A REF impact case study template follows the same five-part structure used since REF2014: a summary, underpinning research, references, a details-of-impact narrative, and corroborating sources. Institutions can start REF 2029 drafts now by mapping verified REF2021 evidence into this structure, using the framework’s new “continued case study” route rather than starting from a blank page.
A REF impact case study is a five-page narrative, assessed on reach and significance, that traces a demonstrable benefit to society, the economy, policy, health or culture back to underpinning research produced at the submitting institution.
- What does the REF impact case study template require?
- How REF2021 and REF2014 evidence maps onto REF 2029
- What has changed for REF 2029 impact case studies
- Step-by-step: building your REF 2029-ready draft now
- Common questions on REF impact case study templates
What does the REF impact case study template require?
The REF2021 template, set out in Annex G of the REF’s Guidance on Submissions, has five sections with indicative word limits: a 100-word summary of the impact, a 500-word account of the underpinning research, up to six references to that research, a 750-word details-of-impact narrative, and up to ten sources that corroborate the claims. Combined with a header recording the submitting unit and a Yes/No flag for whether the case study continued from REF2014, the whole document runs to five pages.
That structure did not appear from nowhere. It is a direct descendant of the REF2014 template, which used the same five sections across four pages, with an indicative combined word limit of around 2,200 words for the summary, research and impact sections together. REF2014 case studies had no header field and no continuation flag, because there was no prior REF cycle to continue from.
- Summary of the impact — a jargon-free, high-level statement of who benefited and how.
- Underpinning research — the specific findings, insights or outputs that generated the impact.
- References to the research — evidence the underpinning work meets the required quality bar.
- Details of the impact — the causal narrative linking research to real-world change.
- Sources to corroborate — named, checkable evidence: reports, data, testimonials.
How REF2021 and REF2014 evidence maps onto REF 2029
REF 2029 guidance, published in stages at 2029.ref.ac.uk, confirms an explicit “continued impact case study” (Continued ICS) route: where impact reported in REF2014 or REF2021 has carried on, institutions submit updated evidence of its extended reach and significance rather than building an entirely new narrative. This makes REF2021 case study files the single most useful evidence source for a REF 2029 draft.
| Feature | REF2014 | REF2021 | REF 2029 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Page limit | 4 pages | 5 pages | Expected to retain the 5-section structure (Section 6 guidance) |
| Header/continuation flag | None | Added — submitting-team header plus REF2014 continuation flag | Continued ICS route formalised for REF2014/REF2021 evidence |
| Underpinning research quality threshold | 2-star minimum | 2-star minimum | 2-star threshold lifted |
| Assessed criteria | Reach and significance | Reach and significance | Reach and significance (unchanged) |
| Element weighting | Impact 20% | Impact 25% | Engagement and Impact 25% (confirmed 10 December 2025) |
In practice, mapping means pulling the Section 4 “details of the impact” narrative and Section 5 sources straight from a REF2021 submission, then adding a fresh evidence layer covering activity since the REF2021 census date. Where a REF2021 case study scored well, the underpinning research and early testimonials rarely need rewriting — only extending.
What has changed for REF 2029 impact case studies
Three REF 2029 decisions directly affect how a case study template should be drafted. First, the three assessment elements have been renamed: Outputs is now “Contribution to Knowledge and Understanding” (CKU), Impact is now “Engagement and Impact”, and Environment is now “Strategy, People and Research Environment” (SPRE). Second, following a sector-wide pause to the exercise announced by science minister Patrick Vallance in September 2025 and results from the SPRE/PCE pilot, the four UK funding bodies revised the element weightings on 10 December 2025: CKU now carries 55%, Engagement and Impact remains at 25%, and SPRE was downgraded from a proposed 25% to 20%. Third, the previous requirement that underpinning research reach at least 2-star quality to support a case study has been lifted for REF 2029, widening the pool of eligible research.
A recommended maximum of five outputs per researcher — the REF2021 norm — was also reinstated in the December 2025 revision, alongside removal of the previous minimum-of-one requirement. None of this changes the five-section case study format, but it does change what belongs in Section 2: underpinning research no longer needs a 2-star quality justification, freeing space to strengthen the impact narrative itself.
Step-by-step: building your REF 2029-ready draft now
Research offices do not need to wait for final REF 2029 guidance to start drafting. The following sequence turns existing REF2021 files into a working REF 2029 draft.
- Pull every REF2021 case study, plus any REF2014 case studies whose impact has continued, into a single tracking sheet.
- Flag each as a likely Continued ICS (impact still developing) or a candidate for a wholly new case study.
- Copy the REF2021 Section 4 “details of the impact” text into the REF2029 draft template as a starting narrative, not a final one.
- Add a dated evidence log for activity since the REF2021 census date — new testimonials, adoption figures, policy citations.
- Re-check underpinning research against REF 2029’s revised eligibility rules, since the 2-star threshold no longer applies.
- Update Section 5 sources with current, checkable corroboration — expired links and outdated contacts are a common cause of lost marks.
- Hold the draft against the December 2025 weighting change: with Engagement and Impact still at 25%, case study quality remains as consequential as it was in REF2021.
Common questions on REF impact case study templates
How do you write an impact case study for REF?
Start from the five-section template — summary, underpinning research, references, details of the impact, and corroborating sources — and build the narrative around reach and significance. Use specific, dated evidence and named sources rather than general claims, since REF panels assess case studies on demonstrable, traceable impact.
How much is a REF impact case study worth?
There is no fixed cash value, but Simon Kerridge’s widely cited 2023 estimate, reported via the LSE Impact of Social Sciences blog, put a single 4-star impact case study from a very large Unit of Assessment at over £2 million in QR funding across a REF cycle. Value scales with UoA size and star rating.
How many impact case studies are needed for REF 2029?
REF2021 linked the number of required case studies to a unit’s submitted Category A staff FTE, on a banded formula rising with size. REF 2029’s Engagement and Impact guidance is expected to retain a broadly similar FTE-linked approach, though the exact bandings are confirmed in the funding bodies’ published Section 6 guidance rather than fixed in advance.
Is REF2021 evidence still valid for REF 2029?
Yes. REF 2029’s Continued ICS route was created specifically so that impact first reported in REF2014 or REF2021 can be resubmitted with updated evidence of its extended reach and significance, rather than requiring institutions to build every case study from scratch.
For research administration teams, the practical implication is straightforward: REF2021 case study files are not archive material, they are the working draft for REF 2029. The template’s core five-section shape has survived two REF cycles and, on current guidance, is expected to survive a third — what changes each cycle is the weighting attached to the impact element and the eligibility rules around underpinning research, not the narrative structure itself. Institutions that start mapping REF2021 evidence into REF 2029 drafts now, rather than waiting for final guidance, will have a material head start once submission windows open.
