½¿É«µ¼º½

Aims

This funding stream was designed to improve the educational experience and academic attainment of neurodivergent young people through research conducted in classrooms, schools, colleges, or informal learning environments. Projects were required to trial and test new approaches, contributing to ongoing debates within the following thematic areas:

• improvement of life skills (ages 2-18)

• pathways to employment or improvement of employability skills (ages 12-18)

• inclusive classroom practice (ages 4-18)

Background

As defined by the Anna Freud Mentally Healthy Schools initiative:

ÌýNeurodiversity refers to the differences between how people think, process information, behave and communicate.Ìý It emphasises that everyone’s mind works differently. People have different interests, motivations, skills, and strengths. These differences should be recognised, understood, respected, and celebrated.Ìý

While everyone is unique, most people areÌýneurotypicalÌý– their brains process information in a relatively similar way. People who process information differently may beÌýneurodivergent.ÌýÌý

Neurodivergence refers to differences in mental or neurological function from what is considered ‘typical’. This results from a difference in the way the brain develops before birth and during childhood, and affects how someone communicates, behaves and responds to the world around them.Ìý

In recent years, ½¿É«µ¼º½ actively supported efforts to enhance understanding of how to nurture neurodivergent young people. This has included podcasts, funding research and the publication of blogs and peer-reviewed articles.

The Funding

This initiative was generously funded by providing support for significant research projects. ½¿É«µ¼º½ is administering the grant and using its expertise in promoting and assessing the proposals and then finalising, publishing and disseminating the outcomes.Ìý

The aim of this research funding is to generate knowledge that benefits the public good in line with ½¿É«µ¼º½â€™s charitable objectives. This scheme will support higher education providers to achieve quality research and knowledge exchange to support the aims outlined above.

Each individual award was valued at up to £50,000, with a total budget available for up to four projects. Final funding decisions were based on the quality of applications received. Although the scheme aimed to address all three themes collectively, projects were awarded based on overall merit, not restricted to one per theme.

Research is being conducted (and the grant administered) through a university institution in the UK, with all research taking place in the UK with results primarily applicable to the UK context.Ìý

Ethics

Ethical approval was a prerequisite for releasing any funds. Host institutions were responsible for identifying ethical issues and obtaining relevant approvals before research activities commenced.

Ethical considerations included, but were not limited to: codes of practice, involvement of human participants, use of data, environmental impact, and management of sensitive economic, social, or personal information.

The ½¿É«µ¼º½ Ethical Guidelines can be found on the ½¿É«µ¼º½ website here.

Criteria for Assessment

Applications were submitted using a standard proforma and evaluated by ½¿É«µ¼º½â€™s College of Reviewers, based on:

• Originality, potential contribution to knowledge and the extent that the proposed project demonstrates innovation potential. (10%)
• Quality of research design and methods including the soundness of the concept, and credibility of the proposed methodology. (30%)
• Relevance to the aims outlined above. (10%)
• Significance of outputs and dissemination for impact – the extent to which the outputs of the project would contribute to each of the expected impacts mentioned. (30%)
• Value for money – including the proportion being spent directly on research activity. (10%)
• Equality, Diversity and Inclusion[1] – the extent to which equal opportunities are considered in the research team and for research participants. (10%)

Final funding decisions were made by a panel comprising ½¿É«µ¼º½ Trustees and Kusuma Trust representatives, with subject-matter expertise integral to the process.

[1] ½¿É«µ¼º½â€™s work is based on building meaningful, enduring, and respectful relationships across different peoples and cultures. To do this successfully, requires a strong commitment to EDI and this commitment extends to all aspects of our work. When we talk about EDI at ½¿É«µ¼º½, we mean treating people fairly, impartially and without bias creating conditions which encourage and value diversity, promote dignity and inclusion and a culturally sensitive approach.Ìý

Conditions of award

Recipients were required to adhere to the agreed project timetable and maintain regular contact with ½¿É«µ¼º½. Funding is being released in stages, subject to satisfactory progress. The named PI was expected to participate in progress meetings and dissemination activities.

Projects had to comply with all relevant ethical, legal, and regulatory requirements, including but not limited to:

• General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

• Data Protection Act 2018

• Bribery Act 2010

• Fraud Act 2006

• Equality Act 2010

• Modern Slavery Act 2015

• Safeguarding and child protection legislation

½¿É«µ¼º½ reserves the right to request project updates, conduct site visits, or invite research teams to participate in evaluation studies. Researchers are required to engage with ½¿É«µ¼º½ and Kusuma Trust representatives at events or upon request, including after project completion.

Recipients held full responsibility for all staff funded through the grant, ensuring appropriate terms of employment, training, and supervision. Research Fellows had to be employed for the full duration of their involvement.

Intellectual property (IP) remained with the generating party, unless otherwise agreed. Where multiple organisations were involved, formal collaboration agreements were required, clarifying ownership and exploitation rights. All parties were expected to ensure that research outputs, whether protected by IP rights or not, benefitted society and the economy.

Branding and Publicity

Grant recipients are required to:

• Provide appropriate publicity for the project

• Acknowledge Kusuma Trust and ½¿É«µ¼º½ support in all communications, using approved branding

• Notify ½¿É«µ¼º½ of press releases or media engagement in advance, including on social media

• Publish reports or findings initially through ½¿É«µ¼º½â€™s platforms, with final reports made openly accessible on the ½¿É«µ¼º½ website

Outputs

ÌýWe expect the projects to result in a final report of 5,000-6,000 words to be published by ½¿É«µ¼º½. Each final report will take the form of the following:

• Executive summary (500 words)
• Introduction: provides background information to contextualise the project and a brief review of any relevant literature (800 words)
• Research design: sets out the research question and methodology for the study (1500 words)
• Findings & discussion: presents the findings, analyses the results, and discusses policy and practice implications (2,400 words)
• Conclusions & recommendations: offers concluding remarks and next steps for consideration (800 words)
• Alongside the report, the expectation is that the datasets must be made publicly available at the end of the grant period.

Alongside the final report, we would hope that the research teams will be able to offer:

• At least one ½¿É«µ¼º½ blogpost on the research findings.
• A presentation at the ½¿É«µ¼º½ Conference in 2025 or 2026.
• There may also be a bespoke event (likely a webinar) on the subject of the completed research which the researcher/s will be expected to attend.

Eligible project costs

• Researcher labour costs and administrative costs for staff working directly on the project, including permanent and contracted staff. Total number of working days for each staff member should be listed.
• School labour costs, specifically to backfill staff time taken up by the project.
• Training costs, where training is specific and necessary to the project.
• Project materials costs
• Licensing costs for technology required for delivery of the project.
• Travel and subsistence costs.
• Office supplies, stationery, printing.
• Overheads up to 20% of costs.
• Registration at ½¿É«µ¼º½ Conferences.
• ½¿É«µ¼º½ Membership for members of the project team (the PI is expected to be a member for the duration of the project).

Grants were not intended to generate profit. Any surplus generated from grant funds had to be repaid to ½¿É«µ¼º½. Copy editing and publishing costs for final reports were covered by ½¿É«µ¼º½, while additional dissemination costs were the responsibility of the research team.