Notice

Recognition Arrangements Grant Programme: Round 3 guidance for applicants

Updated 6 April 2024

This funding opportunity closed to applications on 5 April 2024.

1. Summary

Professionals working in regulated professions often require recognition of their professional qualifications when looking to provide services internationally. Arrangements to facilitate recognition of professional qualifications (RPQ), or ‘recognition arrangements’, are agreements put in place between the regulators or professional bodies for professions in different countries or regulatory jurisdictions. They can support UK businesses to export services, UK professionals to work internationally and can also make it easier for international professionals who meet UK standards to provide services in the UK.

To support RPQ, the government is encouraging and supporting regulators and professional bodies from all sectors to agree recognition arrangements with their international counterparts. The government therefore runs the Recognition Arrangements Grant Programme (the ‘programme’), using section 8 of the Industrial Development Act 1982, following a pilot phase. The programme is now in its third year. 

The programme offers grants to regulators and professional bodies to support agreeing recognition arrangements. Successful applicants will receive funding of up to £75,000 per applicant per financial year, to cover up to 80% of eligible costs. 

Applicants may use grant funding for a range of work, including for acquiring external technical expertise or new members of staff dedicated to this work.  

To apply, there is a 2-stage application process which begins with applicants submitting a high-level expression of interest to determine whether the proposal is well suited to the work the programme seeks to support, as outlined in section 3 - purpose. Following that, applicants will be invited to submit a more comprehensive final application which will be scored in line with this guidance document.  

The application window for the third round of funding was open from Wednesday 24 January 2024 to Friday 5 April 2024.

2. Background

‘Recognition arrangements’ describes the range of arrangements that regulators and professional bodies may agree with international counterparts, which include mutual recognition agreements (MRAs) and memoranda of understanding (MoUs). These can provide a streamlined process by which professionals who have obtained a professional qualification in one jurisdiction can apply for recognition of that qualification in another (host) jurisdiction. Once their qualifications have been recognised, this can enable professionals to practise in the host jurisdiction, subject to fulfilling any other regulatory or immigration requirements. 

Many regulators already have powers to agree recognition arrangements. For those who don’t, the Professional Qualifications Act 2022 contains powers to enable UK regulators of regulated professions to agree recognition arrangements with international counterparts. Regulators and professional bodies may agree profession specific recognition arrangements with international counterparts either through established frameworks agreed as part of free trade agreements (FTAs), or on an independent, regulator-to-regulator basis. 

The UK has agreed frameworks to facilitate recognition arrangements with several trade partners in FTAs, including the EU, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. These frameworks offer regulators and professional bodies a streamlined process to facilitate the agreement of recognition arrangements. The government is discussing further such frameworks with other international trade partners as part of ongoing trade negotiations. 

For more detailed information on recognition arrangements, go to our technical guidance for regulators and professional bodies in arrangements for the recognition of professional qualifications.

3. Purpose

The programme provides targeted financial support to regulators and professional bodies who are working towards the agreement of recognition arrangements, where their work seeks to: 

• deliver one or multiple recognition arrangements  
• develop or expand capability to agree recognition arrangements in future

Recognition arrangement negotiations with international counterparts can be labour intensive and take time. The government is therefore providing funding through this programme to support the work of eligible regulators and professional bodies to agree recognition arrangements. The programme will operate until 31 March 2025. 

It offers funding towards the costs of hiring new members of staff to work towards recognition arrangements, or for commissioning technical expertise from external consultants. This expertise could include translation services or reports to map the qualifications issued by international counterparts. 

This will ultimately help businesses and professionals to access new markets, reduce barriers to trade, and enhance the value of UK professions and professional qualifications overseas.   

Funding will not be dependent on the successful outcome of the proposed recognition arrangement, although applications will be assessed on projected deliverability and negotiability.

4. Who can apply for funding

Organisations eligible to apply for funding are: 

• regulators that control access to professions regulated in law (when access to the profession is limited by legislation, or by provisions made under and given effect to by legislation to individuals who hold specific qualifications or experience)
• professional bodies that award professional titles and voluntarily regulate professions without underpinning legislation, for example, chartered professional bodies

These bodies must operate within at least one of the 4 UK nations to be eligible for the programme. 

Applications will be considered from any sectors and professions which are reliant on recognition of professional qualifications, though applicants will be expected to demonstrate the relevance of RPQ as a barrier to trade as part of their application. More information can be found on this in section 7 – assessment criteria. 

Professional bodies which correspond to professions which are not regulated in the UK, but are regulated overseas, are also eligible to apply. 

Joint applications are welcome from groups of regulators and professional bodies from similar regulatory remits, but the group must designate a lead applicant for the purposes of funding and reporting. The lead applicant will be responsible for ensuring delivery by the whole group, including providing evidence for reimbursement of costs associated with the grant, across all group members. The lead applicant must have full authority to represent the group and its members; Department for Business and Trade (DBT) will rely on the lead applicant to act for and on behalf of the group as a whole. 

These groups could be regulators or professional bodies that operate in different nations within the UK, or those that oversee similar professions. This is in line with the government’s wider approach to encourage regulators and professional bodies within similar regulatory spaces across the UK to coordinate and pursue the maximum benefit for UK professionals. 

Applicants may only submit one application per application round. Where applicants have multiple workstreams supporting recognition arrangements, these should be included within a single application.

Where a regulator or professional body carries out a mix of commercial and non-commercial activities, it is eligible to apply but must confirm in writing that this grant will not cross-subsidise commercial activities carried out by the applicant (or group members in the case of joint applications). Applicants must provide such evidence as DBT requires, which may include evidence of the applicant’s accounts, to demonstrate that no cross-subsidy has taken place. All funding issued will be as reimbursement and subject to claw-back provisions, in line with the standard terms of government grant funding.

5. Grant form and structure

The programme opened on 8 August 2022 and will offer funding until 31 March 2025. The maximum grant funding award available for individual and group applications is £75,000 per financial year, to reimburse no more than 80% of costs incurred from work towards agreeing a recognition arrangement. Applicants are welcome to submit an expression of interest during the programme’s application window and proposals deemed suitable will be invited to submit full applications before the application window closes. 

The financial year for the programme will start on 1 April 2024 and end on 31 March 2025. Further details on the expected timelines of the programme can be found in section 8 – how to apply. 

All proposed funded activities towards a recognition arrangement must be supplied, invoiced and settled before 31 March 2025 to be eligible for reimbursement. Recognition arrangements will not be required to have been completed and agreed by 31 March 2025 for proposals to be considered eligible.

Applicants will be required to evidence how funded activities will be conducted, in detail proportionate to the scale of funding bid for. Only applications from eligible applicants that can demonstrate financial viability will be considered and applicants will be required to evidence this through the application process. 

Further information on application requirements and scoring criteria can be found in section 7 – assessment criteria.

6. What we will fund

Successful applicants will be able to claim up to 80% of costs of eligible activities as reimbursement in arrears for staffing costs, technical expertise contracted externally or a combination of these, up to the maximum amount detailed in section 5 – grant form and structure. 

Staffing costs eligible for reimbursement through the programme could include, but are not restricted to: 

• staff salaries 
• posting job vacancy advertisements for new roles 
• additional employment costs, including National Insurance contributions 

Externally contracted technical expertise eligible for reimbursement through the programme could include, but is not restricted to: 

• translation of documents and communications for recognition arrangements 
• technical research to underpin the development of recognition arrangements between regulators and professional bodies and international counterparts, for example, assessment of the standards and requirements of different regulators and professional bodies, or reports to scope potential recognition arrangement projects 
• legal drafting for recognition arrangements 

DBT will also consider applications for other externally contracted technical expertise that will facilitate the work towards the delivery of recognition arrangements, in line with the funding rules.

Eligible regulators and professional bodies may seek funding to support work towards one or multiple recognition arrangements within a single application. Funding may also be sought for a variety of funded activities within a single application, where applicants are able to evidence the benefit of multiple activities as assessed against the scoring criteria in Annex A. 

Funding can be sought for work towards agreeing recognition arrangements that are in early scoping stages. However, applicants are advised that deliverability of this work will form a key part of the criteria against which all applications will be assessed. 

Successful applicants may be reimbursed eligible costs incurred in working to agree recognition arrangements with EU counterparts through the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) framework. This also applies to work under frameworks included in other FTAs, such as those agreed with Australia, New Zealand, and Japan, and frameworks in standalone RPQ agreements, such as that with Switzerland. However, where activities towards recognition agreements are legally mandated by domestic legislation implementing FTAs or RPQ Agreements, applicants will need to provide clear evidence that any activities would provide value for money for UK Government and are additional pieces of work not aimed at solely meeting legal obligations.

If you would like to check whether a proposed activity is eligible, you should contact the DBT Recognition Facilitation team.  DBT may also get in touch with applicants to discuss proposals in more detail. 

Note funds cannot be used to reimburse existing costs, such as salaries of current staff members, or travel expenses. Funds also cannot be used for external expertise that is not aligned with the evidence requirements for contributing to a recognition arrangement, outlined in section 7 – assessment criteria and Annex A – scoring criteria.

7. Assessment criteria

Applicants should consider long term outcomes in line with those specified in section 3 - purpose. Consideration should be given to the countries and professions of interest, the overall objectives of the proposal and the intended activities eligible for funding. Further guidelines are available in the application form.  

Applications will be appraised by a panel fairly and objectively against the below criteria: 

• economic value: how effective proposals will be in supporting UK services trade and providing economic value. Applicants will be expected to demonstrate how the proposed recognition arrangements will benefit the sector in question or help to grow the UK economy, for example, by supporting and expanding exports of the UK’s services sector globally
• value for money: how proposals represent value for money. Applicants will be expected to evidence financial need for additional funding and be expected to demonstrate that projected costs are minimised where possible and in line with market prices
• benefit to RPQ in sector: how the proposed recognition arrangement(s) will contribute to the recognition of UK professional qualifications for the profession in question, for example, in numbers of potential qualifications recognised, or in line with UK objectives such as upholding the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland. 
• deliverability: how feasible the proposed funded activities are to be delivered within the funding period
• negotiability: how likely the proposed recognition arrangement(s) are to be agreed with international counterparts

In assessing these criteria, the panel will consider the additional benefits resulting from grant funding, and the strength of evidence offered in support of those benefits. Evidence must be directly relevant, as up to date as possible, and should be in proportion to the overall amount of funding requested. If applying for the highest possible amount of funding, significant evidence will be required to score highly for each part of the criteria in Annex A.

Applications in each round will then be ranked by score. In order of ranking, successful applications will be offered funding awards. The amount awarded will be decided by the panel, informed by the funding applied for. Where funding awards differ from the amount bid for within applications, DBT will offer successful applicants a reason for this difference.  

To support development of applications, we have provided an example project outline below. This example does not represent an exhaustive or prescriptive list of the types of eligible activities or approaches to applications, but to give an idea of a type of project or evidence that applicants may choose to include when drafting their application. Evidence provided should be in proportion to the overall amount of funding requested, and applicants may choose to provide some of the types of evidence in the example below that are most relevant and available.

Example: project proposal outline

Project overview

A review of professional qualifications to assess the compatibility of regimes, to determine the potential to develop MRAs with 2 international jurisdictions. Funding would be used towards fees for an independent expert to review UK and counterpart qualifications and generate reports, and towards fees for translation services to translate relevant qualification materials. Project activities are planned for June to March, to account for time for DBT application review and signing of agreements. 

Application criteria

Economic value

Evidence provided on:

• the number of UK-qualified professionals in the profession
• the contribution of professionals’ income to the sector/economy
• sectoral contributions to key government priorities
• the value of the sector to the UK economy
• import/export values for professionals
• anticipated trends of international supply or shortages
• levels/data on UK students/upcoming qualified professionals
• details of the size and value of the profession in each jurisdiction activity is proposed
• indirect benefits to UK market
• explanations of why alternative activities (for example, utilising existing staff resource) would not sufficiently provide the same outputs

Value for money

A detailed spending forecast for activities is provided, alongside a breakdown of costs (for example, hourly rates and estimated hours and how this constitutes up to 80% of total costs). Justifications are provided for all costs, including consideration of alternative funding and why specific expertise may be required. Evidence is provided on where funding makes a significant difference to if or when outcomes are achieved.  

Benefit to RPQ

An assessment of existing recognition routes with each jurisdiction is provided, alongside the specific market access and economic opportunities that recognition arrangements could achieve for each jurisdiction. Quantitative evidence of the impact of MRAs on facilitating trade or business mobility is outlined. Details included on how MRAs could improve or sustain professional standards in the sector. 

Deliverability

A monthly project plan is provided, including information on key deliverables and the person(s) responsible for them. Mitigation for delivery risks set out, including consideration of reliance of external parties. Examples of similar work in the past referenced. 

Negotiability

Evidence provided on:

• the working relationship with international counterparts
• information on the potential compatibility of regimes for all proposed jurisdictions
• previous recognition arrangements or international frameworks for cooperation (for example, MoUs)
• existing political cooperation, industry links, or soft trade links with specific jurisdictions

For further information on the criteria used to assess applications, refer to Annex A – scoring criteria. Additional information on how to reflect the scoring criteria in applications will be provided at expression of interest (EOI) meetings.

8. How to apply

Applications to the programme will go through the following stages:  

1. Expression of interest (EOI) submitted: Eligible regulators and professional bodies must submit a Round 3 expression of interest summarising their proposal for funding. 

2. EOI meeting and full application submitted: Applicants will be invited to discuss their EOI proposal with DBT, before submitting a full application during the application window (24 January to 5 April 2024).   

3. Moderation: applications are assessed and scored against the scoring criteria by a cross government moderation panel. 

4. Awards: awards are finalised, unsuccessful applicants are notified, and successful applicants will be asked to sign a Grant Funding Agreement (GFA). 

Application round 3: 24 January to 5 April 2024 

This application round will be open to proposals seeking funding across the financial year 2024 to 2025 (for proposals incurring eligible costs between 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025). 

As part of stage 2 above, applicants will be invited to a meeting to discuss their EOI proposal with DBT and to receive a full application form and advice on developing credible applications. Applicants may submit a full application form following this meeting, which will be scored against the criteria in Annex A – scoring Criteria.  

Information required within the full application form includes: 

• applicant details (for example, lead applicant contact details, Companies House or charity number, details of other government funding since 1 April 2022) 
• a summary of the overall proposal, indicating specific recognition arrangement(s) and all activities for which grant funding would be used
• an economic assessment of the benefits of the proposal to the sector or wider UK economy
• a technical assessment of the benefits of the proposal for facilitating the recognition of professional qualifications within the sector 
• a project plan for the lifecycle of the proposal, in detail proportionate to funding bid for 
• an evidence-based assessment of the negotiability of the proposed recognition arrangement(s) with international counterparts

All applicants with new proposals will be required to submit an EOI in order to be considered for a full application.  

Refer back to this guidance in advance of submitting your EOI and full application for any changes to the scheduled application round. DBT will endeavour to provide applicants with a receipt of acknowledgement of their EOI and any full application within 3 working days of submission. Application forms must be received before the Round 3 application round closes to be considered for funding.  

Full application forms, or questions, should be sent to the DBT Recognition Facilitation team.

The panel will conduct a fair and objective appraisal of full applications against the criteria set out in this guidance. We will send a notification email advising you of our decision. Decisions made by DBT are final and will not be open to appeal.

9. Approval of grant

If after considering your application, the panel determines that you will be offered funding, you will be contacted by DBT to discuss and agree the content of the grant funding agreement. A grant offer letter will then be issued to you. This agreement should be signed and returned to DBT within 5 working days of receipt. Applicants will need to ensure compliance with conditions contained in the grant offer letter to receive grant funding. The date of co-signature of the grant funding agreement between DBT and successful applicants will be taken as the start date of the funding period, with the end date taken as 31 March 2025. 

Grant funding will follow a reimbursement model in common with the UK government’s short form Model Grant Funding Agreement and in accordance with a pre-defined payment schedule. More details on the grant funding agreement will be provided to applicants in due course, but for more information contact the DBT Recognition Facilitation team.    

Upon receipt of evidence of actual costs as anticipated in the payment schedule, and subject to approval by DBT of the grant claim, we will endeavour to pay grant funding in reimbursement of 80% of those costs to your nominated bank account within 30 days. Successful applicants will be required to submit a supplier information form to seek reimbursement. If you do not return the supplier information form, or there are errors, payment may be delayed. Funded activities that are not evidenced by information as having been supplied, invoiced, and settled before the ended of the financial year for which grant funding has been awarded will not be reimbursed. 

In line with monitoring and reporting clauses contained in the short form Model Grant Funding Agreement, DBT will act as monitoring officer for the duration of grant funding to ensure value for money and deliverability. DBT reserves the right to terminate funding periods where key performance indicators have not been met.

10. Evidence and reporting

DBT will work closely with all applicants to monitor the delivery and effectiveness of the programme. Successful applicants will be required to attend regular meetings with DBT and to submit regular reports during the funding period, to contribute towards the monitoring and evaluation of the programme. Successful applicants will also be required to submit an end of grant delivery report and where appropriate provide reports to update DBT on the progress of projects beyond the funding period. All applicants will be requested to submit feedback on the process and outcomes. Specific timings and detailed reporting requirements will be agreed before funds are allocated and included in the grant funding agreement to be signed between DBT and successful applicants. 

Only the actual costs of funded activities will be eligible to be reimbursed in accordance with the prescribed payment schedule from the programme (always in arrears), and only those costs comprehensively evidenced will be included as eligible. Funds cannot be distributed or passed through to external contractors directly.  

For staffing costs, the evidence required to demonstrate actual costs and performance can include, but is not limited to: 

• job descriptions and specifications 
• job advertisement postings 
• CVs received 
• payroll information (for example, P60s)
• timesheets for hours worked
• any other supporting evidence, which can be verified 

For externally contracted expertise, the evidence required to demonstrate actual costs and performance can include, but is not limited to: 

• actual invoices paid (for example, specialist external contractors)
• bank statements showing payment for invoiced services 
• regular reporting of expenditure within eligible categories, showing reconciliation of spend to invoices 
• any other supporting evidence, which can be verified 

You will be required to submit to us this and any other evidence we require to substantiate eligible costs.

11. Further information

Should you require further information, contact DBT Recognition Facilitation team.

Annex A – scoring criteria

1. Economic value (weighted 25% of overall score)  

An economic assessment of the projected benefits of the proposal to the sector or profession in scope of proposed RA(s), broken down by RA, utilising quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
Economic benefits from the proposed RA(s).	Evidence indicating changes to trade, mobility or growth, as a result of RA(s), for example, estimates of the volume/value of sectoral trade or business mobility flows that may be unlocked due to the proposed RA(s).
Evidence of impact of past RA(s).	Evidence of any similar projects supporting establishment of RA(s) undertaken in the past, including detail of how they were resourced and funded; economic benefits of past RAs.
Economic size of profession or sector within scope of proposed RA(s).	Existing volume or value of sectoral trade or business mobility flows.

Additional consideration may also be given to:

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
Indirect economic benefit created by the sector.	Qualitative or quantitative evidence demonstrating impact on other sectors in the UK or ‘knock-on’ benefits for other areas of the economy.

2. Value for money (weighted 20% of overall score)  

A financial assessment of the impact of grant funding on the proposal, broken down by RA(s), utilising quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
Costs of the proposal.	Estimates for work to be procured, based on, for example: quotes procured for the proposed activities; costs of relevant, similar technical work conducted previously; proposed salaries and other staffing costs for new hires; how estimated costs have been determined; commercial market rates for these costs.
Projected impacts of grant funding on recognition agreement (RA) delivery.	How proposed activities will deliver or support the establishment of RA(s).
Projected impacts of grant funding on RA activity.	Estimate the extent to which the projects/activity would take place without grant funding, with details and appropriate documentation:  Example answers include:  Not at all   Take place, but at later date (include projected timescales)  Take place, but at smaller scale (include estimate of how much smaller)  Take place, but lower quality (provide detail on impact)  Take place to the same time, scale and quality
Consideration of alternative funding.	Evidence of alternative options to grant funding considered; evidence of seeking alternative forms of finance to fund proposed project (with details and outcomes).

3. Benefit to RPQ in sector (weighted 20% of overall score)  

An evidence-based assessment of existing routes to recognition between applicant(s) and counterpart(s) and intended improvements as a result of the proposal.

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
An assessment of existing ease of recognition, including an indication of the impact on professionals seeking to provide services between the UK and counterpart jurisdiction(s), and the improvements offered by the proposal.	Current standards and/or procedures for professionals to secure recognition between applicant(s) and counterpart(s); any recent changes to standards and/or procedures, with accompanying explanation; proposed improvements to these as an intended outcome of the proposal; evidence of how improvements may be measured.
Considerations of RPQ as a means to facilitate trade or business mobility between the UK and counterpart(s).	Qualitative evidence to indicate how RPQ may improve the ease of access for UK professionals into the counterpart jurisdiction or vice versa.
Estimated Impact of RA(s) on numbers of recognition decisions by applicant(s) and/or international counterpart(s).	Numbers of professionals likely to be recognised between applicant(s) and counterpart(s) through proposed RA(s) as compared against existing routes; current or historic numbers of recognised qualified professionals within the sector, for the UK and/or counterpart(s), and numbers requiring recognition decisions; membership figures for applicant(s) and/or counterpart(s).

Additional consideration may also be given to:

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
Sectoral or industry needs.	Case studies or other qualitative evidence of businesses and professionals seeking to provide services being affected by RPQ; case studies or other qualitative evidence of decisions made by stakeholders as a result of RPQ acting as a barrier to trade, within scope of the proposed RA(s).

4. Deliverability of project outputs (weighted 20% of overall score) 

A project plan, with specific detail wherever possible, proportionate to the scale of funding sought.

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
An overall project timeline.	A timeline broken down by month at a minimum, and by week if possible, for at least the first financial year of the overall proposal, with indicative plans for any future years in as much detail as possible.
Key deliverables and milestones.	Outputs as highlighted in section 6 of this guidance (What will we fund); all internal processes required to achieve deliverables and milestones; indications of support that may be required from DBT to achieve these.
Objectives.	Evidence to indicate projected costs to be reimbursed through grant funding; evidence to indicate proposal objectives are SMART.
Identification of key stakeholders.	Stakeholders may include regulatory partners in the same sector, external experts to be commissioned, et al; these should be identified by organisation, or specific teams/individuals if known (subject to GDPR considerations).
Mitigations for missed milestones.	RAG ratings for all key milestones; identification of potential or probable scenarios that may result in missed milestones; proposed adjustments to project plan in the event of these identified scenarios, such as new dates for future milestones or reprioritisation of workstreams.

Additional consideration may also be given to:

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
Past examples of applicant(s) producing similar outputs to those included in proposals.	Examples of specific outputs, for example, reports mapping qualifications between jurisdictions.
Internal processes to hire staff.	A recruitment plan; job description(s).
Internal processes to procure external expertise.	Internal guidance demonstrating established processes for conducting procurement exercises; evidence of previous procurement exercises.
Evidence a new staff member or external expertise is required for this work.	A high level indication from applicant(s) of existing resources and how this may limit work towards RAs.

5. Negotiability of recognition arrangement(s) (weighted 15% of overall score) 

An evidence-based assessment of the likelihood of the recognition arrangement(s) being agreed as a direct outcome of funding.

Consideration should be given to:	Evidence to demonstrate considerations may include:
Evidence of FTA framework(s) to facilitate the agreement of RAs that will be used to negotiate proposed RA(s).	Justification for using the framework(s), for example, those agreed in FTAs with international partners, any internal or shared work done by the applicant(s) and/or counterpart(s) to understand these frameworks.
Evidence of existing political cooperation between UK and host jurisdiction(s) relevant to the proposal.	Shared political agreements signed by governments (for example, the 2019 Common Travel Area MoU).
Shared regulatory or sectoral cooperation between UK and host jurisdiction(s) relevant to the proposal.	Shared membership of regulatory programmes or representative bodies across jurisdictions, working groups, shared assemblies, other regular and recurring meetings; correspondence with or identified colleagues from counterpart(s).
Compatibility of existing qualification regimes between applicant(s) and counterpart(s).	Reports mapping existing qualifications between jurisdictions; any understanding between applicant(s) and counterpart(s) of existing qualification regimes.

Annex B – scoring definitions

Applications will be awarded scores of 0 to 6 for each of the 4 subsections in section 3 (‘Grant Proposal’) of the full application form. Guidance on the scoring ranges can be found below. 

Note – applications awarded below 3 for one or more sections of the full application form will not be awarded funding.

Score	Definition
0	Not demonstrated  This score will be awarded where the panel is satisfied that evidence to meet the specified criteria is neither relevant nor robust.
1	Limited demonstration  This score will be awarded where the panel is satisfied that evidence to meet the specified criteria is minimally relevant or robust, suggesting the proposal is highly unlikely to produce intended outputs or achieve intended outcomes.
2	Moderate demonstration  This score will be awarded where the panel is satisfied that evidence to meet the specified criteria is partially relevant or robust, suggesting the proposal is unlikely to produce intended outputs or achieve intended outcomes.
3	Adequate demonstration  This score will be awarded where the panel is satisfied that evidence to meet the specified criteria is adequately relevant and robust, suggesting the proposal is likely to produce intended outputs, and may achieve intended outcomes.
4	Good demonstration  This score will be awarded where the panel is satisfied that evidence to meet the specified criteria is both relevant and robust, suggesting the proposal is likely to produce intended outputs and achieve intended outcomes.
5	Strong demonstration  This score will be awarded where the panel is satisfied that evidence to meet the specified criteria is relevant and highly robust, suggesting the proposal is highly likely to produce intended outputs and likely to achieve intended outcomes within or beyond the funding period.
6	Excellent demonstration  This score will be awarded where the panel is satisfied that evidence to meet the specified criteria is exceptionally relevant and robust relative to other applications, suggesting the proposal is highly likely to produce intended outputs and may achieve intended outcomes within the funding period.