OpenCharities

This text was generated using OCR and may contain errors. Check the original PDF to see the document submitted to the regulator.

2024-12-31-accounts

Foreword

Annual report and financial statements 2024

I

Contents

2 Chair’s foreword

84 Financial statements and notes

108 Reference and administrative details

Foreword

Foreword

Chair’s foreword

The Nuffield Foundation was set up in 1943, six months after the publication of the Beveridge report . It was a time of extraordinary change and very obvious social need, but it was also a moment when those who had lived through two great wars hoped society could be improved for many of its citizens.

Eight decades on, the Foundation is still on that journey. Technological, demographic and social change have rendered the Britain of the 1940s unrecognisable in many ways, but there are those in our society who still find themselves struggling to overcome inherent barriers and disadvantages. It is the work of this Foundation to apply rigorous and trusted understanding to these issues, to understand not only the problems and people affected by them, but what might best enable change.

In this sense our strategy and programmes are always dynamic and at the service of those we were founded to help. Work like Grown up? Journeys to adulthood , which seeks to truly understand the journeys from adolescence to adulthood, or Public right to justice , which aims to inform and challenge thinking around the future of the justice system in England and Wales, and how it could work better. While continuing to fill crucial gaps in data and research evidence, the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory has focused on improvements in care for children with complex needs, seeding change in relation to the way family courts hear care cases involving babies, and testing ways to improve children’s participation in proceedings. It also published the first research to identify the number of parents in care proceedings in England with learning disabilities or difficulties. From childhood to older adults, the Foundation and its research centres have sought to understand needs and shape action.

Nor have we stood back from rapid technological change. The Ada Lovelace Institute is well regarded for its work on how AI might be put to the service of society and individuals, with its successful contribution to the EU AI Act demonstrating significant impact in this space. The highly respected Nuffield Council on Bioethics has continued its commitment to conducting rigorous ethical analysis in the priority areas of reproduction,

parenthood and families, the mind and brain, and the environment and health.

All this is inspiring work of a high quality, trusted by government and practitioners for its rigour and independence, and for the collaborative approach that marks our culture. I am deeply grateful to our superb Trustees whose commitment to making a difference is genuine, to our directors and the Nuffield team, as well as the raft of experts across the UK whose work we fund, for a commitment to making society better. We all know that this work is very far from complete, and we continue to challenge ourselves about how to do it better.

And finally, this has been a year of change for us personally. We said farewell and thanked an outstanding CEO in Tim Gardam, and welcomed another highly experienced and purposeful leader in our new CEO, Gavin Kelly. It was a transition made easier by the fact that each is profoundly motivated to serve the purpose of the Foundation in making a meaningful difference to the lives of those in the greatest need and who are most exposed to society’s inequalities.

I also want to pay a personal tribute to our former Chair, David Rhind FRS FBA, who died in January 2025. As an academic, David made a major contribution to the development of UK official statistics and how these are used by government, but he is remembered by his Nuffield colleagues as one who encouraged the contribution of all to the vision described in Lord Nuffield’s two main objectives: the advancement of social well-being and of educational opportunity.

Eighty years on from the Foundation’s inception, that founding purpose remains and, while we look back with pride, we are more focused than ever on drawing on this legacy for those in greatest need in our own times.

Professor Sir Keith Burnett Chair of Trustees

Chief Executive’s foreword

new and emerging institutions to fill gaps in the UK’s civic and research infrastructure, deploying evidence and analysis to advance the public good.

Formed amid the tumult of World War II, the Nuffield Foundation has a deep-rooted commitment to supporting rigorous inquiry that addresses the social challenges of both today and tomorrow. Now, perhaps as much as ever, the work we fund and lead is needed to address the inequalities and insecurities that so many people face.

Major in-house research projects – Grown-up? Public right to justice, and an exploration of the role of AI in education – signal the beginning of greater collaboration between the Foundation and its centres.

It is this mission to deploy rigorous evidence in pursuit of a prosperous, fair and inclusive society that makes it such an honour to become Chief Executive. A few months into the job, I’m greatly impressed by the breadth and depth of our agenda, as well as the commitment the whole organisation shares to breaking new ground in pursuit of influence and impact.

The Foundation’s three centres have all emerged into highly respected institutions in their own right. This year the Ada Lovelace Institute will publish a new strategy, placing the interests of people and society at the heart of rapidly moving debates on AI. The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory will be championing new practice, for instance supporting the development of a ‘baby court’ in Blackpool, bringing a problem-solving approach to care cases involving newborn babies. And the Nuffield Council on Bioethics will lead a major review of the time limits for human embryo research.

We are now developing our strategic priorities for the next phase of the Foundation. We do this against a backdrop of geopolitical rupture, enduring economic stagnation, the accelerating possibilities and risks of AI, escalating climate crisis, depleted public services and low levels of trust in many public institutions. Despite all these challenges, we approach our next chapter with great confidence.

Underpinning all of our work is a set of core values. We prioritise rigour and quality while our independence gives us the freedom to be objective, curious and to take the longer-view. We will collaborate and be open to working with others. And, crucially, we will embed equity, diversity and inclusion in the work we fund and lead – taking new steps to support a more diverse range of grant-holders and foster an inclusive workforce

The Foundation’s diverse portfolio of around 200 active grants continues to generate a river of new insight into key aspects of UK public life, and a range of our strategic grants are now bearing fruit. The IFS Deaton review of inequalities, and The skills imperative 2035, are due to conclude this year with landmark reports, joining the Pissarides review, which produced its final analysis in early 2025. Each provides a new understanding of key aspects of the social and economic challenge of the decade ahead. We will re-open our Strategic Fund to support a new wave of ambitious multi-year, multi-disciplinary, high-impact projects.

Finally, I’d like to thank the Board, led by our Chair, Sir Keith Burnett, for its warm welcome and invaluable support during my first months. I greatly look forward to working with all my colleagues on a new era for the organisation that faces into the future, anticipates emerging challenges and identifies the evidence that will help us advance social well-being in the decade ahead.

Our history also provides a well of inspiration as we look ahead. As well as backing deep scholarship across disciplines, there is also a tradition of supporting those operating at the cutting-edge of practice, resulting in the trialling of innovative approaches – “prudent pioneering” in the words of the Foundation’s first ever annual report. We can also learn from Nuffield’s track record of fostering

Gavin Kelly Chief Executive

2

3

The year in numbers

The year in numbers

The year in numbers

£14.7m

Total value of new research grants awarded during 2024

Charitable expenditure of £28.4m in 2024, up from £22.0m in 2023

----- Start of picture text -----
Restricted and
other Funds
£3.0m
Ada Lovelace
£3.2m
Nuffield Council
Strategic Hosted
on Bioethics
and other centres
£1.8m
Funds £6.1m
£5.8m Family Justice
Observatory
£1.1m
Research,
and analysis
£13.5m
----- End of picture text -----

----- Start of picture text -----
Research,
development
and analysis
£13.5m
----- End of picture text -----

Applications

Applicants submit a short outline application and those that meet our criteria are invited to submit a full application, which is subject to independent peer review and considered by Trustees.

----- Start of picture text -----
2023 2024
----- End of picture text -----

Outline application Number of full applications Number of awards (514 and 855 applications) (81 applications) (50 and 53 applications)

Split by domain (including Strategic Fund)

Split by organisation type

----- Start of picture text -----
Strategic
University
Fund
£8.5m
£5.0m
Education
£4.9m
Research/
policy
institution
£1.9m
Justice Welfare Charities/voluntary
£1.9m £2.9m organisation Other
£1.0m £1.3m
----- End of picture text -----

£277k Average grant awarded (incl strategic fund) £194k Average grant awarded (excl strategic fund) £5k – £2.5m Range of grants awarded

4

5

The year in numbers

The year in numbers

Grants locations

Grants awarded by locations Projects that received additional funding

Communications and engagement

Across the Nuffield Foundation, the Ada Lovelace Institute, the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory and the Nuffield Council on Bioethics:

Research Placements and Experiences

convened

469

face-to-face, hybrid and online events attended by more than

29,835 people

had

609,650 visits

visits to our websites

(formerly Nuffield Research Placements, providing year 12 or equivalent students from disadvantaged backgrounds with STEM-related project experience)

875 students

were placed

93%

of Research Placement students were satisfied with their experience

95%

Experience Placement students were satisfied with their experience

were referenced in broadcast, print and online media

7,714 times

53 new projects funded 19

projects that received additional funding

In 2024, the Nuffield Foundation awarded 53 new grants and provided additional funding to 19 existing projects. In total, £15.4m was distributed to universities, think tanks, and third-sector organisations across the UK.

increased our LinkedIn following by an average of

79.5% across our accounts

to 25,439 followers

46

7

2024 HighlightsForeword

2024 HighlightsForeword

2024 highlights

Research into the reliability and consistency of Ofsted inspections , led by Dr Christian Bokhove at the University of Southampton, fed into Ofsted’s proposed changes to their processes. Findings were timely, as they aligned with the Ofsted Big Listen consultation, announced by the new Chief Inspector. Following the general election, the Labour government announced the scrapping of single word judgements, citing this research as part of the evidence for the change.

Unpacking the disability employment gap , led by Dr Mark Bryan of the University of Sheffield, investigated what is contributing to the longstanding gap in the employment rate between people with a disability and people without. It highlighted the role of education and the economic structure of an area.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies’ (IFS) research found that the removal of private schools’ tax exemption status was likely to have little effect on pupil numbers in the private sector, and raise £1.3-1.5 billion in net terms. Its findings were cited by politicians and the media in the run up to the 2024 general election, and included in the Labour Party’s manifesto. The Labour government subsequently set about turning its manifesto pledge into law.

The new Racial Diversity UK (RDUK) grants programme launched in 2024, aiming to explore how patterns of racial diversity and disparity are developing and shaping the UK, and helping to map pathways to a racially just and inclusive society. A large number of outline applications across a wide range of topics were received. The first RDUK-funded research projects are expected to start in 2025, with the second outline application round in Autumn of that year.

Public right to justice , an in-house research programme, will explore how the justice system in England and Wales could work better both to develop evidence-based proposals for reform and to inform thinking about the future of that system. It is led by the Justice team at the Foundation, with expert input from the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (Nuffield FJO) and the Ada Lovelace Institute. Both this programme and the IFS project above represent a major new strategic investment in our work on justice, recognising the critical importance of the justice system and the challenges it faces.

A team from the IFS, and Oxford and York universities, led by Professor Imran Rasul, was awarded a £2.5 million Strategic Fund grant for a new project, Transforming justice: The interplay of social change and policy reforms. The programme of interlinking economic and quantitative analysis studies will examine the implications of recent justice system reforms in England and Wales on outcomes, performance and experiences, and how demands on the justice system have changed.

Public right to justice , an in-house research programme, will explore how the justice system in England and Wales could work better both to develop evidence-based proposals for reform and to inform thinking about the future of that system.

48

9

2024 Highlights

Advancing our Mission, Sharing our Progress

Five of the six projects funded from the £1.1 million Understanding Communities grants programme, launched in partnership with the British Academy, completed in 2024. The research explores how local communities function and can improve people’s lives.

Grown up? Journeys to adulthood , another in-house collaboration, was launched in 2024. Exploring the challenges and opportunities facing the 8.6 million young people in the UK aged 14–24 (‘Generation Z’), the programme follows the Nuffield Foundation’s Changing face of early childhood series, which continues to impact policymaking.

Working with the Home Office to influence biometrics policy, the Ada Lovelace Institute (Ada) was invited by the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee to advise on procurement practices around AI. It also provided insights to the Information Commissioners Office to shape its work on generative AI, and gave a presentation to the Equality Human Rights Commission to inform strategy development. Ada saw over half of its recommendations included in the groundbreaking EU AI Act, the first comprehensive regulation of AI anywhere in the world.

A Nuffield Council on Bioethics (NCOB) report recommended a phased approach to the governance of human stem cell-based embryo models research to provide reassurance that ethical concerns are considered. These findings have already fed into the work of key stakeholders such as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, who have responsibility for enacting the changes recommended.

Nuffield FJO research findings showed at least one in three parents in care proceedings in England involving a baby have learning disabilities or difculties, but that in most cases these were not identified until care proceedings had started. The research raised concerns about the fairness of proceedings and the lack of support for families. The implications for practice were debated throughout the year.

Advancing our Mission, Sharing our Progress

The Nuffield Foundation is an independent charitable trust with a mission to advance educational opportunity and social well-being in the UK.

takes time, may be indirect, and will always involve collaboration with others.

We assess our success by:

The Foundation is also the founder and co-funder of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory, and the Ada Lovelace Institute.

Our aim, across all our activities, is to improve lives for people, families and communities within a just and inclusive society.

grant-holders to achieve impact. This focuses on regular reflection on progress against project aims, capacity building, and communications and engagement activities.

Our work addresses the inequalities, disadvantages and vulnerabilities people face in education, welfare and justice, and considers the social and ethical implications of science and digital technologies for people and society.

In order to achieve our aim, we:

We assess the overall impact we have on social well-being by focusing mainly on measuring the reach, engagement and impact of our communications and public affairs activities with target audiences.

Our progress, or ‘impact’, means helping to create positive change that contributes to the Nuffield Foundation’s overall aim of improving social well-being. We recognise that this

10

11

Advancing our Mission, Sharing our Progress

Advancing our Mission, Sharing our Progress

Strategic priorities

We are developing our strategic priorities for the next phase of the Foundation and we will set these out later in 2025.

We do this against a backdrop of fast-paced geopolitical developments, the acceleration of the possibilities and risks of AI and other technologies, the climate crisis, economic stagnation and inequality, depleted public services, and an increasingly polarised public debate.

This changed context, and the scale and complexity of the challenges we face, have reinforced the need for our funded research to build independent and rigorous evidence that informs policy, improves practice and drives meaningful change.

Alongside new strategic priorities, we will this year set out in more detail what we mean by impact and how this can be achieved in different ways. In the next phase of our work, we will particularly look to fund research proposals, programmes and organisations which can clearly articulate the difference that they expect to make.

Changing Lives for the Better

The Changing Lives for the Better programme of events and activities, launched in 2023 to celebrate our 80th anniversary, continued in 2024 to explore the big themes that will define our strategic priorities in the future.

The programme enabled us to consult with a wide range of stakeholders to identify the most pressing challenges facing society, determine the urgent research questions that need to be answered, and contribute to our strategic direction.

The future of work and skills

In January 2024, in partnership with the Resolution Foundation, the National Foundation for Educational Research and the Institute for the Future of Work, we hosted a high-profile webinar on the future of work and skills. The event, attended by 296 people, featured key insights from three Nuffield-funded programmes presented by research leads from the partner organisations. The full event, combined with separate presentations, had 765 views online.

Through a panel and audience discussion with local authority and business experts, the event addressed critical questions about the implications of automation technologies, regional disparities in employment and the key skills needed for the labour market of tomorrow. A central theme was how to bridge research, government and employers to tackle the UK’s pressing employment challenges. This discussion will help shape our strategic focus on work and skills in the context of devolution and the impact of ‘place’ on people’s life chances.

The future of the justice system

In March 2024 we hosted an event exploring the challenges facing the UK’s justice system, and opportunities for reform. Experts from across the country convened to examine the system’s current state, and to propose strategies to improve legal experiences and outcomes for individuals and communities.

Nuffield Foundation Trustee Sir Ernest Ryder opened the event with a keynote speech, followed by Dr Natalie Byrom who shared the findings from a Nuffield-commissioned report on accessing justice. Throughout the event, discussions highlighted the pressing need for evidence-based reform that prioritises those who rely on the justice system. This event marked a pivotal step in defining the Foundation’s future work

on justice, including our Public right to justice programme.

Our insecure society: Risks across the life course

In June 2024, we held a major conference to examine the various risks and insecurities people face throughout their lives. This event brought together key thinkers and partners from research, policy and practice to discuss critical issues affecting society today.

One central theme of the conference was the distinction between the collective pooling and individual bearing of risk, and the difficult choices this presents for policymakers on questions of taxation and investment in public services. Our keynote speaker, Sir Andrew Dilnot, set out this framing and linked it to the changing demography of the UK, especially our ageing population.

through a single lens or their interactions with one public service alone. This was illustrated clearly by Dame Clare Moriarty of Citizens Advice who spoke about the complexity of lives, and the substantial increase in the numbers of people seeking urgent advice on multifaceted issues. We discussed some of the ways technologies might potentially help, as well as the associated risks.

Another key theme that emerged was the importance of geography when it comes to inequality, and the extent to which the place where people live continues to shape their opportunities and life course. This felt particularly salient when we looked at the experience of young people and their transition from education into work.

The event underscored the importance of building a prosperous, fair, inclusive and sustainable society. It also underlined the need for effective, accountable and trustworthy institutions. Insights from this conference are helping to shape our strategic priorities.

The conference highlighted the need for public institutions which can engage with the range of complex circumstances faced by individuals, rather than seeing people

The event underscored the importance of building a prosperous, fair, inclusive and sustainable society. It also underlined the need for effective, accountable and trustworthy institutions.

12

13

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one – research portfolio

We fund research that advances educational opportunity and social well-being across the United Kingdom. We shape our research portfolio by bringing together researchers and users of research to identify the larger questions in our core areas of Education, Welfare and Justice.

Education

not have used screens, or their usual routine. Sleep was tracked using motion sensors. Toddlers in the screen-free group had better sleep quality, with fewer night awakenings. The study was co-created with parents and early years experts to ensure inclusivity.

Within our Education domain, our objective is to identify ways to improve educational outcomes – across all life stages – through policy change and approaches to teaching and learning that are grounded in robust evidence. We also want to understand wider influences on education and skills, such as the role of families and socio-economic context.

What: Raising educational outcomes for pupils with SEND and disabilities Who: Dr Jo Van Herwegen, UCL Institute of Education, et al. Headline findings: The number of students diagnosed with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) has increased in recent years, and students with SEND are on average at least two years behind their peers by the end of secondary school. This study found that targeted interventions can improve educational outcomes for these students by an average of five months, compared to teaching-as-usual or standard interventions. The research found a slightly bigger effect on mathematics than reading overall – six months of additional progress compared to five months. The study led to the creation of MetaSENse, a first-of-its-kind database to help teachers

Key Education outputs published in 2024

What: Bedtime Boost trial Who: Professor Tim Smith, University of the Arts, London, et al. Headline findings: This world-first randomised controlled trial found that removing screen time an hour before bed improves toddler sleep quality. Bedtime Boost involved 105 families with toddlers aged 16–30 months. Families were randomly assigned to one of three groups: bedtime box and no screens, bedtime box and may or may

find evidence-based interventions. The team also made several policy recommendations.

What: Post-16 pathways to the labour market for lower attaining learners at Key Stage 4 Who: Professor Peter Urwin, University of Westminster, et al.

What: Exploring female computing performance and subject choice in English schools Who: Dr Peter Kemp, King’s College London, et al.

Headline findings: This project explored the post-16 educational pathways taken by learners who achieve grade 3 (D) or below in Maths and/or English GCSE at Key Stage 4. It used linked National Pupil Database and Longitudinal Education Outcomes administrative data to carry out three quantitative investigations:

Headline findings: The report examined the impact of a curriculum change in England that replaced the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) GCSE with Computer Science, which shifted focus to computer theory and programming skills. The number of girls taking a GCSE in computing has more than halved since 2015 when 43% of ICT GCSE students were female, compared to just 21% in 2023 taking GCSE Computer Science. To ensure computing appeals to more young people, the authors recommended including curriculum reform, improving support for computing teachers, and changing the current narrative around computing to focus beyond male tech entrepreneurs.

  1. Post-16 pathways of the 2011 Key Stage 4 cohort.

  2. Comparison of the 2011 and 2016 KS4 cohorts.

  3. Analysis of impacts of reforms that followed the Wolf Review.

Researchers drew together findings from

these studies to understand the labour market destinations of lower attainers. Findings identified a pressing need to improve outcomes for these learners, who are predominantly from disadvantaged

14

15

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

backgrounds and often have special educational needs.

What: Education priorities in the next general election

Who: Jon Andrews, Education Policy Institute, et al.

Headline findings: Ahead of the general election, researchers published an analysis of the education plans in the manifestos of the main political parties in England. The report provided an independent, evidence-based assessment of the extent to which the main parties committed to addressing five priority areas: the early years; school organisation and outcomes; post-16 and higher education; education funding; and the education workforce. Overall, it found that manifesto commitments did not go far enough in addressing the key challenges facing the system. It highlighted that all parties should have been clearer on how they would tackle the soaring costs of provision for children with SEND, recruit and retain the education workforce, and address widening disadvantage gaps through targeted interventions and funding.

What: Education spending across different stages of education Who: Luke Sibieta, Institute for Fiscal Studies, et al. Headline findings: This project delivered six reports across the year, including outputs linked to the general election – The uncertain course for school and college funding over the next parliament ; School spending in England: A guide to the debate during the 2024 general election ; The state of education: What awaits the next government ; and Higher education finances: How have they fared, and what options will an incoming government have? There was also a report on spending on SEND, and one on challenges facing education in Wales. The seventh annual report on education spending in England rounded off the year with a warning that schools and colleges faced another round of belt tightening in the next spending review.

What: Teacher recruitment and retention challenges in England

Who: Jack Worth, National Foundation for Educational Research

Headline findings: The teacher workforce in England is facing major challenges in attracting and retaining enough teachers. NFER’s 2024 annual report, Teacher labour market in England , highlighted how the latest data showed that teacher supply was in a critical state, representing a substantial risk to the quality of education, with teacher training recruitment numbers well below what’s needed to maintain adequate staffing levels in schools. At the same time, there has been little progress in reducing high teacher workload since the pandemic, an issue which has a strong impact on retention. The report, which came out just before the general election, set out four recommendations to tackle the issues, including that the gap should be narrowed between teacher pay growth and the wider labour market, and that political parties should consider introducing a Frontline Workers Pay Premium to compensate public sector workers for the lack of remote and hybrid working in their roles compared to the wider graduate workforce. The report was also highlighted to the School Teachers’ Review Body which determines teacher pay.

What: Evaluating the short- and medium-term impacts of Sure Start Who: Dr Sarah Cattan, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, et al. Headline findings: This project follows on from a grant that reported in 2021 which identified significant long-term health impacts of Sure Start. This new research was funded to meet a need from policymakers to learn more about other areas where Sure Start might have had a positive impact. Interim reports revealed that Sure Start also had a positive effect on children’s academic attainment and reductions in special educational needs, and showed benefits for children’s social care and youth justice outcomes. Findings contributed directly to policy via submissions to the Bell Review of Early

Education, discussions with senior officials at the Department for Education, and presentations to the Family Hubs Division. A final overarching report will be published in 2025.

Policy and practice impact of Education projects

Early years language intervention NELI funded for a fifth year

Government support for the Nuffield Early Language Intervention (NELI) programme continued, with new Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson agreeing funding for a fifth year, for reception pupils in England who started school in September 2024.

NELI is a well-evidenced catch-up programme for four- and five-year-olds who need extra support with their speech and language development.

Research shows that babies born during the COVID-19 pandemic have poorer communication skills compared with babies born before Covid. The September 2024 reception intake consisted of children who were babies during the second lockdown, so NELI has a crucial role in supporting pupils still impacted by the pandemic’s legacy.

The 20-week intervention is delivered by specially trained teaching assistants. Small-group sessions feature ‘Ted’, the NELI puppet, and games that help children to concentrate on speaking, listening and learning.

An evaluation by the Education Endowment Foundation found NELI boosts young children’s language skills by an additional four months, and that children eligible for Free School Meals made up to seven months’ additional progress. This means NELI could have a significant role in helping to close the language development gap between

socio-economically disadvantaged pupils and their peers.

More than 11,100 primary schools in England are registered for NELI, and more than 200,000 pupils have benefited from the programme.

How school attendance affects educational attainment and future employment prospects

A project led by Dr Markus Klein at the University of Strathclyde investigated the impact of different types of school absence on educational attainment and labour market outcomes, factors that mediate absence and outcomes, and variations by gender, socio-economic background and ethnic group.

The researchers successfully engaged policymakers. Findings were presented at Westminster at a Department for Education roundtable on school absence, and at the APPG on Parental Participation in Education, and to the Scottish Government. The insights have contributed to strategies aimed at improving school attendance.

Knowledge exchange workshops were held in Glasgow, Manchester and Cardiff to influence strategy at a local level. The project was also part of a Nuffield-hosted event on school absence which reached a broad policy, practice and research audience.

Findings were presented at events attended by headteachers and other practitioners, providing opportunities to share best practice. The grant-holders also reached academics through numerous conference presentations, engaged with governments internationally, and produced four academic papers. They achieved media coverage, including three articles in Tes.

16

17

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

Opportunities, University College London –

Exploring educational provision for 14–16-year-olds in further education (FE) colleges in England

are all extremely highly regarded in the early years sector, and used their excellent links into local and central government to amplify the findings of this project. One of the authors was invited to contribute to the Bell Review of Early Education (which took place before the election and fed into Labours’ plans for early years). The findings were discussed with the Department for Education and informed decision-making around the funded entitlements. For example, evidence from the grant was used to shape new clarifying guidance on additional charges. There was also considerable interest in the research from local authorities, and over 100 people attended a webinar organised by the Local Government Association. The final report also received widespread news coverage, including in the national and regional press.

A grant led by the Association of Colleges (AoC), the national membership body for England’s FE colleges, and University College London focused on a key group of learners: 14–16-year-olds studying in FE colleges. Little is known about these students, who are often overlooked in policy discussions. Through their research, they highlighted the diverse pathways into FE provision, the challenges students faced in school, and the experiences and benefits of studying in a college environment. The recommendations focused on funding, vocational learning and support for high-need students.

The final report was launched in November 2024 at the AoC national conference, attended by over 1,000 college and business leaders. It was featured in Education Programme Head Dr Emily Tanner’s panel discussion on the main stage, launched at a lunchtime session, and referenced in a breakout session on 14–16 learners. The findings were included in the AoC’s and Nuffield’s submissions to the government’s Curriculum and Assessment Review.

How Universal Free School Meals impact children in England

This work, led by Professor Angus Holford at the University of Essex, has improved public understanding and awareness of the effects of providing Universal Free School Meals (UFSM).

The research found that UFSM reduces obesity at age 4–5 and age 10–11, and that it adds about two weeks’ progress to children’s reading scores but does not affect levels of school absence.

Understanding early education entitlements for three- and four-year-olds

The three organisations involved in the grant – Centre for Evidence and Implementation; Coram Family and Childcare; and the Centre for Education Policy and Equalising

We hosted a launch event that framed the research within the broader context

The research found that Universal Free School Meals (UFSM) reduces obesity at age 4-5 and age 10-11, and that it adds about two weeks’ progress to children’s reading scores.

of children’s nutrition in the cost-of-living crisis. Donna Ward of the Strategic Policy Directorate at the Department for Education chaired the panel discussion. The event and wider media coverage have fostered good engagement with the project findings.

The research has been used in campaigns by the third sector to promote UFSM provision, and by local government officers and councillors who already offer UFSM to back the policy. For example, evidence continues to be cited in England-based campaigns for the expansion of FSM entitlement, as indicated by the School Food Review Working Group to Andrea Leadsom, then a minister. Findings were also used in a campaign in Northern Ireland and cited in Dutch media, demonstrating the potential for the project to impact policy decisions internationally.

New learnings on Ofsted inspections

This project sought to answer important questions about Ofsted inspections to better understand the variation and consistency of judgements, and to prompt Ofsted to consider changing their processes to improve inspections.

The research, led by Dr Christian Bokhove at the University of Southampton, coincided with the launch of Ofsted’s Big Listen consultation by the new Chief Inspector, creating a receptive environment and making it an opportune time to achieve influence.

Co-investigator Professor John Jerrim at UCL’s Institute of Education served as an academic advisor to Ofsted during the project, providing opportunities to share research findings. Ofsted officials were also represented on the project advisory board and were aware of the research as it progressed.

Co-investigator Dr Sam Sims, also from the Institute of Education, presented evidence in person to the Education Select Committee’s Ofsted Inquiry.

The team contributed to a roundtable we convened to discuss research findings and potential improvements to the inspection process.

Following the general election, the Labour government announced the scrapping of single word judgements, citing this research as part of the evidence for the change.

The researchers have also reached broader audiences by publishing several blogs via FFT Education Datalab, which has a wide readership. They also received significant coverage in the sector press, including Tes magazine and Schools Week. Additionally, they contributed to two BBC productions: Analysis – What makes a good school? (BBC Sounds) and The Briefing Room – What’s the point of Ofsted? (BBC Radio 4).

Analysing the impact of COVID-19 on the life chances of children and young people

There were two elements to this grant, led by Professor Lee Elliot Major from the University of Exeter. The researchers conducted an international review of pandemic-related learning loss and the major strategies adopted by countries for education recovery, providing a useful summary of how different governments responded.

Next, the team used a skills formation model, to identify how cognitive and socio-emotional skills develop across childhood and adolescence, predicting the likely impact of Covid-related learning loss on GCSE results by 2030. Based on the evidence, six ‘low-cost policy solutions’ were put forward aimed at addressing the disadvantage gaps in attainment through a broad range of school engagement approaches.

Ofsted’s proposed new report card system, which aims to increase focus on support for disadvantaged and vulnerable children, responds to a recommendation from this

18

19

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

Professor Elliot Major was also a panellist at an event we convened to explore the evidence base around, and potential solutions for, rising cases of school absence.

project to rebalance the inspection system. The scorecard has attracted interest from the Welsh and Scottish governments and school leaders in several countries. Outcomes from the pilot are being presented to officials at the Department for Education. The researchers have published a self-evaluation toolkit to enable schools to assess their equitable practice and outcomes for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds. More than 50 secondary schools in England signed up for the pilot and it will be rolled out to schools across the country. A version for primary schools is also in the pipeline.

The report findings and the event attracted sector and general media coverage, ensuring the grant’s findings reached policy and practice audiences as well as those with a wider interest in the issues covered, such as parents.

Examination of higher education (HE) fees and funding

Higher education fees and funding are complex and poorly understood. Supported by our General Election Analysis and Briefing Fund, this project aimed to improve the level of understanding across policymakers, sector leaders and the public.

The report also recommended a UK-wide programme of undergraduate students tutoring and mentoring school pupils to help develop their foundational skills. This has been trialled by the University of Exeter, and other higher education sector leaders have shown interest in promoting the scheme across the university sector. Universities UK has also highlighted it as an exemplar of social mobility work in higher education.

This project, which was led by Dr Gavan Conlon at London Economics, carried out a range of in-depth analyses on higher education fees and funding arrangements across the four home nations of the UK. Findings were presented to policy stakeholders via

five reports and four well-attended events in Belfast, Edinburgh, London and Cardiff, co-organised with the Higher Education Policy Institute.

how their well-being is affected by different social and economic factors. We want to understand the ways in which some people and groups are potentially vulnerable to adverse outcomes, and to identify how those risks can be mitigated or channelled more positively.

Researchers explored the main parties’ manifesto commitments on higher education fees and funding for England. The Labour Party and the Scottish Labour Party subsequently approached the team for a more in-depth discussion of the analysis for England and Scotland, and modelled several options ahead of the election.

Key Welfare outputs published in 2024

What: The IFS Deaton review of inequalities Who: Professor Richard Blundell, et al. Headline findings: Launched in 2019, this review by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) is a comprehensive study of inequalities: how they arise, which matter and why, and how they should be addressed. The collection of analysis and commentaries covers a multitude of topics including inequalities of income and wealth, health, political participation, geography, race and gender; and the role of early childhood, families, education, the world of work, firms, trade and globalisation, tax, welfare, and public services. They were published in their entirety this year in a special edition of Oxford University Press’ journal Oxford Open Economics. The conclusions of the Review are forthcoming.

Engagement with policymakers included discussions with the Department for Education in Westminster and the Welsh Government to go through findings for England and Wales respectively; high-level discussions with the Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland; and presenting evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s Education, Children and Young People Committee session on the Scottish HE fees and funding system.

Findings from the project achieved significant national media coverage, including in the Financial Times, and the team was also invited to submit an article to an academic journal for a special edition on fees and funding.

Welfare

What: Understanding Communities Who: Six multi-institution, multi-discipline teams Headline findings: Understanding Communities is a £1.1 million grants

Within our Welfare domain, our objective is to improve people’s lives by understanding

This review by the Institute for Fiscal Studies is a comprehensive study of inequalities: how they arise, which matter and why, and how they should be addressed.

20

21

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

encompassing the workplace and society in general. However, eliminating the educational disparities between disabled and non-disabled people could close the DEG by 12%. The DEG varies significantly between areas, with a strong correlation with levels of economic deprivation. Strong local labour markets characterised by low unemployment and a thriving knowledge sector, coupled with good availability of elementary jobs, can disproportionately improve the employment prospects of disabled people and narrow the DEG.

programme in collaboration with the British Academy aimed at exploring how local communities function and can improve people’s lives. The six funded projects were developed in 2021 at workshops co-hosted by the Nuffield Foundation and the British Academy for early to mid-career researchers, policymakers and practitioners. Five of the six projects completed this year, highlighting the importance of understanding local contexts in community initiatives, the value of natural settings and public spaces in fostering social connections and community integration, the importance of accessible, in-person services, and the strengths and limits of volunteer-led activities.

What: Welfare access, assets and debts of LGBT+ people in the UK Who: Dr Peter Matthews, University of Stirling, et al. Headline findings: This was the first project to explore the experiences of LGBT+ people accessing social security benefits in the UK, and it highlighted a complex picture of disadvantage and advantage. While bisexuals tend to have lower amounts of wealth and are more likely to report having financial problems, gay men and lesbian women tend to have higher

What: Unpacking the disability employment gap Who: Dr Mark Bryan, University of Sheffield, et al. Headline findings: The employment rate of disabled people in the UK is substantially lower than for non-disabled people. Analysis of nationally representative data shows that most of the disability employment gap (DEG) is related to ‘structural’ barriers

wealth compared to their heterosexual counterparts. The research also highlighted that some LGBT+ people delay benefit claims due to fear of discrimination and encounter heteronormative biases in the system, particularly trans individuals, who face specific administrative barriers. To address these issues, the team made recommendations for government departments around LGBT+ inclusion training, improved data collection and gender-neutral administrative processes.

What: Evidencing the outsourcing of social care provision in England Who: Dr Anders Bach-Mortensen, University of Oxford, et al.

Headline findings: Following a new comprehensive, longitudinal data resource on outsourcing trends in the adult and children’s social care sectors, this research provides a more complete picture of the care crisis than ever before. It found dramatic increases in the outsourcing of residential care services to private providers, although public and third sector adult care homes and children’s care homes were also found to have higher regulatory inspections ratings. For-profit operators also experience more frequent involuntary closures and cancellations by the Care Quality Commission and Ofsted. Findings also show disparities in the geographical distribution of services. For-profit adult care homes increasingly cater to self-funded residents in affluent areas. Children’s social care for-profit homes are, however, often concentrated in areas with lower property prices. This raises concerns about children placed far from their local authority areas. The findings highlight the need for more effective market oversight, realigned incentive structures and a transparent data-driven approach to policymaking.

Improving work and well-being for people with musculoskeletal conditions

Musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions are the leading cause of pain and disability in

England, affecting people’s ability to work, care for a family and live independently. Our Oliver Bird Fund (OBF) is dedicated to improving the lives of people with MSK conditions.

In Spring 2024 we launched a third funding round inviting applications to the OBF. The call invited applications focused on the challenges of living with MSK conditions at any life stage and tackling inequalities. The focus of the new £6 million funding is on enabling children and adults who have an MSK condition to participate as fully as possible in society.

The Fund is already supporting 12 research projects worth more than £6 million from two previous funding rounds. This third round is an important opportunity to further grow an evidence base of research.

We are pleased to be working in partnership and co-funding with Versus Arthritis again. People with MSK conditions, who volunteer as Versus Arthritis Research Partners, have contributed to the development of this funding call. They will be involved in assessing applications to ensure that the projects receiving funding are those that can lead to real benefits for the community.

Key Oliver Bird Fund outputs published in 2024

What: How arthritis affects earnings over time

Who: Dr Adam Martin, University of Leeds, et al.

Headline findings: Over 30 million working days are lost due to MSK conditions every year in the UK. However, few studies have used individual-level data to explore the relationship between arthritis and employment. This project investigated how labour market experiences differ for people with arthritis when compared to similar individuals without arthritis. Published findings in 2024 also showed that the employment of people with arthritis, as with others with long-term

22

23

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

conditions, was disproportionately affected by the pandemic.

What: Assembling the data jigsaw: Powering robust population research in MSK disease Who: Professor Will Dixon, University of Manchester, et al. Headline findings: This project brings together existing and innovative health and social care data in Greater Manchester to fill gaps in knowledge around living with a MSK condition. Results revealed that the use of over-the-counter supplements, pain relief and sleep aids is common in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. It is recommended that healthcare professionals should proactively ask about these during consultations.

Policy and practice impact of Welfare projects

Multiple low-paid employment (MLPE) among women in the UK

This project, led by Louise Lawson at the University of Glasgow, examined the prevalence and impacts of MLPE among women in the UK through analysis of existing data and interviews with 105 women. They found that around 3% of working women were in MLPE each year in the 2010s, and nearly one in five of all working women experienced it at some point in that decade. Hence, MLPE is often a temporary situation, but one which disproportionately affects older women, carers and those with school-age children. Contrary to expectations, almost half of women in MLPE are university-educated, and have their primary job in the public sector.

The team’s recommendations for the UK government and Scottish Government were developed through a workshop with policy experts in government, research institutions and charities. They focus on reducing financial insecurity and improving work–life balance for women in MLPE through:

The launch of the final report in May 2024 was accompanied by a roundtable event chaired by members of the Scottish Parliament, and members of the team appeared on both Scottish radio and television to discuss their findings and recommendations. Throughout the project, the team also presented their research to relevant teams within several government departments and alongside exhibitions of artwork made by women in MLPE in Glasgow Women’s Library.

Improving intervention around exploitation among adults with cognitive impairment

This project has been the first robust exploration of the links between cognitive impairment (including intellectual disability, dementia, brain injury, and autistic spectrum disorders) and exploitation of adults in England. The team, led by Dr Alison Gardner at Nottingham Rights Lab, conducted statistical analysis of available data, reviewed safeguarding reports, and captured the experiences of people living with cognitive impairments and of practitioners. The findings highlight the potential scale of exploitation, and what policy and practice improvements might prevent further cases.

The team has worked in partnership throughout with the Ann Craft Trust and the Human Trafficking Foundation, both leading organisations in this area. As well as helping shape the research, these relationships have supported wide dissemination to large audiences of practitioners. Emerging findings were shared with the Director of Labour Market Enforcement, the CEO of Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, safeguarding leads at the Department of Health, and the Network of Safeguarding Adults Board Chairs.

Supporting tenancy sustainment in social housing

Main findings were launched during Adult Safeguarding Week in late November 2024. A key date in the calendar for practitioners, the team took the opportunity to give face-to-face and online presentations. The UK Anti-Slavery Commissioner, Eleanor Lyons, endorsed the findings: “(by) stitching together diverse data, the authors have created a compelling account of the ways in which cognitive impairment can heighten risk for exploitation”. She called for their report to mark “the start of a new conversation about the way we recognise and act on adult exploitation”. The team will continue to share learning with frontline practitioners, and extend their conversations to policymakers and practitioners in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Professor Paul Hickman, Dr Kesia Reeve and colleagues at Sheffield Hallam University have been concerned by how pressures on tenants in social housing – most recently the cost-of-living crisis – are affecting their ability to pay rent. Holding on to home took a multi-dimensional approach to exploring who, how and why tenants struggle to make housing payments. Crucially they wanted to understand how to improve support and prevent tenancy failure.

They surveyed and interviewed tenants in case study areas, interviewed staff working for social landlords, analysed rent payment records, and assessed conversations between tenants and housing officers. They have generated recommendations for national policymakers, for social landlords and for activities to benefit individual tenants.

24

25

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

Throughout the project emerging findings have been shared with the social housing sector supported by organisations including the Chartered Institute of Housing and the Housing Quality Network (HQN). The team was centre stage at the Rent Income Excellence Network annual conference in the autumn. They have provided impactful training to housing association staff, with requests to do more. Their final report was published in January 2025, with accompanying guidance. They have presented findings at events run by the National Housing Federation and the Department of Work and Pensions, and will contribute to future events organised by the National Federation of Arm’s Length Management Organisations and HQN. They will also deliver podcasts for HQN and Voicescape.

eight projects produced nearly 100 written outputs, received over 30,000 media mentions and held 14 public events over a five-month period.

Justice

Within our Justice domain, our aim is to explore how the real-world application of law and the administration of justice meets the needs and expectations of individuals and the wider public. While our overarching interest is in supporting an effective, fair and accessible justice system that serves society, a particular focus is on issues of justice that have the most significant effect on the lives, opportunities and well-being of people who are vulnerable or disadvantaged in some way. We believe that the challenges currently facing the justice system make critical examination of who the system serves, and how it operates, more important than ever.

General Election Analysis and Briefing Fund

Prior to the 2024 general election, we funded eight projects to improve the use of reliable and accurate research and data in political debate, and to support well-informed voting decisions. This was through impartial assessment to improve understanding of the factual evidence on key issues among the public and the media in the run-up to the election. Across the work we funded, there was coverage of a large range of topics, including public spending, taxation, social security, compulsory and higher education, housing, and health and social care. Different formats were used to inform and engage with the debate, including detailed briefings, international case studies, interactive data visualisation and podcasts. In total, the

Key Justice outputs published in 2024

What: Mapping the changing face of cross-examination in criminal trials Who: Professor John Jackson, University of Nottingham, et al. Headline findings: The process of cross-examination in court can be distressing, particularly for the most vulnerable: children, complainants in sexual offence cases, and witnesses with learning

Holding on to home took a multi-dimensional approach to exploring who, how and why tenants struggle to make housing payments.

disabilities. ‘Best evidence’ measures

have been increasingly introduced to ease the burden of testifying. For the first time, this research looks systematically at the cross-examination of vulnerable witnesses in criminal cases across the UK and Ireland. Recommendations were made around emerging broad conclusions:

What: Understanding the health and social needs of mothers and children in family court cases

Who: Professor Ruth Gilbert, Administrative Data Research Centre for England, UCL Institute of Child Health, et al. Headline findings: This study examined the risk of first-time mothers in England being involved in care proceeding and their social and health characteristics, by analysing linked administrative family court and healthcare records using data from the Children and Family Court Advice and Support Service (Cafcass), local health records and national Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) for all women giving birth in England. The findings show how national population analyses can benefit from data linkages between healthcare and family justice to inform policy and preventative interventions. Specifically, the research revealed:

for young mothers living in deprived neighbourhoods, and those with health problems at their first birth. Mothers with intellectual disabilities, or a history of an adversity-related hospital admission or mental illness, were at the highest risk of care proceedings.

What: Child First – examining children’s collaboration in the Youth Justice System Who: Professor Stephen Case, Loughborough University, et al. Headline findings: The number of children aged 10–17 years entering the Youth Justice System (YJS) is decreasing, but those remaining often have multiple, complex and unmet needs. Despite the importance of understanding these needs and children’s experiences, their voices have often been downplayed or neglected. However, the adoption by the Youth Justice Board and wider YJS of ‘Child First’ as its guiding principle and key strategic objective, is placing much greater emphasis on the importance of the participation and engagement of children. Child First is an evidence-based framework for working with children incorporating four tenets: see children as children; develop pro-social identity for positive child outcomes; collaborate with children; and promote diversion away from the justice system. The focus for this project was ‘collaboration with children’. Researchers explored children’s

26

27

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

Headline findings: This was the first

views and experiences of collaboration in youth justice decision-making processes.

output from our Strategic Fund grant Transforming justice: The interplay of social change and policy reforms led by Professor Imran Rasul. The project provided the first robust estimates of the impact on education and crime outcomes of the closure between 2010 and 2019 of nearly one-third of youth clubs in London, which provided free after-school programmes for local teenagers. Children and young people in areas affected by youth club closures performed nearly 4% worse in GCSE exams and became 14% more likely to commit criminal offences. The study emphasised the important role that youth clubs can play in assisting young people, particularly those from low-income backgrounds, by offering amenities that support positive behaviours. It also indicates that closing youth clubs was not cost-effective; for every £1 saved from

Findings revealed that their experiences of Child First collaboration practice were inconsistent. For local authority youth justice services, experiences were generally positive. Within youth custody settings, they varied depending on the establishment and incentive scheme level. Interactions and engagement with the police, courts and children’s social care services were mostly negative. The research set out a range of recommendations for youth justice agencies on how they could improve the way they collaborate with children to more fully embed Child First principles into practice.

What: The effects of youth clubs on education and crime Who: Carmen Villa, the IFS

closures, there were associated societal losses of nearly £3 due to forgone education benefits and costs of crime.

Policy and practice impact of Justice projects

More findings on financial settlements in divorce

In 2023, the Fair shares? project, led by Professor Emma Hitchings at The University of Bristol, provided the first detailed insight into what happens to assets when a marriage breaks down. In 2024, two further reports were published exploring subsets of the dataset. They considered:

The research was singled out in the Law Commission’s 2024 review of the laws governing finances on divorce as being critical to their consideration for reform proposals. The report received extensive media coverage, informing public debate and driving forward legal reform.

Better understanding the needs and experiences of children in care

Children in care face many vulnerabilities and disadvantages. Increasing understanding of their situation, experiences and needs – and informing policy and practice to assist them – has been one of our priority issues for many years. Two major studies funded by us were particularly impactful in this respect.

Despite children with complex identities often needing extra help to make sense of their identity, the Children and Families Act 2014 no longer requires English adoption

agencies to give due consideration to a child’s race, religion or cultural birth heritage, and wider and intersectional dimensions of identity are not captured in existing data.

Race, religion and representation among care-experienced children , led by

Dr Sariya Cheruvallil, Contractor of Coventry University, has developed an evidence base of how young people from minoritised backgrounds experience and express their identities, to inform theoretical and practical work with children in care. The research uses an ‘Identities in-flux’ model, integrating intersectionality and ‘Lived religion’ theories to develop a more nuanced and complex framing of these children’s identities. The research is shaping inclusive and sensitive frontline practice and national policy to respond to the increasing diversity of children and young people entering care.

As well as a final research report and academic papers, a range of other outputs included policy and practice briefing documents, an animated film and practice tools. The team also delivered knowledge exchange workshops to over 400 frontline social workers and family practitioners, and presented to key government departments and agencies, including the Department for Education and the Youth Justice Board.

Permanently progressing? Building

secure futures for children: Phase 2 middle

childhood , led by Dr Helen Whincup of University of Stirling, is following a cohort of 1,836 children who became looked after in the Scottish care system in 2012/13 when aged five or under. This phase of the study revisits children in middle childhood (aged between 9 and 16 years old). By 2022, 79% of the 1,836 children were living in homes where it is anticipated they will remain until adulthood, the majority with their parents. Findings show:

28

29

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

being over two and a half years. Too many children (more than one in ten) were still in impermanent placements.

On publication, the research received widespread coverage in the news media and generated interest among Members of the Scottish Parliament and senior Scottish Government officials. The research has been used to inform and support calls for practice reform around maintaining contact with a child’s family, to highlight a lack of support to kinship carers, and to identify improvements in children’s data and tracking their outcomes. Practitioners – including social workers, psychiatrists, mental health specialists and family lawyers – have welcomed the research, with high levels of attendance at professional knowledge exchange events and coverage of the research within specialist publications.

Nuffield Council on Bioethics

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics (NCOB) was established by the Nuffield Foundation in 1991. It is a leading independent policy and research centre, and the foremost bioethics body in the UK. The NCOB identifies, analyses and advises on ethical issues in biomedicine and health so that decisions in these areas benefit people and society.

In 2024 the NCOB launched its five-year strategy, Making ethics matter , strengthening its commitment to rigorous ethical analysis and to building networks to amplify bioethics’ influence and impact in decision-making across policy and practice. The strategy introduced three priority areas: reproduction, parenthood and families; the mind and brain; and the environment and health.

The NCOB also engaged in topics outside of its priority areas, with the aim of embedding ethics in policymaking. In 2024 it ran a major project exploring public views on assisted dying, which included commissioning England’s first Citizens’ Jury on the subject. The NCOB’s focus in 2025 will be to reach those involved in shaping the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, making sure they are aware of this evidence and draw on it to ensure that the Bill reflects public priorities.

Additionally, the NCOB has further

established itself within the field of genomics. It has secured funding to establish and coordinate a UK ethics network to build consensus, encourage expert knowledge exchange and co-create resources to support the genomics sector as a whole.

Alongside these projects, the NCOB published its first impact report within the new strategic period and launched its new website and brand in November 2024. Evolving its horizon scanning activities, it published a 2024 Horizon Scan in a new time-framed presentation and has progressed a project to develop an ethical lens for horizon scanning and foresight.

The NCOB also provided written evidence to the UK COVID-19 Inquiry’s module 4 on Vaccines and Therapeutics, in which they set out the NCOB’s ethics advice and engagement with government during the pandemic.

Developing the NCOB’s priority areas

The mind and brain

In 2024, the NCOB partnered with the Nuffield Foundation on a project exploring links between genomics and neuroscience in education, in particular the development of predictive tools for educational attainment, such as polygenic indices (PGIs). In the context of research, PGIs offer potential to help explore genetic influences on educational attainment in more depth. However, these also raise significant ethical questions relating to the translation of this research into classroom applications, amid concerns that it could further reinforce inequities experienced by marginalised groups if not managed appropriately. The scoping paper, published in early 2025, describes key scientific developments in the field, touching on the ethical issues that arise.

In March 2024 the NCOB published a briefng note summarising current developments in research using human neural organoids and highlighting the ethical issues that may arise. Human neural organoids – used to model aspects of the developing brain – are promising research tools that could help improve understanding of brain conditions and treatments. Although research is in its early stages, it is moving at pace, raising ethical questions such as whether the moral and legal status of neural organoids warrant special ethical consideration, and how best to design informed consent processes for research. A second report, providing insights on these issues and the next steps for governance and regulation, will be published in 2025.

Also in 2024, the NCOB opened a call for evidence to help assess significant developments around neurotechnology use in healthcare. Recognising that the use of neurotechnologies in healthcare raises ethical questions around informed consent, voluntariness, risk, environmental impacts,

privacy and (in)equity – and that the range

of such technologies has expanded hugely since its last report on the subject in 2013 – the call for evidence will help to inform the NCOB’s next steps in delivering ethical advice to decision makers in this field.

Reproduction, parenthood and families

In 2024, the NCOB established an interdisciplinary expert working group to assess the ethical and regulatory questions raised by research using human stem cell-based embryo models (SCBEMs). As a research tool, SCBEMs have the potential to bring public benefit through new insights around early human development. However, questions have been raised regarding how they should be regulated. The NCOB published a report in November 2024 which tackles these questions head on. It recommends a phased approach to the governance of SCBEM research to provide reassurance that ethical concerns – for instance relating to the transferring of a SCBEM into a human or other animal – are taken into account. These findings have already fed into the work of key stakeholders such as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, who have responsibility for enacting the changes that the NCOB have recommended.

The environment and health

In 2024, the NCOB built on its previous background paper which provided an overview of – and examination into – ethical issues arising in climate change and health. It published a report in January 2025 highlighting the need to address the intersection between climate change and health, and demonstrating how embedding ethics into decision-making can help policymakers to develop proportionate measures to tackle climate change and its widespread effects.

30

31

Strategic goal one

Strategic goal one

in ethical guidance relating to genomics healthcare and research. The NCOB are now engaging with key stakeholders in the sector on the next steps and hope to announce further work in 2025.

In September 2024, the NCOB published a joint report with the Ada Lovelace Institute examining the use of AI-powered genomic health prediction (AIGHP) in the NHS. This is a set of AI-driven techniques that assess genetic variations in someone’s DNA to calculate whether they are more likely to develop a particular disease. AIGHP has the potential to transform our healthcare system by offering a more preventative and personalised approach. However, the report urges caution, concluding that the potential harms of widely adopting AIGHP across the NHS at a population level – such as exacerbating genetic discrimination – would outweigh its potential benefits. The report makes recommendations to be considered by decision makers who are responsible for the introduction of this technology into the NHS.

The NCOB also produced a ‘time-framed’ evolution of their annual Horizon Scan – this new iteration was published in November and has so far received very positive feedback.

Horizon scanning

Assisted dying

In 2024, the NCOB commissioned England’s first Citizens’ Jury to explore public views on assisted dying. This provided policymakers with their first opportunity to understand what people in England think about assisted dying and how their reflections may be shaped by hearing evidence and engaging in deliberation. In the autumn, the NCOB published two reports summarising the Jury’s conclusions and recommendations and the results of two nationally representative surveys. The findings indicate that people in England support legalisation for assisted dying when it is limited to adults with a terminal illness who have capacity to decide. The jury were united in a desire for improvements to our nation’s palliative care and social services. These findings were presented to the media, and the resulting media coverage reached an estimated 2.5 billion people.

At the end of 2024, MPs voted in favour of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill for England and Wales passing onto committee stage. In 2025, the NCOB will work to ensure those sitting on the Bill committee are aware of the evidence so that they can use it appropriately.

Genomics

The NCOB has continued its leading role in coordinating ethics across the genomics healthcare and research sectors. The NCOB’s work in 2024, in partnership with the Office for Life Sciences, focused on mapping existing ethics guidance in the sector to identify areas where further work is needed.

In January 2024, the NCOB published its second report on the topic, making the case for coordinated action to address gaps

The NCOB embarked on an ambitious project in 2024 to develop an ethical lens for horizon scanning and foresight. It is now working with UK policymakers and international foresight experts to develop four different tools and approaches which can help embed ethics into the foresight process. These are:

32

33

Strategic goal two

Strategic goal two

Strategic goal two – evidence, data and digital society

We will work to improve the accessibility, use and collection of the evidence and data necessary to understand the issues affecting people’s life chances. We will consider the broader implications of a digital society.

The workshop topics were:

AI in the public

sector workshops

In response to concerns about the potentially far-reaching impact of AI on people’s lives, and in collaboration with the Ada Lovelace Institute, we commissioned four workshops to explore the opportunities and risks of using AI in the public sector.

They were led by Professor Diane Coyle at the Bennett Institute for Public Policy and Professor Wendy Hall at the Web Science Institute.

Each workshop brought together leading stakeholders, experts and policymakers from a range of sectors and disciplines to discuss the issues within the context of how AI can enable public services to be delivered effectively, equitably and responsibly.

AI’s rapid development raises questions about data privacy and decision-making, which could lead to biases and unequal treatment of citizens. But there are also likely to be positives, such as improving the responsiveness of public services, and better data analysis.

The research questions that emerged will help inform our new Foundation-wide strategic priorities.

Children’s information: Improving lives through better listening and better data

Good statistical and administrative information are vital for effective policy and practice in children’s services. How the views and experiences of children and families are represented within that information is a critical issue, as is how the information is used. This Strategic Fund project, led by Professor Leon Feinstein at the University of Oxford, aims to ensure the voices of children, families and practitioners are better heard and used to improve services, experiences and outcomes in ways that are effective and ethical.

The project involves an innovative collaboration between four local authorities, five universities and the organisation Research in Practice, with researchers working closely with practitioners, children and families. It focuses primarily on children and families needing additional support from local authority children’s services – who are often the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in society – but also considers universal services. The project is establishing Information Use Projects (IUPs) in the four local authority sites (North Yorkshire, Hampshire, Oldham and Rochdale), actively testing ways to address the challenges of incorporating user voice in and about data and improving the uses of data.

The team is developing an important new body of knowledge about good, democratic and effective use of children’s information in local authorities, and reaching receptive audiences in central and local government. Project partner Research in Practice is holding events for practitioners to share emerging learning and explore common barriers and facilitators around good information use.

Engagement included a series of video resources produced by the team about the ethics and principles of data governance, and a policy brief on measuring outcomes for care leavers.

We commissioned a journalist to write an overarching narrative about the project, to help to tell the story of the work being undertaken, to provide cohesion between the project’s various constituent parts, and to set out the potential scope and scale of its findings.

The project has now entered a two-year impact activity phase, which will include a major report of findings and learning so far, to be launched at a conference in 2025.

Minimum Digital Living Standard for households with children

This research, led by Professor Simeon Yates at the University of Liverpool, developed a Minimum Digital Living Standard (MDLS) for households with children. MDLS sets a benchmark, or ‘basket’, of digital goods, services and skills which people agree households with children should be able to reach to have an adequate quality of life and to participate in society.

The final report was published in 2024 and the appetite for developing MDLS to inform policy and practice among devolved nations has been substantial. At the same time as we made the award, the Welsh Government tendered for development of an MDLS for Wales. The team was awarded that contract, with complementary work happening alongside our grant, involving partners in Wales. In May, a launch event in Cardiff brought together the Welsh Government and third sector stakeholders to consider how MDLS will inform partnership working. The Scottish Government are also contracting with the team to produce an MDLS for Scotland, and

34

35

Strategic goal two

Strategic goal two

the Welsh Government have commissioned a second stage.

A launch event was held at the Foundation in March, with representatives attending from the Department for Work and Pensions; the Department for Digital, Culture Media & Sport; and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology.

Professor Yates also gave evidence to the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee Enquiry into Digital Exclusion on the cost-of-living crisis. Local government, including the Liverpool City Region and the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, has been very engaged, and the London Borough of Camden are already using MDLS to shape their digital strategy.

The Ada Lovelace Institute

The Ada Lovelace Institute (Ada) was established by the Nuffield Foundation in 2018 as an independent research institute with a mission to make data and AI work for people and society.

Ada does this by building evidence through its research, convening diverse voices, and shaping policy and practice on AI and data in the UK, EU and internationally. Ada amplifies the voices of people to ensure that public opinions, attitudes and concerns inform debates and decision-making about data and AI.

Last year was rife with narratives about AI driving progress. But to ensure that these technologies actually work for people and society, Ada sought to bring calm, caution and evidence to hype cycles.

AI, society and public services

2024 brought into sharp relief the societal and democratic impacts of data-driven technologies – from the fallout of the Horizon scandal to the varied worries about and actual use of AI in elections around the world. We also saw great desire for AI to solve longstanding issues affecting the delivery of public services.

Despite the growing enthusiasm about the promise of AI technologies, we still lack adequate information about their reliability, efficacy, safety and impacts on people. There is a growing need to ask the right questions about these technologies: First, do they work? Second, do they work well enough for everyone? And finally, do they work well in context – not just under test conditions, but in the real world, on the street, in the hospital or in the classroom?

Ada has been examining these questions through work on the intersection of data, AI and public services. It had the rare opportunity to get under the bonnet with the London Borough of Barking & Dagenham and published an observational study of their early use of the OneView data system and predictive analytics tools. Ada’s research uncovered several prerequisites for data analytics to be used and trusted by frontline workers:

• Required outputs from the system must be clearly specified and understood for all users.

Ada built on that research with two reports on the procurement of AI in local government, the culmination of a year-long research project to analyse the complex guidance landscape available to local government procurers and engage with a variety of stakeholders involved in

procurement on the ground. Throughout Ada’s research it’s become clear that it’s crucial to get procurement right if we want AI in public services to work well for people and society. With this in mind, Ada has called for a National Taskforce for the Procurement of AI in Local Government to address the multiple challenges in this area in a joined-up way, which has received an enthusiastic response from across the local government procurement landscape.

Ada has also focused on the impacts of AI and data-driven systems that may entrench inequalities in society. It engaged with health data experts, doctors, and transgender and non-binary patients to understand the way gender is coded in the data-driven systems used in primary care in England. Ada’s research highlighted that the way these systems are set up can sometimes have unintended consequences on the people the data represents. Because of this, any move to predictive or AI-driven healthcare must be carefully thought through.

Ada also wrote to the Home Secretary on the case for biometrics regulation and was subsequently quoted by the Policing Minister in a recent Westminster Hall debate. It also participated in a Home Office roundtable on this vital issue and is looking forward to seeing what proposals may be brought forward.

The safety conversation

The conversation about what it means to keep AI safe has continued since the UK AI Safety Summit in 2023. 2024 saw two more global meetings of international policymakers in Seoul and San Francisco. The network of global AI safety institutes has grown from two at Bletchley to more than 10 now, with Kenya, Singapore, Korea, Canada and Australia – along with the EU AI Office – joining the fold.

The focus on safety has largely remained a narrow one – on model evaluations, and

on a narrow set of risks such as bioweapons or the prospect that humans will lose control of these systems. However, for Ada, this is not enough. Ada’s view is that ‘AI safety’ should mean keeping people and society safe from the range of risks and harms that AI systems cause, from deepfakes and disinformation to discrimination in hiring or public service provision.

At the Seoul summit and the San Francisco convening, Ada argued for a renewed focus on context-specific evaluations of AI systems in collaboration with sectoral regulators and new statutory powers to replace the existing voluntary approach. It also conducted and published research looking at the evaluation of foundation models, which found that current evaluations are not enough to prevent unsafe products from entering the market.

The governance landscape

2024 saw the passing of EU AI Act, the first comprehensive regulation of AI anywhere in the world. Many of Ada’s key recommendations were included in the Act, such as the establishment of a new AI Office to ensure coordinated regulatory oversight, the inclusion of Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) models so that accountability is more logically distributed along the value chain, and the requirement for public bodies to undertake fundamental rights impact assessments.

Ada’s work did not stop with the passage of the Act, as preparation for implementation quickly got underway. It supported the EU Code of Practice on General Purpose AI models, which will detail the obligations for GPAI models via a co-regulatory approach – joining working groups covering transparency and copyright, risk assessment and mitigation, and corporate governance.

Outside of the EU, 2024 also saw some successful and unsuccessful attempts at US state level to pass legislation on AI technologies. After a change in government,

36

37

Strategic goal two

Strategic goal two

the UK introduced a new data bill (on which Ada briefed Parliament), began to implement its online safety Act, and set out its intention to pass a new bill to regulate frontier models, on which a consultation is expected early next year. Given the bill’s likely narrow focus, Ada has been working with other civil society organisations to identify what else might be needed from this bill to ensure it addresses the vast range of technologies that currently impact people’s lives.

and inclusive data stewardship, to exploring what lessons can be learned for AI regulation from three other regulated sectors. Government took notice: Ada’s diagram of the foundation model supply chain was featured in the consultation response paper on AI regulation.

Listening to the public

Listening to people is essential if we want to think about how new technologies are woven into the fabric of society. We still need to understand more about how AI and other data-driven technologies impact different people’s lives, livelihoods, relationships, safety and well-being. And we need to have a better sense of what real people want from data and AI, and how they want it to fit into their lives.

Indeed, debates on governance and regulation often tend towards the ideological – but when it comes down to it, we need evidence on what works and what doesn’t. Ada worked to build this evidence throughout 2024 – from examining the effectiveness of a first-of-its-kind third-party AI auditing regime, to publishing a landscape review of the current state of participatory

In 2024 Ada commissioned an update of its 2023 survey ‘How do people feel about AI?’, published in March 2025. This vital evidence will help to understand people’s views of technologies from autonomous weapons to cancer-predicting AI tools. It will also enable Ada to track attitudes over time and see where legitimacy and trust might be changing.

Public good, or public benefit, is a buzzword in almost every policy conversation right now. In 2024 Ada began new research asking people what they think is the relationship between AI and public good, so that policymakers can take real people’s views into account early in decision-making, and service- and process-building.

New Partnerships and Collaborations

Much of Ada’s influence comes through working in partnership with other organisations to amplify its capacity, broaden its expertise and ensure the impact of its work.

In 2024 Ada entered into several new partnerships with academia, civil society and policy, and strengthened existing ones:

AI UK, Open Society Foundations, Omidyar, MacArthur Foundation, Ford Foundation, European AI Fund and the Mozilla Foundation.

Nuffield Family Justice Observatory

The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (Nuffield FJO) was established by the Nuffield Foundation in 2019. Funding currently extends to 2029.

While continuing to fill crucial gaps in data and research evidence, the Nuffield FJO has increased its focus on using data and research evidence to bring about changes in policy and practice by convening discussions and working alongside changemakers. In 2024 its focus was on catalysing improvements in the care for children with complex needs, seeding change in the way family courts hear care cases involving babies, and testing ways to improve children’s participation in proceedings. It also published the first research to identify the number of parents in care proceedings in England with learning disabilities or difficulties.

The Nuffield FJO’s work is focused on four themes:

The Nuffield FJO works with others – from judges and lawyers to local authorities, third sector organisations and academics – to gather insights and convene discussions about how evidence can be used to initiate

38

39

Strategic goal two

Strategic goal two

collaboration and new ideas into better experiences for children and families in the family justice system in England and Wales, and complement the existing board members, chaired by Jenny Beck KC (Hon).

change. It holds events to share evidence and innovation with thousands of professionals on the frontline of the family justice system, provoking connection and conversation. The Nuffield FJO takes an active advisory role contributing to a variety of working groups and taskforces on a range of subjects and topics, including private law, adoption, children with care experience, child participation within the family courts, deprivation of liberty orders, media and court transparency.

The Nuffield FJO took part in a ‘practice week’ – sitting in on public and private law proceedings, Family Drug and Alcohol Courts, private law pilot sites, magistrates’ courts and legal meetings, and visiting services across the breadth of England and Wales. This experience provided invaluable first-hand insights for the team.

The family justice system is under immense pressure. Children and families, and the professionals working in and with the court, face ongoing difficulties. Yet in this challenging system, there are green shoots of inspiration that demonstrate how a child’s best interests can be at the heart of everyday practice. The Nuffield FJO was proud to launch its Seeding change stories series in which it is gathering and sharing examples of positive experiences and innovative practice, to show what is being achieved against the odds.

It is the Nuffield FJO’s partners – the organisations and individuals working within or alongside the family justice system – and, above all, the families whose lives have been affected by this system who have brought this work to life. All at the Nuffield FJO are grateful to those who have attended its events, shared its research, and contributed ideas and experiences.

Private law

In 2024 the Nuffield FJO marked five years since its founding with its five-year impact report. This detailed its impact against five system goals. Three new board members also joined the Nuffield FJO: Her Honour Judge Carol Atkinson; Her Honour Judge Carole Burgher; and Ben Collins, director of system development for the Southeast London Integrated Care System. They bring a wealth of experience in turning research,

The family court has a role when families cannot agree on arrangements for children – most usually following parental separation – known as private law cases. Not much is known about the children and families appearing in the system, their background and particular issues, or the services available to them on their journey towards the courtroom.

Children and families, and the professionals working in and with the course, face ongoing difficulties. Yet in this challenging system, there are green shoots of inspiration.

The Nuffield FJO has been working with the judiciary, children and young people, and other family justice practitioners to develop a toolkit for judges on writing to children when decisions about their futures have been made in court. This will launch in early 2025.

In 2024 the Nuffield FJO worked with partners to improve how children are heard within court proceedings, and how they are helped to participate in ways that uphold their legal rights and promote their welfare.

In April it published a report which highlighted that children in private law proceedings are only offered the opportunity to share their views in just over a half of cases – and that this doesn’t radically change as children mature – with more than 40% of 12-, 13- and 14-year-olds having no obvious means for involvement.

As active members of the working group of the President of the Family Division, the Nuffield FJO has been focusing on families involved in applications which include those other than parents in private law proceedings, in particular ‘kinship care’ situations, where friends or family members have stepped in to care for children. This working group was convened in response to research the Nuffield FJO published in 2023, highlighting the unmet needs of this group.

Working with partners across England and Wales, the Nuffield FJO has been exploring how children’s participation might be better supported. It created training opportunities for practitioners in Cardiff and Birmingham as they launched their private law Pathfinder courts – a new initiative being introduced in the family justice system, focusing on the voice of the child.

Babies

The number of babies being removed from their parents at birth remains high, and many of these parents have previously had

40

41

Strategic goal two

Strategic goal two

a child taken into care. The Nuffield FJO has continued to explore what needs to change to reverse this trend. Where it is considered necessary to take a baby into care, it has been providing evidence and guidance to help inform more humane experiences and lessen the likelihood of the removal of a subsequent child from the parent’s care.

this group of children and young people, and convening discussions across the family justice system on how to facilitate change.

From June 2023, the Ministry of Justice began publishing, for the first time, data about applications for deprivation of liberty (DoL) orders under the inherent jurisdiction of the high court. This followed 12 months of the Nuffield FJO collecting and publishing this data during the pilot phase of the national DoL court. In 2022, it called for data about DoL orders to be published in national administrative data, to ensure that some of the most vulnerable children in society are counted in national statistics. It continues to monitor, provide a light analysis and publish quarterly summaries of this data.

The Nuffield FJO is working with parent groups, children’s services, the family court and local specialist services to develop a ‘baby court’ in Blackpool, which is informed by its evidence and seeks to improve outcomes for babies and their families.

The Nuffield FJO bulletin to share research and emerging good practice on newborn babies at risk of care proceedings has almost a thousand subscribers. In 2024 it published four editions.

The Nuffield FJO’s research about children on DoL orders continues to be the go-to evidence. In 2024 it informed the work of the Department for Education, NHS England and the Office of the Children’s Commissioner, and it featured in a growing amount of media coverage. The research inspired the Department for Education and NHS England to establish a Task and Finish Group to identify ways to improve practice. Alongside this, the Nuffield FJO has been instrumental in setting up a ‘Peer Collaborative’ of local authorities and health trusts seeking to improve care for children with complex needs. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, published in December 2024, includes new measures relating to children on DoL orders.

It continued to work with its partners Research in Practice, Birth Companions, Family Rights Group and Lancaster University, to improve practice in this crucial perinatal period, and push for improved cross-government statutory guidance.

Young people and the care system

The continued increase in the number of older children and young people who are being taken into care has prompted concerns about the ability of the family justice system to respond to their needs. The Nuffield FJO has been using data to shine a spotlight on

The Nuffield FJO has been instrumental in setting up a ‘Peer Collaborative’ of local authorities and health trusts seeking to improve care for children with complex needs.

Working through Somerset Council, the Nuffield FJO published a report sharing the thoughts and views of 13 young people who are in care, have care experience or are subject to a DoL order.

babies removed from their care have learning disabilities or difficulties, and that this is often not identified until court proceedings are well underway. The BBC reported on this new data, and the Nuffield FJO was grateful to work with several mothers with learning disabilities who felt able to tell their stories.

In 2025 the Nuffield FJO will organise and host the UK’s first ever national conference on children with complex needs and the use of DoL orders.

The number of babies being removed from their families has been rising for many years. Uncovering that such a significant proportion of the parents in these cases are likely to have learning disabilities or difficulties has a profound impact on how we should be thinking about the type of support they need. The pre-proceedings period is a vital chance for parents to learn or prove their parenting ability. If services are not being adapted to meet the needs of people with learning disabilities or difficulties, then they may not be receiving the support they need and, at worst, be treated unjustly.

Inequalities in the family justice system

To be effective and fair, the family justice system needs to understand how the system is used and experienced by children and adults, and how this experience differs for different families.

Professor Katy Burch of the Institute of Public Care looked at care proceedings of babies which involve parents with learning disabilities or difficulties, and the broader characteristics and circumstances of these parents, gaining insight into their experiences of care proceedings. The study found that one in three parents at risk of having their

Originally incubated by the Nuffield FJO, The Racial Justice Family Network launched at a joint event with CoramBAAF, bringing together social work and legal professionals,

42

43

Strategic goal two

Strategic goal three

judges, academics, and people with lived experience to promote anti-racist practice in family justice. The network will promote anti-racist initiatives and anti-discriminatory practices throughout the family justice system to address systemic discrimination, racism and inequities. Its goal is to improve outcomes for Black, Global Majority and other ethnically minoritised children, families and professionals.

Placing a spotlight on data

In 2024 the Nuffield FJO began shining a light on data and its use within the family justice system. It published a briefing paper, Improving lives – the power of better data in the family justice system , which set out some challenges and opportunities for improving data. This has prompted a conversation with officials at the Ministry of Justice about how improvements can be made. In 2025 the Nuffield FJO will continue to highlight this topic, by comparing data in the youth justice field with that in the family justice field.

The Nuffield FJO’s briefing paper AI in the family justice system also prompted discussion and reflection about AI and its potential to improve experiences for families and professionals. The paper outlined the challenges and risks involved, and discussed options for governance supporting safe and fair usage.

In 2025 the Nuffield FJO will work towards presenting data visually via a chart of the month and a data tracker, to make data more accessible, agile and engaging for those working in this field.

Strategic goal three – profile and influence We will increase the profile and influence of our research portfolio and of the Nuffield Foundation as a whole.

Grown up?

We are an open, collaborative and engaged funder that offers more than money. We collaborate with our grant-holders throughout their projects to plan and execute communications and public affairs strategies, and engagement activities. This approach ensures the work we fund gains maximum visibility and influence. The success of this collaboration is demonstrated in the impact examples listed under strategic goal one.

Grown up? Journeys to adulthood is a major new Nuffield project exploring the challenges and opportunities facing the 8.6 million young people in the UK aged 14–24.

The programme, a collaboration between the Foundation and its research centres, aims to deepen our understanding of how this generation navigates adolescence, and to provide insights that inform policy and practice.

We create various syntheses that compile findings from individual projects to enhance their collective impact and open new avenues for engagement. Our events programme brings together diverse audiences to foster productive discussions, while our public affairs team links politicians and policymakers with the Foundation’s work, that of the centres, and our grant-holders.

It follows on from the Changing face of early childhood series which produced a number of reviews focusing on infants and preschool children, highlighting issues facing families of the under-5s. Findings and recommendations continue to influence policymaking.

We make all research outputs from our grant-holders available on our website to bolster their collective impact. Utilising our communication platforms, we ensure the research we fund reaches a broader audience and amplifies its message. We facilitate connections and engagements in our fully accessible office and recognise the importance of online spaces to involve as many people as possible in our work.

For current 14–24-year-olds, traditional milestones such as completing education, entering the workforce and leaving home are being reached later than previously. Yet, knowledge gaps remain in what we know about young people’s experiences today.

A set of inter-connecting issues and concerns are shaping the themes

44

45

Strategic goal three

Strategic goal three

----- Start of picture text -----
Nuffield Foundation – Annual report 2024
----- End of picture text -----

and focus of Grown up? ; the pathways, barriers and opportunities for young people navigating education and employment; the role of technology in shaping young people’s well-being and social connections; and the pressures young people face and the support systems available to them.

A specially commissioned Youth Insight Group and deep-dive workshops with young people across the country are capturing shared and common experiences of this generation, as well as unpacking differences and inequalities by group and by place.

We are also mindful of the increasing divergence in youth policy across the governments of the UK, which provides valuable opportunities to learn and think in new ways.

Grown up? brings together the Nuffield Foundation, Nuffield Family Justice Observatory, Ada Lovelace Institute and Nuffield Council on Bioethics. This multidisciplinary approach allows us to draw on a wide range of expertise from colleagues across a range of relevant, specialist areas.

By creating a deeper understanding of young people’s journeys through life, the Nuffield Foundation aims to improve the systems that affect them. The insights generated by Grown up? will guide future research, grant funding and policy development.

Central to Grown up? is ensuring that young people’s voices shape the research.

Public right to justice

‘ Where has my justice gone? ’. The event

vividly surfaced many of the challenges facing the workings of the justice system, focusing particularly on the negative impacts on those encountering that system. The multiple strains on the system are raising questions about its effectiveness, causing public confidence to diminish, and prompting growing calls for change.

In recognition of the challenges facing the justice system, we have set up a new programme, Public right to justice (PRTJ). It will inform and provoke thinking on the future of the system in England and Wales, explore how it could work better, and establish a robust case for reform. As with our wider work on Justice, we are interested in all aspects and stages of the administration of justice, and how people resolve their legal problems more widely. Our priorities here are the administrative, civil, family and youth justice systems – parts of the system that can often get overlooked in public debates about the state of justice.

The first phase of PRTJ will focus on gathering evidence to shine further light on some of these critical challenges and to inform priorities for focus in the rest of the programme. The work will include several specially commissioned evidence reviews on a range of key issues, along with a collection of scene-setting essays from expert authors with diverse backgrounds and experiences, exploring the theme Why justice matters from different perspectives These materials, together with some planned stakeholder engagement, will inform a Phase one final report in 2026.

The programme will develop further our longstanding belief in the salience of the justice system to everyday social and economic life, and the important role that research can play in supporting and improving that system. The catalyst for the programme was a Nuffield Foundation conference held in Spring 2024, entitled

The project is being led by our Justice team with expert input from colleagues at the Nuffield FJO and the Ada Lovelace Institute.

A specially commissioned Youth Insight Group and deep-dive workshops with young people across the country are capturing shared and common experiences of this generation, as well as unpacking differences and inequalities by group and by place.

46

47

Strategic goal three

Strategic goal three

Other projects

Early childhood

We remain engaged with policymakers on our Changing face of early childhood series, which continues to have salience alongside the major portfolio of research we fund on the early years. In June we brought together a range of academics, experts and officials from the Department for Education to consider how evidence and practice can be used to embed and enable a longer-term holistic approach to early childhood over the next 10 years.

Through our response to Sir David Bell’s review into the early years, we stressed the importance of integrated services, making the case for inter-agency working that links childcare to other services which can support children’s development, including outreach initiatives, evidence-based interventions and programs that work with parents and children. Research we funded by the IFS made clear the longer-term benefits of Sure Start for children and young people’s health and educational outcomes in later childhood and adolescence.

We have contributed to the growing awareness of the damaging effects of experiencing poverty in early childhood, particularly on children’s long-term well-being and opportunities. Carey Oppenheim, who led the Changing face of early childhood review, is a member of the Child Poverty Strategy Analytical Expert Reference Group, which advises on and scrutinises the Government’s Child Poverty Strategy.

Ofsted

We responded to the major Big Listen consultation, which sought views on Ofsted’s work, from schools and children’s social care to teacher training and early years, with

a particular focus on disadvantaged children. We submitted a cross-Foundation response which incorporated relevant grants, as well as our own synthesis work on early childhood and the work of the Nuffield FJO.

In April we brought together high-level officials from Ofsted, the Department for Education and our grant-holders, to discuss the evidence base on Ofsted’s role as a regulator, the importance of school improvement, the accountability framework and alternative judgement processes, with consideration of the effects that any changes would have on interventions.

Curriculum development

In March we responded to the consultation on the Conservative government’s proposals for an Advanced British Standard, a new 16–19 qualification combining aspects of A levels and T levels into a single qualification. In November we provided written evidence to the Curriculum and Assessment Review, led by Professor Becky Francis CBE. The review is examining the existing national curriculum and statutory assessment system in England, to ensure they are fit for purpose and meeting the needs of children and young people. We drew on 32 Nuffield-funded projects to inform our response.

School absence event

In July 2024, we hosted an event to address the challenges posed by school absences, closures and learning loss on young people. The event had a total of 150 attendees across in person and online audiences, including researchers, policymakers, sector leaders and education practitioners.

Delegates heard findings from a number of Nuffield-funded research projects on how missed school is affecting young people, the implications for social mobility and the solutions that are most likely to be effective. An expert panel emphasised the need for

to provide capacity-building opportunities for skills development, to grow connections with peers, and to nurture future research talent. Across 2024 we’ve engaged the network via newsletters, social media, and targeted resources and training that focused on working with policymakers and Parliament, and reaching non-academic audiences.

both targeted attendance interventions and broader strategies to address systemic issues, such as school inclusion, family support and home–school relationships. Discussions also explored how learning loss impacts long-term educational outcomes and contributes to inequalities.

The event highlighted the importance of evidence-based policies to reduce disparities and support the recovery of the education system. The event identified potential areas for further research to support policy and practice aimed at improving attendance.

We ended 2024 with a second event that brought network members together to consider how to achieve research impact in a changing context. Dr Rajnaara Akhtar, Associate Professor at the University of Warwick, and Dr Arun Advani, Director of the Centre for Analysis of Taxation, shared insights on achieving impact with research, emphasising the importance of ongoing conversations with key policymakers and maintaining a long-term dialogue that extends beyond the finish date of a project.

Early career researchers

Following its launch event in the autumn of 2023, we have continued to build the Nuffield Foundation Emerging Researchers Network, with 335 early career researchers (ECRs) on the email mailing list. The Network was instigated to support early career researchers (ECRs) working on Nuffield-funded projects. Its purpose is

Susannah Bowyer at Research in Practice, and Alaster Smith, Head of Research Evidence and Engagement at the Department for Education, joined a panel discussion. Workshops explored building

48

49

Strategic goal three

Strategic goal three

partnerships with the third sector, how to ensure research is heard in Parliament, and writing for non-academic audiences. The feedback on the event was very positive, and the opportunity to meet in person was welcomed.

We are really pleased to have three ambassadors working with us to build the network in 2025. They are Dr Cristina Sechel and Emily Hancock from The University of Sheffield, and Dr Fiona Long from Cardiff University. They will ensure that the network’s activities are effectively tailored to meet members’ needs.

Digital and media profile and opportunities

The Foundation’s communications activities aim to expand our influence and impact, increase awareness of our in-house research work and grant funding opportunities, and support grant-holders to enhance the reach and visibility of their Nuffield-funded projects.

In 2024 we had 133,525 visits to our website. Core web pages like the homepage and funding section continued to attract stable traffic, indicating a healthy performance. Additionally, the average number of pages visited per user has increased by an impressive 65%, reflecting heightened interest in deeper exploration of our site.

We appointed digital agency William Joseph to help us deliver a series of website optimisations to resolve user challenges and align our website with our new strategy. The strategy will provide a framework to guide further website development to reflect the growth of the organisation, improve the

site’s structure and align it more closely with organisational goals.

We also increased newsletter subscribers 17% to 8,211, and followers on LinkedIn by 36% to 5,598. Top performing posts in terms of impressions and engagement on LinkedIn in 2024 included:

• The announcement of a Strategic Fund grant to Professor Ruth Patrick at the University of York for Social security in a devolved UK - the first comprehensive study of its kind.

• A blog post by Emily Tanner on our Nuffield at 80 ‘ Place and opportunity ’ webinar, which looked at how place was a determinant of economic growth and productivity.

We were mentioned in the media 4,686 times in 2024 and comments from our spokespeople featured more than 1,686 times, an increase of 33% and 32% respectively. A range of projects attracted significant media interest throughout the year, reflecting the broad scope of the work we fund. Highlights across the year included:

• In January, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) published their annual review of education spending which was reported on by PA News and syndicated across 200 outlets. The IFS review also reported in Tes and About Manchester where a quote from Josh Hillman featured. Catherine Dennison’s quote about the Holding on to home project was included in an article by The Big Issue.

Fiscal Studies (IFS) released Constraints and trade-offs for the next government , which within the first week of publication had more than 850 media mentions. Findings were leading news stories on the BBC online and The Guardian and an article including mention of Nuffield funding and a quote from Mark Franks was also syndicated 265 times, appearing in the Independent and Daily Mail.

• In February there was considerable interest in the General Election Analysis and Briefing Fund report from London Economics about higher education fees. It was reported on by the Financial Times, The Telegraph and Times Higher Education. An article on Long-term outcomes for care-experienced parents and children was also syndicated more than 250 times, including in the Independent, featuring a quote from Ash Patel. Teaching improvement through data and evaluation (TIDE), a 2024 strategic grant, was reported on in an exclusive with Tes.

• In May, after the election announcement, findings from the Economy 2030 Inquiry report were included in a Reuters article. This was syndicated on several small national and international news sites. With the election campaign in full swing in June, the IFS published their analysis of the education challenges facing the next government. This was reported on by the Independent and The Telegraph, and a later report on higher education finances was picked up by the Guardian, all featuring quotes from Josh Hillman. The Independent also covered the Education Policy Institute’s report on priorities for the election with a quote from Josh Hillman.

Foundation’s Mark Franks was quoted in the Independent, the Telegraph and on ITV’s Good Morning Britain. General election publications by the Resolution Foundation were reported on by the Independent, London Evening Standard, BBC and The Telegraph.

• In July, Emily Tanner wrote an exclusive for FE News with evidence-based insights to support the new government’s skills agenda. Ruth Patrick’s Benefit changes and larger families project received significant press coverage from July to September. Highlights include an analysis piece in The Times, an opinion piece in the Guardian and participant quotes on Radio 4 news.

50

51

Strategic goal three

Strategic goal four

• Permanently progressing? Building secure futures for children: Phase 2 middle childhood , led by Dr Helen Whincup of the University of Stirling, earned significant media coverage in Scotland in September, including articles by BBC Scotland and The Herald. The announcement of a new grant, Exploring school–college partnerships for 14–18 learners in Scotland , was also reported on by Tes. Another article was published in Tes on findings from the COVID-19 and the impact of school closure project, following their attendance at our school absence event.

• In October, the IFS Green Budget received national and international media coverage in the run-up to the government’s budget statement. This article in the Independent was syndicated 255 times across local news. Oxford University’s project Evaluating the outsourcing of social care in England was reported on in the Observer, and findings discussed in an opinion piece and a letter in the Guardian. A report from IFS’s Evaluating the short- and mediumterm impacts of Sure Start was reported in the Sunday Mirror and several opinion pieces referenced the research, including the Guardian and the Yorkshire Post. An article about the Understanding the takeup of early education entitlements project was reported on by the Independent and syndicated across local news 256 times.

proposed impact of inheritance tax on farmers in The Telegraph featured Arun Advani’s research.

Public affairs

The public affairs team works across the Nuffield Foundation, making connections with grant-holders, the Ada Lovelace Institute, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics and the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory. Many of the impact stories in this report are the result of our engagement and influencing strategies. We promote the work of the Nuffield Foundation by engaging with government departments, parliamentarians, public bodies and the third sector. The public affairs team also advises grant-holders directly. We bring together those we fund to respond and engage directly with policy development through meetings and policy workshops, and write responses to government consultations, select committee inquiries and parliamentary debates.

Strategic goal four – opportunities for young people

Our student programmes are direct interventions to create opportunities for young people to develop the quantitative literacy and critical thinking necessary to be engaged citizens in modern Britain.

There are now two options offered: a two-week Research Placement (RP) or five-day Experience Placement (EP). RPs are collaborations with a STEM-related knowledge expert on a live research question or area of development. While producing a scientific or technical report and poster, the students benefit from the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the host organisation’s current work. The EPs are explorations with industry experts to identify essential skills needed for employment in STEM sectors. While producing a workbook and reflective report, students gain insight into working in professional environments, as well as knowledge of the challenges for different sectors, in turn preparing them for employment.

Research Placements and Experiences

For more than 26 years, Research Placements and Experiences (RPE, formerly Nuffield Research Placements) have supported students from the UK to develop a wide range of skills through engaging, real-world placements.

The programme continues to provide opportunities for year 12 (or equivalent) students from disadvantaged backgrounds to take part in authentic and meaningful science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) and STEM-related projects. Students can develop a range of personal, research and data skills during their placement.

Evaluation of the 2023/24 placements was positive:

The programme is funded by the Nuffield Foundation, but from October 2020 it has been delivered by STEM Learning, the UK’s leading provider of STEM education and careers support.

52

53

Strategic goal four

Strategic goal four

Nuffield Foundation Fellowship at POST UK

to future students, teachers and parents/ carers, and 95% and 100% of providers would recommend RP and EP placements, respectively, to others.

We offer PhD students, in their final or penultimate year of studying within a scientific, natural or social science field at a UK university, the opportunity to undertake a three-month fellowship at the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST).

POST Fellows benefit from the Foundation’s expertise throughout the three months. Staff share their networks and make connections to other experts, and Fellows have access to our wide array of public outputs and historic research. Fellows are also given the opportunity to present to an engaged audience at the Foundation’s offices.

“The people I met were amazing and intelligent people who were willing to share their knowledge and expertise with me. I was able to develop coding skills I wouldn’t have considered gaining otherwise. I produced something that will be of use to my supervisors, something that will be of significance and importance.” Feedback from RPE student

Four Fellows published their work in 2024. Hannah Romanowski wrote about digital disengagement and impacts on exclusion, and conducted horizon scanning on extremism and hate crime. Xavier McNally explored the policy implications of housing insecurity in the private rented sector in England, and did a horizon scan on UK foreign policy in a changing world. Emma Cary researched children’s well-being in schools. Hannah Gardiner examined the opportunity and delivery considerations of AI and mental healthcare, and separately the ethical and regulatory considerations.

Vedang Narain is working on his Fellowship on the health opportunities and challenges of wearable technologies, with one other Fellow due to start in 2025.

54

55

Grants awarded in 2024

Grants awarded in 2024

Grants awarded in 2024

Principal Investigator Project Name Value (£) Term
and Institution (months)
New Education projects funded in 2024
Christine O’Farrelly, Implementing efective 447,865 24
University of Cambridge early education
interventions at scale
Lynn Ang, Examining the challenges 370,244 22
University College London and benefts of
childminding in England
Loic Menzies, Accountability and 367,216 20
Education Policy Institute curriculum international
review and CES exemplar
Ludovica Gazze, Clear skies, clear 319,100 36
University of Warwick minds: Air quality and
children’s welfare
Clara Joergensen, Pupil School Mobility – 311,468 29
University of Birmingham types, pathways and
implications for education
Matt Walker, The uneven distribution 301,095 17
National Foundation for of pupils with SEND in
Educational Research mainstream schools
(NFER)
Emily Jones, Employer investment in 299,436 25
Learning and Work Institute upskilling and reskilling
in a changing economy
Anne Green, Youth transitions to 280,385 24
University of Birmingham good employment:
East Birmingham &
North Solihull
Mona Sakr, Achieving high-quality 278,089 26
Middlesex University provision in the baby room
of English nurseries
Chris Wellings, The evaluation of Thrive 249,482 36
Thrive at Five at Five’s sites in Stoke
and Redcar
Ozan Aksoy, Evaluating the 224,529 36
UCL Institute of Education Fundamental British
Values initiative of the DfE
Principal Investigator Project Name Value (£) Term
and Institution (months)
Stephanie Thomson, Exploring school–college 203,750 24
University of Aberdeen partnerships for 14–18
learners in Scotland.
Susana Castro-Kemp, An international analysis 203,293 24
University College London of SEND policy and
practice: ScopeSEND
Beth Bell, Improving well-being– 199,216 20
University of York focused online media
literacy in schools
Sandra Mathers, Assessing and improving 183,922 24
University of Oxford language-supporting
practice in the early years
Sam Tuckett, Beyond teacher assessed 177,647 16
Education Policy Institute grades: Post-16 education
choices and COVID-19
Marion Heron, Educational dialogue for 167,664 16
University of Surrey improving Foundation
Year student outcomes
Dave Thomson, Out of sight: Exclusions, 116,908 31
FFT Education Datalab alternative provision and
later life outcomes
Birgitta Rabe, Impact of school 69,091 15
Universityof Essex breakfastprogrammes
Sonia Ilie, Choices, chances, 52,620 18
University of Cambridge and transitions around
creative further and
higher education
Funding for two projects, 75,103
each less than £50,000
Additional funding for Education projects funded in previous years
Additional funding for 51,209
three projects, each less
than £50,000
Total Education grants 4,949,332
New Justice projects funded in 2024
Linda Cusworth, ‘The forgotten 10%’: 382,174 24
Lancaster University Private family law cases
involving non-parents

56

57

Grants awarded in 2024

Grants awarded in 2024

Principal Investigator Project Name Value (£) Term
and Institution (months)
Chris Gill, Understanding and 332,369 21
University of Glasgow developing user-focused
tribunal hearings
Linda Mulcahy, Developing a mixed 295,449 24
University of Oxford funding model for free
legal advice
Nina Vaswani, Challenging justice 285,989 27
University of Strathclyde inequalities with children
in confict with the law
Helen Hodges, Understanding the 177,868 28
Swansea University circumstances of
children involved in
breach proceedings
Renee Luthra, Immigrant families in the 171,899 24
University of Essex family justice system
Robert Thomas, SEND complaints and the 108,046 18
University of Manchester Local Government and
Social Care Ombudsman
Jean-Pierre Gauci, Immigration detention and 95,859 12
British Institute of the rule of law
International and
Comparative Law
Funding for three projects 72,433
less than £50,000

Additional funding for Justice projects funded in previous years

Samantha Parsons, Long-term outcomes for 51,235 53
University College London care-experienced parents
and children: Evidence of
risk and resilience from
two British cohort studies
Additional funding for 89,675
fve projects, each less
than £50,000
Total Justice grants 2,062,996
New Welfare projects funded in 2024
Anders Bach-Mortensen, Evaluating the outsourcing 349,154 30
University of Oxford of social care in England
Principal Investigator Project Name Value (£) Term
and Institution (months)
Susan Harkness, Family change, wellbeing 340,107 36
University of Bristol and social policy
Chris Morris, Full Fact: Evidence-based 308,366 36
Full Fact responses to
harmful misinformation
Gabriella Conti, All women are born (un) 295,386 24
University College London equal: Menopause, HRT
and women’s well-being
Malte Jansen, Distributional impacts 273,656 19
University of Sussex of net zero on
electricity consumers
Max Ghenis, Enhancing, localising and 251,296 12
PolicyEngine democratising tax-beneft
policy analysis
Aiman El Asam, A Digital Lives’ Framework 232,162 30
Kingston University for counsellors
and psychotherapists
Su-Min Lee, Impact of the cost 160,000 15
London Economics of childcare on
parental mobility
Neave O’Clery, Food banks as hubs 151,141 18
University College London in the crisis ecosystem
Laura Fumagalli, Roots of problem debt 149,350 36
University of Essex and policies to mitigate
its consequences
Vivien Burrows, Tackling the information 140,117 18
International Longevity gap in retirement
Centre UK saving decisions
Tim Pike, How can low earners 132,811 18
Pensions Policy Institute aford a commensurate
retirement income?
Nanya Coles, Safety routes: Enhancing 64,874 12
SafeLives domestic abuse referrals to
make victims safer, sooner
Additional funding for Welfare projects funded in previous years
Anna Taylor, Changing the story 99,511 50
The Food Foundation of dietary inequality

58

59

Grants awarded in 2024

Future plans

Principal Investigator Project Name Value (£) Term
and Institution (months)
Simeon Yates, Developing a Minimum 99,203 46
University of Liverpool Digital Living Standard for
households with children
Caroline Oliver, Afghan resettlement 79,026 24
University College London in England: Outcomes
and experiences
Steve Nowottny, Full Fact: Evidence-based 73,462 39
Full Fact responses to
harmful misinformation
Additional funding for two 27,185
projects, each less than £50k
Total Welfare grants 3,226,807
Other grants
Funding for four projects, 28,000
each less than £50,000
Total other grants 28,000
New Strategic Fund projects funded in 2024
Imran Rasul, Transforming justice: The 2,503,751 48
Institute for Fiscal Studies interplay of social change
and policy reforms
Ruth Patrick, Social security in 1,579,679 42
University of York a devolved UK: Realities,
risks and opportunities
for families
Andrew Clegg, The Wellbeing in 892,518 46
Bradford Teaching Later Life in Bradford
Hospitals NHS (WeLL-Bradford) Study
Foundation Trust
Additional funding for Strategic Fund projects funded in previous years
Christopher Pissarides, The Pissarides Review 79,432 44
Institute for the Future into the future of work
of Work and wellbeing
Total Strategic Fund grants 5,055,380

Additional General Election Analysis and Briefing Fund projects funded in 2024

Additional funding for three 34,750
grants each under £50,000

Future plans

Nuffield Foundation

In 2025 we will set out strategic priorities for the whole Foundation, taking account of the thinking, convening, research and other work set out in this report that has helped us to shape our approach.

We will also publish outputs from some of our new programmes of work:

AI in UK education

The Nuffield Foundation and the Ada Lovelace Institute (Ada) are collaborating on a project to inform conversations around the use of AI in UK education. This initiative is part of a new approach to joint working between our centres and grants teams that allows us to combine our expertise.

In early 2025, this work produced a landscape review, A learning curve? , which drew on existing and emerging evidence to highlight the opportunities and challenges posed by AI in our classrooms.

A learning curve? presents several key findings on the opportunities and barriers, the pedagogical evidence base, social impact, regulation and governance, and support for procurement. It provides greater clarity on the role of AI in education, supports policymakers and education experts to navigate issues, and highlights priority areas for further research.

Given the significance of the impact that AI is set to have on education, the Nuffield Foundation and Ada are continuing to collaborate on work that adds to the evidence base.

The next stages of this project will be deep dives into three areas:

Project outputs will also help shape grant funding calls for further research.

Synthesis projects, strategic grants and new funds

The Foundation’s in-house research projects, Public right to justice and Grown up? Journeys to adulthood , will start releasing their outputs in 2025. Both projects will also continue into 2026.

The keynote essays on Why justice matters will be published, followed by the commissioning and then the findings of the series of evidence reviews.

A series of publications that stimulate the debate on young people’s journey through adolescence will be produced as part of Grown up? There will also be findings from the Youth Insight Group and deep-dive workshops with young people.

In the coming two years, both projects will begin developing inputs into policy and practice, sharing key learnings and influencing decision makers.

Our Strategic Fund drives meaningful change in policy or practice by supporting researchers to tackle big, original and ambitious ideas. Grants of between £750,000 and £3 million enable multi-year, cross-disciplinary work that spans institutions. In 2025 we will re-open applications to the Strategic Fund for projects that will address some of the biggest challenges facing society, and which will align with our new strategic priorities.

The second and final volume of the IFS Deaton review of inequalities is set to be published and launched in 2025. Drawing on the work of the hundreds of scholars who contributed to the review, the book will

60

61

Future plans

Future plans

examine the moral relevance of inequalities as well as the importance of early life experiences and education. It will consider the implications of earnings inequalities and economic stagnation on the importance of wealth and social mobility, and their intersection with inequalities in health and political power. The book will conclude with lessons and principles for how policymakers should think about and address inequalities.

We have funded a growing portfolio of research in post-16 education and skills, which we will continue to engage with policymakers on into 2025. In March we are bringing together researchers and policymakers from across the four UK nations to consider how we can improve meaningful participation in post-16 education and training. In the autumn, The skills imperative 2035 will draw to its conclusion, providing recommendations for policymakers, employers, educators and other stakeholders on how young people can be supported to develop the essential skills the future workforce needs. In the interim, there will be specific reports on understanding the factors that affect skills development through childhood, international variation in skills development and outcomes, and the significance of educational pathways and employment history for skills development.

The Children’s information project,

with Professor Leon Feinstein leading a consortium of universities and local authority partners, enters a two-year impact activity phase. 2025 will see the release of a major report to share advice, insight and learning from the project to date, for both national policy and local practice audiences in children’s services, as well as the full evaluation of the local site pilots exploring different ways of developing information use. A series of events throughout the year will support stakeholder engagement efforts through targeted convening and output dissemination.

In 2024 we awarded a £2.5 million Strategic

Fund grant to a team from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Oxford and York universities, led by Professor Imran Rasul. The project, Transforming justice: The interplay of social change and policy reforms , is a programme of interlinking economic and quantitative analysis studies, examining the implications of the past decade’s justice system reforms in England and Wales on outcomes, performance and experiences, and how demands on the justice system have changed. The research fully gets into its stride in 2025 with a wide range of individual projects planned that will address various aspects of the justice system’s performance and the demands on it. These will include work on different features of offending by children, public perceptions of justice, and the impacts on case outcomes of court closures and legal representation.

Professor Rasul was appointed President-Elect of The Royal Economic Society (RES) for 2024/25. In 2025, we will partner with the RES on its annual conference in Birmingham, and host its prestigious summit event at our offices later in the year.

Teaching improvement through data evaluation, led by the National Institute of Teaching , will develop a measure of teaching quality, and start to identify the characteristics and practices of high-quality teachers and schools, with a longer-term view of improving outcomes for pupils by improving teacher development practices.

Professor Ruth Patrick at the University of York is leading Social security in a devolved UK. The research is focused on evidencing the differences in the design, delivery and implementation of social security at the devolved level and its impact on families, with regular policy briefings planned and state of the nation policy reports for governments in Holyrood, the Senedd, Stormont and Westminster, as well as for devolved regions and local authorities.

Racial Diversity UK Fund

The Foundation’s new Racial Diversity UK (RDUK) grants programme launched in June 2024. Drawing on funding from the ‘Commonwealth Relations Trust’, RDUK look to the future of a racially diverse UK as shaped by its colonial past, and marked by the 1948 British Nationality Act and arrival of the Empire Windrush.

Headed up by Liz Gilfillan, who joined the Foundation in April 2024, RDUK aims to explore how patterns of racial diversity and disparity are developing and shaping the UK, and helps to map pathways to a racially just and inclusive society.

A large number of outline applications across a wide range of topics were received for the fund in October, demonstrating the interest, relevance and potentially important contribution of the RDUK programme towards achieving racial justice and understanding the effects and potential of the UK’s changing diversity.

In the same year, the RDUK Steering Group was established comprising three Nuffield Foundation trustees (Ash Amin, Ann Phoenix and Brian Bell) and three external experts (John Solomos, Deborah Cadman, Raj Patel).

The Steering Group will meet regularly each year to further develop the vision and ambitions of the RDUK programme and steer the programme to achieve these.

We expect the first RDUK-funded research projects to get started by summer 2025, and we will be publishing information about the focus and expected impacts of these projects later in the year, along with updates about the programme’s vision, ambition, scope and priorities as these evolve The second outline application round for the programme will be in Autumn 2025.

Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan

We will continue to use our learning from the RDUK programme and our engagement with researchers in the racial diversity field to develop and deliver our Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Action Plan, and to consider how racial inequality issues are addressed in other areas of our work. Work on this includes ensuring that learning from RDUK is embedded in our five-year EDI Action Plan; building RDUK learning into the EDI staff seminars, which will continue their 2024 focus on race inequality into 2025; and joining up RDUK’s outreach and engagement work with the race-focused activity supported by Hello Brave, who are continuing to support us in creating strong, equitable relationships with Black researchers across the UK.

Genomics, neuroscience and education

A focus area in 2025 is a collaboration between the Nuffield Foundation and the Nuffield Council on Bioethics on developments in genomics in education, resulting in a scientific scoping report, an ethics deep-dive workshop, and published outcomes from the workshop.

The project is an example of the Foundation and one of its centres combining their expertise on a topical issue affecting society, with findings from this work providing a base for further exploration of the ethical and policy implications of applying genomic insights to education, while also identifying research gaps.

New Podcast Series for 2025

We are collaborating with the Academy of Social Sciences (AcSS) on its podcast series, the We society .

Hosted by AcSS president, journalist and author Will Hutton, the podcast features conversations with expert guests and public figures, exploring timely topics and society’s big challenges through a social science lens.

62

63

Future plans

Future plans

With podcasts increasing in popularity, it gives us and our centres a great opportunity to reach new audiences, share our in-house expertise, and raise the profile of the work we do – as well as those we fund and partner with – via an increasingly influential form of communication. The Leverhulme Trust is also part of the collaboration with the AcSS.

The We society has more than 300,000 all-time listens and is available on podcast platforms including Apple and Spotify. The first episodes featuring us will be broadcast in May–July 2025. Two other series will follow in the autumn and early 2026.

Developing our people and organisation

Our focus for 2025 is ensuring we are prepared to deliver on our new strategic priorities.

Building on our engagement survey (carried out in early 2024), as part of our strategic planning project, we focused on refreshing our overarching values to provide a consistent and unifying framework for our work, and one which will support our future ambitions. These values will be published in 2025, and we will be focusing on how these can be embedded in and reflected in the way that we work.

As referenced elsewhere in this report, 2025 will see us launching our new EDI Action Plan, continuing to look at initiatives that diversify our workforce and ensuring that inclusion is reflected in all aspects of our work. Related to this, we continue to look at opportunities to create opportunities for those earlier in their careers (or changing careers) and will continue to provide paid internships and apprenticeships.

Our learning and development programme will also support our EDI work and the embedding of our values, through further staff training that supports inclusion in our day-to-day work, including a focus on inclusive leadership. We will also use a re-launched system of personal reviews

and objective setting to develop a culture of continuous feedback and development.

With a new Chief Executive, and forthcoming new strategic priorities, the second part of the year will see us focusing on ensuring that our resourcing model will enable us to meet our future needs.

In line with good practice, we will also conduct a Board Effectiveness review this year to ensure our Trustee board is working as effectively as possible.

Fellowships at POST

We continue to offer PhD students – in their final or penultimate year of studying within a scientific, natural or social science field at a UK university – the opportunity to undertake a three-month fellowship at the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST).

At the end of 2024, we awarded seven new placements, the highest number yet, and these Fellows will start their Fellowships in 2025/2026. The amount of the Fellowship award has been increased from £7,000 to £8,000.

Nuffield Council on Bioethics

Having launched its new strategy at the beginning of 2024, in 2025 the Nuffield Council on Bioethics (NCOB) will continue its work to embed ethics in policymaking and deliver the high-quality research it is known for.

The first report in 2025 is from the environment and health priority area and demonstrates the value of embedding ethics into decision-making to support policymakers in the UK to implement effective and fair climate measures. Later in 2025 the NCOB will publish case studies which illustrate how decision makers can approach ‘trade-offs’ in this area of policy.

In the reproduction, parenthood and families priority area, the NCOB will embark on a major new project to deliver a comprehensive review of the 14-day rule for embryo research to inform future policy in this area. This innovative piece of work will draw on the NCOB’s research, futures and engagement expertise to combine and analyse views of international scientists, policymakers and the UK public.

In horizon-scanning, the NCOB will build on 2024’s groundwork to develop and refine a range of tools and approaches for policymakers to implement into foresight processes. This includes developing a rapid ethical assessment tool as part of an international collaboration led by the University of Birmingham exploring ‘ethical expertise in times of crisis’.

Publishing final reports from its work on assisted dying, and a report on the ethics and regulation of neural organoids, are among other planned outputs of 2025.

Finally, the NCOB plans to develop its international approach in the year ahead, aiming to strengthen the voice of bioethics in policy and public debate on the global stage.

Nuffield Family Justice Observatory In 2025 a significant focus will be on:

Ada Lovelace Institute

Having welcomed the new Director Gaia Marcus in the summer of 2024, Ada spent the latter half of the year speaking to the team, board and wider stakeholders about where it is best to put its energies and focus for the next few years. Looking ahead to 2025, Ada’s independence feels even more vital than ever, allowing Ada to stand as an ‘honest broker’ or bridge – adding value to ongoing discussions, undertaking research without capture from vested interests in the private or public sectors, and continuing to work on mechanisms for rebalancing power.

The lack of a positive democratic vision for data and AI technologies in society is ever more pressing. These technologies are not value-neutral: the way they are designed and implemented matters and has profound ripple effects on people and institutions. Despite this, there is a ‘vision gap’ where AI technologies are being developed and deployed without democratic input or a clear sense of what kind of society we are seeking to build.

Ada will continue its work with different publics to understand the issues that crop up when technology intersects with various aspects of their lives. It will also ask what interventions in regulation, policy or practice are needed to make sure technologies align with the public’s idea of what ‘good’ looks like.

Ada will also drive work that asks how and if AI tools are working for us all, evaluating and documenting the real-world impacts of AI and data-driven technologies on communities and society. As new

64

65

Equity, diversity and inclusion

Equity, diversity and inclusion

technologies and use cases gain prominence, Ada will look to interrogate their use and impact – for example, in their forthcoming research on AI assistants, liability and AI agents.

With an expected acceleration of calls to roll out AI across the public sector, Ada will double down on bringing calm, curiosity and evidence to the table. Their research will look to identify conditions for success and how to best balance the needs of users, professionals, services and society in decisions about the use of AI and other data-driven technologies in public services. Ada is keen to engage with different publics and workers to critically examine the values embedded in AI implementation and understand what kinds of uses of AI are effective, seen as publicly legitimate and achieve positive outcomes.

And finally, Ada will build on its work on public compute and AI industrial policy. The institute will aim to uncover how current concentrations of power are impacting people and society, and support the development of credible policy and market levers for rebalancing power, distributing benefits and protecting those hit the hardest.

Equity, diversity and inclusion

Embedding equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) into all aspects of our work is a key priority, aligns with our values and is central to our purpose of advancing well-being and improving people’s lives. Understanding the systemic inequalities, disadvantages, discrimination and vulnerabilities that people face, how they intersect and what should be done about them is a core focus of the work that we fund and do. Our focus is on EDI in the substance of our work, funding

a more diverse range of grant-holders and diversifying our workforce and embedding an inclusive culture.

As part of the development of our new strategic approach, we decided to provide a much more comprehensive and specific account of our EDI work and develop an EDI Action Plan, to help focus our work over the next five years. This was developed through reviewing the progress we have made on EDI to date, examining the data we hold and engaging with our staff to understand what progress on EDI for the Foundation should look like. This plan will be published in 2025 and progress regularly reported on.

In support of our EDI work, we monitor the diversity of our staff and job applicants so that we can understand where we need to take further steps to ensure we are an inclusive employer. Table 1 presents data on four protected characteristics for Nuffield Foundation employees as of 31 December 2024. The proportion of staff from ethnic minority backgrounds has remained stable (19.8% in December 2024, 20.0% in December 2023). There has been a small increase in the number of staff declaring a disability, which has increased from 10.5% in 2023 to 11.5% as of December 2024. The EDI Action Plan incorporates actions and initiatives that might address areas of under-representation within our workforce.

We continue to ask those people holding governance roles in the Foundation to provide their diversity monitoring information. 75% of our Trustees have provided this information. Of those disclosing, 57% are male and 43% are female, 71% are White and 29% are from other ethnic backgrounds. Incorporating members of our wider governance bodies (the Trustees, our committees, and the members of the Governing Boards for the Ada Lovelace Institute, the NCOB and the Nuffield FJO), 58% have disclosed this information. From those disclosing, 52% of members are female and 48% are male, 82% of members are White with 18% from other ethnic

backgrounds, and 7% have disclosed a disability.

During 2024 we hosted three interns as part of the 10,000 Interns Foundation’s scheme, which provides paid placements for Black and disabled students and graduates, and we will offer further placements again in the summer of 2025. We also host two apprentices, and we will continue to identify other opportunities that support young people (or returners) into work. Finally, we continue to use accreditation schemes to provide a framework for our employment activities and remain signed up to the RNIB’s Visibly Better standard, the Age-Friendly Employer pledge, and we are a Disability Confident Level 2 employer.

Since 2021 we have introduced voluntary diversity and inclusion monitoring of applicants, and grant-holders and their teams, to find out more about the people who apply for – and are awarded – funding. Tables 2 and 3 present data on four protected characteristics for Principal Investigators and Co-Investigators named in applications and those who were grant-holders in 2024, comparing these against the same in 2021, 2022 and 2023.

Overall, as can be seen in Table 2 and 3, trends across different protected characteristics have remained mostly stable across both applicants and grant-holders since 2021. It should be noted that there is some early tentative evidence that we are attracting a more diverse range of applicants in terms of ethnicity (with the proportion of Principal Investigator applicants identifying as not White rising from 10% to 19% between 2021 and 2024), although there is not yet clear evidence of this feeding through to a higher proportion of grants being held by non-White individuals.

Table 1:
Our staf as of 31 December 2024 (%)
Age
29 or under 20.8
30–39 34.4
40–49 24
50–59 16.7
60+ 4.1
Prefer not to say 0
Ethnicity
Asian or Asian 7.3
British
Black or Black 5.2
British
Mixed 4.2
Other ethnic group 3.1
White
Prefer not to say		 73.9
6.3
Disability
No
Yes		 80.2
11.5
Prefer not to say 8.3
Gender
Female 72
Male 26
Use another term 2
Prefer not to say 0

66

67

Equity, diversity and inclusion

Equity, diversity and inclusion

Table 2: Applicant protected characteristics

Principal Investigator Principal Investigator Principal Investigator Co-Investigator Co-Investigator Co-Investigator
2024 (%; 2023 (%; 2022 (%; 2021 (%; 2024 (%; 2023 (%; 2022 (%; 2021(%;
n=426) n=509*) n=446) n=130) n=698 n=839) n=742) n=177
Age
29 or under 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 0
30–39 22 25 28 31 26 25 24 24
40–49 38 36 40 38 36 37 35 36
50–59 26 27 21 19 22 24 28 30
60+ 10 9 7 8 11 9 9 8
Prefer not 2 1 1 0 2 2 2 2
to say
Ethnicity
Asian or
Asian British		 6 6 9 5 9 9 6 5
Black or
Black British		 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 0
Mixed 6 4 3 2 4 2 3 2
Other ethnic 4 3 2 2 5 4 2 2
group
White 80 83 84 88 78 81 86 90
Prefer not to 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 1
say
Disability
No 75 78 83 85 79 80 80 83
Yes 20 19 12 10 16 14 17 15
Prefer not 4 3 5 5 5 6 3 2
to say
Gender
Female 67 63 62 55 60 59 58 53
Male 31 35 35 42 37 38 40 46
I use another 0 0 2 2 1 0 1 1
term
Prefer not 2 2 1 1 3 3 1 1
to say

Table 3: Grant-holder protected characteristics

Principal Investigator Principal Investigator Principal Investigator Co-Investigator Co-Investigator Co-Investigator
2024 (%; 2023 (%; 2022 (%; 2021 (%; 2024 (%; 2023 (%; 2022 (%; 2021 (%;
n=147) n=74) n=100) n=107) n=255) n=143) n=186) n=191)
Age
29 or under 2 1 0 1 4 4 4 5
30–39 26 26 21 21 21 22 18 16
40–49 42 31 33 32 36 37 40 42
50–59 22 27 30 29 29 22 23 23
60+ 8 14 15 17 8 13 12 12
Prefer not 0 1 1 1 2 2 3 3
to say
Ethnicity
Asian or
Asian British		 5 3 3 4 2 1 2 2
Black or
Black British		 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
Mixed 2 5 4 4 3 1 1 1
Other ethnic 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
group
White 86 83 86 86 93 96 94 95
Prefer not to 3 8 5 5 0 1 2 2
say
Disability
No 81 85 86 87 82 81 80 81
Yes 16 14 14 13 13 15 16 15
Prefer not to 3 1 0 0 4 4 5 5
say
Gender
Female 58 60 61 62 56 58 60 61
Male 39 38 37 36 42 41 38 37
I use another 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 2
term
Prefer not 2 1 1 1 0 1 2 0
to say

68

69

Financial review

Financial review

Financial Review

2024 is the second year of our current seven-year financial framework, which sees an increase in our charitable spending to achieve our strategic goals.

Our two key financial metrics are annual charitable expenditure and the value of our investment portfolio, both of which increased compared to the previous year.

Our charitable expenditure in 2024 was £28.4 million, an increase of £6.4 million from 2023’s charitable expenditure of £22.0 million. This increase is predominately explained by increased spend in our Strategic Fund commitments (£3.2 million increase from 2023), the Nuffield Early Language Intervention programme (£0.9 million increase from 2023) and smaller increases across our remaining programmes. Our investments were valued at £542 million at the end of December 2024, a £24 million increase against the December 2023 valuation of £518 million. Against our longer-term financial targets we remain significantly ahead of our target position, and so market volatility does not yet cause any concern for our long-term ability to spend at our intended levels.

Our investments were valued at £542 million at the end of December 2024, a £24 million increase against the December 2023 valuation of £518 million. Against our longer-term financial targets we remain significantly ahead of our target position, and so market volatility does not yet cause any concern for our long-term ability to spend at our intended levels.

Expenditure

Key components of our 2024 expenditure include:

These activities indicate some of the ways in which we are using our financial resources to deliver the aspirations laid out in our strategy.

Investment management and governance

Our financial objectives are:

Our investment objective remains to have a diversified portfolio that will allow for high and stable long-term spending, earned in a way that is consistent with our values.

The portfolio return of 9.5% (2023: 8.5%) was a fair return for the year on long term measures but it was significantly behind, by 8.3% (5.7%), its market-based benchmark of 17.8% (14.2%), which is based on a portfolio passively invested with 90% in global equities and 10% in short-dated gilts. Private equity contributed 3.5% of this under performance, reflecting that it works on a different valuation cycle to its public equity benchmark. An investment in the GMO Climate Change fund fell in value by 24% over the year, which together with mixed contributions from other managers contributed to the remaining under performance against the market benchmark.

In many ways 2024 was an extraordinary year for financial markets, with seven companies representing half the value of the US S&P 500 index at various times of the year, while the US market represented 70% of the world market. This situation led to our active managers viewing such concentrated positions as too undiversified for a long-term investor and continued with a more diversified approach. This prudent position limited our exposure to these seven companies resulting in a lower performance than the market index described here. The Investment Committee remains confident in its approach.

During the year, the Trustees commissioned an independent view of our investment strategy. It made several observations which the Investment Committee will consider in 2025. Overall, the committee are content with the performance of its return maximising strategy, and that its approach of prudently embracing

risk remained the best way of supporting the charity’s purposes.

50% of the US dollar exposure in the portfolio is being hedged back to sterling to protect some of the historic currency gains. The hedge was introduced at £1 to $1.15. We anticipate that when GBP recovers towards its more normal value ($1.35 to $1.40), we will return to an unhedged strategy.

We dedicate one Investment Committee meeting a year to understanding better how our managers are implementing our expectations as responsible investors, reflecting our underlying principle of ‘know what we own’. As part of this, we examine our portfolio against several metrics to ensure we are not earning our returns by exploiting vulnerable people, or in an unsustainable way, and discuss with our investment managers how they express our policy in what they own, how they vote and how they engage with their underlying investments.

We continue to carefully watch inflation, both globally and in the UK.

Our Investment Committee is made up of three Trustees and two independent investment professionals and fulfils a key governance role by monitoring and overseeing this area on behalf of the Board of Trustees.

Responsible investing policy

Our policy is based on three principles:

Our full responsible investing policy is available on our website: www.nufeldfoundation.org/about/governance

Asset allocation and ranges

Asset class
Real assets
Global equities		 Target
65%		 2024 Actual
75%
Private assets
Currency
Total real assets
Short-dated gilts and cash		 25%
-
90%
10%		 17%
-2%
90%
10%
Total assets 100% 100%

Manager structure and principal benchmarks

Investment performance is assessed against total returns relative to a composite benchmark based on asset allocation at the beginning of each period. Performance is also compared to an appropriate peer group index (previously WM Charities Unconstrained Index). Individual manager benchmarks are set out below.

Asset class
Real assets
Global equities
Private assets		 Manager
Arrowstreet, Harding
Loevner, GMO, Metropolis,
Sparinvest, Veritas
Various illiquid funds		 Manager
Arrowstreet, Harding
Loevner, GMO, Metropolis,
Sparinvest, Veritas
Various illiquid funds		 Manager
Arrowstreet, Harding
Loevner, GMO, Metropolis,
Sparinvest, Veritas
Various illiquid funds
Nominal assets
Short-dated gilts
Asset class
Total equities
Private assets
Fixed interest		 Internally managed
Benchmark
Target
MSCI ACWI
+ 1%
MSCI ACWI
+ 3%
0–5yr ML Gilt index
-

70

71

Principal risks

Principal risks

Investment performance

Investment performance
Total returns_(annualised %)_ 1 Year
3 Years		 5 years 10 Years
Nufeld Foundation
Bespoke benchmark		 8.5%
7.3%
14.2%
7.7%		 9.4%
11.0%		 10.0%
10.3%
Infation (annual weekly earnings) 6.0%
5.5%		 4.7% 3.9%
ARC Steady Growth Index
Key
Nufeld Foundation
Bespoke benchmark
ARC Steady Growth Index		 8.2%
1.7%
Actual performance
90% MSCI ACWI; 10% UK 1–5 year Gilts
Commonly used index for charity funds		 4.1% 5.4%

Reserves policy

As our endowment is managed on a total return basis, and as a significant proportion of our accounting commitments will not be realised for several years and are fully covered by cash and cash-like holdings within our investment portfolio, we are satisfied that our current reserves position is appropriate and is a good indicator of our strategic intent.

The primary focus of our reserves policy is to monitor the long-term health of the Nuffield Foundation’s financial outlook. Our strategy is to preserve the endowment’s value over the very long term while releasing the funds required to meet our short-term spending commitments.

As at 31 December 2024, the ‘target value’ of our endowment was £474 million, with an upper range of £550 million and lower range of £398 million. The actual value of the endowment was £542 million, in excess of what we consider to be the usual volatility range. This has allowed us to look at accelerating our level of expenditure beyond our standard rate of Capital Maintenance Index (CMI) plus 4.5%.

Principal risks

We are responsible for the management of risks, with detailed consideration delegated from the Trustee board to the Audit, Risk and Governance Committee and supported by senior staff. We have developed a risk management approach that ensures we consider the gap between our risk appetite and the actual profile of a given risk, as well as developing mitigations and assurances for each area of risk. Our strategic risk areas, together with key notes and actions, are:

The short-term reserves level (General Fund expenditure reserve) is a secondary focus within our financial management. The nature of our expenditure is that we make commitments (either in grants to third parties or in the designation of funds for our in-house programmes) well in advance of the funds being drawn down, and so we expect this expenditure reserve to be negative. The December 2024 level is (£6.9) million.

Strategic risk area

Are we alert to our external environment and key issues? Are we innovative, trying new things?

Do our research and programmes sufficiently contribute to our strategic purpose of improving people’s lives?

Are we alert to and managing any issues that might negatively affect our reputation?

Do we have the right leadership and organisational culture?

Do we have the right workforce capability and capacity?

Are we making sufficient progress in embedding equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) into our work and reflecting it in our workforce?

Are our finance, assurance and compliance approaches clear, robust and fit for purpose?

Do we do have the right governance and funding structures and approaches in place?

Status and key actions

We horizon scan in the course of our work and are exploring how we can better build this into annual cycles. We challenge ourselves regularly on whether we are sufficiently open to innovation and change. Our Grown up? and Public right to justice projects are two examples of new approaches.

Ada, the NCOB and the Nuffield FJO have clearly defined change frameworks in place. Grant funding has set out five dimensions of impact and tests all grant applications against these. Our communications and public affairs teams work to connect the evidence that we produce with policy and practice, and we are prioritising further building our networks this year. This area is core to our purpose and kept under ongoing review.

We have appropriate checks and balances in place to prevent misconduct, fraud, mismanagement and conflict of interest. We are transparent about who we fund and use our Guide for Applicants to explain our funding criteria and how decisions are taken.

Our Leadership Team represents the whole organisation and meets regularly to agree priorities and take decisions. Our new strategic priorities will create a clearer thread between organisational, team and individual objectives, and our new values framework means we will be able to be more consistent about living by a coherent set of values.

We keep our capability, capacity and ability to recruit under regular review including though the appropriate Board sub-committee. We conduct an annual key person risk assessment to identify single points of failure and to identify risk mitigation actions.

We continue to take steps to embed equity, diversity and inclusion in our work and our working practices. We have developed our EDI Action Plan, which we will publish in 2025, in consultation with our staff, and plans are in place for monitoring and reporting our progress.

We are satisfied that this risk is being well managed; we have made our approach to assurance reporting clearer and have undertaken a third-party review of data protection policies and practices.

We have governance structures in place for the Foundation and for each of the centres. In 2025, we will undertake a review of these, including checking our governance against the updated Charity Commission Governance Code. We are also updating our policy on third-party funding.

72

73

Structure, governance and management

Structure, governance and management

Does our investment strategy allow us to fulfil our strategic purpose?

Our investment model has proved resilient to date; this will require continued careful monitoring over the coming period, and we are considering additional protections in 2025.

We are undertaking third-party reviews of some of our systems to verify factors such as value for money, operational effectiveness and security. We have a programme to consider whether and how to use AI tools within our organisation.

Do our systems support effective working and decision-making? Are we alert to the opportunities and risks of recent technologies?

Trustees

Structure, governance and management

The Foundation has eight Trustees, who act jointly as a corporate body. Trustee appointments are overseen by the Staff, Nominations and Governance Committee. Appointments are made for an initial five-year term with the option for a mutually agreed second term of up to four years.

The Board of Trustees meets five times a year and retains overall responsibility for all activities of the Foundation. All strategic and policy decisions are taken by Trustees collectively, advised by several committees. There are also oversight boards for the Ada Lovelace Institute, the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory and the Nuffield Council on Bioethics – these do not have formal fiduciary duties.

The Trust Deed

The Nuffield Foundation is a charity registered with the Charity Commission (206601). It was established by Trust Deed on 9 June 1943 by Lord Nuffield. The Trust Deed details the objects of the Foundation which include: the advancement of health; the advancement of social well-being; the advancement of education; the care and comfort of the aged poor; the relief of handicaps; the benefit of the Commonwealth and ‘such other charitable purposes as shall be declared in writing by all the Trustees’.

Committee / oversight board membership is as follows:

Italics External to / independent of Nuffield Foundation

A Common Investment Fund was established by a Charity Commission scheme and took effect on 1 January 1980. It allowed the investments of different charities (but for which the Foundation Trustees were also responsible) to be invested as one unit. Subsequently, these funds (the Oliver Bird Fund, the Elizabeth Nuffield Educational Fund and the Commonwealth Relations Trust) have been classified as ‘subsidiary charities’ of the Foundation and are only identified separately in the notes to these accounts.

The Trust Deed has been amended on several occasions, most recently in 2016.

Remit Current Membership
Board sub-committees
Audit, Risk and Governance Responsible for the process leading to the
preparation of the annual fnancial statements the
control environment, the oversight of risk manage-
ment and all corporate governance matters.		 John Pullinger (Chair)
Ash Amin
Clare Tickell
Claire Brown
Finance Oversight of fnancial planning and performance John Pullinger (Chair)
monitoring; oversees the management of Ash Amin
Investment signifcant initiatives.
Considers the Foundation’s asset allocation and		 Clare Tickell
Claire Brown
Keith Burnett (Chair)
Staf, Nominations and
Remuneration
Entity boards
Ada Lovelace Institute		 monitors investment performance; can appoint
and dismiss investment managers.
Oversight and development of the
Foundation’s stafng policies, including
Trustee personnel matters.
Lead the strategic development of the Ada
Lovelace Institute, responsible for securing
long-term sustainability. Board members also play
a leading role in identifying questions or projects
relating to the use of data and AI for investigation
and deliberation.		 James Banks #
Brian Bell +
John Pullinger
David Balance
Gary Steinberg
Keith Burnett (Chair)
Deirdre Carty +
Gavin Kelly +
Ann Phoenix
Ernest Ryder +
Clare Tickell +
Julie Maxton (Chair)
Francine Bennett +
Rocio Concha Galguera
Alix Dunn
Shakir Mohamed
Ali Shah
John Thornhill
Nufeld Council on Bioethics Responsible for reviewing and challenging
the Nufeld Council on Bioethics’ work, providing
assurance that it is operating within its remit
and committing expenditure in line with the
terms of the funding grant and the goals of the
Strategic Plan.		 Chris Todd
Shannon Vallor
Brian Scott (Chair of the
Board) #
Jane MacNaughton (Chair
of the Board) +
Sarion Bowers +
Sarah Dickson +
Tim Gardam +#
(Note that the Council has a deliberative function, Graham Hart #
with responsibility for developing the Nufeld Adam Hedgecoe +
Council on Bioethics’ strategy) Gavin Kelly +
Katherine Littler
Dan O’Connor +
Vivienne Parry #
Dave Archard (Chair of
Council) #
Sarah Cunningham-Burley
(Chair of the Council) +

74

75

Structure, governance and management

Structure, governance and management

Nufeld Family
Justice Observatory		 Provides independent oversight, ensuring that
the work of the Nufeld Family Justice Observatory		 Jenny Beck (Chair)
Clare Carter
resonates with the wider family justice sector, Sally Jenkins #
refects its England and Wales remit, and provides Chris MacDonald
assurance to the funders on value for money Eamon McCrory
and impact. Andrew Powell
Rob Street
Andrew Webb #
Theresa Williams #
Carol Atkinson +
Carole Burgher +
Ben Collins +
Panel for Trustee Remuneration Periodically reviews the principles and levels
of remuneration of Trustees and other members
of our governance environment and makes
recommendations to the Chair of Trustees.		 Claire Brown (Chair)
Deirdre Carty
+ ad hoc members

chaired by Jane MacNaughton and a Council chaired by Sarah Cunningham-Burley. For our newer bodies, the Ada Lovelace Institute has a Governing Board chaired by Dame Julie Maxton and the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory has a Governing Board chaired by Jenny Beck.

We set terms of reference for all committees and panels, and parameters for the delegation of authority to senior staff. Senior staff set further levels of delegation for operational matters. New Trustees receive an induction, including a series of meetings with other Trustees and senior staff, and a handbook for Trustees, containing information about procedures, committees, meetings, decision-making and financial procedures at the Nuffield Foundation.

In 2021 we set up a wholly owned subsidiary, Nuffield Foundation Education Ltd, as a ‘special purpose vehicle’ for the management of the grant from the Department for Education to roll out the Nuffield Early Language Intervention. The results of the subsidiary have been consolidated into the group accounts.

Organisational structure and management of the Foundation

The Foundation has employed an average of 86 full-time equivalent staff (including staff of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, the Ada Lovelace Institute and the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory, all of whom are employed by the Foundation) during the year. The Chief Executive, supported by a Leadership Team, is responsible for the management of the Foundation and for advising Trustees on strategic and operational matters. Trustees are responsible for grant-making decisions, with delegated authorities in line with agreed procedures.

Statement of grant-making policy

We seek to be an open, collaborative and engaged funder that offers more than money. We are not simply an academic funding body, though the research we fund must stand up to rigorous academic scrutiny. We publish details of available funding and the relevant application process on our website and promote these opportunities through our stakeholder engagement and communications.

We house several semi-autonomous bodies which, although legally part of the Nuffield Foundation, have their own governing structures with distinct terms of reference. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is a longstanding example, with a Governing Board

Grants are peer-reviewed by independent referees, who include representatives from the policy and practice worlds, as well as research experts. We require ethical scrutiny of proposals involving primary research and

evidence of a commitment to the communication of research findings. Trustees make final decisions on these applications.

Once a grant has been awarded, we will work with grant-holders to ensure an advisory board is in place to provide a range of technical, subject, policy and practice expertise. We also require grant-holders to report on progress and to produce at least one publicly available output that sets out how they used their grant and what they achieved. We also require an end of project assessment, including feedback on the Foundation’s performance as a grant-maker.

Statement of policy on staff remuneration

We aim to recruit and retain able staff to deliver the operational activities of the organisation. Staff are paid on a pay band commensurate with the responsibility their position entails. Annual pay increases are agreed by the Trustees based on recommendations from the Staff, Nominations and Remuneration Committee, taking inflation and national average earnings and any other relevant internal and external factors into account. We do not have a system of bonuses or other variable rewards but will occasionally make additional payments to staff to recognise additional levels of responsibility or contribution.

Periodically, staff pay is independently benchmarked to external comparators. We last undertook a full benchmarking exercise in the summer of 2021, to ensure that our remuneration remained in line with our external markets, and that there was appropriate internal parity. Details of senior staff pay are contained in note 4 to the accounts.

The Foundation is a Living Wage Employer accredited by the Living Wage Foundation.

Pay gap reporting

The Nuffield Foundation is below the headcount requirement for statutory reporting on our gender pay gap, but we choose to share the gender and ethnicity pay gaps in our annual report for transparency and accountability. We are conscious that these figures

are sensitive to fluctuation due to our relatively small workforce. We, however, recognise the importance of understanding what they may tell us about our recruitment and retention practices and we will continue to monitor them.

Gender pay gap

As of 31 December 2024, the mean gender pay gap has reduced; mean average male pay is now 9.7% higher than average female pay (down from 14.8% in 2023, and 15.7% in 2022). Looking at the median pay gap, this has now reduced from median male pay being 4.3% higher than female median pay in 2022, to female median pay being 1.9% higher than male median pay in 2024.

For reference, our overall staff base is 72% female, 26% male and 2% non-binary/other gender identity.

Ethnicity pay gap

Looking at the average pay of employees who have disclosed themselves as being from a White background compared with those staff from ethnic minority backgrounds, our mean pay gap has increased over the last year. Mean average pay for White employees is now 22.8% higher than those from ethnic minority backgrounds (up from 19.0% in 2023) and the median pay gap has increased from 7.0% in 2023 to 17.0% in 2024.

For reference, 74% of our staff have disclosed that they are of a White background and 20% are from an ethnic minority background (unchanged from 2023).

Statement of policy on fundraising

Section 162a of the Charities Act 2011 requires us to make a statement regarding fundraising activities. We do not undertake any fundraising activities, although we can accept offers from partners to contribute to work that we undertake. We show these sums in our accounts as ‘donation income’. We do not use professional fundraisers or ‘commercial participators’ or, indeed, any third parties to solicit donations. We are therefore not subject to any regulatory scheme or relevant codes of practice; nor have we received any complaints in relation to fundraising activities nor do we consider

76

77

Structure, governance and management

Structure, governance and management

it necessary to design specific procedures to monitor such activities.

Charity Governance Code

We have carried out a review of our activities against the Charity Governance Code, a tool designed to help charities and their Trustees develop high standards of governance. We have an action plan to implement any relevant findings against this code.

Streamlined energy and carbon reporting

Although not required for charities of our size, we have elected to report our energy utilisation as a part of our wider commitment to responsible operations.

UK energy use
(kWH)
Associated greenhouse
gas emissions
(Tonnes CO2equivalent)
Intensity ratio
(emissions per square metre)		 2024
1113,975
40.34
0.04		 2023
117,229
39.72
0.04

‘UK energy use’ covers gas and electricity use from our UK office plus the annual emissions from IT equipment.

‘Associated greenhouse gas emissions’ has been calculated using the GHG Reporting Protocol and each year we use the respective government emission conversion factors for greenhouse gas company reporting.

The bulk of our energy demand comes from our office use. We use cloud-based and mobile technology solutions, so our in-house IT requirements (servers etc.) have been reduced to a minimum.

We have limited energy usage other than our office and IT commitments (Foundation travel is limited and is almost entirely by public transport). We have not attempted to calculate the power consumption of staff while working from home.

Public benefit

In preparing this report, the Trustees have referred to the Charity Commission’s general guidance on public benefit and are satisfied that the activities undertaken by the Foundation meet the Commission’s requirements. As a research funder, the immediate beneficiaries are the organisations that we fund: universities, research institutes, voluntary organisations and others. Ultimately, the beneficiaries are much wider, since the aim of our grant-making is to improve the design and operation of social policy so that the lives of potentially every person in the UK benefit.

Individual young people are the immediate beneficiaries of our student programmes including the roll-out of the Nuffield Early Language Intervention; the public benefit reaches beyond the individuals directly supported, for example by ultimately seeking to address the skills gaps needed for the UK to flourish.

Going concern

We monitor our going concern position throughout the year, with regular formal reviews.

Our general outlook on going concern is that the nature of the Foundation’s endowment management and its future financial commitments mean that the Trustees remain satisfied that the Foundation has sufficient reserves to continue as a going concern for the foreseeable future.

Our most recent review confirms that, as our investment value is significantly in excess of long-run target, our asset al.ocation is intentionally overweight on nominal / liquid funds (so strengthening our resilience to short-term adverse shocks), and as cash and gilt holdings are double the requirement to meet forecast outflows over the next 24 months, our general outlook remains positive.

Statement of Trustees’ responsibilities

The Trustees are responsible for preparing the Annual Report and the Financial Statements in accordance with applicable law and regulations. Charity law requires that Trustees prepare financial statements for each financial year, in accordance with United Kingdom Generally

Accepted Accounting Practice (United Kingdom Accounting Standards and applicable law). Under charity law, the Trustees must not approve the financial statements unless they are satisfied that they give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the charity and of the incoming resources and application of resources, including the income and expenditure, of the charity for that period. In preparing these financial statements, the Trustees are required to:

The Trustees are responsible for keeping adequate accounting records that are sufficient to show and explain the charity’s transactions, to disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the charity and to enable them to ensure that the financial statements comply with the Charities Act 2011. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the charity and, therefore, for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.

These financial statements are published on the Foundation’s website, in accordance with legislation in the United Kingdom governing the preparation and dissemination of financial statements, which may vary from legislation in other jurisdictions. The maintenance and integrity of the Foundation’s website is the responsibility of the Trustees. The Trustees’ responsibility also extends to the ongoing integrity of the financial statements contained therein.

Disclosure of information to auditors

In so far as the Trustees are aware:

Approved by the Trustees on 16 May 2025 and signed on their behalf by:

Professor Sir Keith Burnett Chair

78

79

Independent auditor’s report

Independent auditor’s report

Independent auditor’s report

Independent Auditor’s Report to the Trustees of Nuffield Foundation

Opinion

We have audited the financial statements of Nuffield Foundation (the ‘Charity’) and its subsidiary (‘the Group’) for the year ended 31 December 2024 which comprise the Consolidated Statement of Financial Activities, the Consolidated and Charity Balance Sheets, the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows and notes to the financial statements, including significant accounting policies. The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is applicable law and United Kingdom Accounting Standards, including Financial Reporting Standard 102 The Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland (United Kingdom Generally Accepted Accounting Practice). In our opinion the financial statements:

Basis for opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (ISAs (UK)) and applicable law. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of our report. We are independent of the group in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in the UK, including the FRC’s Ethical Standard, and we have fulfilled our other ethical

responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

Conclusions relating to going concern

In auditing the financial statements, we have concluded that the Trustees’ use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

Based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the charity’s or the group’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from when the financial statements are authorised for issue.

Our responsibilities and the responsibilities of the Trustees with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this report.

Other information

The Trustees are responsible for the other information contained within the annual report. The other information comprises the information included in the annual report, other than the financial statements and our auditor’s report thereon. Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and, except to the extent otherwise explicitly stated in our report, we do not express any form of assurance conclusion thereon.

Our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements or our knowledge obtained in the audit or otherwise appears to be materially misstated. If we identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements, we are required to determine whether this gives rise to a material misstatement in the financial statements themselves. If, based on the work we

have performed, we conclude that there is a material misstatement of this other information, we are required to report that fact.

We have nothing to report in this regard.

Matters on which we are required to report by exception

In light of the knowledge and understanding of the group and charity and their environment obtained in the course of the audit, we have not identified material misstatements within the Trustees’ report.

We have nothing to report in respect of the following matters in relation to which the Charities (Accounts and Reports) Regulations 2008 requires us to report to you if, in our opinion:

Responsibilities of the Trustees

As explained more fully in the Trustees’ responsibilities statement, the Trustees are responsible for the preparation of the financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for such internal control as the Trustees determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

In preparing the financial statements, the Trustees are responsible for assessing the charity’s and group’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the Trustees either intend to liquidate the charity or to cease operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so.

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement

when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

Details of the extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud and non-compliance with laws and regulations are set out below.

A further description of our responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements is located on the Financial Reporting Council’s website at: www.frc.org.uk/ auditorsresponsibilities. This description forms part of our auditor’s report.

Extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud

Irregularities, including fraud, are instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations. We identified and assessed the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements from irregularities, whether due to fraud or error, and discussed these between our audit team members. We then designed and performed audit procedures responsive to those risks, including obtaining audit evidence sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

We obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks within which the charity operates, focusing on those laws and regulations that have a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The laws and regulations we considered in this context were the Charities Act 2011 together with the Charities SORP (FRS 102). We assessed the required compliance with these laws and regulations as part of our audit procedures on the related financial statement items.

In addition, we considered provisions of other laws and regulations that do not have a direct effect on the financial statements but compliance with which might be fundamental to the charity’s ability to operate or to avoid a material penalty. We also considered the opportunities and incentives that may exist within the charity for fraud.

Auditing standards limit the required audit procedures to identify non-compliance with these laws and

80

81

Independent auditor’s report

Independent auditor’s report

regulations to enquiry of the Trustee and other management and inspection of regulatory and legal correspondence, if any.

We identified the greatest risk of material impact on the financial statements from irregularities, including fraud, to be the override of controls by management. Our audit procedures to respond to these risks included enquiries of management and the Audit, Risk and Governance Committee about their own identification and assessment of the risks of irregularities, sample testing on the posting of journals, reviewing accounting estimates for biases, reviewing regulatory correspondence with the Charity Commission and reading minutes of meetings of those charged with governance.

Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit, there is an unavoidable risk that we may not have detected some material misstatements in the financial statements, even though we have properly planned and performed our audit in accordance with auditing standards. For example, the further removed non-compliance with laws and regulations (irregularities) is from the events and transactions reflected in the financial statements, the less likely the inherently limited procedures required by auditing standards would identify it. In addition, as with any audit, there remained a higher risk of non-detection of irregularities, as these may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal controls. We are not responsible for preventing non-compliance and cannot be expected to detect non-compliance with all laws and regulations.

Use of our report

This report is made solely to the charity’s members, as a body, in accordance with Part 4 of the Charities (Accounts and Reports) Regulations 2008. Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the charity’s members those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the charity and the charity’s members as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.

Crowe U.K. LLP Statutory Auditor 5 June 2025

82

83

Foreword

Foreword

Financial statements and notes

844

85

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

Consolidated Statement of financial activities for the year ended 31 December 2024

Consolidated Statement of financial activities for the year ended 31 December 2023

----- Start of picture text -----
Note Unrestricted Restricted Endowed Total Funds Total Funds Note Unrestricted Restricted Endowed Total Funds
Funds Funds Funds 2024 2023 Funds Funds Funds 2023
£000s £000s £000s £000s £000s £000s £000s £000s £000s
Income and Endowments Income and Endowments
Donations and legacies 2 99 6,832 - 6,931 4,219 Donations and legacies 2 174 4,045 - 4,219
2 10 36 - 46 126 Charitable activities 2 108 18 - 126
Charitable activities
Investment activities 7 - - 5,334 5,334 4,155 Investment activities 7 - - 4,155 4,155
Other income 2 45 - - 45 38 Other income 2 38 - - 38
Total income 320 4,063 4,155 8,538
Total income 154 6,868 5,334 12,356 8,538
Expenditure on:
Expenditure on:
Raising funds
Raising funds
Investment management costs - - 1,418 1,418 1,182 Investment management costs - - 1,182 1,182
Charitable activities Charitable activities
Research, development and analysis 13,213 179 - 13,392 11,607 Research, development and analysis 10,920 687 - 11,607
Student and Other Programmes 45 20 - 65 413 Student and Other Programmes 444 (31) - 413
Nuffield Early Language Intervention - 2,743 - 2,743 1,852 Nuffield Early Language Intervention - 1,852 - 1,852
In-house programmes In-house programmes
-
Ada Lovelace Institute 1,617 1,617 3,234 2,986 Ada Lovelace Institute 2,417 569 - 2,986
Nuffield Council on Bioethics 769 1,022 - 1,791 1,441 Nuffield Council on Bioethics 783 658 - 1,441
- -
Nuffield Family Justice Observatory 1,058 1,058 1,001 - -
Nuffield Family Justice Observatory 1,001 1,001
Other in-house programmes 235 - - 235 13 Other in-house programmes 13 - - 13
-
Total in-house programmes 3,679 2,639 6,318 5,441 -
Total in-house programmes 4,214 1,227 5,441
Strategic and Other Funds
Oliver Bird Fund - 38 - 38 13 Strategic and Other Funds
- - Oliver Bird Fund - 13 - 13
Strategic Fund 5,605 5,605 3,093
- -
Strategic Fund 3,093 3,093
Racial Diversity UK - 150 - 150 21 Commonwealth Relations Trust - 21 - 21
Total Strategic and Other Funds 5,605 188 - 5,793 3,127 Total Strategic and Other Funds 3,093 34 - 3,127
Effect of discounting grant liability 63 - - 63 (480) Effect of discounting grant liability (480) - - (480)
Total charitable activities 3 22,605 5,769 - 28,374 21,960 Total charitable activities 3 18,191 3,769 - 21,960
Total expenditure 18,191 3,769 1,182 23,142
Total expenditure 22,605 5,769 1,418 29,792 23,142
- - Net gains on investments - - 37,945 37,945
Net gains on investments 43,762 43,762 37,945
Net (expenditure)/income (17,871) 294 40,918 23,341
Net (expenditure)/income (22,451) 1,099 47,678 26,326 23,341 Transfer between funds 14 17,617 2,054 (19,671) -
Transfer between funds 14 18,598 2,168 (20,766) - - Other recognised gains/(losses) (6) - - (6)
Other recognised gains/(losses) 8 - - 8 (6) Net (expenditure)/income after transfers (260) 2,348 21,247 23,335
Net (expenditure)/income after transfers (3,845) 3,267 26,912 26,334 23,335 Reconciliation of funds: Total funds brought forward at
4,279 9,293 451,556 465,128
1 January
Reconciliation of funds:
Total funds brought forward at 1 January 4,019 11,641 472,803 488,463 465,128 Total funds carried forward at 31 December 14 4,019 11,641 472,803 488,463
Total funds carried forward at
14 174 14,908 499,715 514,797 488,463
31 December
----- End of picture text -----

86

87

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

Consolidated and Charity Balance sheet for the year ended 31 December 2024

Group Group Charity Charity
2024 2023 2024 2023
Note £000s £000s £000s £000s
Fixed assets
Tangible fxed assets 5 1,345 1,510 1,345 1,510
Intangible fxed assets 6 77 240 77 240
Investments 7 541,906 517,658 541,906 517,658
Programme-related investments 85 85 85 85
543,413 519,493 543,413 519,493
Current assets
Debtors
Bank and cash
Liabilities: amounts falling due
within one year
Grants payable
Creditors
Net current liabilities
Liabilities falling due after one year
Grants payable
Provisions
Net assets
Funds
Unrestricted funds
Designated fund
General fund		 8
9
10
9
11
14
14		 6,890
2,504
9,394
(16,234)
(3,398)
(19,632)
(10,238)
(18,179)
(199)
514,797
7,027
(6,853)		 4,659
1,797
6,456
(15,620)
(3,831)
(19,451)
(12,995)
(17,836)
(199)
488,463
7,664
(3,645)		 6,044
1,439
7,483
(16,234)
(3,390)
(19,624)
(12,141)
(18,179)
(199)
512,894
7,027
(6,642)		 3,100
438
3,538
(15,620)
(2,695)
(18,315)
(14,777)
(17,836)
(199)
486,681
7,664
(3,645)
Restricted funds
Endowed funds		 14
14		 174
14,908
499,715		 4,019
11,641
472,803		 385
12,794
499,715		 4,019
9,859
472,803
Total funds 514,797 488,463 512,894 486,681

Notes 1–15 form part of these financial statements.

These financial statements were approved and authorised for issue by the Trustees on 16 May 2025 and were signed on their behalf by:

The surplus generated by the Charity in 2024 after gains and losses was £26,213k (2023: gain £22,315k).

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows

2024 2023
Note £000s £000s
Net cash fows from operating activities
Net cash used in operating activities (24,080) (23,638)
Cash fows from investing activities
Investment additions (5,216) (4,146)
Investment fees paid directly from portfolio
Investment cash withdrawals
Payments to acquire tangible fxed assets
Investment income
Net cash provided by investing activities
Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents/net debt
Cash and cash equivalents at 1 January
Cash and cash equivalents at 31 December
Change in cash and cash equivalents/net debt in the year
Reconciliation of net income to net cash fows from
operating activities
Net income for the year
Adjustments for:
Depreciation
Amortisation
Investment income
(Gains) on investments
Increase/(decrease) in grant payable
(Decrease)/increase in creditors
(Increase) in debtors		 7
5
7
5
6		 729
24,000
(60)
5,334
24,787
1,797
2,504
707
26,334
225
163
(5,334)
(43,762)
958
(433)
(2,231)		 631
21,409
(185)
4,155
21,864
3,571
1,797
(1,774)
23,335
197
198
(4,155)
(37,945)
(4,518)
1,262
(2,012)
Net cash outfows from operating activities (24,080) (23,638)

There is £7.6m of cash held in investments (2023: £3.9m) which are not available for immediate use to further charitable activities, these are being held as part of the investment portfolio to generate investment returns.

Professor Sir Keith Burnett Chair

88

89

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

‘Other costs’ include staffing, hosting seminars and conferences, commissioned research or evaluations together with any direct costs immediately attributable to a specific activity. ‘Support costs’ reflect the apportionment of costs shared by all activities. Redundancy and termination payments are recognised when there is a demonstrable commitment on an individual or group basis that cannot be realistically withdrawn. Basis of allocation of costs Investment management costs and charity administration costs are allocated to the funds in proportion to their holding in the endowment at the beginning of the year. Where identifiable,

Notes to the financial statements

1. Principal accounting policies

a. Basis of accounting

The financial statements have been prepared under the historical cost convention, as modified by the revaluation of investments and in accordance with applicable Accounting Standards. The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the second edition of the Charities Statement of Recommended Practice issued in October 2019 (the ‘SORP’), the Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland (FRS 102) issued on 16 July 2014 and the Charities Act 2011. The Nuffield Foundation is a public benefit entity and is registered with the Charity Commission in England and Wales (Charity number: 206601)

The financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis and the accounting policies below are consistently applied. Based on the nature of the Foundation’s endowment management and its future financial commitments, the Trustees remain satisfied that there are no material uncertainties that may cast significant doubt about the ability of the Foundation to continue as a going concern for the foreseeable future.

The Foundation’s financial statements are presented in pounds sterling and rounded to thousands. The functional and presentation currency is the pound sterling.

b. Basis of consolidation

Consolidated accounts have been prepared which include the Foundation and its subsidiary company, Nuffield Foundation Education Ltd. The Nuffield Foundation Education Ltd is a private company limited by guarantee that was incorporated on 5th May 2021.

The consolidation is on a line-by-line basis. Amounts owed and owing between the entities have been eliminated from the consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of financial activities.

c. Estimates and judgements

The Foundation must make certain estimates and judgements that have an impact on the policies and amount reported in the annual accounts. The estimates and judgements are based on historical experiences and other factors including expectations of future events that are believed to be reasonable at the time such estimates and judgements are made. Actual results may differ from these estimates. These are reviewed on an ongoing basis and any revisions are recognised prospectively.

The key estimates and judgements made by the Foundation are addressed below.

I. Investments

The carrying value of investments is subject to estimates, assumptions and judgements of their fair value. In determining this amount, the Charity ensures its managers adopt the International Private Equity and Venture Capital Valuation Guidelines, applying the overriding concept that fair value is the amount for which an asset can be exchanged between knowledgeable willing parties in an arm’s length transaction. The nature, facts and circumstance of the investment drives the valuation methodology.

II. Fixed assets

The actual lives of tangible and intangible fixed assets and their residual values are assessed annually. In re-assessing asset lives, factors such as economic and future market conditions are considered, as is the remaining life of the asset and projected disposal values.

III. Dilapidation provision

The dilapidation provision requires management’s best estimate of the expenditure that will be incurred based on contractual requirements. The timing of cash flows and any discount rates used to establish net present value of the obligation requires

management’s judgement. The provision was recognised in 2020 and will be assessed regularly for fair value.

IV. Discounting of long-term grant commitments Grant awards are often paid out over a number of years and non-current liabilities are discounted to net present value based on expected future cash outflows. The discount rate used is taken from the interest rate earned on Foundation’s cash accounts and is assessed annually. Due to historic low interest rates, this become material for the first time in the 2023 and was presented for the first time in those accounts. The movement on the balance is shown in 2024 as the second year of presentation.

d. Income

Investment income represents dividends and interest generated from the investment portfolio, including any associated tax credits or recoverable taxation. This income is accounted for on an accruals basis and is allocated proportionally to the underlying funds.

Grants and donations are accounted for when the charity has entitlement to the funds, probable receipt and the amount is measurable. Where income is received in advance, it is deferred until the charity is entitled to that income.

Expenditure

e.

Charitable expenditure comprises grants and other payments made by the Trustees in accordance with criteria set out in the Trust Deed.

Grants are charged to the Statement of financial activities when allocations are approved by the Trustees and notified to the recipient, less any awards cancelled or refunded. Grants awarded subject to conditions are included as expenditure at the point at which the Trustees make an

unconditional offer of a grant to the applicant.

Multi-year grants are recognised at their present value where settlement is due more than one year from the end of the accounting period and where the effect of discounting is material. The discount rate used is the most current available estimate, as discussed in Note 1c.

f.

Investment management costs and charity administration costs are allocated to the funds in proportion to their holding in the endowment at the beginning of the year. Where identifiable, costs related to Charitable activities or governance are attributed to appropriate activities and funds in full or, where not separately identifiable, are apportioned using the most relevant allocation basis for that expenditure.

g. Investments

Quoted investments are included in the accounts at their bid price as at the balance sheet date. Unquoted (e.g. private equity) investments with no readily identifiable market price are included at the most recent valuations from their respective managers.

h. Taxation

The Foundation is a charity within the meaning of Paragraph 1 Schedule 6 Finance Act 2010. Accordingly, the charity is potentially exempt

90

91

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

from taxation in respect of income or capital gains within categories covered by Chapter 3 of Part 11 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 or Section 256 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992, to the extent that such income or gains are applied exclusively to charitable purposes.

The non-charitable subsidiary of the group is subject to UK Corporation Tax. However, it is able to make a qualifying charitable donation (Gift Aid) to the Foundation to reduce any taxable profits following the Deed of Covenant signed in 2024.

No tax charge arose in the period.

All realised and unrealised exchange gains and losses are accounted for in the Statement of financial activities.

The Foundation has financial assets and financial liabilities of a kind that qualify as basic financial instruments apart from the derivative instruments held. Basic financial instruments are initially recognised at transaction value and subsequently measured at their settlement value.

k. Fixed assets (tangible and intangible)

Fixed assets are stated at cost less depreciation. Assets over a value of £5,000 are capitalised. Assets under construction are not depreciated until they are brought into use. Depreciation has been calculated at the following annual rates, in order to write off each asset over its estimated useful life.

Software 3 years
Computers 3 years
Equipment 5 years
Infrastructure/IT systems 5 years
Fixtures and fttings 10 years
Artwork/Antiques 20 years

l.

Total return accounting

The Charity Commission permitted the Foundation to adopt the use of total return in relation to its permanent endowment on 7 February 2006. The power permits the Trustees to invest permanent endowments to maximise total return and to make available an appropriate portion of the total return for expenditure each year. Until this power is exercised, the total return shall be an ‘unapplied total return’ and remain as part of the permanent endowment. The Trustees have decided that it is in the interests of the Foundation to present its expendable endowment in the same manner in note 13, although there is no legal restriction on the power to distribute the expendable endowment.

The Trustees have used the values of the permanent endowments at 31 December 2003 to represent the ‘Preserved Value’ of the original gift.

m. Fund accounting

Unrestricted funds are donations, investment income and other income received or generated for the objects of the charity without further specified purpose and are available as general funds. Some of these funds are designated by the Trustees to fund specific strategic programmes.

Restricted funds have arisen from restrictions applied by donors. Expenditure that meets these criteria is identified to the fund, together with a fair allocation of support and charity administration costs.

The endowed funds of the Foundation consist of both permanent and expendable capital funds. Income generated from the expendable endowment funds is applied to the general fund or, where specified, to restricted purposes. A total return distribution is made each year from the endowment funds to fund charitable activities.

The amount recognised as a provision is the best estimate of the consideration required to settle the present obligation at the end of the reporting period, taking into account the risks and uncertainties surrounding the obligation.

n. Pension costs

The Foundation makes contributions into a defined contribution pension scheme for its employees. Pension costs are charged as they are incurred.

Where the effect of the time value of money is material, the amount expected to be required to settle the obligation is recognised at present value using a discount rate. The unwinding of the discount is recognised as a finance cost in profit or loss in the period it arises.

o. Provisions for liabilities

Provisions are recognised when the Foundation has a present obligation (legal or constructive) as a result of a past event, it is probable that the Foundation will be required to settle the obligation, and a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of the obligation.

The Foundation recognises a provision for returning the new office at 100 St John Street back to its original state at the end of the 20-year lease term.

2. Income
2024
Unrestricted
Restricted
Total
£000s
£000s
£000s
Donations and legacies
Grants received in
support of:
Nufeld Early Language
Intervention
-
2,896
2,896
Nufeld Council on
Bioethics
99
1,835
1,934
Ada Lovelace Institute
-
1,863
1,863
Oliver Bird Fund
-
133
133
General Grants
-
105
105
99
6,832
6,931
Charitable activities
Sales, royalties and fee
income
10
36
46
Other income
45
-
45		 2023
Unrestricted
Restricted
Total
£000s
£000s
£000s
-
2,872
2,872
174
709
883
-
331
331
-
133
133
-
-
-
174
4,045
4,219
108
18
126
38
-
38
154
6,868
7,022		 320
4,063
4,383

92

93

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

3. Expenditure Direct costs Direct costs Support and Total 2024
a. Charitable expenditure governance
costs
Grants Other
£000s £000s £000s £000s
Research, development and analysis
Education 4,949 584 1,000 6,533
Welfare 3,227 452 652 4,331
Justice 2,063 288 509 2,860
New grants commitment sub-total 10,239 1,324 2,161 13,724
Cancelledgrants (332) - - (332)
Student and Other Programmes
Nufeld Early Language Intervention
In-house programmes
Ada Lovelace Institute
Nufeld Council on Bioethics
Nufeld Family Justice Observatory
Other in-houseprogrammes
Strategic and other funds
Oliver Bird Fund
Strategic Fund
Racial DiversityUK		 9,907
63
-
-
-
(205)
-
(205)
-
5,055
(24)		 1,324
2
2,546
2,447
1,362
992
165
4,966
-
15
63		 2,161
-
197
787
429
271
70
1,557
38
535
111		 13,392
65
2,743
3,234
1,791
1,058
235
6,318
38
5,605
150
Efect of discounting grant liability 5,031
63		 78
-		 684
-		 5,793
63
Total charitable expenditure 14,859 8,916 4,599 28,374
a. Charitable expenditure Direct costs Direct costs Support and Total 2023
(comparative information) governance
costs
Grants Other
£000s £000s £000s £000s
Research, development and analysis
Education 4,116 512 979 5,607
Welfare 2,663 419 825 3,907
Justice 1,923 267 557 2,747
New grants commitment sub-total 8,702 1,198 2,361 12,261
Cancelledgrants (654) - - (654)
Student and Other Programmes
Nufeld Early Language Intervention
In-house programmes
Ada Lovelace Institute
Nufeld Council on Bioethics
Nufeld Family Justice Observatory
Other in-houseprogrammes
Strategic and other funds
Oliver Bird Fund
Strategic Fund
Commonwealth Relations Trust		 8,048
401
-
-
-
-
-
-
(28)
2,488
-		 1,198
-
1,836
2,173
1,045
745
13
3,976
-
11
15		 2,361
12
16
813
396
256
-
1,465
41
594
6		 11,607
413
1,852
2,986
1,441
1,001
13
5,441
13
3,093
21
Efect of discounting grant liability 2,460
(480)		 26
-		 641
-		 3,127
(480)
Total charitable expenditure 10,429 7,036 4,495 21,960

94

95

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

b. Support and governance costs Total 2024 Total 2023
£000s £000s
Staf costs 2,117 2,039
Ofce costs
Information technology		 1,754
535		 1,721
559
Governance costs
Amounts payable to statutory auditors (inc VAT):
Statutory audit
Grant audit
Amounts paid to other advisors:
External assurance work
IT audit
Trustees’ remuneration
Trustees’ expenses
Legal fees
Total support andgovernance		 4,406
54
13
3
4
100
5
14
193
4,599		 4,319
51
6
6
-
98
10
5
176
4,495

See note 1f for basis of allocation.

4. Personnel costs 2024 2023
£000s £000s
Wages and salaries 5,274 4,697
Social security costs 569 513
Other pension contributions 526 490
Redundancy costs 53 50
Average number of staf employed in year:
Grant-making
Ada Lovelace Institute
Family Justice Observatory
Nufeld Council on Bioethics
Support services
Average number of full-time equivalent staf in year
Remuneration of higher paid staf
Between £60,000 and £69,999
Between £70,000 and £79,999
Between £80,000 and £89,999
Between £90,000 and £99,999		 6,422
Number
16.6
27.7
7.7
14.1
27.7
93.8
85.8
5
8
4
-		 5,750
Number
16.0
27.3
7.0
12.5
26.8
89.6
82.4
8
-
3
3
Between £100,000 and £109,999 4 4
Between £110,000 and £119,999 2 -
Between £130,000 and £139,999 - 1
Between £150,000 and £159,999 1 -
Between £160,000 and £169,999 - 1

The key management personnel of the Nuffield Foundation during the year were its CEO and Directors, including the Directors of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Ada Lovelace Institute and the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory. They form the Leadership Team, responsible for planning, strategy and major decision-making within the organisation. Their combined remuneration during the year was £1,309k (2023: £1,338k). They received no benefits additional to those received by other staff.

Employer’s pension contributions for higher paid staff were in total £215k (2023: £182k). Redundancy payments of £53k (2023: £50k) were made during the year.

The Nuffield Foundation paid contributions during the accounting period at a rate of £2.20 for every £1 of member contributions up to a maximum of five times the member contribution, together with an additional flat rate sum regardless of contribution, of £1,284 per employee (pro rata to their hours) for starters prior to January 2022.

96

97

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

5. Tangible fxed assets Other assets Assets under Total
Construction
Groupand Charity £000s £000s £000s
Cost or valuation
At 1 January 2024 2,021 28 2,049
Additions 9 51 60
Disposals - - -
Transfers 79 (79) -
At 31 December 2024
Depreciation
At 1 January 2024
Charge for year
Disposals
At 31 December 2024
Net book value
At 31 December 2024
At 1 January 2024		 2,109
539
225
-
764
1,345
1,482		 -
-
-
-
-
-
28		 2,109
539
225
-
764
1,345
1,510
6. Intangible fxed assets Software Total
Groupand Charity £000s £000s
Cost or valuation
At 1 January 2024 977 977
Additions - -
Disposals - -
Transfers - -
At 31 December 2024
Amortisation
At 1 January 2024
Charge for year
Disposals
At 31 December 2024
Net book value
At 31 December 2024
At 1 January 2024		 977
737
163
-
900
77
240		 977
737
163
-
900
77
240

Intangible assets include infrastructure systems such our CRM system, accounting ERP system, HR system and website.

All tangible fixed assets are held for continuing use in the Foundation’s activities.

Assets under construction are fit out costs relating to the creation of a new meeting space at 100 St John Street, which completed in early 2024.

98

99

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

7. Investments 2024 2023
a. Investments at market values
Groupand Charity £000s £000s
Market value at 1 January 517,658 497,607
Purchases at cost (354,411) (184,669)
Sales at market value 354,197 184,467
Cash withdrawals (24,000) (21,409)
Other 4,700 3,717
Realised and unrealisedgains 43,762 37,945
Market value at 31 December 541,906 517,658
Historic cost of listed investments at 31 December 486,478 449,151

‘Other’ movements include fees and expenses paid directly

from the investment portfolio, income received and accrued income charges.

b. Disposition
of investments
Groupand Charity
Listed equities
Fixed income
Private equity
Currency hedging		 2024
£000s
404,651
45,275
93,786
(9,366)		 Purchases
£000s
(295,639)
(1,312)
(8,457)
(13,230)		 Movement
Sales
Gains/
(Losses)
£000s
£000s
282,026
46,325
-
(607)
9,210
567
-
(2,499)		 Movement
Sales
Gains/
(Losses)
£000s
£000s
282,026
46,325
-
(607)
9,210
567
-
(2,499)		 Other
£000s
1,794
1,492
966
-		 2023
£000s
370,145
45,702
91,500
6,363
Cash 7,560 (35,773) 62,961 (24) (23,552) 3,948
Total
Total UK investments
Total overseas investments		 541,906
220,293
321,613		 (354,411) 354,197 43,762 (19,300) 517,658
188,518
329,140
Total 541,906 517,658

‘Other’ movements include cash withdrawals, fees and expenses paid directly from the investment portfolio, income received and accrued income charges.

c. Income from investments 2024 2023
Group and Charity £000s £000s
Global equities 2,468 1,018
UK government bonds 1,429 1,399
Private equity 1,031 1,371
Cash 406 367
5,334 4,155

are included within the overall value of the equity investments above.

d. Illiquid assets and investment commitments

At the year end, the Foundation had undrawn commitments to private equity funds of £33,238k, which are expected to be called at various dates between 2025 and 2035. Over a similar period, the current investments in private equity funds are expected to be realised by a return of capital. The carrying value of the private equity investments of £93,786k reported above represents the latest valuations of the funds at or prior to 31 December 2024 as provided by the relevant fund managers. However, it is not possible for the Trustees to liquidate these investments prior to the future return of capital.

The Incorporated Trustees of the Nuffield Foundation is the sole subscriber of the Nuffield Foundation Education Ltd (a company limited by guarantee), which is registered in England and Wales (Company Number 13377195). Each member is liable to contribute an amount not exceeding £1 towards the assets of the company in the event of liquidation.

The company’s principal activity is delivering the NELI programme to schools with support via a grant from the Department of Education.

The company has made a Gift Aid donation to the Foundation of £211k (2023: £nil). This payment is outstanding at the year end.

The forward exchange contracts have all been revalued at the applicable year end exchange rates and the resulting unrealised translation gains of £7m

Nufeld Foundation Education Ltd Proft and Loss 2024
2023
£000s
£000s
Total Income 2,779
1,856
Proft after tax 216
3
Nufeld Foundation Education Ltd Proft Balance Sheet
Net Liabilities -
(5)

100

101

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

8. Debtors and prepayments Group Group Charity Charity
2024 2023 2024 2023
£000s £000s £000s £000s
Accrued income 4,239 3,693 2,343 769
Other debtors
Amounts owed bysubsidiary
Due within oneyear		 2,651
-
6,890
6,890		 966
-
4,659
4,659		 1,651
2,050
6,044
6,044		 509
1,822
3,100
3,100
6,890 4,659 6,044 3,100
11. Provisions for liabilities 2024 2023
Groupand Charity £000s £000s
At 1 January 199 199
At 31 December 199 199

The Foundation recognised a provision during 2020 for returning the new office at 100 St John Street back to its original state at the end of the 20-year lease term.

12. Commitments under Operating Leases

At 31 December 2024 the Foundation had the following future minimum payments under non-cancellable operating leases:

9. Grants payable
Groupand Charity
Grants awarded but not paid at 1 January
Grants awarded in the year
Grants cancelled in the year
Grants paid in the year
Discountingofgrant liabilities
Grants awarded but not paid at 31 December
Payables within one year
Payables after one year		 2024
£000s
33,456
15,357
(560)
(13,902)
63
34,414
16,234
18,179
34,413		 2023
£000s
37,974
11,686
(777)
(14,947)
(480)
33,456
15,620
17,836
33,456
Group and Charity
Not later than one year
Later than one year and not later than fve years
Later than fve years		 2024
£000s
822
3,282
7,795
11,899		 2023
£000s
822
3,282
8,616
12,720

The Foundation’s operating lease is in relation to the new office building at 100 St John Street which was leased in August 2020 for a 20-year term.

Lease payments recognised during the year total £684,000 (2023: £684,000).

For a list of research, development and analysis grants awarded in the year please see pages 56 to 60 of the report.

10. Creditors falling due within one year Group Group Charity Charity
2024 2023 2024 2023
£000s £000s £000s £000s
Income Tax and National Insurance 165 182 165 182
Accruals 1,416 2,006 1,416 1,550
Other creditors (inc trade creditors) 777 1,416 769 736
Deferred income 1,040 227 1,040 227
3,398 3,831 3,390 2,695

Deferred income brought forward has been fully utilised in the year.

102

103

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

13. Statement of total return Permanent Expendable Total
endowments endowments
£000s £000s £000s
Investment return
Restricted and unrestricted investment income - 5,119 5,119
Endowment investment income 215 - 215
Unrealised gains 1,763 41,999 43,762
Investment management costs (57) (1,361) (1,418)
Total return for year
Less: application of return		 1,921
(836)		 45,757
(19,930)		 47,678
(20,766)
Net total return for year
Unapplied total return
At 1 January
As 31 December		 1,085
11,583
12,668		 25,827
272,907
298,734		 26,912
284,490
311,402
‘Preserved’ value at 31 December 2003 7,581 180,731 188,312
14. Funds Balance at Income Expenditure Gains/ Transfers Transfers Balance at
a. Fund movements 1 January (losses) 31 December
2024 2024
Endowment Other
£000s £000s £000s £000s £000s £000s £000s
Endowments
Permanent endowments
Elizabeth Nufeld 4,113 46 (12) 378 (179) - 4,346
Educational Fund
Commonwealth Relations 15,052 169 (45) 1,385 (657) - 15,904
Trust
Expendable endowments
Oliver Bird Fund
Main Fund
Total endowed funds
Expenditure reserve
Restricted funds
Elizabeth Nufeld
Educational Fund
Commonwealth Relations
Trust
Oliver Bird Fund
Ada Lovelace Institute
Nufeld Council on
Bioethics
Nufeld Early Language
Intervention
Student and Other
Programmes		 19,165
30,420
423,218
453,638
472,803
-
4,683
4,045
322
225
1,782
584		 215
342
4,777
5,119
5,334
-
-
133
1,899
1,835
2,896
105		 (57)
(91)
(1,270)
(1,361)
(1,418)
(179)
(150)
(38)
(1,617)
(1,022)
(2,743)
(20)		 1,763
2,807
39,192
41,999
43,762
-
-
-
-
-
-
-		 (836)
(1,332)
(18,598)
(19,930)
(20,766)
179
657
1,332
-
-
-
-		 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-		 20,250
32,146
447,319
479,465
499,715
-
5,190
5,472
604
1,038
1,935
669
Total restricted funds
Unrestricted funds
Designated
Strategic Fund
Ada Lovelace Institute
Nufeld Family Justice
Observatory
Other		 11,641
1,157
2,829
3,628
50		 6,868
-
-
-
-		 (5,769)
(5,605)
(1,617)
(1,058)
-		 -
-
-
-
-		 2,168
-
-
-
-		 -
6,535
1,287
(179)
-		 14,908
2,087
2,499
2,391
50
Total designated funds
General fund		 7,664
(3,645)		 -
154		 (8,280)
(14,325)		 -
8		 -
18,598		 7,643
(7,643)		 7,027
(6,853)
Total unrestricted funds 4,019 154 (22,605) 8 18,598 - 174
Total expenditure reserve 15,660 7,022 (28,374) 8 20,766 - 15,082
Total funds 488,463 12,356 (29,792) 43,770 - - 514,797

104

105

Financial statements and notes

Financial statements and notes

The transfer of £20,766k between the endowments and expenditure reserve is the total return distribution for 2024 (see note 13). This is comprised of £5,334k investment income from the endowments plus £15,432k of capital gains.

Other transfers of £7.6m include a designation from the General Fund to the Strategic Fund of £6m, plus £1.6m for designated funds support costs in year for Strategic Fund, Ada Lovelace Institute and Nuffield Family Justice Observatory.

b. Analysis of funds – 2024 Unrestricted Restricted funds Expendable Permanent Total
Investments
Other fxed assets
Net current assets/(liabilities)
Liabilities due after more than 1yr
Total funds
Analysis of funds – 2023
Investments
Other fxed assets
Net current assets/(liabilities)
Liabilities due after more than 1yr
Total funds		 funds
£000s
-
-
174
-
174
Unrestricted
funds
£000s
-
-
4,019
-
4,019		 £000s
-
-
14,908
-
14,908
Restricted funds
£000s
-
-
11,641
-
11,641		 endowment
£000s
521,656
1,507
(25,320)
(18,378)
479,465
Expendable
endowment
£000s
498,493
1,835
(28,655)
(18,035)
453,638		 endowment
£000s
20,250
-
-
-
20,250
Permanent
endowment
£000s
19,165
-
-
-
19,165		 £000s
541,906
1,507
(10,238)
(18,378)
514,797
Total
£000s
517,658
1,835
(12,995)
(18,035)
488,463

c. Description of funds

independent research and deliberative body tasked to ensure data and AI work for people and society

• The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is part-funded by The Wellcome Trust and by the Medical Research Council; this is managed as a restricted fund, held for the purpose of funding an independent body that informs policy and public debate about the ethical questions raised by biological and medical research. It also receives additional external funding from other organisations which is held as restricted funds.

• The Main Fund includes Lord Nufeld’s original
endowment and a variety of subsequent gifts that
have been subsumed into this fund.
• The ‘Expenditure Reserve’ is that part of the
Foundation’s net assets that the Trustees have
determined to be currently available for future
expenditure. It comprises a general fund and
a number of designated funds:
– The Strategic Fund represents Nufeld
Foundation’s designated commitment for major,
 2024
2023
£000s
£000s
Trustee remuneration
100
98
Travel expenses and
accommodation paid
to Trustees
Trustee duties
5
10
CIFAR
2
-
Total
7
10
Number of Trustees receiving
expenses
8
8

During 2023 one of our Trustees was appointed a Fellow of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR). This Fellowship receives an annual grant, starting in 2024, for which the Nuffield Foundation will act as the administrator. During 2024, costs associated with the Fellowship came to £2k (2023: £300), and income was received of £18k (2023:nil). These are included in the SOFA and the expenses are included in the table above.

b. Transactions with subsidiary

The Foundation is expecting a Gift Aid donation of £211k receivable from Nuffield Foundation Education Ltd (2023:nil).

Intercompany balance at
1 January
Gift Aid donation to parent
charity
Recharge of direct subsidiary		 2024
£000s
1,822
211
17		 2023
£000s
1,787
-
35
costs charged toparent
Intercompany balance at
31 December		 2,050 1,822

15. Related party transaction

a. Transactions with Trustees

Each Trustee is entitled to an annual allowance by virtue of the provisions of the Trust Deed. During the year, Trustees received £11,000 (2023: £11,000) and the chairman received £17,703 (2023: £17,703), with the total paid to active Trustees during 2024 of £100,000. In addition, Trustee Indemnity Insurance was purchased during the year.

106

107

Reference and administrative details

Financial statements and notes

Reference and administrative details

Trustees

Professor Sir Keith Burnett CBE, FRS, FAPS, FOSA, FInstPhys, FLSW FRS (Chair) Rt Hon Sir Ernest Ryder TD, DL, FRSA (Deputy Chair) Professor Ash Amin CBE, FBA, FACSS Professor Brian Bell Professor Lorraine Dearden FACSS Professor Ann Phoenix FBA, FACSS John Pullinger CB, CSTAT, FACSS Dame Clare Tickell DBE, FRSA, FCGI

Senior staff

Tim Gardam, Chief Executive (until November 2024) Gavin Kelly, Chief Executive (from January 2025) James Brooke Turner, Investment Director Deirdre Carty, Director of HR and Office Services Mark Franks, Director of Welfare Danielle Hamm, Director of the Nuffield Council

Tim Gardam, Chief Executive (until November 2024) Gavin Kelly, Chief Executive (from January 2025) James Brooke Turner, Investment Director Deirdre Carty, Director of HR and Office Services Mark Franks, Director of Welfare Danielle Hamm, Director of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics Lisa Harker, Director of the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory Josh Hillman, Director of Education Natalie Leon, Director of Finance and Information Systems Gaia Marcus, Director of the Ada Lovelace Institute (since June 2024) Rob Street, Director of Justice Nicola Webb, Director for Strategy and Engagement

Principal Investment Managers Arrowstreet Capital 200 Clarendon Street Boston, MA 02116, USA

GMO LLC 40 Rowes Wharf, Boston, Massachusetts 02110, USA

Harding Loevner 400 Crossing Blvd, Fourth Floor Bridgewater, NJ 08807, USA

Metropolis Capital Amersham Court, 154 Station Road, Amersham, Buckinghamshire, HP6 5DW,

Sparinvest S.A. 28, Boulevard Royal, L-2449 Luxembourg

Veritas Asset Management 1st Floor, 90 Long Acre London, WC2E 9RA

Auditors

Crowe U.K. LLP 5 Ludgate Hill London EC4M 7JW

Principal address

100 St John Street London EC1M 4EH

020 7631 0566 www.nuffieldfoundation.org Charity number 206601

Investment Consultants

Cambridge Associates 80 Victoria Street 4th Floor, Cardinal Place London SW1E 5JL

Solicitors

Bates Wells 10 Queen Street Place London EC4R 1BE

Global Custodian

The Northern Trust Company 50 Bank Street, London E14 5NT

Bankers

Barclays Bank plc 1 Churchill Place London, E14 5HP

© Nuffield Foundation 2025

100 St John Street London EC1M 4EH

Registered charity: 206601

T: + 44 (0) 20 7631 0566 E: info@nuffieldfoundation.org Twitter: @NuffieldFound LinkedIn: Search ‘Nuffield Foundation’ Website: www.nuffieldfoundation.org

108

109

nuffieldfoundation.org