Amendments to data

The error must be a clear mistake, not a reinterpretation or reclassification of data.

We will only use amended data that corrects genuine errors in the previous submissions. We will expect providers to briefly explain the data error so that we can ensure that this condition has been met.

If we identify a concern that amendments were made for reasons other than to address a genuine error (such as a reinterpretation or reclassification), we may escalate the issue internally.

The error affects a significant component of the data (e.g. multiple records or fields).

As a general guideline, a data error should affect multiple records or fields to be considered widespread within individual-level data returns. This might involve a change to the lower of either five per cent of records or 100 records. However, an error that affects an entire cohort for a given course or partnership would also normally be considered widespread, regardless of the number or proportion of records involved. Similarly, if records that are part of the required record for the return have been omitted in error, this would normally be considered widespread regardless of the number or proportion of records involved.

For aggregate data, we may use data amendments that correct less widespread data errors if the nature of the error results in a disproportionate impact. For example, a change to one or two fields in the entire return may still affect funding.

Whilst we would not normally expect a provider to make data amendments for a small number of records or fields (excluding the examples given above), the decision about whether an error is widespread will likely depend on a provider’s context, including its size and complexity.

Providers may find it helpful to reflect on the following questions:

• Is the scale of the error or amendment large enough to influence regulatory decisions or public reporting?
• Does this affect a significant number of students, courses, or financial records?

The error affects one or more of the ways we use the data (e.g. funding, regulation, analysis), or has a significant impact on the provider.

When considering whether to submit a data amendment, a provider should consider the likelihood that it would have a significant impact on the interpretation of data used by the OfS or Research England in different applications.

This involves stepping back from commercial or reputational interests and asking whether a reasonable provider, acting in the interests of students and taxpayers and committed to meeting its conditions of registration, would consider the amendment to be material.

To support this assessment, providers may find it helpful to reflect on the following questions:

• Use of data by regulators
  • Is this data used by the OfS or Research England in a way that could be materially affected by the amendment?
  • Could this amendment change how we are benchmarked to others?
• Impact on regulation or funding
  • Could this amendment affect how our compliance with other registration conditions are assessed?
  • Might this amendment affect any funding allocations from the OfS or Research England?
• Impact on student outcomes or experience
  • Would this amendment alter how our student outcomes are reported?
  • Could this affect interpretations of the quality of our provision or support for students?
• Impact on financial or strategic view
  • Might this amendment affect how our financial sustainability or risk profile is viewed?
• Reputational versus public interest
  • Are we considering this amendment primarily to protect our reputation, or does it serve the interests of students and taxpayers?
  • Would a reasonable provider acting in the public interest consider this amendment significant?

Where a provider decides that data errors should be corrected, it should email us at [email protected]. The email should include a brief justification explaining:

• what the data error is
• which data return and year the error relates to
• why it meets the criteria (whether the errors are genuine, widespread and material as set out above)
• whether or not you consider the error material enough to warrant submission of a reportable event (and, if yes, whether this has already been submitted)
• when you expect to be able to submit the amended data
• a named contact for further information.

You do not need to provide a detailed field-by-field breakdown – a high-level summary is adequate.

The next step is to submit the data amendment in the timeframe you set out in your original email to us, unless otherwise instructed. 

The process for submitting the amendment varies according to how the data was originally returned:

• Data returns submitted using the new OfS portal: Please submit corrected data through the new portal.
• Jisc data returns: We will notify Jisc so they can open the relevant system for you to submit the amendment. 
• All other data returns: We will open the relevant system within the legacy OfS portal for you to upload your amended data.

Once amended data has been uploaded to the relevant system, the OfS and Research England data teams will consider the corrected data, and the explanation provided within your original email to us.

We will ask your accountable officer to sign off the data, and then proceed to use the amendment in our processes, unless: 

• We require clarification about specific data items from the provider. For Jisc collections we will use the HESA Issue Management System to raise queries; otherwise queries will be directed to the named contact given in the provider's original email.
• We are concerned that amendments were made for reasons other than to address a genuine error. In these rare cases, we may escalate the issue internally and may require further information from the provider’s named contact or accountable officer.
• We consider that the nature, extent or circumstances of data error could potentially warrant submission of a reportable event, and you have not confirmed whether you have submitted one or intend to do so.

Amended data will normally be picked up in the next cycle of our routine data processes. For example, any amendments that flow through into an OfS National Student Survey data publication will be incorporated into the next update. 

Where our assessment anticipates a substantial impact on a given use of data, we may use the amendment outside of routine processes. This will be at our discretion. For example:

OfS funding

Amended data may be used to recalculate any recurrent funding allocations that were based on the original version of the data. For example, if errors in a provider’s HESES25 return seem likely to be material, we would expect to recalculate 2026-27 recurrent funding using the amended data return.

If this is done before the final grant announcement for a given academic year, providers will be notified of the changes to grant at the next public grant announcement. If the final grant announcement for the year has passed, accountable officers will be notified separately by email.

Discover Uni

Amended data may be used to correct the data published on the Discover Uni website if errors in a provider’s individualised student data returns seem likely to generate information that could mislead prospective students.

Research England funding

Amended data may be used to recalculate any current and, exceptionally, past funding allocations that were based on the original version of the data. For example, if errors in a provider’s HESA Student 2023-24 return were found likely to be material, Research England would expect to recalculate 2025-26 recurrent funding using the amended data return.

Existing Research England funding publications are not usually updated on the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) website. Research England will directly liaise with providers.

Any funding changes are subject to approval by Research England’s Executive Chair. Amendments will be used in all future Research England funding processes.

Research England policy and analysis

The amended data may be incorporated in any current work (or a recent output) that used the original version of the data. For example, Research England may recalculate Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF) metrics or reproduce analyses using the amended data of an annual financial return, if the errors were found to be material.