Research and analysis

Cornwall and Isles of Scilly UKSPF evaluation: interim findings

Updated 3 December 2025

Applies to England

Executive summary: Cornwall and Isles of Scilly interim findings

Introduction

The UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) provides a total of £3.5 billion of funding for local investment over 4 years (2022 to 2026), with all places in the UK receiving an allocation via a funding formula. Local decision-makers work with their local communities and partners to deliver interventions under three investment priorities: Communities and Place, Supporting Local Businesses and People and Skills.

This interim report presents the emerging findings from the place level evaluation of UKSPF in Cornwall and Isles of Scilly (CIOS), based on research conducted between November 2024 and January 2025. It outlines the progress made to date and presents interim evaluation findings.

Key process evaluation findings

Intervention design

• CIOS successfully developed their investment plan by integrating previous economic strategies and through consultation with a wide range of partners.
• The investment plan was broad, in part due to alignment with previous strategies and the limited time available for drafting and refinement. Subsequent calls and specifications for funding covered a wide range of interventions and themes, though a more targeted strategic focus may have been more effective.
• Faced with limited time to design the UKSPF programme, Councils in CIOS took a pragmatic approach, drawing on their extensive experience with ERDF-funded programmes. This enabled them to design projects that continued familiar funding themes and focus delivery, within the 18 to 24-month window, on interventions that built directly on previous work.
• CIOS Councils were keen to use UKSPF to invest in new interventions rather than as additional finance for funding sources already secured. Match funding was encouraged but not where it displaced existing allocations such as Towns Fund.
• Reliance on public funding, especially from larger European allocations resulted in lower match funding rates than desired (averaging 71% UKSPF intervention) with limited interest from the private sector to contribute.
• Good growth principles were embedded into UKSPF delivery to support cross cutting themes. These were considered successful in encouraging some interventions to undertake additional activities that they otherwise would not have.

Portfolio implementation

• In CIOS, the UKSPF was delivered through the Good Growth Programme, overseen by a delivery team and programme board.
• The portfolio of calls under the Good Growth Programme was broad with over 42 separate funding opportunities. This was difficult to manage effectively with operational challenges around resources and concerns for potential duplication, within and between funding calls.
• A process of submitting initial expressions of interest which received feedback from the Good Growth Team helped to encourage better quality submissions while also reducing the number of less appropriate bids when full applications were opened. Advice and guidance were also available to encourage applications from organisations who may not have previously accessed public funding.
• The assessment process was thorough, with multiple stages. While this approach helped select appropriate projects, it was resource intensive and caused some delays to contracting.
• Good quality applications, that weren’t initially approved, were held in reserve and reassessed later if additional funding was available or other projects did not proceed. Some of these applications were successfully contracted later and this was considered excellent practice.

Intervention delivery

• A large proportion of the 143 interventions funded under UKSPF were continuations or modifications of existing provision, which helped maintain quality by building on proven delivery models. However, competition from existing suppliers was strong and only a small number of new interventions or organisations were successful in securing funding.
• The Good Growth Team and many intervention leads delivered high-quality projects, drawing on their experience and skills from previous programmes.
• The Growth Hub provided a single point of entry for the Supporting Local Businesses investment priority, issuing referrals to relevant projects. This approach influenced the types of businesses seeking support, often less ambitious or with limited potential, and led to inefficiencies in processing referrals.

Data collection and monitoring

• Data provided through claim forms was sometimes inconsistent and early in the programme there were issues with guidance on output and outcomes.
• All projects, regardless of size or risk, were required to provide large amounts of information. However, the programme team adjusted the requirements over time, reducing the administrative burden to projects.
• There were more than 320 output and outcome indicators across the 41 intervention types. This resulted in a very complex monitoring sheet and made assessment of ongoing performance difficult.

Programme oversight

• Governance of the Good Growth Programme was strong, with an Economic Prosperity Board and Advisory Board, as well as involvement of the programme officers. Delegation and urgency procedures were used to devolve functions to other responsible officers and reduce governance burdens.

Progress to date: expenditure, outputs and outcomes

CIOS was allocated a total UKSPF core budget of £129.5 million (with an additional £47.4 million for 2025/26) with a further £2.5 million allocated for Multiply. The programme has spent £74.7 million to date, 57% of the overall allocation. Spend to date for the Supporting Local Businesses investment priority is 39% of the total allocation, Communities and Place projects are at 49% and People and Skills projects had used 71% of the allocated funding.

Monitoring data outputs reported by CIOS in December 2024 shows mixed progress across the programme. Research and Development interventions are mainly on track to meet their output targets, with some already achieved. Decarbonisation Good Growth Principle is forecast to meet its targets; though many of the outputs are yet to be claimed. Skills and Wages interventions are also progressing well with several targets already met. However, delays in starting many skills projects pose a risk to full delivery.

Outcomes data is limited, with most targets yet to be achieved.

Early impact findings

Most UKSPF interventions in CIOS are still underway or nearing completion and many impacts will take time to fully emerge. Monitoring data, however, already shows early signs of impact in the deep dive areas being explored by the evaluation, these include.

• Increased confidence among businesses receiving support on innovation processes.
• Introduction of some new to firm products, processes or technologies following support.
• Five commercial buildings completed to support innovation activities.
• Collaboration and knowledge transfer between HE Institutions and businesses with anticipated results for research and development.
• Training for more than one thousand people, including new qualifications, indicating the development of new skills by the local population.

The outcomes and impact of UKSPF in CIOS will be explored in more depth in the final evaluation report.