Next steps for REF Managers in SPRE preparations

Whilst the REF 2029 panels finalise the Guidance and develop their criteria and working methods, Cathal and Gemma share how their institutions are beginning to prepare Strategy, People, and Research Environment (SPRE) submissions. This blog has been developed from a session they ran at the recent ARMA (Association of Research Managers and Administrators) REF Forum. 

As the dust settles on the announcements at the end of the pause to the REF 2029 criteria setting phase, those tasked with preparing submissions will be asking: what does this mean for my institution, and where do I begin?  

While the scale of preparation will look different across institutions, with varying resources, capacity and infrastructure, the underlying challenge is shared. 

What we know about Strategy, People, and Research Environment (SPRE) 

SPRE replaces the proposed element of People, Culture and Environment (PCE). Its focus is on creating the conditions for world-class research to thrive. At its core, SPRE is about how institutional strategies and practices: 

• underpin positive, inclusive, and collaborative research cultures 
• enable environments in which excellent research and impact can flourish 
• support, develop, and recognise all those who undertake and enable research  

SPRE is a strategic, narrative-led assessment, focussing on how effectively institutions enable research through their strategies, systems, support structures, and ways of working. This includes how they invest in people, develop infrastructure, and foster collaboration and engagement. It is not a mechanistic exercise driven by metrics or performance indicators. 

In our own institutions, we will be encouraging units to focus on what makes them distinctive. As is good academic practice, claims must be evidenced and credible. There are a range of ways we can do this, and REF does not dictate a single approach. It is important to remember that the much discussed ‘indicators’ are not synonymous with ‘metrics’. They are a broad range of evidence sources that can support and illustrate narratives, rather than drive them.  

We also now know that SPRE represents 20% of the overall UoA score. The Institutional-Level Statement (ILS) will contribute 60% of the SPRE score for each unit, with the Unit-Level Statement (ULS) contributing 40%. This means that the ILS will now represent 12% of each submitting unit’s overall score.  

Both the ILS and ULS follow four sections which will be familiar from REF 2021 – context, mission and strategy; people; income, infrastructure and facilities; and collaboration, engagement and impact. The ULS will build on the institutional narrative, demonstrating how institutional strategies are realised within disciplinary contexts. 

What can we take from the PCE Pilot?  

With the focus now shifting to SPRE, and the template familiar, we must not lose sight of the immense value of the PCE Pilot. The Pilot represented a significant collective effort, involving 40 submitting institutions and 165 pilot panel members who diligently and constructively reviewed and reflected on this material.  

Key lessons from the pilot that we will be encouraging our units to reflect on include: 

• Integrated ILS and ULS templates are essential: The Pilot reinforced that the Institutional- and Unit-Level statements must work together, with ILS establishing strategy and ULS demonstrating how strategy is enacted in practice. 
• Reflection and progress matter: Panels valued demonstrations of ongoing development, adaptation and continuous improvement rather than static descriptions. 
• Credibility and evidence are decisive: Strong submissions combined clear strategy, reflective narrative and robust evidence. Narrative without evidence was not sufficient to support robust assessment.    
• Unit context and distinctiveness is important: The most effective ULS reflected local context and highlighted discipline-specific approaches, rather than relying solely on institutional messaging.  
• Clear articulation of strategy, intent and action: Panels responded positively to statements showing structured thinking, practical steps taken, and plans for sustainability. 

The Pilot Report, read alongside the reflections from REF 2021 Institutional Level Pilot Panel (ILEPP) report, provides a roadmap for early SPRE preparations.  

While the format and structure of SPRE is likely to be similar to that of environment in REF 2021, this should not be taken to mean a return to previous approaches. The emphasis on people, culture and environment remains central, even if the terminology has evolved. The work undertaken across the sector to understand and evidence research culture will continue to be highly relevant in shaping strong SPRE submissions.  

Where should we begin?  

What are the implications of this for REF Managers? While approaches will vary across institutions, there are some common areas where early attention will be valuable.  

Our immediate considerations are:  

• Internal timelines must reflect new structures and weightings. For some institutions, this may be more complex, particularly where staffing changes disrupt institutional memory, but establishing clarity early will help manage this.  
• While we don’t yet have a template or confirmed word counts, the SPRE guidance gives us enough of a steer to begin drafting the ILS, or at least thinking broadly about what will go into each of the four sections. 
• Managing the relationship between institutional and unit-level material is critical. The guidance is clear that overlap between the ILS and ULS should be avoided, so thinking early about how these narratives will align, and where they will differ, will help avoid duplication later. 
• There is, to our mind, less certainty at unit level, so early engagement and shared expectations with units is essential. We are encouraging units to reflect on their distinctiveness, their strengths, challenges, and the approaches they have developed. This can help lay the groundwork for more confident and coherent submissions.  

In terms of practical starting points, we recommend: 

• Start the institutional narrative early: Sketch out ILS content, identify contributors, and build this into governance. Sharing early outline drafts with units to support alignment and transparency, helping to shape a clear and credible narrative. 
• Plan data and evidence: Identify what you need, what you have, and where gaps or format issues exist. Engage early with HR, planning, student data and EDI teams to lay out shared expectations and to ensure evidence can effectively support the narrative. 
• Engage and support units: Encourage early reflection in units on distinctiveness, strengths and context. Clear expectations and ongoing dialogue will support confident, coherent submissions. 

Discussions at the ARMA REF Forum highlighted that there is still uncertainty around SPRE, but also a strong sense of shared challenge and collegiality across the sector. There is still more detail to come, but there is also plenty to work with already. For REF managers, the focus now is on building on what is already familiar, bringing together institutional strategy, unit-level insight, and the evidence that underpins both. Starting early, focusing on narrative, and drawing on the lessons of REF 2021 and the PCE pilot will put institutions in a strong position as SPRE develops. The task ahead is not to start from scratch, but to bring together the work already underway across the sector into clear, credible, and confident accounts of how excellent research environments are created and sustained.

We would like to gratefully acknowledge the input from Becky Gordon (Lancaster University) who developed with us the ARMA presentation that this blog reflects on, from Jenny Hulin (Cardiff University) for providing valuable feedback and the work of colleagues in the Research Strategy Team at The University of Manchester, and the Research Information and Systems Team at the University of Southampton on SPRE preparations. 

As well as being members of the REF 2029 panel secretariat, Dr Cathal Rogers is Research Culture and Assessment Manager at The University of Manchester and Dr Gemma Fitzsimmons is Head of Research Information and Systems, University of Southampton.