Hi there
I am a doctor by qualification with over 7 years of experience in health tech building products and scaling businesses.
I am currently working in the UK as a lead product manager. I was selected to join Antler to ideate and start my own venture in the UK and have applied for the Global Talent Visa on the 28th of February with the help of a law firm. I am still waiting to hear back from Tech Nation. Can you please help me with the expected timeline for endorsement via the fast-track route.
Usually it takes 3 weeks to 8 weeks to get a response. For fast track it should be within the 3 weeks period.
Thanks a lot Lizzy
It’s been over a month and I had applied for the fast track route (3 weeks) but I am still waiting.
You can reach out to them again as a subtle reminder. Hoping to hear good news from you.
did you get a reply?
Hi Katrina
I did get a reply and they rejected the endorsement. It has been extremely disappointing especially because the feedback received is inaccurate.
I attached the Antler proof and they chose not to even look at it. They said they have not seen it in the application.
I attached a mentorship document and they chose not to look at it. They says I have not submitted any proof. I have attached it.
All these documents were attached. I expected better quality work from Tech Nation. This has been quite a let down.
I reappealed and it has been a month since then as well. No news from Tech Nation.
Sorry to hear that! Sounds like you got really unlucky with an assessor 
I’m in a similar situation (with another accelerator), been waiting for over a week now, lots of fast tracked ones got a decision in like 3 days.
Yea,
They took 4 weeks for a fast track application and it has been another 4 weeks since the reappeal.
I wish they were more transparent in their approach. Missing acknowledging documents is a very basic error.
1 Like
Wish you all the best Katrina, hope your endorsement comes in soon.
1 Like
Thanks, and hope your appeal goes through quickly! Can I ask how many edits you had on the original application and appeal?
I have not had any Katrina
1 Like
It is possible your application was not well put together. Getting into antler doesn’t guarantee endorsement.what’s the feedback?
Hi Francisca
I’m not sure what went wrong. I had 2 people who have got the global talent visa go through all my documents. My application was submitted by a law firm so that I had the right guidance.
I’m still waiting for the re-appeal.
Do you suggest something I can do to help my case. I really need to get this visa through so that I can go ahead and join antler.
What’s the list of evidence you submitted?
What was the feedback?
Hi Francisca
I had submitted the following evidence
- Antler offer letter for fast track
- MC - Growth of Tech company outside of work, National Award, Growth of Non-Profit
- OC 2 - Speaker with significant viewership, Mentoring
- OC - 3 - Technical documents for high impact products ( 2 technical documents for 2 different software with reference letters from company)
- 3 reference letters
Here is the feedback
The applicant has applied for Exceptional Talent based on Optional Criteria 2 and Optional Criteria 3.
It should be noted that the applicant has applied for Fast Track processing because she has been
accepted into the Antler cohort. However, no evidence was submitted to support the application.
Therefore the application will be processed within normal timelines.
The applicant has submitted the mandatory three letters of reference. They are relatively general and
don’t provide any detailed insights about the applicant. For example, one letter states that she “played
an important role in the advancement and promotion of the telehealth sector” and “implemented
innovative processes” but provided no details. Another letter states that she “spearheaded a series of
innovative initiatives” but again provided no details.
The applicant has not led or contributed to an industry-led technology initiative. Nugenomics is an early
stage startup—it is not an “industry-led initiative”.
In addition, she has not led the growth of an NGO or social enterprise. She provides a description of the
Action Covid Team including the signing of several partnership agreements. However very limited
evidence has been provided—email correspondence regarding the submission of a report does not
suffice as evidence.
We accept that the Bharat award demonstrates recognition but this isn’t sufficient to meet the MC.
Overall, the applicant lacks significant recognition within the digital technology sector. She has not been
featured in major media outlets or publications, nor has she served as a keynote speaker at prominent
tech or healthtech conferences or events. Furthermore, she has not received endorsements from
leading industry experts beyond her immediate work colleagues. Additionally, she has not made
consistent and notable contributions to the broader technology community.
Optional Criteria 2 requires the applicant to provide proof of recognition for work outside their immediate
occupation that has contributed to the advancement of the sector.
The applicant is a member of GAPIO and has delivered talks and webinars. She submitted evidence of
two webinars on the 25th and 27th January 2024 which is only four weeks before the submission of this
application.
Although Salaso won an award, there is no reference to the applicant and she doesn’t appear as one of
the recipients in the photo.
There is no evidence of mentoring activities that were listed in the application.
The applicant meets the requirements of Optional Criteria 3.
Based on the above, the applicant has not provided sufficient or compelling evidence and cannot be
endorsed for this visa.