The report marks a significant shift in the regulator’s approach, acknowledging mistakes, committing to cultural change, and outlining reforms designed to rebuild trust across the higher education sector.
A turning point for the OfS
The dispute arose from an OfS investigation into the University of Sussex that ran from 2021 to 2025 and resulted in a £585,000 fine for alleged breaches relating to freedom of speech and governance. The university challenged the decision through judicial review, and in April 2026 the High Court found against the regulator on several key grounds.
The court concluded that the OfS had adopted an overly broad interpretation of some regulatory requirements, incorrectly applied aspects of freedom of speech law, failed to give adequate weight to relevant evidence, and had approached parts of the investigation with a closed mind.
Rather than appealing the judgment, the OfS accepted the court’s findings, commissioned an independent review by KPMG, and used the opportunity to reflect on wider concerns raised by institutions, sector bodies and its own staff.
The new principle: “No Surprises”
At the heart of the report is a new regulatory philosophy described as “no surprises”. The OfS says institutions should have a clear understanding of regulatory expectations, emerging concerns and potential risks before formal action is taken. The aim is to ensure that investigations and enforcement actions are not unexpected and that providers have meaningful opportunities to engage, respond and improve.
Under this approach, the regulator will seek earlier dialogue with providers, increase transparency about its decision-making, and reserve formal enforcement action for situations where concerns are serious, escalating or unresolved through engagement.
Five lessons learned
The report identifies five major lessons from the Sussex case.
1. Relationships matter
The OfS acknowledges that its relationship with the University of Sussex became increasingly adversarial during the investigation. The report notes criticism from both the court and the KPMG review that there was insufficient emphasis on constructive engagement and dialogue. It also highlights survey findings showing relatively low levels of trust among university leaders.
In response, the regulator plans to work more collaboratively with institutions and sector bodies, while establishing more regular meetings with providers when concerns emerge.
2. Greater transparency is essential
Universities have long argued that regulatory investigations can be difficult to navigate. The OfS now accepts that institutions need better information about why investigations are opened, how decisions are reached and what is expected from providers during the process.
The regulator has committed to publishing clearer guidance on investigations and enforcement and ensuring more regular communication throughout ongoing cases.
3. Enforcement should not be the first response
One of the strongest messages emerging from the report is that enforcement action should often be a last resort rather than a starting point. The OfS intends to give institutions opportunities to address concerns through compliance activity before formal investigations are launched wherever possible.
While the regulator stresses that it will continue to act decisively when students or public funds are at risk, it recognises the importance of proportionate intervention.
4. Stronger governance and decision-making processes
The judicial review highlighted concerns about decision-making structures, including risks of “decision momentum” and insufficient independent challenge. The KPMG review found that responsibilities for policy development and enforcement had become blurred and that decision-making was concentrated among a relatively small group of senior staff.
To address this, the OfS has created a specialist enforcement team, commissioned an external review of its structures and processes, and begun comparing its regulatory practices with those of other UK and international regulators.
5. Culture must encourage challenge
A recurring theme throughout both the court judgment and the KPMG review was the risk of closed-mindedness and a culture that did not sufficiently encourage challenge. The OfS accepts that staff need to feel empowered to question assumptions and challenge senior perspectives.
The regulator has launched a broader cultural review aimed at promoting openness, agility and constructive challenge throughout the organisation.
Looking ahead
The report outlines 13 specific actions designed to embed these lessons into future regulatory practice. Collectively, they signal a move away from a more enforcement-led model towards one based on engagement, transparency and continuous improvement.
For universities, the document offers reassurance that the regulator has listened to judicial and sector criticism. For the OfS, however, the real challenge will be implementation. Rebuilding trust after such a high-profile defeat will require more than revised guidance and new procedures. It will require institutions to see evidence of a regulator that is genuinely more collaborative, transparent and open to challenge.
The report therefore represents more than a response to a legal setback. It is an attempt by the OfS to redefine its relationship with the higher education sector and position itself as what it describes as an “exemplary regulator”. Whether that ambition is realised will become apparent in the years ahead as these commitments are put into practice.
