Future Leaders Fellowships: Round 11 (UKRI)

Future Leaders Fellowships: Round 11 (UKRI)

This page is a historical reference for the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Future Leaders Fellowships Round 11. I checked the official UKRI opportunity page before updating this entry. UKRI currently labels the opportunity Closed. The page gives the principal Round 11 closing date as 16 June 2026 at 4:00 PM UK time. Its timeline also records a non-academic funding route that opened on 22 June 2026 and was listed to close on 4 November 2026 at 11:00 AM UK time. Because the official page now marks the opportunity closed, this entry must not be read as an invitation to submit an application.

The checked UKRI page does not announce a Round 12 or another replacement cycle. There is therefore no new application deadline to add here. The deadline field keeps the real Round 11 closing date so the archive entry remains tied to the verified cycle, while historicalReference = true makes its status clear to readers and to the site.

Verified details

The £110 million figure is the total fund shown by UKRI, not a guaranteed amount for an individual fellow. UKRI says there is no fixed minimum or maximum project cost. It also explains that the scheme has funded fellowships from £300,000 to over £2 million, but those figures are examples of the range previously funded, not an automatic award entitlement. An applicant would have needed to request only the resources required for the proposed work and explain why those resources represented good value.

Purpose of the fellowship

Round 11 was designed as a personal award for researchers and innovators who were moving toward independence or establishing an independent position. UKRI’s stated aims were to develop, retain, attract and sustain research and innovation talent in the UK; support career paths across academic, business and interdisciplinary boundaries; provide sustained resources for early-career researchers and innovators; and support ambitious programmes addressing difficult or novel challenges.

This is an important distinction from a conventional project grant. The fellowship was intended to support the fellow’s development as an influential research or innovation leader as well as the proposed programme of work. UKRI expected applicants to explain what they wanted to achieve, why they were the right person to deliver it, why a fellowship was the right career mechanism, how they would benefit others, how their host would support them, what ethical or responsible research and innovation issues applied, and what resources were needed.

The scope was broad. UKRI encouraged applications across its remit, including the arts, humanities, social sciences and the five critical technologies named in the Department for Science and Innovation’s Science and Technology Framework. Research and innovation proposals could include work in other environments, international links, new skills such as policy or commercialisation, mentoring, professional training, and other activities connected to a credible career-development plan. The programme could be a single workstream or a portfolio of linked projects led by the fellow.

Who was eligible

The official eligibility description focused on the applicant’s career stage and proposed independence rather than on holding a particular employment contract. Researchers and innovators could apply if they were transitioning to or establishing independence, or if they were developing their own original and ambitious plans within a commercial setting. UKRI said there was no eligibility rule based solely on whether someone held a permanent or open-ended job.

The fellow had to be based at, and supported by, a UK organisation eligible for UKRI funding. Academic-hosted applications, including applications hosted by NHS trusts, were to use the UKRI Funding Service. Non-academic hosted applications, including those from charities, were to use the Innovation Funding Service. Catapults were to use the Funding Service where eligible, with the Innovation Funding Service available where they were not eligible for the academic route.

The host requirement was substantive. The host needed to provide a suitable research or innovation environment and support the fellowship. For academic applicants, UKRI’s guidance said the host should confirm an open-ended UK-based independent research or innovation position to be taken up during or on completion of the fellowship, in line with the organisation’s employment policies and practices. The host also needed to take account of the fellow’s protected time and career development.

Applicants who had already achieved research or innovation independence were not eligible. UKRI gave examples including having secured funding aimed at this career stage or already managing a significant programme of work within a business. Senior academics and senior innovators were also excluded. The official page said UKRI could not confirm an individual’s eligibility before submission, so applicants had to use the published guidance and their host’s research office or relevant support team to assess their position.

Academic host organisations faced a cap on the number of applicants they could submit. That meant an interested academic applicant needed to notify the host early and allow time for an internal selection process. Joint applications on a job-share basis were permitted, provided the application explained the arrangement in the applicant capability and career-development sections. Clinically active applicants had additional time-commitment rules, and the application included relevant clinical questions where applicable.

Award structure and costs

The fellowship could last up to seven years. UKRI funded four years in the first instance, or a proportionately extended equivalent for a part-time applicant, with the option to apply for a further three years during the final year. The design gave fellows protected time for research or innovation, training and development, and the establishment of an independent position.

In most cases, UKRI expected the fellow to spend 100% of working time on the fellowship and its associated activities. Academic-hosted fellows could spend up to six hours per week, adjusted pro rata for part-time applicants, on other commitments or related activities that enhanced career development. Clinically active applicants could spend up to 20% of their time on average across the grant on clinical commitments. Applicants undertaking patient-oriented research as part of the fellowship could undertake up to 40% on those duties, subject to the official rules.

UKRI did not set a project-cost ceiling for Round 11. The requested budget still had to be proportionate to the objectives and fully justified. If the expected total cost exceeded £1.4 million, the applicant was asked to email the Future Leaders Fellowships team at [email protected] using the subject header “application over 1.4 million”. This was described as a soft cap for monitoring application costs, not an absolute prohibition on a larger request.

The fellowship provided salary support. UKRI said that support was tapered throughout the fellowship and that host organisations were required to commit to an increasing percentage of the fellow’s salary as the fellowship progressed. A strong cost case therefore needed to join the work programme, salary arrangements, facilities, staffing and development activities into one credible plan. The total fund should not be confused with an individual award amount.

How the application worked

Round 11 used different services for different host contexts, and UKRI explicitly said applicants could not use the old Joint Electronic Submissions (Je-S) system. The fellow was responsible for completing the application, while team members and project partners were expected to contribute. Only the lead research organisation could submit the completed application to UKRI.

The official application sequence was:

1. Select “Start application” near the beginning of the UKRI Funding Finder page.
2. Confirm that you are the fellow.
3. Sign in or create a Funding Service account, selecting the organisation, verifying the email address and setting a password. Non-academic hosts followed the Innovation Funding Service route described by UKRI.
4. Answer the application questions in the online text boxes, saving work and returning later as needed. Where the service required an upload, follow its file instructions.
5. Review the completed application in read-only view before sending it to the research office.
6. Send the application to the research office for checking.
7. Make any requested edits and allow the research office to submit the checked application to UKRI.

There was no outline proposal stage for Round 11. UKRI advised applicants to begin early, coordinate with the host organisation, and account for internal institutional deadlines in addition to the UKRI deadline. Images could be used only where they conveyed important visual information that was difficult to express in words. A descriptive caption or legend had to sit immediately below each image and count toward the relevant word limit; text paragraphs, tables and excessive image use were not permitted as image substitutes.

The application questions covered the proposed work and its public-facing summary, the core team, applicant capability, career development, host support, ethics and responsible research and innovation, resources and cost justification, and any relevant specialist areas such as clinical research, human participation, animals, data or international collaboration. The applicant needed a coherent account across those sections. A career plan disconnected from the work programme, or a host statement that did not explain practical support, would have weakened the case even if the research idea was strong.

Assessment and timeline

UKRI’s assessment process began with checks on applicant and host eligibility, costings and relevant statutory matters such as animal use or ethics compliance. At least three independent experts from the UK and overseas reviewed each application. Applicants were invited to respond to reviewer comments and were given 10 working days for that response. A shortlisting panel then considered the reviews and response against the assessment criteria. Shortlisted applicants proceeded to an expert interview panel, after which UKRI made the final funding decision.

The official timeline recorded the following dates and milestones:

• The opportunity opened on 2 February 2026 at 9:00 AM.
• A webinar for host organisations was scheduled for 24 March 2026 at 2:00 PM.
• A webinar for academic applicants was scheduled for 26 March 2026 at 2:00 PM.
• The main closing date was 16 June 2026 at 4:00 PM.
• The non-academic funding opportunity was listed to open on 22 June 2026 and close on 4 November 2026 at 11:00 AM.
• A principal investigator response was listed for 11 January 2027, with a due date of 25 January 2027.
• Sift panels were listed for the week commencing 15 March 2027.
• Interview panels were expected in the week commencing 17 May 2027.

The same page now labels the overall opportunity Closed, so these timeline entries should be treated as the published Round 11 record rather than as a current invitation. The page does not publish a successor round. Anyone looking for a future application should search UKRI’s current Funding Finder and the Future Leaders Fellowships scheme page for a new official announcement.

What a competitive application needed to show

The assessment criteria required more than a promising topic. The proposal had to explain the vision and approach, the applicant’s capability to deliver, career development, host organisation support, ethics and responsible research and innovation, and the resources and cost justification. These areas were connected: the proposed programme needed to fit the fellow’s trajectory, the host needed to provide a credible setting for independence, and the costs needed to correspond to the work and its outcomes.

Applicants also needed to be precise about the kind of independence they were building. Useful evidence could include responsibility for an original programme, a plan for leading people or partnerships, a route to new skills, mentoring and training commitments, cross-sector experience, and a host-backed path to a sustained role. The fellowship’s broad remit allowed ambitious research and innovation, but breadth did not remove the need for a focused delivery plan.

Ethics and responsible research and innovation were part of the application rather than an optional appendix. A proposal involving human participants, personal data, animals, clinical work, international partners, dual-use concerns or commercial translation needed to identify the relevant issues and explain how they would be managed. Similarly, requests for equipment, staff, facilities or partner support needed to show why each resource was necessary and how the host environment would make the programme deliverable.

Historical-reference guidance

This entry should be used to understand the Round 11 scheme, its eligibility model, funding structure and published process. It should not be used as evidence that an application can still be submitted. UKRI’s official page is the controlling source for any later status change, separate route, correction or new round. The verified URL remains the UKRI opportunity page shown above, and no replacement cycle was announced there when this entry was checked.