LJMU REF 2029 Code of Practice

The LJMU Code of Practice governs how LJMU will run its REF 2029 submission, including which staff contracts count toward the volume measure and how research outputs are selected. It is built around the principles of robustness, transparency, and equity and inclusion.

It was first planned by Research and Innovation Services with input from professional services, the Vice-Chancellor's Office, and Faculty Associate Deans for research and Knowledge Exchange. It then went through three phases: an internal drafting phase (April to October 2025), an open staff consultation (November 2025 to January 2026), and a revision/approval phase before submission to REF in February 2026.

After consultation, the draft and its Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) were reviewed and approved by the University Research and Knowledge Exchange Committee (URKEC) and the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) before submission to Research England for external review and approval.

All ‘Teaching and Research’ (Academic Employment Function 3 / ACEMPFUN=3) contracts are automatically treated as having SRR if the written job description includes an expectation of research activity. 100% of such staff are returned. There is no further selection or assessment step. This decision process applies across all Units of Assessment (UoAs).

Job descriptions are held by Human Resources and linked to the HESA Staff record by employment.

This only applies to ‘Research-only’ (ACEMPFUN=2) contracts for return in the annual HESA Staff record. Six criteria are used, as itemised in the Code of Practice. Meeting any one criterion is sufficient.

Human Resources supplies staff lists to School Directors, who lead the assessment (with input from Unit of Assessment Co-ordinators and, where needed, HR or line managers). Completed assessments proceed to URKEC for a light-touch sign-off review before staff are notified by email.

Yes. Appeals can be made on grounds of incorrect process, a change in job role, or defective evidence. Staff have 10 working days (20 for those on parental or health-related leave) to notify intent to appeal, and up to 25 working days (30 for those on leave) to submit a full written case, sent to a dedicated appeals email address.

An Appeals Panel made up of the Academic Lead for the Researcher Development Concordat, the Deputy Director of Human Resources, and the Associate Dean for Research and Knowledge Exchange from the opposite Faculty to the initiating staff member. The panel members are independent of the original decision-makers. The panel’s written decision is final, though staff can request a follow-up feedback meeting.

Each eligible contract is mapped to the UoA which it is most associated with using two criteria in order of priority: (1) the job description's stated research subject area or (2) the expectation as set by the School Director. School Directors and Unit of Assessment Co-ordinators will agree the mapping.

The Faculty Research and Knowledge Exchange Committee REF Executive (FRKEC REF) reviews for accuracy and double counting. URKEC then ratifies via a light-touch sampling review. After this, Human Resources uploads the results to the annual HESA staff record.

Output selection starts from self-nomination: individual staff nominate their own outputs on an ongoing basis (via the Symplectic Elements system), which are then internally reviewed. Outputs can be externally re-reviewed as needed. The Central REF team and Unit of Assessment Co-ordinators use reviews to build output selection models, which go to FRKEC REF, then URKEC for approval, then ELT for final sign-off before submission.

Unit of Assessment Co-ordinators support staff returning from maternity or paternity leave or health-related absence to nominate outputs. Co-ordinators may also nominate eligible outputs on behalf of staff who have retired or left the University other than through involuntary redundancy.

Outputs solely linked to staff made redundant through involuntary redundancy are not submitted. Outputs from staff who held an eligible employment relationship but then left through a scheduled contract end or resignation can still be considered.

As part of its Strategy, People and Research Environment (SPRE) statement, each UoA prepares a Statement of Representation describing its research areas, groups, and typical output types. The Statement of Representation is used to check that the proposed output selection genuinely reflects the unit's research.

No. The Code states explicitly that REF is not to be treated as a reflection on individual staff performance.

No. The Code states that AI Large Language Models may not support or supersede expert peer review. The University considers using AI LLMs to assess research quality or representativeness inappropriate and ineffective.

Yes. Part 1.3 (‘Update on Actions Since REF 2021’) sets out changes and their rationale. It reflects on findings in the LJMU REF 2021 Equality Impact Assessment (for example gender disparity in SRR status, and fewer outputs submitted for female staff returning from parental leave) and lists subsequent changes for REF 2029, which include:

• a fuller decoupling of output selection from staff selection
• a move from annual SRR assessment to automatic identification via job descriptions
• research independence moving from a staff self-report survey to automatic consideration for all research-only staff
• removing ‘core’ type membership of a Research Centre/Institute as a standalone marker of SRR
• new university positionality, such as the LJMU Statement on Responsible Research Assessment