Corporate report

Evaluation Strategy update 2025

Updated 13 October 2025

This update to our Evaluation Strategy (originally published Summer 2024) gives an overview of evaluations conducted over the last spending review period (SR21) which set departmental budgets for FY22-FY24 inclusive. During this time, the UK Space Agency commissioned and published more evaluation than ever before, including our most robust impact evaluation design yet1, and our teams have already started using the findings to inform and improve delivery.  

Going into the next spending review period, we intend to build on this success as we develop our evaluation pipeline, specifically by: 

• working with our newly established External Panel of Experts to challenge ourselves to make our evaluations as robust as possible, improving the evidence available for UK Space Agency decision makers  

• investing in long-term evaluation designs to help us understand the impact of our programmes, which can take years to be fully realised

• continuing to collaborate with key actors in and beyond government to maximise the lessons we learn from our programme of evaluation

• reflecting and responding to helpful feedback from a recent Request for Information (RFI) from evaluators about a new framework for procuring evaluation

SR21 programme of evaluation

1. Evaluations including impact 

Below we present findings from our portfolio which included impact evaluations. These generally included process and value for money evaluations too.   

1.1 European Space Agency (ESA) 

The UK Space Agency plays a central role in managing the UK’s involvement in the Agency (ESA), which receives around 70–75% of the UK Space Agency’s annual budget, and the UK has committed £1.84bn between 2022 and 2027. 

Evaluation findings include:   

• strong economic return –  Every £1 the UK invests in ESA generates about £7.50 in direct economic benefits. ESA contracts resulted in turnover, productivity, and private R&D investment growth for UK firms, with positive effects demonstrated to last up to 20 years post contract award

• scientific and technical leadership –The UK is a leading ESA member, contributing to and leading major missions in space science, Earth observation, and climate monitoring. UK organisations have developed world-class technologies and played key roles in missions such as the Rosalind Franklin Mars Rover, Vigil, and TRUTHS

• industrial and commercial – ESA contracts have helped UK companies develop new technologies, enter new markets, and attract private investment. Programmes like the General Support and Technology Programme (GSTP) and Navigation, Innovation and Support Programme (NAVISP) have supported innovation and the growth of small businesses

• societal and environmental benefits – ESA-funded Earth observation data supports climate science, disaster preparedness, and environmental management. Public engagement through high-profile missions has inspired interest in science and technology, though a national strategy could further enhance this impact

• strategic value – ESA membership allows the UK to collaborate internationally, share costs, and access projects that would be unaffordable alone. Most benefits would not be achievable outside ESA. However, the UK’s ability to deliver full missions is limited, and better coordination across government is recommended

The ESA evaluation comprises a qualitative process evaluation, a theory-based impact evaluation (drawing on contribution analysis), a quasi-experimental impact evaluation (using staggered difference-in-difference estimation) and social cost benefit analysis. The impact evaluation is a 3 on the Maryland Scientific Scale2 This means we can be reasonably confident that the outcomes are attributable to the programme. 

1.2 International  

The UK Space Agency is a long-standing advocate of international relationships and collaboration within the space sector. In 2023, we launched our first funds dedicated to building and strengthening the UK’s ties with international space partners beyond ESA member states. 

International Bilateral Fund (IBF)

The International Bilateral Fund (IBF) was launched by the UK Space Agency to build partnerships with countries outside the European Space Agency. With £20.6 million in UK funding and additional partner contributions, the programme supported 48 projects aimed at strengthening international collaboration, boosting innovation, and enhancing the UK’s global space presence. 

IBF evaluation findings include:  

• partnerships and reputation – The IBF created at least 59 new international partnerships and deepened many existing ones, especially with the USA, Australia, and India. UK organisations reported improved global reputation and leadership, though future funding is needed to sustain these gains

• economic and commercial – The programme attracted £15.8 million in matched and in-kind contributions and £3.05 million in external investment. While revenue growth to date has been modest, project teams expect significant commercial returns after 2027.  In addition,13 new international markets were entered, and two university spin-outs are underway

• skills and knowledge – At least 63 early-career professionals gained hands-on experience. The programme was perceived to improved technical, managerial, and business skills, especially in navigating international collaboration. Knowledge exchange with global partners was identified as a key benefit

• scientific and strategic potential – Nine future space mission opportunities were identified, including with NASA and ISRO (Indian Space Research Organisation). 34 academic institutions participated, with early research outputs already published. Some projects explored technologies with potential applications in climate science, clean energy, and healthcare

• value for money – The programme has delivered £4.2 million in measurable UK benefits so far, with £16.5 million expected in the coming years. However, current costs exceed benefits. This is typical for early-stage innovation. Many benefits—like reputation and strategic influence—are not easily monetised but are considered valuable

The findings are from a theory-based impact evaluation, drawing on contribution analysis and social cost benefit analysis. The impact evaluation is a level 1 on the Maryland Scale of Scientific Methods, meaning we cannot be sure that the outcomes are attributable to the programme. Due to the infancy of the programme (launched in 2023), the evaluation can only capture emerging outcomes.  

1.3 Discovery 

The Discovery priority manages frequent national and international space missions, including complimentary national investments to the European Space Agency (ESA). This investments are short and long term, and seek to  strengthen UK capability in space science and engineering, and that offer opportunities for the UK to lead global discovery. 

Ariel

The Ariel mission, led by the UK through the UK Space Agency, is a European Space Agency project aiming to study the atmospheres of 1,000 exoplanets. Scheduled for launch in 2029, Ariel is designed to deepen our understanding of how planets form and evolve. Core funding for the mission comes from ESA’s space science budget, with an additional £30.3m support from the UK Space Agency to ensure UK leadership in science, engineering, and programme management. 

The interim evaluation assessed how well the UK’s investment is delivering on its goals, including 

• scientific progress – UK researchers are producing high-quality science, with Ariel-related annual average publications doubling since the UK Space Agency’s investment. Half of these papers include UK authors, showing strong national leadership

• skills and public engagement – The mission is helping to train and retain talent in the UK space sector. Outreach efforts like the Ariel Data Challenge and ExoClock have engaged thousands of students, amateurs, and professionals worldwide, including many in the UK

• innovation and commercial  – Two UK start-ups—Blue Skies Space and Spaceflux—have emerged from Ariel-related work. They have contributed to, amongst others, securing over £14 million in funding and creating jobs. These companies are applying space science and AI to real-world challenges

• challenges ahead – Delays in telescope assembly and funding uncertainties pose risks to future progress.UK-specific funding issues such as spending review uncertainties have impacted planning and staff retention

The Ariel evaluation comprises a qualitative process evaluation a theory-based impact evaluation, using contribution analysis and social cost benefit analysis. The impact evaluation is a level1 on the Maryland Scale of Scientific Methods, meaning we cannot be sure that the outcomes are attributable to the programme. 

Comet Interceptor

The Comet Interceptor mission, led by the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), aims to intercept a pristine comet in 2029. The UK is a major contributor, with £16 million in national funding supporting scientific leadership, international collaboration, skills development, and innovation.  

The interim evaluation assessed the early progress and emerging impact of the UK’s contribution, including:  

• scientific leadership – UK researchers hold key roles, including leadership over two instruments and an Interdisciplinary Scientist position. UK authors contributed to 39% of mission-related publications, with early signs of strong citation impact. Most scientific benefits are expected post-launch

• international collaboration – The UK is the second biggest contributor to Comet Interceptor research globally, collaborating with 26 countries. UK leadership roles have helped shape the mission and raise its international profile

• skills and outreach – Around 10 UK-based team members are gaining valuable experience. Outreach activities have reached diverse audiences through 45 events in 13 countries. However, short-term contracts and funding uncertainty risk staff retention and continuity

• innovation and commercial – Innovation is limited by the mission’s fast-track nature, but early commercial benefits include £150k in technology sales from Oxford University. UK supply chain involvement is growing, though further commercialisation is constrained by limited resources

• delivery and administration – UK-funded activities are broadly on track. Challenges include funding uncertainty, administrative burdens, and risks from staff turnover. Reporting processes between the UK Space Agency and ESA are improving but still need streamlining

The Comet interceptor evaluation comprises a qualitative process evaluation and a theory-based impact evaluation, using contribution analysis. The impact evaluation is a level 1 on the Maryland Scale of Scientific Methods, meaning we cannot be sure that the outcomes are attributable to the programme.  

2. Process and cost benefit evaluations 

We have not yet conducted impact evaluations for the below priority areas. Details of other evaluations are provided.  

2.1 Earth observation  

The Earth Observation priority seeks to deliver a portfolio of activities that ensure long-term value-for-money access to the data we need. 

Centre for Earth Observation Instrumentation (CEOI)

The Centre for Earth Observation Instrumentation (CEOI) was established in 2007 to advance the UK’s capabilities in Earth Observation (EO).  CEOI is funded by the UK Space Agency with parallel technology investment from industry.  

This independent evaluation, commissioned by the UK Space Agency, assessed CEOI’s impact, value for money, and delivery model, including:  

• boosting innovation: CEOI supports early-stage EO technologies, helping UK teams progress by an average of 2.2 Technology Readiness Levels. Many projects would not have advanced without CEOI funding

• economic value: CEOI has delivered substantial benefits to date, with the largest benefits likely to accrue in future years with further investment catalysed by CEOI creating a pipeline for future benefits creation. Major ESA contracts and foreign investment have been secured as a result

• collaboration and skills: CEOI has strengthened partnerships between academia, industry, and government. Over 70% of participants gained technical insights, and nearly half improved their skills through CEOI activities

• effective delivery: The programme’s delivery model—run by a consortium of experts—was praised for its technical support and responsiveness. However, short-term funding cycles limit its potential

• strategic role: CEOI plays a key role in maintaining the UK’s international standing in EO, enabling participation in ESA missions and enhancing export capabilities

The evaluation comprised a combination of methods as part of the process evaluation, as well as social cost benefit analysis.  

2.2 Innovation  

The Innovation priority aims to deliver a step change in the UK’s share of the fastest-growing or highest-potential commercial space markets, by managing a portfolio of investments in high risk, high reward technologies and applications, using future-focused regulation. 

National Space Science Innovation Programme (NSIP) process evaluation  

The National Space Innovation Programme (NSIP) aims to support the UK’s space sector by funding innovative projects that contribute to national capabilities and economic growth. The programme team has used the findings below to inform call 2 (launched earlier in 2025). 

This interim evaluation highlights the following: 

• High demand and strategic value – NSIP is seen as a vital funding source that aligns well with national priorities and fills a gap in the UK’s space funding landscape. 

• Increased diversity of project themes – NSIP has expanded its scope since its pilot phase, effectively supporting a diverse range of project themes and reflecting its alignment with the UK Technology Roadmap

• Delivery Challenges – Tight timelines and a complex application process created pressure for applicants and administrators. Participants were generally satisfied with funding levels but advocated for longer grant durations and more flexible financial planning

• Need for Clearer Guidance – While support was appreciated, clearer instructions and more consistent communication—especially around reporting—would improve the experience

• Access and Inclusion – NSIP has supported a range of organisations, including SMEs, but more could be done to help newer entrants access funding

• Learning from pilot programme implementation - The programme’s evolution has demonstrated the value of incorporating learnings from previous phases, such as the introduction of multi-year funding 

• Recommendations – Suggested improvements include longer grant duration, simpler applications, better guidance, and stronger monitoring

A modified real-time process evaluation (RTE) approach was adopted, which involved collecting real-time process data on the performance of NSIP and feed recommendations for improvement back in time for future funding calls. 

Unlocking Space for Business (USB) 

The UK Space Agency’s Unlocking Space for Business pilot aimed to help UK businesses in financial services and transport & logistics adopt satellite data and space technologies. Over 18 months,258 businesses   participated in at least one USB initiative, with some subsequently responding to funding calls. 

Evaluation findings include:  

• what worked well 

• tailored workshops helped businesses explore relevant space solutions

• funding (grants and Small Business Research Initiative (SBRI) contracts) enabled pilot projects that demonstrated clear return on investment (ROI)

• the UK Space Agency’s reputation helped suppliers connect with high-profile businesses

• collaboration between suppliers and end users improved understanding and solution design

• who benefited 

• businesses with some prior knowledge of space tech gained the most

• newcomers reported increased confidence and understanding

• suppliers learned more about customer needs and refined their offerings

• challenges and suggestions 

• experienced businesses wanted more advanced content. 

• some found the admin burden of leading grant projects too high

• participants suggested clearer guidance, more targeted networking, and greater focus on smaller businesses and the transport sector

• suppliers requested a summary of lessons learned and a roadmap for future support

This was a mixed-method process evaluation, involving in-depth interviews, focus groups and analysis of some administrative and survey data.