Section 2 – Submissions

Introduction

This section provides guidance to Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) on preparing and submitting their REF 2029 submissions. It provides information on:

• the scope, structure, and content of submissions
• the special request processes available and the requirements for each of these
• the method of submissions
• the survey of submission intentions
• data verification
• data protection
• interdisciplinary and collaborative research

Scope of submissions

Based on allocation of volume-contributing contracts in HESA, each HEI will make submissions organised into submitting units for return into the relevant Units of Assessment (UoAs). In exceptional circumstances, HEIs may request to except from submission a small unit. The arrangements for this are set out in sub-section 3.2.. HEIs will normally make only one submission in each UoA in which it submits, and only exceptionally will this be waived to allow multiple submissions. Such exceptions and the process for obtaining approval for them are set out in sub-section 3.1..

In REF 2029, unit-level submissions will be determined by an institution’s volume measure rather than by the submission of individual staff members. HEIs must make a submission in each UoA for which they hold contracts that contribute to this volume measure unless they apply for and are granted a small unit exception. The volume measure establishes the required number of outputs and Impact Case Studies (ICS) for each submitting unit, based on HESA records of staff with significant responsibility for research and research independence in 2025-2026 and 2026-2027.

Responsibility for mapping contracts contributing to the volume measure into UoAs lies with the submitting HEI. Further detail on how contracts are allocated to UoAs is provided in sub-section 12, Section 3: Volume Measure guidance in the Guidance. Unit-level submissions may draw on research and related activity from one or more organisational areas within the institution, provided this aligns with the subject remit of the UoA descriptor or meets the requirements for aggregation as outlined in sub-section 1, Section 5: Assessment criteria – Submissions in the Panel criteria.

A unit-level submission comprises a complete set of data returned by an HEI in any of the 34 UoAs across the three elements of assessment: Contribution to Knowledge and Understanding (CKU), Engagement and Impact (E&I), and Strategy, People and Research Environment (SPRE). A submission provides evidence to the sub-panel about the activity and achievements of a ‘submitted unit’. A submitted unit comprises the collection of subject structures, research groups and research activity in an HEI, that collectively contribute to all or part of the total institutional submission to the UoA. This includes:

• those staff whose contracts contribute to the volume measure (as outlined in Section 3: Volume measure guidance in the Guidance)
• those staff with substantive links to the HEI whose research outputs meet the UoA descriptor (as outlined in sub-section 6.1, Section 4: CKU guidance in the Guidance)
• those staff who have produced eligible underpinning research for ICS (as outlined in sub-section 8., Section 6: E&I guidance in the Guidance)
• the wider research community underpinning the research environment, including all research staff, staff who enable or support research, impact and engagement, and research students (as outlined in sub-section 3.5., Section 7: SPRE guidance in the Guidance)

By extension, a submitted unit also means:

• the research produced during the REF publication period (1 January 2021 to 31 December 2028) with a substantive link to the HEI and which aligns with the UoA descriptor or meets the criteria for aggregation
• research within that UoA descriptor, or that meets the criteria for aggregation, undertaken within the institution (between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2028), which underpins submitted ICS
• the structures, strategies, practices and environment that support research, research engagement and/or impact during the assessment period

For REF 2029 there is an institution-level submission to SPRE that comprises information about the institution’s strategy and enabling infrastructure to support research and impact, relating to the period 1 August 2020 to 31 July 2028.

Submission to REF 2029 is contingent on having a Code of Practice approved by the relevant funding body. Further details on Codes of Practice can be found in Section 8: Code of Practice guidance in the Guidance.

Joint submissions

We encourage joint submissions in a UoA by two or more UK institutions, where this is the most appropriate way of describing the research they have developed or undertaken collaboratively. Two considerations drive the method for joint submissions:

• panels should receive joint submissions in the form of a unified entry, enabling them to assess a joint submission in the same way as submissions from a single institution
• the REF team must be able to verify data in a joint submission through the HEIs to which the data relates

Joint submissions may be made by HEIs that are from different countries in the UK. In such cases, any funding will be allocated to each HEI according to the funding method of their respective funding body.

Purely for REF 2029 administrative purposes, one HEI needs to be identified as the lead in terms of management and data security of a joint submission. ICS and the unit-level SPRE statement (ULS) will be submitted by the lead HEI on behalf of all other HEIs in the joint submission. Each HEI involved in the joint submission will submit separate research outputs and quantitative data for SPRE. Each HEI’s institution-level SPRE statement (ILS) will be provided to the sub-panel for the joint submission.

When an institution creates a joint submission in the Submission system, the system will determine the required numbers of outputs and ICS for the joint submission based on the volume measure derived from HESA. The Submission system will include the facility for HEIs involved in joint submissions to give ‘View’ and ‘Edit’ permissions to the other HEIs involved in the relevant UoA. In order for sub-panels to be able to judge joint submissions like a single submission, the REF team will aggregate the data from each HEI, enabling the sub-panel to receive and assess it as a coherent whole.

Panels will assess the joint submission as they would a single submission, and the outcome will be a single set of quality sub-profiles at unit level. The overall quality profile for this joint submission for each participating HEI will be produced by combining the single unit-level sub-profile for SPRE with each institution’s own institution-level SPRE sub-profile, as set out in Annex A: Quality profiles in the Guidance. The quality profile for a joint submission will list the HEIs involved in alphabetical order, irrespective of which HEI took the administrative lead in making the submission.

Panels will provide confidential feedback on joint submissions to the heads of all the HEIs concerned; but the panels and the REF team will not comment specifically on the contribution by an individual HEI to the unit-level quality profiles.

Institutions involved in a joint submission that wish to make an additional individual submission in the same UoA should seek permission via the multiple submission request route as set out in sub-section 3.1. Where a multiple submission has been granted on the basis of a joint submission, the multiple submission is only valid if the joint submission is made.

For joint submissions, the total volume measure will be based on all the volume contributing contracts aligned to the UoA in each HEI, except where one or more of the partners is making a multiple submission in that UoA.

Where an HEI is making both a joint and a multiple submission to a UoA, they will be required to indicate how to split their total volume measure for the UoA between the joint submission and multiple submission in the Submission system. This split of the volume measure should relate to how the volume measure contributing contracts align with the joint and multiple submission. Where an individual has one volume contributing contract with the HEI, this should therefore contribute to either the joint or multiple submission and not be split across both. Where the individual has multiple volume contributing contracts with the HEI these may be split across both the joint and multiple submission as appropriate.

Where an individual holds eligible contracts with more than one of the partners in the joint submission, all of their volume contributing contracts may contribute to the volume measure of the joint submission provided the total CONFTE of their eligible contracts submitted does not exceed whichever is smaller of individual’s total eligible contracted CONFTE or 100% CONFTE (as outlined in paragraph 11.8.3., Section 3: Volume Measure guidance in the Guidance).

Where an HEI is making both a joint submission and a multiple submission, no output can be returned in both the joint and multiple submission, regardless of which institution holds the substantive link(s) to the output.

Following conclusion of REF 2029, each of the UK funding bodies will distribute research funding in line with its individual funding formula. Assuming that the volume measure will be an element in those formulae, the funding bodies envisage using the actual volume measure submitted by each HEI involved in a joint submission, unless the HEIs involved propose a different, agreed percentage split of funding at the time of submission. HEIs may also request that this percentage split is published in the final results. Should the funding bodies decide to use a dynamic volume measure in future funding allocations, they will consult with HEIs that have both joint and multiple submissions in a UoA over the implications for volume measure splits.

Technical guidance for the submission system will provide further information on procedures for making joint submissions.

Special requests

Special requests enable institutions to seek approval for a limited range of exceptions or adjustments to the standard REF 2029 submission requirements. These requests must be made to the REF team by the relevant deadlines. The criteria and approvals processes for each type of special request are detailed below.

The special request process allows for the tailoring of REF 2029 submissions to enable HEIs to show their excellence to best effect. These include the shaping and excluding of units and the submission of classified material.

There are six types of special request with three sets of deadlines:

Requests made in the Submission system with deadlines in March, June and October 2027

1. requests to make multiple submissions to a UoA
2. requests for exception from submission for small units
3. requests for appropriate assessment for outputs and ICS with security classifications

Requests made in the Submission system with a deadline in 2028

4. requests for exception from the substantive link requirement for outputs (deadlines in February and July 2028)
5. unit reduction requests for equality-related (ER) circumstances (deadline July 2028)

Requests made by email with a deadline in July 2028

6. unit reduction requests for major unforeseen events

For transparency, a summary of small unit exceptions and unit reductions will be published alongside the quality profiles.

Information on approved special requests for unit reductions, the number of approved exceptions from the substantive link requirement for outputs, and approved multiple submissions will be made available for context to the sub-panels when assessing the ULS. The number of approved small unit exceptions will be made available to the IL SPRE Panel for context in the assessment of ILS.

For each request type, the REF team aim to provide outcomes to HEIs within two months of the deadline for that request.

Requests to make multiple submissions to a UoA

Institutions will normally make one submission in each UoA they submit to. They may exceptionally, and only with prior permission from the REF Director, make more than one submission (multiple submissions) in the same UoA. These exceptions are:

• where an institution involved in a joint submission wishes to make an additional individual submission in the same UoA
• in Sub-panel 26 (Modern Languages and Linguistics) where one submission is in Celtic Studies and the other in Modern Languages and Linguistics. This has been agreed in recognition of the special cultural significance of Celtic Studies in parts of the UK, and the particular legal status of the Welsh language in Wales and Scottish Gaelic in Scotland
• where a sub-panel considers there is a case for multiple submissions in its UoA, given the nature of the disciplines covered and as outlined in sub-section 5 of Section 5: Assessment criteria – Submissions in the Panel criteria
• where HEIs merge after 1 July 2026, they may seek permission to make two separate submissions in some or all of the UoAs in which they wish to submit, if they anticipate difficulty in achieving academic cohesion between the merger date and the submission date. Requests to make two submissions in only some of the UoAs must be accompanied by strong evidence that the environments for supporting research and enabling impact for each proposed submitting unit are still clearly separate and distinct. Where institutions are considering mergers during this REF assessment period, they are encouraged to email info@ref.ac.uk to discuss how this may affect their submission to REF 2029 as early as practicable

We will invite requests to make multiple submissions in late 2026. There will be three staggered deadlines for requests in March, June and October 2027.

A separate application to make multiple submissions will be required for each UoA in which the HEI wishes to make multiple submissions. All requests for multiple submissions must be made through the Submission system. All multiple submission requests an HEI intends to make must be submitted by the same deadline.

To be granted approval for a multiple submission, institutions will need to make a convincing case that:

• the bodies of research to be listed in each proposed submission fall within the scope of the UoA but are clearly academically distinct from each other and
• the environments for supporting research and enabling impact of each proposed submitted unit are clearly separate and distinct, without significant overlap in their research or staffing strategies, infrastructure, facilities or any other aspects to be described in the textual parts of submissions

All requests will be judged by the REF Director, in consultation with the relevant main and sub-panel chairs. In considering these requests, administrative convenience of the submitting institution, or its preference for separate assessment outcomes, will not be factors.

Requests to make multiple submissions are not binding. An institution may decide to make only one submission in a UoA where they have been given approval for multiple submissions.

A multiple submission for which an equality-related unit-reduction is later approved can only use the equality-related unit reduction if the multiple submission is used.

Where merged HEIs have other approved submission-adjustment requests for their original submission, these can be carried forward into their multiple submissions.

Exceptionally, where HEIs expect to merge before the submission deadline on 24 November 2028 and the intention to merge becomes apparent after the final October 2027 deadline for requests to make multiple submissions, HEIs may seek permission to make two separate submissions in all of the UoAs in which they wish to submit for approval by the REF Director. Such requests should be emailed to info@ref.ac.uk and must otherwise meet the expectations set out above for mergers taking place after 1 July 2026 in respect of multiple submissions.

Where a multiple submission is granted, HEIs will be required to indicate how to split their total volume measure for the UoA between the multiple submissions in the Submission system. This split of the volume measure should relate to how the volume measure contributing contracts align with the multiple submissions. Where an individual has one volume contributing contract with the HEI, this should therefore contribute to one of the submissions within the UoA and not be split across both. Where the individual has multiple volume contributing contracts with the HEI these may be split across the multiple submissions to the UoA as appropriate.

Where a multiple submission is granted, any output must still only be submitted to the UoA once overall and it is expected that submitted outputs and ICS will thematically follow the sub-division of the research areas generated for the multiple submission. Similarly the Statement of Representation and Statement on the Community in SPRE should describe the breadth of broad research areas and people and roles within the sub-division.

Requesting an exception from submission for small units

HEIs will normally make submissions across all UoAs into which volume contributing contracts have been allocated, as appropriate to the research structures of the institution. We therefore expect to see submission of units of all sizes to REF 2029. In exceptional circumstances, HEIs may request an exception from submission for a small unit.

Small unit exceptions are intended to balance the need for inclusivity with proportionate burden. They are not intended to exclude small groups of researchers from existing larger units or disenfranchise those who are able to contribute. The funding bodies acknowledge the significant contribution that high-quality research within small units can make.

Requests can be made for an exception from submission where the volume measure calculated after both rounds of HESA submissions is expected to be equal to or lower than 9.99 CONFTE and where the unit is also demonstrably and exceptionally academically distinct from other submitting units within the submitting institution. It is the responsibility of the submitting institution to ensure that the unit’s CONFTE over this period averages below 10 and this will be validated in the Submission system at the point of final submission. It is not expected that units below the CONFTE threshold would routinely be excepted from submission.

Appropriate small unit exceptions would normally fall under one of the following circumstances:

• the research is in the scope of a UoA in which the institution has not previously submitted, and has not been an area of investment and growth for the institution
• where a previous REF submission has been made to this UoA, there has since been a reduction in CONFTE or a reduction in the strategic importance of the research area in the institution
• where a previous REF submission has been made to this UoA at 5 to 9.99 FTE, the expansion of the CONFTE threshold to equal to or below 9.99 for REF 2029 has brought the unit in scope of the small unit exception process
• where a unit has been granted a small unit exception in previous exercises

Small unit exceptions will only be granted to units that are academically distinct from other submitting units within the institution. Academic distinctiveness may be evidenced where, for example:

• the unit has a clearly defined research focus, strategy, theme or methodological approach that is substantively distinct from other submitting units in the institution
• the unit’s research outputs and impact activity is attributable specifically to this unit and is not returnable to one or multiple other units being submitted within the institution even by making full use of the flexibility within REF 2029 afforded by the decoupling of staff and outputs and the scope of UoA descriptors

In addition to addressing the criteria at 3.2.4. and 3.2.5., small unit exception requests may include reference to how the unit is sufficiently small that meeting the full requirements of the REF submission, such as submitting the minimum of one impact case study, would create disproportionate burden. This information may be provided, where relevant, to contextualise the request but will not be assessed as a standalone criterion.

A separate application for a small unit exception will be required for each unit the HEI wishes to except from submission. All requests for small unit exceptions must be made through the Submission system.

We will invite requests to make small unit exceptions in late 2026. There will be three staggered deadlines for requests in March, June and October 2027. All small unit exception requests an HEI intends to make must be submitted by the same deadline.

Small unit exception requests will be determined by the REF Director, in consultation with the relevant main and sub-panel chairs. Requests will be considered against the totality of submitted units within an institution in order to evaluate the extent to which the unit could reasonably be aggregated within another submitted unit. Advisory Panels may be consulted to support consistency and proportionality in assessment.  

Small unit exceptions will not be granted in combination with a multiple submission request relating to the same UoA.

Requests for exception from submission for small units are not binding. An institution may decide to submit a small unit where they have been given approval for exception from submission.

Requesting appropriate assessment for outputs and ICS with security classifications

There may be specific instances where research concerns topics or has had impacts of a sensitive nature where the material in either an output or impact case study could only be made available for assessment to individuals with national security clearance vetting. For outputs this may relate to the topic of the research, the format of the output, or both. For ICS this may relate to the underpinning research, the nature of the impact, or both. REF 2029 welcomes the submission of both outputs and ICS where this is the case.

This process is separate to the processes for confidential outputs and confidential ICS where sensitivities of material mean those outputs or ICS have not been and/or cannot be published but do not require security clearance to access or assess them. Further guidance on confidential outputs and confidential ICS is available in the sub-section 20., Section 4: CKU guidance and sub-section 11., Section 6: E&I guidance in the Guidance.

To enable submission and assessment of outputs and ICS that require security clearance for assessment, the submitting HEI must request advance permission from the REF Director to submit such outputs or ICS. We will invite HEIs to make these requests in late 2026. There will be three staggered deadlines for requests in March, June and October 2027. Requests must be made directly in the Submission system. All requests to submit outputs and/or ICS requiring security clearance for assessment that an HEI intends to make must be submitted by the same deadline.

Only outputs and ICS classified as SECRET or TOP SECRET would be expected to require this process. This would normally correspond to requiring assessment by individuals with Security Check or Developed Vetting clearance. For further information, HEIs may wish to refer to the UK Government security classifications and national security vetting clearance levels publications. Outputs that have been published and are in the public domain are unlikely to have a security classification or require security clearance for assessment.

In making these requests, HEIs should ensure that the government department sponsoring the research is aware of and supports the submission of the output or the impact case study. Where the HEI is unable to confirm this at the point of making the request, the REF team will consult with the Offices of the Chief Scientific Advisors for National Security and Defence to corroborate the sponsoring department’s support before approving the request.

Requests must provide the following outline information:

• the Unit of Assessment to which the item is intended to be submitted
• whether the item is an output or an impact case study
• a reference for the item. This reference must also be used at the point of submission for the item, should approval to submit be granted, to enable tracking of the item through the assessment process
• the security clearance level required to access and assess the item
• confirmation, where possible, that the sponsoring government department is aware of and supports the submission of the output or impact case study
• supporting information that outlines, insofar as possible given security classification considerations, the research and/or impact area of the item and the expertise necessary to assess the item. No classified information should be included in this supporting information

Permission will be granted to submit such outputs and ICS where the REF Director considers, having consulted the relevant panel chairs and the Office of the Chief Scientific Advisor for National Security and the Officer of the Chief Scientific Advisor for Defence, that:

• the confidentiality arrangements outlined in the guidance for submitting outputs and ICS that include confidential information are insufficient to enable the institution to submit the item in the normal way for assessment and
• it is practicable to identify existing panellists or appoint additional assessors who have the appropriate clearance and expertise, and do not have direct conflicts of interest, to assess the material

Approval to submit outputs or ICS requiring security clearance for assessment will not be binding.

Where permission is granted, arrangements will be made for the HEI to make the output or impact case study available securely to the appropriate panel members/assessors. Only outline information will be made available to the wider panel and no details about individual outputs or ICS will be published.

Where approval is granted for the submission of outputs requiring security clearance for assessment, it will be optional at the point of submission to tag the output with taxons from the broad research area and the research specialism taxonomies. This is in recognition of the limited information HEIs may be permitted to supply to non-security cleared personnel about these outputs.

HEIs should allow sufficient time for such outputs and ICS to go through the relevant organisation’s internal release processes ahead of the submission deadline.

To ensure appropriate calibration and moderation in the assessment of items requiring security clearance for assessment, we will endeavour to ensure that the individuals undertaking assessment of these items are also full panel members, output assessors or impact assessors undertaking a full assessment load wherever possible. As necessary, we may also make use of specialist advisors with appropriate security clearance where appropriately cleared expertise is not available on the panels.

Requesting an exception from the substantive link requirement for an output

As outlined in paragraph 6.8.1, Section 4: CKU guidance in the Guidance, in exceptional cases, outputs sole-authored by staff on excluded contracts (for example, teaching-only or other non-research contracts) may be submitted with prior approval from the REF Director.

This exception is granted for specific outputs (not to specific staff) for which it can be demonstrated that the institution has provided allocated time and funding to support specific research activity associated with the output. Where HEIs wish to submit outputs using this exception, they are required to outline a transparent and consistently applied approach to doing so in their Code of Practice (see paragraph 6.8.2., Section 4: CKU guidance and paragraph 12.5.2., Section 8: COP guidance in the Guidance).

For outputs to be eligible for this exception, staff must meet the initial requirement for an eligible employment relationship to the institution, namely being employed for at least 12 months on a 0.2 FTE contract (see paragraph 6.3.1., Section 4: CKU guidance in the Guidance).

At the point that the Submission system is open for the upload of outputs, HEIs will be able to make requests for exception from the substantive link requirement. There will be two deadlines for these requests:

• February 2028 for outputs published between 1 January 2021 and 31 January 2028
• July 2028 for outputs published on or after 1 February 2028 and for outputs pending publication that the HEI expects to submit to REF 2029

Approvals for such requests will only be made after each of the deadlines and not provided iteratively during the request window.

To make the request, HEIs should upload details of the output into the Submission system as for any other output and provide the following additional information:

• a statement evidencing the allocated time and funding provided by the institution to support research activity associated with the output (maximum 100 words to be entered into a text box)
• upload of documentary evidence of the allocated time and funding provided by the institution to support research activity associated with the output

Requests for exception from substantive link requirements will be determined by the REF Director, in consultation with the relevant main and sub-panel chairs. Where exceptions are not granted, the outputs will be ineligible for submission and should be removed or updated in the system prior to submission.

Approved requests to submit outputs with an exception from the substantive link requirement are not binding and HEIs will be able to de-select such approved outputs from the submission as required.

Unit reduction requests for equality-related circumstances

The funding bodies are committed to supporting and including a range of measures within REF 2029 that are intended to promote equality, diversity, inclusion and transparency. Institutions are expected to meet their obligations under the Public Sector Equality Duty, and it is a requirement of the exercise that they develop, apply and document transparent and equitable approaches to the preparation of submissions in a code of practice.

Equality-related (ER) circumstances include disability, ill health, pregnancy, maternity and paternity leave, adoption leave, other family and caring-related absences and absences relating to gender reassignment or other protected characteristics (as defined in the Equality Act 2010).

The approach to ER unit reductions maintains broad continuity with the principles established for REF 2021, while adapting the detailed arrangements to align with the decoupled framework introduced for REF 2029. The principles are to:  

• ensure appropriate recognition of the effect ER circumstances can have upon research capacity in a submitting unit
• create the right incentives for HEIs to support staff with ER circumstances (and avoid introducing negative incentives, for example, around recruitment)
• recognise the potential disparity in the available output pool for submitting units where the impact of ER circumstances on capacity materially exceeds what can reasonably be accommodated by the flexibility of a decoupled framework
• maintain the integrity and robustness of the exercise – both in supporting equality, diversity and inclusion, and ensuring the credibility of assessment process 
• ensure the submission requirements of the process are proportionate to the identified need for it

The decoupled model in REF 2029 separates the staff contracts used to calculate the volume measure from the outputs selected for submission; the introduction of a substantive link focuses output eligibility on those where the HEI has enabled the research. These changes to the framework have implications for the preparation of submissions, including that:

• decoupling provides greater flexibility for institutions by broadening the pool of outputs eligible within each submitting unit and enabling institutions to determine their submission from this expanded pool in a way that best reflects the breadth and quality of the unit’s research
• requiring an HEI to have enabled the research in submitted outputs creates a level playing field for researchers who join an institution during the REF period. It mitigates the risk that early career researchers are at a disadvantage, which can be the case when outputs can move with researchers between institutions

This overall approach to output submission is intended to support submitting units in meeting their submission requirements in an equitable and proportionate way. Institutions should therefore take a flexible approach to building their outputs for submission in a given unit, rather than setting uniform expectations about output production and contribution to the pool.   

Additional flexibility is provided within the recommended maximum requirement of five outputs to reflect the impact of individual staff circumstances on unit capacity. Significant individual circumstances that reduce the available output pool are a recognised basis for exceeding the maximum of five outputs per substantive link in a submission (see sub-section 7.4., Section 4: CKU guidance in the Guidance and sub-section 11.5., Section 8: Assessment criteria – SPRE in the Panel criteria).

In view of the flexibility provided by the decoupled framework, the funding bodies anticipate that there will be only a limited number of cases where ER circumstances have a disproportionate effect on unit capacity. Such cases will be those where the impact materially exceeds what can reasonably be accommodated within that flexibility and therefore requires recognition through a reduction in the number of outputs required for the unit.   

Unit reductions are not intended to address routine variation in productivity or the effects of staffing changes, but to provide proportionate adjustment where sustained and disproportionate collective disruption from ER circumstances has demonstrably affected the unit. The funding bodies consider that disruption is likely to have a greater impact on smaller units, where there will be less flexibility to absorb its effects. This view is informed by the experience of assessing where the effects from circumstances were disproportionate in the previous exercise, including the Equality and Diversity Advisory Panel’s recommendation that any future reduction process focus primarily on smaller units, and underpins the introduction of a size threshold aligned with the submission size bands used elsewhere in the framework.

Unit reductions should exceptionally be requested for submitting units with a volume measure equal to or less than 9.99 CONFTE. This may also provide an alternative route for some small units that have experienced a disproportionate impact from individual circumstances and are otherwise being considered for a submission exception.

The funding bodies recognise that preparing a request will require some administrative effort, which may be more challenging for smaller units operating with limited capacity. The submission requirements have been developed to minimise this effort where possible, while ensuring robustness in the process is maintained.

The criteria for making an ER unit reduction request are:

• the final volume measure in the submitting unit is equal to or less than 9.99 CONFTE after averaging the HESA return for 2025 to 2026 and 2026 to 2027
• the output pool for the submitting unit is diminished due to a disproportionate reduction in research capacity relating to ER circumstances. For the purposes of this assessment, a disproportionate effect corresponds to a reduction of 15% or more in research capacity over the REF period

Calculating the impact on capacity

For this process, capacity will be measured in person-years across the 7.5 years of the REF period, up until the request deadline. A person-year is equivalent to one full-time role for one year. A unit’s total capacity will be calculated using its volume measure – as this is the basis on which the output requirement is determined – multiplied by 7.5 years.

• for example, a unit with a volume measure of 6 CONFTE would have a total capacity of 45 person-years, while a unit with a volume measure of 9 CONFTE would have a total capacity of 67.5 person-years

When calculating the impact of ER circumstances, institutions will need to calculate absences in person-years.

• for example, one full-time researcher absent for a year due to parental leave would count as one person-year, while two full-time researchers each absent for six months cumulatively over the REF period for ill health due to disability would together count as one person-year. A researcher employed on a 0.5 FTE contract who is absent for a full year would count as 0.5 person-years

The total ER absences will be compared against the unit’s total capacity. To be eligible to request a reduction, those absences must amount to at least 15 per cent of total capacity. Calculations should be made to one decimal place, rounding up from 0.05.

• for example, a unit with a volume measure of 6 CONFTE would need to demonstrate ER absences of at least 6.8 person-years, while a unit with a volume measure of 9 CONFTE would need to demonstrate at least 10.1 person-years

To calculate the percentage impact on capacity, institutions may include the ER absences of staff members whose contracts have contributed to the volume measure only, as it is from this population that total unit capacity is calculated. Any further impacts on capacity that relate to the wider research community may be included in the 500-word case.

Making reduction requests

We will invite requests for unit reductions due to ER circumstances in January 2028, after all unit substantive link allocations and volumes have been finalised in the second HESA return. The deadline for making requests will be 1 July 2028. All requests must be made in the Submission system.

Institutions will not be required to provide evidence alongside a submitted request, but will need to be able to verify the information provided in requests in the event of audit. Processes for collating evidence within institutions must not require individual staff members to disclose or report individual circumstances to the institution for the purposes of the REF submission. Institutions should have robust procedures in place to manage data for unit reduction requests confidentially and in accordance with their obligations regarding the processing of personal data, to minimise the risk of harm to individuals. 

Institutions submitting a reduction request must include a declaration outlining their approach to collation of data, including procedures for managing it confidentially. They will not be required to submit an updated code of practice. The REF team may seek further information where necessary on the process followed, to ensure robustness and consistency with the guidance.

Submitted requests should include a case (maximum  500 words) for the reduction covering:   

• an indication of the level of reduction in research capacity of the submitting unit due to ER circumstances, with an indicative loss of person-years across the REF period
• any additional applicable factors related to disciplinary norms, for example, single-authored outputs, long form/extended process norms
• the nature of the impact on the submitting unit’s available output pool, in the context of the submitting unit’s wider research community and the flexibility offered by decoupling, and any remaining limitations that require the submitting unit to ask for a reduction 

Requests should not include any information on the nature of the ER circumstances experienced by staff that have informed the submission of the request. Institutions need to ensure they can verify any submitted information in the event of audit during the assessment year. Appropriate evidence for the request in the event of audit could include, for example:

• aggregated and anonymised HR records showing time lost
• letters indicating a pause to a grant

Using the estimate of the number of person years capacity lost, submitting units should:  

• calculate a benchmark number of outputs to be reduced by applying the percentage reduction in capacity to the number of outputs required, for example, apply a 30% reduction in the number of outputs required, where the capacity reduction over the REF period is determined to be 30% 
• propose an output reduction that takes into account the percentage reduction in capacity, but also any gains or losses to the output pool, for example, gains from the increased flexibility for output eligibility or losses from disciplinary constraints due to longform outputs

Requests will be considered by the REF Director in consultation with PDAP and the Main Panel Chairs. RDAP may be consulted to support consistency and proportionality in assessment in relation to research diversity.  

Requests will be assessed on the effect of circumstances on the submitting unit’s research capacity within the REF period, including the reduction in capacity relative to the unit’s overall capacity across the assessment period and the aggregate impact of this on the available output pool, taking account of the flexibility provided by the decoupled framework.   

Where a request is made, information on its submission and outcome will be provided to sub-panels, as part of the data describing the submitting unit for SPRE. This information will be limited to whether a request was made and its outcome (granted in full, in part, or not granted) and will not include the details of the request itself.  

Unit reductions for major unforeseen events

Units that have been affected by major unforeseen events since 1 January 2021 can put a case forward to the REF Steering Group to request a reduction in the number of outputs required for the affected unit(s).

The Steering Group will consider cases where there has been a major event affecting the submitting unit’s research infrastructure or facilities that has consequently had a significant effect on the productivity of a large proportion of staff in the unit. We would expect there to be additional, usually external, evidence of this effect (for example, formal extensions to grants).

In making the request, the institution will need to set out (maximum 500 words):

• details of the event, including timing and the nature of the effect on research infrastructure and/or facilities
• how this in turn has affected the capacity of staff in the unit, including details of how many of the unit’s staff were affected, the nature of the effect and its duration, including details of any additional (preferably external) evidence of the effect
• the nature of the impact on the submitting unit’s available output pool, in the context of the submitting unit’s wider research community and the flexibility offered by decoupling, and any remaining limitations that require the submitting unit to ask for a reduction 
• an indication of the output reduction being sought, calculated in line with the guidance on requesting output reductions due to equality-related circumstances

The Steering Group will not require documented evidence with the request, but institutions will need to be able to verify the information provided if asked for.

The deadline for requests is 1 July 2028. Requests should be made by emailing info@ref.ac.uk. Requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis by the Steering Group. Advice may be sought on any discipline-related matters from the main and sub-panel chairs.

Where requests are accepted, the output requirement for the unit will be amended in the Submission system. The sub-panel for the relevant UoA will be notified of the accepted request.

Irrespective of whether or not output reductions are approved, the submitting unit can include details of the major unforeseen event in the narrative sections of the ULS to enable the sub-panel to understand the wider context of the submitting unit’s environment.

Method of submission

 All submissions to REF 2029 must be made through the online Submission system. This secure, cloud hosted service is the only way HEIs can make a submission to the REF.  

Timeline for the Submission system

We are developing software for the REF 2029 to collect submissions from HEIs, on behalf of the four funding bodies. This system will use the REF 2021 system as a foundation, making revisions as required to reflect changes to policy between REF 2021 and REF 2029 and to ensure that the system meets Government Digital Service assessment standards.

The software development will be undertaken following an Agile approach that should allow the release of updates as the development progresses. The special requests feature within the Submission system will be available from late 2026, with further features coming online throughout 2027. A test version of the system will be made available to HEIs and Current Research Information System (CRIS) providers for testing and training. The full functionality of the submission system will be available by the end of 2027.

Institutions will be able to build, check and revise submissions continuously until the final submission deadline on 24 November 2028.

Access and user roles

Each HEI will control its own set of users within the Submission system. Permissions can be set at a granular level: some users may only work on outputs, others on impact, while a small number of nominated authorised submitters (confirmed by the head of institution) will have the ability to finalise submissions on behalf of their HEI. 

Access will be restricted to these institutional users, REF system administrators, and designated audit agencies for the purposes of legal compliance. All information will be encrypted at rest and in transit between the servers and clients. 

Building a submission and using the Submission system

HEIs will be able to build their submissions in several ways and to use a combination of these methods: 

• direct entry: structured web forms are provided for outputs, meta data about ICS, and quantitative data for SPRE
• Word file upload: Word templates will be provided for ICS and Strategy, People and Research Environment (SPRE) statements
• bulk upload: data can be imported in supported formats (XML, JSON, Excel). Schemas and templates will be published on the REF website.
• integration with CRIS: where HEIs use CRIS, submission data may be transferred directly into the REF system using the API or importing data, reducing duplication of effort 
  

At all stages, institutions will be able to export their data for checking and internal use. The system incorporates validation that flags missing or inconsistent information, helping institutions to identify issues before submission. A range of reports can be generated to track the completeness of submissions, highlight errors, and provide assurance. 

Access to research outputs

All outputs that are listed in submissions will be made available to the relevant sub-panel.

For journal articles and conference proceedings, the submission must include a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) wherever available. The system will use DOIs to source metadata, citation counts and, where agreements permit, the full text from publishers. Where we cannot source particular outputs from the publishers, the HEI must provide an electronic copy. Where supplementary information has been published for the output, the submission must include a DOI (or other URL, if no DOI is available) for this, where it differs to the DOI of the submitted output.

For all other types of output, the HEI must provide an electronic copy wherever this is available. Where this is not possible, or where most appropriate, a physical output or appropriate evidence of the output must be submitted (Annex B: Output glossary in the Guidance will be updated with additional information on output collection formats in early 2027).

Final submission

When an institution is ready, its authorised submitter will use the system to finalise the submission. Once submitted, the data and materials will be locked for assessment, and institutions will receive confirmation of receipt. 

Survey of submission intentions

In 2027, we will survey HEIs regarding their submission intentions to assist with planning of the assessment phase. This will inform further appointments of members and assessors to the sub-panels. Through the survey we will ask HEIs to indicate:

• likely UoAs to which the HEI will be making a submission and the likely volume measure for each, building upon the data provided from the 2025 to 2026 HESA return
• main areas of research and impact to be included in the submission and the likely volume of work in each research area (this will need to be in sufficient detail for panels to understand the full range of expertise required for the assessment, and in particular to inform the recruitment of sub-panel members and assessors)
• likely volume of work to be submitted in languages other than English
• likely volume of physical and digital outputs

All institutions intending to participate in REF 2029 will need to confirm this via the survey and complete the required information. Responses to the survey will not be binding, but institutions should note that the information will be very helpful to the REF team and panels in planning their work and especially to underpin the appointment of further full sub-panel members, and output and impact assessors. Institutions are therefore encouraged to ensure their responses are as accurate as possible.

Data verification

All information provided by HEIs in submissions to REF 2029 must be verifiable. We will check a proportion of submitted information from each institution as a matter of course. Panel members will also be asked to draw attention to any data that they would like us to verify, and this data will be investigated. HEIs should therefore be able to provide justification for all information submitted.

For REF 2029, the volume measure is derived from the 2025 to 2026 and 2026 to 2027 HESA Staff record. Institutions must ensure that HESA returns are as accurate as possible. The REF team will verify a proportion of volume contributing contracts and submitted UoA allocations in 2028. HESA data will be used as submitted when verifying outputs information (for example, contract dates where available) and a sample of substantive links will be selected at random for verification against HESA records. Where the substantive link cannot be evidenced by the HESA Staff record, additional verification may be sought from the HEI.

This approach is intended to ensure the integrity of submissions, while recognising that HESA data is collected for administrative purposes and does not require routine justification from HEIs. Where significant anomalies are identified, HEIs may be asked to provide clarification prior to the submission deadline.

For the submission of UoA allocated SPRE HESA data, the Submission system will limit the extent to which the total number of doctoral degrees awarded and grant income that is submitted can exceed the total extracted from HESA for each academic year across the period 2020 to 2021 to 2027 to 2028.

Each submitted impact case study should include details of external sources of information that could corroborate claims made about the impact of the submitted unit’s research. References to sources of corroboration will be provided to sub-panels. Contact details and any data files will be held by the REF team and will not be routinely provided to the sub-panels other than to facilitate panel-instigated audit. We will also audit a proportion of ICS and will examine these sources during that process.

The detailed arrangements for data verification and audit in REF 2029 are currently being developed. We will publish the details of these arrangements in spring 2027.

Where an HEI is unable to provide justification for any piece of information contained in its submission, that information will be excluded from assessment. The funding bodies will consider what further action to take in any case where serious discrepancies are found.

We are conscious of the potential additional workload verification may cause HEIs and aim to minimise this. To this end, data checking and verification will normally be conducted by correspondence with the REF team. If HEIs wish to make it available, our verification team may also seek to rely on any relevant internal audit work that an HEI has undertaken in preparing or submitting REF data. Members of the REF team and other officers of the funding bodies reserve the right to visit HEIs to verify submission information.

Data protection

We will collect, store and process all personal data submitted by HEIs to the REF in accordance with UK data protection legislation, including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018. Information will be processed for the purposes of delivering, conducting and evaluating REF 2029.

Personal data will be shared via a secure system with panel chairs, members, assessors, secretaries and observers, all of whom are bound by confidentiality arrangements. It will also be shared with the four UK funding bodies to inform the selective distribution of public funds for research and to support their statutory functions: the Department for the Economy, Northern Ireland; Medr; Research England; and the Scottish Funding Council. These organisations may use the data to analyse and monitor REF 2029.

Personal data may also be shared, where necessary, with third parties such as academic researchers or consultants commissioned by the funding bodies to carry out research or analysis.

We will publish parts of submissions, including the names of impact authors and contributors. HEIs are responsible for ensuring that individuals whose personal data is included in submissions are aware of these uses and, where required, have given appropriate consent.

Anonymised data will be shared with PDAP for the purpose of monitoring the diversity of staff to whom differing numbers of outputs are attributed within the exercise.

All personal data will be processed by UKRI, acting as a public authority, on the lawful bases of performing a public task. Data will be accessed by authorised staff within UKRI and the UK funding bodies, as well as contracted external partners supporting delivery of REF 2029. Data will be retained and deleted in accordance with the REF 2029 retention and deletion schedule.

HEIs must ensure that individuals whose work is included in submissions are informed about how their data will be used, in line with transparency requirements under data protection law.

Further information on how we use personal data, and how you can exercise your rights as a data subject, can be found in UKRI’s privacy notice.

UKRI may publish anonymised and aggregated information derived from submissions.

Further information about data processing in REF 2029 can be requested by contacting admin@ref.ac.uk.

Interdisciplinary and collaborative research

An underpinning principle of the REF is that all types of research and all forms of research output across all disciplines are assessed on a fair and equal basis, including interdisciplinary and collaborative research. While previous exercises identified challenges in encouraging and assessing Interdisciplinary research (IDR) within a discipline-based UoA structure, REF 2029 seeks to address this through broad UoA descriptors, ensuring panel expertise to assess a wide range of diverse research, and assessment processes designed to support work that spans disciplines such as cross-referral and joint assessment.

REF 2029 encourages the submission of IDR and will support the equitable assessment of this research through the following measures:

• we have appointed a Research Diversity Advisory Panel (RDAP) to advise the REF team, panel chairs and the funding bodies on supporting the equitable recognition of diverse forms of research, including IDR. RDAP will not advise on the assessment of individual research outputs, but will advise on process, and provide advice and support for cross-panel collaboration
• we have appointed two members to each main panel with specific responsibility for providing guidance on the assessment of IDR. We will also appoint at least two members of each sub-panel with specific responsibility for providing guidance on the assessment of IDR submitted in that UoA and to work with panellists and assessors in other sub-panels to ensure the equitable assessment of IDR
• informed by the survey of submission intentions, we will seek to appoint assessors to work with more than one sub-panel where there are strong cross-disciplinary connections between particular sub-panels
• the Panel criteria contains further details on processes for assessing IDR outputs according to the generic assessment criteria for outputs
• outputs may be submitted to more than one UoA where they meaningfully align with the relevant UoA descriptors (where the HEI has sufficient substantive links to the output) and will be assessed independently by the relevant sub-panels in each case. Cross-referral and joint assessment between sub-panels will continue to support the equitable assessment of research that draws on multiple disciplinary perspectives
• within the ILS and ULS, HEIs can provide information about their approach to supporting IDR. The panels will give due credit where these arrangements have enhanced the vitality and sustainability of the research environment

REF 2029 will also support collaborative research through the following arrangements:

• we encourage joint submissions in a UoA by two or more UK institutions, where this is the most appropriate way of describing the research they have developed or undertaken collaboratively
• outputs that are co-authored or co-produced and are listed in more than one submission (whether within the same HEI or from different HEIs) will be assessed on an equal footing to any other output where all submission requirements are met as outlined in Section 4: CKU guidance in the Guidance
• where an impact case study is underpinned by collaborative research within an HEI, and the underpinning research aligns to more than one UoA and each UoA has made a distinct and material contribution, the impact may be submitted to all of the UoAs with which the underpinning research aligns (see paragraph 8.2.6 and paragraph 8.6.3, Section 6: E&I guidance in the Guidance)
• where an impact case study is underpinned by collaborative research across more than one HEI, each HEI with a significant contribution to the underpinning research may submit the impact (see paragraph 8.2.5 and paragraph 8.6.3 in Section 6: E&I guidance in the Guidance)
• within the ILS and ULS, HEIs can provide information about how they support collaboration both within and beyond academia, and panels will give due credit where these arrangements have enhanced the vitality and sustainability of the research environment