Partnership to Transform University Knowledge Exchange Metrics (Research England)

Partnership to transform university knowledge exchange metrics (Research England)

This opportunity is a national, institution-facing funding program for a single external advisory partner to help Research England (RE) modernise the UK knowledge-exchange metrics system. It is unusual among UK funding calls because the result is not a typical research grant to many teams: the program is designed around one successful application, with a single long-term partnership that will shape how universities measure, compare, and improve knowledge exchange outcomes across the sector.

The call was published 13 May 2026, opened 13 May 2026, and remains open as of the check date (2026-05-18) with a closing date of 22 July 2026 at 12:00pm UK time. The funding is up to £5,000,000 total for one award, covering a period from January 2027 to the end of March 2032.

Key details

What this opportunity is (and is not)

The call asks for a national adviser role, titled in broad terms as a position to act as “national knowledge exchange metrics advisors.” In practical terms, this means the successful team would be expected to guide the design and development of next-generation knowledge exchange (KE) data, metrics, and evidence for UK universities.

The program’s intent is to strengthen both institutional practice and national policy tooling, including data outputs relevant to HEIF (Higher Education Innovation Funding), KEF (Knowledge Exchange Framework), and broader funding and impact measurement. The language on the official page is explicit that this is meant to be system-level work rather than a one-off project: the applicant is expected to support a multi-year agenda with outputs that are reusable across the UK HE landscape.

This is not just about building a dashboard or generating a single report. The listed focus areas include data architecture, policy-facing evidence studies, metrics design, convening and commissioning capability, AI-enabled analytical approaches where appropriate, and international benchmarking. It also places emphasis on practical implementation, including dissemination and practical adoption in policy and funding contexts.

The official page also points to an “advisory” role where RE, HESA, and the selected partner operate in a tripartite relationship. That matters: applicants are not expected to “deliver in isolation” but to co-develop and co-deliver outputs with public institutions and national data systems.

Who the grant is designed for

This is best matched by organisations that already live in the KE/commercialisation data ecosystem and can evidence that depth in senior application materials. Officially, applicants must be based in organisations that can satisfy Research England funding eligibility conditions. In practice, this tends to favour university consortia, KE teams, and specialist advisory groups with real experience in:

• KE data and commercialisation metrics
• Institutional and sector policy context for KE
• Policy-facing analysis methods for evidence production
• Cross-stakeholder collaboration in education, government, and innovation settings

The call allows collaborative or independent delivery. You can apply as a single organisation or a consortium if you do not hold all required capabilities in-house. The official material also notes that applicants can include co-lead structures and that applications should evidence how they are positioned to deliver at sector scale.

Given the strategic scope, this is best for applicants who can demonstrate proven record and implementation capability, not only high-level technical skill. The call repeatedly frames expected outputs as evidence-based, operational, and usable by policy actors over several years.

Official eligibility and in-scope rules

As written in the call, the opportunity is only available to lead applicants that can be considered under Research England terms. The minimum baseline conditions are:

• Registered with the Office for Students (OfS), in the approved (fee cap) category
• Undertake research and related activities, including knowledge exchange
• Undertake research with principal activity and public dissemination expectations aligned to UK systems
• Evidence strong expertise in one or more of: KE/commercialisation metrics, RE processes, UKRI funding functions, KE policy
• Only eligible English Higher Education Providers and organisations can lead applications

Applications are screened for scope and eligibility first. If an application is outside scope, RE states it will not be assessed on merit.

These restrictions imply that many private consultancies will still struggle unless they are applying in partnership with eligible HE providers and can show clear sector alignment. It also means applicants should not assume broad “innovation funding” eligibility applies.

One critical operational constraint: ongoing internal activities already running at your own institution are listed as not fundable in this specific call context. This is for new advisory work tied to the published framework, not retrofitting existing internal activities under the grant title.

What the funded team is expected to deliver

The call’s scope includes several broad but concrete categories.

1. System design work: improve how KE/commercialisation data is captured, interpreted, and measured at national scale.
2. Evidence and output production: generate clear, policy-relevant evidence studies and conceptual frameworks for stakeholders.
3. Metric innovation: develop practical, nationally usable KPIs for student entrepreneurship, spinout pathways, patent flows, institutional KE activity, and related value creation indicators.
4. Data product and analysis capability: prototype new dataset structures and analytical approaches that can function consistently across institutions.
5. Delivery ecosystem support: convene experts and commissions as needed and provide accessible advice and outputs that can translate into policy decisions.
6. Communication with public value: produce outputs and dissemination formats that are readable to institutional leaders, funders, and policy users.

The call language repeatedly stresses that this is for “next generation” approaches, not maintenance of current frameworks alone. Teams should show a roadmap for iterative development across 2027–2032, with agility to respond to changing policy priorities.

Application process and submission details

The process is unusual for UKRI in that submission is not via standard online portal; the page states that applicants should complete the business case template and email it to [email protected].

The official instructions include several non-negotiable constraints:

• Use the business-case submission template provided in the opportunity page’s supporting documents.
• Keep to a maximum of 15 pages.
• Keep section headings intact while allowing explanatory text to be compressed if needed.
• Follow formatting guidance for readability: sufficient spacing and accessible font size.
• Submit by 22 July 2026 at 12:00pm UK time.

A key implementation recommendation is to build a page-specific production schedule backward from the deadline. Teams should treat internal review and sign-off windows as hard constraints, because the page explicitly asks applicants to follow institutional deadlines.

Suggested document build plan

For teams with internal compliance requirements, a practical internal schedule is:

• Week 1: collect evidence of KE/commercialisation expertise and policy-relevant outputs.
• Week 2: draft the strategic section and technical architecture section.
• Week 3: convert all claims into measurable evidence with explicit examples and data logic.
• Week 4: finish budget logic, risk and governance sections; send to internal legal/compliance.
• Final week: tighten language for accessibility and re-check page criteria against each required heading.

Because the page emphasises that RE can reduce requests or reject awards if the proposal is weak, this is a competitiveness test as much as an eligibility test.

Assessment and what happens next

The published assessment pathway includes:

1. Eligibility check against scope and rules
2. Expert panel review across KE, commercialisation, and national policy domains
3. Shortlist of top three applications to interview stage
4. In-person interview in Bristol (with virtual accommodation where needed)
5. Final scoring and prioritisation post-interview

Interviews were expected to take place in September 2026 (weeks of 7 and 14 September), and applicants are advised to include accessibility planning with their team and institutional support contacts.

After this, funding is expected to be shaped through policy-linked output commitments and long-horizon delivery rather than a single “award letter and done” cycle. Given the five-year period, teams should expect implementation milestones and review mechanisms to be central in any offer stage, even if those details are not fully visible before award.

Funding, costs, and what is not specified

Officially, up to £5,000,000 is available across one award. The page clarifies funding is primarily revenue and should be used for justified costs to enable the full scope of delivery.

A key feature is the absence of a strict mandated costing template; the funder instead expects clear justification for costs and activities. Indirect cost handling and project spend controls should be explicit, especially because the call is described as “agile.”

The page says proposals should include costs up to the anticipated threshold, not exceeding the total funding cap. In practice, this means teams should avoid two common mistakes:

• using a fully under-justified budget to leave room for “future scaling,”
• proposing budget lines for ongoing activities without tying them to the specific national KE metrics role.

In other words, budget quality is judged more on strategic clarity than template compliance.

Who should apply now: fit-check framework

If you are considering this opportunity, ask these four fit checks before drafting:

• Eligibility: are you or your lead partner an eligible English HE provider with OfS approved status?
• Scope fit: can your proposal demonstrate policy-level advisory delivery across the UK HE KE system rather than one-off local outputs?
• Team sufficiency: do you have a mix of sector knowledge, data architecture, and implementation leadership?
• Delivery discipline: can you show concrete governance, risk management, and publication/dissemination commitments over five years?

If one of these is weak, the call will likely fail at either eligibility or panel stage. If all are strong, the main differentiator becomes evidence quality and clarity of impact pathway.

This opportunity is especially suitable for candidates with:

• university KE leaders and data teams,
• consultancies with proven sector delivery,
• consortia combining economic development, metrics, and HE policy expertise.

Given the single-award structure, only a best-in-class submission is realistically competitive.

Common reasons applications fail (and how to avoid them)

The official criteria and framing imply several high-probability failure modes:

1) Weak demonstration of national-level impact

Many teams submit strong local projects but fail to demonstrate national transferability. This call needs sector-level thinking across institutions and funders. Remedy: show how outputs move from a prototype to reusable frameworks.

2) Underdeveloped evidence sections

The criteria strongly reward evidence-backed claims. Generic claims like “we are experts” without portfolio examples are likely insufficient. Remedy: include prior work, explicit outputs, and outcomes with measurable indicators.

3) Missing alignment with RE and KEF/HEIF context

The call repeatedly references RE’s role and KE policy infrastructure. Remedy: explicitly map proposed outputs to RE and broader UKRI use cases.

4) Budget mismatch

Because funding is single-award and strategic, weakly connected cost lines are likely interpreted as risk. Remedy: tie each budget component to a named output or assessment criterion.

5) Inaccessible or non-compliant application presentation

The page requires readable formatting and a constrained structure. Remedy: treat the 15-page rule and section integrity as a compliance checkpoint, not a style preference.

FAQ

Is this grant only for universities?

The call says lead applications can be for eligible organisations and consortia, and lead organisations must be eligible English HEPs. The safe interpretation is that RE expects institutions that can operate in this framework, with consortium models accepted when capabilities are distributed.

Can a consultancy apply on its own?

Consultancy participation is possible, but the lead must meet Research England eligibility conditions and the proposal must evidence in-sector implementation capability. If the lead is not eligible, partner architecture should be explicit in a consortium.

Is there an online portal?

No. The official method is email submission to the listed RE inbox using the required template.

How selective is it?

Very selective. The pathway includes an expert panel and interview stage for top applicants, and only top three move to interview.

What happens if we miss the July 22 deadline?

Submissions should be sent by 22 July 2026, 12:00pm UK time. Applications after that point are at risk of being excluded under the stated deadline rule.

Are ongoing projects fundable?

The call says proposals should not be for existing ongoing activities at your organisation. New, scoped work tied directly to this KE advisory mandate is expected.

Are supporting documents mandatory?

The official notes include business-case guidance and template, plus a separate equality impact assessment form. Use both, especially if you have a complex consortium.

How this differs from other UKRI calls

Compared with many standard fellowships or project grants, this is structurally a strategic advisory and systems-modernisation contract at national level. The evidence burden is less about individual research discovery and more about systems transformation.

A typical research grant assessment focuses on novelty of science and feasibility of a specific project. This call adds another layer: sustained sector impact across institutional reporting, funding, and policy. That means applicants need stronger delivery governance, clearer stakeholder coordination, and explicit pathways from analysis to implementation.

For applicants already considering UKRI Research England or KE-related opportunities, this one is a good benchmark for how national-scale program teams are being assessed: less by short-cycle outputs, more by long-cycle architecture and transferable evidence design.

Official links

• Opportunity page: https://www.ukri.org/opportunity/partnership-to-transform-university-knowledge-exchange-metrics/
• Application template (PDF): https://www.ukri.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/RE-140526-KEMetricsAdvisors-BidTemplate.pdf
• Equality impact assessment (PDF): https://www.ukri.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/RE-120526-EqualityImpactAssessment-KE-MetricsAdvisors.pdf
• Contact: [email protected] (include subject: “Funding Finder: Knowledge Exchange Metrics”)

If you are currently evaluating whether your team should enter, prioritize a hard eligibility pass first and then build the application as evidence-first narrative. The deadline gives only a few weeks, so early narrowing is necessary.