CaSE letter to UKRI CEO Prof Sir Ian Chapman

Following discourse surrounding UK Research and Innovation’s (UKRI’s) new funding model and the specific impact of some changes to the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), CaSE have written to ask for further clarity on some key areas.

Prof Sir Ian Chapman FREng FRS FInstP
Chief Executive
UK research and Innovation (UKRI)
London

Monday 23^rd February 2026

Dear Sir Ian,

On behalf of Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE) and our members I want to express our thanks to you and UKRI for engaging with us and the community in recent weeks. We were pleased to hear your desire to deliver a better and more productive UKRI funding system and appreciate the genuine contrition for how recent communications have gone. It is also very welcome that you have expressed a strong commitment for wide consultation and input from the community in the coming months. As I mentioned to you previously, we would be happy to set up and facilitate a discussion with CaSE members and UKRI.

As you will be aware following our recent discussions, we believe there are still areas that require clarification. It is our hope that once clear and full details of the decisions and their rationale are available, we can move forward productively.

Here I will set out our remaining questions covering the overall restructure of UKRI funding, and the specific issues relating to the STFC. We will be publishing this letter, and any reply we receive, on our website.

The new funding model

• When will UKRI publish the high-level comparisons promised at your select committee appearance? CaSE believes making comparisons available to allow for proper scrutiny of public spending is a good use of taxpayers’ money and would welcome the ability to make as detailed comparisons as possible. This would also help the understanding of how funding is changing.

• Can you explain fully what is counted as ‘curiosity-led research’ (bucket one) and why those classification decisions were made? A common understanding of curiosity-driven research is research motivated by the intrinsic desire to understand something – yet this is not a definition that you could apply to all QR funding despite it appearing entirely in bucket one.

• Who is responsible for monitoring the disciplinary health and capability of the UK research base? There is concern that the combination of the recent financial pressure on HEIs combined with UKRI’s funding changes could result in a loss of capability in some areas of underpinning research. Therefore, monitoring is critical to ensure that the R&D sector can deliver the outcomes that will improve lives and livelihoods.

STFC funding

During your lecture at the CaSE 40^th Anniversary event on February 10^th, you said that “no decisions have been made” about funding at STFC:

• Can you set out a timetable and the rationale that will be used for future STFC funding decisions?

• How will you ensure that these changes mean we don’t lose critical capability in the UK or see early career researchers and other top talent leave the UK?

We would appreciate clarity on all these points as soon as possible. The current uncertainty risks harm to UK R&D beyond any direct impact of the decisions we are discussing here.

With thanks and kind regards,

Dr Alicia Greated FRSE FIET

Executive Director
Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE)