ADR UK Research Fellowships: £200k to Unlock Public Data

This funding opportunity is for researchers who want to run high-quality, policy-relevant studies using UK public sector administrative data without waiting years to assemble that data themselves. The official announcement is for ADR UK Research Fellowships 2025 (RF2025), and the opportunity page is now marked as Closed. The call was open from 13 November 2025 and closed on 26 February 2026.

The practical value of this page is to help you decide quickly whether this fellowship is a fit, and if it is, exactly what a realistic application requires in plain terms.

The key facts from the official page are these: projects can be up to 18 months, the maximum award is up to £200,000 on a Full Economic Cost (FEC) basis, projects must use ADR England flagship datasets, and applications are assessed on strong policy impact potential and feasible use of those datasets.

At a glance

What this opportunity is for, in plain language

This is a data-enabled fellowship rather than a grant for collecting your own survey data. The funding is designed to support research that demonstrates the policy impact potential of administrative data. In concrete terms, that means your project should use linked or longitudinal public-sector data to answer a question with real public-good relevance.

The program is not trying to fund all data-heavy research. It is trying to fund research that uses ADR England flagship data to produce answers that can inform public services, policy decisions, and civic understanding. The UKRI call text frames this in four objectives:

• useful research, with clear and feasible policy impact
• useful data, showing how your work helps future users work with flagship datasets
• useful engagement, with planned interaction with government/public stakeholders
• community building, including participation in communities of practice

So, this is as much about how you will use the data responsibly and engage with the ecosystem as it is about your final outputs.

Who should apply: quick fit test

The fellowship is broad across disciplines as long as you are doing credible research using administrative data. It is not limited to one sector such as health or education. The strongest applications are usually those where the dataset is directly tied to a social or public-services question and where the research design stays realistic for 15 to 18 months of protected work.

Use this self-check before you invest time in drafting:

1. Can your core question be answered primarily with ADR England flagship datasets?
2. Can you explain the public benefit in terms of policy relevance or service improvement?
3. Can you realistically complete the design and approvals in a roughly 18-month period?
4. Does your institution support administrative-data approvals and secure infrastructure?
5. Are you prepared to show evidence of feasibility (variable availability, access pathway, and governance) rather than just ambition?

If you answer “yes” to most of these, you are likely in the right lane.

Who is eligible

The official page states this call is open to organisations and individuals meeting standard ESRC conditions, and all researchers irrespective of career stage are encouraged to apply. In the call text, the specific exclusions are explicit: international project leads, international co-leads, and international fellows are not eligible, and applicants must remain UK-based for the full fellowship period because ADR England flagship data are only accessible from within the UK.

For practical planning, this means:

• If you are PI-led from a UK university, UK charity research unit, or other eligible UK organisation, you are potentially eligible.
• If you are outside the UK for the full period, this scheme is not practical.
• If your team is international, the leadership rules are strict; non-UK-led roles likely need careful interpretation with the institution.

The call also explicitly says this is a good target for people new to this space only if they include strong mentoring and capacity-building as part of the plan. That does not mean newcomers are excluded; it means your proposal should not pretend you have deep administrative-data experience if you do not.

What this funding covers and what it does not cover

Funding is at Full Economic Cost. The call page states a maximum of £200,000 across the project and a practical expectation that ESRC contributes up to 80% of FEC while the lead institution covers the remainder. The programme can be attractive financially, but that “co-funding” model means you should work closely with your research office early on; the funding calculation is done at the institutional level, not only at the PI level.

The fellowship has strict scope constraints:

• Core work must use ADR England flagship datasets.
• Projects are expected to stay in the fellowship window and be achievable.
• Proposals too focused on supplementary data should not crowd out the use of the flagship datasets.
• Research that does not pass the public benefit and accreditation tests is not fundable.

This is a practical filter many teams miss: you can add a small private or local dataset to enrich analysis, but if your project story is not clearly anchored in ADR datasets, it is usually rejected early.

Data access and secure research readiness

A major reason this opportunity feels harder than other fellowships is not the word count. It is the governance stack around access.

The call identifies the Five Safes model via ADR UK frameworks, with both researcher accreditation and project accreditation requirements depending on route and data owner approvals.

For this fellowship, the official route is typically:

• Become an Accredited Researcher (via ONS People and Project Service) with evidence of training where needed.
• Have your project accredited (for feasibility, legal/ethical standing, and public-interest suitability), with relevant approvals from data owners.
• Ensure any required data sharing agreements are covered in your planning.
• Include SafePoint-related requirements where applicable and feasible.

You should treat this as part of your application design, not as an admin task after submission. The reviewers want to know you have a realistic path from idea to analytic access.

There are operational notes that matter:

• The SRS and data environments have constraints on outputs. The call notes that only static outputs such as tables, graphs, reports, or code are allowed for export in some secure environments.
• Machine learning is considered case-by-case and model files themselves are often restricted for export.
• Access set-up may require institution-level coordination, which can delay starts if you underestimate lead times.

In short: build approval lead time into your plan and do not present a timeline that assumes instant data handover.

How to decide if this is worth your time

You should apply only if the project depends on linked administrative data and if your institution can support the compliance pathway. This scheme has unusually high review standards on feasibility and governance, because each shortlisted project will likely use sensitive data in protected environments.

A practical decision framework:

• Fit with dataset: If the dataset is merely an optional add-on, don’t apply.
• Policy signal clarity: If you can only describe impact vaguely (“this should help policy”), the proposal is weak.
• Feasibility confidence: If you cannot describe where missingness, linkage, or approvals may break your design, you risk rejection.
• Institutional support: If your institution cannot co-fund remaining FEC or manage approvals quickly, the risk is high.
• Time realism: If you need more than six months just to reach first secure environment access, your Gantt is probably too aggressive.

If these points are mostly “strong yes,” then this is likely worth pursuing.

Application process (what actually happens)

This was submitted through the UKRI Funding Service, not Je-S. The official process on the page is:

1. Confirm you are the fellow and create/sign into a UKRI Funding Service account tied to your organisation.
2. Start from the funding page and work through the application questions.
3. Answer directly in text fields, upload only required files with valid file formats, and respect image rules.
4. Save drafts and review the read-only version before sending internally.
5. Send complete draft to your research office for institutional checks.
6. Final submission is made by the lead organisation.

Important constraints from the call:

• You must include your own image handling plan if you include visuals. Each image needs a caption and must stay under size and format limits.
• References should be self-contained. Links are not expected to be central to the assessor’s judgement.
• If application guidance is not followed, submissions can be rejected without review.
• After final submission, changes are not permitted.

Operationally, applications in this format typically fail when teams leave institutional processes to the last minute. The call itself is explicit that lead organisations can take time to check and submit, so treat internal sign-off as a formal milestone.

Assessment and decision process

The call uses a staged review process:

• Expert review against the opportunity criteria.
• For stronger applications, a formal response stage to reviewer comments.
• Unsupportive reviews can lead to rejection at an early stage.

The assessment areas listed include:

• vision and approach
• applicant capability to deliver
• career development
• host organisational support
• resources and cost justification
• ethics and responsible research and innovation
• feasibility and data requirements
• data management and sharing (if applicable)
• facilities

This list shows what to prioritise. A strong methods section alone is not enough if feasibility or governance is weak.

Timeline: what to track, not just dates

For RF2025 specifically:

• 13 November 2025 9:00 am — opening of the call
• 13 November 2025 — funding-service briefing webinar
• 18 November 2025 — dataset-specific RAPID briefing
• 26 February 2026 4:00 pm — close

Because the call is now closed, this is a planning template for future rounds and for resubmission behavior.

Resubmissions are allowed for previously unsuccessful ADR UK UKRI applications if revised according to UKRI’s resubmission policy. That means a non-successful bid can still be improved and reworked, which is unusual but important.

Practical next steps before writing (if this call were open)

A practical sequence that tends to reduce rework:

1. Write a one-paragraph proposal in plain language first.
2. Map each sentence to a specific dataset field or evidence source.
3. Confirm with your institution whether your lead can be on the fellowship and whether remaining FEC co-funding is realistic.
4. Start researcher accreditation and project approval conversations before you draft the narrative.
5. Build a data feasibility matrix: what you need, what is available, and the fallback if a key field is restricted.
6. Draft your impact section to identify end users, not just academic outputs.
7. Create a submission pack with internal compliance check points and fixed internal deadlines.

This sequence is usually more productive than polishing writing first.

What a strong application should include (and why)

Strong:

• A project problem that can be solved with ADR England data and does not require unrealistic bespoke collection.
• A realistic staffing and timeline plan with the 0.4 FTE / 0.6 FTE split reflected in costings.
• Evidence that ethics, data governance, and secure environment access are feasible.
• Practical engagement plan (not generic statements) for stakeholders and policy audiences.
• Clear data management and analysis plan, including what happens if missingness or linkage limits appear.

Weak:

• Overstating methodological complexity without evidence of access permissions.
• Presenting a social-impact narrative without a concrete pathway to policy users.
• Submitting a budget where host co-funding is not explained for the non-ESRC portion.
• Treating the fellowship as a personal travel grant rather than a structured data-heavy research programme.

Common mistakes to avoid

1. Assuming data access is immediate after award. For administrative data programmes, approvals and training usually involve multiple internal and external checkpoints.
2. Using generic social-benefit language but not defining outcomes and deliverables.
3. Underestimating the governance work and treating it as after the write-up.
4. Making “all data” a priority and ADR datasets a token mention.
5. Ignoring the requirement to include the research process in the funding submission narrative, especially in terms of feasibility and public benefit.
6. Forgetting that this is not an application route for international fellows or international project leadership.

FAQs

Is this only for established professors?

No. The official call is open to researchers irrespective of career stage. The review is staged to your career context.

Does this support a PhD student-led project?

The fellowship is intended for fellowship-level applicants, not as a student-only bid. Teams can include collaborators, and budget design may support students/assistants where appropriate.

Can I use a non-ADR England dataset as my main dataset and add ADR England later?

The published criteria indicate this is not aligned. The flagship datasets should be the foundation of your proposal.

What happens after submission if I make a mistake?

The page states that applications that do not follow guidance may be rejected or may not be eligible for amendment after submission. Build a pre-submission checklist and review step.

Can I resubmit if I am not funded?

Yes, if your previous UKRI ADR UK application was unsuccessful and you revise it in line with UKRI resubmission rules.

Can I apply if my team is not UK-based full time?

For this fellowship the rules are explicit about UK location for the fellowship duration, because data access is UK-based.

Can I ask for help if I have issues with the Funding Service?

Yes, support is offered through UKRI Funding Service support channels and ESRC-specific opportunity contacts. The call text includes dedicated emails and phone support for the UKRI service.

Official contact and useful links

• ADR UK Research Fellowships 2025 (official UKRI page)
• ADR UK website: https://www.adruk.org/
• ESR C contact for this scheme: [email protected]
• ONS SRS accreditation/helpdesk: [email protected]
• Dataset-specific queries: [email protected]

What to do now if this exact call is closed

If you are reading this after the closing date, treat the page as a strong design template for similar upcoming ADR UK calls. Three concrete actions still matter:

1. Keep a short statement of your idea and map it against the four objectives now.
2. Track where your project idea falls short in data access, institutional support, or cost split.
3. Use the eligibility and governance requirements from this call as a baseline for future rounds.

The fastest path to a stronger application is usually: narrow your research question to a specific policy problem, prove feasibility with concrete data-variable reasoning, and prepare the institutional support plan before writing the full narrative.

If this fellowship is the right vehicle for you, the next step is not writing a 20-page application immediately. The next step is to start with governance readiness: confirm accreditation path, confirm institution eligibility, and confirm that ADR England flagship data can actually support your question.