Evaluator: frequently asked questions

Evaluation of the British International Research Institutes

Please note that all answers will be published below by 26 March 2026, 12pm.

Are you open to proposals from sole traders?

These calls are open to sole traders. We are also open to collaborations between sole traders or combinations with consultancies, if that is felt appropriate by the applicant.

Is there a word limit for the word/pdf proposal submissions and do you provide a template?

There is no word limit, or a template for invitations to tender (ITTs). Proposals in the bidder’s preferred format are welcome.

Do you have a required format for the final report?

The final deliverable is a report, which can be in the format of a word/PDF document. In both cases, it is expected that a written executive summary in Word/PDF is provided (max two pages), and a methodology section should be included. Select case studies that may be used for external strategic communications should be included where appropriate.

The rest of the structure is dependent on the findings with respect to the agreed evaluation questions and is left to the engaged consultancy to determine appropriate presentation. The final report is expected to be no longer than 25 pages long, with additional annexes allowed.

Do you have a draft services agreement for our legal team to review?

Yes, there is a draft services agreement that can be sent should your team require it. Please email [email protected] to request a copy.

Do you have any specific requirements regarding the number of catch ups with the British Academy team?

There is no prescribed arrangement, and bidders are invited to make suggestions for each project. For guidance, if catch ups are not included in a bid, we usually start at suggesting a catch up every two weeks, and then adjust based on the milestones.

To what extent is a regional presence important for the evaluations? 

A regional presence is not required, and it is anticipated that the evaluation activity can all be addressed remotely. For companies not based in the UK, an international data sharing agreement bespoke to the situation will need to be arranged which may increase the time from award or tender to kick-off by a week.

Who are the primary audience(s) for each of the evaluations?

The British Academy will use the findings as part of an evidence base for government funders, non-government funders, and internally to improve programme delivery and design. Please see the respective scheme ITT you are interested in for the funding body/ies associated with the evaluation.

Is consultation with award-holders required as part of the evaluation, and if so, what scale of consultation do you anticipate as sufficient? 

It is unlikely that monitoring data that the British Academy provides will be sufficient to perform a full evaluation, therefore it is anticipated contractors will need to consult award-holders to meet the evaluation questions. The scale and type of contact with previous award-holders is left to the discretion of the bidder.

Will the British Academy facilitate connections between the relevant award-holders and the evaluator?

The British Academy will facilitate connections between the evaluator and relevant award-holders, in line with GDPR best practice.

Are award-holders and applicants aware they might be evaluated?

Potential interviewees should be notified that they may be evaluated prior to evaluation. The British Academy can help facilitate this.

Do award-holders need to submit monitoring data?

Schemes will either require award-holders to submit a final report or an interim report and a final report.

Innovation Fellowships

Will anonymised EDI data that is available on Flexi-Grant® be provided to evaluators?

Yes, available equalities data will be provided to the evaluators.

For the Route B and Global Innovation Fellowship schemes, will the British Academy be able to provide contact details for the lead individuals at the external partner organisations?

Yes, contact details for lead individuals at partner organisations will be provided.

Are any end-of-fellowship reports available from the awardees in the earlier rounds? How many?

There are 33 end of grant reports available collectively from Routes A and B: FCDO, 31 and two respectively. Please be aware that not all past award holders submitted their final reports.

Are any interim reports available and how many? 

• Two interim reports are available from early rounds of Route B: FCDO
• Interim reports from the 2023 Global Innovation Fellowships cohort are due to be returned this month (February, a total of four awards).
• Innovation Fellowships: Route A do not have interim reports

Mid-Career Fellowships

Are academic evaluation teams welcome to submit a response proposal?

Yes, the Academy accepts proposals from academic evaluation teams.

For the 219 awards made between 2018 and 2024, do you have an outcome database or outcome data collected in the form of end-of-fellowship reports? How many?

Yes, there are 169 end of fellowships reports available between 2018/19 and 2022/23. Reports from the 2023/24 round are not yet available.

Will you be able to provide contact details for advisors and/or administrators in the university research offices to the supplier to support the evaluation work? Does the Academy have existing contact points we should work through?

The most up to date University Research Office contacts held by the Academy are those of pre-award-approvers. These will be provided to the supplier.

Does the British Academy hold contact details for Mid-Career Fellowship award holders and unsuccessful applicants that can be accessed?

Yes, the Academy will provide contact details of applicants and award-holders to facilitate the evaluation delivery.

Career Pathway Tracking of the British Academy Writing Workshops

How would the British Academy consider a tender submission from an organisation that is currently employing someone who has previously completed evaluation work for the British Academy outside of their current employment?

The movement of individuals between companies would not be considered part of this clause, unless the team applying for the tender is essentially the same, but using a different name. Therefore, if the majority of the team involved in the tender has not – in that form – performed an evaluation for the British Academy in the past two years, they are able to submit a tender for consideration.

Do you want the case studies to feature award holders/co-applicants or solely workshop attendees? Is the requirement solely for career tracking the workshop attendees, or also the award holders?

The case studies should be focused on the workshop attendees only, as is the career tracking.

In what form will the career tracker live on as, i.e. will there be a dynamic platform such as power BI, or will it just be static?

The British Academy is currently agnostic regarding the static or dynamic platform for the career tracker. The British Academy has Salesforce, Power BI and a full Microsoft platform and can accommodate a tracker on these.

What number of past workshop attendee responses for a tool such as a career tracker survey does the British Academy anticipate?

Our previous career tracker has a response rate of over 70%, however, we had direct contact with those we were tracking, and a strong relationship. Response rates for workshop attendees between 30-50% would be considered good.

Could you please define what is meant by participants?

Participants are the attendees only in this case. The British Academy holds contact data for the award holders, and does not hold contact details for the attendees. The award-holders should have this information. The study is expected to determine whether this is the case, and whether this mechanism is sufficient for future studies.

Is the aim to track the award-holders or these plus their attendees, if the British Academy holds contacts data for the latter too?

The aim is to track the impact on the careers of the writing workshop attendees, through the contact mechanism the British Academy has of the workshop award holders.

British International Research Institutes

How far back in time are you expecting the evaluation to go?

5 years

Is someone who speaks Kiswahili (Swahili), the main language spoken in Nairobi, needed?

No. We do not believe a translator or Swahili speaker is needed, but if this changes, the Academy will facilitate this at no cost to the evaluators.

Do we need to include costs for Interpreters in the budget? If not, will these be provider or is it an expectation that those participating in interviews will speak English?

There is an expectation that interviews will be in English. We have an AI option that we can include to support translation if this is not possible, at no extra cost to contractors.

Are you expecting interviews to only be with senior staff or are you also expecting interviews with other staff such as researchers and academics?

A mix of them, but due to the structure of the organisations, mainly senior staff, but some of these are also Academics or researchers.

The tender suggests that the methodology should be based on desk-based research and interviews. Are you also open to alternative evaluation methods?

Yes.

Can I also clarify the accommodation arrangements for the Rome visit. The tender suggests that accommodation for up to 2 people is included at no cost, but also states that accommodation recommendations are available?

The recommendations are in case you plan to send more than 2 staff members, or if staff come with family and need another option, as we are unable to accommodate families at the BSR.

Is there any flexibility in terms of the budget?

Unfortunately not, we have allocated the maximum budget available to the evaluation.

Can you confirm why the research institutes in Rome and Nairobi have been selected for in person fieldwork, and not the other institutes?

Some institutes do not have an in-country presence. Those that do, but were not selected are either in an area of active or high risk of war, or, at the time the institute has visiting availability, wild fires or other natural disasters are at high risk levels, and we do not wish to place the contractors at risk.

Will the Academy be able to provide contact details for individuals associated with each of the institutes

Yes, this will be provided after the kick off meeting.

Is there any previous evaluation evidence that will be made available to the successful bidder?

We have data that we have been collecting for the past 5 years, and the previous evaluation will be available (published Feb 2019)

For the overseas visits: What of the activities on the logic model will be in scope during the visits?

Accommodation, facilities, equipment, conservation, some of the fellowship activities, and potentially some events, but these are tbc.

What will the visits look like on the ground and what would you like to get out of these?

The visits are so that the evaluators can put desk research and information that is gathered from the other institutions into context, as well as understand the role these organisations have locally as well as internationally. The five days for the visits have been put aside for the evaluators so what you may wish to do is open and will be facilitated. These visits can also mean you can have face to face interviews with the local stakeholders and directors.

For the period prior to 2025/26, are there structured datasets beyond the narrative annual reports: for example, spreadsheets of grant awards, researcher lists, or financial records — or are the annual reports the primary source of historical data?

There are some of these, but they are not collated into document - each BIRI has a separate case file.

Approximately how many individual documents will be shared with the evaluation team, and in what formats are these primarily held?

Hundreds in equal mixes of PDF, Word and spreadsheet.

Are the Academy or individual BIRI able to provide lists of researchers who have received BIRI funding over the evaluation period, including name, institutional affiliation, and career stage at time of award?

Yes - via individual BIRI.

Several BIRI produce non-textual research outputs including archaeological records, digital image collections, and audiovisual materials. Are these accessible in digital form, and would the Academy welcome their inclusion within the evaluation's scope alongside conventional research outputs?

Yes

The deliverables include an exploration of the counterfactual. Could the Academy elaborate on the depth or approach envisaged: is this primarily expected as a narrative or theory-based counterfactual, or would the Academy welcome a quantitative comparator approach where feasible?

We are aware how hard it is to provide a counterfactual in this sector, especially where we have only just started looking at real time data collection. There is no expectation as to what this looks like, we would just like the most robust approach to be taken as appropriate.

Would it also be possible to receive any documentation detailing the scope of activities undertaken through the programme that would be subject to evaluation? In particular, we would welcome any materials that provide greater detail on, or sources for, the activities listed in the logic model.

We would recommend checking out the website here for info that has a broad sweeping view: https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/international/research-institutes/ Many of the other documents are internal versions of things here. I can attach the metrics we are using currently to collect the data behind the logic model which may be of help.