Conclusion 2

UKRI does not have a set of clearly defined objectives against which to judge its performance and hold it accountable. To articulate the value of public investment in R&I, it is important to monitor progress and performance against specific targets and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). UKRI lacks specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound objectives and KPIs, meaning it is difficult to know whether it is making progress against its overall objectives. Instead, UKRI’s board tracks progress using an ‘annual balanced scorecard’ which comprises over 100 metrics across four themes: its impact; stakeholders’ experience of UKRI; the health of the UK’s R&I system; and the extent to which UKRI is learning and improving as an organisation. This scorecard is shared with DSIT but is not made publicly available. UKRI advised us that private sector investment in UK R&I was £46.7 billion in 2024, but the lack of timeseries data and target means it cannot be clear on whether it is making sufficient progress 3 in increasing UK private investment. DSIT suggested three KPIs for the incoming leadership of UKRI to monitor: overall public and private spend on R&D, UK global rankings on the creation of ideas and, UK global rankings in scale-up growth and application of research. At a macro level, DSIT agreed that it would be appropriate to have around six to ten high level measures for UKRI to be able to provide the whole picture of the R&I system. recommendation UKRI should set measurable outcomes and 6-10 targets in priority areas, such as private investment in R&I, to help appraise its performance effectively.