Â鶹ӳ»­

Research and knowledge exchange

Research Excellence Framework

*** PAGE CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION *** 

Welcome to the REF2029 Information Hub

Click the topic below for a brief explainer and FAQs

REF2029 Code of Practice

The REF2029 Code of Practice will appear here, once it has progressed through all of the internal Â鶹ӳ»­ approval processes.

Code of Practice FAQs

What is a Code of Practice and why do we need one?

A Code of Practice (CoP) is a requirement for REF 2029. It sets a minimum standard for participation. Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) wishing to make a submission to the exercise must have a CoP approved by the funding bodies.

The CoP sets out how the University is preparing for the REF and how it will decide on the contents of its submission in a fair, accurate and transparent way, whilst complying with Research England’s requirements and rules.

Much of the structure and content of the CoP is pre-determined by Research England and consists of commitments from the University to follow the rules. In particular REF state a CoP is expected to support the following principles:

  • Robustness: submissions should be an accurate reflection of the sector. This supports confidence in the outcomes of the REF and related funding.
  • Transparency: people should understand how decisions about submissions are made and that a fair process is followed. Transparent processes help reassure the sector that the same rules are being followed everywhere.
  • Equity and inclusion: decisions about submissions should be fair and impartial, supporting a diversity of people and research. The CoP promotes inclusive research environments where diverse individuals and research contributions are valued and supported and recognises the wide range of research, roles and people that are essential to promoting an inclusive research environment and ensuring the vitality of the UK’s vibrant research system.

What is outlined in the Code of Practice?

The structure of the document is outlined in REF’s CoP template, which contains 5 sections:

  • Part 1 – an introduction to the University’s CoP which explains our approach to the principles of robustness, transparency and equity and inclusion; how this is contextualised within institutional policies and what updates and actions have been in place since REF 2021.
  • Part 2 – the process we follow to identify academic staff with significant responsibility for research who hold education and research contracts and will contribute to the REF 2029 volume measure.
  • Part 3 – the process we follow to identify research independent academic staff who hold research-only contracts and will also contribute to the REF 2029 volume measure.
  • Part 4 – the process we follow to allocate appropriate contracts to one of the 34 REF 2029 Units of Assessment.
  • Part 5 – the process we will follow to select the required number of outputs for submission to REF 2029.
  • Part 6 – appendices with supporting information referred to in the main body of the CoP.

Who is producing the REF 2029 Code of Practice at Â鶹ӳ»­?

The CoP at Â鶹ӳ»­ is being produced by the RIQI team, in Research & Innovation Services, with oversight from the REF Steering Group, chaired by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research & Innovation, Prof Maria Fasli. The CoP has received scrutiny from University Executive Board, University Research & Innovation Committee, Senate and colleagues with distinct focuses, such as EDI. It has now been shared with colleagues representing UCU, UNISON and UNITE for comment and feedback. Following agreement with the unions, the CoP will be shared with the broader University community.

When do we need to submit our CoP?

The unpausing of REF in December 2025 created a tight timeline to secure the necessary University approvals ahead of the final submission window. The CoP needs to be submitted for approval between 11th and 15th May 2026, with final approvals from Research England set to be received by August 2026.

REF2029 Governance

Information on REF2029 governance will appear here shortly.

Governance FAQs

Governance FAQs will appear here.

Creating the Volume Measure

Information on creating the REF2029 volume measure will appear here shortly.

Volume Measure FAQs

Volume measure FAQs will appear here.

Contribution to Knowledge and Understanding

Information on the CKU element of REF2029 will appear here shortly.

Resources

Determining a substantive link between an output and HEI [PDF 129.55KB] (Flowchart)

CKU FAQs

CKU FAQs will appear here.

Engagement and Impact

Engagement and Impact accounts for 25% of the overall assessment in REF2029. The E&I submission remains consistent with REF2021 with some key updates:

  • Fewer impact case studies are required, with the smallest units now only needing one.
  • The 2* threshold for underpinning research has been removed, allowing for a broader scope of work that underpins impact.
  • Discussion of engagement strategies and responsible research practices is encouraged in impact case studies.

Find out the key information about Engagement and Impact in REF2029 in the video below:

 

For more in-depth detail and the most up to date information about Engagement and Impact, please see the .

Here are some useful documents relating to Engagement and Impact:

If you have a question about Engagement and Impact in the REF after reviewing the above information, see our FAQs below.

If you can’t find your answer here, email the RQI team at rqi@sussex.ac.uk who will be able to assist.

Engagement and Impact FAQs

What does ‘underpinning research’ mean?

‘Underpinning research’ means that the research made a distinct and material contribution to the impacts being claimed in the case study. It means that the impact would not have happened in the way that it did without the contribution of the research. You can find examples of some of the ways research can underpin impact in section 8.6 of the REF guidance.

What does the inclusion of ‘engagement’ mean in REF2029?

We are still waiting for further information from the REF team on how engagement will be assessed, though 3.5.2 in the Engagement and Impact guidance has noted that narratives ‘expressing research engagement across the lifecycle of research’ and including ‘specific consideration of appropriate responsible practices’ will be welcomed. In their follow-up Town Hall, the REF team noted that engagement strategies and responsible practices that enhanced or sustained the impact being claimed are encouraged to be included, but case studies will not be penalised if they do not include them.

Some resources that might be helpful when considering engagement are:

  • Examples of high-quality engagement practice from the .
  • Practical tutorial on high-quality engagement from the .
  • Fast Track Impact’s .

Can research produced by someone not on a research contract be used to underpin an impact case study?

Yes. Research undertaken by staff who are not on a research contract is eligible to underpin an impact case study, as long as the research was produced while they were at Â鶹ӳ»­.

Can research produced by a PhD student be used to underpin an impact case study?

No, research that has been undertaken solely by research students cannot be used to underpin an impact case study.

Can an impact case study go into a different Unit of Assessment to where the research outputs are submitted?

Yes. An impact case study does not need to be submitted into the same UoA as the research outputs, as long as the underpinning research is within the UoA’s remit.

Can the same project be submitted to more than one Units of Assessment or by other institutions?

Yes, the same impact case study can be submitted to multiple UoAs (within Â鶹ӳ»­ or in different Higher Education Institutions) where the underpinning research is within the UoA’s remit. Where this is the case, each unit can provide common descriptions of the impact arising from the research.

Why do I need to collect a consent form when gathering evidence?

Under the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), we are required to inform those providing corroborating evidence or contact details for REF impact case studies as to how their personal data will be used, shared and stored to support our submission to REF2029.

We must obtain their affirmative, fully-informed consent to use this material, with their accompanying identifying data, in – or to support – our impact case studies.

When asking them to corroborate your impact, please ensure that they have read the Â鶹ӳ»­ Privacy Notice for REF2029, and ask them to confirm their consent for us to use their information. We have developed a consent form for you to capture and record this, which is available to download on the REF2029 and Data Protection page. Completed forms should be stored safely and securely alongside evidence material, and the accompanying email exchange, for audit purposes.

How do we deal with confidential or classified information in impact case studies?

It is possible to request that impact case studies are redacted for publication or are not published in the public REF database. Any evidence that is submitted alongside an impact case study is not published in any circumstances.

There will be processes in place for managing any conflict of interest for REF panel members who will be assessing impact case studies. There will also be arrangements in place to review case studies that include any classified and sensitive information that require security clearance. Full guidance on this is to follow from REF in .

The level of security needed can be stipulated by a respondent as part of providing their consent, as per the consent form appendix here. If this is relevant to your case study, please discuss this with the RQI team.

 

Strategy, People and Research Environment

Information on the SPRE element of REF2029 will appear here shortly.

SPRE FAQs

SPRE FAQs will appear here.

Key REF Contacts, FAQ and Links

Key REF Staff, Groups & Teams

Pro-Vice-Chancellor Research & Innovation

Research Information, Quality & Impact

Meet the RIQI team

REF Steering Group

 (Pro-Vice-Chancellor Research & Innovation)

(Director of Research & Innovation Services)

 (Associate Dean for Research & Innovation, Â鶹ӳ»­ Business School)

 (Associate Dean for Research & Innovation, Faculty of Social Sciences)

(Associate Dean for Research & Innovation, Faculty of Media, Arts & Humanities)

(Associate Dean for Research & Innovation, Faculty of Science, Engineering & Medicine)

(Head of Research Information, Quality & Impact)

(Associate Director, Library)

(Research Quality Manager)

Faculty

Research support in each of our 4 Faculties:

Faculty of Media, Arts & Humanities

Faculty of Science, Engineering & Medicine

Faculty of Social Sciences

Â鶹ӳ»­ Business School

Library

Research support in the Library

Links

TBC

Contact us

rqi@sussex.ac.uk