Corporate report

UKHSA Advisory Board: Science and Research Committee minutes

Updated 4 July 2025

Recommendation

The Advisory Board is asked to note the minutes of 29 January 2025 meeting of the Science and Research Committee. The minutes were agreed on 7 May 2025.

Minutes (confirmed), Science and Research Committee

Present at the meeting were:

• Jon Friedland – Non-Executive Member of UKHSA Advisory Board (Chair)
• Graham Hart – Non-Executive member
• Raj Long – Associate Non-Executive Member
• Isabel Oliver – Chief Scientific Officer
• Susan Hopkins – Chief Medical Advisor

In attendance:

• Mary De Silva – Deputy Chief Scientific Adviser, DHSC 
• Richard Gleave – Director of Scientific Strategy and Development
• 10 attendees had their name and title redacted

Apologies:

• Sarah Collins – Commercial Director
• Steven Riley – Director General, Data, Analytics and Surveillance

Welcome, apologies and declarations of interest

25/001 The Chair welcomed participants to the Science and Research Committee and noted apologies.

25/002 The Chair requested that future meetings be attended in person where possible.

25/003 The Committee congratulated the Chief Scientific Officer on her new role as Chief Medical Officer for Wales.

Minutes of Previous Meeting and Matters Arising

25/004 The minutes of the previous meeting of 19 November 2024 (enclosure SRC/25/001) were agreed.

25/005 The Committee noted the progress of the terms of reference review.

25/006 The Committee noted the actions report (enclosure SRC/25/003). The appendix provided a detailed update on Pandemic Preparedness (Action 72).

25/007 The due dates for the overdue actions rated amber would be revised in consultation with the action owner.

Review of the Vaccine Development and Evaluation Centre (‘VDEC’)

25/008 A paper (enclosure SRC/25/0007) was presented by Raj Long, Associate non-executive member. The paper reviewed the progress of VDEC after one year and identified opportunities for growth.

25/009 VDEC was set up in 2023 to bring together UKHSA’s vaccine expertise and capabilities and coordinate action on UKHSA’s vaccine R&D priorities. It was envisioned that it would drive a step change in vaccine R&D activity and impact. VDEC would also act as an external brand and front door for customers, especially vaccine developers. It’s current activity mostly reflected that of the Countermeasures, Development and Evaluation division (previously Vaccine Development, Evaluation and Preparedness, VDEP).

25/010 The Committee commended the authors for a clear and well-presented report. The Committee discussed the challenges involved in defining the activities associated with ‘evaluation’ in the context of VDEC.

25/011 It was explained UKHSA did work to fulfil its public health responsibility and the opportunities that exist to advance further the development of vaccines and life sciences industry to enable others by contributing to a broader range of work, such a clinical trials and population evaluation work. Appropriate measures needed to be in place to manage any potential or perceived conflicts of interest between UKHSA public health and industry work.

25/012 The Committee recommended that:

• VDEC being the centre for leading vaccine development across government was strongly endorsed with UKHSA taking on a leadership role. To do this effectively, VDEC need to be involved in more activities and be more agile in its responses.
• for UKHSA to realise the full public benefit of VDEC, it needed to work differently and use its skill and expertise for a more integrated offer to external partners. The technical production of a vaccine was just one stage in a long implementation process. VDEC needed connectivity and support from ExCo to ensure the public benefited from its developments.
• the opportunity from data providing a more comprehensive offer to partners should be explored further.
• UKHSA should present a plan to the cross-government R&D Group and explain how it would lead on vaccines. This would help improve awareness of the role of VDEC across Government.
• there should be a clear role for VDEC in the UK and across government to maximise impact and there was a need for the right leadership to do this. VDEC needed to be multi-disciplinary in terms of output and remit.
• VDEC was an organisation-wide centre and brand for UKHSA not a structure within it and this needed further work.
• VDEC should be the entry point for external organisation and have suitable links in place with other functions to effectively deal with enquiries. [Information redacted in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.]
• there were opportunities to bring together upstream and downstream work for partners.
• the recommendations would be taken forward by a programme team, with representation from each Group and DHSC, and report to the Vaccines Board to help maintain momentum.

25/013 Progress would be reviewed by the Science and Research Committee in 6 months.

Chief Scientific Officer’s Report

25/014 The Chief Scientific Officer presented a paper (enclosure SRC/25/004) which updated on Science and Research activities in UKHSA and highlighted achievements and other issues since the last update to the committee in September 2024.

25/015 UKHSA had published the 2024 Review of Science, including an update on progress on the implementation of the 10-year Science Strategy (published in 2023) and a reflection on the impact of its science. This had been used to help inform colleagues across UKHSA and partner organisations.

25/016 Growth Through Science work had moved on considerably over the last 12 months. UKHSA’s contribution is increasingly understood and helping drive the Science Strategy.

25/017 The World Health Organization (WHO) and UKHSA had co-launched the Collaborative Open Research Consortia (CORC) on the Arenaviridae and other Bunyaviricetes viral families. This would provide increased visibility to UKHSA to research funders and international partners. It was noted that Raj Long would be able to assist with preparations undertaken by UKHSA to attract funders. Some concern was expressed in the meeting about the impact of developments in the USA on WHO and Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funding and the situation would be monitored closely.

25/018 UKHSA had produced a paper showing how it supported UK growth. A follow up paper for Minister Gwynne which included worked, examples, was being produced. It was agreed the DHSC would be sent details of this paper together with any data showing how UKHSA helped protect the UK economy from health shocks.

25/019 The Committee discussed the external income funding figures. It was explained the funding showed what had been granted not what was being held. Some concern was expressed about the impact of developments in the USA on WHO and CDC.

UKHSA’s Place and Role in the Science Ecosystem

25/020 Director of Scientific Strategy and Development presented a paper (enclosure SRC/24/005) which provided context for a further paper on the role of UKHSA within the life and wider science ecosystem.

25/021 It was explained that the further paper would consider the implications of the ALB Review for UKHSA’s role in the life sciences, research and innovation and wider sciences ecosystems covering the diversity of workstreams relevant to this topic and using inputs from across UKHSA.

25/022 The Committee recommended that the follow up paper should:

• detail which areas UKHSA had clear leadership and where UKHSA was a collaborator in Science and Research.
• define the ecosystem components first and then explain that the breadth of UKHSA’s responsibilities and scientific work was a challenge at it led UKHSA to be part of multiple ecosystems identified by Government (Life Sciences, Risk, Government Sciences etc.) with varied roles.
• explain where UKHSA was a leader now and where it should be a leader.
• describe UKHSA’s relationship with partners and collaborations and assess whether these were the right ones.
• identify areas where UKHSA was an enabler for others to succeed.
• provide an analysis of how UKHSA relates to each ecosystem (Life Sciences, research academia, funders, government science) and the mechanisms for engaging with these.
• be complemented by a communication strategy explaining UKHSA’s strengths compared to other organisations and be supported by proven successes.

25/023 The Committee would review again in 9 months.

Review of the Centre of Climate and Health Security (‘CCHS’)

25/024 Graham Hart and [Title redacted] presented the Review of the Centre for Climate and Health Security (enclosure SRC/25/004) which was conducted between July and November 2024 and sought the Committee’s advice on next steps.

25/025 The Committee noted the Review and commended the excellent work.

25/026 The Committee commented that DHSC colleagues had not been interviewed for the review. This would have been useful given DHSC’s role in research priorities. There was a £15million research programme available but little engagement from UKHSA to date. Strengthening UKHSA’s role in advising other government departments and setting the research agenda should be taken forward.

25/027 The Committee recommended that:

• the relationship with DHSC should be prioritised.
• CCHS should demonstrate to Government and colleagues across the regions and Local Authorities the value of its services.
• there was an opportunity for UKHSA to capitalise its position as a research organisation to set the research agenda. There needed to be a discussion with the communications team regarding external visibility to all the other partners and a clear understanding of the direction of CCHS within UKHSA. If this was missed then there is a risk of moving from leadership in the field to being a relative laggard.
• stakeholder prioritisation mapping should be undertaken.

25/028 The Committee agreed the recommendations set out in the Review, subject to the above comments.

Artificial Intelligence

25/029 [Title redacted] presented a paper (enclosure SRC/25/008) which outlined the development of the UKHSA Artificial Intelligence Strategy.

25/030 An AI Steering Committee had been established and was chaired by the Chief Data Officer. This Committee was overseeing the approach to AI at UKHSA.

25/031 It was noted that the vision was for UKHSA to use AI responsibly and innovatively to support the delivery its strategic priorities. There were four strategic themes which set out how UKHSA will adopt AI technologies:

• empower the agency to embed AI through reskilling our teams to ensure safe and effective implementation.
• embed enterprise level AI use across UKHSA in alignment with recognised policies and risk management practices.
• allocate funding to AI tools and products which tangibly improve business productivity, efficiency and data driven knowledge, policy and actions.
• develop and learn from others’ uses of AI technologies that are aligned to our strategic priorities.

25/032 The Committee recommended that:

• the elements of strategy and operational planning should be more clearly separated.
• there should be a vision for how AI could be used to improve how UKHSA operated where it would be most applicable.eg: improve research, empower change, pandemic forecasting, improved use of data. There should also be a vision for how public health could be improved
• AI Strategy should explicitly be used to develop risk awareness.
• the document should focus more on how AI was leading developments rather than how it worked.
• there should be more detail about how the everyday efficiency of UKHSA staff could be improved by AI.
• any governance procedures to follow when implementing AI should be included eg: approval of a Data Ethics Committee.
• add how UKHSA could help enable the AI work of other organisations and the opportunities AI presents in other places.

Pathogen Prioritisation Update

25/033 [Title redacted] presented a paper (enclosure SRC/24/009) to update the Committee on work to develop a UKHSA Priority Pathogen Family research and Development tool, as originally commissioned by the Cabinet Office under the umbrella of the UK Biological Security Strategy.

25/034 Development had been a difficult process because due to a range of different expert opinions and potential alternative use cases for the list. The tool is currently focused in human pathogens but there were ongoing discussions with Cabinet Office, the Animal and Plant Health Agency, the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and DHSC about a possible second phase building on a ‘One Health’ approach.

25/035 The tool is already proving useful for the Pandemic Preparedness work. The diagnostic accelerator had used it during the review of available diagnostics against some of the pathogens identified. This helped identify measures needed to strengthen preparedness.

25/036 The Committee commented that:

• the Pathogen Prioritisation list will never be perfect and will constantly evolve.
• UKHSA should progress using the list in its current form.
• the Pathogen Prioritisation list could be refreshed annually.
• the ‘One Health’ approach was endorsed.
• the tool should apply to vaccines and also to diagnostics and therapeutics.
• the DHSC needed a way of prioritising within the list because investments could not be made in all the pathogen families, such as pandemic potential and potential for ANR. Understanding what research exists or was already ongoing would further help the DHSC with prioritisation.
• there was a need for more people to generate evidence to make it easier to provide a UK specific list.

25/037 It was also noted that the 100 Day Mission was scoping priority pathogens and CORCS may also do so in detail for specific pathogen families.

Forward look and topics for future meetings

25/038 The Science and Research Committee noted the topics for future meetings as listed in the paper (enclosure SRC/24/024).

25/039 HPRUs would be added to the Forward Look. The paper should examine the current relationship and the input being provided from UKHSA.

25/040 There was a meeting with the Chair and Chief Scientific Officer arranged for 11 February 2025 to discuss the agenda for the next meeting in detail. Committee members were encouraged to communicate any potential topics for discussion.

Any other business and Close

25/041 There being no other business, the meeting ended at 10.58am.