

    1. Confirmation of whether UKRI or UK-based project participants received project deliverables, reports, datasets, or dissemination materials associated with the project.
    2. Confirmation of whether UKRI conducted or received any assessments relating to compliance with dissemination, transparency, or open-access obligations.
    3. Confirmation of whether any deliverables or outputs were classified as confidential, sensitive, restricted, or exempt from public dissemination, and the general basis for such classification where held.
    4. Confirmation of whether UK participants had any limitations on access to project outputs compared with EU-based consortium participants.
    5. Confirmation of whether UKRI holds records relating to concerns, complaints, reviews, audits, or discussions regarding dissemination or transparency obligations for these projects.
    6. Confirmation of whether UKRI holds dissemination plans, exploitation plans, or publication strategies relating to these projects.

    I am primarily requesting confirmation, status information, and summaries rather than full copies of documents unless readily accessible.

    Published: 7 August 2026

  3. FOI2026/00249: National Quantum Computing Centre (NQCC)

    Request received: 22 March 2026

    Please provide the following information for the National Quantum Computing Centre (NQCC), and if possible separately for the Programme Delivery team, for the period 1 January 2023 to 22 March 2026:

    1. The number of employees who:

    a) passed probation

    b) had probation extended

    c) did not pass probation

    d) resigned during probation and

    e) left employment within 12 months of starting

    2. The number of formal grievances raised by employees.

    3. The number of complaints alleging:

    a) bullying and/or harassment

    b) discrimination

    c) disability discrimination and

    d) failure to make reasonable adjustments.

    4. For each category above, the number that were:

    a) upheld

    b) partially upheld and

    c) not upheld

    5. Any anonymised management information, reports, summaries, or trend analyses relating to:

    a) probation outcomes

    b) bullying or harassment complaints

    c) discrimination complaints

    d) reasonable adjustments and

    e) employee wellbeing concerns within NQCC.

    6. Any recorded notices, guidance, internal communications, meeting papers, or reports held by UKRI/NQCC during that period which refer to the following terms in relation to NQCC or the Programme Delivery team:

    • “reasonable adjustments”

    • “flexible working”

    • “probation”

    • “bullying”

    • “harassment”

    • “discrimination”

    • “disability”

    • “wellbeing”

    I am content for personal data and identifying details of individuals to be redacted. I am seeking anonymised statistical, policy, and recorded management information only.

    Published: 4 August 2026

  4. FOI2026/00464: Process and Evidence for Auditing Employee Existence

    Request Received: 28 May 2026

    Can you please provide me with a detailed listing of the steps that Innovate UK take to audit the existence of employees whose time costs are being included in grant claims submitted to Innovate UK.

    Please also include the full listing of documentary evidence that are obtained to get reasonable assurance that these employees exist.

    If you do not trace either individual salary payments or overall net pay from a payroll report to a bank statement please explain why.

    Published: 4 August 2026

  5. FOI2026/00467: MA taught programmes in Academic Year 1985/86 awarded a ESRC quota award

    Request received: 1 June 2026


    Could you please provide me with a list of MA taught courses in Academic Year Year 1984/85, 1985/86 or 1986/87 which the ESRC provided a quota of awards to support students to undertake these masters courses? This list would also identify the universities where the courses were offered?

    Published: 3 August 2026

  6. EIR2026/00456: SS5 Postcode Area - Flood and Subsidence Risk

    Request Received: 22 May 2026

    I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 concerning any reassessment, reclassification, or alteration of flood risk and/or subsidence risk affecting properties within the SS5 postcode area.

    This request arises following difficulties obtaining household insurance cover, including refusals or restrictions from insurers where flood risk and/or subsidence concerns appear to have influenced underwriting decisions.

    Please provide the following information for the SS5 postcode area covering the last 10 years:

    1. Flood Risk Reviews and Reclassification

      • Details of any flood risk reclassification, rezoning, reassessment, or review affecting SS5.

      • Information regarding any changes to flood modelling, drainage assessments, surface water calculations, river or coastal flood categorisation, or other flood-related risk methodologies.

    2. Subsidence and Ground Stability Assessments

      • Copies of any reports, datasets, geological assessments, environmental studies, or technical analyses relating to:

        • subsidence risk;

        • clay soil movement;

        • ground instability;

        • shrink-swell risk;

        • historical land movement;

        • heave; or

        • structural ground movement within SS5.

    3. Risk Classification Methodologies

      • Copies of any maps, scoring systems, risk bandings, classification methodologies, or assessment criteria used to determine flood or subsidence risk within SS5.

      • Details of any recent amendments or updates to these methodologies that may affect insurance underwriting decisions.

    4. Communications with Third Parties

      • Details of any communications, meetings, correspondence, or data-sharing arrangements between your organisation and:

        • insurance companies;

        • the Association of British Insurers (ABI);

        • local authorities; or

        • property risk data providers
          relating to flood or subsidence classifications affecting SS5.

    5. Incident and Claims Data

      • Any recorded increase, trend analysis, or statistical information relating to incidents within SS5 involving:

        • flooding;

        • subsidence;

        • heave;

        • landslip; or

        • structural ground movement
          during the past 10 years.

    Please search documentation including emails, minutes of official meetings, hand written notes, reports, presentations, graphs, maps and other official documents both in electronic and paper form. Please include both internal and external communications.

    Should going back 10 years prove to be excessive (i.e. in that it would trigger the cost exemption under Section 12 FOIA) then please limit your search to a lesser period of time (i.e. 5 years or two years).

    Published: 3 August 2026

  7. FOI2026/00463: Women in Innovation Assessor Demographics and Professional Background

    Request Received: 22 May 2026

    I would like to request aggregated information relating to assessors involved in the Innovate UK Women in Innovation competition for 2026.

    Specifically, I request the following anonymised and aggregated information relating to assessors:

    1. The gender distribution of assessors.

    2. The age distribution of assessors (for example by age bands, if exact ages are not held or cannot be disclosed).

    3. The professional background or sector classification of assessors (for example: academic, investor, entrepreneur/founder, clinician, industry specialist, corporate executive, consultant, etc., according to whichever categorisation Innovate UK holds).

    4. The proportion of assessors with direct founder or startup experience.

    5. Any assessor training materials, guidance documents, or policies relating to:

    • unconscious bias,

    • equality/diversity/inclusion,

    • assessment consistency,

    • or evaluation criteria for Women in Innovation programmes.

    I am requesting aggregated and anonymised information only and am not seeking the identities of any individual assessors.

    Published: 3 August 2026

  8. FOI2026/00446: Innovation Assessment Structures Concerning Early-Stage Applicants

    Request Received: 20 May 2026

    Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I would like to request information relating to Innovate UK and/or DSIT innovation assessment structures concerning early-stage applicants and exploratory scientific projects.

    Specifically, I request any available information regarding:

    1. how “early stage” is defined within relevant Innovate UK assessment processes;

    2. the criteria used when assessing applicants considered “too early stage”;

    3. the proportion of rejected applications categorised as early-stage or insufficiently developed over the past five years;

    4. the proportion of funded applicants who already possessed:

    • laboratory facilities,

    • engineering teams,

    • existing prototypes,

    • institutional partnerships,

    • or prior significant funding;

    5. whether Innovate UK or DSIT maintains internal analysis regarding barriers faced by:

    • sole researchers,

    • micro-enterprises,

    • independent inventors,

    • or unconventional scientific applicants;

    6. any reports, policy discussions, or reviews concerning whether current innovation structures sufficiently support exploratory or frontier-stage scientific thinking.

    If some information falls under exemption categories, I would still request partial disclosure where possible.

    7. I would also appreciate clarification regarding whether Innovate UK assessment structures are primarily intended to support:

    • commercially mature projects,

    • or genuinely exploratory early-stage scientific capability.

    I request this information in the public interest regarding innovation accessibility, scientific governance, and the long-term effectiveness of UK innovation structures

    Published: 3 August 2026

  9. FOI2026/00347: Imerys British Lithium Company funding

    Request received: 21 April 2026

    I would like to request information relating to public funding provided to Imerys British Lithium Ltd and/or Reserach by British Lithium Ltd (Company Registration Number: 12725402). 
     
    Specifically, I request: 
    • Copies of grant award summaries and funding decisions relating to Imerys British Lithium Ltd or Research by British Lithium Ltd. 
    • The total value of Innovate UK funding awarded to these entities since 2017. 
    • Non-confidential sections of grant applications submitted by these companies. 
    • Project evaluation reports, progress reports, or completion reports produced as part of grant monitoring. 
    • Any internal Innovate UK assessments of the technology readiness level (TRL) of lithium extraction technologies proposed by the company. 
     
    If any material is considered commercially sensitive, I request that the non-exempt portions still be disclosed with appropriate redactions. If the request exceeds cost limits, please prioritise the release of grant summaries and evaluation reports. 

    Published: 28 July 2026

  10. FOI2026/00387: Usage of the AI Skills Hub

    Request received: 30 April 2026

    I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 regarding the Government’s AI Skills Hub (aiskillshub.org.uk) 

     
    Please provide the following information, covering the period from the launch of the AI Skills Hub to the most recent date for which figures are available: 

     
    1. The total number of people who have registered for the AI Skills Hub. 

     
    2. The total number of people who have started at least one course, module or learning pathway through the AI Skills Hub. 

     
    3. The total number of people who have completed at least one course, module or learning pathway through the AI Skills Hub. 

     
    4. If available, a breakdown of registrations, course starts and course completions by month 

     
    5. Any website traffic figures held for the AI Skills Hub, such as  
    total visits or sessions; 
    unique users; 
    page views; 
    average session duration; 
    bounce rate; 
    monthly traffic figures; 
    most viewed pages. 

     
    6. Any internal dashboards, reports, briefings or summaries that discuss usage, uptake, engagement or completion rates for the AI Skills Hub. For the avoidance of doubt, I am seeking the most recent figures held by UKRI. 

    Published: 28 July 2026