Below, we see our S-Web 5.2 UKRI demonstration page. This system not only improves assessment but also benefits applicants directly. When they fill in the online forms, their submission transforms into a beautiful website or menu within an existing website or app.

Rather than just funding projects, UKRI can actively promote UK innovation by establishing a network of dynamic websites. In S-Web 6, these sites evolve into AI-powered applications, incorporating affiliate resale that monetises products and services through the Swapping Menus Function.

This approach allows UKRI to fully evaluate the projects it funds, mitigate fraud and inefficiency, and allocate future funding to be based on measurable results.

Project Summary

Describe your project briefly and be clear about what makes it innovative. We use this section to assign the right experts to assess your application.

Your answer can be up to 400 words long.

Public Description

• Describe your project in detail and in a way that you are happy to see published.
• Do not include any commercially sensitive information.
• If we award your project funding, we will publish this description. This can happen before you start your project.

Your answer can be up to 300 words long.

Scope

• Describe how your project fits the scope of the competition.
• If your project is not in scope, it will not be sent for assessment.
• We will tell you the reason why.

Your answer can be up to 400 words long.

Question 4. Your idea and innovation

What is your idea and innovation, and why is it game-changing?

Explain in your answer:

• The specific innovation you propose to develop
• How your innovation is clearly different from alternative solutions that are already available
• Whether the innovation is for new solutions in existing areas, or a totally new approach or idea
• The specific need or challenge you propose to address and who would benefit from it immediately and longer term
• Any work you have already done to respond to this need, for example, if the project focuses on developing an existing capability or building a new one
• Any challenges or opportunities relating to equality, diversity and inclusion arising from your project

Your answer can be up to 600 words long.

You must submit an appendix to support your answer. It can include diagrams or charts to showcase the technical merit of your innovation and should evidence how it is world leading. It must be a PDF no larger than 10MB. It can be up to two A4 pages but must be legible at 100% zoom.

Assessors will be looking for proposals involving a game-changing, world-class innovation where the innovation need is clearly defined. The nearest state of the art is understood and evidenced, and the proposal demonstrates an idea that is different from, and ahead of, alternative, already available solutions.

A fully developed proposal needs to go beyond presenting a brand new, commercially viable idea and should demonstrate a structured and evidenced understanding of the sector and the opportunity identified.

Justification for Funding

Smart grants are a highly competitive competition, where only the very best game-changing and disruptive ideas, which score highly, will be successful in securing funding.

Explain in your answer:

• The journey you have followed to ensure you are ready for Smart grant funding, including any training, support, and mentoring you have undertaken.
• Any other routes of investment, including alternatives from the public and private sectors, that you have already explored, why they are unsuitable, or why your application was turned down.
• Why you consider Smart funding to be the right route for your project, organisation, and consortium, where applicable.
• What will happen to your project if you are not successful in securing Smart funding.
• What clear advantages public funding would offer your project that other routes would not—for example, enabling partnerships, leveraging wider investment, reducing risk, and accelerating routes to market.
• Why public funding is justified as a means to fund this project.

Your answer can be up to 400 words long.

Assessors will be looking for:

• Applicants who have researched the match between their needs and grant readiness against the scope of the competition before applying for Smart funding.
• The impact that Smart funding will have in terms of what would happen to the project if it did not secure grant support. For example, would it still be able to go ahead, albeit with adjustments, or would it not be able to go ahead at all?
• For projects where benefits will accrue to others outside the project, they will look at the unique advantages Smart public funding will bring in de-risking the costs for the applicants.

The Potential Market

What is your target market and what is your strategy for securing the market opportunity you have identified, including your route to market and commercialisation of project outputs?

Explain in your answer:

• The size and current structure of the specific markets you are targeting, including international, domestic, or both, supported by current market data.
• The structure and dynamics of the target markets and how your innovation is distinct and strong enough to change and impact these, including customer segmentation, competitors, trends affecting market growth, and predicted growth rates within clear timeframes.
• Who is ready to commit to buying your innovation, and how you will ensure significant return on investment (ROI), including evidence from any end user or market research that you have already carried out.
• Your agreed plan for exploitation, your proposed route to market and commercialisation, including your business models and any partnerships you have formed or will be looking to form to secure market share.
• The export potential for your project outputs.
• Any barriers to entry and how you will overcome these.
• Your freedom to operate and your project outcome’s potential for significant but realistic returns.

Your answer can be up to 400 words long.

Assessors will be looking for:

• Proposals where the target market and customer base have clearly been researched and defined, and a strong understanding of the potential markets, including how the proposed innovation will disrupt these in an ambitious way, has been presented and evidenced.
• Route to market and commercialisation plans that demonstrate business skills and planning, the potential for early revenue generation, de-risking the path to significant ROI, and how commercial viability will be achieved.
• All plans must be realistic, appropriate, and practical for the identified market, including any barriers that exist and provide achievable solutions to show how these will be overcome.

Impact and Benefits

What will be the impact of receiving the grant, both for your business and outside your organisation?

Explain in your answer:

• The nature of the outputs you expect from your project, for example, reports, demonstrator, know-how, new process, product or service design, and how these will help you to target the need, challenge, or opportunity identified.
• How your project fits with your current product, service lines, or offerings and how your organisation will profit from the innovation, including increased revenues, growth, or cost reduction.
• How your innovation will affect your share of the market, productivity, and growth, in both the short and the long term.
• The timescale needed to realise these benefits.
• How your innovation will impact the creation, safeguarding, or displacement of jobs, both within your consortium and the wider sector.
• How you will protect and exploit the outputs of the project, for example, through know-how, patenting, designs, or changes to your business model.
• The sustained, long-term expected impacts on the UK economy, society, and the environment, to your customers, supply chains, and the broader sector.
• Any expected regional impacts.
• Any negative impacts that you have identified, and how you will mitigate against these.
• How you have considered equality, diversity, and inclusion in the development and design of your innovation, for example, unintended exclusion of minority groups.

Your answer can be up to 600 words long.

Assessors will be looking for:

• Proposals that deliver and evidence considerable positive impact for the organisations involved and for the wider economy.
• Impact should be considered at every level, from job security or creation and safer working environments or practices to developing skills, capacity, and increasing market share.
• Societal, environmental, and regional benefits should also be demonstrated and measured, for example, benefits to quality of life, public empowerment, and waste avoidance.

Delivering Your Project

Who is in the project team, why do you have the right skills and experience to succeed, and how will you successfully deliver your project?

Explain in your answer:

• The roles, skills, expertise, and experience, including in project and risk management, of all team members, which are relevant to ensuring successful delivery of the project.
• The diversity of the project team that is relevant to your approach, observing confidentiality of protected characteristics.
• Your capability to deliver in the required timeframe, given your existing business activities or constraints, and considering no extensions or delays to the project duration are possible for Smart-funded projects.
• Any roles you will need to recruit for, and how you will promote equality, diversity, and inclusion.
• The resources, equipment, and facilities needed for the project and how you will access them.
• The details of any vital external parties, including subcontractors, who you will need to work with to successfully complete the project and why these tasks cannot be carried out by project partners.
• The current relationships between project partners and how these will change as a result of the project, if your project is collaborative.
• Your approach to project management, identifying any major tools and mechanisms you will use to secure a successful project outcome.
• How your project team will deliver outcomes and impact beyond the life of the project, and how you will ensure swift, successful commercialisation following project completion.

Your answer can be up to 400 words long.

You must submit a project plan to support your answer. This needs to be in sufficient detail to identify any links, dependencies, or potential duplication between work packages or milestones.

Your appendix can include diagrams and charts. It must be a PDF no larger than 10MB, up to two A4 pages, and legible at 100% zoom.

You must also submit a risk register, indicating the main risks for your project, including but not limited to technical, commercial, managerial, and environmental.

It must include:

• Any identified interdependencies between these risks, the likely impact, and your mitigation strategy.
• Particular attention to how you will mitigate project delivery risks with your immediate and extended teams, for example, your supply chain or end users.
• A PDF format, up to two A4 pages long, no larger than 10MB in size, with a legible font at 100% zoom.

Assessors will be looking for:

• Strong and capable project teams, who have clearly shown and evidenced their capacity to deliver the project and outcomes.
• Skills in managing complex R&D projects, financial and risk management, as well as technical skills relating to the nature of the innovation itself.
• Realistic project plans showing how progress will be tracked and managed.
• A comprehensive risk register that provides confidence in mitigation strategies and tools for overcoming challenges.
• Clear relationships between consortium members (if applicable) and how these will lead to successful delivery.
• Post-project strategies for commercialisation that are adequately resourced and take into account existing business commitments.

Project Plan (Appendix 1)

You must submit a project plan to support your answer. This needs to be in sufficient detail to identify any links, dependencies, or potential duplication between work packages or milestones.

Appendix Requirements:

• Must include diagrams and charts where necessary.
• File format: PDF.
• File size: No larger than **10MB**.
• Document length: Up to **two A4 pages**, legible at 100% zoom.

Assessors will be looking for:

• Project teams that clearly demonstrate their capacity to deliver the project successfully.
• Evidence of skills in **R&D project management, financial management, risk management, and technical execution**.
• A **realistic and structured project plan** showing clear tracking mechanisms.
• A **comprehensive risk register** with tools and mitigation strategies to overcome potential challenges.
• Defined relationships between consortium members, showing how they contribute to delivering the work packages.
• Post-project commercialisation strategies that are adequately resourced and take existing commitments into account.

Risk Register Appendix

You must also submit a risk register, indicating the main risks for your project, including, but not limited to, technical, commercial, managerial, and environmental.

Your appendix can include diagrams and charts. It must be a **PDF no larger than 10MB**, up to **two A4 pages**, and legible at 100% zoom.

Assessors will be looking for:

• A comprehensive risk register that clearly identifies potential risks, their impact, and mitigation strategies.
• How technical, financial, managerial, and market risks are addressed, including interdependencies.
• Demonstrated strategies to de-risk the project and ensure smooth execution.

Value for Money

How will you spend your grant funding and how does this represent good value for money for the taxpayer?

Explain in your answer:

• What the funding will be spent on and how costs are distributed between consortium partners, if applicable.
• A breakdown of costs aligned with tasks or work packages, and how best value for money has been calculated, for example, quotation comparison.
• How you and any project partners will fund their contribution to the project and ensure that this is in place, ready for the latest possible start date stated in the competition’s eligibility criteria.
• Any subcontractor costs and how these have been calculated.
• How you will fund and resource any post-project activities to continue your journey towards commercialisation.
• Any wider support that you may need to access, for example, partnerships, private finance, and export advice, and how this is critical to project success.

Your answer can be up to 400 words long.

Assessors will be looking for:

• Proposals where costs are commensurate with the work being carried out, with evidence of how best value for money has been calculated.
• Availability of match funding, agreed by all consortium partners (if applicable), to ensure that the project can proceed if successful in this competition.
• Strong financial planning beyond the project to ensure swift commercialisation.
• Evidence that the project is fully resourced, financed, and has plans in place to maximise its chances of success.
• Assessment of funding availability and whether expertise in commercialisation and growth is in-house or externally provided.

OKRs, Points, Collaboration, Royalties, TDD & Completing The Objective

Introduction: This document outlines the integration of **Objectives and Key Results (OKRs)** within the Total Business Systems – Company Controller (TBS-CC), a core component of the Sienna AI framework. It explores how incentivised point-scoring structures drive productivity, collaboration, and innovation. By linking OKRs to royalties, developers and creatives are rewarded in perpetuity for their contributions, fostering a new economic model for software development.

Summary: The OKR system at the heart of Sienna AI is designed to maximise efficiency and foster innovation. A key motivator is the points system, where high-value contributions earn significant scores, with the Hawking Award (🦼 = 2500 points) being the highest. Achievements are visible in team planners, encouraging further adoption and refinement of successful implementations.

Drawing inspiration from the music industry’s royalty system, where songwriters continue to earn revenue decades after a hit song, the system ensures that up to 25% of Sienna AI revenue is distributed among developers and creatives. This model diverges from traditional venture capital structures, making Sienna AI an attractive platform for top engineering talent.

The Quanta Analytica module ensures fair revenue distribution, tracking performance and financial flows in real time. This gamification of software engineering encourages teams to prioritise test-driven development (TDD) and modern DevOps methodologies, addressing cultural resistance to rigorous testing.

By giving higher OKR scores to testing milestones than software completion, the system reverses industry norms that often deprioritise quality assurance. Inspired by David Farley’s advocacy for Modern Software Engineering, this approach mitigates the risks seen in large government failures, such as the UK Post Office Horizon scandal.

Ultimately, the OKR-driven royalty structure transforms the nature of software engineering, ensuring longevity, financial security, and sustained motivation. The first milestone objective for this model is the GP-AI Gatekeeper project, setting the stage for its broader application across Sienna AI’s 10 Technologies framework.

This Government Software Project WASTED $500,000,000... Here's Why

Original YouTube Video: This Government Software Project WASTED $500,000,000... Here's Why by David Farley - MSE Continuous Delivery

Introduction: Government software projects routinely suffer catastrophic failures, with an estimated 87% of projects over $6 million failing. This document explores why large-scale initiatives—such as the £469 million Fire and Rescue Services project—collapse under their own weight. The core issue lies in rigid bureaucracy, flawed planning models, and misguided incentives that prioritise process adherence over actual results.

Summary: Traditional waterfall development remains the default for government projects, despite overwhelming evidence that it leads to delays, cost overruns, and outright failure. Software development is an iterative, learning-driven process, yet governments often assume they can create a perfect plan upfront—a fundamental misunderstanding of how complex systems evolve.

The Fire and Rescue Services project exemplifies these failures. Originally budgeted at £120 million, it ballooned to £469 million without delivering a functional system. Instead of solving problems, the project fixated on meaningless status reports, bloated staffing (with nearly 1,000 technologists from 30+ contractors), and rigid adherence to processes. No one was held accountable, and in some cases, individuals responsible for the failures were rewarded.

David Farley outlines a proven alternative: Start simple, make it work, learn, and iterate. Success doesn’t come from more funding or larger teams but from small, adaptable systems that evolve over time—mirroring how science and engineering truly work.

Innovate UK Smart Grants: November 2024 – Official Application PDF

Competition Details:
The Innovate UK Smart Grants: November 2024 competition provides £15 million in funding for game-changing and commercially viable R&D innovations with the potential to significantly impact the UK economy. Organised by Innovate UK, part of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), the competition opened on 14 November 2024 and closed on 22 January 2025 at 11:00 AM.

Official GP-AI Gatekeeper Application PDF:
This document is the official PDF output generated after the submission of the GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025 application. It is a complete duplicate of the original entry, containing responses to all nine required sections. For a more accessible and scannable version, view the application at the following link: GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025 – Full Application

Issues with the Government CMS:
While this PDF replicates the original application, all links are incorrectly formatted due to a bug in the government’s CMS. Instead of being embedded under text, URLs appear in full, disrupting readability. The system saves links correctly during input, but a faulty export function renders them unusable.

Additionally, the text in the PDF is unselectable, preventing AI parsing and manual copying. This is a fundamental design flaw, as selectable text should be standard in any document meant for review. The lack of link functionality may explain why Innovate UK discourages their use—not by policy, but due to system limitations.

This issue highlights the urgent need for a modern, AI-driven CMS replacement, ensuring accessibility, functionality, and efficiency for future applications.

⚕️⚛️ GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025 – Complete Application plus Video Dialogue

Introduction

This document is the definitive presentation of GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025, containing the full Innovate UK Smart Grants application, along with the complete script from the video presentation submitted on 22 January 2025. It provides a structured, in-depth breakdown of the economic, technological, and healthcare transformations proposed by Sienna AI Ltd.

🔗 Watch the Full Video Here

Summary

The document opens with the script from three key video presentations, where Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s challenge—to determine whether the UK will be an AI maker or an AI taker—frames the discussion. The project aligns with Labour’s five mission objectives, tackling NHS inefficiencies, economic growth, clean energy, public safety, and expanded opportunities.

At its core, GP-AI Gatekeeper is the first of four revolutionary AI-driven healthcare technologies, alongside GP-AI Psych, The Good Doctor App, and GP-AI Physio. These systems aim to reduce NHS wait times, automate administration, and empower medical professionals using modern software engineering principles such as Objectives & Key Results (OKRs) and AI-driven decision logic.

Beyond healthcare, the project has far-reaching economic impact, projected to return 1% of the UK workforce to employment, adding up to £147 billion annually in GDP and savings.

🔗 Read the Full GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025 Application

OKR DevOps – Solving the Cultural Problem for David Farley

Original Version:

Dear David Farley,

In podcast episode ☆DF🚀62b6. How OKR DevOps encourages testing, the episode begins with you and Nicole Forsgren. You talked about how, if you want to endear yourself with somebody, show them a problem that they have that your solution can fix.

I’ve been working on OKR (Objectives and Key Results) Systems since 2016 and its parent, the TBS-CC, since 2002. Its points-driven method for encouragement and collaboration is out of the park in terms of behavioural science motivating and collaborating.

But for you, in your book, which is very dear to me, it seems that the biggest problem you had was the cultural problem around test-driven design and continuous delivery practices.

In the Innovate UK GP-AI Gatekeeper grant application, I had the opportunity to add two appendices about delivering the project. I used this to present the OKR system within it, which mentions that simply by awarding more points for the test than for the completion of the code, when points equal royalties for life if one has a hit (just like music), you solve the motivation problem.

In solving the motivation problem, you solve the cultural problem.

Job done.

The 3 OKR System Documents Within the GP-AI Gatekeeper Presentation:

• Delivering Your Project
• Project Plan Appendix
• OKRs 4.9 Risk Register Appendix

The complete updated document for David Farley, Including the dialogue from the podcast:

GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025 – OKR DevOps: Solving the Cultural Problem

🎬⚕️⚛️ Gatekeeper 2025 – Video Dialogue – Acts 1, 2 & 3

This document contains the full dialogue from the GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025 video, structured across three key acts. It provides a detailed deeper script of the presentation submitted to Innovate UK on January 22, 2025.

Key Sections Covered:

• Act 1: Sienna AI, Keir Starmer’s Speech, Labour’s Five Mission Objectives and the £112 to £147 Billion Economic Gain
• Act 2: Exposing NHS Inefficiencies & The Misdiagnosis Paradox
• Act 3: The 16-Stage GP-AI Gatekeeper Design

For those who prefer a video format, you can watch the full 13-minute video here:

▶️ Watch on YouTube

Economic Growth from Returning 1% of the UK Population to Work

This document provides the core economic modelling and accounting framework for the £112 to £147 billion economic gain outlined in the first of three GP-AI Gatekeeper video presentations:

▶️ ⚕️⚛️ GP-AI Gatekeeper Act 1: 💷💷 The £112 to £147 Billion Economic Gain

It quantifies the financial impact of returning 1% of the UK population to work, along with savings generated through NHS efficiencies, reduced welfare reliance, and mitigated costs of migration-related public services.

This was the document formally submitted to Dr. Dawn Geaches for independent assessment.

GDP Gain from Returning 1% of the Population to Work

• UK GDP in 2023 (Statista): £2,536,090,000,000 ÷ 35,000,000 workforce = £72,460 annually per worker.

• UK population: 68,400,000.

• 1% of the population: 684,000 individuals.

• GDP generated by re-integrating 1% of the population: 684,000 × 72,460 = £49.52 billion annually.

NHS Savings from Full ⚕️⚛️ GP-AI Project Implementation

• Savings in NHS GP Services: £2.85 billion to £3.65 billion annually (~24-31% of the GP services budget).

• Potential savings if applied to the entire NHS budget (£179.6 billion):

- 24% × 179.6 = £43.1 billion annually.

- 31% × 179.6 = £55.7 billion annually.

Welfare Savings

• Savings if 1% of the population no longer claimed welfare benefits:

- Lower Estimate: £10.26 billion annually.

- Higher Estimate: £17.1 billion annually.

Savings on Services Resulting from Migration

• Net migration 2023/2024: 1,630,000 individuals (primarily to meet labor demands), putting a strain on public services like healthcare, housing, and education.

• Estimated strain on public services: £10-25 billion annually based on housing, healthcare, and education needs.

• (The lower threshold was set at £10 billion, ensuring conservative estimates.)

Total Potential Annual Savings and Gains

• Increased GDP: £49.52 billion.

• NHS Savings: £43.1 billion to £55.7 billion.

• Welfare Savings: £10.26 billion to £17.1 billion.

• Savings on Migration-Related Services: £10 billion to £25 billion.

Grand Total (Annual Savings and Gains)

• Lower Estimate: 49.52 + 43.1 + 10.26 + 10 = £112.88 billion.

• Higher Estimate: 49.52 + 55.7 + 17.1 + 25 = £147.32 billion.

💙⚕️ The Good Doctor App Book & Additional Documentation

This is the second document submitted to Innovate UK as part of the assessment for the projected **£112–£147 billion annual economic gain**.

While 2088z36)⚕️⚛️ Economic Growth Gained by Returning 1% of the UK Population Back to Work quantified the financial impact of reintegrating 1% of the UK workforce, this document—alongside **GP-AI Gatekeeper, GP-AI Psych, and GP-AI Physio**—presents the technological and structural designs that would make this return to work a reality.

About This Document

This document was created before the GP-AI Gatekeeper Innovate UK presentation commenced. The development of GP-AI Gatekeeper became a necessary component for the full-scale implementation of The Good Doctor App design.

This version includes the original seven chapters of The Good Doctor App, alongside twelve additional supporting documents at the end.

Chapters

• Chapter 1: Origin of the Name The Good Doctor App – Autistic Insight Meets A.I. Precision
• Chapter 2: Specialist Knowledge Integration – ALL-COMMs and Dedicated GPT-4 Memory
• Chapter 3: Integrating Medical Scans and Diagnostic Technology into *The Good Doctor App*
• Chapter 4: The Good Surgeon
• Chapter 5: Complex Consultations Inspired by House< and Real-World Experience
• Chapter 5c: GP-AI Psych – Big Pharma, Criminal Marketing, and the Prison of the Mind
• Chapter 6: If You Don’t Know, Ask! Sienna AI—Unleashing the Potential of Millennials
• Chapter 7: Training Simulations, Spartan Contracts, and UK Butterfly

The twelve supporting documents at the end of *The Good Doctor App* document:

• 20.12z3] 🌀3. GMC ExWit and OKRs 4.7 for the NHS (From GMC-32) [8 Oct 2024]
• 20.66a] ⚕️ GP-AI Part 1. Revolutionizing Healthcare for an Aging Population [09 Oct 2024]
• 20.66b] ⚕️ GP-AI Part 2. ALL-COMMs – David Farley – Microsoft – Open AI [09 Oct 2024]
• 20.66c] ⚕️ Expanding NHS Efficiency with TBS-CC OKRs 4.7 – Creating a Competitive, Fun Environment in Healthcare [09 Oct 2024]
• PART 2: Podcast Episode ☆DF64 - 🌐 Sienna.gov & UK Butterfly.🌐 Segment 9: (☆DF64f) OKR 4.7 NHS Darlings
• 2075a) ⚕️🌀 The GP-AI Project – User Adoption Strategy and Sienna AI Integration [27 Oct 2024]
• 20.66d] ⚕️ GP-AI Part 4. OKRs 5.0 – Powering Government Objectives [19 Oct 2024]
• 20.12z5d] 🌀5. OKRs 5.0 - Wes Streeting's role within the 4 aspects of OKR 5.0 [11 Oct 2024]
• 20.12z5e] 🌀5e. OKRs 5.0 – Labour’s NHS Milestone Key Results – for Building an NHS Fit for the Future. [12 Oct 2024]
• 20.12z5f] 🌀5f. OKRs 5.0 – Labour Party Mission Objectives [12 Oct 2024]
• 20.12z6] 🌀6. The GP-AI Project and OKRs Reducing the Waitlist from 7.6 to 2.3 Million by 2029 [20 Oct 2024]
• 2075s) ⚕️🌀 GP-AI Gatekeeper – 9) Deep Dive Diagnostic Solutions – 10) Continuous Learning [15 Dec 2024]
• 2088z1)⚕️⚛️ OKRs – Points, Collaboration, Royalties, TDD and Completing The Objective (Q8-9) [1 Jan 2025]
• 2088z36)⚕️⚛️ Economic growth gained by returning 1% of the UK population back to work ✨ [28 Jan 2025]

S-Web 6 VC AI CMS – A Much Stronger UKRI Validation Process

At this point in the Innovate UK application process, I began documenting the core issues within the current validation system and conceptualising a solution: S-Web 6 VC AI CMS. This document outlines how an AI-driven CMS could significantly improve the UKRI validation process and safeguard against flawed submissions.

Key Topics Explored:

• The Problem: £8 Billion at Stake—But How Much Is Real Innovation?
• Exposing the AI-Generated Grant Application Industry
• The MI6 Example: If AI Can Fool UKRI, It Can Fool Intelligence Agencies Too
• The Real Cost of Medical Record Fraud & The Lucy Letby Case
  • Drawing Parallels with The Good Nurse
• The Government’s Multipurpose CMS: The DWP Oxymoron

S-Web 6 VC AI CMS – A Much Stronger UKRI Validation Process

• The Critical Failures of the Current UKRI/Innovate UK CMS
• Lack of Dynamic Content & Validation Features
• Lack of Collaboration, Research Integration & AI-Powered Networking
• No Public or Private Showcasing of Innovation
• Technologically Outdated & Not Future-Proof
• Fails to Enable Complex, High-Impact Competitions

How S-Web 6 VC AI CMS Fixes This – Applicants Build Websites Instead of Static Forms

S-Web: A 20+ Year Pedigree in CMS Design

• S-Web 1 (2002): CapeVillas.com CMS
• S-Web 1.2 (2006): Affiliate Property Management System
• S-Web 2 (2010): Website Duplication for Affiliate Resellers
• S-Web 3 (2013): Rebuild with CMS Logic
• S-Web 4 (2016): The Birth of Nudge CRM AI
• S-Web 5 (2019): The Ultimate Affiliate & Reseller System
• S-Web 5.1 Websites (2020): The Birth of the Fastest CMS
• S-Web 5.2 (2021): A CMS for High-Level Presentations
• S-Web 5.2 (2025): The Real Example of How Applications Should Be Presented

S-Web 6: The Next Evolution in AI-Powered CMS

• The Next Generation of CMS: AI-Entangled, Automated, and Dynamic
• S-Web 6: A Call for Collaboration & Funding

The Conclusion: A Unified Vision for UK Innovation with Sienna AI

• From Individual Projects to a Unified Ecosystem
• The Problem is the System Itself
• The UK Needs a Real Innovation Ecosystem
• Final Thoughts

GP-AI Gatekeeper 2025 for Dr Dawn Geatches iUK KTM

During the pre-build up to the application, I had the opportunity to speak with Dr. Dawn Geatches. After the close of the competition, I sent her an email where the focus was on:

Validating the £112–£147 Billion Impact

A key outcome from refining this project was a substantial increase in the estimated economic impact. Initially, I referenced a £20 billion figure, but thorough due diligence led to a much larger and evidence-based estimate of £112–£147 billion in GDP and savings annually.

To put this in perspective, this is enough to:

✅ Build the equivalent of the entire HS2 rail network every year

✅ Finance every GP surgery and family doctor in the UK

✅ Support the entire UKRI research programme

✅ With enough spare to build an aircraft carrier

I understand this sounds ambitious. However, I have been researching Economic AI since 2011 (see links in the footer). GP-AI Gatekeeper, GP-AI Psych, and The Good Doctor App are merely the most impactful and easiest-to-deploy components of this system.

I hope the primary focus of our meeting can be on validating these numbers. The formula is straightforward:

1. Do you agree with the figures predicting that GP-AI could generate between £112–£147 billion annually?
   🔗 Economic Growth Gained by Returning 1% of the UK Population Back to Work ✨ [28 Jan 2025]
2. Can the combined technologies—GP-AI Gatekeeper, GP-AI Psych, The Good Doctor App, and GP-AI Physio—realistically increase the UK workforce by 1%?
   While this is outside your scope, it’s clear that if these designs were implemented, at least 1% of the UK workforce could return to work. A more realistic figure is 4% by 2029, assuming development begins this year.

For the most detailed presentation of the medical technologies, please refer to:

🔗 The Good Doctor App 1 [5 Nov 2024]

If the figures above are validated, this application is not just the best application in the last round but rather the most significant project ever presented to Innovate UK and UKRI. If there is another project of greater potential, please advise me so that I do not make this claim publicly.