Reviewer response for version 1
This article provides an update on the ELIXIR-UK role in setting up and providing training resources and tools for both the UK and the broader ELIXIR community. 
It provides a good overview of the activities conducted and work achieved since 2014. 
The article then also provides an opinion of the funding situation supporting training activities.
Some general comments for improvement:
- The title and abstract indicate that the article will be about ELIXIR-UK and its role as lead of ELIXIR Training, and the work it has accomplished both for the UK and ELIXIR in this training sphere. 
The introduction even ends with an excellent summary statement "This report provides an overview of ELIXIR-UK's role in bioinformatics training at the national level." 
However, the article scope goes beyond what is indicated by the abstract, and frequently includes funding issues and statements. 
While I recognize the need to acknowledge funding sources (can be done under Grant Information section) and to highlight funding shortfalls, I am not convinced that the current organization of repeating funding sources and problems in each section is the ideal organization as it appears to be a complaint rather than a constructive opinion. 
Grouping all funding related content into one section (Future Plans section) would greatly improve the read and tone of the article. 
In fact, splitting the article in 2 would be ideal - one article would be the report, as described by the abstract; and the second article would be the opinion, and could describe the future directions/funding opinions expressed at the end of the current article and throughout each section.
- Some references are hyperlinks and others are superscripts to the Reference Section. 
It would be better to be consistent. 
For example, the GOBLET survey on page 3 is a hyperlink to the publication rather than being listed in the reference section.
- Some resources are missing hyperlinks, particularly the ELIXIR-UK website on page 3. 
Please add hyperlinks to text missing them. 
Another example on page 6, for core Key Performance Indicators identified by the group. 
A hyperlink (or further text on the KPIs) to the KPIs in particular would be helpful to groups looking to implement similar metrics in their own training programs.
- What is the model for resources used in the statistics training and metabolomics training? 
Is the training software free or commercial software? 
How does commercial software align with the mandate of ELIXIR-UK and ELIXIR to train broadly?
- Page 5, Clinical Genomics, are there not other institutes like EBI involved in Clinical Bioinformatics training? 
As a North American, EBI comes to mind as an important training centre in the UK, yet is not discussed in this article. 
In general, where do these other very visible training groups in the UK fit into ELIXIR-UK?
- Page 7, External Liaisons - keep the same order of relationships as presented in the opening paragraph for this section. 
GOBLET section - the establishment and adoption of best practices is fundamental to what or whom? 
Bioschemas section - awkward location of the last paragraph. 
Consider moving up within the section. 
NIH section - North America was also a training expert brought together here. 
Please add.
- Page 8, Future Plans - how is it known that the delivered training programs are impactful? 
What are the metrics of impactfulness? 
Is this related to the KPIs? 
If so, please hyperlink or share the KPIs so that other training groups may benefit from these. 
Why is the cost-recovery model not sustainable? 
The point of a cost-recovery model is to ensure sustainability, otherwise the model is wrong.
- Page 8-9, Future Plans - in general the future plans section focuses more on the UK activities than the ELIXIR wide activities. 
Only the ELIXIR-wide TeSS and Coordination activities are described as going forward. 
Is the training impact and quality assessment work not continuing, and why not?
Overall, this article describes a significant body of work and expresses important opinions on funding its continuation, but would greatly benefit from a reorganization, and possibly a split into two articles - report and opinion.
Structure
Recap
Strength
Recap
Structure
Recap
Strength
Recap
Weakness
Todo
Todo
Weakness
Todo
Weakness
Weakness
Todo
Recap
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Weakness
Todo
Todo
Todo
Weakness
Todo
Other
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Other
Recap
Recap
Todo
Todo