Funding opportunity

Funding opportunity: Collaborative community research to tackle health inequalities

Opportunity status:
Closed
Funders:
Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), Medical Research Council (MRC), Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC)
Co-funders:
National Centre for Creative Health (NCCH)
Funding type:
Grant
Total fund:
£25,000,000
Award range:
£625,000 - £2,500,000
Publication date:
9 March 2023
Opening date:
Closing date:

Last updated: 13 September 2023 - see all updates

Apply for funding to create and test collaborative models for the integration of cultural, community and natural environment assets into health and care systems. The aim is to create healthier communities and environments across the UK.

You must be based at a UK research organisation eligible for UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) funding.

Applications must be interdisciplinary and include appropriate partners and co-investigators from outside of academia.

The full economic cost (FEC) of each application can be between £625,000, and £2.5 million for 36 months. UKRI will fund 80% FEC.

Due to a technical issue, which has now been resolved, the closing date has been updated to 12 July 4:00pm UK time to facilitate submission for those impacted.

Who can apply

Before applying for funding, check the following:

Who is eligible to apply

We strongly encourage researchers and consortia who were funded through the phase one and phase two funding opportunities to apply for funding:

  • phase one: scale up health inequality prevention and intervention strategies
  • phase two: build community research consortia to address health disparities

However, this is an open funding opportunity and funding from phase one or phase two is not a requirement.

Leadership team

Applications should be led by a strong, interdisciplinary leadership team who can articulate a clear shared vision for the project. You should ensure partnerships within the leadership team are equitable and support novel interdisciplinary approaches.

Co-investigators from community assets and other relevant sectors, as well as representation from people with lived experience, must be included as part of the leadership team. These co-investigators from outside of academia can be costed at 100% FEC where justified. This should be utilised to ensure equitable representation from different partners.

More detail about community assets and the inclusive interdisciplinary approach expected from applications can be found in the ‘What we are looking for’ section.

For administrative purposes it is necessary to identify a single principal investigator who must be affiliated with the lead research organisation. The principal investigator and their research office will be ultimately responsible for administration of the grant.

However, the balance of activity and management across the team and partner organisations can be shared however you see fit. For example, you could adopt a shared leadership approach with co-principal investigators included. Your approach to management, leadership and decision making must be clearly specified in your application.

Your application should be submitted by the principal investigator but must be co-created with input from all partners. This should be evidenced in the application.

Principal investigator

Standard AHRC eligibility criteria will apply to this funding opportunity for UK principal investigators and research organisations.

You must be a resident in the UK and be hosted by an eligible research organisation (higher education institutions or recognised independent research organisations) as stated in the research funding guide.

Co-investigators based at eligible research organisations

Standard AHRC eligibility criteria will apply to this funding opportunity for UK co-investigators based at eligible research organisations.

You must be a resident in the UK and be hosted by an eligible research organisation (higher education institutions or recognised independent research organisations) as stated in the research funding guide.

Co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations

Co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations must also be included in the leadership team, for example:

  • policymakers
  • local and national government
  • third sector and voluntary organisations
  • practitioners from relevant sectors
  • people with lived experience or community researchers
  • private sector
  • health systems
  • community organisations

Where justified, the time of these co-investigators can be listed under ‘Exceptions’ and will be funded at 100% FEC. 100% FEC ‘Exceptions’ costs are only for staff time and cannot include estates and indirect costs.

The combined costs for co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations must be a minimum of 10% of the total FEC of the grant application. If the combined cost for co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations is below 10%, you must clearly articulate why and how partners from outside academia are equitably included within the project. The combined cost cannot exceed 30% of the total FEC.

The intention behind this requirement is to ensure partners from outside of academia are appropriately included and funded within applications.

We recognise that some partners may be employed by a government-funded organisation. To avoid the double counting of public funds in the costings, no salary costs will be covered for co-investigators from government bodies where the person’s involvement in the project falls within their regular duties. Government organisations can only charge to the grant any additional costs they incur as a result of being involved in the project.

Please note that if there are international co-investigators in your application, the combined costs for co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations, and any international co-investigators must not exceed 30% of the FEC. You should consider what balance of co-investigators is needed and explain this clearly in your application.

Co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations should submit a statement of support from their organisation (if they are based at an organisation) as part of your application. This will be used to assess how effectively the proposed work integrates with community assets and other organisations outside of academia.

Interdisciplinary team

All applications must have a minimum of three individuals on the leadership team.

Applications requesting between £625,000 and £1.25 million FEC must include representation in the leadership team from remits of at least two UKRI research councils. At least £6.25 million of the total budget will be reserved for applications in this funding range.

Applications requesting between £1.25 million and £2.5 million FEC must include representation in the leadership team from remits of at least three UKRI research councils.

All applications must include at least one researcher from an arts and humanities discipline.

Disciplines included in your leadership team could include, but are not limited to, expertise from across:

  • arts (for example, creative health, culture and heritage, design research)
  • humanities (for example, health and medical humanities, ethics)
  • social sciences (for example, psychology, demography, sociology, geography, education)
  • environmental sciences (for example, natural sciences, environmental microbiology)
  • biosciences and biomedicine (for example, agri-food production, diet, nutrition and health, lifelong health and wellbeing, microbiology)
  • medical or health research (for example, population health sciences, nursing and other allied sciences, health systems and improvement, implementation sciences, mental health research)
  • law and criminal justice
  • policy
  • economics
  • built environment

Early career researchers

We particularly encourage applications from early career researchers (both as principal investigators and co-investigators) and regard this programme as an important pipeline for growing interdisciplinary researcher capacity in the UK. Support for leadership from early career researchers and showing that you have the right skills at the right level should be clearly explained in your application.

If the principal investigator is an early career researcher, as defined by AHRC, a mentor must be included within the application. This mentor must be clearly outlined in the resources and cost justification section of the application form.

For mentoring cost, an hour per month of the mentor’s time should be built into the budget as a directly allocated cost and entered in the application form in the other directly allocated costs section. Estates and indirect costs for this one hour can also be charged to the grant.

Institutions may provide additional mentoring support alongside other forms of leadership or career development support for early career applicants.

Applicants at other stages of their career can also include mentorship in the application if it is felt it would support the project leadership and benefit delivery of the proposed work.

International applicants

Applications can include international project partners and co-investigators (for example international organisations, businesses, and government organisations) where established expertise is not available within the UK. International co-investigator costs can be funded as ‘Exceptions’ at 100% FEC.

Funded collaborative research grants will be UK-focused. The inclusion of international co-investigators and associated costs must be fully justified and how their inclusion will support the grant objectives clearly explained.

It is important to note that the combined costs for international co-investigators and co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations must not exceed 30% of the total FEC of the the grant application. You should consider what balance of co-investigators is needed and explain this clearly in your application.

Equality, diversity and inclusion

We are committed to achieving equality of opportunity for all funding applicants. We encourage applications from a diverse range of researchers and partners.

We support people to work in a way that suits their personal circumstances. This includes:

  • career breaks
  • support for people with caring responsibilities
  • flexible working
  • alternative working patterns

Find out more about equality, diversity and inclusion at UKRI.

What we're looking for

Scope

About the programme

This funding opportunity is phase three of the mobilising community assets to tackle health inequalities programme.

The programme is led by AHRC in partnership with NCCH, and is supported by BBSRC, ESRC, MRC, and NERC.

The programme is guided by AHRC’s Programme Director for Health Inequalities, Professor Helen Chatterjee. The role of the programme director is to provide intellectual leadership to the programme and facilitate coordination across, and bring coherence to, funded grants from the three phases of the programme.

This funding opportunity is supported through two UKRI strategic themes:

Community assets

Community assets are broadly defined for this programme, to include organisations, individuals, networks and places which are used to support community interests. Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • artists and arts organisations
  • community centres
  • community organisations and leaders
  • charities
  • libraries
  • museums
  • heritage sites
  • green and blue spaces such as parks, coastal areas, woodland, fields and waterways
  • community kitchens and gardens, allotments, farms
  • gyms and other sports- and exercise-related assets
  • housing, legal, debt and advice services

Health inequalities

This programme uses the term health inequalities to include varying definitions and interpretations of inequality and inequity, including the unfair and avoidable differences in health across different population groups.

Understanding the drivers of such inequalities and the role of community assets in reducing these differences is a core tenet of this programme.

Research challenge

In the past decade there has been increased recognition of the links between economic and social inequalities, and of the uneven distribution of health outcomes within and between UK communities. Community assets are known to improve health outcomes, but such resources are also unevenly distributed.

Read:

The NHS Long Term Plan commits to broadening access to ‘social prescribing’ schemes, in which patients are typically referred to organisations in their communities that can provide a range of cultural, nature, and social-based activities to improve their physical and mental health.

Community assets are potentially a key vehicle for tackling health inequalities and creating community resilience to public health challenges including, but not limited to, mental health, poor environmental quality, nutrition and diet, and ageing.

To realise this potential, community assets need to be better integrated with health and social care systems, including NHS Integrated Care Systems in England and the devolved equivalents. Better integration of community assets into health systems will enable commissioners, funders, referrers and providers to better target support where it is needed most within communities.

There is also potential for community assets to be utilised to embed ‘planetary health’ approaches within health and care systems. Community assets which promote flourishing natural systems, and connectedness to nature, can help to achieve positive health outcomes. This supports the concept of planetary health, which focuses on the fact that the health of humans and the health of the environment are inextricably linked.

Integrating community assets into health systems can be challenging due to the complexity and precarity of many community assets, particularly regarding sustainable and long term funding. Community assets operate largely outside of statutory services, are unequally distributed across geographies, and tend to operate at small scales, with limited, short-term. The fragility of community assets is therefore a critical challenge.

Systems-level research is required to understand how community assets can be integrated with health systems and mobilised to address place-based health inequalities at a larger scale. Increased collaboration and partnerships across and between community assets, and with other key stakeholders (including but not limited to local authorities, health and social care, businesses, housing, education) is needed to achieve this.

Programme objectives

Collaborative research grants funded through this funding opportunity will work towards meeting the following programme objectives:

  • to develop testable and replicable collaborative models for integrating community assets within the changing structures of health and social care in the UK, by understanding the complexities, barriers and enablers of integration
  • to explain the links between these community assets and place-based health inequalities with a view to creating healthier, and more resilient, communities and environments, particularly for people living in the most deprived areas
  • to converge data and learning from a range of local and regional models to inform the spread and adoption of collaborative models across the UK

Your application should be highly collaborative and have a strong focus on real world impact.

Duration

The duration of the funded projects is 36 months.

Projects must start by 1 February 2024.

Funding available

A total budget of £25 million is available to support applications for collaborative research grants under this funding opportunity.

At least £6.25 million of the total budget will be reserved to support high quality applications requesting between £625,000 and £1.25 million FEC. This is intended to support applications covering disciplines where the research community is not yet able to take on larger scale funding, or disciplines which have not yet been extensively engaged in this type of research.

Applications may request funding for 36 months, ranging from £625,000 to £2.5 million FEC.

UKRI will fund 80% FEC.

What we will fund

Through this funding opportunity we are looking to support inclusive, interdisciplinary research that builds upon existing resources to develop the evidence base and produce collaborative models for integrating community assets into health and care systems.

Collaborative research grants

Collaborative research grants will support high quality innovative research addressing the programme objectives, with interdisciplinary collaborations creating critical mass and expertise.

In addition to carrying out high quality research, collaborative grants will build capability and capacity in addressing the community assets and health inequalities challenge. They will attract new expertise to the field either through applying existing strengths to the research area, or through development of early career researchers, and partners from outside of academia.

Collaborative research grants will work closely with the AHRC Programme Director for Health Inequalities, Professor Helen Chatterjee, as part of a portfolio of grants funded through this opportunity.

Developing the evidence base

Funded collaborative research grants will develop an understanding of the complexities, barriers and enablers of integrating community assets with health and public health systems, for example the NHS Integrated Care Systems in England, or devolved equivalents.

Grants will progress the evidence base for the drivers of deprivation across communities and the links between community assets and health inequalities.

Producing collaborative models

Funded collaborative research grants will produce financial, collaborative and organisational models for targeted health prevention or intervention programmes, making community assets more commissionable within health systems.  They will scale up local-level models of community-asset health interventions to address health inequalities at regional and national levels.

Building upon existing resources

Applications should utilise and build upon existing research and resources across the community asset and health system sectors. Project plans should include asset mapping and create linkages to existing prevention programmes, interventions, and other resources.

Applications should maximise the use of relevant existing data resources in the first instance, as well as (where appropriate) producing data that responds to the proposed challenge and is of value to the wider community. You should consider the amount of work required to integrate data and evidence from different sectors and sources and build in time to project plans to achieve this.

Knowledge exchange

Applications should aim to connect research with decision-making at local, regional and national levels. You should consider including costed plans for knowledge exchange, communications, and stakeholder and public engagement into the project. The aim of which will be to change opinions, gather insights from individuals with lived experience, and gain support from different communities for the systemic changes needed to scale up and integrate community assets within health and care systems.

Effective knowledge exchange should be bi-directional and equitable: we expect to see evidence of how your engagement plans will both enable you to learn from relevant stakeholders and individuals or communities with lived experience and positively impact, involve and credit these groups, to inform decision-making.

Inclusive interdisciplinary research

Funded collaborative research grants must be made up of diverse but complementary groups of cross-disciplinary academics from across the arts, humanities, social, environmental, medical, health and biological sciences, working together with partners from outside of academia, including community asset and health system partners, and people with lived experience.

The level of interdisciplinarity in the funded collaborative grants will be expected to reflect the level of complexity of the interconnected systems needed to create change in health inequalities via community assets. For example, taking an ecosystem wide approach to understanding the links between the health of people and the health of the environment, and considering how community assets can support a ‘planetary health’ approach.

You are encouraged to include time in your project plan to develop a ‘shared language’ across the different disciplines and sectors involved in the project.

Collaborative grants must involve partnerships with stakeholders from relevant sectors including, but not limited to:

  • local and national government
  • healthcare systems, including social care
  • third sector and voluntary organisations
  • community assets
  • people with lived experience or community researchers
  • private sector
  • policymakers

Co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations can be included as part of the leadership team. This should be utilised to ensure equitable representation from different partners. We strongly encourage inclusion of practitioners and people working within relevant sectors, including those listed above, in project teams.

Funding should provide opportunities for diverse community representation within the collaborative grants. Collaborative grants should consider how the lived experience of individuals can be better integrated into health systems research through co-production.

You are encouraged to include lived experience or community researchers, or both, as a valuable addition to the project team and cost this contribution accordingly. Engagement with communities must be equitable and your plans must demonstrate that you have identified their needs and interests, and the ways in which they will positively benefit from participating in the project.

Applications should articulate how equality, diversity and inclusion will be considered in the approach to embedding lived experience as well as evidence that they have identified any barriers to access, and established plans to mitigate or overcome these barriers.

Underrepresented disciplines

Disciplines that have not extensively engaged with the community assets and health inequalities challenge are encouraged to apply as part of a collaborative grant. Examples could be from across the environmental sciences, as well as economics and disciplines interested in links between community assets and nutrition and diet. Partners and co-investigators from within and outside of academia covering underrepresented disciplines should be considered as part of applications.

Example challenges

The example challenges list provides some examples of specific challenges that could be addressed through this funding opportunity. The compilation of this list was guided by evidence from phase one and two of the programme. The list is not intended to unduly influence other ideas from outside the programme, within the remit of the funding opportunity.

The examples are intended to demonstrate the complexity of the challenges faced, and the need for interdisciplinary research and the inclusion of relevant sectors from outside of academia to address them.

Example challenges include, but are not limited to:

  • understanding the opportunities, challenges and benefits of the co-location of services, assets, programmes, such as through community hubs, particularly regarding financial sustainability of such service provision, including understanding economic cost effectiveness and social value
  • developing targeted approaches to tackling drivers of deprivation through system change by making it easier for commissioners, referrers, funders, health and community professionals to identify the poorest people living in the most deprived areas and offering SMART solutions to levelling up using community-based approaches
  • designing and testing the feasibility of interventions and prevention strategies which tackle both health and the wider social determinants of health (for example, employment, housing, poverty, debt, healthier lifestyles, diet, exercise, environmental degradation) by supporting collaboration and integration across community assets
  • exploring the role of anchor institutions, community development trusts, community interest companies and other community connector organisations in supporting links between health systems, community assets and people living in deprived areas. This could also involve understanding the synergistic opportunities presented by other funding schemes which support levelling up and public health research (such as the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Determinants Research Collaborations)
  • exploring how community assets can be mobilised to facilitate health and care interventions or prevention strategies that embed a planetary health approach, such as examining how green infrastructure can modify the impacts of climate change on urban environments, while simultaneously providing benefits to health and wellbeing or how community assets can be mobilised to simultaneously support pro-environmental and pro-healthy behaviours

What we will not fund

The following are not within scope:

  • applications with no co-investigators from outside of academia
  • applications with fewer than three investigators
  • applications between £625,000 and £1.25 million which do not span the remits of at least two UKRI research councils
  • applications over £1.25 million which do not span the remits of at least three UKRI research councils
  • applications with no arts and humanities disciplines included
  • development of novel interventions to improve individuals’ health
  • research where the primary benefit is outside of the UK

Supporting skills and talent

We encourage you to follow the principles of the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers and the Technician Commitment.

International collaboration

If your application includes international applicants, project partners or collaborators, visit Trusted Research for more information on effective international collaboration.

How to apply

There is a mandatory expression of interest (EOI) stage. To submit an EOI, fill in the survey by 4:00pm UK time on 31 May 2023.

If a full application is submitted without an EOI by the stated deadline, it will be rejected.

UKRI Funding Service

We are running the funding opportunity on the new UKRI Funding Service. You cannot apply for this opportunity on the Joint Electronic Submissions (Je-S)system.

If you do not already have an account with the UKRI Funding Service, you will be able to create one by selecting the ‘start application’ button at the start of this page. Creating an account is a two-minute process requiring you to verify your email address and set a password.

If you are a member of an organisation with a research office that we do not have contact details for, we will contact them to enable administrator access. This provides:

  • oversight of every UKRI Funding Service application opened on behalf of your organisation
  • the ability to review and submit applications

Research offices that have not already received an invitation to open an account should email support@funding-service.ukri.org

Submitting your application

Applications should be prepared and submitted by the lead research organisation but should be co-created with input from all investigators, and project partners, and should represent the proposed work of the entire consortia.

To apply:

  1. Select the ‘Start application’ button at the start of this page.
  2. This will open the ‘Sign in’ page of UKRI’s Funding Service. If you do not already have an account, you’ll be able to create one. This is a two-minute process requiring you to verify your email address and set a password.
  3. Start answering the questions detailed in this section of ‘How to apply’. You can save your work and come back to it later. You can also work ‘offline’, copying and pasting into the text boxes provided for your answers.
  4. Once complete, use the service to send your application to your research office for review. They’ll check it and return it to you if it needs editing.
  5. Once happy, your research office will submit it to UKRI for assessment. Only they can do this.

As citations can be integral to a case for support, you should balance their inclusion and the benefit they provide against the inclusion of other parts of your answer to each question. Bear in mind that citations, associated reference lists or bibliographies, or both, contribute to, and are included in, the word count of the relevant section.

Deadline

UKRI must receive your application by 11 July 2023 at 4:00pm UK time.

You will not be able to apply after this time.

You should ensure you are aware of and follow any internal institutional deadlines that may be in place.

UKRI will need to collect some personal information to manage your funding service account and the registration of your funding applications.

We will handle personal data in line with UK data protection legislation and manage it securely. For more information, including how to exercise your rights, read our privacy notice.

AHRC will publish the outcomes of this funding opportunity.

If your application is successful, some personal information will be published via the UKRI Gateway to Research.

UKRI Funding Service: section guidance

Summary

In plain English, provide a summary that can be sent to potential reviewers to determine if your proposal is within their field of expertise.

This summary may be made publicly available on external facing websites, so please ensure it can be understood by a variety of readers, for example:

  • opinion-formers
  • policymakers
  • the general public
  • the wider research community

Guidance for writing a summary Succinctly describe your proposed work in terms of:

  • its context
  • the challenge the project addresses and how it will be applied to this
  • its aims and objectives
  • its potential applications and benefits, including specific communities who will benefit

Word count: 500

Applicants

List the key members of your team and assign them roles, for example:

  • principal investigator
  • co-investigator
  • researcher
  • technician

You should only list one individual as principal investigator.

Section: vision

Question: what are you hoping to achieve with your proposed work?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Explain how your proposed work:

  • is of excellent quality and importance within or beyond the fields or areas
  • has the potential to advance current understanding, generates new knowledge, thinking or discovery within or beyond the field or area
  • is timely given current trends, context and needs
  • impacts world-leading research, society, the economy or the environment
  • impacts upon health inequalities and delivers against the programme objectives

Please note the programme objectives are:

  • to develop testable and replicable collaborative models for integrating community assets within the changing structures of health and social care in the UK, by understanding the complexities, barriers and enablers of integration
  • to explain the links between these community assets and place-based health inequalities with a view to creating healthier, and more resilient, communities and environments, particularly for people living in the most deprived areas
  • to converge data and learning from a range of local and regional models to inform the spread and adoption of collaborative models across the UK

Within the vision section we also expect you to:

  • use accessible, jargon-free, language. This section will be assessed by people with lived experience, as well as academic reviewers
  • identify who will benefit from the project, and how the proposed work will impact upon this community

Word count: 500

Section: co-creation and lived experience

Question: how is co-creation and lived experience embedded in your proposed work?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Explain how your proposed work:

  • has clearly identified a relevant community and their needs
  • impacts the communities you work with, including lived experience participants
  • will create long-term positive change for the identified communities
  • has included equitable co-creation and co-production with community partners and people with lived experience, and identified any barriers to access for those participants

Within the co-creation and lived experience section we also expect you to:

  • use accessible and jargon-free language. This section will be assessed by lived experience reviewers as well as academic reviewers
  • if needed, create and submit up to two images (each no larger than one side of A4) to support your application via a single PDF upload. These could be diagrams or images that explain your plans. Upload instructions will be provided within the service

Word count: 1,000

Section: approach

Question: How are you going to deliver your proposed work?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Explain how you have designed your approach so that it:

  • is effective and appropriate to achieve your objectives
  • is feasible, and comprehensively identifies any risks to delivery and how they will be managed
  • if applicable, uses a clear and transparent methodology
  • if applicable, summarises the previous work and describes how this will be built upon and progressed
  • will maximise translation of outputs into outcomes and impacts
  • describes how your, and if applicable your team’s, research environment (in terms of the place, its location, and relevance to the project) will contribute to the success of the work
  • explains the inclusive and interdisciplinary approach being used and how the different disciplines and sectors represented in the project team will add value to the approach
  • demonstrates how equality, diversity and inclusion have been integrated into all stages of the research planning and delivery

Within the approach section we also expect you to:

  • provide a detailed and comprehensive project plan including milestones and timelines in the form of a Gantt chart or similar (additional one-page A4)
  • include a detailed and appropriate management plan for the proposed work, including how roles, responsibilities, and time allocated will be spread across the leadership team
  • state which research council remits are represented in the proposed work, as per opportunity requirements (see ‘who can apply’ section)
  • detail how equality, diversity and inclusion have been embedded in the research team. For example, through the inclusion of early career researchers, range of partner organisations and people with lived experience

Word count: 3,000

Section: data management and sharing

Question: how will you manage and share data collected or acquired through the proposed research?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Provide a data management plan which should clearly detail how you will comply with UKRI’s published data sharing policy which includes detailed guidance notes.

Word count: 1,000

Section: organisation letter (or email) of support from co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations

Question: for co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations, where applicable, upload a single PDF containing letters of support from each co-investigator organisation.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

If your co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations are not associated with an organisation at all (for example, some people with lived experience), they do not need to submit a letter of support.

If this is the case for all of your co-investigators then add ‘N/A’ into the text box, mark this section as complete and move to the next section.

If you have named co-investigators that are not based at eligible research organisations who can provide letters of support from their organisation, enter the words ‘attachment supplied’ in the text box below.

Each letter you provide should:

  • state how they will deliver the project’s objectives
  • describe how their organisation will support them during the lifetime of the project
  • be no more than two sides of A4

Unless specifically requested, please do not include any personal data within the attachment.

Upload details are provided within the service on the actual application.

For audit purposes, UKRI requires formal collaboration agreements to be put in place if an award is made.

Word count: five

Section: project partners: contributions

Question: provide details about any project partners’ contributions using the template provided.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

If you do not have any project partners, simply add ‘N/A’ into the text box, mark this section as complete and move to the next section.

If you do have project partners, download and complete the project partner contributions template (DOCX, 52KB) then copy and paste the table within it into the text box below.

Ensure you have obtained prior agreement from project partners that, should you be offered funding, they will support your project as indicated in the template.

Word count: 1,000

Section: Project partners: letters (or emails) of support

Question: upload a single PDF containing the letters or emails of support from each partner you named in the table in the previous ‘contributions’ section.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

If you do not have any project partners, simply add ‘N/A’ into the text box, mark this section as complete and move to the next section.

If you have named project partners in the previous ‘contributions’ section, enter the words ‘attachment supplied’ in the text box below.

Each letter or email you provide should:

  • confirm the partner’s commitment to the project
  • clearly explain the value, relevance and possible benefits of the work to them
  • describe any additional value that they bring to the project
  • please refer to AHRC’s research funding guide for more guidance

Please do not provide letters of support from host organisation or co-investigators based at eligible research organisations.

Unless specifically requested, please do not include any personal data within the attachment.

Upload details are provided within the service on the actual application.

For audit purposes, UKRI requires formal collaboration agreements to be put in place if an award is made.

Word count: five

Section: Applicant and team capability to deliver

Question: why are you the right individual or team to successfully deliver the proposed work?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Evidence of how you, and if relevant your team, have:

  • the relevant experience (appropriate to career stage) to deliver the proposed work
  • the right balance of skills and expertise to cover the proposed work
  • the appropriate leadership and management skills to deliver the work and your approach to develop others

Use the Résumé for Research and Innovation (R4RI) format to showcase the range of relevant skills you, and if relevant your team (investigators, researchers, other (technical) staff for example research software engineers, data scientists and so on, and partners), have and how this will help to deliver the proposed work. You can include individuals’ specific achievements but only choose past contributions that best evidence their ability to deliver this work.

Complete this section using the R4RI module headings listed below. You should use each heading once and include a response for the whole team, see the UKRI guidance on R4RI. You can enter N/A for any you think irrelevant, and will not be penalised for doing so, but it is recommended that you carefully consider the breadth of your experience:

  • contributions to the generation of new ideas, tools, methodologies, or knowledge
  • the development of others and maintenance of effective working relationships
  • contributions to the wider research and innovation community
  • contributions to broader research or innovation users and audiences and towards wider societal benefit
  • additions (you can use this heading to provide information which provides context to the wider application, such as detail of career breaks – it is not a requirement)

You should complete this as a narrative and you should avoid CV type format.

Word count: 1,500

Section: outsourcing

Question: are you outsourcing any project activities?

If you are not, enter ‘N/A’ in the text box, mark this section as complete and move to the next question.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

UKRI recognises that in some instances, it may be appropriate to outsource elements of the proposed work. If that is the case in this application, please provide the following information:

  • the scope of the outsourced activity, that means what is being undertaken and what will be delivered
  • the relevance of the outsourced activity to the application
  • why the outsourced activity cannot be undertaken in house
  • why this provider is the most appropriate
  • the cost or costs of the outsourced activity and the tendering process that has been followed

Please provide any goods and services quotations.

Word count: 1,000

Section: ethics and responsible research and innovation (RRI)

Question: what are the ethical or RRI implications and issues relating to the proposed work? If you do not think that the proposed work raises any ethical or RRI issues, explain why.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Using the text box, demonstrate that you have identified and evaluated the relevant ethical or responsible research and innovation considerations, and how you will manage them.

Within the ethics and RRI section we also expect you to:

  • include ethical and safeguarding considerations related to the inclusion of lived experience participants or partners. This should include identified ethical or safeguarding risks and plans to mitigate against them

If you are collecting or using data you should identify:

  • any legal and ethical considerations of collecting, releasing or storing the data including consent, confidentiality, anonymisation, security and other ethical considerations and, in particular, strategies taken to not preclude further reuse of data
  • formal information standards with which study will be compliant

Word count: 1,000

Section: research involving human participation

Question: will the project involve the use of human subjects or their personal information?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

If not, enter ‘N/A’ into the text box, mark this section as complete and move on to the next section.

If you are proposing research that requires the involvement of humans subjects, provide the name of any required approving body and whether approval is already in place. Then, justify the number and the diversity of the participants involved, as well as any procedures.

Provide details of any areas of substantial or moderate severity of impact.

Word count: 500

Section: references

Question: List the references you’ve use to support your application.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Ensure your application is a self-contained description. You can provide hyperlinks to relevant publications or online resources. However, assessors are not obliged to access the information they lead to or consider it in their assessment of your application.

You must not include links to web resources in order to extend your application. If linking to web resources, to ensure the information’s integrity is maintained include, where possible, persistent identifiers such as digital object identifiers.

Word count:1,000

Section: resources and cost justification

Question: What will you need to deliver your proposed work and how much will it cost?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Download the FEC template (DOCX, 96KB), complete it and then upload it as explained.

Using the text box, demonstrate how the resources you anticipate needing for your proposed work:

  • are comprehensive, appropriate, and justified
  • represent the optimal use of resources to achieve the intended outcomes
  • maximise potential outcomes and impacts

This section should not simply be a list of the resources requested, as this will already be given in the detailed ‘costs’ table. Costings should be justified on the basis of FEC of the project, not just on the costs expected from UKRI. For some items we do not expect you to justify the monetary value, rather the type of resource, such as amount of time or type of staff requested.

Where you do not provide adequate justification for a resource, we may deduct it from any funding awarded.

You should identify:

  • support for activities to either increase impact, for public engagement, knowledge exchange or to support responsible innovation
  • support for access to facilities, infrastructure or procurement of equipment
  • support for preserving, long-term storage, or sharing of data
  • support for mentorship, if appropriate to the application
  • support from partner organisations and how that enhances value for money
  • support for inclusion of lived experience and community partners in the proposed work
  • the combined costs for co-investigators not based at eligible research organisations. This should be a minimum 10% FEC of the grant. If less than 10%, how equitable partnerships outside of academia are included in the proposed work should be clearly articulated in the ‘approach’ section

Word count: 1,000

How we will assess your application

Assessment process

We will assess your application using the following process.

Peer review

Your application will be assessed by reviewers from academia and people with lived experience.

We will invite expert reviews from two academics and two people with lived experience. The reviewers will be asked to assess your application against the specified criteria for this opportunity.

Moderation panel

Following peer review, we will invite experts to consider and reach a final agreement on the grading and ranking of proposals and where necessary, to agree broad feedback for applicants. The ranking of proposals is based on the reports of the academic and lived experience peer reviewers on the overall research quality of the proposal and the principal investigator’s response to their comments. After which, the panel will make a funding recommendation.

Portfolio balancing

This funding opportunity is intended to offer a coordinated UK-wide investment, with a spread of collaborative grants funded across locations, disciplines, community asset types, and approaches. The panel will be empowered to recommend the strongest overall portfolio of proposals that provide the greatest added value. A sub-panel may be convened to consider the applications deemed fundable by the full moderation panel and may decide on the final portfolio of applications to be funded.

Principles of assessment

We support the San Francisco declaration on research assessment and recognise the relationship between research assessment and research integrity.

Find out about the UKRI principles of assessment and decision making.

We reserve the right to modify the assessment process as needed.

Assessment criteria

Here is a sample set of expert review guidance. While the content is not the same as what is asked of the applicant, it should directly reflect it.

What we are looking for

Lived experience reviewers will provide comments on the first two sections, ‘vision’  and ‘co-creation and lived experience’. Lived experience reviewers will receive additional support and guidance from AHRC about how to complete their reviews.
Academic peer reviewers will provide comments on all sections.

Section: vision

Have the applicants demonstrated how the work they are proposing:

  • is of excellent quality and importance within or beyond the fields or areas
  • has the potential to advance current understanding, generates new knowledge, thinking or discovery within or beyond the field or area
  • is timely given current trends, context and needs
  • will impact world-leading research, society, the economy or the environment
  • impacts upon health inequalities to benefit a community and delivers against all the programme objectives

Section: co-creation and lived experience

Have the applicants demonstrated how the work they are proposing:

  • has clearly identified a relevant community and their needs
  • impacts the communities you work with, including lived experience participants
  • will create long-term positive change for the identified communities
  • has included equitable co-creation and co-production with community partners and people with lived experience and identified any barriers to access for those participants

Section: approach

Have the applicants demonstrated that they have designed their approach so that it:

  • is effective and appropriate to achieve their objectives
  • is feasible, and comprehensively identifies any risks to delivery and how they will be managed
  • if applicable, uses a clear and transparent methodology
  • if applicable, summarises the previous work and describes how this will be built upon and progressed
  • will maximise translation of outputs into outcomes and impacts
  • describes how their, and if applicable their team’s, research environment (in terms of the place, its location and relevance to the project) will contribute to the success of the proposed work
  • explains the inclusive and interdisciplinary approach being used and how the different disciplines and sectors represented in the project team will add value to the approach
  • demonstrates how equality, diversity and inclusion has been integrated into all stages of the research planning and delivery

Section: applicant and team capability to deliver

Have the applicants provided evidence of how they, and if relevant their team, have:

  • the relevant experience (appropriate to career stage) to deliver the proposed work
  • the right balance of skills and expertise to cover the proposed work
  • the appropriate leadership and management skills to deliver the work and their approach to develop others

Section: resources and cost justification

Have the applicants demonstrated how the resources they anticipate needing for their proposed work:

  • are comprehensive, appropriate, and justified
  • represent the optimal use of resources to achieve the intended outcomes
  • maximise potential outcomes and impacts

Section: ethics and responsible research and innovation (RRI)

Have the applicants identified and evaluated the relevant ethical and responsible research and innovation considerations, and how they will be managed.

Contact details

Get help with your application

For help on costings and writing your application, contact your research office. Allow enough time for your organisation’s submission process.

Ask about this funding opportunity

Email: support@funding-service.ukri.org
We aim to respond to emails within two working days.

Phone: 01793 547490

Our phone lines are open:

  • Monday to Thursday 8:30am to 5:00pm UK time
  • Friday 8:30am to 4:30pm UK time

Additional info

Webinar for potential applicants

We held a webinar on 10 May 2023 at 12:00pm to 1:30pm. This provided more information about the opportunity and offered a chance to ask questions.

Watch a recording of the webinar.

Webinar time stamps

01:15 Presentation from Professor Helen Chatterjee (Programme Director)

12:03 Presentation from Catherine Gilmore (AHRC)

26:10 Q&A

Supporting documents

Equality impact assessment (PDF, 215KB)

Updates

  • 13 September 2023
    The number of academics doing the peer review of your application has changed from three to two. See 'How we will assess your application' section.

This is the website for UKRI: our seven research councils, Research England and Innovate UK. Let us know if you have feedback or would like to help improve our online products and services.