AHRC research funding guide for applicants

This funding guide contains details of the postdoctoral funding schemes that are operated in applicant-led mode.

The schemes we operate offer very different types of support. You can read case studies of research previously funded by AHRC.

Introduction

Equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI)

The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) is committed to promoting the values of equality of opportunity, diversity and inclusivity.

As a UK public sector organisation, we are fully committed to our legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010 legislation and the Public Sector Equality Duty.

We encourage everyone who applies for AHRC funding to consider the importance of EDI within the research they are delivering, the research teams they are working within and the people who engage with their research.

For more information see our guidance for equality, diversity and inclusion.

Disability and accessibility support for UKRI applicants and grant holders

UKRI can provide guidance and support if you are applying for UKRI funding or already hold an award, if you are disabled, have a long-term health condition, are neurodivergent or have a learning disability.

You can share information with us about the reasonable adjustments you may need during the application process. You do not need a formal diagnosis. For further information see Disability and accessibility support for UKRI applicants and grant holders.

Trusted Research

UKRI is committed to ensuring that effective international collaboration in research and innovation takes place with integrity and within strong ethical frameworks. Trusted Research and Innovation (TR&I) is a UKRI work programme designed to help protect all those working in our thriving and collaborative international sector by enabling partnerships to be as open as possible, and as secure as necessary. Our TR&I principles set out UKRI’s expectations of organisations funded by UKRI in relation to due diligence for international collaboration.

Applicants for UKRI funding may be asked to demonstrate how their proposed projects will comply with our approach and expectation towards TR&I, identifying potential risks and the relevant controls you will put in place to help proportionately reduce these risks.

Subsidy control

A subsidy is a financial or in-kind contribution (direct or indirect) from public resources which confers a benefit to an enterprise and can be given in the public interest, to promote a social good or address economic issues.

Whilst most research council investments are not considered to be subsidies, AHRC still needs to assess collaborative research projects to ensure grant funding is compliant with UK subsidy control legislation.

It is the responsibility of the research organisation to ensure that at all times any grant funding requested or awarded is compliant with the UK Subsidy Control Act 2022 .

Further information on the UK’s commitments in relation to subsidy control can be found in the government’s guidance on the UK’s international subsidy control commitments.

Use of generative AI

You must follow the UKRI policy on the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI).

Applicants can use generative AI but must apply caution and consider the risks of providing personally sensitive or intellectually confidential content to a third party. They should also consider the risk of bias when using outputs from the generative AI tool or model and consider mitigation. Applicants are expected to be transparent where they have used generative AI tools in the development of an application.

Expert reviewers and panellists must not use generative AI tools in their assessment activity. They should not take into account or speculate as to whether generative AI has been used in an application.

Concordats UKRI has signed up to

You should make sure you are familiar with these concordats so you can apply the principles in your research. They are the:

concordat to support research integrity
concordat to support the career development of researchers
Technician commitment to ensure visibility, recognition, career development and sustainability for technicians
Environmental sustainability concordat to support the aim for net zero by 2050

Transferring your grant to another country

We are part of the Money Follows scheme. In some cases it may be possible to transfer your grant to another country.

Research involving animals

There are occasions where AHRC may fund research that involves animals.

As a public funder of research and innovation UKRI has a responsibility to ensure that our activities and those we fund are aligned with UK legislation and other guiding principles on research and innovation involving animals.

For more information see UKRI’s position on animals in research and innovation.

Language of funding application content

All content of funding applications, including letters of support, must be in English or Welsh. Content in other languages will not be translated by AHRC or the assessors and if extensive may result in the application being rejected.

Funding opportunities

Funding modes

From 1 April 2025 UKRI has streamlined terms for various funding types or modes. Responsive mode is now applicant-led and strategic, thematic or managed is now targeted mode.

Our four applicant-led schemes are always open to applications and open to research proposals within the full breadth of the AHRC’s discipline remit as outlined in Annex A. These schemes are Research Grants, Curiosity Awards, Catalyst Awards and Follow-on Funding for Impact and Engagement.

We also offer time-limited funding opportunities which may support the full breadth of AHRC’s remit or may have a narrower and targeted focus.

Search for currently open funding schemes and opportunities.

International opportunities

AHRC attaches major importance to the position of UK arts and humanities research in the international and global arena and positively encourages active collaboration between UK researchers and those in other countries. AHRC offers a number of international collaborative research opportunities which are available throughout the year through a number of collaboration agreements with overseas funders:

AHRC allows international researchers to act as project co-lead (international) on Research Grants and some other funding opportunities. Further information on this policy can be found under Individual eligibility criteria.

Eligibility

Organisational eligibility

To apply for funding you need to be based at an eligible organisation.

You can check if your organisation is eligible. Or find the criteria and how to apply to be an eligible organisation.

Project role types

You can read the different role types and descriptions in use across UKRI. The following are the role types that AHRC uses.

Project lead (PL)

The project lead (formerly principal investigator) takes responsibility for the intellectual leadership of the research project and for the overall management of the research or other activities. The PL will be the person to whom we address all correspondence and must be based at the organisation at which the grant will be held.

Academic standing

To be eligible, you must be actively engaged in postdoctoral research and be of postdoctoral standing. This means that you either have a doctorate or can demonstrate in the application that you have equivalent research experience and training.

You must have a level of skills, knowledge and experience appropriate to the nature of the proposed project.

Contractual eligibility for project lead and project co-lead (UK)

You must be one of the following:

be employed by the research organisation submitting the proposal
if not employed by the submitting organisation, have an existing written formal arrangement with the organisation confirming that the research will be conducted as if you were an employee, that is, enables you to carry out research there and receive from the organisation all necessary management and infrastructural support and that commits the organisation to take full responsibility for the research and its proper governance
be scheduled to move to the submitting organisation before the proposed start date of the grant, whether or not the proposal is successful, in such a way that would ensure that the previous criterion is met by the time the grant starts

It is no longer a requirement to provide evidence of contractual arrangements within the application. However we do require that such an arrangement is in place at the point that the grant begins and we may ask for evidence of it during the assessment process.

Duration of contractual arrangement

The contractual arrangement must last for at least the duration of the grant of the project lead or project co-leads.

For other roles it must last at least the length of time that the person is working on the grant.

For project co-Lead (UK), where there is mention of “submitting organisation”, this should be replaced by “an eligible organisation”.

Individual eligibility criteria

The project lead must be resident in the UK (AHRC follows the government definition of a resident in the UK).

It is not permissible for someone to be both a project lead or project co-lead (UK) and a research and innovation associate on the same project.

Unless otherwise stated in the relevant scheme or call guidance Professors Emeriti are eligible to apply to AHRC schemes, as long as the contractual conditions outlined previously are met. If you are a holder of any other senior non-stipendiary post you may also be eligible to apply for funding if you meet the requirement outlined under ‘contractual arrangement’. It is possible for the research organisation to propose that any contract put in place if the proposal was successful would be stipendiary even if the current arrangement is not.

Project co-leads

The role of project co-lead (UK)

A Project co-Lead (UK) (previously known as a co-investigator) assists the Project Lead in the management and leadership of the research project. The Project co-Lead (UK) can also undertake research activity, although this is not a requirement.

Eligibility of project co-lead (UK)

The same eligibility criteria apply to project co-lead (UK) as project leads.

Project co-lead (international)

UKRI has a policy to allow international researchers to act as Project co-lead (international) on some of its funding opportunities and schemes.

A project co-lead (international) is an individual employed by a research organisation (RO) in an overseas country who otherwise fits the normal definition of a project co-lead on a research project, collaborating with the grant holder in the management and leadership of the project. They were previously known as International Co-investigator. Project co-leads (international) will not be expected to take on a leadership role for some schemes where not appropriate to the scheme purpose (for example, fellowships).

The project co-lead is usually expected to make a major intellectual contribution to the design and conduct of the project. Project co-leads (international) will not be permitted to take over as project lead if the UK project lead steps down for any reason. The contribution and added value of the international participants to the research collaboration should be clearly explained and justified in the application.

The international RO would be expected to meet the general equivalent requirements for being eligible to receive UKRI funding, taking into account the national context of the international RO.

PhD project students

PhD study cannot be funded through any of our applicant-led schemes or through any other funding opportunity unless otherwise specified.

Eligibility of Research council institute staff

Research council institute staff need to ensure that they meet the relevant criteria for each particular scheme in relation to their academic experience and to the nature of their contract.

Institutes that are considering submitting a proposal to a research council to which they will be newly eligible are encouraged to discuss the proposal with the relevant research council staff in the first instance.

Research and innovation associate

Research and innovation associates (previously known as researchers) must be of postdoctoral standing. This means that they should possess either a PhD or have the equivalent research experience.

The responsibilities of the post requested on the project should be commensurate with the level of experience and skills of the proposed research and innovation associate (whether named or unnamed).

AHRC does not fund the employment of researchers who are registered for higher degrees unless the researcher is already of postdoctoral standing and:

the work of the higher degree is not an integral part of, does not arise directly from, or feed directly into, the work of the project
the salary costs sought are appropriate and directly related to the actual time the postdoctoral researcher will spend working on the project

It is expected that the research and innovation associate will be based at the same institution as a leader on the research project, and a thorough justification as to how the research and innovation associate will be supported must be provided where this is not to be the case.

It is also expected that the research and innovation associate will be managed and supported in line with the principles of the Researcher Development Concordat and the AHRC guidance on training and developing early career researchers in the arts and humanities.

Mentors

Some AHRC funding opportunities and schemes allow for the inclusion of a mentor (the funding opportunity will specify if this is possible). The role of the mentor is to supervise and support the work of the PL, answer any queries and help with any problems that may arise during the research. They will not be directly involved in running the project, their role is advisory only.

Mentors should not be included in the Core Team section of the application form, instead their role should be outlined in the Applicant and Team Capability to Deliver section. Costs for mentor’s time may be claimed from the grant and included in the directly allocated or directly incurred categories in the resources and costs section.

Project partners, collaborating organisations and sub-contractors

In research council proposals, the terms project partner, collaborators and sub-contractors have specific meanings and cannot be used interchangeably and for all organisations with whom you are collaborating.

Project partners

A third party person who is not employed on the grant, or a third party organisation, who provides specific contributions either in cash or in-kind, to the project. These contributions should be clearly identified within the ‘project partner’ section of the proposal; in-kind contributions should be included, even if a rough estimate. Entitlement to the outputs of the project and Intellectual Property (IP) will be determined between the parties involved, however any access to project outputs and IP must be in line with any relevant Subsidy Control regulation.

As a rule project partners are expected to provide contributions to the delivery of the project and should not therefore be seeking to claim funds from UKRI. However, where there are specific circumstances where project partners do require funding for minor costs such as travel and subsistence, this will be paid at 80% full economic cost (FEC) unless otherwise stated by us; note that any applicable Subsidy Control regulation and HMRC guidance will also be taken into account which may affect the percentage of these costs that we will fund. These costs should be outlined and fully justified in the proposal and will be subject to expert review.

UKRI Head Office Staff acting in their capacity as a UKRI employee are not eligible to be Project Partners.

Independent Research Organisations (IROs) and Public Sector Research Establishments (PSREs) may participate as project partners provided that they are not an organisation at which the project lead, fellow or project co-lead (UK) are based.

University museums, galleries, libraries, presses and archives may be categorised as project partners provided that they are not formally linked to an organisation at which the project lead, fellow or project co-lead (UK) are based.

Where IROs, PSREs, university museums, galleries, libraries, presses and archives are the organisation at which the project lead, fellow or project co-lead (UK) are based they may still participate in the project but must be fully costed to the project according to FEC rules, so cannot make contributions in-kind to the project

Except for the circumstances previously outlined, UK higher education institutions that receive grant funding from one of the UK higher education funding bodies cannot be project partners, they cannot make contributions in-kind to the project.

Minor Directly Incurred costs may be requested to facilitate collaboration and these should be costed in line with the FEC of the project. If costs are being charged to the project, then they must relate solely to the activities on the project, and not be part of everyday business for the organisation. For example, travel and subsistence costs should not be charged to the grant, unless it is clearly justified in the proposal that the partner organisation would be unable to contribute to the project without having these costs covered. If all or a substantial amount of the collaborating organisation’s involvement is being charged to the project as part of the FEC, then this organisation is not a ‘project partner’ and their role as a ‘Subcontractor’ should be outlined in the application.

Each project partner must provide a project partner letter or email of support to provide assurance that the project partner has authorised the proposed contribution or commitment. The letter or email should be a maximum of two sides of A4 per partner. These also must be in English or Welsh, documents in other languages will not be translated by AHRC or the assessors; they should be signed by the named contact, stating the capacity in which they are providing the sign off.

Subcontractor

A third party individual who is not employed as staff on the grant, or a third party organisation, who is subcontracted by the host organisation to deliver a specific piece of work. This will be subject to the procurement rules of the host organisation. All costs that support the delivery of the subcontract are eligible and will be paid at 80% FEC unless otherwise stated, these should be outlined and fully justified in the proposal and will be subject to peer review. Entitlement to the outputs of the project and IP will be determined between the parties involved, however any access to project outputs and IP must be in line with any relevant Subsidy Control regulation.

University museums, galleries and libraries may participate as subcontractors provided that they are not formally linked to an organisation at which the project lead, Fellow or project co-lead (UK) are based.

Collaborator

We do not have an official role or descriptor of “collaborator” as this is a word often generically used in relation to a project, therefore this could lead to confusion. Instead, the term “collaboration” should be used in the generic sense to explain that there is a project relationship or interaction, accompanied with an official project role descriptor of project partner, sub-contractor, PL, PcL to explain the nature of the collaboration.

Dual Roles

An organisation or individual can act as both a project partner and subcontractor, however this must be fully justified and will be subject to peer review. Project partner related costs are expected to be minor. Where the project needs work to be undertaken that is more significant and includes costs other than travel and subsistence, the organisation or individual may need to be included as both a project partner and a subcontractor.

Technicians

Carefully consider and recognise the role of technical staff when submitting your grant application. AHRC’s working definition of a Research Technical Professional (RTP), a Technician, is anyone who brings indispensable specialist technical skills, at an advanced level, to a research project.

Depending on the project the following may qualify for inclusion:

academic, research or library professionals
animators, archivists, conservators, curators, graphic designers, illustrators
sound engineers
staff who have expertise in digital, software and data areas such as digital technicians, information systems specialists and research software engineers

AHRC encourages a holistic approach to the research ecosystem.

Technical staff often provide essential support to research projects and should be recognised and costed accordingly. An important way of acknowledging the contributions of technical staff is by entering their details in the Core Team and the Applicant and Team sections of the application form; it should be noted that these sections can be completed even if you have not yet identified a specific person to perform these duties.

Costs

All proposals to all AHRC funding opportunities and schemes should be costed on the basis of the full economic costs (FEC) of the research and all costs that contribute to the full economic costs of the proposal should be included. If the proposal is successful AHRC will contribute 80% of these costs.

For guidance on cost headings use the guidance on how to include costs in your application.

All travel claims should evidence value for money alongside environmental impact, welfare and business need. Consequently, these should only include travel by standard class by train and economy class by air. Exceptions to this would be permitted where:

there is a justifiable health and wellbeing need
it is approved by the Research Organisation prior to purchase
evidence of this should be available

Patent and other intellectual property rights (IPR) costs, such as those relating to licensing agreements and the establishment of spin out companies, are not eligible.

Open access

UKRI provides research organisations with block funding for publication costs, and as such AHRC does not provide funding in grants for any publication costs associated with peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers, monographs, book chapters and edited collections.

Publication costs associated with research outputs other than those listed above such as critical editions, catalogues, may continue to be included in grants as a Directly Incurred Other Cost. Any request for such costs will need to be fully justified.

The UKRI open access policy requires that monographs, book chapters and edited collections published from 1 January 2024 are made open access within 12 months of publication. Costs for these publication types cannot be included in individual funding applications.

Proposals with an international element

For some of our schemes, AHRC allows costs to be included to support international elements as part of the proposed research. Project co-lead (international) eligibility is included in the eligibility section.

Project co-lead (international)

UKRI only covers specific costs of project co-leads (international) involved in applications led by UK project leads.

Unless otherwise specified in the funding opportunity guidance these rules apply regarding cost limits:

combined costs of international project co-leads from non-OECD DAC countries (including India and China) cannot be more than 30% total FEC
countries on the OECD DAC list (excluding India and China) are not subject to the 30% funding cap
project co-leads (international) in countries on the OECD DAC list (excluding India and China) are also able to claim overheads at 20% of the international research organisations directly incurred costs

All costs must be fully justified and will be assessed in the context of the proposal as a whole. Directly incurred costs (for example, travel and subsistence costs, conference attendance) for a project co-lead (international) are required to be reasonable. Applicants may apply for funds to cover other directly incurred costs (for example, consumables, consultancy fees, survey costs and equipment costing less than £25,000), provided they are fully justified. Single items of equipment over £25,000 are not eligible.

Applicants may apply for funds to cover the cost of roles based in the international RO to support the research activities in that country.
Roles applicants can apply to cover are:

researcher co-lead
research and innovation associate
specialist
technician
professional enabling staff

Other international elements to proposals

If you are applying to a scheme in which project co-lead (international) are not eligible or if it is not appropriate for you to have an project co-lead (international) on your project, you can still involve international elements within your grant application. These will be paid at the usual 80% FEC. There is no limit to how much of the proposal can be spent on other international elements but the requested funds should be appropriate to the needs of the proposal.

Project leads and project co-leads (UK) can request funding for travel and subsistence to visit and research in other countries where this is essential to the conduct of the research proposed.

Non-UK based academics can be part of certain activities associated with a grant where their input is justified and essential to the delivery of grant objectives, for example through being members of an advisory group. Costs such as travel and subsistence associated with this can be included if fully justified.

Funds can be paid to a non-UK based researcher or expert on a ‘consultancy’ basis if their expertise is seen to be vital to the success of the project. This would need special justification in the proposal.

Before including an international element applicants need to consider:

is the expertise available within the UK?
proportion of the overall costs that the consultancy constitutes (the majority of the research must still be undertaken by UK-based researchers)
access to research data and IPR: project leads collaborating with overseas organisations in any capacity are required to have assurances in place before the start of the research project regarding access to research data, outputs, resource material, as well as have an understanding of the expectations of the overseas organisation regarding ownership of material

Non-UK based consultancy costs would need to be listed under ‘Other Directly Incurred Costs’ on the proposal form, and applicants must demonstrate clear value for money and justification.

Non-UK organisations who are contributing their own resources (in cash or in-kind) can be ‘project partners’ on grant proposals. This contribution could include supporting the time of researchers to be involved in the grant. A letter of support from the project partner would need to accompany the proposal.

Mentoring

Where mentoring is included for any of the researchers, salary costs to cover the mentor’s time can be claimed from the grant; this is unless otherwise specified in the funding opportunity guidance. Their costs should be included in the directly allocated or directly incurred categories in the resources and costs section.

Archaeology: radiocarbon dating

AHRC provides funding to the National Environment Isotope Facility (NEIF) to allow our research communities to make use of their radiocarbon dating function. If your project requires radiocarbon dates you must request these from the NEIF. Only in cases where the NEIF confirms they are unable to provide the service required will use of other facilities be considered.

All applicants must discuss their requirements with the Director of the Radiocarbon Facility, Dr Rachel Wood (email: rachel.wood@arch.ox.ac.uk), before submitting their proposal to AHRC. Further details on the facility and how to apply for dates if your project is successful can be found at National Environmental Isotope Facility.

This guidance applies to all the funding opportunities run by AHRC.

Outside of our standard schemes, some funding opportunities may emphasise skills development or capacity-building. In those cases we will consider requests to use other facilities on a case-by-case basis. We advise applicants to discuss these cases with AHRC before submitting the application. If use of alternative facilities is proposed, the costs should be included in the proposal and justified as normal.

Requesting fewer than 100 radiocarbon dates

If you require fewer than 100 radiocarbon dates and the NEIF has confirmed they are able to provide the type of service required, you must not include the costs for these in your application. You must state within your application that you have discussed this with the NEIF, and they are able to provide the service required.

If your proposal is successful you will still need to complete an application to the NEIF panel for confirmation of the dates.

Requesting more than 100 radiocarbon dates

If you require more than 100 radiocarbon dates and the NEIF has confirmed they are able to provide the type of service required, you must include the costs for these in your application as part of the proposed budget. As with all proposed costs, you should also include justification for the cost of the radiocarbon dating as part of the Justification of Resources. You must also state within your application that you have discussed this with the NEIF, and they are able to provide the service required. If your proposal is successful you will still need to complete an application to the NEIF panel for confirmation of the dates.

If NEIF is unable to provide the type of service required

If the NEIF confirm they are unable to provide the type of service required for the proposed project then costs for the dating must be included in the application and justified as normal.

Application guidance

The Funding Service

All funding applications should be made through the Funding Service. Links are available from specific funding opportunities. You can find guidance on:

Creating a proposal

Once you have completed your proposal it should be submitted to your research organisation for review and approval, they will submit your proposal to AHRC. You must allow sufficient time before the deadline for your research organisation to be able to do this (some research organisations will also have their own internal deadlines).

The published scheme deadline is for submission of the completed application to the AHRC by the research organisation and late proposals will not be considered. Applicants must ensure that they have obtained the permission of any other person named on the proposal form (for example any project co-lead (UK) or project partners) for the provision of their personal information to UKRI and the processing of their data by UKRI for the purpose of assessing the application and management of any funding awarded.

Submission rules

If a proposal breaks any of the scheme submission rules (either in this guidance or funding opportunity) in any way it may be rejected.

Late proposals will not be accepted.

If a proposal has been rejected following initial checks but before it has been to reviewers, it will be eligible for resubmission. If there are any restricted eligibility criteria for the scheme to which you are applying, at the point of resubmission you must still be eligible to apply to this scheme.

Use of links and references

References can be included within the core question answers.

Applications should be self-contained, and hyperlinks can only be used to provide links directly to references. Assessors are not required to access links to carry out assessment or recommend a funding decision.

Hyperlinks can be provided to relevant publications or online resources. To ensure the information’s integrity is maintained include, where possible, persistent identifiers such as digital object identifiers.

References should be included in the appropriate question section of the application and be easily identifiable by the assessors.

Assessors usually require the name and date to be able to easily identify a reference. This is dependent on research discipline.

Subjects

For all schemes you are asked to classify your proposal in terms of subject area and keywords. This information will be used to assist in selecting peer reviewers.

Your proposal will be considered by panellists who have a broad knowledge and understanding of the subject areas and disciplines with which their panel is concerned, they might not necessarily have detailed knowledge of your particular specialism. Specialist advice is made available to the peer review panel via the reviews provided by Peer Review College members. You are encouraged to address your proposal to a group of peers conceived as broadly as is consistent with the specialist nature of your project. We are committed to the principle that the work we fund should be disseminated to as wide an audience as possible, both within the UK and internationally.

Submitting more than one application to the same scheme

AHRC considers that you should be responsible for determining your own research priorities, and you should normally only submit one proposal at any one time to the same scheme. If you choose to submit more than one proposal, you must demonstrate that you will be able to carry out all of the projects that are successful. You should describe fully the scope and extent of your involvement in each of the projects, as our reviewers will evaluate the extent to which you, any leaders and members of the research team (as appropriate), are able actively to conduct and manage the research set out in your proposals.

Joint proposals

Proposals with leaders from more than one Research Organisation should be submitted as one application. If successful, payment of the grant will be made to the institution in which the Project Lead is based and which submitted the proposal.

Confidentiality and use of the information supplied

By submitting a proposal you are giving your permission to UKRI to use all the information provided to process your proposal, to administer your award if successful, to conduct analysis on all proposals received and all of those which are funded.

The entirety of your proposal will be shared with the peer reviewers and panels who are selected to assess your proposal.

Where the funding opportunity is co-funded by another organisation outside of UKRI we will share the entirety of your proposal with that organisation.

AHRC will publish on publicly available websites some details of funded projects such as the project title, project summary, names of all project leads, project co-leads, research assistants, research and innovation associates, names of project partner organisations, project dates, amount awarded.

Read the details of how we handle your data and your data protection rights.

Assessment criteria and expert review

Detailed guidance on the assessment criteria used is published on the relevant funding opportunity. You can also refer to Core section questions and how they will be assessed.

Publication metrics

As part of our commitment to support the recommendations and principles set out by the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), AHRC reviewers and panel members are advised not to use journal-based metrics, such as journal impact factors, as a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess a leader’s contributions, or to make funding decisions.

The content of a paper is more important than publication metrics, or the identity of the journal in which it was published, especially for early-stage researchers. Expert review and panel members are encouraged to consider the value and impact of all research outputs (including datasets, software, other digital outputs, inventions, patents, preprints, other commercial activities) in addition to research publications. We advise our expert reviewers and panel members to consider a broad range of impact measures including qualitative indicators of research impact, such as influence on policy and practice.

How we make decisions

The assessment process for each application depends on the type of funding. More details are available on how we make decisions and the assessment process.

The Peer Review College

The Peer Review College members provide AHRC with expert reviews. We have additional guidance for reviewers.

AHRC reserves the right to seek reviews from specialists who are not current members of the Peer Review College if suitable College members are not available, or where such peer review input is required as part of agreements with other funding bodies. Reviews may be sought from specialists within the UK or abroad.

All peer reviews are subject to a quality check. Reviews deemed by AHRC to be of insufficient quality will be rejected from the assessment process.

Confidentiality

The Research Councils operate an open peer review process, while at the same time preserving reviewer anonymity. Reviewers are required to treat proposals in confidence and keep any personally retained documentation (paper or electronic) secure. Reviewers should review all materials in accordance with instructions given in the Funding Service and should refer any questions relating to reviewing the application to the Council, and must not contact applicants. Applicants may be given the opportunity to respond to any completed reviews, the applicants’ research organisation will also be given access to the anonymised review to support transparency of decision making. The Councils expect all parties to respect the roles of all involved in the peer review process.

Peer Reviewer grading scale

Unless otherwise indicated grades awarded to all proposals and their definitions are:

6 Exceptional: the application is outstanding, it addresses all of the assessment criteria and meets them to an exceptional level
5 Excellent: the application is very high quality, it addresses most of the assessment criteria and meets them to an excellent level. There are very minor weaknesses
4 Very good: the application demonstrates considerable quality, it meets most of the assessment criteria to a high level. There are minor weaknesses
3 Good: the application is of good quality, it meets most of the assessment criteria to an acceptable level, but not across all aspects of the proposed activities. There are weaknesses
2 Weak: the application is not sufficiently competitive, it meets some of the assessment criteria to an adequate level. There are, however, significant weaknesses
1 Poor: the application is flawed or of unsuitable quality for funding. It does not meet the assessment criteria to an adequate level

A review is considered unsupportive where it is scored 1 to 3.

Sifting of proposals

Proposals will be sifted before going to moderating panel based on the following principles.

AHRC will reject a proposal upon submission where the proposal does not meet the published eligibility criteria; either relating to documentation requirements or where it does not meet the aims or criteria of the scheme to which it has been submitted.

AHRC will sift proposals against quality criteria, solely on the basis of information supplied by an AHRC peer review process.

The sifting process

The sifting process occurs in two stages.

Sift stage 1

Each proposal is assessed on the following criteria, in reference to eligibility and assessment requirements:

all application documents must be eligible under the scheme requirements
all applicants and named staff must be eligible under the scheme requirements

The proposal must meet the aims and criteria of the scheme to which it has been submitted.

Sift stage 2

A sifting decision is made based on the overall confidence levels and grades given by the peer review process. An application will be rejected when the threshold of unsupportive review scores is reached. Details of the threshold will be included on the relevant funding opportunity webpage on the UKRI Funding Finder. If an application is rejected at sift stage 2, it will not be made available for Applicant Response. The reviews will be made available to the applicant through the Funding Service.

This change of process has been rolled out on funding opportunities across 2024 and 2025. Check the funding finder text of specific opportunities for details.

Responding to a review

For opportunities and schemes that have an expert review stage and where the application is not rejected at sift stage 2, the applicant will be given the right of reply to the reviews received.

The applicant response allows the project lead to correct any factual errors or conceptual misunderstandings, or to respond to any queries highlighted in the comments from the peer reviewers. It is not intended to be an opportunity to change or re-constitute a proposal in the light of the reviewers’ comments. You are not obliged to submit a response, but it is strongly recommended that you do so, even where all the reviews are favourable, as responses from applicants are forwarded to the moderation panel, and taken into account.

The response should be self-contained and not depend on additional information such as external links. Hyperlinks can only be used to provide links directly to references. Panels are advised to base their assessment on the information in the peer reviews and applicant response and are under no obligation to access links to any other type of content.

The response must be no more than 500 words per review and may include images and tables.

Applicants have 14 calendar days to respond to reviewers’ comments; completed responses must be submitted to us by 4pm UK time on the due date stated. Extension requests will not usually be permitted, except on an exceptional basis for EDI reasons and based on the applicants individual circumstances. Extensions can be requested by emailing AHRC at operations@ahrc.ukri.org.

For schemes with open deadlines, we will not be able to provide you with exact dates of when we will contact you for a response. You will be contacted by email with a deadline once the reviews have been obtained.

AHRC will not issue reminders for overdue responses and it is the PL’s responsibility to ensure they submit their response by the deadline set. If the response is not received by the deadline the application will proceed to the panel stage without it.

Peer review panels

Non-standing Peer Review Panels are convened on an ad hoc basis from the AHRC Peer Review College membership.

In selecting panel members we will aim to achieve a balance in terms of gender, ethnicity, institution and regional distribution, and to achieve a range of expertise which broadly reflects that of the applicant population.

The proposal, peer reviews, and the PL’s response to these reviews will be considered individually by members of the peer review panel and then discussed at the panel meeting.

The peer review panel will determine a final grade for each application and will rank proposals in order of priority for funding. The panel will consider only the expert peer reviews and the PL’s response to these reviews to reach its decisions. Final funding decisions will rest with AHRC.

Peer review panel members are not permitted to discuss with applicants the content of any proposals they have reviewed, either during or after the assessment process.

Panel grading scale

The panel grade applications using the following scale:

10: The application is exceptional; it very strongly meets all of the assessment criteria to the highest standard, the panel agrees that it is difficult to articulate how the application could be improved
9: The application is outstanding; it very strongly meets all of the assessment criteria
8: The application is excellent; it strongly meets all of the assessment criteria
7: The application is very good; it meets the assessment criteria well but with some minor weaknesses and limitations
6: The application is good; it meets the assessment criteria well but with some clear weaknesses and limitations
5: The application is adequate; it meets the assessment criteria but with clear weaknesses and limitations
4 The application is weak; it meets the assessment criteria but with significant weaknesses and limitations
3:The application is poor; it meets the assessment criteria but has major weaknesses and limitations
2: The application is unsatisfactory; it does not meet one or more of the assessment criteria
1: The application is unsatisfactory; it does not meet any of the assessment criteria

Award decisions

Notification of the outcome

All outcome notifications are sent to the email address on your Funding Service account.

AHRC is unable to provide information on why your proposal was unsuccessful.

Applicants are advised that under no circumstances should they contact peer review panel members to discuss individual proposals, meeting details or outcomes.

If you are successful find out how to accept your offer.

AHRC, on advice from peer reviewers or panels, may remove costs if they are not justified or not permitted under the scheme rules.

Resubmission policy

Proposals that have been rejected at any point in the assessment process

If the application is rejected at any point in the assessment process (either following the peer  review stage or the panel meeting stage) applicants will not be allowed to resubmit the same, or  substantively similar, application to any scheme or opportunity.

This policy applies for both resubmission to the same opportunity and applying for a different opportunity provided by any part of UKRI.

Similarly, applications rejected by other UKRI bodies will not be allowed to resubmit the same, or substantively similar, application to any AHRC opportunity.

Proposals that have been rejected prior to the assessment process

An application will normally be rejected prior to assessment stage, because of a failure to adhere to AHRC’s scheme or opportunity rules. Applicants rejected in this way will be informed of the reasons why their application was rejected. Those that had been submitted to our applicant-led schemes may be given the opportunity to resubmit the same application again once the errors have been corrected. This applies only to these schemes: Research Grants, Catalyst Awards, Curiosity Awards, Follow-on Funding for Impact and Engagement.

What constitutes a new proposal?

A new proposal should involve a significant change of focus from any previous proposal you have submitted to AHRC or other UKRI bodies, and will likely be accompanied by a different set of costings to deliver the project. Proposals which demonstrate only minor amendments from previous submissions, for example specific changes based on previous peer review feedback alone, will be counted as resubmissions.

We expect new proposals to have fresh or significantly modified objectives or an entirely revised methodological and analytical approach to a research question. Any proposal which does not meet either of these criteria will be judged a resubmission.

When preparing any new proposal, a good approach is to critically ask yourself if any of the following apply. If the answer is ‘yes’ then your proposal may be considered a resubmission:

broadly the same title or proposal summary
overall aim of a new proposal and its high-level objectives is broadly the same
broadly the same research questions
broadly the same resources required to carry out the research
Project Lead and Project co-Lead (UK) on a proposal are amended (for example swapping of roles) whilst the content of the proposal is essentially the same

This is not an exhaustive list and none of these points in isolation will be used to define a resubmission.

In order to treat everyone fairly, we cannot engage in discussions about whether a particular proposal will be treated as a resubmission before you apply. We advise that you consult your organisation before making an application which you believe may be considered a resubmission.

Research outputs, outcomes and impact

If successful, you will be required to submit outputs, outcomes and impacts linked to your award through Researchfish. Information can be added to Researchfish at any point once the grant has been made and beyond its conclusion. Although you can add information to Researchfish at any time, you will be required to submit this information to AHRC at a point during the year which will be communicated in advance to all Research Organisations. This allows for a deeper and longer-term record of the results of AHRC funding. Researchers will need to create an account in order to sign in and start submitting outcomes.

The monitoring of existing or past awards may be taken into account in the assessment of future applications, particularly if this monitoring is found to be less than satisfactory.

Financial reporting

As part of the terms and conditions of an AHRC award, your Research Organisation will be required to submit a final expenditure statement (FES) no later than three months after the end of the award period. Final expenditure statements are made available in the Research Organisation’s Funding Service account as soon as the end date of the grant has been reached. The Research Organisation will need to complete and submit the statement using the Funding Service.

It is the responsibility of the Research Organisation to monitor when the FES is due and to submit on time. The Funding Service system will automatically provide reminders of FES due dates, but AHRC will not notify grant holders or Research Organisations directly.

If we do not receive a final expenditure statement we will:

recover 20% of the funds if not received in three months of the grant end date
recover all funds if not received within six months

See Meeting UKRI terms and conditions for funding for more information. Research Organisations may appeal against sanctions, but appeals must be received within 60 days of the pay run in which the sanction was imposed at the latest.

AHRC complaints and appeals procedures

For details on the complaints procedure or appeal process, refer to the Complaints policy.

Additional information

Demonstrating potential impact

The excellent research funded by the UK Research Councils has a huge impact on the wellbeing and economy of the UK. Working together with our wider communities and other partners, we want to ensure that these impacts are effectively demonstrated and supported throughout the research lifecycle and beyond. This will add value, stimulate interest from wider stakeholders, including the general public, and where needed, actively highlight the need for continued investment in the research base.

The onus rests with applicants to demonstrate how they will achieve this excellence with impact, bearing in mind that impacts can take many forms and be promoted in different ways.

The Research Councils describe impact as the demonstrable contribution that excellent research makes to society and the economy. Impact embraces all the extremely diverse ways in which research-related knowledge and skills benefit individuals, organisations and nations by:

fostering global economic performance, and specifically the economic competitiveness of the United Kingdom
increasing the effectiveness of public services and policy
enhancing quality of life, health and creative output

This accords with the Royal Charters of the Councils and with HM Treasury guidance on the appraisal of economic impact.

The Research Councils give their funding recipients considerable flexibility and autonomy in the delivery of their research, postgraduate training and knowledge transfer activities.

This flexibility and autonomy encompasses project definition, management, collaboration, researcher development activities, participation, promotion and the dissemination of research outputs; this approach enables excellence with impact.

In return, the Research Councils expect those who receive funding to:

demonstrate an awareness of the wider environment and context in which their research takes place
demonstrate an awareness of the social and ethical implications of their research, beyond usual research conduct considerations, and take account of public attitudes towards those issues
engage actively with the public at both the local and national levels about their research and its broader implications
identify potential benefits and beneficiaries from the outset, and through the full life cycle of the projects
maintain professional networks that extend beyond their own discipline and research community
publish results widely, considering the academics, user and public audiences for research outcomes
exploit results where appropriate, in order to secure social and economic return to the UK
manage collaborations professionally, in order to secure maximum impact without restricting the future progression of research
ensure that whilst working on AHRC grants, all research staff and students develop research, vocational and entrepreneurial skills that are matched to the demands of their future career paths
take responsibility for the duration, management and exploitation of data for future use
work in partnership with the Research Councils for the benefit of the UK

The expectations clarify the position of the Research Councils with respect to impact, rather than introducing a new approach. Many of these expectations are already incorporated into Research Council processes and guidance, for example:

exploitation is addressed within grant terms and conditions
continuing professional development (CPD) of all staff working on AHRC grants in line with the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers is a recommendation

AHRC recognises that not all research will have direct dissemination, but aims to encourage researchers to maximise potential impacts where they occur. The nature of your research may mean that identifying potential impacts or beneficiaries outside academia is not straightforward at the time of application. Where this is the case you should explain the reasons throughout the application, in the same way as demonstrating impact identifying how the research will be beneficial should also be evidenced throughout the application. Excellent research without obvious or immediate dissemination will continue to be funded by the AHRC and will not be disadvantaged as a result of the introduction of these sections to applications.

Access to research outputs

If one of the proposed outputs is a journal article, the applicant must ensure that they comply with the former UKRI position on access to research outputs, see Shaping our open access policy.

AHRC subject remit and proposal classification

In order for a proposal to be eligible to be submitted to the AHRC, the majority of the research, the main focus of its research questions and problems, must lie within the Arts and Humanities.

For proposals that cross Research Council boundaries the Research Councils have put in place the following agreement on what to do if your research spans different disciplines.

Proposal classification

You are required to classify your proposal as part of the application. This information serves primarily as means to assist AHRC in identifying the most appropriate peer reviewers and panellists to assess the proposal. It is therefore very important to complete this section accurately.

In order for a proposal to be eligible for consideration by AHRC, the choice of primary research area must come from the list in Annex A.

Annex A: AHRC disciplines

Histories, Cultures and Heritage

Level 1 – Archaeology

Level 2:

Prehistoric Archaeology
Archaeology of Literate Societies
Archaeology of Human Origins
Archaeological Theory
Maritime Archaeology
Landscape and Environmental Archaeology
Industrial Archaeology

Level 1 – Classics

Level 2:

Classical Literature
Classical Reception
Philosophy, Thought and Religion
Epigraphy and Papyrology
Languages and Linguistics

Level 1 – Cultural and Museum Studies

Level 2:

Gender and Sexuality Studies
Museum and Gallery Studies
Cultural Studies and Pop Culture
Policy, Arts Management and Creative Industries
Cultural Geography
Heritage Management
Conservation of Art and Textiles

Level 1 – Development Studies

Level 2:

Development Studies

Level 1 – History

Level 2:

Cultural History
Political History
Imperial/Colonial History
History of Science/Medicine/Technology
War Studies
Religious History
Economic and Social History
American Studies
Post-Colonial Studies

Level 1 – Human Geography

Level 2:

Historical Geography

Level 1 – Information and Communication Technologies

Level 2:

Information and Knowledge Management

Level 1 – Law and Legal Studies

Level 2:

Jurisprudence/Philosophy of Law
Human Rights
Criminal Law and Criminology
International Law
EU Law
Public Law
Comparative Law
Common Law, including Commercial Law
Law Regulated by Statute
Law Relating to Property
Legal History

Level 1 – Library and Information Studies

Level 2:

Archives
Records Management
Information Science and Retrieval
Library Studies
Information and Knowledge Management
Computational Studies

Level 1 – Philosophy

Level 2:

Political Philosophy
Philosophy of Mind
Aesthetics
Metaphysics
History of Ideas
Language and Philosophical Logic
Epistemology
Ethics
History of Philosophy
Philosophy of Science and Mathematics and Mathematical Logic
Philosophy of Religion

Level 1 – Political Science and International Studies

Level 2:

Diplomacy and International Relations

Level 1 – Theology, Divinity and Religion

Level 2:

Old Testament
Modern Theology
Judaism
Islam
Liturgy
Systematic Theology
Church History and History of Theology
New Testament
East Asian Religions
Buddhism
Hinduism
Jainism
Sikhism
Alternative Spiritualties/New Religious Movements
Atheism/Secularism
Inter-faith Relations
Contemporary Religion

Creative and Performing Arts

Level 1 – Dance

Level 2:

History of Dance
Dance Performance
Dance Notation
Social Dance
Choreography

Level 1 – Design

Level 2:

Architecture History, Theory and Practice
Design History, Theory and Practice
Digital Art and Design
Product Design

Level 1 – Drama and Theatre Studies

Level 2:

Theatre and Society
Dramaturgy
Scenography
Performance and Live Art
Theatre and History
Theories of Theatre
Drama and Theatre – Other

Level 1 – Media

Level 2:

Media and Communication Studies
Journalism
Publishing
Television History, Theory and Criticism
New Media/Web-Based Studies
Film History, Theory and Criticism

Level 1 – Music

Level 2:

Traditional Music
History of Music
Music and Society
Popular Music
Composition
Classical Music
Musical Performance
Musicology

Level 1 – Visual Arts

Level 2:

Fine Art History, (Theory and Practice)
Photography (History, Theory and Practice)
Art Theory and Aesthetics
Community Art including Art and Health
Installation and Sound Art (History, Theory and Practice)
Ethnography and Anthropology
Digital Arts (History, Theory and Practice)
Applied Arts (History, Theory and Practice)
Art History
Design History, (Theory and Practice)
Film-based media (History, Theory and Practice)
Time-based media (History, Theory and Practice)

Languages and Literature

Level 1 – Languages and Literature

Level 2:

American Studies
Interpreting and Translation
Life writing
History and Development of the English Language
Literary and Cultural Theory
Post-Colonial Studies
Scandinavian Studies
Asiatic and Oriental Studies
Middle Eastern and African
Italian Studies
Hispanic, Portuguese and Latin Studies
English Language and Literature
Creative Writing
Comparative Literature
French Studies
Celtic Studies
Medieval Literature
Ethnography and Anthropology
Australasian Studies
Comparative Studies
German, including Dutch and Yiddish
Russian, Slavonic and East European Languages and Literature
Gender and Sexuality

Level 1 – Linguistics

Level 2:

Textual Editing and Bibliography
Syntax
Semantics and Pragmatics
Phonetics
Language Variation and Change
Lexicon
Linguistic Theory
Morphology and Phonology
Applied Linguistics
Linguistics (General)

Subjects where the AHRC and the ESRC share interests and responsibilities

The following is a list of some of the main areas of study where the AHRC and the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) share interests.

Area studies

AHRC supports research that is concerned with the culture, history, language and religion of specific regions.

ESRC supports research that is concerned with the society, economy, politics and human geography of specific regions.

Communications, cultural and media studies

AHRC supports research that seeks to understand communications, culture and media through the study of phenomena such as the visual arts, film and television, history, language, literature and performance.

ESRC supports research that approaches communications, culture and media through the study of sociology, social theory, social anthropology, politics and economics. Note that there is also an important interface between AHRC, ESRC and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) in this area where proposed research projects include a significant engagement with, or advancement of, communication technologies. In the case of relevant research applications, the AHRC or ESRC will liaise with EPSRC when consulting reviewers and making funding decisions.

Cultural policy and management

AHRC supports historical, comparative and empirical research that addresses questions of human value in creativity and culture, including both the individual and collective experience of creativity and culture. AHRC also supports research in museum studies.

ESRC supports research into the psychological processes involved in creativity and the social and economic influences on and consequent impacts of creativity and culture, and public policy and management in this area.

Education

ESRC is the primary funding body for educational research across all subjects, including the arts and humanities. AHRC supports research where the imperative for the research questions resides in the arts and humanities, but there may be an educational element. Examples include research into the history of education, children’s literature, creative art and performance in (but not for) educational environments, religious teaching and scholarship, and the role of education in librarianship and museums practice.

Gender studies

AHRC supports research that is concerned with sex and gender as they relate to the creative and performing arts, language, law, literature, religion and history of all periods.

ESRC supports research that is concerned with sex and gender as they relate to society, the economy and politics.

Human geography

ESRC is the primary funding body for human geography. However, AHRC supports research in cultural geography, which includes research into the interpretation of the cultural landscape; cultural constructions of nature and environment; creative and imaginative aspects of geographical thought and practice; relationships between space, place and cultural identity.

AHRC also supports research in historical geography, which includes geographical change over time, connecting the local to the global; histories of geography and cartography; and the study of past geographies and their legacies.

History

AHRC supports historical research covering all periods of history from ancient times to modern, and in all parts of the world. Applicants whose research focuses primarily on the very recent past will need to show in their proposal how and why their focus is indeed predominantly historical, for example how the study will focus on change over a defined period of time or will make predominant use of historical modes of analysis.

ESRC supports historical research across all periods that seeks to understand the development of social and economic arrangements over time and applies social and economic theories. Research focusing on contemporary or near-contemporary social, political, economic or geographical themes should normally be directed to ESRC.

International relations

ESRC is the primary funding body for international relations, but AHRC supports research that is concerned with the relationship between international relations and the culture, history, language and religion of specific countries and regions.

Librarianship and information science

AHRC supports research into the practice and techniques of information and knowledge management as they relate to librarianship, archives and records management, information science and information systems, storage and retrieval, and professional practice in journalism and the media. AHRC also supports research into information use and users in specific organisational environments.

ESRC supports research into the broader socio-economic context of information use and policy, information flows within and between organisations, and the shaping, use and potential of information and communication technologies.

ESRC also supports research on knowledge management and on forms and structures of knowledge, as they relate to the wider socioeconomic context. Note that there is also an important interface between AHRC, ESRC and EPSRC in this area where proposed research projects include a significant engagement with, or advancement of, technologies dealing with information management. In the case of relevant research applications, AHRC or ESRC will liaise with EPSRC when consulting reviewers and making funding decisions.

Linguistics

AHRC supports research into the structure, history, theory and description of language and languages. This includes the development and exploration of theories of language, the elucidation of the historical development of languages and the production of descriptions of languages or features of languages.

ESRC supports research in areas of computational linguistics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and interdisciplinary social science research involving linguistics. Both Councils also fund research into phonetics and applied linguistics relating to the areas for which they are responsible.

Law

AHRC supports research into the content, procedures, theory, philosophy and history of the law. This includes studies of legal systems and legislation in all periods of history and in all parts of the world.

ESRC supports socio-legal studies, which are concerned with the social, political and economic influences on and impact of the law and the legal system.

Philosophy

AHRC supports research in philosophy, covering all topics, methods and periods. This includes research into ethical theory and applied ethics, for example bio-ethics, professional ethics and environmental ethics.

ESRC supports research into the social political and economic influences on and effects of ethical positions of institutions and individuals.

Religious Studies

AHRC supports research into religions and belief systems of all kinds, in all periods of history and in all parts of the world. This includes research into the ethics of religions and belief systems, and their application in socioeconomic, scientific and technological contexts.

ESRC supports research that is concerned with the social and economic influences on and the impacts of religious beliefs and groups.

Science and technology studies

ESRC is the primary funding body for research on innovation and the interdisciplinary study of science, technology and society.

AHRC supports research into the history, law and philosophy of science, technology and medicine, as well as their interface with religion. AHRC also supports research into the interpretation and representation of, and engagement with, science, technology and medicine through art, literature, performance, museums, galleries, libraries and archives.

Social anthropology

ESRC is the primary funding body for social anthropology, but AHRC also supports anthropological research where the research questions and methods are significantly concerned with arts and humanities phenomena and critical, historical and practice-led approaches. This includes studies of archaeology, history, language, law, literature, the creative and performing arts and religion.

Page viewed: 5:28 pm on 4 February 2026