Executive summary
Programme overview
The Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) Challenge Clusters programme delivered by UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) International, aimed to harness the power of disciplinary and interdisciplinary research to address global challenges and deliver sustainable development impact.
The GCRF Challenge Clusters aimed to bring together current and former GCRF projects, along with associated partners to accelerate impact against a specific global challenge. The programme was a two-stage funding opportunity which provided seed funding for initial projects in Stage One, with the intention of six to eight of those initial projects to apply for and receive further funding after being evaluated in Stage Two.
Purpose and approach of this review
The purpose of this light-touch review is to bring together key findings, early outcomes and results of the programme to give an overview of how it has progressed, whether it has met its original aims, and any significant changes, challenges or outcomes experienced at project level.
This review will present data, narrative and examples collected from internal UKRI information. Evidence has been collated from project reporting and funding opportunity documents which can be used to highlight impact and provide learning for designing similar programmes in future.
Key findings
The GCRF Challenge Clusters programme aimed to bring together a mix of previous GCRF and other Official Development Assistance (ODA) funded projects focusing on specific research themes and topics to harness the collective impacts of individual projects with the aim of achieving a larger impact.
The programme was successful in achieving this and bought together several previously funded projects to create 21 Challenge Clusters within the six GCRF Challenge Portfolios.
This was a two-stage programme, with Stage One focusing on synthesis of research findings and the development of new insights which would be collated and used to create a full application for Stage Two, to receive funding to undertake full projects.
The approach of the Challenge Clusters programme was experimental and overall, the model worked well and provided researchers with a platform to share ideas and work in a flexible manner that would not normally be possible within other funding formats.
Some felt it was difficult working on the same theme or challenge and being able to identify and engage new partners across different discipline areas and sectors. The majority felt that the cluster mechanism was a successful way of consolidating differences in approach, expertise and opportunities for learning.
The Challenge Clusters projects were impacted by the global COVID-19 pandemic and the reduction to the ODA budget by the UK government in February 2021, which resulted in the cancellation of Stage Two of the programme.
Although both challenges had the potential to negatively impact the programme, the Challenge Clusters projects found innovative solutions to allow them to continue their work. UKRI supported this by allowing flexibility in payment which permitted grant holders to repurpose funds, allowing researchers to make progress towards their objectives and ensuring good practice for managing public money.
Due to the pragmatic approach by grant holders, the programme was able to produce many outputs and learning opportunities despite the circumstances. Bringing together several projects catalysed the synthesis and forward movement of ideas and at the end of projects, many of the concepts and partnerships developed as part of Stage One have continued, despite the withdrawal of continued funding in Stage Two.
Monitoring, evaluation and learning reporting and analysis of Researchfish data shows that over 483 outcomes have been generated by the Challenge Clusters projects to date. This includes several examples of ‘further funding’ and ‘collaborations and partnerships’ that grant holders have indicated are likely to extend past the lifetime of the project.
Overall, the Challenge Clusters programme has made progress in meeting its original objectives for Stage One despite setbacks caused by the pandemic and budget reductions. Projects were less ambitious than they would have been had they gone on to receive the secondary funding, but have still been able to generate impactful outcomes.
The programme has provided valuable learning in relation to the clustering approach and how effective it was in relation to its aims of increasing the impact of individual projects. Partnerships and concepts developed as part of this funding are likely to continue, providing a good basis for potential further outcomes and impacts in future.
Programme summary
At the time of the development of the Challenge Clusters Programme in 2019 the GCRF had been active for three years and already funded hundreds of projects through a selection of different programmes.
UKRI identified that individual projects were more likely to be able to successfully address intractable global challenges collectively, by bringing together both GCRF and other ODA funded research from a range of academic disciplines, alongside other stakeholders such as non-government organisations (NGOs), government departments and industry. In ‘clusters’ these groups would be in a stronger position to be able to achieve a much greater impact. To harness this potential impact, the Challenge Clusters programme was delivered by the UKRI International Team (formerly the International Development Team at UKRI) in 2019.
The Challenge Clusters could address any challenges relevant to the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that were aligned with, and had already received funding, from a GCRF programme, as long as applicants could demonstrate that the proposed activities were additional to funded activities already being undertaken. Table 1 shows the intended timeline and funding available at the time of the programme going live.
| Award details | Stage 1 | Stage 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Total number of awards | 21 | 6 to 8 |
| Total funding | Up to £150,000 per award | £1 million to £2 million |
| Duration of awards | 12 months | Three years |
Programme objectives
The Challenge Clusters funding opportunity was funded through the GCRF which formed part of the UK government’s ODA commitment and for which UKRI was a significant delivery partner. The GCRF was a five-year £1.5 billion fund which sought to tackle global challenges in the national interest and ensuring that UK research takes a leading role in addressing the problems faced by developing countries.
It aimed to do this through supporting challenge-led disciplinary and interdisciplinary research, strengthening capacity for research and innovation within both the UK and developing countries and providing an agile response to emergencies where there is an urgent research need.
Challenge Clusters was part of the Collective Programme under the UKRI GCRF Collective Fund, which was a series of funding opportunities that were designed to enhance the coherence, strategic focus and overall impact across the six GCRF Challenge Portfolios in alignment with the UN Sustainable Development Goals:
- cities and sustainable infrastructure
- education
- food systems
- global health
- resilience to environmental shocks and change
- security, protracted conflict, refugee crises and forced displacement
The programme was delivered by the UKRI International Team and steered by the GCRF Challenge Leaders who were appointed to direct the Challenge Portfolios. Proposals had to include at least two existing GCRF projects to form a Cluster, build on existing successful GCRF partnerships and research outputs, and be led by a former or current UKRI GCRF grant holder.
The programme was intended to be split into two stages, with Stage One focused on synthesis of research findings and developing new insights, supporting the use of evidence in decision-making or the application of best practice. These insights and synthesis would then be used to assist the development of research agendas and applications for Stage Two, with six to eight projects successfully receiving funding to undertake their full projects as part of this second stage.
Intended outcomes and impact
The strategic aims of the GCRF Challenge Cluster funding opportunity were to:
- stimulate and support the coherent clustering of GCRF and non-GCRF projects and actors to achieve greater impact
- address development challenges within, between and beyond the GCRF challenge portfolios
- identify research gaps which are barriers to achieving impact against challenges
- develop and strengthen equitable international academic, policy and industrial partnerships and continue to build capacity in the development landscape both in low and middle-income countries and in the UK
Another important aspect of the GCRF was capacity building and applicants were encouraged to identify research capacity building activities as part of their research approach. Another key pillar of the GCRF is partnerships and applicants were also required to ensure that projects focused on the development of equitable partnerships as part of their application.
Summary of internal programme delivery
The application deadline for Stage One proposals for the Challenge Clusters funding opportunity was September 2019 with the aim for successful projects to commence in April 2020. Applications were submitted through the Joint Electronic Submission (Je-S) System and the funding opportunity was hosted by EPSRC for administrative purposes. A total of 40 proposals were received which is a comparatively low number compared to other similar funding opportunities, however this is likely to be due to the eligibility criteria stating that applications were required to be based off existing GCRF awards.
The application consisted of completion of the standard Je-S form with the required supplementary documents included as attachments: Case for Support, Justification of Resources, ODA Compliance Statement, Data management plan, Gender Equality Statement, CVs for principle investigators and co-investigators, Pathways to Impact and Letters of Support is applicable.
Applications went through an external peer review process in early 2020, before going on to be considered by a specially convened panel of experts drawn from academic work, business, and charities.
Applications were assessed against the following criteria at both stages.
Excellence
A: credibility of the challenge identified, including the interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral considerations
B: potential of the identified projects and partners to leverage research findings to address the identified challenge
C: clarity and pertinence of the objectives for the proposed research
D: extent that the proposed programme is ambitious and has clear innovation potential
Impact
A: extent to which it is challenge-led and impact-focused, generating excellent and novel research and translating this into measurable real-world outcomes
B: clarity of vision and integrated plan for the translation of the proposed research into measurable international development impact
C: potential to deliver impact and scalable solutions at the local, national and international level
D: developing a sustainable programme that has a legacy beyond the initial investment, with potential to leverage further support from development agencies, as well as financial or in-kind contributions including from ROs and the private sector
Implementation
A: coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks, resources and budget
B: competence and complementarity of the participants within the cluster of projects
C: adequate participation of the relevant policymaking bodies, NGOs, ROs, industry, business, and research institutes
D: appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management
The panel scored proposals based on the assessment criteria in order to rank them, which was followed by the UKRI Executive approving funding for the top 21 proposals based on recommendations.
Reporting requirements
To minimise the burden on grant holders, the reporting requirements for the Challenge Clusters were intended to be as light-touch as possible. One Monitoring Evaluation and Learning (MEL) progress report was required from grant holders within three months of their Stage One award coming to an end.
Grant holders were provided with a reporting template to complete in the following format:
- introduction: a brief explanation about the project and purpose of the report
- final Theory of Change: a diagrammatic and narrative Theory of Change including results chain, assumptions, risks and mitigation measures and stakeholder mapping
- stakeholder engagement and equitable partnerships: explaining the types of stakeholders engaged and partnerships formed, the level of engagement with them and the importance of each stakeholder to achieving project objectives
- project progress: explanation of the progress of the project against outcomes, outputs or workstreams, including any changes to project plan alongside the reason and impact of the change and any risks faced and mitigation measures taken
- conclusion: the final narrative section of the document summarising the key findings from the report and any recommendations to UKRI for designing future projects
- annexures (optional): space to provide any relevant images, success stories and communication materials relating to their award
Successful applicants were also required to report research outcomes online via the Researchfish system, in line with the standard UKRI Terms and Conditions. In addition to the standard reporting outcomes all grant holders were required to complete sections under the ‘GCRF Collective Fund’ outcomes to gain further insight into this particular funding mechanism. Analysis of the research outcomes data for the Challenge Clusters programme can be found within the ‘project-level findings’ section below.
Background and context to programme
For Stage One of the Challenge Clusters Programme, 21 grants were funded at a total of £2.8 million. The projects started between April and June 2020 and were intended to have a duration of 12 months. However, due to disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, several grant holders requested and received no cost extensions to allow them additional time to complete the work originally set out as part of their objectives, with the final award coming to an end in May 2022.
Remit of successful projects
The GCRF Challenge Clusters programme was funded through Official Development Assistance (ODA), which meant that proposals were required to have at least one primary beneficiary country on the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) list to be eligible for ODA funding.
ODA compliance statements were also a compulsory part of the application process. Proposals could be led by any current or former GCRF grant holder based in the UK or abroad, based in a research organisation (RO), who was named as either a principal investigator or co-investigator across UKRI-funded GCRF projects. Co-investigators could be based anywhere in the world.
Challenge Clusters projects had to focus on the six global strategic challenge portfolios. The primary challenge areas for the 21 successful projects were:
- global health: six awards
- food systems: six awards
- education: three awards
- security, protracted conflict, refugee crises and forced displacement: three awards
- resilience to environmental shocks and change: two awards
- cities and sustainable infrastructure: one award
The challenge portfolios encouraged joint thinking and research across the areas meaning many projects had a wider focus spanning multiple areas including the three main GCRF themes (Equitable access to sustainable development, Sustainable economies and societies, Human rights, good governance and social justice).
ODA budget reductions by UK government and changes to programme outcomes
As outlined, the intention of the Challenge Clusters programme was for successful Stage One applicants to apply for and receive funding to go on and complete their full research grants, with between six to eight going on to receive up to £19 million available over three years.
In February 2021, the UK government took the decision to reduce its ODA budget from 0.7% to 0.5% of Gross National Income (GNI). The ensuing ODA Review resulted in an overall cut of around 70% in all planned UKRI ODA expenditure for the financial year 2021 to 2022.
The GCRF and Newton Fund portfolio of awards were subsequently affected by the reduction which resulted in a decrease of £3.8 million funding from the programme. The budget available to the Challenge Clusters programme was affected and resulted in the cancellation of Stage Two, meaning that there was no funding available for grant holders to develop research findings into full research grants.
The internal UKRI ODA Review completed in July 2022 documents the key findings from surveys of grant holders undertaken by UKRI to better understand the wider consequences of the 2021 ODA budget cuts at project level.
International context
Challenge Clusters projects had a wide reach across a range of ODA countries in Africa, South America and Asia.
African countries included:
- Eswatini
- Ethiopia
- Kenya
- Lesotho
- Malawi
- Nigeria
- Rwanda
- Tanzania
- Uganda
- Zambia
- Zimbabwe
Some projects focused on specific countries, while others had a wider reach in several countries and regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa.
Countries of operation in Asia included:
- Bangladesh
- Cambodia
- India
- Kazakhstan
- Lebanon
- Mongolia
- Nepal
- Pakistan
- Sri Lanka
- Vietnam
- Uzbekistan
Countries in Latin America included:
- Colombia
- Ecuador
- Guatemala
- Mexico
In Eastern Europe the programme included Belarus.
Project-level findings
Note: findings captured throughout this section are those highlighted to UKRI through project reporting from grant holders.
Challenges, barriers or significant external changes faced at project level
Challenge Clusters awards were impacted by the global COVID-19 Pandemic which subsequently changed what was possible for grant holders to achieve and contributed to some projects being unable to deliver against their original objectives.
One of the biggest challenges that impacted awards were global travel restrictions and lockdowns. These measures meant that it was not possible to travel or to conduct regional fieldwork, meaning original projects plans were required to be amended and work was adapted so that it could be conducted remotely.
In most cases this was an effective way to continue project work and to engage with stakeholders, however, other grant holders felt that the level of engagement and collaboration was negatively affected by this context, and not being able to connect with collaborators in person was difficult.
Remote working also came with further challenges, with examples provided including issues with time differences and internet connectivity. Although travel restrictions affected project progress, in some cases grant holders were able to repurpose funds that would have been spent on travel expenses, in order to progress other aspects of projects which were led by in-country partners.
Other external factors that were reported as impacting projects progress included social unrest in Columbia and political upheaval in Myanmar and Nepal.
Grant holders expressed that another key challenge was the short timescale between the funding opportunity opening and closing for applications. Proposals were expected to be ambitious, however, some applicants felt that two months did not allow much time for meaningful partnerships to be developed, and that having a longer lead time may have resulted in project objectives being more ambitious.
Additional time to prepare would have also allowed for the Clusters to better understand the different contexts and disciplines of the other projects within their Cluster, allowing for the Clusters to make progress more quickly upon receiving funding.
Significant changes and risks faced at project level
One of the most significant risks faced at project level was the ODA budget reduction in February 2021, which subsequently meant that awards received less funding initially and that Stage Two of the Challenge Clusters Programme was unable to go ahead. For many projects, the main deliverable for Stage One of the programme was the development of a proposal for Stage Two, so the removal of Stage Two made it significantly challenging to measure the success of initial progress made.
One report stated that despite the ODA budget reductions, their project had still been able to make progress and generate some useful outputs. However, without Stage Two they would not be able to immediately apply these outputs to further research without seeking alternative funding sources, which would ultimately delay and inhibit outcomes and any impacts.
Some clusters had included flexible funding in their original project plans, which meant that they were able to be more agile when responding to the challenges posed by both the budget reductions and the pandemic. Whereas other projects had included specific funding plans, which meant they were less well positioned to be able to repurpose funds and amend the direction of their research progress.
An example provided describes how the UK co-investigators within the cluster reduced their budgets to ensure that their overseas African colleagues could be retained, which was made possible through receiving financial support from their UK organisations.
Another example describes the approach they took towards managing the ODA budget reductions, through making the decision to ringfence funding for international partners and absorb the reductions in UK budgets.
Project continuation and sustainability (beyond completion date)
Although the cancellation of Stage Two had the potential to impact the sustainability of the Challenge Clusters, project reporting demonstrates that several awards have been successful in receiving additional funding which has enabled them to continue with their research.
One project went on to secure funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), part of UKRI, to embed a smaller project that was part of their Challenge Cluster and to develop the findings from the later stages of their research.
Another received further funding through Horizon Europe, stating that the Challenge Cluster project was a key catalyst in bringing together new partners that are going on to collaborate on this newly developed project.
Another reported that they had received additional funding through the UKRI GCRF and Newton Fund Consolidation Accounts (GNCA) ODA allocation, which had enabled them to continue working on their project.
While other awards had not secured funding at the time of submitting reporting to UKRI, several cited actively exploring available funding opportunities to allow them to develop their findings into a full proposal, as initially planned. One report stated that although the project had not met all its intended objectives, the team had a strong commitment to continuing to publish research findings and to work with different policy and third sector organisations. Another report demonstrated how the project team had continued to collaborate and engage following the completion of their project and had actively discussed ways of moving their work forward, for example, identifying suitable funding opportunities.
These are positive examples of project continuation which have, in most cases, been made possible due to the commitment of project staff. Although the programme has now ended, in most cases the concepts, collaborations and partnerships developed will continue through the synthesis of ideas which are continuously evolving.
Analysis of research outcomes reporting (via Researchfish)
Researchfish gathers information on project outcomes that that have been generated through funding provided by UKRI. This allows us to reflect on the success of each project by measuring the number of various outputs and outcomes produced, and use of those outputs by other individuals, organisations or projects.
The narrative around these outcomes and outputs is a useful source of information which allows us to understand how, and to what extent, projects are progressing towards achieving their initial aims. It also provides us with wider knowledge on how successful UKRI’s programmes have been, enables analysis of the outcomes and impacts of research across the wider community and supports us to identify stories of impact to promote our achievements.
The short-term nature of the Challenge Clusters programme has led to only three years’ worth of output data being currently available. However, this still provides a useful overview of the progress made to date. Grant holders will also continue to report via Researchfish for a five-year period following the end date of their projects, which will provide a continued insight into further progress and early impacts.
Researchfish requires grant holders to record common outcome types which cover outputs (such as publications, exhibitions, new research tools or method) and outcomes (such as new or improved products, processes or public policies). Out of the 21 Challenge Clusters awards, an average of 95.82% of grant holders have reported research outcomes to UKRI. Table 2 shows the total outcomes reported against each common outcome, from when the awards commenced in 2020, up until the most recent reporting period in March 2023.
| Outcome type | Number of outcomes | Number of awards |
|---|---|---|
| Publications | 94 | 19 |
| Software and technical products | 3 | 3 |
| Further funding | 25 | 8 |
| Collaborations and partnerships | 140 | 16 |
| Engagement activities | 174 | 21 |
| Influence on policy, practice, patients and the public | 18 | 6 |
| Other outputs | 29 | 10 |
| Total | 483 |
There have been 140 collaborations and partnerships recorded, and data shows that many of the partnerships involved within the Challenge Cluster projects were already well established before the programme (with the earliest starting in 2009) and will therefore most likely continue following the conclusion of the projects. This shows the importance of pre-existing partnerships which rely on strong working relationships, particularly where there are short or urgent time frames.
However, this does also highlight a potential need for more opportunities for researchers to develop new, more wide-ranging partnerships and networks going forward, and work on these in preparation for potential funding opportunities and collaborations.
These collaborations and partnerships have been established across 103 different organisations from across the world including universities, hospitals, charities, businesses, and NGOs. This demonstrates that projects have broadly made good progress in strengthening existing, and developing new, equitable international partnerships. Many of these are multidisciplinary with the inclusion of a selection of stakeholders within these, including academics, policymakers and healthcare practitioners.
A total of 174 engagement activities have been recorded under a variety of outcome subtypes, including participation in workshops, talks and presentations, press releases, engagement-focused websites and blogs, which have had varying levels of impact. It is positive to see that all 21 awards have reported against this outcome type, demonstrating how the projects have engaged with a variety of different audiences to share research findings, engage stakeholders, and encourage collaboration.
To date, six projects have reported a total of 18 outputs under ‘influence on policy, practice, patients and the public’, including the contribution to new or improved professional practice, influence of training of practitioners and researchers and membership of guideline committees.
It is positive to see that although Stage One was focused mainly on the synthesis of research findings, some projects have made progress towards the development of new practices and materials, which have had an impact on target groups. These activities provide valuable evidence which can then be utilised more widely to further influence policy change.
Case studies and stories of impact
As part of reporting, grant holders provided any success stories, images and communication materials which demonstrate early impacts. We have highlighted some of these examples of impact.
Scaling up biocontrol innovations in Africa
The team developed a mobile phone application that was made available to download and use as a source of information for farmers who have not previously practiced biocontrol approaches before.
The application provides guidance for crop biocontrol technology and advice to farmers about how to set up push-pull technology, which provides biocontrol against crop pests, and information about how and where to source materials.
As of 2021, the application had 793 active users across Africa countries including Uganda, Kenya, Malawi, Rwanda, Zimbabwe and Nigeria as well as users from countries outside of Africa including Bangladesh, South Korea, Uzbekistan and Italy.
Circular Plastic: utilising frontier technology and user-centred design to add value to plastic waste, facilitating entrepreneurship and employment
This project developed a network of researchers and NGOs to take plastic waste and turn it into filament for 3D printing to create new products to meet local needs.
Two hubs were created in Nigeria and Rwanda which supported the existing hub in Kenya. Each of these hubs tested the process of creating new products through 3D printing and developed an understanding of local plastic waste management through a mapping exercise.
It was concluded that there is a realistic opportunity to create valuable products from the waste which resulted in the development of six case study products:
- Custom Fruit Picker
- Boat Bailer
- Milk Cooler
- Cassava Peeler
- Modular Fishing
- Sand Dredging Bucket Adaptor
These products were designed to meet local needs in Kenya, Rwanda and Nigeria, and the designs were informed by design workshops, product testing and manufacturing in respective countries.
The project and the six product designs were awarded a Silver International Design Excellence Award from the Industrial Design Society of America.
Challenge Cluster for post-TB lung health in children in sub-Sahara Africa
The findings from this award have increased the awareness about post-TB (tuberculosis) disability among policymakers in the national TB programs of the Ministries of Health in West Africa, and among various TB survivor and advocacy organisations who participated in multi-country participatory workshop.
Policymakers have emphasised the need for research data to support including post-TB disability in their agenda. The project also successfully developed the capacity and confidence of healthcare workers from several West African countries in performing lung function measurement in children. This was achieved through a novel online training followed by intensive in-person paediatric spirometry training.
Recommendations and learning
Grant holders were asked as part of their conclusions to provide recommendations to UKRI in relation to any aspect of the programme which may be useful for future projects of a similar nature, for example to highlight challenges, areas for improvement and share ideas as to how these could be mitigated for future funding opportunities.
The feedback and recommendations received by Challenge Clusters grant holders was varied and provided important insight into many aspects of the programme, which will support UKRI to embed learning in the design and delivery of future programmes.
One report stated that all members of their cluster benefitted from the additional learnings and insights gained from the ability to make cross-country comparisons and share relevant experiences. The creation of clusters research groups addressing similar challenges in different countries made direct comparisons possible, and generated greater confidence in the relevance of conclusions from the individual research projects. This also strengthened the credibility and relevance of the research evidence for national policymakers.
Other learnings from the Clusters approach state how academic exchanges generated new ideas, led to the compilation of new evidence, and identified new avenues for future research. In some instances, new international partnerships were formed, including new collaborations between early-career researchers from different countries in the Global South.
Creating trusted relationships is critical to success when working with marginalised communities, and it was recognised that the development of partnerships takes time, resources and expertise, which is particularly important when working across different cultural and economic contexts.
One recommendation provided was for funders, researchers, and institutions to address the resourcing of partnership and network development, and provide more time and opportunity for this to take place.
In relation to the ODA budget reductions, one report highlighted how working collaboratively with partners in insecure, low economic or conflict-affected contexts, requires trust-building and time to gauge a good understanding of the working environment.
Many partners in ODA-recipient countries were directly, detrimentally affected by the ODA budget reductions, which made strengthening partnerships and rebuilding trust challenging. For future funding opportunities it is imperative for funders to commit to agreed funding streams for the lifetime of projects, and set out the conditions of funding clearly to ensure that they are not altered while projects are underway.
As well as providing feedback through project reporting, the UKRI International Funds Team who coordinated the programme held a workshop with grant holders in February 2022 following the completion of the programme. Some key points raised in relation to the Challenge Cluster model include how researchers felt it was difficult to identify and engage new partners across different discipline areas and sectors despite them working on the same theme or challenge.
Some principal investigators also found that due to geographical context, scale, and disciplinary breadth of the Cluster a lot of time was spent learning about the component projects, their context and approach.
Other feedback mentioned how organisation of the Cluster was time consuming and more difficult than originally envisaged, and a recommendation was that each Cluster could have benefited from a project manager or coordinator. This feedback specific to the Challenge Clusters model is beneficial to UKRI and provides first-hand experience from grant holders on how successful the approach was, and points to consider if a similar programme were to be developed in the future with an aim to accelerate impact of projects.
Feedback also highlighted how funding schemes like the GCRF are essential for promoting and supporting international collaboration and provided a recommendation to ensure that future funding opportunities are made available, to build on the significant progress made in short-term projects such as the Challenge Clusters. This is valuable feedback for UKRI to consider, especially as the GCRF comes to an end and new funds, such as the International Science Partnerships Fund (ISPF), are being developed to provide opportunities for continued international collaboration and research and innovation.