Select Committee on Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Written Evidence

Memorandum 33

Supplementary evidence from the Science and Technology Facilities Council following the oral evidence session on 21 January


  We have two types of grants:

    Rolling five year ones for combined programmes seeking support for groups of PDRAs

    Standard three year ones for distinct projects usually requiring support for single PDRAs.

  The AGP ranked all of them. The cut was imposed by reducing the value of the award for the rolling grants (primarily by removing some PDRAs), so this did not result in any awards being cancelled, only the value reduced.

  For the standard grants ranking a number of non-core rolling grant posts, which were assessed against the standard grants, were removed in the cut such that the final list of awarded standard grants was no different to if we had not made the required saving.

  In simple terms we made the saving by cutting posts and associated costs rather than number of awards.


  The criteria consisted of an assessment of:

    —  strategic importance

    —  impact

    —  competitiveness

    —  level of UK involvement

    —  scientific user base

    —  science output

    —  outreach

    —  training

    —  industrial impact

March 2008

previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2008
Prepared 30 April 2008