Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP): 2026 to 2027 Round 2

Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP): 2026 to 2027 Round 2

The Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP): 2026 to 2027 Round 2 was an Innovate UK competition for strategic innovation projects delivered by a UK knowledge base and a UK business. The official UKRI opportunity page and the linked Innovation Funding Service record now mark this round closed. Its final deadline was 24 June 2026 at 11:00am UK time. This page is therefore a historical reference, not a live application listing.

The official record does not announce a new KTP Round 3 deadline. It tells applicants who could not finish this competition to look for a later round, but it does not provide a new date on the reviewed opportunity pages. Do not treat the archived deadline as a date that can still be met, and do not infer a future deadline from the name of this round.

Key details

What the round funded

KTP is a collaboration model rather than a general-purpose award for an academic institution. A business partner identifies a strategic challenge or opportunity. A knowledge base partner supplies the expertise and recruits an associate to work on the project. The partnership is intended to bring new knowledge and skills into the business and to leave a capability that the business can use after the project ends.

The project had to be specific and strategic for the business. The application needed to explain why the business required a KTP, what new knowledge it needed, what new capabilities would be embedded, how the work related to the Industrial Strategy, and why the business had high growth potential. The programme was not intended for routine consultancy, ordinary contract research, or a project with no clear route to embedding knowledge inside the business.

Innovate UK identified six Industrial Strategy sectors for this round: Advanced Manufacturing, Clean Energy Industries, Creative Industries, Defence, Digital and Technologies, and Life Sciences. A proposal outside those sectors could still be eligible if it exploited a novel area of research and the business partner demonstrated high growth potential, but the official guidance said priority would be given to alignment with the Industrial Strategy.

Funding and cost rules

The total fund for the competition was £10,000,000. That amount was a competition budget, not a fixed award for every applicant. Innovate UK said that the budget would contribute towards the eligible costs of individual projects and that the round was competitive. A technically strong application could still remain unfunded if the available portfolio budget was insufficient.

Projects had to run for between 12 and 36 months. The official competition record described total eligible costs as typically £8,500 per month. Innovate UK paid only a proportion of eligible costs. The remaining contribution came from the business partner, and the business also had to cover its own staff time, additional costs, non-eligible items such as capital equipment, and later commercialisation activity.

The published contribution limits were:

• A small or medium-sized enterprise could receive an Innovate UK grant contribution of up to 67% of eligible project costs.
• A large company could receive an Innovate UK grant contribution of up to 50% of eligible project costs.

The actual proportion depended on factors including the project duration, the registered location of the business, the location of the project, the size of the business or group, the type of business, and whether the business operated virtually. A group’s overall size had to be declared where the business was part of a group. Applicants needed to use the KTP cost guidance when preparing the figures; the headline percentages did not remove the need for a detailed, supportable budget.

The competition was designed to provide funding on a no-subsidy basis. The official guidance said that project outputs had to be published or made openly available on a non-selective basis, and that commercial exploitation could not give a selective advantage. Applicants with questions about subsidy-control obligations were directed to seek independent legal advice.

Eligibility for the closed round

Every application needed two core partners: a UK knowledge base acting as the lead and a UK registered business. The knowledge base had to be a higher education institution, further education institution, research and technology organisation, or Catapult, and it had to be registered as a KTP knowledge base. It could not apply alone.

The knowledge base had to invite the business into IFS, invite an Innovate UK appointed Knowledge Transfer Adviser (KTA), complete the application with the business, and submit it with KTA support before the close. It also had to recruit associate roles fairly, provide at least half a day of academic support per week, provide the project secretariat, agree intellectual property arrangements before the project started, and meet the programme’s supervision and governance expectations. The knowledge base could not hold 50% or more ownership of the business partner or control it through a shareholder agreement.

The business partner had to be a UK registered business with at least two full-time equivalent employees. A UK subsidiary of an overseas parent could qualify if the subsidiary was individually registered in the UK. The registered name and registration number used in the application had to match the relevant public register. A business not registered at Companies House had to provide evidence of its legal status and ownership.

The business also needed to demonstrate high growth potential, determine the size of the business or group, show that it could fund its contribution, host the associate, provide day-to-day supervision, host required meetings at its own expense, and show that it could finance exploitation of the project’s outputs. It had to provide financial accounts for the current financial year and the preceding two years, subject to the additional guidance for younger businesses. The knowledge base was expected to carry out its own financial due diligence.

The official record excluded UKRI, its councils and businesses owned or operated wholly or partly by UKRI, the Advanced Research and Invention Agency, central government departments, and the devolved administrations in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. An organisation eligible to be a KTP knowledge base could not also apply as the business partner. Subcontractors were not allowed in this competition.

How applications were submitted

The following steps describe the application route for the completed round. They are retained to explain the archived opportunity and to help a future applicant understand the KTP structure; they are not instructions to submit to this closed competition.

1. Form the partnership and involve a KTA

The knowledge base and business first had to agree on a specific strategic project and confirm that the partnership met the eligibility rules. A business without an existing knowledge base relationship could ask a Knowledge Transfer Adviser to help identify a suitable partner. The KTA supported the application process, and the application could be withdrawn if the appointed KTA had not approved it before submission.

2. Create the IFS application

The knowledge base created the application in the Innovation Funding Service, invited the business partner, and invited the KTA. The business partner then created or used an IFS account and entered estimates of its own eligible project costs. The application title had to follow the prescribed “Knowledge Base and Business Partner KTP Year and Round” format and use the business’s full registered name.

3. Complete project details and scope

The first section covered the delivery team, project duration, project summary, public description, and scope. The scope response had to show the business need, the new knowledge required, the capabilities that would be embedded, Industrial Strategy alignment, and the business’s high-growth characteristics. A project outside scope would not be assessed and would be withdrawn.

4. Answer every application question

The second section included questions about animal testing, permits and licences, international collaboration, export controls, trusted research and innovation, KTP type, associate numbers, Industrial Strategy sector, business type and size, project need, market opportunity, previous funding, exploitation, and other compliance matters. Applicants had to answer all relevant questions. The IFS guidance prohibited website addresses in the application answers and required any animal, licensing, export-control, or international-collaboration information to be complete and accurate.

The knowledge base and business had to complete a joint commitment statement using the current template and upload it as a legible PDF. The application also allowed supporting appendices, including evidence about the business partner’s financial position. Appendices had to follow the stated PDF, file-size, and formatting rules; photographs, website excerpts, electronic reports, and documents containing hyperlinks were not accepted in those uploads.

5. Complete the finances and declarations

The knowledge base had to enter costs for associate employment, associate development, travel and subsistence, consumables, academic supervision, additional associate costs, estates, and other eligible categories. Travel, subsistence, and consumables needed itemised justification. The business section covered its financial position, contribution to its own participation costs, and staff numbers in the business and group. Both partners had to accept the terms and conditions, declare the application accurate, and confirm that the KTA supported submission.

6. Submit before the close

All assigned sections had to be complete, all partners had to accept the terms and conditions, and the required documents had to be uploaded before submission. The official record allowed an application to be reopened and resubmitted before the deadline, but the final resubmission still had to be made by 24 June 2026 at 11:00am UK time. That window has passed.

Assessment and outcome

Applications that met the eligibility and scope rules were assessed holistically against impact, challenge, innovation, and cohesiveness. Each area carried up to 10 marks, for a maximum of 40. Assessors also considered affordability, commercialisation of outcomes, and the viability of the whole project. The fixed budget meant that marks alone did not guarantee an award.

The closed-round record also required a credible exploitation plan. The initial plan was formed through the application questions, while the business had to show how it would support exploitation after the funded work. A proposal could be rejected where it lacked a genuine market opportunity, failed to explain how knowledge would be embedded, relied on an ineligible business, lacked affordability evidence, or could achieve the same outcome through a simpler mechanism such as contract research.

What to do now

This page should be used to understand the completed 2026 to 2027 Round 2 competition, its partnership model, and the evidence it required. It should not be used as proof that Innovate UK is accepting new applications. The official pages reviewed do not publish a successor KTP deadline, so prospective applicants should wait for a new Innovate UK or UKRI competition record and then verify its fund, eligibility rules, dates, cost guidance, and IFS instructions directly.

Official sources for this archive entry:

• UKRI opportunity page
• Innovation Funding Service competition record