Public Engagement Grants 2026: How to Win up to £125,000 for STFC-Focused Engagement Projects

Science needs an audience — and sometimes that audience needs help understanding why particle detectors, telescopes, or satellite data matter for everyday life. The Nucleus Public Engagement Awards 2026 from the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) fund projects that bring STFC-supported science to the public, while building engagement capacity in STFC communities. If your organisation is UK-based, has audited accounts, and can put a credible subject matter expert on the team, this grant could pay for two to three years of ambitious public-facing work.

This guide tells you what the award actually buys, who stands the best chance of success, how reviewers will judge your proposal, and — most importantly — how to write an application that reviewers remember for the right reasons. Expect practical examples, realistic timelines, and insider-level application advice you can use immediately.

At a Glance

What This Opportunity Offers

The Nucleus awards are tailored to public engagement with science supported by STFC — think astronomy, particle physics, accelerator science, space science, and the ground-based facilities that underpin them. The scheme pays for project activities and the people who run them, with a strong emphasis on measurable public engagement and capacity building within STFC-linked communities.

For TRAC (Transparent Approach to Costing) organisations — typically universities and research institutes — the full economic cost (FEC) ceiling is £125,000 and STFC will fund 80% of that FEC. That means a TRAC applicant could request up to £100,000 in STFC funding but must account for the remaining 20% from institutional contributions, match funding, or other sources. Non-TRAC organisations — often charities, community groups, and SMEs that do not use TRAC costing — are eligible for up to £100,000 funded at 100%, simplifying budgeting for smaller organisations.

Funding can cover staff time, freelance fees for creative or evaluation specialists, venue hire, travel, equipment directly related to engagement activities, and reasonable administration. Because projects must run 24–36 months, this scheme suits multi-phase programmes: piloting activity in the first year, scaling and embedding successful models in the second, and evaluating plus disseminating outputs in the final phase.

Beyond money, awards often give winners increased visibility within STFC networks and opportunities to show results to a national audience. If your goal is to build lasting public programmes, not just one-off events, this funding supports that scale and continuity.

Who Should Apply

This scheme is for organisations that want to engage the public with STFC-funded science or strengthen engagement capacity in STFC communities. That includes, but is not limited to:

• University public engagement teams seeking to run large, evaluated programmes connecting STFC research to schools, families, and adult learners.
• Registered charities and cultural organisations running immersive exhibits or long-term outreach partnerships with STFC scientists.
• Small and medium enterprises with a track record in science engagement or science communication offering scalable programmes with measurable outcomes.
• Research councils or facilities aiming to increase community participation in facilities or to broaden the demographic profile of people engaging with STFC science.

A crucial eligibility point is that your proposal must include a subject matter expert in an STFC-funded area. That usually means a researcher or technician funded by STFC or whose work clearly aligns with STFC remit. You also need to be working for an organisation based in the UK with audited accounts — this is a hard line. If you’re a freelancer or an independent practitioner, partner with a qualifying host organisation who can hold the award.

Real-world examples of suitable projects:

• A science centre partnering with an STFC lab to co-develop a touring hands-on exhibit about cosmic rays, plus training for the STFC researchers to improve public-facing talks.
• A university team creating a two-year schools programme that sends STFC researchers into classrooms and evaluates changes in student attitudes to physics.
• A community arts organisation working with STFC facility staff to produce a multi-site outdoor festival that brings satellite imagery and climate science to coastal communities.

If your work is exploratory and short-term (one-off events or pilot pieces without a sustained plan), this particular scheme may not be the right fit — reviewers favour projects that show a clear arc over two to three years.

Insider Tips for a Winning Application

1. Tell a programme story, not a menu of events. Reviewers want to see a coherent plan where activities stack logically: testing, iterating, scaling, evaluating, sustaining. Lay out how Year 1 establishes proof-of-concept; Year 2 refines and scales; Year 3 evaluates, shares, and embeds. Use a simple timeline with milestones and deliverables.

2. Make the STFC link explicit and visible. Don’t assume reviewers will infer relevance. Explain which STFC facility, dataset, or research area you’re working with, name the subject matter expert, and describe their role. Attach letters confirming the expert’s involvement. If your project uses STFC data, specify datasets and access arrangements.

3. Budget from the ground up and show honesty about FEC. If you’re TRAC, calculate full economic costs with your finance team so the 80%/20% split is crystal clear. For non-TRAC applicants, itemise costs so reviewers can see value for money. Explain any institutional contributions or match funding. If you plan to spend on evaluation, that’s a good signal — it shows you plan to measure outcomes.

4. Design a realistic evaluation framework. Include measurable outcomes (numbers reached, demographic breadth, changes in understanding, behaviour, or attitudes). Use mixed methods: surveys, pre/post measures, interviews, and qualitative case studies. Name an evaluator or evaluation approach and budget for their time.

5. Prioritise capacity building and sustainability. STFC wants engagement capacity increased within its communities. Show how you’ll train researchers, build reusable resources, or create networks that outlive the grant. Explain how activities will continue after funding ends, or how your work positions the organisation for future support.

6. Show inclusivity in recruitment and access. Detail how you will reach underrepresented groups, remove barriers, and accommodate accessibility needs. Be specific: which communities, which gates (transport, childcare, cost), and what mitigation you will provide.

7. Use plain English and concrete examples. Avoid jargon and long theoretical descriptions. Explain technical terms the first time you use them. Use short case studies or mock activity outlines to bring abstract plans to life.

Taken together, these tactics help your proposal feel credible, achievable, and aligned with STFC goals. Aim to build confidence: reviewers should leave the application thinking, “This team will deliver.”

Application Timeline (Work Backwards from 31 March 2026)

Start at least 10–12 weeks before the deadline. High-quality applications need time for institutional checks and external reviews.

• Week -12 to -10: Confirm eligibility with your finance and contracts teams. Identify the STFC subject matter expert and secure a preliminary letter of support. Map out the project timeline and preliminary budget.
• Week -10 to -8: Draft the project narrative (objectives, activities, evaluation, risk register). Begin drafting costings as FEC if you’re TRAC. Book time with your institutional grants office for formal budget sign-off.
• Week -8 to -6: Circulate a full draft to internal reviewers: your finance contact, a non-specialist reviewer, and an external reviewer with engagement experience. Revise based on feedback.
• Week -6 to -4: Secure final letters of support and partner agreements. Finalise the evaluation plan and hire (or shortlist) the evaluator if necessary. Draft applicant biography and organisational track record.
• Week -4 to -2: Final proofreading, formatting, and checking attachments. Ensure all documentation (audited accounts, partner letters) are current and in the correct formats. Run the budget through your institutional approvals.
• Final 72 hours: Submit early. Systems and people trip up late in the day. Save PDFs and screenshots of your submission confirmation.

If your institution requires internal deadlines earlier than the funder’s, align with those first — many universities do.

Required Materials

Prepare these documents well in advance. Missing a single file can disqualify an otherwise excellent bid.

• Project Narrative: A cohesive description of aims, activities, timelines, and milestones. Include year-by-year breakdown and the roles of named personnel.
• Detailed Budget and Justification: For TRAC applicants this must show full economic costs and the requested 80% portion. For non-TRAC applicants, provide clear line items and justifications. Include travel, staff, equipment, venue hire, evaluation, and overheads where permitted.
• CVs or Biographies: Short bios for the project team and the named STFC subject matter expert. Emphasise engagement experience and relevant technical skills.
• Letters of Support or Partner Agreements: Specific letters stating what partners will provide (e.g., access to facilities, data, co-delivery). Avoid vague praise — reviewers want concrete commitments.
• Audited Accounts: Your organisation’s most recent audited financial statements. This proves you meet the basic eligibility and can manage public funds.
• Evaluation Plan: Outline methods, indicators, and who will do the evaluation. If you’ve hired an external evaluator, include a short statement of work.
• Risk Register and Governance: Briefly describe potential risks (e.g., venue closures, staff turnover) and mitigation strategies. Clarify project governance: who signs off, reporting lines, and ethical approvals if needed.
• Data and Inclusion Plans: How you will collect, store, and, where appropriate, share data; plus your approach to equality, diversity and inclusion.

Start collecting letters and audited accounts early — those take the longest.

What Makes an Application Stand Out

Reviewers reward clarity, feasibility, and evidence of impact. Stand-out applications typically show these qualities:

• Tight focus with measurable outcomes: Funders prefer a narrower plan that delivers than a sprawling wish-list. If you can’t measure it, you probably shouldn’t promise it.
• Clear STFC integration: Named STFC experts actively involved in design and delivery, not token sign-offs. Evidence of data access, joint planning meetings, or use of STFC facilities strengthens credibility.
• Strong evaluation and learning: Funded projects often serve as exemplars for national practice. Proposals with independent evaluation, published learning resources, and open data are attractive.
• Realistic budgets and institutional support: TRAC applicants must demonstrate institutional commitment for the 20% not covered by STFC. Non-TRAC applicants who show sound financial governance and audited accounts score well.
• Equity and reach: Demonstrable strategies to reach new audiences and reduce barriers to participation add weight. Concrete partnerships with community organisations are persuasive.

Remember: reviewers are trying to predict deliverability. Every claim should be backed by a named person, a timeline, or a budget line.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

1. Vague letters of support. A letter that simply says “We support this project” is useless. Ask partners to commit to specific deliverables and include timelines and named contacts.

2. Underestimating costs or overheads. TRAC organisations must calculate FEC; don’t present partial costing. For non-TRAC applicants, make sure you include all realistic costs and justify them.

3. Treating evaluation as an afterthought. Evaluation is not optional. Budget for it and describe methods. An evaluation that only counts attendance won’t satisfy reviewers; mix quantitative and qualitative measures.

4. Overly broad goals. “Increase science literacy” is noble but vague. Define who, by how much, and in what timeframe. Use concrete indicators like “increase correct answers to a five-question STEM quiz by X% among Year 8 pupils.”

5. Ignoring accessibility and inclusion. Failing to spell out how you will remove barriers (transport, sensory-friendly sessions, translated materials) weakens your case. Inclusion should be baked into design, not appended.

6. Poor risk planning. Don’t assume everything will go to plan. Have contingencies for staff illness, venue problems, and data delays. A short risk register shows maturity.

Fix these issues by getting early feedback, involving finance and evaluation experts, and testing your concept with intended audiences.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Can an individual apply? A: No. The lead applicant must be an organisation based in the UK with audited accounts. If you are an independent practitioner, partner with a qualifying host organisation to act as the applicant.

Q: Who counts as the STFC subject matter expert? A: A researcher, technician, or knowledge-holder working on research funded by STFC or closely aligned with STFC remit. The expert should be named, describe their role, and ideally provide a letter confirming time commitment.

Q: How does TRAC vs non-TRAC funding work in practice? A: TRAC organisations must calculate full economic costs and will be funded at 80% of FEC up to a £125,000 ceiling. Non-TRAC organisations are funded at 100% up to £100,000. Discuss costing with your finance office early to avoid surprises.

Q: Can project activities be entirely digital? A: Yes, provided the activities engage public audiences with STFC science and you evaluate impact. Hybrid and blended approaches are acceptable; justify how digital delivery achieves your outcomes.

Q: Are international partners allowed? A: Yes, but the lead organisation and grant-holding organisation must be UK-based. If international partners are involved, describe their contribution and show how funds will flow.

Q: Do I need preliminary data or pilot activity? A: Not strictly, but pilot results strengthen feasibility claims. Even small tests or case studies demonstrating public interest and operational capacity can boost reviewer confidence.

Q: Will I receive feedback if unsuccessful? A: Typically, applicants receive summary comments from reviewers. Use that feedback to refine resubmissions.

Q: Is match funding required? A: TRAC applicants effectively need institutional support to cover the 20% not funded by STFC (unless other match is secured). Non-TRAC applicants are funded at 100% up to £100,000, so match is not required in the same way.

Next Steps — How to Apply

Ready to prepare your application? Do these five things this week:

1. Check eligibility with your finance team and ensure your organisation has audited accounts ready.
2. Contact a likely STFC subject matter expert and secure a letter of support or collaboration agreement.
3. Draft a one-page project summary (objectives, audience, high-level activities, budget estimate) and circulate to your internal reviewer.
4. Reach out to STFC public engagement team at [email protected] with any clarifying questions; they can confirm alignment with remit.
5. Visit the official opportunity page and register on the application portal well before the deadline.

Ready to apply? Visit the official opportunity page and submit your application here: https://www.ukri.org/opportunity/nucleus-public-engagement-awards-2026/

For administrative support or portal queries contact [email protected]. For policy queries contact [email protected].

Make no mistake: this is competitive funding, but it rewards smart, realistic, and well-evidenced plans that put STFC science in front of diverse publics and leave something lasting behind. If you can pair strong community partnerships, named STFC expertise, and a clear evaluation plan, you’ll give your proposal the best possible chance.