UKRI Translation: BBSRC Proof of Concept 2026: A £3 Million Call for Bioscience Commercialisation Projects Worth £100,000 to £800,000 at 80% Full Economic Cost, Closing 14 October 2026

UKRI Translation: BBSRC Proof of Concept 2026: A £3 Million Call for Bioscience Commercialisation Projects Worth £100,000 to £800,000 at 80% Full Economic Cost, Closing 14 October 2026

The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council opened this call on 5 August 2026 at 9:00am UK time, and it closes on 14 October 2026 at 4:00pm UK time. That gives applicants a shade over ten weeks — short for a scheme that expects a market analysis, a route to market, an IP exploitation plan and an institutional statement of support.

The name is new; the scheme is not. BBSRC’s Funding Finder page states plainly that this opportunity “was formerly known as BBSRC Follow-on Fund.” If you have applied to, reviewed for, or been rejected by the Follow-on Fund, this is the same pipeline under a new label, sitting inside UKRI’s wider “UKRI Translation” family alongside the AHRC and EPSRC proof of concept calls. The financial envelope also matches the previous round: £3 million in total, individual projects of £100,000 to £800,000 full economic cost, and 80% of FEC covered by BBSRC.

What this call funds is the awkward middle of translation — the stage where a research output is too developed to be a research grant and too raw to attract private investment. BBSRC wants that gap closed with a defined programme of work, clear objectives, and a credible answer to the question of who eventually buys or adopts the result.

Key details

What the money is for

The stated aim is to translate bioscience research into innovations — products, services and solutions — that generate real-world economic, societal and environmental impact. BBSRC frames the target applicant as a researcher who already has “a sound understanding of the market opportunity for their intellectual assets” and needs funding to execute a defined programme of work against clear objectives.

Two shapes of project are explicitly welcomed: commercialisation projects aimed at de-risking innovative ideas, and later-stage projects that encompass significant technical milestones. That is a wide band. A team with a validated enzyme and no manufacturing route fits. So does a team with a working prototype diagnostic that needs field data before a regulatory conversation. The common requirement is that the work moves an existing BBSRC-supported output toward practical application, not that it sits at a particular technology readiness level.

Projects must primarily deliver benefit to the UK. International market benefit is allowed and expected — BBSRC says outcomes “may also provide benefits within international markets” — but only where the primary aim remains significant UK benefit. Anything designed principally to promote economic development or welfare in ODA-eligible countries is out of scope, because the scheme does not support Official Development Assistance activity.

The exclusion list is specific and worth reading before you write anything:

• Projects focused solely on delivering training.
• New research, or work that effectively extends an existing research grant.
• Applied or contract research conducted on behalf of commercial organisations.
• Applications outside BBSRC remit or outside the scope of the Proof of Concept scheme.
• Patent costs and other intellectual property rights costs, including those relating to licensing agreements and to establishing spin-out companies. These are not eligible costs on research grants at all.

That last one catches people. You can build an IP strategy into the application, and you should; you cannot charge the patent attorney to the grant.

BBSRC also reserves the right to reject applications as out of scope or out of remit before assessment, and says those decisions are final and not subject to appeal. Applications declined at that stage do receive feedback.

Who can apply, and the BBSRC-link test

Standard organisation eligibility applies, so the project lead must be at a UK research organisation eligible for BBSRC funding. International and overseas organisations are not eligible, and neither are researchers based at overseas institutions.

The distinguishing eligibility rule is the funding-history test: your application “must have a direct link to current or previous BBSRC-supported funding.” BBSRC restates it twice — applications with no prior link to BBSRC funding are not eligible, and the project must draw on current or previous BBSRC-supported research, other BBSRC research investment, or both.

“Other type of BBSRC research investment” is broader than a standard responsive-mode grant, which matters if your route into this scheme came through an institute strategic programme, a doctoral training partnership, equipment funding, or a network. If your link is anything other than an obvious grant reference, resolve it with the Proof of Concept team at [email protected] before you invest weeks in the application. The Background section is where you must name the key grants and funders that enabled the work, including previous BBSRC grant references, so a vague claim of lineage will not survive.

Core team roles follow current UKRI conventions: project lead, project co-lead (UK), specialist, research and innovation associate, technician, and researcher co-lead. Only one person can be listed as project lead. UKRI has extended the “specialist” role so that public contributors — including people with lived experience — can now be named on an application, which is genuinely useful for health-adjacent or agri-food projects where user insight is the weak point of most submissions.

Demand management is not currently applied to this call, so institutions are not capped on submissions. BBSRC notes it may introduce limits if interest exceeds what the assessment process can handle, and would communicate that clearly.

The project partner and IP rules that decide many applications

Industry and user involvement as project partners is strongly encouraged. If you have no project partners, you are not disqualified, but you must use the project partner letters text box to explain clearly how industry, users, or both shaped the project so far and how they will be engaged as it progresses.

Where partners do want access to the intellectual property generated during the project, BBSRC sets hard contribution thresholds specific to this opportunity:

• A partner seeking pre-negotiated access to foreground IP must contribute a minimum of 50% of total project costs.
• A partner seeking only the right to negotiate access to foreground IP at the end of the award must contribute a minimum of 10% of total project costs.

Contributions can be cash, in kind, or a mix, but must be directly relevant and auditable in relation to the project. BBSRC publishes a Project Partner Contribution Calculator (XLSX) in the Supporting documents section and expects you to use it — applications where partners seeking foreground IP access fall below the thresholds may be declined for assessment.

Two further points shape spin-out planning. Empty shell companies with no investment, staff or premises, formed solely to commercialise foreground IP from the project, are exempt from contributing project costs. And BBSRC advises against direct assignment of foreground IP to a newly formed spin-out, preferring option agreements until the spin-out has raised enough funding to drive translation, at which point a substantive agreement should be executed. If you plan to do something different, justify it explicitly in the relevant sections; BBSRC reserves the right to request more information on IP management before making an award.

If you want to bring investors in as project partners, BBSRC asks you to contact [email protected] first rather than structuring it yourself.

How to apply and what you have to write

Applications go through the UKRI Funding Service. Je-S is not an option. The project lead completes the application, but only the lead research organisation can submit it — you send the finished application to your research office, they check it, and they submit. Build that internal handover into your timeline, and respect any institutional deadline that sits ahead of 14 October.

The written sections and their limits:

Alongside these you complete Ethics and Responsible Research and Innovation, and mandatory declaration sections on animal involvement and the 3Rs, genetically modified organisms and biological risk, human participation in health-related research, and Trusted Research and Innovation. Each must be completed or explicitly confirmed as not applicable.

Uploads are limited and specific. Market research excerpts can be attached to the Opportunity and market analysis section as a PDF of no more than 10 sides of A4 in Arial 11pt and no more than 8MB. The Route to market section expects a project plan with milestones and timelines as a Gantt chart or similar on one additional A4 page. Partner letters go in as a single PDF with a two-page limit per partner, in English or Welsh. The organisational statement of support is uploaded, and BBSRC encourages you to source it from your Technology Transfer Office or equivalent.

References sit inside the word count of the section they support. Hyperlinks may only point at reference information — assessors are not obliged to follow links, and applications must be self-contained. Images are permitted where they carry information that words cannot, with a captioned legend that counts towards the word limit, but sentences, paragraphs, tables and excessive images will get the application rejected.

Generative AI is permitted for preparing applications, with caution, under UKRI’s published policy.

Assessment: four criteria, one committee

There is no external peer review stage advertised here. All applications are assessed by the Proof of Concept Committee, drawn from the BBSRC Knowledge Exchange, Translation and Commercialisation College, an expert community appointed under the oversight of the BBSRC Appointments Panel. Your application is scored against the criteria and ranked against the rest of the cohort. BBSRC makes the final decision and gives feedback with the outcome. The target turnaround is six months from submission.

The four criteria tell you how to weight your writing:

Scientific and technical merit — scientific quality including technical feasibility, objectives and deliverables; risks and mitigations; novelty relative to existing technology; the technology readiness level gain achieved across the project; the quality of the development and implementation plan and the strength of the consortium; and input from end users and customers.

Societal impact — the societal benefits of the innovation including non-monetary ones such as time saved or improved patient care; a knowledge exchange plan; how end user or customer needs are addressed; regulatory alignment or engagement where relevant; and consideration of societal sensitivities.

Economic impact — a robust business plan covering need, size, competitors, value and location; the likelihood of commercialisation and the credibility of the route to market including partner support; economic benefit both in the UK and globally; and consideration of IP management.

Added value — whether the resources requested represent an appropriate investment relative to anticipated outputs; the degree of partner support during and after the project; and a considered plan for what happens once Proof of Concept funding ends.

Notice that a “technology readiness level gain throughout project” appears under technical merit. Committees on this scheme reward movement, not position. A project that credibly takes something from TRL 3 to TRL 5 reads better than one that claims a high starting TRL and shows little advance.

Preparation strategy for the ten-week window

Register for the 19 August webinar, which runs 1:00pm to 2:00pm UK time; a recording will be made available for those who cannot attend. It is the cheapest way to hear how the committee is currently interpreting the renamed scheme.

In the first fortnight, settle three things that are hard to change later: the BBSRC funding link and its grant references, the partner structure and whether any partner wants foreground IP access, and the institutional statement of support. The partner question drives money — a partner who wants pre-negotiated IP access has to fund half the project, and discovering that in late September is fatal. Run the Contribution Calculator early and share the output with your TTO.

Treat the Route to market section as the centre of the application. At 2,500 words it is the longest, and it carries the plan, the risks, the evidence base, the facilities access, the Gantt chart, and the question of what support you will need after the award. Write it before the Background section, because it exposes which parts of your prior work you actually need to narrate.

In the cost justification, focus on what the guidance says assessors want: staff, significant travel for fieldwork or collaboration, equipment over £25,000, unusual consumables, facilities and infrastructure, and anything costed as an Exception. Assessors explicitly are not looking for a line-by-line breakdown. Reasonable adjustment costs can be requested and, where a funding limit applies, may exceed the maximum funding amount.

Common mistakes

Treating it as a research grant with a commercial paragraph. New research and extensions of existing grants are ineligible. If the core of your work is a hypothesis test, this is the wrong call.

A weak or generic BBSRC link. “Our lab has long-standing BBSRC support” is not the same as naming the grant that produced the intellectual asset you now want to translate.

Budgeting patent and licensing costs. They are not eligible on research grants. Plan for your institution or partner to carry them.

Leaving the organisational support letter to the last week. The text box allows ten words; the substance is an uploaded, institutionally approved statement, ideally from the TTO, naming a person, position and office. Approval chains are slow in October.

Ignoring the ODA boundary. A project aimed primarily at welfare or economic development outcomes in ODA-eligible countries will be rejected before assessment, however strong the science.

Missing the internal deadline. Only the research office can submit. The 4:00pm cut-off on 14 October is absolute, and submitted applications cannot be amended.

Frequently asked questions

Is this the Follow-on Fund? Yes. The official page states the opportunity was formerly known as BBSRC Follow-on Fund. The 2026 round one Follow-on Fund call closed on 31 March 2026; this is the current open route.

Can a non-UK partner be involved? Project partners may be in industry, academia, the third sector or government, in the UK or overseas, including the EU. What is not permitted is an overseas lead or an overseas research organisation as the applicant.

Do I need matched funding beyond the 20%? No. BBSRC states there is no requirement for additional matched funding beyond the standard 20% FEC contribution from the research organisation, and assessors are instructed not to treat institutional matched funding as a basis for recommendations. Third-party partner contributions are still encouraged.

Can I resubmit a previously declined application? The Background section asks you to identify whether the application is a resubmission, including an invited resubmission, and to explain how the work has developed. You can also flag an invited resubmission through the sensitive information route by emailing [email protected] with the opportunity title, “sensitive information” and your Funding Service application number in the subject line.

Where are outcomes published? BBSRC publishes funding outcomes at UKRI Gateway to Research, including some personal information for successful applications.

Official links and contacts

• Funding Finder page: UKRI Translation: BBSRC Proof of Concept 2026
• Opportunity-specific questions: [email protected]
• UKRI Funding Service helpdesk: [email protected], 01793 547490, open Monday to Thursday 8:30am to 5:00pm and Friday 8:30am to 4:30pm
• Supporting documents on the official page: Project Partner Contribution Calculator (XLSX) and the Equality Impact Assessment (PDF), added on 5 August 2026

Contact your own research office first on costings and eligibility. UKRI’s helpdesk triages by urgency and technical severity, and questions already answered on the Funding Finder page are explicitly deprioritised.