The main funders have agreed a revised formula for calculating indirect costs on new research awards, following months of consultation with universities and sector bodies. The change follows a review commissioned last year after several vice-chancellors raised concerns that the existing formula no longer reflected the real cost of hosting large collaborative grants, particularly those involving expensive shared equipment or clinical trial infrastructure.

The change applies to grants awarded from the next funding round onward, and does not touch awards already in payment. Vice-chancellors' groups had pushed for a longer transition window, warning that a sudden change could leave some institutions short of the funds needed to cover existing commitments made under the old formula. Funders say they will confirm final timing within a fortnight, following further conversations with the sector's finance directors' forum.

Finance and research offices are advised to hold off recalculating existing costings until that guidance lands. A joint working group, made up of representatives from the major funders and several university finance teams, is expected to publish a worked example before the next call opens, alongside a short set of frequently asked questions covering the most common edge cases raised during consultation.

Several research-intensive universities said privately that they expect the new formula to leave them modestly better off overall, though the effect will vary considerably by discipline, with laboratory-based sciences most likely to benefit and desk-based social science and humanities disciplines least affected. A full breakdown by subject area has not yet been published, and funders have declined to give an early estimate of the total additional cost to the public purse.

The change comes amid a wider review of how the funding system pays for the indirect costs of research more broadly, with a separate consultation on postgraduate and doctoral training costs expected to open later in the year. Sector bodies have welcomed the willingness to revisit these formulas but cautioned that repeated changes, however well intentioned, make multi-year financial planning harder for institutions already managing tight margins.

The main funders have agreed a revised formula for calculating indirect costs on new research awards, following months of consultation with universities and sector bodies. The change follows a review commissioned last year after several vice-chancellors raised concerns that the existing formula no longer reflected the real cost of hosting large collaborative grants, particularly those involving expensive shared equipment or clinical trial infrastructure.

The change applies to grants awarded from the next funding round onward, and does not touch awards already in payment. Vice-chancellors' groups had pushed for a longer transition window, warning that a sudden change could leave some institutions short of the funds needed to cover existing commitments made under the old formula. Funders say they will confirm final timing within a fortnight, following further conversations with the sector's finance directors' forum.

Finance and research offices are advised to hold off recalculating existing costings until that guidance lands. A joint working group, made up of representatives from the major funders and several university finance teams, is expected to publish a worked example before the next call opens, alongside a short set of frequently asked questions covering the most common edge cases raised during consultation.

Several research-intensive universities said privately that they expect the new formula to leave them modestly better off overall, though the effect will vary considerably by discipline, with laboratory-based sciences most likely to benefit and desk-based social science and humanities disciplines least affected. A full breakdown by subject area has not yet been published, and funders have declined to give an early estimate of the total additional cost to the public purse.

The change comes amid a wider review of how the funding system pays for the indirect costs of research more broadly, with a separate consultation on postgraduate and doctoral training costs expected to open later in the year. Sector bodies have welcomed the willingness to revisit these formulas but cautioned that repeated changes, however well intentioned, make multi-year financial planning harder for institutions already managing tight margins.

The main funders have agreed a revised formula for calculating indirect costs on new research awards, following months of consultation with universities and sector bodies. The change follows a review commissioned last year after several vice-chancellors raised concerns that the existing formula no longer reflected the real cost of hosting large collaborative grants, particularly those involving expensive shared equipment or clinical trial infrastructure.

The change applies to grants awarded from the next funding round onward, and does not touch awards already in payment. Vice-chancellors' groups had pushed for a longer transition window, warning that a sudden change could leave some institutions short of the funds needed to cover existing commitments made under the old formula. Funders say they will confirm final timing within a fortnight, following further conversations with the sector's finance directors' forum.

Finance and research offices are advised to hold off recalculating existing costings until that guidance lands. A joint working group, made up of representatives from the major funders and several university finance teams, is expected to publish a worked example before the next call opens, alongside a short set of frequently asked questions covering the most common edge cases raised during consultation.

Several research-intensive universities said privately that they expect the new formula to leave them modestly better off overall, though the effect will vary considerably by discipline, with laboratory-based sciences most likely to benefit and desk-based social science and humanities disciplines least affected. A full breakdown by subject area has not yet been published, and funders have declined to give an early estimate of the total additional cost to the public purse.

The change comes amid a wider review of how the funding system pays for the indirect costs of research more broadly, with a separate consultation on postgraduate and doctoral training costs expected to open later in the year. Sector bodies have welcomed the willingness to revisit these formulas but cautioned that repeated changes, however well intentioned, make multi-year financial planning harder for institutions already managing tight margins.