Research Software Maintenance Fund - Round 1

Project Lead 

You must be based at a UK research organisation eligible for UKRI funding to lead the project and apply for funding from the Research Software Maintenance Fund. A Project Lead may submit multiple Expressions of Interest, but the SSI reserves the right to limit the number of full applications that may be submitted by an applicant, depending on demand. 

Eligible organisations are: 

• UK higher education institutions
• research council institutes
• UKRI-approved independent research organisations
• public sector research establishments
• NHS bodies with research capacity 

Check if your institution is eligible for UKRI funding. 

You do not need to be an academic or researcher to lead the project. We suggest that the Project Lead should be someone with a senior responsible role for the software, which might be the software’s creator, a project manager, a product manager, or research software engineer but it is up to the applicants to justify why the Project Lead is the most suitable for the role. 

UK research organisations will be funded at 80% of the full economic cost (fEC). This includes Directly Allocated and Indirect costs. 

Business, third sector or government body Project co-Leads

Applicants based in UK business, third sector or government organisations can be included as Project co-Leads (PcLs). When a Project Lead includes a PcL, they must ensure that all associated costs are fully justified within the Resources and Costs Justification section of the application. Applicants based in UK business, third sector or government organisations cannot be Project Leads, nor are they eligible to take over the leadership of the project. These types of PcLs will only be able to claim certain costs depending on their organisation type. 

It is the responsibility of the Project Lead to ensure that the PcL’s organisation is an appropriate organisation to receive, and has systems in place to manage, the funding provided. They will also need to provide assurance that appropriate agreements are put in place for the delivery of the overseas activities funded under the grant. The SSI will not undertake eligibility checks as standard but reserves the right to perform additional checks or seek further information from the project applicants if necessary. 

On a single application, the combined costs of all PcLs from UK business, third sector and government organisations and any Project co-Leads (International), PcL(I)s, from non-OECD DAC list countries must not exceed 50% of the total fEC of the grant application (at 100% fEC). In addition, for this funding opportunity, no more than 75% of the number of leads (Project Lead, PcLs, PcL(I)s) can be from business, third sector or government organisations and international partners. 

Table: Eligible costs for PcLs from UK business, third sector or government organisations 

Applications which include PcLs from the UK business sector or from third sector organisations must ensure that the involvement of these organisations complies with the UK Subsidy Control Act 2022. This Act regulates how public funding is used to manage any advantage which threatens or actually distorts competition in the United Kingdom and/or any other country or countries (“UK Subsidy Control Regime”). 

This guidance is based on ESRC's rules on inclusion of Project co-Leads from business, third sector and government. 

International applicants

Applicants based in non-UK organisations can be included as Project co-Leads (International) (PcL(I)s). When a Project Lead includes a PcL(I), they must ensure that all associated costs are fully justified within the Resources and Costs Justification section of the application. International applicants cannot be Project Leads, nor are they eligible to take over the leadership of the project.  

It is the responsibility of the Project Lead to ensure that the PcL(I)’s organisation is an appropriate organisation to receive, and has systems in place to manage, the funding provided. They will also need to provide assurance that appropriate agreements are put in place for the delivery of the overseas activities funded under the grant. The SSI will not undertake eligibility checks as standard but reserves the right to undertake additional checks or seek further information from the project applicants if necessary. 

In general, we will fund 100% of eligible costs, where these have been sufficiently justified. For PcL(I)s based at a non-UK research organisation, overheads will be paid at 20% of the international research organisation’s directly incurred staff salary costs. Indirect costs may not be charged on non-staff related direct costs, for example, equipment, consultancies and conferences as well as travel and subsistence. For PcL(I)s based at business or third sector organisations, the eligible costs follow the same criteria as for UK business or third sector guidance above. 

In the interests of supporting equitable partnerships with those based in low or middle income countries, a 30% funding cap does not apply to any PcL(I) based in a country on the OECD DAC list (excepting India and China) on ESRC applications. 

The total costs claimed for an international Project co-Lead who is not from a country listed on the OECD DAC list, plus applicants based in research organisations in India and China, must not exceed 30% of the total full economic costs (FEC) cost of the project. 

On a single application, the combined costs of all PcLs from UK business, third sector and government organisations and any PcL(I)s from non-OECD DAC list countries must not exceed 50% of the total FEC of the grant application (at 100% FEC). In addition, for this funding opportunity, no more than 75% of the number of leads (Project Lead, PcLs, PcL(I)s) can be from business, third sector or government organisations and international partners. 

Any other international costs included in an application which are not associated with a Project co-Lead (international) will be funded at 80% FEC. 

This guidance is based on ESRC’s rules on inclusion of international Project co-Leads.

The Research Software Maintenance Fund is aimed at funding work – particularly around reducing technical debt, improving user experience, and building community – that will improve the sustainability of research software that is hard to find funding for elsewhere. 

The types of work we expect to be funded under this initiative include: 

• Technical - updates to code/software: e.g.
  • Developing components/plugins/integrations to improve interoperability
  • Improving user experience for end users
  • Structural improvements to the codebase (refactoring/rearchitecting, scalability, porting, testing)
• Community - development of materials or events used to engage users or developers: e.g
  • Community meetings and outreach to users
  • Contribution process improvement (including Code of Conduct development)
  • Sprints, hackathons
  • Dissemination (including blog posts, case studies)
• Documentation - written material used as reference for users and/or developers: e.g. revisions and extensions to
  • User manuals
  • Contributor guides
  • Project website
  • Tutorials
• Training - events or schemes to improve users and/or developers' ability: e.g.
  • Hosting in-person or virtual courses and workshops
  • Mentoring new contributors to the project
• Governance - activities to improve management and/or sustainability: e.g.
  • improving governance structures
  • Developing roadmaps
  • Work with advisors to improve sustainability/identify business models 

The scheme includes two types of awards: Large Awards of £500k for two years and Small Awards of £150k for one year. All projects must be completed by Tuesday 29 February 2028. 

Applicants must demonstrate that the software(s) they maintain: 

• Is beyond the prototype/pilot stage and has had at least one stable release;
• Is used by people outside their organisation(s), and is used beyond the immediate collaborators of the software’s developers/wider project team;
• Supports research being carried out in the United Kingdom;
• Is open to feedback and additional contributors; and
• Is committed to developing a roadmap and sustainability/business plan. 

Any software is recommended but not required to be openly licensed, however we encourage all applications to consider how they can improve practices to enable a thriving community of users and contributors.  

Examples of projects that are not likely to be successful if submitted to this fund: 

• A project around software in its earlier stages that is not used extensively or known beyond the creator(s);
• A project that is focused on improving or supporting a platform or service that has few deployments or low adoption/engagement in its target community;
• A project that is widely successful and adopted but has little or no applications to UK research; and
• A proposal for a research project primarily using software to create new research results. 

Additional research outputs are not required to be developed as part of the funding, however if they are (e.g. publications, datasets, additional research software) they must follow UKRI’s policy on open research.  

Applications supporting multiple research software projects are encouraged, as are applications that seek to merge or bridge between similar software. 

What you can apply for

Funding can be used to support and maintain existing research software or sustain a team responsible for multiple software tools. However, it is not intended for developing entirely new software, nor is it intended as a continuing source of funding once the grant finishes. 

Acceptable use of funds includes, but is not limited to: 

• Salary support for staff (full-time, part-time, or contract): developers, research software engineers, contributors, technical writers, community managers, product managers, project managers, user experience researchers, community educators, or other roles that directly support the software project(s);
• Hackathons, sprints, outreach, or other forms of community engagement and support for community participation;
• Operational needs such as cloud computing, storage, networking, or continuous integration services; and
• Support for work that bridges software projects or ecosystems, including better coordination across software projects that are similar, dependent on one another, or frequently used together. 

We are running this funding opportunity on our funding platform, which is powered by GoodGrants, and you will be required to register on the platform to submit your application. You cannot apply on the UKRI Funding Service or Joint Electronic Submissions (Je-S) system. 

The project lead is responsible for completing the application process but we expect all team members and project partners to contribute to the application. Please note that some information that you provide in your application will be shared publicly - Please refer to the Terms and Conditions for further information. Information you provide will also be used to evaluate the initiative and provide recommendations for improving research software funding. 

To apply: 

1. Go to the RSMF submission website: https://digitalresearchinfrastructure.grantplatform.com/
2. Register for an account, if required
3. Choose the appropriate application form “Research Software Maintenance Fund – Round 1” and click on “Start application”
4. Fill out the information on the first “Start here” tab, including the Application name (the name of your proposal), and click “Save + next”
   1. This will also save your draft application so you can return to it
5. Complete all the tabs before submitting the application. If there are mandatory responses missing, these will be highlighted in red
6. You can move through the application using the “save + next” button at the bottom of the page, or you can jump between different sections using the tabs at the top of the application pane
7. Once you have completed all mandatory questions on all tabs, you can submit the application
8. You will receive an email notification confirming receipt.

You can download a list of the application questions on the Start Here tab. 

After submission, you may continue to update/revise your application up until the deadline, at which point your application will be locked. Please note that you will not re-submit the application after the initial submission, but the revisions will be saved each time you choose “save + next” or “save + close”. 

You can see the applications you have submitted at the bottom of the “Applications” page of the RSMF submission website. You can withdraw an application by selecting it and choosing the “Delete” action from above the list of actions. You can also copy or download an application. 

Additional information about how to use the GoodGrants platform for applicants is available.

Process 

Full applications will be reviewed in a single round by a peer review panel comprising of reviewers with expertise in different areas, including research software use from relevant disciplines, research software engineering, project and product management, community management, and sustainability. 

The applications will be split among four review panels based on the size of the award applied for and their main disciplinary area. We aim to have each application reviewed by three independent reviewers.  

Each panel will discuss the application and place them into one of the following categories: Excellent, Good, Adequate, and Unsatisfactory. Applications in the Excellent category will be ranked across all panels and funded in the rank order. Panel chairs will collectively agree the placing of their panel’s rankings in relation to other panels. 

If there are funds left after all Excellent applications are funded, we will conduct a lottery on the applications categorised as Good, to distribute the remaining funds; however, given the high quality of the EoIs, we expect the number of applications categorised as Excellent to exceed the amount of available funds. We will not fund applications in the Adequate or Unsatisfactory categories. 

 Criteria 

There are four main criteria the reviewers will consider: Impact of proposed work, Value beyond the software, Feasibility of proposed work, and Quality of processes and procedures. While these are broadly mapped onto the sections of the application as indicated, the reviewers may consider information and/or evidence provided throughout the whole application. This may include publicly available websites or repositories for the software. The descriptions in this document should be read in conjunction with the guidance for each section in the application form. 

Below is a brief explanation of each criterion. Please consider these to be examples rather than exhaustive definitions – the applications come from a wide range of domains, so the criteria need to have a good degree of flexibility to remain applicable. As much as is possible, applications will be split among the panels to allow the reviewers to discuss and compare similar applications. 

Impact

This criterion considers the impact this work, if funded, will have on the tool/software (e.g. in terms of improved maintenance or ease of adoption), but also the impact the improved tool/software is likely to have on the research or the research community. The reviewers will assess, for example: 

• Whether applications clearly demonstrate the benefit to UK research resulting from this work and that it addresses a need in the research community. 

• The benefit to the long-term maintenance and adoption of the software.  

• The timeliness of this work, and why this leads to greater impact. 

• How the work will be sustained to ensure the impact is fully realised. 

This will primarily be assessed through the Vision sections. 

Value

This criterion considers the wider value added by the proposed work. beyond the direct impact on the software and its users. The reviewers will assess, for example:  

• Advancement of good practices (in the widest interpretation of the phrase) including what practices you plan to use in your work, how the team members and contributors are supported in adopting these in other areas of their work, and how the wider community might benefit from the development of these practices. 
• How the work integrates and improves the wider software ecosystem used by the target research user communities 
• What is being done to increase the diversity of users and contributors, to improve the accessibility of the software, and how considerations of equity, diversity, inclusivity and accessibility guide the work of the project. 

This will primarily be assessed through the Vision sections.  

Feasibility

This criterion considers the way that the proposed work will be carried out. Here we look for evidence that the funded work is likely to deliver the objectives and benefits, for example:  

• Is the plan of work realistic, are the activities sufficiently resourced, and in appropriate order?  

• Are there mechanisms to track the progress of work?  

• Are there considerations for future sustainability of the tool/software? 

This will primarily be assessed through the Approach and Resources sections 

Quality 

This criterion considers the quality of processes and procedures in place for maintaining and developing software, such as:  

• Does your team have the capability to deliver the proposed work, what are the governance structures, and will these ensure successful delivery?  

• Are there plans for engaging the community and seeking external contributions, and how will this be managed? 

• What is the current and anticipated quality of the software, and how do the skills and experience in the team enable this transition? 

• What is the state of documentation, and is training available? 

• What software engineering approaches are being used? 

This will primarily be assessed through the Approach, Capability to Deliver and Project Partners sections. 

Each round will open with a call for Expressions of Interest, which should outline the main idea, the software’s importance and how funding will benefit research. We will check that the proposed work fits the scope and applicants meet the eligibility criteria for this funding. 

These are: 

• The work being proposed falls under at least one of the five activity categories: technical, community, documentation, training and governance
• The work is focussed on supporting or maintaining existing research software that has a demonstrable user base beyond the software creators
• The Project Lead is from an eligible UK research organisation
• The team has an appropriate connection with the software
• There is an existing connection and expected benefit to UK research
• The team understand the other software being used in this area
• The team have considered how to measure the impact of the activities  

Successful applicants will then be invited to submit their full proposal detailing planned activities, budget, team experience, and other considerations around community, sustainability and diversity. A panel of experts will identify applications proposing the most significant impact, quality and value while demonstrating feasibility of the proposed work, and will distribute the available funding among those. 

The review panel will be composed to ensure fairness and balance across a range of domain and technical expertise, as well as different roles, levels of seniority and other relevant experience. 

Further details of the assessment process and criteria for the full applications will be published on the SSI website when the full applications stage opens. 

Core Criteria 

Expressions of Interest submissions should demonstrate the following core criteria: 

Eligibility and Team Structure

Q: What types of software projects are eligible for funding?

A: To be eligible for the Research Software Maintenance Fund, your software must:

1. Have been previously released publicly and been available to other researchers
2. Have demonstrable evidence of usage by researchers external to your immediate collaboration team
3. Be primarily used for enabling research in the UK

The fund is designed for maintaining existing software, not for developing entirely new software.

Q: I'm a postdoctoral researcher who leads the maintenance of a software project, but my institution may not allow me to be the Project Lead. How should I approach this?

A: This is a common challenge for many software maintainers. If institutional policies prevent you from being the Project Lead, it's acceptable to have your group leader or supervisor serve as the Project Lead while you take on a key role in the project. However, you must make this situation clear in your application. Reviewers will be instructed not to discriminate against such arrangements.

Q: Can a Research Software Engineer on a fixed-term contract be a Project Lead?

A: Yes, from the RSMF's perspective, Research Software Engineers on fixed-term contracts are eligible to be Project Leads.

However, your institution may have additional rules or constraints that you should confirm with your research office. Many institutions do not allow staff on fixed-term contracts to be Project Leads if their contract end date is earlier than the end date of the proposed project.

If institutional policies prevent you from being the Project Lead, consider the approach described in the earlier FAQ about postdoctoral researchers, where a permanent staff member could serve as the formal Project Lead while you take on a key role in the project.

Q: Are international organisations eligible to be lead organisations?

A: Yes, but only in specific circumstances. International organisations that are eligible for UKRI funding (such as EMBL-EBI) can be lead organisations on applications to this fund. If you have questions about your organisation's eligibility, please contact grants@software.ac.uk.

Q: My software has significant international adoption. Does having users and contributors outside the UK make it ineligible for RSMF funding?

A: No, having international users and contributors does not make your software ineligible. In fact, international adoption is seen as a benefit that demonstrates the wider impact of your software.

The eligibility requirement "Be primarily used for enabling research in the UK" refers to the software's purpose rather than its geographical user distribution. This means that:

1. The software should be designed for research purposes (as opposed to, for example, general-purpose software that might sometimes be used in research)
2. There must be demonstrable usage by researchers in the UK
3. The application must be led by someone based at a UK research organisation

Software originally developed in the UK that now has an international user and contributor base is still eligible, provided it meets these criteria and continues to be used by UK-based researchers.

Q: What costs are eligible under the funding model for this call?

A: For UK research organisations, the funding follows a standard research grant model with 80% of full economic cost (fEC). This includes directly incurred costs, directly allocated costs, and indirect costs. Staff costs are eligible under this model.

For external partners who are not UK research organisations (such as industry, third sector, or international collaborators), different rules apply – please see the RSMF webpages for details.

Q: What types of operational costs are eligible? For example, would subscription costs for communication platforms like Slack be covered?

A: Yes, subscription costs for communication platforms such as Slack would be allowable operational costs under the RSMF.

The fund supports various operational needs that facilitate software maintenance work, including:

1. Communication and collaboration platforms
2. Cloud computing resources
3. Continuous integration services
4. Testing environments
5. Other infrastructure necessary for effective software maintenance

When including these costs in your application, be sure to justify how they directly support the maintenance activities of your research software.

Q: Can I apply for salary costs for international collaborators?

A: What costs can be applied for depends on the type of collaborator (research organisation, industry, charity, individual, etc.) and these are detailed under the "Who can apply - International applicants". The project lead organisation must have appropriate processes in place to be able to pay international collaborators in compliance with relevant UK legislation.

Salary costs can be included in many cases, as we recognise that many pieces of research software are developed by international teams. If you have a specific query about what costs are eligible, please contact grants@software.ac.uk with more details (where the international collaborator is based, what sort of organisations the collaborator belongs to, what types of costs you are looking to fund).

Q: Can I submit more than one application?

A: You may submit or be associated with multiple Expressions of Interest. However, the SSI reserves the right to limit the number of full applications that may be submitted by an applicant, depending on demand.

Q: I am a freelancer or independent contractor who developed/maintains research software. How can I be involved in an RSMF project?

A: There are two potential routes for freelancers or independent contractors to be involved in RSMF projects:

1. As an International Project Co-Lead:
   1. Your business is applying as a partner
   2. You can claim 100% of your salary costs and travel/subsistence expenses (up to 1 FTE)
   3. No pension, national insurance, overheads, or equipment costs are allowed
   4. You must have systems in place to manage the funding provided and satisfy legal requirements around fraud prevention, subsidy control, modern slavery regulations, etc.
2. As a contractor supplying services to the lead organisation:
   1. The UK research organisation would be the lead applicant
   2. Your involvement would be as a named contractor providing services
   3. The lead organisation would receive 80% of your costs (standard UKRI rate)
   4. This route may allow for inclusion of other costs beyond salary and travel/subsistence
   5. You would need to meet the lead organisation's procurement/supplier requirements

For freelancers without formal business management systems, the second option (working as a contractor to the lead organisation) is likely more suitable. In this case, your UK collaborator would submit the application, noting your agreed involvement as a contractor with appropriate budget allocation.

Q: How should we cost industry partners or services in our RSMF application?

A: The costing approach depends on how the industry partner or service provider is included in your application:

1. If included as services/consultancy contracted by the lead organisation:
   1. They would be costed at the standard 80% of full economic cost (fEC) rate
   2. The lead organisation's procurement processes would apply
2. If included as a Project Co-Lead (UK company):
   1. They can include 100% of eligible costs up to a maximum of 1 FTE
   2. Eligible costs include staff costs and travel/subsistence
   3. Ineligible costs include National Insurance, superannuation, overheads, and other direct costs
   4. The combined costs of all co-leads from non-UK research organisations cannot exceed 50% of the total fEC of the project

When deciding how to include industry partners in your application, consider both the financial implications and the administrative requirements of each approach.

Q: For the award limits (£500k for Large Awards, £150k for Small Awards), do these refer to the 100% fEC amount or the 80% amount that will be funded?

A: The award limits (£500k for Large Awards and £150k for Small Awards) refer to the amount of funding provided by the RSMF, not the 100% fEC amount.

For proposals that include only UK research organisations, this means the award limits refer to the 80% fEC amount that will be funded. For example, a Large Award with a maximum value of £500k would correspond to a total project cost of £625k at 100% fEC.

For proposals that include a mix of UK research organisations and other partners (such as businesses or international organisations), the calculation would need to account for the different funding rates applicable to each type of partner.

Scope and Focus

Q: Should I apply for a large award or a small award?

A: This will depend on your specific circumstances, and you should choose the size that is most appropriate to your proposed activities. Consider the following factors:

• There will likely be a larger number of small awards than large ones
• Well-defined specific activities that lead to an overall reduction in ongoing maintenance effort are more likely to succeed
• Large awards won't necessarily all go to applications supporting multiple software projects, it will depend on the fit of the proposed activities to the software and users
• Focus on activities that you can clearly communicate the benefits of to reviewers, such as those that enable existing users to continue their research, open up new research areas, or increase adoption

Q: Should I apply for a large or small grant? Would multiple, related software packages be appropriate for a large award?

A: When deciding between a large (up to £500k, 2 years) or small award (up to £150k, 1 year), consider the scope of your project and the number of software packages involved. Multiple, related software packages are encouraged for large awards.

If you apply for a large grant and the reviewing panel believes your project would be better suited to a small grant, they may indicate this during the review process. However, the ultimate decision and justification for the size of the award rests with you as the applicant.

Note that the RSMF anticipates funding more small grants than large grants in each round, which you may wish to factor into your decision.

Q: If our software needs substantial rewriting or rebuilding, is it still eligible?

A: This would be eligible if it meets the basic criteria that demonstrate existing use in UK research outside of the immediate collaborators of the software maintainers/creators. The fund is not intended for developing entirely new software, nor for continuing the development of software without an existing user base.

Q: Is green software engineering in scope for this funding?

A: Yes, applying green software engineering principles to research software is in scope for the Research Software Maintenance Fund. Most green software engineering practices also improve maintainability more generally, making them appropriate for this funding.

Projects may also want to consider how they can evidence their commitment to Equality, Diversity, Inclusion and Accessibility (EDIA) and community building through existing green software engineering practices and processes.

Q: Can I apply for funding to improve the environmental sustainability of research software or build a community of Green Software Engineers?

A: Green software engineering activities are eligible for RSMF funding when they focus on improving specific existing research software. You do not need to target a single specific codebase, but your application should:

1. Describe the codes that would be addressed (the application form includes a question on landscape analysis to identify codes being used by the community)
2. Focus on improving the maintenance of existing software, not general Digital Research Infrastructure (DRI) topics
3. Demonstrate that the activities will lead to improved sustainability of the software

For more general community-building initiatives around Green Software Engineering (such as creating communities of practice or developing general training materials not tied to specific software), you may find the flexible funds calls from various UKRI-funded DRI Network Plus projects more suitable. These include:

• CHARTED (training-focused Network Plus)
• NetDRIVE
• National Federated Compute Services Network Plus

Many of these Network Plus initiatives only started in April 2025, so some have not yet announced their calls. For the latest information, check the individual project websites or contact the specific Network Plus teams.

Q: Is large software infrastructure (as opposed to software packages) also in scope for this funding?

A: Yes, large software infrastructure is in scope for the Research Software Maintenance Fund. To be eligible, you need to demonstrate that the infrastructure is used by those carrying out research in the UK, and that its main purpose is enabling research.

Q: Can funding be used for establishing governance structures or international entities?

A: Yes, activities relating to governance are allowed under the Research Software Maintenance Fund. If establishing a new governance organisation, such as a foundation, it is acceptable for that entity to be based outside of the UK if this can be justified. However, you will still need to demonstrate the benefit to UK research in your application and the lead applicant must be based at a UK research organisation.

Q: Are training materials or courses about software development practices eligible for funding?

A: General development of training materials or courses would not be considered in scope for the RSMF, but proposals for training and documentation activities for a specific piece of research software leading to improved user experience, contributions or sustainability would be allowed.

For projects primarily focused on developing training for Digital Research Infrastructure, the UKRI DRI programme has funded several NetworkPlus projects, including CHARTED which is focussed on training, which includes flexible funds that may be better suited for training course development. Please look out for Information about these funding opportunities directly from these projects.

Q: Are 'meta' proposals that focus on supporting a software ecosystem rather than a specific tool eligible?

A: This will depend on the activities proposed and whether software ecosystem or stack was already adopted by users in UK research.

For example, proposals that focus on initially identifying or developing a software stack (rather than maintaining an existing one) would be considered out of scope.

For smaller-scale activities that might still be beneficial (such as documentation sprints, training material development, or community events), consider applying for the smaller, shorter grants offered by the RSMF. There may also be other funding opportunities through the recently funded UKRI DRI NetworkPlus projects which include flexible funds which you may be able to apply for.

Application Process and Timeline

Q: Will there be any information sessions before the application deadline?

A: Yes, the Software Sustainability Institute will be arranging a webinar on Wednesday 7 May to provide more information on what we're looking for in this fund and enable potential applicants to ask questions. Details will be shared on the RSMF website and through the mailing list. The slides and questions & answers will be shared on the RSMF website after the webinar.

Terms and Conditions

Q: What are the terms and conditions for RSMF grants, and how can I review them before applying?

A: The terms and conditions for RSMF grants are based on the University of Edinburgh terms and conditions for grant subcontracts, with modifications to ensure that intellectual property (IP) remains with the applicants.

The complete template Grant Agreement and additional T&C documents are available on the Research Software Maintenance Fund website. If you have specific concerns about the terms and conditions, particularly if your organisation has a special status (such as being an intergovernmental organisation), you are encouraged to contact the grants team at grants@software.ac.uk before submitting your application.

We recommend reviewing the terms and conditions early to identify any potential issues that might need to be addressed in the event of an award.

Conflicts of Interest

Q: I have a personal connection to someone involved with the SSI. Does this bar me from applying to the Research Software Maintenance Fund?

A: No, having a personal connection to someone involved with the SSI does not automatically bar you from applying. However, any potential conflicts of interest should be declared in your application for transparency.

If your project involves direct participation from an organisation with close ties to the evaluation process (such as a Research Software Group that includes panel members), these connections must be disclosed. We will assess each situation individually to ensure there is absolute transparency and no "insider information" is shared during the application process.

The SSI is committed to fair assessment of all applications and has procedures in place to handle conflict of interest cases appropriately.

Members of the SSI team who are directly involved with the administration of the RSMF are not allowed to be part of any application to the RSMF.