Funded International Research Placements 2026: Get £2,500 per Month Plus Travel Support with the UKRI International Placement Scheme

If your research depends on rare archives, museum collections, or cultural institutions abroad, this is the sort of funding that moves a project from an idea scribbled on a café napkin to serious, on-site work. The UKRI International Placement Scheme 2026 pays you to go and work inside major institutions — think the Library of Congress in Washington, the Smithsonian, or Japan’s National Institutes for the Humanities — with travel support and monthly living payments. It’s short, focused, and designed to give PhD researchers and early career scholars time and resources to do what only an overseas placement can achieve.

This article is written for people who want to apply and actually win. Read on for a clear breakdown of what the scheme provides, who can apply, how reviewers judge proposals, and a practical plan you can follow so your application doesn’t read like a wish list but like a promise with a schedule.

At a Glance

Why this placement matters (and when it’s worth applying)

Not every project benefits from travel. Some studies can be done from afar with digitised sources; others require physical proximity to fragile manuscripts, institutional expertise, or local cultural practice. This scheme is tailored to the latter. Picture needing to examine a single archive box that contains the only known drafts of a poet’s unpublished work, or a rehearsal room where a director will let you observe and record modern theatre practices — these are moments that change the research question and produce material you can’t create in your office.

The funding model is bluntly practical. £2,500 per month covers living costs for many locations for the short-term residencies this scheme supports. The travel and visa top-up — £1,200 for Japan and China, £1,000 elsewhere — acknowledges the extra logistical costs of going overseas. You can apply for placements lasting between two and six months; that window forces you to be intentional. Two months is enough for focused archival work or a short field-study; six months allows for building relationships, conducting iterative interviews, or installing a small public-facing project with a museum partner.

Beyond cash, the real value is institutional access and reputational capital. A placement hosted by a recognized centre like the Library of Congress or the Smithsonian can open doors for future grants, joint publications, and curated exhibitions. It’s also an opportunity to practise international collaboration — learning how another institution works, what they count as evidence, and how they present their collections to audiences.

What this opportunity offers (detailed)

This scheme pays you to be at a host institution and to produce a clearly defined piece of work during that time. The financial package has two parts: a monthly living payment of £2,500 and a travel/visa contribution — £1,000 in most cases, and £1,200 where travel costs are typically higher (Japan and China). You may request funding for a placement between two and six months long. So, at the maximum six-month duration, you’re looking at £15,000 in living support plus £1,200 travel for Japan and China, or £1,000 elsewhere.

Money isn’t the only offering. Hosts often provide workspace, curatorial or librarian access, and sometimes mentoring or small project support (for instance, access to digitisation resources or permission to present preliminary findings to their staff). The scheme is explicitly about research placements in cultural institutions, which means your time should be spent engaging with materials, staff, exhibitions, or practices at the host. That could mean research using primary collections, collaborative project development with curators, or fieldwork embedded in institutional programs.

Make no mistake: reviewers expect a tight match between your stated aims and what the host can actually provide. If you plan to consult an uncatalogued collection, get a letter from the host confirming access. If you’ll run pilot workshops, ask the museum how many participants you can reach. Concrete institutional buy-in is the currency reviewers trust.

Who should apply (real-world examples)

This scheme is for two groups: PhD students funded by AHRC or ESRC, and early career researchers based at UK institutions eligible for UKRI funding. That eligibility gate is strict. If your PhD is funded by a different body, or your university isn’t eligible for UKRI awards, you won’t qualify.

Who fits practically? Consider three scenarios.

1. A second-year AHRC-funded doctoral candidate studying British theatre who needs to observe rehearsal and archive production records at the Shanghai Theatre Academy. A two- or three-month placement lets them gather primary sources and conduct interviews with directors and performers.

2. An early career researcher at a UK university whose project examines the visual culture of 19th-century transatlantic exchange. A three-month placement at the Yale Center for British Art or the Huntington Library would offer access to collections and curatorial expertise not available remotely.

3. A researcher working on Indigenous material in US-based collections who needs to consult restricted primary sources at the Library of Congress and discuss repatriation protocols with curators.

In each case, success depends on aligning your aims with the host’s strengths and showing why in-person time is essential. The scheme is not designed for generalized travel or attendance at a conference; it funds placements with a clear research output or demonstrable development benefit to the applicant.

Insider tips for a winning application (practical, actionable)

A strong application reads less like a hope list and more like a project with a timeline, milestones, and institutional partners. Here are seven focused tips that reviewers actually value.

1. Secure a specific host contact before you submit. Generic support letters from an institution’s enquiries email don’t help. Ask for a named person — a curator, head of research, or collections manager — to confirm access, proposed supervision, and any additional in-kind support. A concrete letter reduces reviewer anxiety about feasibility.

2. Use the months wisely. Break your placement into weekly milestones. If you’re at a library, list specific collections and the estimated time needed per item. If you plan interviews, provide a schedule and sample questionnaire. Show what success looks like at two months vs six months.

3. Justify the budget with evidence. Travel money is modest; don’t pad it. Explain why you need two, three, or six months and how that time translates into outputs — a paper, dataset, exhibition proposal, or digital catalogue. Demonstrate cost-consciousness: economy flights, modest accommodation, local transport.

4. Prepare a short dissemination plan. Funders care about impact. Will you present at a departmental seminar? Publish an article? Produce digital images for an open repository? Even a blog post and a talk to host staff signal that the placement has value beyond the applicant.

5. Address ethics and permissions up front. If your research involves human participants, culturally sensitive material, or restricted collections, say how you’ll get approvals and how you’ll handle data and access restrictions. Reviewers treat ethics as a feasibility issue.

6. Show institutional backing at home. A short letter from your UK supervisor or department confirming leave, overhead arrangements, and institutional support adds credibility. It demonstrates you’re not a solo traveller but part of a supported research programme.

7. Get feedback outside your field. Ask someone unfamiliar with your subfield to read the impact statement. If they understand why the placement matters, the reviewers will too. Clarity beats jargon every time.

These tips are small investments that improve the perception of feasibility and impact — two of the main axes reviewers use when deciding who to fund.

Application timeline (work backward from 19 March 2026)

Start early. The deadline is 19 March 2026 at 16:00 UK time. Because you’ll need host engagement and institutional sign-off, aim to start preparation at least ten weeks before the deadline.

• 10–12 weeks before deadline (late January 2026): Identify potential hosts and initiate contact. Tell them the placement window you’re targeting and ask who will write your host letter.
• 8–10 weeks before (early February): Draft your project description, timeline, and risk/ethical plan. Ask your supervisor and at least two colleagues to review.
• 6–8 weeks before (mid–late February): Receive the host letter and institutional letter. Finalise your budget and travel estimates. If you need visa letters from the host, request them now — some institutions require time to draft them.
• 3–4 weeks before (late February to early March): Circulate the near-final application for proofing. Ensure all uploads meet file-size limits and format requirements.
• 48–72 hours before the deadline: Submit early. Systems can glitch. Submit at least two days ahead to avoid last-minute panics.

If you intend to travel to Japan or China, add extra weeks for visa processing. Some visas take well over a month, and hosts may need to provide documentation. Plan conservatively.

Required materials and how to prepare them

The scheme’s application typically asks for project details, institutional letters, CVs, and a budget. Think of each document as a small argument. Don’t hand in a generic CV; tailor it to demonstrate relevant experience accessing archives, conducting fieldwork, or working with cultural institutions.

Essential documents you should prepare:

• A concise project plan (2–3 pages) that explains aims, methods, timeline, and outputs. Use subheadings and a short paragraph explaining why in-person access is necessary.
• A detailed monthly plan or Gantt chart showing activities for each month.
• A letter of support from the host institution, signed by a named staff member and outlining access and support.
• A supervisor or departmental letter confirming your status, institutional backing, and leave arrangements.
• A CV (2 pages for early career; 3–4 for more experienced applicants) focused on relevant experience and outputs.
• A budget and justification showing how travel and living costs were estimated.
• A short ethics statement and, if applicable, evidence of any required permissions.
• Outputs and dissemination plan: state what you will produce and how you’ll share it.

When drafting the host letter, give the host a template or bullet points so they know what to include: confirmation of access, workspace, named supervisor, any digitisation support, and an estimated number of staff hours of engagement.

What makes an application stand out (how reviewers evaluate)

Reviewers look for three things: clarity of purpose, feasibility, and value. Clarity means your proposal reads like a sequence of logical steps: what you’ll do, why you need to do it in person, and what you’ll produce. Feasibility means the time requested aligns with the work plan and the host confirms access. Value means the placement will produce a measurable advance for your research or career.

Review panels often prioritise projects where the host’s strengths and the applicant’s aims form a tight overlap. If you say you need to study the Huntington’s rare book bindings, reviewers will check that the Huntington actually holds those materials and that the host letter promises access. They’ll also look at whether the proposed outputs (a dataset, article, exhibition plan) are realistic for the placement length.

Finally, panels like to see potential for continued collaboration: will the placement lead to follow-on projects, joint outputs, or strengthened networks? Mention these possibilities, but back them up with concrete steps — for example, “we will draft a collaborative article and a grant proposal for follow-on funding within six months of the placement.”

Common mistakes to avoid (and how to fix them)

Many applications fail not because the idea is weak but because they ignore practical details. Here are common pitfalls and how to avoid them.

• Missing or vague host letters. Fix: Obtain a letter from a named staff member that specifies access and support. Give hosts a draft to edit.
• Over-ambitious timelines. Fix: Break your plan into clear weekly tasks and be conservative about what you can do in 2–6 months.
• Budget inflation. Fix: Be realistic. Show evidence for flight costs and local living expenses. Don’t assume the fund will cover family travel or long-term relocation.
• Ignoring visa timelines. Fix: Check processing times immediately and request any host documentation early.
• Weak dissemination plans. Fix: Specify two or three concrete outputs and dates for completion.
• Ethical or permissions issues left unaddressed. Fix: Include a short ethics statement and a plan for permissions and data handling.

Addressing these issues before submission turns potential red flags into strengths.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Can I apply if my PhD is funded by a body other than AHRC or ESRC? A: No. The scheme specifies eligibility for PhD students funded by AHRC or ESRC or early career researchers based at institutions eligible for UKRI funding.

Q: Can the host institution receive any of the funds? A: The funding is to support the applicant’s placement costs. Hosts may provide in-kind support (workspace, staff time) but the award pays travel and monthly living fees to the applicant.

Q: What counts as an early career researcher? A: Definitions vary, but generally researchers who have completed a doctoral degree recently and who are not yet established senior academics. Check the full guidance for precise eligibility based on years since award.

Q: Can I split the placement across two hosts or trips? A: The scheme is intended for a single placement period at a host. Check the guidance if you plan multiple short visits — they may not be admissible.

Q: What if I need more than six months? A: The window is 2–6 months. If your project needs longer residency, consider other funding sources or phase your work into separate grants.

Q: Will I get feedback if I’m not funded? A: Applicants usually receive panel comments. Use them to strengthen a future application.

Next steps and how to apply

If this sounds like the right fit, start now. Reach out to your proposed host, discuss exact dates, and request a named letter of support. Talk to your supervisor and your institution’s research office to confirm eligibility and any internal deadlines they require. Draft a focused project plan with weekly milestones and a realistic budget that uses the travel and monthly allowances the scheme provides.

Ready to apply? Visit the official opportunity page for full guidance, application forms, and contact emails for each host. That page also lists the precise eligibility rules, the application portal, and any updates to deadlines or contacts.

How to Apply

Ready to apply? Visit the official opportunity page: https://www.ukri.org/opportunity/international-placement-scheme-2026/

If you have questions about eligibility or need clarification before contacting a host, the opportunity page lists the relevant UKRI and AHRC contacts and host institution emails. Contact them early — a quick email to confirm potential access will save weeks of uncertainty.

Good luck. Travel well, plan tightly, and make sure the placement you propose will produce something you can point to later — a dataset, an article, a curated display, or a new collaborative grant — not just memories and photographs.