Funding opportunity

Early Life Cohort longitudinal study

• Opportunity status: Open
• Funders: Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
• Funding type: Grant
• Total fund: £42,800,000
• Maximum award: £42,800,000
• Publication date: 18 February 2025
• Opening date: 18 February 2025 9:00am UK time
• Closing date: 8 May 2025 4:00pm UK time

Apply for funding to lead the Early Life Cohort (ELC) on behalf of the broader research community. The ELC offers a once in a lifetime opportunity to generate new research and policy insights on how the early and ongoing life experiences of children born in the 2020s and growing up in the UK shape their future outcomes.

This is an invite only funding opportunity. The application link will be emailed to the invited applicant.

The full economic cost (FEC) of your project can be up to £42.8 million. ESRC will fund 80% of the FEC.

Funding will be available for five years.

Who can apply

You can only apply for this funding opportunity if we have invited you to do so.

To lead a project, you must be based at an eligible organisation. Check if your organisation is eligible

International applicants

Project leads from non-UK organisations are not eligible to apply for funding for this opportunity.

Project co-leads based in non-UK research organisations can be included in research grant applications. Read project co-lead (international) policy guidance for details of eligible organisations and costs.

Business, third sector or government body project co-leads

Business, third sector or government body project co-leads based in the UK can also be included on research grant proposals as a project co-lead. Read Including project co-leads from business, third sector or government bodies for details of eligible organisations and costs.

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.

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

UKRI can offer disability and accessibility support for UKRI applicants and grant holders during the application and assessment process.

What we're looking for

Aim

The Early Life Cohort (ELC) will extend and enhance the UK’s ability to generate world-leading insights about human social and physical lifetime development within and between generations through the establishment of a new long-term study of people growing up in the UK in the 2020s, using innovative data collection techniques.

The ELC will deliver the following sub-objectives

To deliver high-quality UK-wide and country-specific data for the research, policy and practice community to support analysis of:

• the physical, mental and social development of today’s pre-school children
• the impacts of rapid ongoing technological, environmental and social change on early child development
• the key determinants of children’s current and future health, educational, social and economic outcomes

To expand our understanding of the life experiences of children and families from groups previously underrepresented in population cohort studies.

To inform the development and evaluation of contemporary early years policy and practice by the public, private and third sectors.

To advance the science of sampling and population data collection methodology.

The ELC will build on the ELC-Feasibility Study to deliver a once in a generation opportunity to generate new research and policy insights on how the early and ongoing life experiences of children born in the 2020s and growing up in the UK shape their future outcomes by:

• recruiting a new sample of children born this decade (and their carers)
• collecting data on their early life experiences and circumstances
• establishing the foundation for ongoing (longitudinal) data collection throughout their lives

The ELC’s design should be informed by the need to address four key challenges:

• early life experiences are critical to ongoing life outcomes: data needs to be collected at the earliest feasible opportunity in life
• there are marked differences in life outcomes and experiences within generations: data needs to be collected at a large enough scale to be inclusive and representative
• limited data is available on people born in the 2020s: data needs to be collected this decade to capture the unique experiences of this generation across the UK
• methods must evolve to address contemporary research questions and harness new technologies: new methods and approaches must be adopted to collect the data

The data generated will be available for researchers across academic, public, and other sectors to assess how era-defining changes (for example, rapid technological advances, evolution in how and where we work, rising cost of living, climate change) and government responses are affecting the UK’s next generation of young people and adults, and how we can further improve outcomes for future generations.

ELC will be a UK data infrastructure created as a resource for researchers across the UK, in order to generate vital insights for the research, policy and practice community. As custodians of ELC, it will be vital the study team meaningfully engage with these communities and ensure their input directly informs every aspect of the study design and guides its work on delivery.

The data will be representative of the UK population born at the time and key groups within it (for example, the individual UK nations, ethnic minorities, low-income families). It will include sample boosts where appropriate. It will also enable comparisons with the data collected on previous generations dating back to the 1950s.

In delivering the above objectives, the ELC will contribute to the priorities outlined in the ESRC Data Infrastructure Strategy particularly within the following focus areas:

• building and sustaining a foundation
• impact and public benefit

ELC should also contribute to the following:

• leadership and connectedness
• engagement and responsiveness

Proposed activity must not duplicate existing data infrastructure services and functionalities, including but not limited to CLOSER, PRUK, and UKLLC.

Scope

To improve the quality of life in the UK, policymakers and practitioners need to understand how people’s experiences and circumstances continually and cumulatively shape their current and future life chances. These processes are inherently complex, with marked social, cultural, economic and geographic differences in people’s circumstances and outcomes.

Access to large-scale, inclusive and representative data capturing this detailed information over time gives researchers the opportunity to make sense of this complexity and generates huge policy and practice insight. The UK’s science and policy communities benefit from our hosting the world’s most comprehensive series of high-quality, high-impact (birth) cohort studies that track people over the course of their lives, but a new study has not been established on a UK-wide basis since the beginning of the millennium.

Every new generation experiences unique circumstances that shape their lives. This will be especially true of the children growing up in the UK over the next few years, who will undoubtedly grow up in a vastly different setting to previous generations.

The digital world now plays a significant role in early childhood, with impacts and influences pervasive in later childhood and adolescence, while era-defining technological advances such as artificial intelligence are being integrated into our daily lives at an unprecedented scale and pace.

The coronavirus pandemic catalysed unusually rapid social change, such as a substantial increase in flexible working patterns for some parents, and has now been followed by the rising cost of living that will significantly change families’ economic and financial circumstances.

Even if UN climate goals are met, significant environmental change will impact the physical and social environments in which children grow and develop. UK researchers and policy makers from multiple sectors now need new data to capture the impacts of this constellation of rapidly changing circumstances for the generation born in the 2020s.

A new UK cohort study starting in early life will address this need by:

• recruiting a new sample of children born this decade (and their carers)
• collecting quantitative data on their early life experiences and circumstances
• establishing the foundation for ongoing (longitudinal) data collection throughout their lives

The cohort will extend the impacts delivered by the existing cohorts by enabling a wealth of world-leading research on a broad range of topics, with findings that can be generalised to the UK population born at the same time and key subgroups (for example, populations in the individual UK nations, ethnic minorities, low-income families).

As part of the ESRC Data Infrastructure portfolio, ELC will play a role in the delivery of ESRC’s data infrastructure strategy.

Duration

The duration of this award is five years.

Projects must start on 8 August 2025.

Funding available

The full economic cost (FEC) of your project can be up to £42.8 million.

ESRC will fund 80% of the FEC. Exceptions will be funded at 100%.

We anticipate £36.6 million as exceptions costs, and £6.2 million non-exceptions costs. You should communicate with us around these costs throughout the application process. You must consult with us if there is a need to adjust the balance between exceptions and non-exceptions costs as this will require ESRC approval.

What we will fund

This a description of the core of the study. The application must include these elements. Any allowed potential additions to this model are covered below:

• achieved sample: target 30,000 achieved sample
• number of waves: two full rounds of collection before school entry. Wave one between nine to 11 months. Wave two between three to four years
• sampling approach: statistically representative sampling for UK nations, plus alternative sampling approaches to recruit boost groups (ethnic minorities, low income, young mothers)
• boosts: ethnic minorities, low-income areas, individual UK nations outside England and young mothers
• questionnaire design: in person for wave one, mixed mode for wave two
• participants: child, primary carer, additional informant
• bio samples data collection: anthropomety, saliva collection and analysis of that data. Analysis of saliva should be limited to 40 to 50% of the overall sample (should saliva completion rates exceed 50%)
• data linkage: data linkage secured with owners and participants
• data curation: data deposited to UKDS and metadata with CLOSER Discovery. Data deposit should be as early as possible and no later than 12 months of the end of the fieldwork for each wave of data collection
• engagement: full co-production activities (with the public and users). Policy briefings and outreach work to policy and other interests
• training: data user-guides and basic training to support users

If there are measures that have been utilised and have proven to be successful in other cohorts, we would welcome these in the proposal. These should be supported by evidence.

Some of the following additional activities to the core of the Early Life Cohort can be included in the application as long as they are within the overall budget provided above and do not compromise delivering the core. Additional areas can also be included in the application as set out in the ‘Additions to the core study’ section. These will be assessed by the panel, who will advise ESRC on which, if any, should be included:

• piloting and innovation panel, utilising the Feasibility Study cohort as a test bed to inform and improve future sweeps of the main study
• further boosts not mentioned above, for example further boosts in the UK nations, separate boosts (rather than paired groups as tested in the Feasibility Study) for Black African, Black Caribbean, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi families, separate boosts for other or all minority ethnic groups (that is, ‘mixed’, Chinese, Indian). Provide justifications for any additional boosts
• data collection from own household parents, non-resident partner and own household parent partner
• digital resource, for example, a study app

ESRC, informed by advice from the funding assessment panel, reserves the right to remove any of the above additional areas from its funding offer. For example, if there are concerns about viability.

ESRC reserves the right to share relevant prior learnings with the panel if deemed necessary. For example, the Feasibility Study, the Early Life Cohort Advisory Group, and other appropriate consultations.

What we will not fund

We will not fund:

• the continuation of the feasibility study as an independent study, not as an innovation panel
• biomarker collections except anthropometry and saliva
• EEG, eye-tracking or actigraphy
• any activity that could be perceived as an intervention by the scientific community
• standard research projects
• writing up previous research
• preparation of books and publications
• literature surveys
• general conference attendance that is not related to the proposed work
• studentships

ESRC reserves the right to exclude additional items if recommended by the panel.

Data requirements

We recognise the importance of data quality and provenance. Data collected by ESRC funding must be well-managed by the grant holder to enable their data to be exploited to the maximum potential for further research. See our research data policy for details and further information on data requirements. The requirements of the research data policy are a condition of ESRC research funding.

Details on data management and sharing should be provided in the ‘Data management’ section. See the importance of managing and sharing data and content for inclusion in a data management plan on the UK Data Service (UKDS) website for further guidance. We expect applicants to provide a summary of the points provided. Data must be discoverable and be submitted to UKDS and metadata with CLOSER Discovery.

Data promotion

As a resource for the community, ELC must demonstrate and promote the value and potential of the data to the research and user community as well as the wider public. We welcome innovative approaches to achieve this objective. For example, one approach might be via the publication of initial findings, their specific objective being to highlight the availability and relevance of the data to a wide user base. These should be released at the same time as the data is made available, though this should not delay data release.

Any analysis and its presentation must be sufficiently simple for users to quickly and clearly understand the potential of the data. When the data becomes available for the community, you will be required to outline the limitations of the sample to aid usage. This should incorporate information as per the recommendations of the ESRC/MRC Longitudinal Population Studies coverage project as well as other standard metadata.

Impact, innovation and interdisciplinarity

We expect you to consider the potential scientific, societal and economic impacts of your activity. Outputs, dissemination and impact will be a key component used to assess applications. We encourage you to consider how best to promote use of data from the study by a wide range of research communities, including social science and other disciplines.

Collaboration

We are committed to knowledge exchange and encouraging collaboration between data infrastructures such as ELC, researchers and the private, public and civil society sectors. Collaborative working benefits both the data infrastructure and the individuals and organisations involved. Through collaboration, partners learn about each other’s expertise, share knowledge and gain an appreciation of different professional cultures. Collaborative activity can therefore lead to a better understanding of the ways that data collection infrastructures can add value and offer insights to key issues of concern for policy and practice.

The study should learn from and build upon relevant existing public engagement work, as well propose further engagement where there is a need.

Research ethics

ESRC requires that the research we support is designed and conducted in such a way that it meets ethical principles and is subject to proper professional and institutional oversight in terms of research governance. We have agreed a framework for research ethics that all submitted proposals must comply with. Read further details about the framework for research ethics and guidance on compliance.

Team composition and leadership

We are looking for a team with an ambitious and innovative vision to realise our goals as well as the expertise, networks and collaborations required to deliver it. Collectively, the team composition must demonstrate the ELC has the skills and expertise necessary to deliver the work set out in your application.

The team should have a diverse range of skills and experience including the professional skills needed to deliver the following responsibilities:

• leadership, management and organisation of the ELC
• administration of ELC activities
• stakeholder management and engagement
• sustainable development and growth
• development and maintenance of the data infrastructure

The ELC must be resourced adequately and the time committed by core staff to their responsibilities will need to be fully justified. The team must include representatives from all four UK nations.

Applications must explicitly articulate how the expertise of the proposed team will enable the ELC to deliver its responsibilities.

You should ensure that the grant roles allocated to individuals on the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Funding Service are eligible, appropriate, and correctly costed.

Read Roles in funding applications: eligibility, responsibilities and costings guidance, Including project co-leads from business, third sector or government bodies and ESRC research funding guide for details of eligible organisations and costs. Further information on project partners can be found in the ‘Additional information’ section.

Career and skills development

UKRI is a signatory to the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers, and the Technician Commitment, through which UKRI commits to support the professional and career development of researchers and technicians through its funding opportunities.

We encourage you to follow the principles of the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers and the Technician Commitment and you will need to articulate your plans for the professional development of staff in your team at this full application stage.

You are encouraged to consider both leadership development and capacity building in your plans.

Governance and management

Should the study be funded, the ESRC investment management team will continue to be responsible for monitoring the overall delivery of ELC for ESRC. A Management Board will be put in place to hold the ELC study team and the ESRC investment management team accountable for the governance and management of the investment. The Management Board will meet quarterly to receive and review reports provided by the ELC study team and ESRC and offer feedback and advice as necessary. Those involved in the governance of this investment will advise the ESRC senior responsible officer (SRO).

The ESRC SRO is accountable to relevant governmental departments as well as UKRI chief executive, the UKRI infrastructure team, ESRC executive chair and ESRC Executive Board.

The ELC study team will be expected to have appropriate and effective governance and mechanisms in place to provide it with strategic oversight and advice. They should continue to have advisory groups and networks, ensuring the membership is diverse under the Equality Act 2010 and represents different disciplines and geographical areas and institutions. This must include a senior external advisory group including representation from existing and potential data users and experts in the delivery of national data infrastructures for use by broad communities.

Membership of such groups should be made public; the funders expect to be invited as observers. They are strongly recommended to have robust and transparent governance arrangements and escalation processes at University College London (UCL) to support successful delivery and efficient management of resources, risks, and issues.

Monitoring, evaluation, and investment management

Over the course of the grant, the study team will be required to submit a quarterly report to ESRC as agreed with ESRC. The report should generally include:

• finance report, including a list of co-funding and other research grants applied for and received
• change request form as necessary

The study team will also be required to attend quarterly Management Board meetings organised by ESRC, and submit the following in advance, as agreed with ESRC:

• highlight report summarising progress towards their objectives and risks
• fieldwork update report
• project plan (deliverables and milestones, risk register)

Progress reports are to be shared with the ESRC investment manager on a monthly basis, and there will be fortnightly project delivery meetings between the scientific delivery leadership team and the ESRC investment manager.

The study team will also be required to provide an annual report on benefits and impact as per guidance provided by ESRC. It is also a requirement that the study team submit an end-of-project report and final expenditure statement within three months of the grant end. The main contents of the end-of-project report will be agreed with ESRC within the first 12 months of the grant.

ESRC reserves the right to conduct a review at any time during the funding period to assess the delivery of the grant and if necessary to adjust or end the funding.

Milestones and deliverables

During the first three months of the grant, the study team and ESRC will work together to collaboratively agree on the following:

• stakeholder engagement plan
• communications plan
• collaboration strategy
• full data linkage strategy
• procurement specification
• additional funding process (including co-funding)
• finance management
• risk management
• updated delivery plan

Key performance indicators and milestones (see below for more information of specific milestones):

• tracking response rates of the boost groups, AIs, PIs, anthropometry (and saliva if included), plus any other co-funded additional activities
• outputs from the fieldwork agency procurement process
• outputs from engagement activities
• sharing information on any co-funding, if secured
• ESRC invited to observe engagement activities

Governance membership, including but not limited to:

• Management Board
• Advisory Board – proposed membership to be approved by ESRC informed by advice taken from their Management Board during this period

Milestones to be included are:

• ELC Study Team initial grants commenced
• full delivery plan
• fully staffed
• sample frame access confirmed
• fieldwork contracts in place (grant holder-led activity)
• wave one study design sign-off
• cohort recruitment and wave one survey fieldwork starts
• fieldwork progress reviews
• mid-term evaluation
• wave one survey fieldwork complete
• wave one lessons learned review
• wave two study design sign-off*
• wave one data deposit with UK Data Service (UKDS)
• wave two survey fieldwork starts*
• fieldwork progress review
• wave one linked data available in a Trusted Research Environment (TRE)
• wave two survey fieldwork complete*
• wave two data deposit with UKDS*
• wave two linked data available in a TRE*
• grant end date
• gateway: end of grant external impact, process evaluation and benefit realisation

*Wave two data collection, and consequent data deposit, timings will be determined by scientific and community need, as evidenced via stakeholder engagement led by the grant holders. The financial profile assumes second wave fieldwork takes place when the children are around three years old.

ESRC holds a right to review and modify the above reporting requirement at any time.

Trusted Research and Innovation (TR&I)

UKRI is committed in ensuring that effective international collaboration in research and innovation takes place with integrity and within strong ethical frameworks. Trusted Research and Innovation (TR&I) is a UKRI work programme designed to help protect all those working in our thriving and collaborative international sector by enabling partnerships to be as open as possible, and as secure as necessary. Our TR&I Principles set out UKRI’s expectations of organisations funded by UKRI in relation to due diligence for international collaboration.

As such, applicants for UKRI funding may be asked to demonstrate how their proposed projects will comply with our approach and expectation towards TR&I, identifying potential risks and the relevant controls you will put in place to help proportionately reduce these risks.

See further guidance and information about TR&I, including where applicants can find additional support.

How to apply

The project lead is responsible for completing the application process on the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Funding Service, but we expect all team members and project partners to contribute to the application.

This is an invite only opportunity and ESRC will email the link to the invited applicant.

To apply

Select the link as provided in the email sent to you by ESRC.

1. Confirm you are the project lead.
2. Sign in or create a Funding Service account. To create an account, select your organisation, verify your email address, and set a password. If your organisation is not listed, email support@funding-service.ukri.org
   Please allow at least 10 working days for your organisation to be added to the Funding Service. We strongly suggest that if you are asking UKRI to add your organisation to the Funding Service to enable you to apply to this funding opportunity, you also create an organisation Administration Account. This will be needed to allow the acceptance and management of any grant that might be offered to you.
3. Answer questions directly in the text boxes. You can save your answers and come back to complete them or work offline and return to copy and paste your answers. If we need you to upload a document, follow the upload instructions in the Funding Service. All questions and assessment criteria are listed in the How to apply section on this Funding finder page.
4. Allow enough time to check your application in ‘read-only’ view before sending to your research office.
5. Send the completed application to your research office for checking. They will return it to you if it needs editing.
6. Your research office will submit the completed and checked application to UKRI.

Where indicated, you can also demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. You should:

• use images sparingly and only to convey important information that cannot easily be put into words
• insert each new image onto a new line
• provide a descriptive legend for each image immediately underneath it (this counts towards your word limit)
• ensure files are smaller than 5MB and in JPEG, JPG, JPE, JFI, JIF, JFIF, PNG, GIF, BMP or WEBP format

Watch our research office webinars about the Funding Service.

For more guidance on the Funding Service, see:

• how applicants use the Funding Service
• how research offices use the Funding Service
• how reviewers use the Funding Service

References

Applications should be self-contained, and hyperlinks should only be used to provide links directly to reference information. To ensure the information’s integrity is maintained, where possible, persistent identifiers such as digital object identifiers should be used. Assessors are not required to access links to carry out assessment or recommend a funding decision. Applicants should use their discretion when including reference and prioritise those most pertinent to the application.

References should be included in the appropriate question section of the application and be easily identifiable by the assessors, for example (Smith, Research Paper, 2019).

You must not include links to web resources to extend your application.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI)

Use of generative AI tools to prepare funding applications is permitted, however, caution should be applied.

For more information see our policy on the use of generative AI in application and assessment.

Deadline

ESRC must receive your application by 8 May 2025 at 4:00pm UK time.

You will not be able to apply after this time.

Make sure you are aware of and follow any internal institutional deadlines.

Following the submission of your application to the funding opportunity, your application cannot be changed, and applications will not be returned for amendment. If your application does not follow the guidance, it may be rejected.

Personal data

Processing personal data

ESRC, as part of 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.

Sensitive information

If you or a core team member need to tell us something you wish to remain confidential, email datainfrastructure@esrc.ukri.org

Include in the subject line: [the funding opportunity title; sensitive information; your Funding Service application number].

Typical examples of confidential information include:

• individual is unavailable until a certain date (for example due to parental leave)
• declaration of interest
• additional information about eligibility to apply that would not be appropriately shared in the ‘Applicant and team capability’ section
• conflict of interest for UKRI to consider in reviewer or panel participant selection
• the application is an invited resubmission

For information about how UKRI handles personal data, read UKRI’s privacy notice.

Publication of outcomes

ESRC, as part of UKRI, will publish the outcomes of this funding opportunity at What ESRC has funded.

If your application is successful, we will publish some personal information on the UKRI Gateway to Research.

Summary

Word limit: 550

In plain English, provide a summary we can use to identify the most suitable experts to assess your application.

We may make this summary publicly available on external-facing websites, therefore do not include any confidential or sensitive information. Make it suitable for a variety of readers, for example:

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

Guidance for writing a summary

Clearly describe your proposed work in terms of:

• context
• the challenge the project addresses
• aims and objectives
• potential applications and benefits

Core team

List the key members of your team and assign them roles from the following:

• project lead (PL)
• project co-lead (UK) (PcL)
• project co-lead (international) (PcL (I))
• specialist
• grant manager
• professional enabling staff
• research and innovation associate
• technician

Only list one individual as project lead.

There must be representation from each UK nation within the leadership team. You must include a project manager and finance manager in the staff.

UKRI has introduced a new addition to the ‘Specialist’ role type. Public contributors such as people with lived experience can now be added to an application.

Find out more about UKRI’s core team roles in funding applications.

Application questions

Vision

Word limit: 1,000

What are you hoping to achieve with the proposed infrastructure?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Explain how the proposed infrastructure will:

• meet the strategic aims and funding objectives (see ‘Aim’ section) of the funder
• be timely given current trends, context, and needs of the identified stakeholders
• build or sustain the long-term foundations for social science research via the collection of data to meet users’ needs
• have measurable impact beyond the immediate team, including enabling others to conduct high quality, novel or world-leading research that will improve lives
• demonstrate the investment’s potential to deliver impact across the country including all UK nations considering their differing needs, with a clear mechanism for how this will be achieved
• show the investment’s potential to contribute long-term public benefits
• enhance and complement the existing landscape, allowing for comparisons with the data collected in previous generations’ cohort studies whilst balancing the needs to ask new questions
• support innovation in research data collection
• be of international importance

To support your response you should include how you consider how the ELC will interact and effectively align with an increasingly integrated data infrastructure landscape.

References may be included within this section.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service.

Within the Vision section we also expect you to:

• highlight the consequences of not delivering this infrastructure

Approach

Word limit: 2,500

What are your plans to manage and deliver the proposed infrastructure?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

• a credible management plan including strategic and operational matters
• a feasible project plan including a work plan, milestones, and deliverables in the form of a Gantt chart or similar
• identification of risks and appropriate mitigation
• key performance indicators (KPIs) to determine the delivery of outputs and outcomes
• an effective fieldwork procurement process (that will demonstrably deliver value-for-money)
• identification of how accessibility and inclusiveness have been incorporated into the design of the project
• how you will deliver the project to meet the requirements provided in the ‘What we will fund’ section of the scope

For details of what ESRC will fund, please see information in the ‘Scope’ section.

If there are measures that have been utilised and have proven to be successful in other cohorts, ESRC would welcome these in the proposal. These should be supported by evidence.

References may be included within this section.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service.

All applicants planning to generate data as part of their award must complete the separate ‘Data management’ question.

Where indicated, you can also demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service.

Applicant and team capability to deliver

Word limit: 1,650

Why are you the right individual or team to deliver and manage the proposed infrastructure?

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)
• the right balance of skills and expertise
• representatives from all four UK nations
• the appropriate leadership and management skills and your approach to develop others
• contributed to developing a positive research environment and wider community

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service.

The word count for this section is 1,650 words: 1,150 words to be used for R4RI modules (including references) and, if necessary, a further 500 words for Additions.

Use the Résumé for Research and Innovation (R4RI) format to showcase the range of relevant skills you, and if relevant, your team (project and project co-leads, researchers, technicians, specialists, partners and so on), 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 should consider how to balance your answer, and emphasise where appropriate the key skills each team member brings:

• 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: Provide any further details relevant to your application. This section is optional and can be up to 500 words. You should not use it to describe additional skills, experiences or outputs, but you can use it to describe any factors that provide context for the rest of your R4RI (for example, details of career breaks if you wish to disclose them).

You should complete this section as a narrative. Do not format it like a CV.

The roles in funding applications policy has descriptions of the different project roles.

Ethics and responsible research and innovation (RRI)

Word limit: 500

What are the ethical and 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

Demonstrate that you have identified and evaluated:

• the relevant ethical or responsible research and innovation considerations
• how you will manage these considerations

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service.

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 to not preclude further re-use of data)
• formal information standards that your proposed work will comply with

Additional sub-questions (to be answered only if appropriate) relating to research involving:

• human participants

Resources and cost justification

Word limit: 1,750

What will you need to deliver and manage the proposed infrastructure and how much will it cost?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Justify the application’s more costly resources, in particular:

• project staff: including project and financial management staff including breakdown of FTE by work area
• significant travel for field work or collaboration (but not regular travel between collaborating organisations or to conferences)
• any consumables beyond typical requirements, or that are required in exceptional quantities
• all facilities and infrastructure costs
• if applicable, disposal or decommissioning costs
• all resources that have been costed as ‘Exceptions’
• if applicable, subscription costs
• data linkage costs

Assessors are not looking for detailed costs or a line-by-line breakdown of all project resources. Overall, they want you to 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

Cohort sample design

Word limit: 1,500

Provide details on the cohort sample design.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Provide details of:

• how you will obtain a statistically representative achieved sample and use it to deliver the study
• justification for the size and approach to boosts for low-income groups in all four nations, and ethnic minority boosts of Bangladeshi and Pakistani, and Black African and Caribbean families in England and Scotland
• how the sample design delivers for the research and policy community needs
• deliverability within the timeframes given

The following should be included to support your response.

Details on how you will reach a 30,000 achieved sample size, including:

• 15,000 from England
• 5,000 from each of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland
• details on how you will ensure a representative achieved sample, including mitigations for under representation including in the raw sample

Approach to obtaining initial sample from each nation’s data holders.

Boosts, including justification and size for:

• low-income groups in all four nations
• ethnic minority boosts of Bangladeshi and Pakistani, and Black African and Caribbean families in England and Scotland

The study team must take all reasonable steps to secure an exemption from the national opt-out.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Participant recruitment and retention

Word limit: 1,500

Provide a recruitment and retention strategy.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Please provide details of:

• viability of the recruitment and retention strategy, including value for money and ability to deliver objectives and aims of the study
• deliverability within the timeframes given
• incentives, alongside value for money for incentives
• inclusiveness of approaches

The following should be included to support your response.

Incentives, including:

• costs and value for money
• how these will achieve optimal representation and response rates
• details and justification for any additional incentives at the non-response stage

You should also provide details on what actions you can take to increase the response rate of the feasibility study for the main study. You should specify any learnings based on the response rate in Scotland and Northern Ireland and how these can be applied more widely to improve response rates in the main study. You should also include details on how you will address the low response rates from London and North West England.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Data collection

Word limit: 1,500

Provide your plan for quantitative data collection.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Please provide details of:

• deliverability within the proposed timeframes
• harmonisation plans across other longitudinal studies
• how methodological developments and innovations will be incorporated into the data collection
• future proofing of the study
• inclusivity in data collection

ESRC anticipates that wave one of data collection will begin in 2026 and wave two will begin in 2029.

The following details should be included to support your response:

• there must be two full rounds of collection before school entry. The children should be nine to 11 months old for wave one, and three to four years old for wave two
• data should be collected from the child, primary informant and additional informant. Other household parents should not be included in the core of the study
• an outline of how this study will balance harmonisation with other longitudinal studies with innovation in the survey content
• provide separate plans for wave one and wave two data collection and deposit, including modes and timeframes. Wave one should be face to face, wave two should be mixed-mode data collection
• provide a summary of how methodological developments will be incorporated into the data collection, including intentions for future proofing the study
• outline methods for inclusivity in data collection, including any plans to translate the survey instrument
• ESRC will fund anthropometry data collection as part of this study. Please provide details on how this will be collected
• saliva collection should also be included in the proposal. The analysis of that data must also be included. Analysis should be limited to 40 to 50% of the overall sample (should saliva completion rates exceed 50%)
• wherever appropriate and beneficial, there should be a preference for collaboration with CLOSER, Population Research UK (PRUK) and other relevant programmes

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Engagement

Word limit: 1,000

ELC will be a UK data infrastructure created as a resource for researchers across the UK, in order to generate vital insights for the research, policy and practice community. As custodians of ELC, it will be vital the study team meaningfully engage with these communities and ensure their input directly informing every aspect of the study design and guides their work on delivery.

Provide an outline of your engagement strategy for the duration of the study.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Please provide:

• an outline of plans for engaging relevant members of the public, participants, academic, user, and policy communities
• how these plans will be delivered
• an effective plan to identify stakeholders to engage with and address their needs to maximise impact
• how the engagement process will meaningfully shape the survey topics included
• how you will ensure public acceptability of survey content and data linkages
• plans to achieve public trust in data security of the study

The following should be included to support your response.

Provide plans for engagements with participants, academic, user, and policy communities and how these will be utilised. Include how you will ensure engagement approaches are inclusive. Provide details on how members will be selected and if members are recruited on an ongoing or one-off basis. If you will be using existing panels, you must include a justification of the membership and an explanation of how they meet the needs of the ELC. Please include details of any conferences you plan to participate in as part of your engagement.

The proposal must set out credible plans for public engagement relating to the study and learnings from the feasibility study and elsewhere. The proposal should make clear which public engagement activities will be delivered by the study team and which by contracted fieldwork partners or other public engagement specialists. This should be reflected in the costings submitted.

Public trust is vital to recruiting and retaining a representative sample. The study team will be responsible for ensuring that there is clear and accessible communication to the public about how data will be used, how personal privacy will be protected, how data security will be achieved, who will have access and why, and how research findings will be disseminated and provide public benefits. ESRC expects that the Five Safes Framework will be used to help shape these communications, as appropriate.

We encourage you to draw on the principles of the ESRC’s public engagement strategy for longitudinal studies, and outputs from other public engagement activity including by Administrative Data Research UK (ADR UK) and Smart Data Research UK (SDR UK). Also learning from public engagement activities undertaken through the feasibility study.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Engagement with seldom heard families

Word limit: 500

Provide a plan for how you will engage with and retain seldom heard families in the study.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Your plan must include details of the:

• viability of your strategy to engage with groups
• viability of your retention strategy
• deliverability of plans within the timeframe provided
• inclusivity with approaches
• continuous development for how you intend to work with and improve responses from seldom heard families

The following should be included to support your response:

This answer should go beyond the plans for boosts but instead focus on providing detail on how you intend to ensure that the ELC will deliver valuable and useful data on seldom heard families.

How you intend to identify seldom heard families within the sample, and effectively engage with them to assist in delivering a representative and scientifically valuable cohort, including how you will use learning from other studies.

Incorporate plans for second wave inclusion of seldom heard families, and any approaches to future proofing the study to allow identification of new groups.

Data linkage

Word limit: 1,250

Provide a data linkage outline.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Please provide details of:

• the viability of the linkage
• the usefulness of the proposed linkages
• the inclusion of early months and pre-birth data linkages (these are an ESRC priority)
• how the linkages will be prioritised
• the justified consent approach to data linkage

The following should be included to support your response:

Inclusion of all data linkage plans, including with UK LLC, other routine data, and further linkages. You should also include details of how you would enable an admin data spine to be integrated if available.

Whether you will take an opt-in or opt-out data linkage approach, including a justification for this.

How early months data linkages will be incorporated into the plan, as well as backfilling data from pre-birth to pre-interview.

The timelines surrounding data linkage to be agreed during the first three months of the grant.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Collaboration

Word limit: 500

How will you collaborate with other relevant ESRC and UKRI investments?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Does the application identify areas where collaboration is beneficial for the overall delivery of ESRC’s objectives for ELC, and propose a pathway to achieve this?

You should include details on how you intend to collaborate with other relevant ESRC and UKRI investments in a targeted manner. Wherever appropriate and beneficial, there should be a preference for collaboration with UKLLC, CLOSER, PRUK, UKDS, Understanding Society, European Social Survey, Adolescent Health Study, ADRUK, and SDRUK.

You should also consider how you will incorporate and support possible future elements of the wider Early Life Cohort for example any qualitative studies that may occur over the lifetime of the cohort.

Include any plans to ensure that inclusiveness is embedded for users, as well as data discovery arrangements.

References may be included within this section.

Governance

Word limit: 500

How will you manage the award to successfully deliver its objectives?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Explain how the proposed award will be managed, demonstrating that it:

• will be effectively governed, including details about advisory structures
• will be effectively and inclusively managed, demonstrated by a clear management plan
• has plans for monitoring progress as well as self-evaluation throughout the lifetime of award
• identify the expertise within the advisory groups and governance structures
• provide assurance that advisory groups and governance structures will be inclusive with representation across all four UK nations

Additions to the core study

Word limit: 1,000

Provide an outline of which additional elements you wish to add to the core study, as detailed in the ‘Scope’ section of the Funding finder.

The overall costs should be included in the main costings and provided individually in this section so that the panel can assess the value of each specific addition and remove any if needed. Each addition should be justified and costed separately in order to aid the panel with assessing the activity. Details should also be included as to whether they are one off or ongoing activities, including which wave of the study they’ll be included in.

You may only include additions that are listed below. You may choose none, one, or several. The total amount applied for in this application should include the costs of any addition included in this application. Any addition applied for should therefore not cause the application to exceed the total budget for this funding opportunity, as given above.

Any addition must not compromise the delivery of the core activities, in particular if effectively delivering the core requires the whole budget then no additions should be proposed.

What details the assessors are looking for in your response, per allowed addition

Piloting and innovation panel utilising the Feasibility Study cohort as a test bed to inform and improve future sweeps of the main study:

• proposed fieldwork timing and sample age
• estimated DA/DI/Other/Exceptions costs
• value for money and justification of costs
• contribution to objectives of the core study
• contribution to innovation in the core study
• potential to improve and enhance the core study sample
• added scientific value to core study

Further boosts not mentioned above, for example further boosts in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, separate boosts (rather than paired groups as was tested in the Feasibility Study) for Black African, Black Caribbean, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi families, separate boosts for other or all minority ethnic groups (that is, ‘mixed’, Chinese, Indian). Provide justifications for any additional boosts:

• estimated DA/DI/Other/Exceptions costs
• size of boosts
• value for money and justification of costs
• contribution to objectives of the core study
• added scientific value to the core study
• justification of groups identified
• inclusivity strategy

Own Household Parents, Non-Resident Partner and OHP Partner:

• estimated DA/DI/Other/Exceptions costs
• value for money and justification of costs
• contribution to objectives of the core study
• scientific value to core study
• evidence that it is feasible to recruit a sample that will deliver the scientific value
• justification of activities
• potential impact on core data collection

Digital resource, for example, a study app:

• estimated DA/DI/Other/Exceptions costs
• value for money and justification of costs
• contribution to objectives of the core study
• scientific value to core study, which explicitly balances the benefits of a study app against potential dis-benefits. For example, it representing an intervention
• justification of activities

The panel will be asked to judge whether each addition should be funded. In the event that the proposal is funded, the panel may stipulate that ESRC should remove any or all additions to the core study. ESRC will make the final decision based on the panel’s advice.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Co-funding

Word limit: 750

Provide details of ESRC approved co-funding arrangements.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Please provide details of:

• what the co-funder is proposing to fund and how much funding they will provide
• the co-funder’s name, their areas of interest and expertise, and what if any involvement they will have in the co-funded element
• the scientific and policy value of the co-funded element
• the impact of the co-funding on the core of the ELC, including but not limited to participant burden, finances for non-co-funded elements of the study, staff and fieldwork industry capacity to deliver, and the reputation of ELC. This should include a demonstration from the applicant that both positive and negative impacts on the core have been considered
• a maximum of three proposed co-funding arrangements

You should discuss any co-funding arrangements with ESRC during the period that the funding opportunity is open, so that ESRC can assess whether this should be included in the proposal. The proposal submitted cannot be conditional on securing funding from elsewhere, therefore ESRC will require clear evidence of support from the other funder. The applicants must receive written approval from ESRC to include each co-funding arrangement in the proposal.

You should discuss any co-funding arrangements with ESRC during the period that the funding opportunity is open, so that ESRC can advise whether this should be pursued. You must receive written approval from ESRC to include each co-funding arrangement in the proposal. The proposal submitted cannot be conditional on securing funding from elsewhere, therefore ESRC will require clear evidence of support from the other funder.

The panel will assess the co-funding arrangement and advise ESRC whether it should be a part of the ELC. ESRC will make the final decision based on the panel’s advice.

ESRC reserves the right to share relevant prior learnings with the panel if deemed necessary. For example, the Feasibility Study, the Early Life Cohort Advisory Group, and other appropriate consultations.

Following the assessment panel decision, if ELC is funded, ESRC will ensure that there will be a process through which additional co-funding can be considered.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Your organisation’s support

Word limit: 500

Provide details of support from your research organisation.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Provide a Statement of Support from your research organisation detailing why the proposed work is needed. This should include details of any matched funding that will be provided to support the activity and any additional support that might add value to the work.

The committee will be looking for a strong statement of commitment from your research organisation.

ESRC recognises that in some instances, this information may be provided by the Research Office, the Technology Transfer Office (TTO) or equivalent, or a combination of both.

You must also include the following details:

• a significant person’s name and their position, from the TTO or Research Office, or both
• office address or web link

Upload details are provided within the Funding Service.

Project partners

Add details about any project partners’ contributions. If there are no project partners, you can indicate this on the Funding Service.

A project partner is a collaborating organisation who will have an integral role in the proposed research. This may include direct (cash) or indirect (in-kind) contributions such as expertise, staff time or use of facilities. Project partners may be in industry, academia, third sector or government organisations in the UK or overseas, including partners based in the EU.

Add the following project partner details:

• the organisation name and address (searchable via a drop-down list or enter the organisation’s details manually, as applicable)
• the project partner contact name and email address
• the type of contribution (direct or in-direct) and its monetary value

If a detail is entered incorrectly and you have saved the entry, remove the specific project partner record and re-add it with the correct information.

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

Project partners letters or emails of support

Upload a single PDF containing the letters or emails of support from each partner you named in the Project Partner section. These should be uploaded in English or Welsh only.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Enter the words ‘attachment supplied’ in the text box, or if you do not have any project partners enter ‘N/A’. 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
• be no more than one A4 page in length

The Funding Service will provide document upload details when you apply. If you do not have any project partners, you will be able to indicate this in the Funding Service.

Ensure you have prior agreement from project partners so that, if you are offered funding, they will support your project as indicated in the project partners’ section.

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

Do not provide letters of support from host and project co-leads’ research organisations.

Data management and sharing

Word limit: 1,000

How will you manage and share data collected or acquired through the proposed work?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

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

Demonstrate that you have designed your proposed work so that you can appropriately manage and share data in accordance with ESRC’s research data policy and ESRC framework for research ethics (if applicable).

Within the ‘Data Management’ section we also expect you to:

• plan for the research through the life cycle of the award until data is accepted for archiving by the UK Data Service (UKDS) and any other appropriate data repository
• demonstrate compliance with ESRC’s research data policy and ESRC framework for research ethics. This should include confirmation that existing datasets have been reviewed and why currently available datasets are inadequate for the proposed research
• cover any legal and ethical considerations of collecting, releasing or storing the data, including consent, confidentiality, anonymisation, security and other ethical issues
• include any challenges to data sharing (for example, copyright or data confidentiality), with possible solutions discussed to optimise data sharing
• data and metadata deposit plans for wave one and wave two, including timeline for deposit as set out in the funding opportunity

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI)

Word limit: 500

What approaches and activities do you have planned that will embed and further EDI into your team’s organisational culture and proposed work?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Explain how your EDI plan:

• is effective and appropriate to embedding and furthering EDI
• aligns with UKRI’s EDI strategy
• aligns with ESRC’s EDI plan, in particular around objective two to include and support a diversity of people and ideal through our funding partnerships
• comprehensively identifies the key EDI challenges and how they will be addressed and/or managed
• will increase inclusion and diversity within your team over time
• will report and measure EDI outcomes
• will maximise awareness of and mitigate against bias in your team and the wider community in terms of gender, ethnicity or any other protected characteristics under the 2010 Equalities Act through processes, behaviours and culture
• describes how your approach will build upon and integrate existing EDI good practice into your proposed work
• will share good practice with the wider community to ensure your study has maximum impact

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Embedding environment sustainability

Word limit: 500

How will you embed environmental sustainability within the grant activities.

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Explain how your proposed work will embed environmental sustainability throughout its aims, objectives, operations and research outcomes.

You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the service.

References may be included within this section.

Trusted Research and Innovation

Word limit: 100

Does the proposed work involve international collaboration in a sensitive research or technology area?

What the assessors are looking for in your response

Demonstrate how your proposed international collaboration relates to Trusted Research and Innovation, including:

• list the countries your international project co-leads, project partners and visiting researchers, or other collaborators are based in
• if international collaboration is involved, explain whether this project is relevant to one or more of the 17 areas of the UK National Security and Investment (NSI) Act
• if one or more of the 17 areas of the UK National Security and Investment (NSI) Act are involved list the areas

If your proposed work does not involve international collaboration, you will be able to indicate this in the Funding Service.

We may ask you to provide additional information about how your proposed project will comply with our approach and expectation towards TR&I, identifying potential risks and the relevant controls you will put in place to help manage these risks.

How we will assess your application

Assessment process

We will assess your application using the following process.

Peer review

We will invite experts to review your application independently, against the specified criteria for this funding opportunity.

You will not be able to nominate reviewers for applications on the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Funding Service. Research councils will continue to select expert reviewers.

We are monitoring the requirement for applicant-nominated reviewers as we review policies and processes as part of the continued development of the Funding Service.

The peer review will be conducted by the panel members. You will have 14 days to respond to reviewer’s comments.

Panel

Following expert review, the panel will use the evidence provided by reviewers and your applicant response to assess the quality of your application.

Interview

An expert interview panel will conduct interviews with applicants after which the panel will make a funding recommendation.

We expect the interview to be held between 23 and 27 June 2025.

ESRC will make the final funding decision.

Timescale

We aim to complete the assessment process within three months of receiving your application.

Feedback

We will give feedback with the outcome of your application.

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.

Using generative artificial intelligence (AI) in peer review

Reviewers and panellists are not permitted to use generative AI tools to develop their assessment. Using these tools can potentially compromise the confidentiality of the ideas that applicants have entrusted to UKRI to safeguard.

For more detail see our policy on the use of generative AI.

Assessment areas

The assessment areas we will use are:

• vision
• approach
• applicant and team capability to deliver
• ethics and responsible research and innovation (RRI)
• resources and cost justification
• cohort sample design
• participant recruitment and retention
• data collection
• engagement
• engagement with seldom heard families
• data linkage
• collaboration
• governance
• additions to the core study
• your organisation’s support
• project partners letters or emails of support
• data management and sharing
• equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI)
• embedding environment sustainability
• trusted research and innovation

Find details of assessment questions and criteria under the ‘Application questions’ heading in the ‘How to apply’ section.

Contact details

Get help with your application

If you have a question and the answers aren’t provided on this page.

IMPORTANT NOTE: The Helpdesk is committed to helping users of the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Funding Service as effectively and as quickly as possible. In order to manage cases at peak volume times, the Helpdesk will triage and prioritise those queries with an imminent opportunity deadline or a technical issue. Enquiries raised where information is available on the Funding Finder opportunity page and should be understood early in the application process (for example, regarding eligibility or content/remit of an opportunity) will not constitute a priority case and will be addressed as soon as possible.

Contact details

For help and advice on costings and writing your proposal please contact your research office in the first instance, allowing sufficient time for your organisation’s submission process.

For questions related to this specific funding opportunity please contact:

Data Strategy and Infrastructure Programme: datainfrastructure@esrc.ukri.org

Any queries regarding the system or the submission of applications through the Funding Service should be directed to the helpdesk.

Email: support@funding-service.ukri.org
Phone: 01793 547490

Our phone lines are open:

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

To help us process queries quicker, we request that users highlight the council and opportunity name in the subject title of their email query, include the application reference number, and refrain from contacting more than one mailbox at a time.

For further information on submitting an application read How applicants use the Funding Service.

Additional info

Research and innovation impact

Impact can be defined as the long-term intended or unintended effect research and innovation has on society, economy and the environment; to individuals, organisations, and the wider global population.

Research disruption due to COVID-19

We recognise that the COVID-19 pandemic has caused major interruptions and disruptions across our communities. We are committed to ensuring that individual applicants and their wider team, including partners and networks, are not penalised for any disruption to their career, such as:

• breaks and delays
• disruptive working patterns and conditions
• the loss of ongoing work
• role changes that may have been caused by the pandemic

Reviewers and panel members will be advised to consider the unequal impacts that COVID-19 related disruption might have had on the capability to deliver and career development of those individuals included in the application. They will be asked to consider the capability of the applicant and their wider team to deliver the research they are proposing.

Where disruptions have occurred, you can highlight this within your application if you wish, but there is no requirement to detail the specific circumstances that caused the disruption.

Supporting documents

Equality Impact Assessment (PDF, 248KB)