DI-M02: Rejection rationale/ eligibility criteria applicants are failing to meet to enter innovation programmes
2024/25 values
53% of applications assessed during the period were accepted for full support, with 9% of applications still to be assessed.
38% of applications were declined for full support. We sign-posted a number of declined applications to relevant material and documents to help their development and/or refer them to colleagues, for example better suited services the FCA offer such as pre-application meetings with authorisations colleagues. Similarly, a 4-week trial period might be offered to Digital Sandbox applicants to explore the digital sandbox.
- A third (32%) of these applications failed to meet 2 or more of our eligibility criteria.
- The majority of declined applications (44%) did not meet the Need for Support criterion. To be eligible for support, firms must be able to describe why they need it, for example if firms have questions where it is unclear how our rules apply to an innovative business model or what dataset(s) they require.
- 39% of declined applications did not meet the Genuine Innovation criterion. While we take a broad view of innovation, we expect firms to set out a case for why their proposal is innovative and how it compares to alternatives in the market.
- 18% of declined applications did not meet the Consumer Benefit criterion by not demonstrating how their proposal helps consumers, or how they will protect consumers from risks the proposition poses.
- 25% of declined applications did not meet the Readiness criterion. Reasons include having a proposal that is not clearly defined or not developed enough for us to provide realistic support, or firms not carrying out the required background research and make a good faith attempt to understand their regulatory obligations before requesting support.
Source: FCA data
2023/24 values
29% of applications assessed during the period were accepted for full support. 71% of applications were declined for full support.
More than two thirds of these applications failed to meet 2 or more of our eligibility criteria:
- 70% did not meet the Need for Support criterion. To be eligible for support, firms must be able to describe why they need it. For example, if firms have questions where it is unclear how our rules apply to an innovative business model.
- 48% did not meet the Genuine Innovation criterion. While we take a broad view of innovation, we expect firms to set out why their proposal is innovative and how it compares to alternatives in the market.
- 48% did not meet the Consumer Benefit criterion by not showing how their proposal helps consumers (either individuals or businesses), or how they will protect consumers from risks the proposition poses.
- 45% did not meet the Readiness criterion. Reasons include having a proposal that is not clearly defined or not developed enough for us to provide realistic support, or firms not carrying out the required background research and making a good faith attempt to understand their regulatory obligations before requesting support.
Source: FCA data