How to integrate equity, diversity, and inclusion into impact funding streams By Karisha Kimone George, Susannah Williams, Natalie Wall and Nicholas Pleace.
Executive summary With their focus on tackling societal challenges, impact funding streams can potentially benefit a wide range of stakeholders, including minoritised and disadvantaged populations as well as minoritised researchers and early career researchers (ECRs) who want to undertake such work. They thus represent a powerful platform for pioneering equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI). To realise this power, EDI needs to be embodied through: •
a positive team culture centring accountability, empowerment and collaboration
•
meaningful engagement with EDI in decision-making
•
a structured auditing system to maintain a focus on EDI principles over time
This resource identifies practical ways of embedding EDI across impact funding and delivery. It focuses on three interconnected areas: •
organisational culture
•
decision-making processes
•
long-term strategic engagement with EDI
Bringing these insights together, the resource outlines a set of actionable recommendations for impact practitioners, managers and institutional leads, alongside examples of what these approaches look like in practice. Each recommendation is divided into immediate and longer-term actions in recognition of the time, resources, experience and expertise it will take for effective implementation.
Within this report, EDI is defined as: • equity: processes and procedures that prejudice and discriminate against marginalised identities are actively addressed • diversity: diverse voices are present • inclusion: diverse voices are valued
Scan this QR code to let us know how you’ve used this toolkit in your practice.
Develop a positive team culture centring accountability, empowerment and collaboration Why is this important? The success of any organisation in achieving its goals relies heavily on the presence of a team committed to these goals. Team commitment is typically highest when employees feel genuinely supported in performing their roles1; this requires, for instance, clear role descriptions and explicit goals and milestones2. Otherwise, an organisation’s commitment to its stated aims is deemed superficial, leading to employee demotivation and reduced innovation. In order to embed EDI, universities should first consider how the needs of employees managing and delivering impact funding schemes are supported3.
Immediate action - prioritise accountable leadership
Long-term action - prioritise psychological safety
Accountable leadership commits leaders to explicit goals, with compulsory transparency around progress towards these goals including a clear rationale for any changes (a rationale that must consider the equality impact of all decisions). This renders leaders answerable to others4; and supports them in developing an ‘equality impact mindset’.
A psychologically safe working environment5,6 is present when diverse voices:
Within the management of impact funding, accountable leadership should involve: •
a clear strategic plan which outlines core deliverables and assigns responsibility for each deliverable in a manner that prioritises strong and inclusive team values
•
a decision-making framework for assigning (and adjusting) team responsibilities and dividing resources equitably amongst team members
•
reflective leadership practice built upon cultural humility to empower leaders in recognising their own biases and addressing these biases in their day-to-day practice
•
feel included: difference is welcomed and professional boundaries are respected
•
feel safe to contribute: contributions are openly sought out and actively listened to
•
feel safe to challenge: there is a commitment to unhindered curiosity, inviting employees to consider what is missing and how things can be done differently
•
feel safe to learn: all are free to share mistakes and vulnerabilities, with mistakes framed as part of the learning process and honesty valued over being correct; there is a commitment to staff development tailored to enhancing each employee’s cultural capital through access to relevant resources to deepen learning and promote upskilling
A key consideration for developing a psychologically safe working environment includes balancing the lived experience of marginalised employees with learned experience through programmes such as reverse mentoring. This can introduce staff to the structural and systemic inequity experienced by those from marginalised backgrounds.
Meaningfully engage with equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in decision-making Why is this important? Funding streams that support impact and engagement frequently make several decisions determining how support will be developed and distributed, including deciding on funding requirements. Funding requirements are among the most potent motivators within the UK HE research sector for generating change7. Therefore, encouraging EDI-informed practice within these decisions has the potential to increase engagement with EDI on a wider scale.
Immediate action - prioritise equity-informed decision making Researchers from underrepresented backgrounds may be less likely to have competitive research and impact track records which enable well-developed funding applications and/ or may not have the confidence of more experienced researchers to access impact-related training opportunities. Best practice thus requires impact funding streams to be proactive and strategic in supporting researchers with fewer opportunities to access tailored support and career-enhancing opportunities. This should involve: •
setting aside and advertising opportunities (e.g. training sessions) for researchers who have had less access to impact opportunities, mentoring or prior funding7,8 (e.g. researchers from underrepresented backgrounds who face multiple layers of structural inequity). These researchers are more likely to access opportunities specifically developed and explicitly reserved for them. Tracking the impact of accessing these resources is also recommended9
•
embedding a ‘mentoring’ system which prioritises funding projects that include structured support for the professional development of one or more ECR(s)8
•
supporting the development of equity-informed partnerships through mandating that researchers consider their positionality and its impact on how partnerships progress
Positionality involves considering how one’s research lens may lead to certain biases in research and engagement choices (such as research methods) and alienate potential partners from full participation.
Diverse voices should also be integrated into decision making across all activities by increasing diversity on funding decision-making panels. This will generate more inclusive decision making processes (e.g. considering the structural obstacles that may have led to reduced access to impact opportunities, mentoring or prior funding). Making inclusive panel composition and selection processes transparent may also attract applications from diverse researchers who may respond to the diversity of those with the power to make decisions.
Long term action – provide tailored and responsive support In the long term, it will be important to ensure that applicants are not simply given additional expectations without appropriate support. Researchers may need time, guidance and resources to deliver projects well, particularly where they involve complex partnerships, sensitive topics, or engagement with minoritised communities.
This could be supported by: •
giving applicants the option to report their project support needs (such as inclusive recruitment and other training)
•
allowing applicants to cost in appropriate researcher time, including time for relevant training or partnership development
•
drawing on an advisory panel with insight into the challenges faced by researchers at different career stages and from different backgrounds
Integrate a structured auditing system to maintain a focus on EDI principles over time Why is this important? Across the UK HE research sector, there is little evidence of any systematic auditing process in place once initial support (e.g. funding, training) has been received10. It therefore remains unclear whether projects are prioritising EDI principles as they progress; or that partnerships continue to prioritise equity-informed practice over time.
Immediate action - increase researcher awareness of the importance of EDI-informed research engagement practice It is important that impact funding streams showcase an expectation that those who access their resources are committed to EDI-informed research practice. This should involve systematic (rather than ad hoc) signposting to relevant EDI training. We further recommend that a catalogue of EDI training be created, with resources expanded to include the range of principles pertinent to all stages of the research cycle, including decolonising principles (in relation to research partnerships, research methods, and research impact)11,12; the impact of research on research participants; and distributed leadership principles which ensure team equity within research teams and partnerships.
To further reinforce the importance of engaging with EDI-related training, adjustments can be made to the funding application process: •
an item can be added to application forms which asks how EDI has shaped the approach to the proposed project (e.g. how applicants intend to engage with the project team and participants)
•
applicants can also be given the option to outline a plan for acquiring the necessary EDI skills (detailing training programmes that they intend to undertake and how knowledge obtained is expected to shape practice within the project). In this case, time should be allocated for accessing listed resources
Final reporting should also ask researchers to consider the impact of putting EDI principles into place.
Long term action - encourage researchers to consider often-ignored aspects of EDI Insight into EDI within research continues to deepen. For instance, recent work has uncovered the importance of considering emotionally challenging and personally relevant research in relation to researcher wellbeing (particularly for minoritised researchers). Without a proactive approach, EDI-informed research practice may therefore become outdated. Impact funding streams should thus encourage continuous reflection on EDI research principles by setting up platforms where researchers can share best practice in handling EDI issues that emerged.
Endnotes: 1 Chayomchai, A., Promprasert, P., Katchamat, C., & Nokman, C. (2023). Key factors influencing organizational commitment. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review, 6(12), 7718–7723. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijcsrr/V6-i12-27 . 2 Marek-Kołodziej, K., & Jasik, Z. (2025). Identification of key motivators influencing employee commitment in project teams. Scientific Papers of Silesian University of Technology. Organization and Management Series, 227. https://doi.org/10.29119/1641-3466.2025.227.5 3 Távora, I., Saqib, S. I., & Kauser, S. (2026). Advancing equality, diversity and inclusion through voice for all: The role of employee resource groups. British Journal of Management, 37(1), e70025. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.70025 4 Frederick, H. R., Wood, J. A., West, G. R., & Winston, B. E. (2016). The effect of the accountability variables of responsibility, openness, and answerability on authentic leadership. Journal of Research on Christian Education, 25(3), 302–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/10656219.2016.1237907 5 Haughton, J. (2020). How to create psychologically safe workplaces for colleagues from diverse ethnic groups. Chartered Management Institute. https://tinyurl.com/yc84tfvd 6 Puchalla, M., Iwata, M. & Atewologun, D. (2023) Everyone’s talking about psychological safety for inclusion. Delta. https://deltaalphapsi.com/everyones-talking-about-psychological-safety-for-inclusion/ 7 Ruediger, S., Ris, L., & Iyer, K. (2025). Equitable research funding: Strategies, challenges and the role of funding agencies. The European Journal of Neuroscience, 61(11), e70160. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.70160 8 Gladstone, J., Schipper, L., Hara-Msulira, T., & Casci, T. (2023). Equity and inclusivity in research funding: Barriers and delivering change. University of Oxford. https://doi.org/10.5287/bodleian:KZjBY77pO 9 UK Research and Innovation. (2023). ESRC equality, diversity and inclusion living action plan 2023 to 2025. https://www.ukri.org/publications/ esrc-equality-diversity-and-inclusion-action-plan/esrc-equality-diversity-and-inclusion-living-action-plan-2023-to-2025 10 Guyan, K., & Douglas Oloyede, F. (2019). Equality, diversity and inclusion in research and innovation: UK review. Advance HE; UK Research and Innovation. https://www.ukri.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/UKRI-020920-EDI-EvidenceReviewUK.pdf 11Gascoigne, J., Joshi, S., Ensor, J., Altink, H. (2025, January). Decolonising Research: Tackling obstacles and working through challenges. Interdisciplinary Global Development Centre Working Paper No. 6. University of York. https://doi.org/10.15124/j2d6-d689 12 Istratii, R., & Lewis, A. (2019, September, 18-18). Applying a Decolonial Lens to Research Structures, Norms and Practices in Higher Education Institutions: Conversation Event Report [Conference session]. Applying a Decolonial Lens to Research Structures, Norms and Practices in Higher Education Institutions, SOAS University of London: Research and Enterprise Directorate. https://soas-repository.worktribe.com/output/374090