Public Engagement Grants 2026: Nucleus Public Engagement Awards to Fund Up to £125,000 for STFC Science Outreach

If you run or work for a UK organisation that wants to connect people with the big, noisy, beautiful work supported by the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), this is one of those rare funding calls that pays you to do the public-facing work properly. The Nucleus Public Engagement Awards 2026 exist to help organisations create meaningful engagement with STFC-supported science and to build lasting engagement capacity inside STFC communities. That means money for events, community partnerships, training, evaluation — and, critically, the time to do these things well.

Think beyond the one-off show or flashy demo. STFC wants projects that have clear links to its funded remit and include subject-matter expertise in STFC-funded areas. The awards are sized to support ambitious, sustained projects: between 24 and 36 months, with up to £125,000 at full economic cost (FEC) for TRAC organisations (STFC will fund 80% of FEC), or up to £100,000 at 100% funding for non-TRAC organisations. That’s enough to pay staff, commission partners, invest in evaluation, and deliver outputs that last.

This guide walks you through what the award covers, who should apply, how to craft an application reviewers will remember, and a practical timeline to get your submission in by the deadline: 16:00 UK time on 31 March 2026. Read on for concrete examples, budgeting tips, evaluation ideas, and a checklist to make sure you don’t trip over avoidable mistakes.

At a Glance

What This Opportunity Offers

The Nucleus awards are not small stipends for one-off activities. They fund multi-year programmes designed to increase public understanding of, interest in, or the capacity for public engagement with STFC-funded science. That means you can plan a coherent programme: multiple events, development of resources, training for researchers, and rigorous evaluation. Where many small pots of money require a scattergun approach, Nucleus expects a thoughtful programme that builds over time.

Funding supports staffing costs (project leads, engagement officers, part-time producers), participant costs (honoraria for community partners, travel subsidies), production costs (equipment, venue hire, materials), and evaluation. If you are a TRAC-eligible organisation — typically universities and designated research bodies with TRAC accounting — you can cost the full economic cost up to £125,000 and STFC will pay 80% of that. If you are a non-TRAC organisation (for example, many charities or community groups), STFC will fund 100% of eligible costs up to £100,000. That difference matters for budget planning: non-TRAC applicants should be careful about scale, and TRAC applicants need to plan for the 20% co-funding required.

Beyond money, awardees gain visibility through STFC channels, opportunities to network with STFC community members, and the legitimacy that comes from being an STFC-funded engagement programme. If your project includes capacity-building — training researchers, embedding engagement practice — the awards are particularly well-suited.

Who Should Apply

This call is for UK-based organisations with audited accounts that can demonstrate a strong, explicit connection to STFC-funded science. That connection must be more than name-checking a facility — your proposal should clearly demonstrate how the subject-matter expert’s work sits within STFC-funded remit areas (particle physics, astronomy, space science, accelerator science, facility-based research, and similar domains).

Universities, research institutes, museums, science centres, registered charities, and community organisations can apply, provided they meet the audited accounts requirement. If you are a small community group without audited accounts, partner with an organisation that does — that partnership can be the route to eligibility.

Real-world examples of good fits:

• A university public engagement team partnering with an STFC-funded research group to co-design a 30-month programme of workshops, school visits, and a regional touring exhibition about particle detectors.
• A science museum proposing a two-year programme to build researcher capability across several STFC facilities, with training, peer-to-peer mentoring, and a public-facing event series.
• A charity working with an STFC subject expert to co-create digital resources and community-focused outreach activities that reach underserved audiences over three years.

If your organisation wants short-term promotion or a single event, this may be more funding than you need. The award rewards programmes that plan for growth, evaluation, and sustainability.

Funding and Budget Details

Understand the TRAC vs non-TRAC distinction early. TRAC organisations cost projects at full economic cost — that includes direct project costs and an apportioned share of institutional indirect costs. STFC will fund 80% of FEC up to £125,000. Non-TRAC organisations are funded at 100% but the cap is £100,000.

Budget smartly:

• Allocate a clear proportion to evaluation (5–15% of total budget). Strong evaluation is central to these awards.
• Include realistic personnel costs. Funded projects often struggle because they under-resource delivery roles.
• Allow for travel, accessible venue hire, participant expenses (childcare, travel subsidies), and contingencies.
• For TRAC applicants, work with your finance office early to calculate FEC and the institutional contribution.
• If you expect to need equipment beyond a modest amount (e.g., filming kit or specialist display hardware), justify it and show plans for reuse after the project ends.

STFC judges value cost-effectiveness. Your budget should tell the same story as your narrative: if you promise wide reach, the costs should support that claim.

Project Duration and Planning

Projects must run between 24 and 36 months. That’s long enough to pilot approaches, scale what works, and measure impact. Treat the time like stages in a story: setup, delivery, consolidation/evaluation.

A typical 30-month structure might look like:

• Months 1–6: Co-design and recruitment (establish partnerships, refine plans with community stakeholders, hire staff).
• Months 7–24: Delivery phase (events, training, content creation, rolling evaluation).
• Months 25–30: Consolidation and dissemination (final evaluation, handover of resources, sustainability planning).

Plan milestones that are measurable: number of workshops delivered, participants trained, evaluation reports completed, resources published. Funders prefer clear, time-bound markers.

Insider Tips for a Winning Application

1. Embed the subject-matter expert early and plainly. Don’t leave the expert as an afterthought. Their role should be described in concrete terms: how they will support content design, public-facing sessions, training, and quality assurance. Include a concise CV showing STFC-funded experience.

2. Prioritise co-design with communities. Applications that show activities were developed with the target audience — not for them — score higher. Co-design looks like advisory boards, pilot sessions, or community partner letters that describe specific contributions.

3. Make evaluation central, not optional. Describe what success means in measurable terms (e.g., “increase reported science confidence in participants by X% as measured by Y survey tool”). Combine quantitative (attendance figures, demographics) and qualitative (participant stories, case studies) evidence. Use established frameworks where possible (outcomes mapping, Most Significant Change) and explain your data collection methods clearly.

4. Be explicit about inclusion and access. Where will you recruit participants? How will you remove barriers (transport support, accessible venues, translation, timed sessions for sensory needs)? Name the partners who can help reach underrepresented groups.

5. Demonstrate sustainability beyond the award. Reviewers want to see how the work continues after funding ends: will resources be open access, will trained staff be embedded into institutional roles, are partnerships likely to continue? A simple sustainability plan with three viable pathways (institutional adoption, earned income, partner continuation) strengthens your case.

6. Budget to show responsibility. If your ask is the maximum, explain why. Show phased spending that aligns with milestones and be realistic about personnel costs — projects fail when they are under-staffed.

7. Write for non-specialists in the review panel. Explain the STFC link plainly and avoid jargon. Use an early “what this project will actually do” paragraph with short, concrete examples.

Put bluntly: show that you’ve thought through the messy bits — travel budgets, safeguarding, data protection, contingency plans. Reviewers are risk-averse; reduce their worry.

Required Materials

The application will require a full project description, budget with justification, CVs for key personnel (including the STFC subject expert), and evidence of organisational financial probity (audited accounts). You’ll likely need letters of support or collaboration confirming access to facilities, community partners, or venue commitments.

Prepare these items early:

• Project narrative (clear aims, activities, timeline, evaluation plan).
• Detailed budget and justification, using FEC if you’re TRAC.
• CVs or bios for the project lead, the STFC subject expert, and any key delivery staff.
• Audited accounts for your organisation.
• Letters of support from partners and community stakeholders — specific, not generic.
• Risk assessment and safeguarding policy if working with children or vulnerable adults.
• Data management and accessibility statement for outputs.

Draft letters of support early and supply writers with concise templates and key points to include. For budget items that seem unusual (e.g., commissioning an artist, paying community co-design fees), provide short explanations in the justification to avoid reviewer confusion.

What Makes an Application Stand Out

Three things consistently separate good applications from great ones: clarity, feasibility, and impact.

Clarity: A reviewer should understand within the first two pages what you will do, who will benefit, and why it links to STFC funding. Use a crisp summary and plain language.

Feasibility: Show you can deliver. That means realistic timelines, properly costed roles, committed partners, and contingency plans. If a technique or delivery model is experimental, explain a pilot plan and how you will adapt.

Impact: Don’t conflate reach with impact. Numbers are useful, but evidence of deep engagement (learning outcomes, increased participation from underrepresented groups, capacity built in STFC communities) matters more. Provide plausible metrics and a logic model that ties activities to outcomes.

Finally, unique or high-quality partnerships are persuasive. A museum partnering with a grassroots community group and an STFC lab to co-produce a touring programme demonstrates a serious commitment to broad, equitable engagement.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

1. Under-budgeting evaluation and delivery staff. You may think spreadsheets are optional, but projects implode when no one owns delivery or evaluation. Assign named staff and realistic time.

2. Weak letters of support. Generic, unsigned letters do nothing. Ask partners to state specific commitments: “We will provide venue X for Y sessions” or “We will recruit 30 participants from this demographic.”

3. Confusing outreach with engagement. Outreach is broadcasting; engagement is two-way. Proposals that promise long-term relationship-building, dialogue, and co-creation score higher than those promising a series of talks.

4. Ignoring accessibility and inclusion. If you haven’t named concrete measures to reduce barriers, reviewers notice. Describe costs and approaches for transport, translation, sensory-friendly events, and participant subsidies.

5. Leaving the STFC connection vague. You must show strong and clear links to STFC-funded remit. Don’t assume reviewers know your field — explain how the subject-matter expert’s work is funded by STFC or maps to STFC facility areas.

6. Submitting at the last minute without institutional checks. For TRAC organisations, FEC calculations and institutional sign-off take time. Contact your finance and research offices early.

Each mistake has a straightforward fix: plan early, document commitments, and set aside time for review.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Can international collaborators be involved? A: Yes, collaborators outside the UK can participate in delivery activities, but the lead applicant must be a UK-based organisation with audited accounts. Funding rules around payment to international partners depend on whether your organisation can legally subcontract or fund them; clarify with your finance office.

Q: Do I need preliminary evaluation data? A: Not required, but helpful. If you have pilot work or formative evaluation, include it. It signals feasibility and helps justify your proposed methods.

Q: Can the award pay for capital equipment? A: Modest equipment costs linked to delivery and sustainability can be included, but you must justify long-term value. Large capital buys may be inappropriate; explain reuse and maintenance plans.

Q: What does STFC mean by “subject matter expert”? A: A researcher or practitioner whose work sits within STFC-funded remit areas. Include a short CV and explain how their expertise will shape project content and quality.

Q: Is match funding required? A: TRAC organisations will carry an institutional contribution implicitly (because STFC funds 80% of FEC). Non-TRAC applicants are funded at 100% up to the cap, so explicit match may not be required but demonstrating other support can strengthen sustainability arguments.

Q: Will I receive feedback if not funded? A: Typically, applicants receive reviewer feedback. Use it to refine future proposals.

Q: Can I submit more than one proposal? A: Check the specific call guidance on the UKRI page, but generally organisations can only submit once per project; contact STFC for clarification if you’re unsure.

How to Apply / Next Steps

Ready to act? Here’s a pragmatic checklist and a short timeline to get your submission in by 16:00 (UK) on 31 March 2026.

Immediate (ASAP)

• Read the full opportunity page: https://www.ukri.org/opportunity/nucleus-public-engagement-awards-2026/
• Email [email protected] with questions about thematic fit if unsure.
• Notify your finance office and research support that you intend to apply.

Next 8–12 weeks

• Draft a two-page summary of your project and circulate to potential partners for rapid input.
• Secure the STFC subject matter expert and request a short CV.
• Gather audited accounts and start budget work (TRAC applicants: calculate FEC).
• Draft letters of support and request sign-off early.

Final 4 weeks

• Complete project narrative, evaluation plan, and budget justification.
• Circulate to at least two reviewers outside your immediate team for clarity and readability.
• Upload documents to UKRI Funding Service, check institutional approvals, and submit at least 48 hours before the deadline to avoid technical glitches.

Apply now: Visit the official opportunity page and submission portal: https://www.ukri.org/opportunity/nucleus-public-engagement-awards-2026/

Questions or technical help: [email protected] Programme advice or remit queries: [email protected] Policy queries: [email protected]

If you want, I can help you draft a one-page project summary or a budget outline tailored to whether your organisation is TRAC or non-TRAC. Tell me the type of organisation you are, one sentence about the STFC subject area you’ll work with, and your preferred project duration (24–36 months), and I’ll draft a sharp starter pack you can paste into the application.