Applicant guidance

Scientific and technological breakthroughs often rely on a mix of academic and industrial capabilities that can be hard to find in a single organisation, so our programmes will deliberately reach across disciplines, sectors and institutions.

We are keen to explore structures not typical in academic research, such as supporting early career researchers as project leads or funding large (>80%) proportions of senior academics’ time so that they can focus fully on their ARIA project.

Applicants may submit multiple proposals to a funding call, provided each represents a distinct project, though they can be complementary. Each submission will be evaluated independently based on the call’s criteria, with no disadvantage to the applicant. 

Applying for an opportunity seed does not prevent you from applying to other ARIA funding calls or programmes. 

There are some eligibility restrictions. All proposals pass through an initial screening and compliance review. At this stage we carry out some checks to verify your identity, review any national security risks and check for any conflicts of interest (ARIA staff and/or their family members are ineligible to apply for any ARIA funding. Any entity in which an ARIA staff member and/or their family member is a Board Director or a person of significant control (as defined by gov.uk website) is also ineligible to apply). Non-compliant or non-eligible proposals will be rejected at this stage.

If you are successfully selected for award of funding we’ll then conduct some further due diligence, as part of this we may ask for some additional information. Other than the restrictions highlighted above we will not apply any specific constraints. Instead we’ll consider each potential recipient based on the complexity of the scope, value of the potential funding and any associated risks. 

Ideally you should have your organisation’s consent prior to submission of your proposal. We realise this isn’t always possible, so we don’t require it at concept paper stage. As part of the full proposal application, if you wish to conduct the research at your organisation we will require confirmation of your organisation’s consent. If your application is successful and you wish to conduct the research at your organisation, we will need their consent to formally agree the funding.

We can award funding to applicants whose projects will primarily take place outside of the UK if we believe it can boost the net impact of a programme. 

In these instances, you must outline in proposals any proposed plans or commitments in the UK that will contribute to the programme within the project's duration. If you are selected for an award subject to negotiation, these plans will form part of those negotiations and any resultant contract/grant. 

Where you intend to create a subsidiary in the UK, the subsidiary does not necessarily need to be in place prior to the commencement of any funding. You must however outline a credible plan for achieving this within the project’s duration. If you are successfully selected for an award, subject to negotiations, this plan will form part of those negotiations and any resultant contract/grant.

You are encouraged to include the estimated costs for everything you require to deliver the proposed project, however there are some restrictions on what you can include, guidance on this can be found in our Eligible Expenditure Guidance [PDF].

Throughout the solicitation process we only ask for the level of information we need at each stage of the process. This means the amount of information required can range from a high level figure at the outset of a funding call, through to a full cost breakdown if you are shortlisted for the final stages.

• At concept paper stage we will require you to estimate of the high level cost of the project (a short table included in the call documents). 
• At the full proposal stage we will ask you to complete a summary cost template [XLSX]. 
• Prior to contract signature when the scope of work has been agreed we will ask for a detailed cost breakdown [XLSX]. 

Since we aim to attract applicants from diverse sectors, our cost sheets are designed to be generic and are not tailored to specific types of institutions such as universities or companies. When filling out the cost sheets, third-party collaborators should be identified as subcontractors or sub-grantees in the cost sheet, with only the lead applicant's indirect costs included under indirect costs.

How you contract with these organisations is up to you, whether through collaboration agreements, service contracts, partnership agreements, or other arrangements.

When filling out the cost sheets, third-party collaborators should be identified as subcontractors or sub-grantees in the cost sheet, with only the lead applicant's indirect costs included under indirect costs.

How you contract with these organisations is up to you, whether through collaboration agreements, service contracts, partnership agreements, or other arrangements.

ARIA was established to introduce new, agile modes of supporting breakthrough R&D, so we expect our funding will often support activities that push the limits of the typical pace and incentive structures within universities. As such where required ARIA will fund 100% of eligible costs including Full Economic Costs (FEC). 100% FEC allows the full cost for UK universities to be claimed for ARIA work to ensure alignment with our objectives. It also helps ensure equitable access to our funding opportunities since universities across the UK vary in the degree to which they can cross subsidise.

That said, it is permissible to propose a budget at less than 100% FEC. We welcome contributed funding in cases when such funding will strengthen the potential success or the UK benefit of a project. Where you or your organisation wish to fund elements of the proposed project this should be identified in your proposal. This should not be included in the cost breakdown of funds requested from ARIA. In these cases, this funding contribution will be considered as part of the overall strength of the project proposal.

For non academic institutes and non UK academic institutes ARIA will allow 100% of eligible costs.

There are two options for allocating overheads:

1. 25% of labour costs and 5% on external costs;

2. Company calculated overhead rate. If this option is selected then evidence of your overhead rate will be required for agreement by ARIA

Generally, where you receive a Research Agreement:

• VAT will apply, however you should obtain your own VAT/tax advice. ARIA is not registered for VAT and is not able to recover VAT, your overall project value should include VAT if it is applicable.

• A profit margin should be included in your overall project value. This should range form 2 to 10%.

For joint applications, applicants should designate a lead applicant (and organisation, if applicable) to submit the application, listing all other collaborators (e.g. researchers outside your university or company) as proposed subcontractors or sub-grantees to the project. If successful, ARIA will fund the lead organisation, which will then be responsible for entering into agreements with third-party collaborators and distributing funds to them as needed.

Where the activity being funded is considered basic research (experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundations of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular application or use in view/TRLs 1-3) and you are an Enterprise, ARIA will provide funding via a Basic Research Grant Agreement.

Where the activity being funded is considered to be more technologically mature but still research and development (TRLs 3-6) and you are an Enterprise, ARIA will provide funding via a Research Agreement.

Where the activity being funded is between TRLs 1-6 and you are not an Enterprise (e.g. a university or individual), ARIA will provide funding via a Standard Grant Agreement or Research Grant Agreement to an individual. 

This framework of agreements has been developed to ensure compliance with the Subsidy Control Act.

Standard Grant Agreement [PDF]

Research Agreement [PDF]

Basic Grant Agreement [PDF]

Individual Grant Agreement [PDF]

You should provide enough information to allow us to evaluate your proposal, but you should not submit potentially patentable information before a patent application is filed or commercially sensitive information. If there is information that would support your application, but that you do not wish to disclose because you believe it may be patentable or commercially sensitive, please make this clear in your application.

We may enter into an NDA where you have been shortlisted and you want to discuss potentially patentable or commercially sensitive information.

ARIA does use external evaluators as part of its programme solicitation review process. Any external evaluators will be subject to non-use restrictions, confidentiality agreements and conflicts of interest checks.

We will not use evaluators that present a conflict of interest.

ARIA Board members and advisors are not part of the decision making process for ARIA research funding; as such, they will not have access to proposals.

Our project management approach consists of three core components:

1. Project Initiation - We will ask you to document your project delivery plan, outlining your approach to project management, project plan, and key risks and opportunities you anticipate. These will be agreed upon between the Creators and programme teams, forming a baseline for the project and its delivery.

2. Quarterly Reviews - At the end of each quarter, we will ask for:

• Milestones Updates - Progress against specific contractual milestones.

• Project Updates - A general update on your learnings, decisions, highlights, priorities, challenges, new collaborations, and team changes.

• RAG Status - A simple way to communicate the project's health or status.

We want the quarterly review process to be mutually beneficial and provide you with ongoing support. Therefore, each quarterly review will include a meeting where we assist with problem-solving and addressing any challenges you may encounter. The programme team will provide written feedback based on the work to date.

Once a year, we will ask you to complete a metrics template, asking a set of standard questions which will help us measure ARIA’s long term impact.

Our standardised approach is flexible, allowing us to assess each project individually and tailor our methods to the project's size and scope. While low-value projects follow the same standard components, we apply a lighter touch. This means we won’t ask for your project management approach, project plan or risks and opportunities, but will focus on contractually defined information, leaving the rest up to you. Similarly, quarterly reviews will request only the most critical updates on milestones and project progress.

Seed projects, which are not tied to specific programmes, do not need to align with an overall programme trajectory. Quarterly check-ins may be conducted by programme team members instead of the Programme Director, aiming to provide creators with the support they need and foster the development of the ecosystem around the opportunity space.

Project reviews will be conducted at specified intervals to consider the Creators’ progress against agreed outputs and the milestones (negotiated at the start of the project).

Following a review Programme Directors may, in consultation with the Creator, adjust grant funding amounts, redefine outputs. Where the Creator fails to make progress against the milestones (or identify alternative paths to contribute to programme success) we would choose to end the agreement on performance grounds.

There are a number of other reasons why we might choose to end an agreement, these include: if a key individual departs without an acceptable replacement, material breaches, reputational damage, provision of misleading information, or change of control posing national security risks.