Engineering Biology Access to Infrastructure Pilot 2026: Up to £5 Million for UK Scale-Up Projects

Captured cycle: This page is retained for historical guidance. Confirm whether the program has reopened before planning an application.

Engineering Biology Access to Infrastructure Pilot 2026: Up to £5 Million for UK Scale-Up Projects

Innovate UK’s Engineering Biology Access to Infrastructure Pilot is a live UK grant competition for UK small and medium-sized businesses that have already demonstrated an engineering biology innovation in the laboratory and need the facilities, expertise and project plan to validate it at a larger scale. The opportunity is aimed at the difficult transition between proof in a lab and evidence that a product, process or service can work in commercially relevant conditions.

The competition has up to £5 million available in total. Eligible projects must have total costs between £200,000 and £750,000. Applications close at 11:00 a.m. UK time on 21 October 2026. A company considering the call should check scope and assemble its infrastructure partner promptly: eligibility depends on the project team having an appropriate UK scale-up or validation organisation, and the required work must begin by February 2027.

Key details

The £5 million figure is the total pot for the competition, not a guaranteed award per applicant. Individual funding is constrained by eligible project costs, organisation type, research category and applicable grant intensity. Innovate UK says no more than £3 million can be awarded to one enterprise under this competition.

What the pilot is designed to fund

The call supports work that helps a laboratory-proven engineering biology innovation move toward pilot or demonstration scale. It recognises that many small companies cannot justify building specialist production, testing or validation infrastructure of their own. The programme is intended to help SMEs gain access to existing capabilities, including facilities such as catapults, bio-foundries and contract manufacturing organisations, then use them to generate evidence about technical performance and commercial viability.

The core innovation must arise from or enable engineering biology. The brief defines that as purposeful engineering of biological systems to create new or enhanced functions that do not occur naturally, or cannot be achieved efficiently by conventional methods. Examples include engineered organisms, cells, genetic circuits, enzymes, proteins and other biomolecular systems. Named technology areas include biosensors and diagnostics, biomanufacturing, biocatalysis, engineered materials, metabolic engineering, engineered proteins, cell and microbe engineering, synthetic biology platforms, genome engineering, and AI or computational biology when the core innovation is in engineered biological systems.

A credible project does more than book facility time. The proposed work should show how access to scale-up infrastructure will answer a specific technical question, support robust validation and reduce a defined barrier to commercial adoption. The competition expects industrial research and can include validation, manufacturing or regulatory progression where these activities directly support scale-up. It is not a route for general facility expansion, capital purchases, discovery research or a project that stops at a feasibility study.

Who the opportunity fits

The lead applicant must be a UK-registered micro, small or medium-sized enterprise. An SME may apply alone or lead a collaboration, but it still needs a qualifying scale-up and validation organisation in the project, either as a partner or subcontractor. Academic institutions cannot apply alone or lead. This makes the call most relevant to an SME with an existing engineered biology asset and a defined reason it cannot yet demonstrate performance at a meaningful scale.

The supporting organisation needs facilities or capabilities to help technology scale up and validate at scale. If it is a funded partner, it may be a UK-registered business of any size, academic institution, charity, not-for-profit, public-sector organisation or research and technology organisation. Each partner must be invited by the lead through the Innovation Funding Service, accept the invitation and complete its own project costs and Project Impact questions. For an eligible funded collaboration, the lead and at least one other organisation must request funding, and the application must explain why the parties are collaborating and how they will work together.

Subcontracting is also allowed. A subcontractor may be located anywhere in the UK and must be selected through the applicant’s normal procurement process. An overseas subcontractor is possible only with a clear case explaining why suitable UK suppliers cannot do the work. The application must provide evidence of UK contractors approached and explain why they could not participate; a lower overseas price is not enough by itself. Where timing allows, compare both routes before deciding whether a facility should join as a funded partner or contracted supplier.

Every funded organisation must carry out project work in the UK, intend to exploit the results in the UK, and spend most of its funding in the UK. Non-funded collaborators may be based outside the UK and can work from their home country, but they will not claim grant funding for their work. Costs for invited non-funded collaborators still count toward total eligible project costs, so account for their contribution carefully.

Project scope, costs and grant rates

The eligible project cost range is £200,000–£750,000, with a maximum project duration of 24 months. The project must start by 1 February 2027 and end by 31 January 2029. Projects must start on the first day of a month and cannot begin until Innovate UK has approved the Grant Offer Letter. These dates leave little room for a lengthy setup process; plan a realistic start and do not commit to beginning funded work before formal approval.

The maximum grant is not automatically equal to total costs. For industrial research, commercial organisations can request funding for up to 70% of eligible costs if micro or small, up to 60% if medium-sized, and up to 50% if large. Research organisations undertaking non-economic activity may share up to 50% of total eligible project costs. Within that share, eligible research organisations, charities, not-for-profits, RTOs and public-sector organisations may receive up to 100% of their eligible costs; academic institutions may receive up to 80% of full economic costs using the Transparent Approach to Costing method. The competition brief sets specific conditions for these rates, so each partner should confirm its category and calculate its own eligible contribution rather than assuming a headline percentage applies to the whole consortium.

Funding is under the Research, Development and Innovation Streamlined Subsidy Scheme. Innovate UK will check financial viability and eligibility after the application stage and cannot award organisations considered to be in financial difficulty. Costs should therefore be built from eligible project activities, with a clear explanation of why each partner, facility, subcontract and work package is necessary. The call does not fund capital purchases or infrastructure expansion, even where new equipment could be useful to a company’s future plans.

What makes a strong project fit

A strong fit should tell a connected story: the biology is engineered, the lab evidence supports readiness to scale, specialist infrastructure is necessary, and the planned pilot work will produce evidence that changes a commercial or technical decision. The application brief asks applicants to show robust validation, technical and economic viability, readiness to scale, commercial relevance, and a route to UK company growth.

Start with the bottleneck. State what the current laboratory process cannot establish, such as performance in a larger vessel, reproducibility across runs, downstream processing yield, product quality, cost per unit, or integration with a relevant manufacturing setting. Then connect each planned experiment or facility activity to a measurable output. Avoid making broad promises like “scale the platform” without defining the scale, test conditions, acceptance criteria and decision the results will support.

The scope section matters because out-of-scope applications are not sent for assessment. Describe precisely how the primary innovation meets the call’s engineering biology definition and which theme applies. Explain what is engineered and where the competitive advantage comes from. The brief says evidence may include patents, proprietary strains, engineered cell lines, protected know-how, software-enabled biological design capabilities, licences to relevant background intellectual property, or other demonstrable ownership or control of relevant assets. Select evidence that directly substantiates the particular innovation and explain any rights needed to conduct the proposed work.

The facility partner should appear as an integral part of the technical plan, not as a name added to meet a condition. Show what capabilities it contributes, who will do each activity, how its equipment and operating procedures support the work, and how outputs from one work package inform the next. For a subcontractor, explain why procurement selected it and justify the amount. For a collaboration, clarify governance, responsibilities, costs and how decisions will be made when results differ from expectations.

Application process and required materials

Applications are submitted through the Innovation Funding Service. The competition page divides the form into project details, application questions, finances and Project Impact. Set up the application team early, invite partners, and make sure each organisation can access the service and complete its part. The lead is responsible for correctness, eligibility, completion and submission. A submitted application can be reopened before the deadline, but any changes must be resubmitted before the competition closes.

The project details include a summary of up to 400 words, a public description of up to 250 words and a scope response of up to 400 words. The public description may be published if an award is made, potentially before project start, so it should explain the project clearly without commercial secrets. Do not include website addresses in answers: the application explicitly instructs applicants not to include URLs.

The application includes 17 numbered questions. Questions 1–7 are not scored and collect applicant location, theme, animal testing, permits and licences, international collaboration, export licensing, and Trusted Research and Innovation information. The remaining questions cover need or challenge; approach and innovation; team and resources; market awareness; outcomes and route to market; business growth impacts; project management; risks; added value; and costs and value for money. The call says assessors score all answers apart from questions 1–7. Treat each response as a focused case that answers the prompt directly and links evidence to the proposed delivery plan.

Three appendices are explicitly required: a project plan or Gantt chart for project management, and a risk register for the risks response. Each must be a PDF no larger than 10 MB, no more than two A4 pages and legible at 100% zoom. The approach and innovation answer and team and resources answer can each include one optional appendix under the same file and page limits. The brief also requests financial details from every organisation, including each organisation’s costs and funding information; academic institutions must use TRAC and upload support for their costs. Keep these materials consistent with the narrative and with partner cost entries in IFS.

Timeline and submission deadline

The competition opened on 7 September 2026 and closes on 21 October 2026 at 11:00 a.m. UK time. The published timetable gives 27 November 2026 as the notification date. Projects must start by 1 February 2027 and finish by 31 January 2029. The deadline is specific to the Innovation Funding Service brief; submit well before the final hour to allow for partner completion, finance checks and resubmission if something needs correction.

Innovate UK recommends contacting its support service at least 15 working days before the deadline if an applicant needs reasonable adjustments. Applications from people of all backgrounds are welcomed, and support can be requested for disability or a long-term condition. The published contact is [email protected] and 0300 321 4357; phone hours are 9:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m. and 2:00–5:00 p.m. UK time, Monday to Friday excluding bank holidays. The competition brief notes that support may be limited if requested close to the deadline.

Preparation strategy for applicants

First, run an eligibility screen before writing. Confirm that the lead company is an appropriately registered UK SME, the project fits the cost and duration limits, and a qualified UK organisation will support scale-up and validation. If a collaboration has multiple funded entities, agree responsibilities and cost assumptions early. If a project falls outside the cost band, Innovate UK requires a justification email at least 10 working days before close and may decide whether to approve it; do not assume a non-standard budget will be accepted.

Second, build a scale-up evidence chain. Summarise the current lab baseline, identify which conditions change at pilot scale, and list the measurements needed to demonstrate success. Define what a successful, borderline or unsuccessful result would mean for the next commercial step. Keep targets proportionate to the existing evidence. The application is stronger when the proposed work tests a specific uncertainty than when it simply lists activities or facility access.

Third, map the commercial case to the technical work. The market-awareness question requests market size and references where available, customer segments, supply chains, business models, barriers to entry, UK position and an impact-validation approach such as a techno-economic assessment. The route-to-market question asks who the users are, why they would buy, how the business will profit, how outputs will be protected and exploited, and how productivity and growth may change. Use sourced market data and clearly distinguish current facts from forecasts or assumptions.

Fourth, prepare a delivery plan that reconciles milestones, costs and risks. The project plan should identify work-package leads, costs, dependencies and reporting lines. The risk register should cover technical, commercial, management and environmental uncertainty, then name practical mitigations and the inputs critical to success. If permits, licences, animal welfare, export controls or trusted research issues apply, identify them early and show how they fit the schedule. The competition cannot fund work lacking necessary permits and licences by the start date.

Finally, assemble a consistency review across all collaborators. Check that the public summary, scope statement, work plan, market case, partner roles, finance table and appendices describe the same project. Ask a reviewer unfamiliar with the technology to identify what is engineered biologically, why scale-up matters and what outcome would move the business forward. Allow time to correct any ambiguity before final submission.

Common mistakes to avoid

A common scope problem is proposing a biologics development project that is clinical, preclinical therapeutic evaluation, fundamental, discovery-based or only a feasibility study. The call explicitly excludes clinical development of biologics, vaccines or engineering-biology-derived small molecules, clinical trials and preclinical therapeutic evaluation. It also excludes projects without pilot testing, demonstration or commercial validation. Check the exclusion list against every work package, not just the project title.

Another risk is treating infrastructure as the innovation. This is a pilot for scaling engineering biology innovations, not for constructing or expanding infrastructure and not for capital purchases. A proposal should explain how an existing capability enables a product, process or service to be validated and advanced. Similarly, a project with an unproven lab concept but no credible evidence of readiness to scale may be too early for this particular competition.

Do not omit the mandatory capability provider or leave its role vague. The application requires a UK-registered organisation with suitable scale-up or validation facilities or capabilities as partner or subcontractor. Collaboration applications must have at least one other funded organisation in addition to the lead and explain why and how the parties work together. For overseas subcontracting, unsupported claims that it is cheaper or more convenient are insufficient.

Budget mistakes can also jeopardise an otherwise relevant idea. The £5 million is competition-wide, project costs must normally fall between £200,000 and £750,000, and grant percentage limits differ by organisation type. Subcontractor expenses must be justified and appropriate. Make sure costs do not depend on prohibited conditions tied to export performance or specified domestic-input usage. Account for the UK location and exploitation requirements for all funded participants.

Frequently asked questions

Is the £5 million available to each applicant?

No. It is the total competition fund. Each project must have costs between £200,000 and £750,000, and the grant share depends on the organisation’s category and eligible costs. Innovate UK states that no more than £3 million can be awarded to one enterprise in this competition.

Can a university lead the application?

No. A UK-registered SME must lead, whether it applies alone or in a collaboration. Academic institutions may participate as eligible project partners but cannot lead or apply alone. The project must still include a suitable UK scale-up or validation organisation as partner or subcontractor.

Does an applicant need a partner, or can it use a subcontractor?

The call allows the required infrastructure capability provider to participate as either a partner or subcontractor. A funded collaboration has its own conditions: the lead and at least one other organisation must request funding, and the team must explain the collaboration. Subcontractors must be selected through normal procurement, with overseas suppliers requiring a supported case that UK options cannot meet the need.

Are early-stage research or equipment purchases eligible?

The competition is focused on scaling lab-proven engineering biology innovations and includes pilot, demonstration and commercial validation activities. It excludes fundamental research, feasibility studies, discovery-based projects, infrastructure expansion and capital purchases. Check the full competition scope before including any borderline activity.

When will applicants hear about results?

The timetable says applicants will be notified on 27 November 2026. If an application is unsuccessful, assessor feedback will be available through the IFS portal after notification. The brief cautions that a strong score does not guarantee funding if the application is below the funding threshold or not selected under a portfolio approach.

Where should I check the latest instructions?

Use the official Innovation Funding Service competition brief linked below. It contains the application questions, dates, eligibility conditions, supporting information and submission route. The UKRI listing provides a concise summary and links to the detailed brief.

Official links and next steps

• Official Innovation Funding Service competition brief and application
• UKRI opportunity listing
• Innovate UK support contact information

This guide summarizes the call published on the official pages checked on 2 October 2026. Applicants should confirm the live IFS brief and any updates before submitting, particularly for the deadline, eligibility, grant rates and required application attachments.