Funders joint statement: use of generative AI tools in funding applications and assessment

Generative AI tools offer potential benefits for research but also challenges and risks. Research funders in The Research Funders Policy Group, of which Wellcome is a member, set out expectations around the use of generative AI tools in funding applications. 

Skip to contents

Joint statement 

Definition: Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools

AI that can be used to create new content (for example text, images, data, code, videos) based on instructions (prompts) provided by the user.

On behalf of research funders in our Research Funders Policy Group, we recognise Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, Co-pilot, Claude or Gemini, present opportunities and bring benefits in the context of research such as supporting content generation for computer code or assisting neurodivergent researchers or reducing potential language barriers.

However, the use of Generative AI tools in the funding application and assessment process also presents potential risks for research in areas such as rigour, transparency, originality, reliability, data protection, confidentiality, intellectual property, copyright, and bias.

As research funders, our role is to: 

  • Promote and support innovation in research whilst mitigating potential risks. We set clear requirements and raise awareness to protect against potential ethical, legal and integrity issues in the use of generative AI tools to maintain the high standards of the research and innovation we fund.
  • Maintain integrity and trust in our funding processes and decisions. Our reviewers are selected for their expertise and experience in their field, and we value their unique perspectives.

Use by applicants 

Applicants can use generative AI when preparing a funding application if tools are used responsibly and in accordance with relevant legal and ethical standards where these exist or as they develop.  

Examples of use include:

  • translating applications from other languages to English
  • improving the standard of English
  • formatting or reducing word count
  • assisting idea generation or development of hypotheses
  • interpreting, analysing or summarising data (including audio, image files) and text
  • comparing literature sources
  • generating or refining code
  • generating an abstract

Applicants must not use generative AI tools: 

  • for uses that would breach our standard research integrity expectations. Examples include:
    • fabricating, falsifying, manipulating, duplicating, altering original data, images or results  
    • plagiarism – using other people’s ideas, intellectual property or work without acknowledgement or permission
    • breaching data protection rules or intellectual property rights
    • misrepresenting or falsifying information, for example, qualifications gained
    • faking citations or references
  • to generate an entire application, or sections of an application, without human involvement

As best practice, any outputs from generative AI tools in funding applications should be acknowledged. Please refer to individual funder policies for any specific applicant declaration requirements.

Use by reviewers 

Reviewers must not input our confidential funding applications into generative AI tools to develop their reviews. Doing this breaches the confidentiality terms under which reviewers conduct our reviews. Maintaining confidentiality and protecting intellectual property of our applicants is essential for safeguarding the exchange of scientific opinions and assessments. Please refer to individual funder policies for requirements.  

Use by research funders 

As research funders, our final funding decisions are underpinned by human oversight; we do not use generative AI tools to make funding decisions.

We may use enterprise data protected (EDP) generative AI tools to process funding applications. These tools have been assessed for security and safety. However, we will not input confidential funding applications into publicly available versions of generative AI tools.

We’re taking this collective approach to set our high-level joint expectations. Individual funders may publish their own, detailed individual funding policies or procedures. Where individual funders wish to evolve beyond our joint position, this will be explicitly stated.

Generative AI tools will continue to grow and bring new considerations – both exciting and challenging. We’ll continue to work together to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach, monitor developments, and minimise bureaucracy. 

Revised statement published June 2026 on behalf of Association of Medical Research Charities (AMRC), British Heart Foundation (BHF), Cancer Research UK (CRUK), The Royal Academy of Engineering, The Royal Society, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), Wellcome

Statement first published September 2023. June 2026 revisions include:

  • added definition of generative AI tools
  • added examples of acceptable and unacceptable use by applicants
  • reiterated reviewers must not input our confidential funding applications into generative AI tools
  • added our use of generative AI tools as research funders

Research Funders Policy Group 

Contact us 

Contact the current Group Secretariat at UK Research and Innovation (UKRI):

fundingpolicy@ukri.org