Guidance

Regulators' Pioneer Fund round 4: clarification questions (updated 4 July)

Updated 4 July 2025

RPF clarification points

(Added 4 July 2025)

Applying for both the Engineering Biology Sandbox and Regulators’ Pioneer Fund Round 4 (RPF 4)

We are aware that some Engineering Biology projects may meet the eligibility criteria for both the Engineering Biology Sandbox and the Regulators’ Pioneer Fund Round 4 (RPF 4) grant competitions.

In line with the guidance contained in Managing Public Money (specifically Annex 5.1) on how government departments should arrange and control grants, this notice clarifies that a single project cannot receive duplicate funding from both competitions. If the same project is submitted to both, it will only be eligible to receive funding from one competition.

To ensure compliance, we will cross-reference applications to identify any duplicate projects. If identical or substantially similar projects are identified, we will ask a clarification question, under the RPF 4 competition, to confirm that the applications are not for the same project.

If we determine that a project is identical across both competitions, we will:

• notify you that duplicate funding is not permitted
• ask you to confirm which competition you would prefer to proceed with, should your project be successful in both.

If no response is received, we will default to awarding funding through the competition that launched first – the Engineering Biology Sandbox.

(Added 13 June 2025)

• Please note that while the Application Form initially requested only the Lead Organisation name, we require the following additional information to conduct the due diligence checks: the full registered name of the Lead Organisation, the complete address including postcode, and the organisation registration number (or charity number, where applicable). In addition, please provide the full registered addresses and registration numbers (or charity numbers, where applicable) for any collaborations, entities or other parties collaborating to deliver your project. 

• Please note that there are two differences between the application form and competition brief in the listed points to include as part of an answer to question 1 (Q1). Firstly, we ask that you list all entities delivering the project, whether this is in-house within the lead organisation or collaborators, or an external party. Secondly, we ask you to list the other parties collaborating to deliver your project. Both points should be included as part of your answer to the ‘joint collaborators’ section in the application form.

• Please note that there is a slight variation in the wording used for the introductory sentence of question 1 (Q1) - the project summary. While in the application form it reads as follows: “Describe your project briefly and be clear about what makes it an innovative and an innovation-supporting venture”, in the competition brief, the final part of the sentence refers to an ‘initiative’ rather than a ‘venture.’ For clarification purposes, we do not see these two words as being materially different in respect to the innovative project being delivered, so applicants are welcome to use whichever one they prefer without any points being deducted.

• Please note that there is a difference in question 5 (Q5 - Added Value and Return on Public Investment) wording and the marks available. The total score for this question is 20 marks not 10 marks, to ensure that the total score for the application adds up to 100 marks instead of 90.

• Please note that Project Financial Information section has the following additional line included in the Competition brief: “Note that this overhead limit does not apply to third parties.” The full section should thereby read as follows: Please provide a monthly breakdown of your anticipated project costs for the length of the project. You should set out clearly administrative costs, costs associated with training, patent filing, subcontracting, labour and/or materials as applicable. The Lead Applicant can claim up to 20% of their staff costs as overhead costs in addition to staff costs. Where the Lead Applicant engages any third parties in the delivery of their project, the full overheads of these parties can be claimed. These should be detailed in the table below. Note that this overhead limit does not apply to third parties. Please include information on the matched funding your organisation will provide for your project. Contingency costs to cover the monetary impacts of project risks, uncertainties, unforeseen costs or situations should not be included in your project.

Project requirements

Projects starting from October that run for 12 months - if a project starts later in December for example, will funding allow for the project to run to Dec 26? To this end, what is the latest a project can start? (added 27 June 2025)

All projects must commence from 1 October 2025, and all project activities must conclude by 30 September 2026. DSIT reserves the right to amend these dates.

I note that projects have to start 01 October 2025 and end by 30 September 2026; however, can we still apply if a project was to start mid-way through this (i.e. April026). (added 27 June 2025)

All projects must commence from 1 October 2025, and all project activities must conclude by 30 September 2026. DSIT reserves the right to amend these dates.   

Eligibility criteria

Can a UK government department lead on a project and receive funding as a regulator within the definition of the pioneer fund? (added 27 June 2025)

UK regulators (national, devolved and local), local authorities and Combined Authorities can apply for RPF funding. Please note, only the regulators or local authorities who are leading a project can submit an application and claim funding.  If a department can demonstrate it exercises a regulatory function as defined in section 32(2)-(4) of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, then it is technically capable of being the lead applicant on an RPF 4 proposal.  However, the policy intent of the RPF is to support regulators and local authorities, rather than government departments.

Can a company be the lead applicant if benefit to regulators is demonstrated? If not, can a company be a collaborator or do they have to be a subcontracted? (added 13 June 2025)

No, companies cannot apply as the lead applicant for funding. As with previous rounds, RPF funding is targeted on promoting regulators and local authorities to innovate, rather than extending eligibility to organisations that do not have formal regulatory functions. However, organisations that provide coordination, advice, or support related to regulatory matters may partner with a regulator or local authority, even though they are not eligible to be the lead applicant.  

Part of the criteria is collaboration. Can several regulators work together on an application – should there be a lead submitter? (added 13 June 2025)

Only the regulator or local authority leading and sponsoring a project may submit an application and claim funding. They are  the lead applicant.

For the avoidance of doubt, Combined Authorities are eligible to apply as lead applicants. Local Government Association (LGA) describes Combined Authorities as a legal body set up using national legislation that enables a group of two or more councils to collaborate and take collective decisions across council boundaries.

Subject to subsidy control requirements, the lead applicant may involve domestic and/or international partners (such as businesses, industry bodies, civil society groups, other regulators or local authorities or academic institutions) in their proposed project where such participation is relevant to the purpose of the project and would be expected to improve or enhance the outcomes sought.

A regulator or local authority can lead on up to 3 applications in total in this (RPF 4) funding round. There is no limit to the number of applications that a regulator or local authority may participate on as a partner.

Multiple applications 

Can the same regulator submit several applications for different projects? (added 13 June 2025) 

A regulator or local authority can lead on up to 3 applications in total in this (RPF 4) funding round. There is no limit to the number of applications that a regulator or local authority may participate on as a partner. If a lead applicant submits more than 3 applications, we will only accept and assess the first 3 applications submitted. We will not assess additional applications.

Re: the eligibility requirement below, is the three successful bid limitation for a local authority throughout the lifespan of all RPF projects (rounds 1 - 4) or starting now with the RPF round 4? Regulators and local authorities are: (added 13 June 2025)

- limited to being the lead applicant on 3 applications
- not limited to the number of applications in which a regulator or local authority can be a partner.

A regulator or local authority can lead on up to 3 applications in total in this (RPF 4) funding round. There is no limit to the number of applications that a regulator or local authority may participate on as a partner.

Is the above requirement only for successful applications or is there a limitation in how many applications the Combined Authority (CA) can put forward (as a lead)? (added 13 June 2025)

UK regulators (national, devolved and local), local authorities, and Combined Authorities can apply for RPF funding, provided they meet the eligibility criteria. Please note, only the regulators or local authorities who are leading a project can submit an application and claim funding. A regulator or local authority can lead on up to 3 applications in total. There is no limit to the number of applications that a regulator or local authority may participate on as a partner. If a lead applicant submits more than 3 applications, we will only accept and assess the first 3 applications submitted. We will not assess additional applications.

Resubmissions

We would appreciate clarity on what you would consider a meaningful follow-on from a previously funded RPF project and offering something genuinely new and ambitious. (added 13 June 2025) 

If your proposal was successful in the first or second round of the RPF, you may not submit the same proposal in this competition. Any proposal you submit this time should be materially different from any proposal that received funding from the first three rounds. For example, a proposal which took the results of a previously funded RPF project and used them to explore a new area would be considered materially different. A proposal that continued a project that was previously successful in an early round would not. You will need to clearly explain how your proposal is materially different.

Funding 

Are there any constraints on how funding is divided between the lead regulator and other organisations involved in the bid? (e.g. a limit to the amount that can be passed on to non-regulator partners) (added 27 June 2025)

If partners in the bid are to receive funding, then they must be listed as sub-contractors/ collaborators in the application. The lead applicant is responsible for any funding which is sub-contracted in terms of managing public money requirements and is responsible for conducting due diligence on sub-contractors, collaborators, and any other delivery partners involved in the project.

There is no minimum or maximum for what can be subcontracted. However, we would suggest that this is proportionate.

If a strong bid is deemed too expensive, will the applicant be given an opportunity to submit a revised bid at a lower budget, or will the bid be rejected outright? (added 27 June 2025)

Your proposal should state how it will add value for the regulator and local authority and how the proposal offers society and the economy cost-effectiveness, as outlined within question 5 on ‘Added value’ within the application form.

We are not limiting the grant amount available based on project duration. If a short project demonstrated the need for the maximum grant amount, then we would consider the criteria in the competition brief. We have not awarded less than requested in previous RPF applications. In this round we will be again looking to award up to 100% of the requested amount in the application.

Does the grant have a liability cap in the terms? If so at what level? (added 27 June 2025)

A draft Statement of Main Terms for the fund has been published on the RPF 4 GOV.UK webpage. These represent the minimum terms an applicant must be capable of accepting to be eligible, however DSIT reserves the right to amend these.

Does the grant require the recipient to indemnify any other party? (added 27 June 2025)

A draft Statement of Main Terms for the fund has been published on the RPF 4 GOV.UK webpage. These represent the minimum terms an applicant must be capable of accepting to be eligible, however DSIT reserves the right to amend these.

Could you please confirm the minimum amount or percentage of match funding required for applicants? Additionally, are there any examples or averages from successful bids in previous rounds that could guide expectations around typical match funding contributions? (added 27 June 2025)

Match funding is not required for an application to be successful. However, you should commit your own resources to the project wherever possible and describe this in your application. This could include matched funding provided by your organisation to support specific project activities or costs, as well as contributions such as staffing resource and equipment.

How is the Regulatory Pioneer funding categorised financially? Is it CDEL or RDEL? can it only be used for R&D purposes, as per the Frascati definition of R&D? This categorisation will make a substantial difference to our bid. (27 June 2025)

The RPF is CDEL R&D and can only be used for R&D purposes as per the Frascati definition of R&D.

Is there a limitation for successful applications in each round? (added 13 June 2025) 

All applications will be assessed against the eligibility criteria that has been published in the RPF 4 competition brief. A regulator or local authority can lead on up to 3 applications in total, but there is no limit to the number of applications that a regulator or local authority may participate on as a partner. If a lead applicant submits more than 3 applications, we will only accept and assess the first 3 applications submitted. We will not assess additional applications.

Applications will initially be assessed and scored against the competition criteria. However, once the awarding panel are making the final funding decision, DSIT reserves the right to apply a ‘portfolio approach’. This is to ensure the competition meets its policy objectives, ensuring funding is allocated across strategic areas, sectors, or regions identified in the competition scope. As a result, this may mean that a lower scoring proposal is successful over a higher scoring one.

Are there any limits to how much can be subcontracted? (added 13 June 2025)

No, we would like regulators to build their own capacity and expertise, as this may demonstrate lasting impact beyond the lifetime of the funded project, but there are no limitations in acquiring specialist skills and expertise from external organisations to ensure the successful delivery of a project.

In addition to subsidy control implications, you must meet public sector procurement rules in relation to any subcontractors used (or demonstrate compliance with public sector principles if not subject to those requirements).  

If partners in the bid are to receive funding, then they must be listed as sub-contractors/ collaborators in the application. The lead bidder is responsible for any funding which is sub-contracted in terms of managing public money requirements. The lead applicant is responsible for conducting due diligence on sub-contractors, collaborators, etc. 

There is no minimum or maximum for what can be subcontracted, value for money overall will be assessed within the application. However, we would suggest that this is proportionate.

Are partners’ full labour costs and overheads covered within the RPF fund? I ask because I have taken the below from the website, and it is not explicitly clear. 

“The Lead Applicant can claim up to 20% of their staff costs as overhead costs in addition to staff costs. Where the Lead Applicant engages any third parties in the delivery of their project, the full overheads of these parties can be claimed.” (added 13 June 2025)

Third party overheads are not limited. However, we would encourage applicants to make clear in their application the rationale for how their overheads have been calculated and why these costs are critical to the project. Please note, if partners in the bid are to receive funding, then they must be listed as sub-contractors/ collaborators in the application.

Your proposal

The PowerPoint presentation accompanying the launch of this call for tender contained a reference to projects “over-delivering” in past calls, by “moving from proof-of-concept to innovators developing products” (slide 21). Does this imply that it is beyond the scope of this call for a project to move from proof-of-concept through to product development? If so, this appears to contract one of the evaluation criteria (under the ‘Alignment’ category) which states that the proposal should outline “how [it] will help businesses and innovators to bring innovative products and services to market, and/or improve business/public experience”. Apologies if this question was clarified in the launch event. (added 27 June 2025)

It is within the scope of the RPF for a project to start a proof of concept and progress through to product development.  For project taking this approach, we would encourage a review of the proof of concept before implementing any regulatory change, to ensure that it represents value for money and will support innovators and businesses or improve the business/public experience.

We’ve been working with two regulators on a project we’d like to expand across all regulators. Can the RPF be used for this type of activity? (added 27 June 2025)

Full eligibility criteria including project requirements and what the RPF will not fund can be found within the RPF 4 competition brief.

Additionally, can we apply for a first phase of a project (rather than a whole) i.e. discovery or design? (added 27 June 2025)

Yes, we encourage proposals that:

(1) harness new methods and/or new technical approaches to improve regulatory delivery and performance, benefitting innovators, businesses and the public.  We would consider feasibility studies, public engagement and/or surveys to be eligible activities.

(2) short research and development proposals that generate new learning by exploring (a) solutions for a regulatory issue faced by innovators, businesses or the public; or (b) proactive measures to better support innovators, businesses and the public

(3) a short trial or pilot study testing a new initiative to improve regulatory approaches  and better support innovators, businesses or the public.

To what extent can functions be delegated from the lead regulator to partners e.g., project management? (added 27 June 2025)

Subject to subsidy control requirements, the lead applicant may involve domestic and/or international partners (such as businesses, industry bodies, civil society groups, other regulators or local authorities or academic institutions) where their participation is relevant to the project’s purpose and is expected to enhance its outcomes. If any partners are to receive funding, they must be listed as sub-contractors or collaborators in the application.  The lead applicant is responsible for any funding which is sub-contracted in terms of managing public money requirements and is responsible for conducting due diligence on sub-contractors, collaborators, and any other delivery partners involved in the project.  

Could reporting functions also be delegated to either wholly to partners or delegated to partners and reported by the lead regulator? (added 27 June 2025)

The lead applicant will have overall accountability for the use of all project funding in line with Managing Public Money principles. The lead applicant is responsible for any funding which is sub-contracted in terms of managing public money requirements and is responsible for conducting due diligence on sub-contractors, collaborators, and any other delivery partners involved in the project.

As the lead applicant will be the party signing the agreement with DSIT, it may delegate reporting functions to one of its partners. This does not alter the lead applicant’s legal accountability for meeting all reporting requirements. The lead applicant is encouraged to involve partners where their contribution is relevant to the projects purpose and is expected to improve or enhance the outcomes sought.

Do regulators joining the bid have specific responsibilities, other than delivering on any funding allocated to them? (added 27 June 2025)

If partners in the bid are to receive funding, then they must be listed as sub-contractors/ collaborators in the application. The lead applicant is responsible for any funding which is sub-contracted in terms of managing public money requirements and is responsible for conducting due diligence on sub-contractors, collaborators, and any other delivery partners involved in the project.  

In particular, we would love to know whether activities which support the translation of research and innovations from within regulators into societal / economic impact would be within scope (added 27 June 2025)

All applications will be assessed against the eligibility criteria that has been published in the RPF 4 competition brief.  We are looking for project proposals that are based on a new idea or concept aimed at advancing existing knowledge, and that focus on creating a regulatory environment that fosters business innovation and investment.  This includes projects with approaches that help translate innovation into societal or economic impact.

The competition encourages collaborative bids. Would a single-regulator project like ours be less competitive, or is formal collaboration strongly advised to strengthen the proposal? (added 27 June 2025)

We are looking for projects that are collaborative but also welcome projects by a single regulator or local authority, that meet the aims and objectives of the RPF.  All applications will be assessed on their individual merit against the published eligibility and assessment criteria, including ambition, innovation, and value for money.

What is expected admin-wise from us? I presume there will be reporting on spend, anything else? (added 27 June 2025)

Like previous rounds of the RPF, we will monitor selected project’s progress though regular contact with project leads throughout the duration of the project. Projects will be expected to report on delivery progress and financial spend monthly. A final project report will need to be produced by each selected project at the end of their project, which will need to be published. In addition to this a ‘one year on’ progress update, 12 months after project funding has concluded, needs to be submitted to the RPF Team. Lessons learned from selected projects will also need to be published by the project.
 
Successful projects will also be required to work with DSIT’s independent evaluation partner or DSIT’s in-house evaluation resource to participate in the evaluation of the programme. This could include being contacted at intervals throughout the project, providing project data and participating in interviews and/or surveys. Further information on the evaluation of the programme will be provided if your application for funding is successful

Can Academia be a collaborator? (added 13 June 2025)

Subject to subsidy control requirements, the lead applicant may involve domestic and/or international partners (such as businesses, industry bodies, civil society groups, other regulators or local authorities or academic institutions) in their proposed project where such participation is relevant to the purpose of the project and would be expected to improve or enhance the outcomes sought.

We wanted to know if testing of the regulations would be eligible? (added 13 June 2025) 

Yes. We would consider feasibility studies, public engagement and/or surveys to be eligible as this is similar to an R&D project that harnesses new learning by exploring solutions to a regulatory issue faced by innovators or businesses. Please refer to the published RPF 4 Competition Brief for further guidance on what project proposals would be eligible. 

Can funding be used to host events? (added 13 June 2025)

Projects must deliver the aims of the RPF and meet the assessment criteria. If the project proposal’s sole purpose is to host an event without meeting the outlined expectations, it will not be eligible for funding. However, hosting events that support the delivery of your project, or disseminate project findings, which are held within the funding period would be eligible activity for funding.

Can a Company manage the project as a partner/subcontractor? (added 13 June 2025) 

Only the regulator or local authority leading and sponsoring a project may submit an application and claim funding. They are the lead applicant. 

For the avoidance of doubt, Combined Authorities are eligible to apply as lead applicants. Local Government Association (LGA) describes Combined Authorities as a legal body set up using national legislation that enables a group of two or more councils to collaborate and take collective decisions across council boundaries. 

Subject to subsidy control requirements, the lead applicant may involve domestic and/or international partners (such as businesses, industry bodies, civil society groups, other regulators or local authorities or academic institutions) in their proposed project where such participation is relevant to the purpose of the project and would be expected to improve or enhance the outcomes sought.  

Eligible costs include administration costs, costs associated with training (including innovation coaching), patent filing, subcontracting, labour and/or materials as applicable in the delivery of your project, during its funding period. Third party overheads are an eligible cost and are not limited, however, we would encourage applicants to make clear in their application the rationale for how their overheads have been calculated and why these costs are critical to the project. You should commit your own resources to the project wherever possible and describe this in your application. 

If partners in the bid are to receive funding, then they must be listed as sub-contractors/ collaborators in the application. The lead bidder is responsible for any funding which is sub-contracted in terms of managing public money requirements. The lead applicant is responsible for conducting due diligence on sub-contractors, collaborators, etc.

Application process / how to apply

Is there a need for formal letters of support/commitment from non-lead regulators (or other partners)? (added 27 June 2025)

Our awarding panel are not able to take letters of support into account when making their decision.  We would recommend applicants provide evidence of the demand for their project in their application.

To what extent should the project be developed at the point of application? For example, are you expecting a fully developed project plan with defined work packages, delivery milestones, Gantt charts, risk registers, and partner MOUs in place — or is it acceptable to submit a well-articulated strategic concept with a clear problem statement, theory of change, and indicative timelines? (added 27 June 2025)

There is no template, but we would like to see a project plan that provides details about governance and delivery, including: work packages; outputs; outcomes; dependencies; risks and governance (please refer to the bullet points we have listed in the application form under Q4). The plan should be developed enough to give assessors confidence in how you will manage the project effectively, ensuring timely progress, transparent reporting (including financial), robust governance and evaluation.

Are applicants permitted to include diagrams, infographics, or other visual materials within the application to help illustrate concepts or project workflows? If so, are there any formatting guidelines or limitations we should be aware of? (added 27 June 2025)

We ask that your answers to each application question are clear, jargon free, well structured and well-reasoned.  Where appropriate, we will accept diagrams to illustrate concepts or project workflows. 

In the event of an application being successful, particularly with multiple applications, is the applicant obliged to accept the grant and deliver the project?(added 27 June 2025)

There is no legal obligation to accept the grant upon notification of success. The statement of main terms for RPF 4 is available online and are the minimum conditions if the applicant proceeds with their project. DSIT reserves the right to amend these terms.
 We advise applicants to only submit applications which they can deliver within their capacity, should they be successful.

Does the scheme offer any developmental support in developing proposals, is it possible to arrange a short teams call or open Q&A ? (added 27 June 2025)

We are not offering support in developing proposals beyond what is contained within the published competition materials, which can be found on our GOV.UK webpage.  These documents are designed to ensure all potential applicants have equal access to the same information and support. To maintain a level playing field, we are unable to offer one-to-one developmental support such as Teams calls or bespoke Q&A sessions during the application window.

We are currently in discussions around supporting a bid into RPF4. We successfully supported a previous project as consultants (sub-contractor), but are looking this time at taking more of a partner role. We are looking for some guidance on how to approach this. We are specifically trying to get a better understanding of how to present our costs and what would constitute eligible costs. Clearly this is an area that can be challenging to align with a consultancy business model so trying to get a clear overview of the commercial options and what they would mean in practice to help us define our role in the bid/proposal. (added 13 June 2025)

If partners in the bid are to receive funding, then they must be listed as sub-contractors/ collaborators in the application. The lead bidder is responsible for any funding which is sub-contracted in terms of managing public money requirements. The lead applicant is responsible for conducting due diligence on sub-contractors, collaborators, etc. Eligible costs include administration costs, costs associated with training (including innovation coaching), patent filing, subcontracting, labour and/or materials as applicable in the delivery of your project, during its funding period. Eligible costs also include the publishing, communicating, sharing and disseminating of information about the launch of your project and its outcomes. Project financial information should be set out in the template provided in the application.

How do we work out a reasonable level of staff costs? (added 13 June 2025)

We ask that a rationale for how overheads have been calculated and why these costs are critical to the project to be provided and made clear in the application. Staff costs incurred because of RPF projects can be claimed based on FTE ratio supported by evidence. Third party overheads are not limited, for non-third parties we are happy for overheads to be an eligible cost up to 20% of staff costs.

Other 

Finally, will there be another round (i.e. round 5) next year? (added 27 June 2025)

RPF 4 will allocate funding for financial years 2025-2026 and 2026-2027. We do not expect new funding to be available before April 2026, and this will be subject to the outcome of the spending review and approval from HMT.

Under previous rounds of the RPF, online workshops have previously been held with the intention of allowing for regulators and other bodies wishing to put projects in for funding to find interested partners to collaborate on joint bids. Are there plans to hold similar events for this round and, if yes, when will they be held? (added 13 June 2025)

We will not be running stakeholder engagement networking sessions for RPF4. Regulators and local authorities will need to identify collaboration opportunities themselves

I’m getting in touch to ask whether you expect a further round of the RPF to be launched in the next year or so. (added 13 June 2025)

RPF 4 will allocate funding for the financial years 2025-2026 and 2026-2027. We do not expect new funding to be available before April 2026, and this will be subject to the outcome of the spending review and HMT approval.