From Seed to Success

Dr Polly Vizard and Co-I Dr Polina Obolenskaya were originally funded by ADR UK to undertake a quantitative project using a large-scale administrative dataset to address evidence gaps on the lives, circumstances and needs of children and young people from the Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities. Young people from the communities are one of the ‘seldom heard’ groups which are known to be highly disadvantaged but have in the past been typically missing from, or invisible within, national statistics and evidence.  

Following input from the National Statistics Data Ethics Advisory Committee (NSDEC) and the award of supplementary funding from ADR UK and the 2021 Research and Impact Support Fund, the project was expanded mid-way to incorporate a direct engagement exercise. The supplementary funding supported delivery of two direct engagement workshops with children and young people from the Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities and their families. These focused on the issues raised by our statistical analysis and were co-organised with national charity Friends, Families and Travellers. 

As a result of the supplementary funding, our research report Inclusive data: better data and evidence to understand the lives, circumstances and needs of children and young people from the Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities includes qualitative feedback and insights alongside quantitative statistical evidence. Additionally, we co-developed a suite of accessible project outputs, including an animation and a digital comic with Friends, Families and Travellers, creative designers Nifty Fox and a community artist and narrator.  

Looking forward, Dr Vizard is hoping to scale up research in this area, building on this initial mixed methods pilot, and extending the successful research partnership with Friends, Families and Travellers.  

Dr Polly Vizard, CASE. 

Rising asset prices have widened wealth gaps, but the racial dimension of accumulated wealth (assets and inheritances), and the infrastructures that protect and grow it remain under-examined. This project tackled that gap by bringing a comparative UK-South Africa lens to how colonial and imperial legacies continue to shape who benefits from wealth growth today.  

Academically, the project shifted the debate on racial wealth inequality beyond “headline economic measures” and toward an interdisciplinary understanding of how racial wealth divides play out in people’s lives. A major forthcoming output is an Open Access LSE Press book, Colonial pasts and inequality today: the racial wealth divide in Britain and South Africa, authored by a cross-sector team spanning LSE, the Runnymede Trust, and University of Cape Town collaborators, designed as an accessible resource for academics and campaigners alike. 

Beyond academia, the work strengthened policy and campaigning attention, recognising that policy change is often slow, but that alliances and “policy-ready” evidence let the research land quickly when political windows open. The work also supported high-profile engagement and uptake, including LSE public events such as “Why the racial wealth divide matters” (22 Nov 2023) and “Racial justice and wealth inequality: a call for action” (10 June 2025), the latter marking the launch of the Runnymede Trust report Why the UK Racial Wealth Divide Matters: a call for action. 

The team’s immediate priority is to finalise the manuscript within weeks and publish the Open Access LSE Press book (targeting later in 2026), supported by a major communications and public engagement programme. The next research phase will develop under-examined mechanisms e.g. remittances, and how young people across immigrant communities navigate mobility without inherited wealth. Partners with relevant data access or community reach are welcome to collaborate on this next stage. 

The seed funding provided the critical flexibility to scale the project up: (a) extend South Africa fieldwork into the UK, and (b) build UK-based qualitative research to sit alongside, and interpret, the economic evidence on the racial wealth divide. Without this, the breadth of collaboration, and the book-length synthesis, would not have been possible. 

Professor Mike Savage, International Inequalities Institute.

Despite decades of progress, gender inequality remains entrenched in pay and leadership, and is still sometimes defended through an “equity vs competitiveness” narrative. This project tested a high-stakes question for UK firms: does improving gender balance harm innovation, a core driver of productivity and growth? The context is stark: women are paid around 12% less on median, and hold only 18% of board positions in large UK firms.  

The team built a novel dataset linking firm gender metrics (including post-2016 pay-gap disclosures and leadership composition) to multiple innovation measures: patent volumes, patent citations (scientific value), and stock-market responses (economic value). Using evidence across 1996–2019, the most robust finding is clear: gender parity does not reduce innovation, undermining claims of an equity–efficiency trade-off. More granular analyses indicate that larger gender pay gaps are associated with weaker patent outcomes, while higher female representation at the top of the pay distribution is associated with stronger patenting, results presented cautiously pending peer review. The project also delivered a talent outcome, with the funded early-career researcher progressing into a policy-facing role at the IMF, strengthening the pathway for future policy uptake. 

Next steps include incorporating peer-review feedback, releasing a revised working paper, and translating findings for policy audiences (e.g., via established UK research–policy channels). We welcome partnerships with data holders, policymakers, or firms to extend the evidence base and strengthen causal inference on gender balance and innovation outcomes. 

Seed funding arrived at the critical point where the project needed dedicated capacity to progress. It enabled recruitment of a research assistant who became a key co-author, sustaining momentum through major team disruption and preventing the work from stalling. Without this support, the paper would likely not exist in submission-ready form.  

Dr Paweł Bukowski, Centre for Economic Performance. 

Indoor air pollution is a significant but under-measured health and productivity risk: people spend around 90% of their time indoors, and indoor pollution can exceed outdoor levels. Yet households and policymakers often lack practical, real-world evidence on exposure and what interventions deliver meaningful, equitable improvements. This project addressed that gap by generating representative data and testing a scalable solution in partnership with Camden Council. 

Through Camden’s council-letter recruitment, the study ran a field experiment that monitored indoor air pollution in participating households and then randomly provided real-time pollution readings to a treatment group. The results were strong and policy-relevant: indoor pollution fell by around 34% during active at-home hours, driven largely by behaviour change (notably increased ventilation). The data also reinforced the equity case, showing higher exposure burdens among lower-income households. The findings translated directly into practice, with Camden establishing a resident monitor loan scheme informed by the pilot, delivering tangible improvements to residents’ day-to-day home environments. 

The project also became a springboard for major follow-on investment, directly contributing to the launch of the INHABIT Hub, backed by £7.3m UKRI/NIHR funding to scale evidence and policy solutions for healthy, net zero homes.  

Next steps are to publish and scale: the paper is available as an NBER working paper and is being progressed through top-journal submission routes. The team is expanding measurement (including wearable exposure monitoring) and embedding indoor air considerations into retrofit and net-zero programmes to avoid unintended harms. They are seeking boroughs, housing providers, and data partners to pilot and evaluate city-wide rollouts, with the INHABIT Hub providing the delivery platform for the next phase. 

Seed funding enabled the proof-of-concept field experiment: purchasing indoor air monitors, connectivity (SIM routers), and delivering a randomised study with Camden Council. Without this early funding, the team couldn’t have secured credible “real-world” evidence that unlocked policy traction and subsequent large-scale bids. 

Dr Sefi Roth, Department of Geography and Environment.

In the immediate post-COVID period, the UK’s cost-of-living crisis intensified pressures on low-income communities. The team identified an urgent need to understand how community groups were stepping in, often after a COVID-era resurgence, and how this compared with support from larger institutions (housing associations and councils). Capturing this mattered for resilience, service design, and equity. 

The project produced a clear evidence base on the range of practical support community groups provided during the cost-of-living squeeze, alongside analysis of how statutory and large providers (housing associations and councils) were responding. The work directly enabled further research and public engagement. A key output was a two-day knowledge-exchange Think Tank (19–20 Oct 2022, Trafford Hall), bringing together 26 groups from across the UK and housing associations to share findings and recommendations. It moved our evidence into practical action. Participants identified effective partnership models and clarified what’s need to scale impact. After the room, groups sustained collaboration, sharing operational advice and referring across local mutual aid networks, extending reach and capacity beyond any single organisation. It also reinforced ongoing appetite for community action beyond the immediate crisis response. 

Looking ahead, the team will continue research on partnership models that support community groups without substituting for public services, i.e. how community groups can work most effectively alongside local authorities and housing associations. We are seeking research partners including local authorities, housing associations, NHS local partnerships, the Local Trust, and London Councils.  

The seed funding fully enabled the research at the moment it was needed: resourcing staff time and travel to visit groups, conduct interviews, and do the background research. Without it, the work would not have happened at all, particularly in a project-based unit without core funding, where unfunded bidding time and admin burdens are already acute. 

Professor Anne Power & Eleanor Benton, CASE/LSE Housing and Communities.