Committee publication · Correspondence · 24 June 2026 · HC 296
Correspondence from Chief Scientific Adviser, DHSC re, FGM reconstructive surgery, dated 22.06.2026
Summary
Professor Lucy Chappell, Chief Scientific Adviser at DHSC, responds to the Women & Equalities Committee's invitation to give evidence on FGM reconstructive surgery research. She reports that NIHR's November 2025 call received two applications, both rejected in May by independent reviewers as insufficiently developed. DHSC is now providing enhanced support—including a 25 June workshop and tailored methodological advice—to help applicants resubmit stronger proposals.
Key findings
- NIHR launched a research call on FGM reconstructive surgery effectiveness in November 2025, receiving two applications, neither recommended for funding in May
- DHSC acknowledges the Committee's recommendation for further research and commits to remain engaged with funding this research area
- Beyond standard practice, DHSC is providing proactive support to applicants: a 25 June workshop offering methodological and technical guidance, plus NIHR Research Support Service assistance for revised applications
- DHSC aims to improve application quality rather than force inadequate proposals through existing funding routes
- Further public updates will follow the applicant workshop with a revised timeline for research commissioning
Tone
FactualTopics
health-researchgender-equalityfemale-genital-mutilationmedical-ethics
Key actors
Professor Lucy Chappell, DHSC, NIHR, Women & Equalities Committee, Sarah Owen MP
Notable line
“… we are now undertaking activity to support and work with these applicants in resubmitting high-quality applications to this call.”
Key Quotes
“While we received two applications to this call, our independent funding committee recommended in May that neither application was ready for funding at that time.”
“This is a complex area to conduct research, and it is important that the research we fund is feasible, robust, and will deliver impact for patients”
“This is additional to our usual approach for managing unsuccessful applications, but is based on our previous experience of working with applicants to enable a better quality application”
Source · parliament.uk record ↗