Research and analysis

5G Innovation Regions interim evaluation: executive summary

Published 13 May 2026

Executive summary

Introduction

To support the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology’s (DSIT) ambition to deliver world-class digital infrastructure across the UK, drive innovation and unlock opportunities for economic growth, DSIT established the 5G Innovation Regions (5GIR) programme.

The 5GIR programme aims to drive innovative applications powered by 5G from proof of concept to widespread adoption. Innovation Regions aim to demonstrate and adopt 5G and other advanced wireless use cases across key sectors of the economy. Each Innovation Region plans to demonstrate the scalability, replicability, and sustainability of use cases, and disseminate project learnings and benefits.

The 5GIR programme delivery commenced in November 2023 and was originally planned to run until March 2025. In late 2024, DSIT extended the 5GIR programme for 12 months through to March 2026 to give projects more time to realise the benefits from their use cases. 

DSIT commissioned KPMG to evaluate the 5GIR programme^{[footnote 1]} and following the extension, it was agreed with DSIT that an interim process and impact evaluation would be conducted. As an interim evaluation, this report does not attempt to provide a final view on the overall impact of the 5GIR programme, but provides an assessment of how projects are progressing towards the delivery of the intended outcomes as at the end of March 2025.

The evaluation seeks to answer the following 2 overarching evaluation research questions:

• Process evaluation: What went well and what could be improved with regard to the 5GIR programme, specifically in relation to the design and delivery (from both a DSIT and local authority (LA)/partner organisation^{[footnote 2]} perspective)?
• Impact evaluation: To what extent did the 5GIR programme achieve the outcomes it set out to achieve within the timescale of the evaluation and to what extent can these outcomes be attributed to the programme?

More detail on these research questions, what they cover and how this interim evaluation seeks to answer them is set out in Section 2.

Interim process and impact evaluation methodology

The approach taken to delivering the interim process and impact evaluation aligns with that set out in the scoping and baseline report^{[footnote 3]} as well as the principles of the HM Treasury Magenta Book. It also reflects the fact that many of the outcomes and ultimate impacts expected from the 5GIR programme will take time to materialise and had not been delivered at the time of this evaluation.

A range of research and data collection methods have been employed to obtain the evidence needed to answer the research questions. The main sources of data and information used include: programme documentation (e.g benefits trackers^{[footnote 4]} and sector deployment reports^{[footnote 5]}; interviews with 5GIR project leads, DSIT officials and officials from the UK Telecoms Innovation Network (UKTIN); and surveys of other stakeholders involved in the 5GIR projects (network providers and use case stakeholders).

Interim process evaluation

For the interim process evaluation, thematic analysis is conducted on the evidence outlined above to identify key themes and insights. An assessment is made of how the processes and approaches adopted for the 5GIR programme have affected the delivery of the programme through to the end of March 2025. Any lessons that can be learnt from the delivery of the programme for future programme delivery for instance are also outlined.

Interim impact evaluation

The purpose of the interim impact evaluation is to assess what changes have occurred up to the end of March 2025 as a result of the 5GIR programme and the extent to which such changes can be attributed to the programme itself. 

To answer the overarching research question and assess the impact of the programme, in the absence of viable quasi-experimental methods^{[footnote 6]} a theory-based approach to the 5GIR interim impact evaluation using the HMT Magenta Book is applied. Theory-based impact evaluations draw conclusions about an intervention’s impact through rigorous testing of whether the causal chains thought to bring about change are supported by sufficiently strong evidence and alternative explanations can be ruled out.

A Theory of Change (ToC) describes and illustrates the changes an intervention is seeking to make, how it is expected to happen, and the measurable outputs, outcomes and impacts associated with the intended change. At a broad level, the ToC for the 5GIR programme (see Figure 2.1 in Section 2 for more detail) assumed that using the funding provided, a number of stackable use cases would be delivered by 5GIR areas. 5GIR areas were expected to share knowledge and lessons learnt from the delivery of the use cases across their area and outside the intervention area. This activity was expected to lead to a general increase in demand for 5G and other advanced wireless technologies, increasing commercial investment in advanced connectivity networks and services and resulting in increased economic growth. The 5GIR programme also aimed to increase collaboration among partners in the delivery of projects such that a 5G ecosystem was developed.

In line with the approach set out in the scoping report, the theory-based approach of contribution analysis^{[footnote 7]} (CA) is applied to assess the extent to which the activities undertaken by 5GIR areas have been implemented in accordance with the ToC. It is used to test the extent to which the chains of causality, and underlying assumptions, in the ToC are supported by and confirmed by the evidence available. However, based on the evidence available and the change that is currently visible, it is too early to apply fully a CA framework in this evaluation because outputs and outcomes are still emerging and/or uncertain. As a result, in what follows, initial thinking around the contribution story and a preliminary narrative of how the programme is contributing to change is presented. To that end, the evaluation assesses the extent to which the activities undertaken by 5GIR areas up to the end of March 2025 are consistent with the future delivery of expected outcomes and impacts as illustrated in the ToC.     

Caveats and limitations

When interpreting the findings of this interim evaluation there are a number of caveats and limitations to be aware of.  In summary these include:

• At the end of March 2025, many of the use cases had been operational for a relatively short amount of time and some had yet to be implemented. This means that, as at the end March 2025, many benefits were yet to be realised, documented and/or disseminated. As a result, the evaluation does not capture the full impacts of the programme.
• Much of the evidence for the interim evaluation has been drawn from interviews and surveys with programme stakeholders. Contact details for these stakeholders were provided by 5GIR areas.  There is a risk, therefore, that the selection of stakeholders and the information provided by them may contain bias. To mitigate the impact of this, information and data drawn from stakeholders has been reviewed against other sources for consistency.
• The quantitative recording of project-level benefits has been undertaken by each 5GIR area individually. This creates a risk of inconsistency in reporting across 5GIR areas (as well as between 5GIR projects within individual areas). Whilst steps have been taken to minimise this risk, this evaluation is reliant on the accuracy and completeness of data provided.

Key findings

Summary of the interim 5GIR process evaluation findings

The overarching research question for the process evaluation is: What went well and what could be improved with regard to the 5GIR programme, specifically in relation to the design and delivery (from both a DSIT and local authority (LA)/partner organisation perspective)?

To help answer this overarching research question a number of supplementary process evaluation research questions were developed. This section considers the main topics that came through from the thematic analysis of the supplementary questions which included: the outputs achieved through the programme; factors affecting delivery (at the programme and project level) including the funding method used for the programme; and improvements that could be made to the programme.

The evidence identified the following key findings:

A large number of advanced wireless technology use cases were implemented in the period to March 2025:

• By March 2025, 119 use cases had been implemented across 5GIR projects – over 80% of 5GIR areas’ original plans for at least 144 use cases. Use cases using existing connectivity solutions (e.g. public mobile networks or private wifi networks) tended to be deployed earlier than those use cases requiring the provision of a private 5G network. By March 2025, 2 5GIR areas had not implemented use cases; both projects involved the procurement of private 5G networks.

• Examples of the sectors and use cases covered by 5GIR projects include:
  
  
  • Agriculture – with use cases including sensors measuring temperature, humidity, rainfall to maximise crop growth
    
  • Manufacturing – with use cases involving remote monitoring, predictive maintenance, and real-time data analytics
    
  • Aerospace and engineering – with use cases including improving training and operational efficiency through the use of extended reality (XR) technologies
    
  • Social care – with use cases including Technology Enabled Care (TEC) using devices like smart speakers, sensors, doorbells, bed mats and smart watches
    
  • Social housing – with use cases including sensors measuring temperature and humidity to help avoid the build-up of mould
    
  • Ports – with use cases including sensors to support transport logistics and the efficient operation of port facilities
    
• Therefore, 5GIR projects had implemented, or were in the process of implementing, use cases testing the value of advanced connectivity networks and services in line with the original objectives of the programme by the end of March 2025.
• Just over 250 dissemination events sharing knowledge and findings from individual 5GIR projects had been delivered by March 2025. However, the majority of this dissemination was attributable to 2 5GIR areas and occurred within the individual 5GIR area (rather than with organisations outside the area).

There were various factors that supported the delivery of the programme:

• DSIT’s support, particularly technical support, was cited as being important in the successful implementation of use cases for 5GIR projects.
• The funding method used for the 5GIR programme^{[footnote 8]} was reported to have had a positive influence on the delivery of individual projects and of the programme as a whole. Specifically:
  
  
  • Incorporating the funding method into the design of the 5GIR programme was reported to have led to more applications for the programme than would have been the case with a more traditional method of funding.

• The funding mechanism was also reported to have supported the delivery of 5GIR projects, when compared to more traditional funding models, by:
  

  • reducing the time taken for decisions to be made about 5GIR projects within LAs, and
    
  • enabling delivery teams to be more flexible in the delivery of 5GIR projects.

5GIR areas faced challenges which meant that the delivery of 5GIR projects was delayed when compared to original plans:

• Most 5GIR areas found the delivery of their projects within the original timelines of the programme challenging. Factors cited by 5GIR areas as affecting the implementation of use cases included: unexpected factors impacting on delivery (e.g. operational challenges including the closure of Suez Canal delaying deliveries); underestimation of project management requirements; 5GIR areas’ procurement processes taking longer than expected; and the added complexity of delivering stackable use cases amongst others.
• By the end of March 2025, the delivery of most 5GIR projects – in terms of delivery of use cases; realised benefits; and subsequent documentation and dissemination outside the intervention area – had been delayed when compared to what was originally expected (from 5GIR areas’ initial plans). This was, in part, due to issues encountered by 5GIR areas during delivery and probably, in part, due to the optimistic nature of some 5GIR areas’ original plans.

In terms of areas for improvement, the main areas identified include:

Improvements to the initial application guidance:

• The guidance and/or supporting materials could have been clearer about the nature of 5GIR funding and the purposes for which it could be used, e.g. for project management. Project leads identified a lack of project management capacity as an issue for delivery, and therefore increased clarity in the guidance on this point might have enabled 5GIR projects to resource more project management capacity from the start, which would have supported more effective delivery.

• The guidance could have been more explicit about how applicants might have procured the services for their individual project. DSIT officials felt that focusing procurements on the services to be provided, rather than the technicalities of how such services were to be provided, would reduce the need for projects to spend time and resource on third parties and/or consultants.

Streamlined reporting requirements:

• Reporting requirements from DSIT and UKTIN could have been streamlined. Some 5GIR areas highlighted some level of duplication across DSIT and UKTIN requests, which unnecessarily increased the reporting burden.

Timely payment of grants:

• More timely payment of grants to some 5GIR areas would have better supported the delivery of some 5GIR projects.

Summary of the interim 5GIR impact evaluation findings

The overarching research question for the interim impact evaluation is: to what extent did the 5GIR programme achieve the outcomes it set out to achieve within the timescale of the evaluation and to what extent can these outcomes be attributed to the programme?

To help answer this overarching research question a number of supplementary evaluation research questions were developed. This section reflects the themes covered by the supplementary research questions and, therefore, considers: the delivery of realised benefits; documentation and dissemination; the fostering of a 5G ecosystem; the sustainability of projects; and long-term adoption of advanced connectivity services. The section finishes by concluding on the overarching evaluation question.

The evidence identified the following key findings:

Delivery of realised benefits: Whilst a large number of use cases had been implemented, few had yet realised benefits

• 8 of the 10 5GIR areas implemented 119 use cases spanning a range of sectors by March 2025, with the benefits from such use cases being monitored. This compared to plans for at least 144 use cases to be implemented from the initial 5GIR applications.

• However, whilst use cases had been implemented in all but 2 5GIR areas by March 2025, in most cases their delivery had been delayed such that use cases had limited time to demonstrate, or realise, benefits.

• Attributing outcomes to the 5GIR programme is challenging without a robust comparison group. However, all 5GIR project leads and most network providers and use case stakeholders said the 5GIR project would not have taken place in the timescales of the original programme without DSIT funding. Whilst this suggests the delivery of 5GIR projects was largely attributable to the programme, the issue of attribution is not clear cut (particularly given the potential influence of previous programmes); it will be explored further as part of the final evaluation.

• Looking forward, by the end of March 2025, many of the factors required to realise benefits from projects were in place. Use cases had been (or were about to be) implemented and outputs and outcomes from use cases were being actively monitored. This activity provides confidence that, in the extension period, evidence on the benefits from 5GIR projects will be realised.

Documentation and dissemination: A large number of dissemination events have been delivered, mainly within the 5GIR area

• In the period to March 2025, all 5GIR areas had been monitoring and reporting on their projects. However, the documentation of benefits realised from use cases had been limited given most areas had only just implemented use cases by March 2025.

• Just over 250 dissemination events sharing knowledge and findings from individual 5GIR projects had been delivered by March 2025. The majority of dissemination events occurred in 2 5GIR areas. Moreover, most dissemination events had been focused on the individual 5GIR area itself, rather than wider dissemination outside the intervention area.

• Given the dissemination events related to the 5GIR programme and given LAs would have limited incentives to conduct dissemination activities without them being a requirement of the programme, the documentation and dissemination activity is considered to be largely attributable to the programme.

• Looking forward, to support delivery of programme objectives, the evaluation evidence suggests a key focus of dissemination activity should be on identifying and reaching those that are not aware or less interested in advanced wireless technologies. This should help increase the understanding among other organisations in 5GIR areas and beyond of the benefits of 5G and associated connectivity services.

Fostering a 5G ecosystem: 5GIR projects have involved a large number of delivery partners, engaged a large number of firms, and stakeholders consider that a 5G ecosystem has been developed

• Delivery of individual 5GIR projects involved a large number of delivery partners, with many of these representing new relationships formed as part of the programme.

• Meetings, workshops and various other forums had been used to share information across delivery partners and other stakeholders around the delivery of the 5GIR project.

• Data from the benefits trackers shows that, through various activities including working groups, use case demonstration events and workshops, the 5GIR programme had engaged over 1000 firms across a breadth of sectors.

• 5GIR project leads, network providers and use case stakeholders all commented positively on the relationships developed through the programme and the development of an advanced wireless technology ecosystem.

• Whilst some 5GIR areas did have pre-existing relationships with some of their suppliers/stakeholders, most areas needed to establish new relationships as part of their 5GIR projects. Indeed, some 5GIR areas struggled to identify and engage with relevant stakeholders at the start of their project. This suggests that much of the collaboration on 5GIR projects has been brought about between parties that were not known to each other (or did not have an established relationship) before the programme and so were brought together as a direct result of the 5GIR programme. In addition, given that the majority of stakeholders involved in 5GIR projects said the project would not have gone ahead in the timescales of the original programme without DSIT funding, this suggests that much of this collaboration is attributable to the programme.

Sustainability of projects: Stakeholders say they expect existing networks and services to continue

• Whilst it is too early to conclude on the sustainability of projects post-DSIT funding, most 5GIR interventions were designed with some level of sustainability in mind.

• The long-term sustainability of 5GIR projects is dependent on 3 main factors. First, 5GIR projects need to document and evidence their viability. Second, the organisation or department with long-term responsibility for the advanced connectivity networks and/or services need to be convinced of its viability. Third, commitments among wider stakeholders need to be secured to support ongoing delivery.

• Strong documented evidence of the long term viability of most 5GIR projects did not exist at the end of March 2025. Despite the lack of documented evidence, network provider and use case stakeholders said they expected the advanced connectivity networks and services provided in 5GIR areas to continue into the future. Moreover, the level of additional funding generated by the projects, at just over £10 million, provides some confidence that ongoing private or public investment may be secured.

• Whilst it is not possible to categorically attribute this additional funding to the 5GIR programme without further investigating each individual contribution, evidence from the benefits trackers suggests close alignment of this funding with the projects themselves. This suggests the additional funding might not have been forthcoming without the project being delivered, and can therefore be attributed to the programme.

Long-term adoption of advanced wireless technology: Network providers and use case stakeholders to 5GIR projects expressed an increased appetite for investment outside 5GIR areas

• Direct evidence on the adoption of advanced wireless technology is difficult to gather from official statistics.

• Whilst it does not represent adoption per se, additional funding leveraged into 5GIR projects from both the public and private sectors as of March 2025 (over £10 million) provides evidence of the appetite to invest in advanced wireless technologies. Moreover, stakeholders in 5GIR projects reported an increased inclination to invest in advanced connectivity networks and services outside 5GIR areas as a result of the project (with no discernible trend across sectors).

• In assessing the extent to which the stated investment intentions of 5GIR stakeholders are likely to be attributable to the 5GIR programme or not, evidence shows that investment in 5G in the UK in recent years has been lower than in the EU and US. This would suggest that, if 5GIR stakeholders’ investment intentions, outlined above, are realised, then the 5GIR programme might have had a positive impact on organisations’ investment intentions.

Conclusion: The 5GIR programme has achieved a lot of the outcomes, although not all, that it originally set out to achieve, and is in a good position to deliver more outcomes in the extension period.

• Taking all the evidence together, by March 2025, the 5GIR programme had:
  
  

  • Implemented the majority of originally planned use cases
    
  • Delivered just over 250 dissemination events
    
  • Involved a large number of delivery partners in the delivery of projects with stakeholders stating that a 5G ecosystem had been developed
    
  • Leveraged just over £10 million in additional funding into projects with stakeholders stating that they expect existing networks and services to continue
    
  • Increased stakeholders in 5GIR projects’ inclination to invest in advanced connectivity networks and services outside 5GIR areas as a result of the project
    

• The main areas where delivery fell below original expectations included the fact that most 5GIR projects had not been able to evidence realised benefits and/or disseminate their learning beyond their immediate area within the original timeframes for the programme.

• With the extension to the programme, 5GIR areas are in a good position to evidence realised benefits from implemented use cases. This should enable the documentation and dissemination of benefits derived from the use cases. The dissemination of the findings on benefits should help improve the understanding of organisations around the benefits of advanced wireless technology adoption and so increase economic activity and investment. These are all aspects for 5GIR areas to focus on in the extension period in order to support the programme in achieving its objectives.

• The final evaluation, due to be conducted following the completion of the programme in 2026, will consider the extent to which these activities, outputs and outcomes have been achieved and, as a result, the extent to which the 5GIR programme can be expected to drive economic growth and accelerate commercial investment in advanced connectivity services in the next few years.

1. KPMG, 5G Innovation Regions and Smart Infrastructure Pilots Programme Evaluation: Scoping and baseline report, May 2024 ↩

2. Where partner organisation refers to other stakeholders involved in the delivery of 5GIR interventions ↩

3. KPMG, 5G Innovation Regions and Smart Infrastructure Pilots Programme Evaluation: Scoping and baseline report, May 2024 ↩

4. The benefits tracker was a spreadsheet used to track progress against each project’s intended benefits. ↩

5. Sector deployment reports were produced to capture the learnings from each 5GIR project. ↩

6. 5G Innovation Regions and Smart Infrastructure Pilots Programme Evaluation: Scoping and baseline report, May 2024 ↩

7. Contribution analysis is considered the most appropriate theory-based approach to apply to this evaluation because of the ability to use the range of evidence and information to test and, where relevant, attribute causality to linkages in the ToC. ↩

8. The funding method used for the 5GIR programme was predominately a non-ring fenced capital grant. One of the main reasons for using this mechanism was to provide LAs with increased flexibility and freedom to devise and deliver their plans. ↩