© Crown copyright 2017
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: email@example.com.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/digital-economy-act-part-5-data-sharing-codes-and-regulations/research-code-of-practice-and-accreditation-criteria
Part 1: Code of Practice
About the Code of Practice and Accreditation Criteria
1.1 Through the Digital Economy Act 2017 (the Act) the UK Parliament has enacted legislation, applicable across the UK, that facilitates the linking and sharing of datasets held by public authorities for research purposes. The Act supports improvements in the quality and range of research outputs to broaden the capacity of research to deliver a number of direct and indirect public benefits, including the promotion of social cohesion to the stimulation of innovation and economic growth.
1.2 To provide clarity and transparency about how powers enabling access to public authority data for research purposes will operate, the Act requires the UK Statistics Authority (hereafter ‘the Authority’)1 to prepare, consult on and publish a Code of Practice concerning the disclosure, processing, holding and use of personal information under this gateway2. The Authority must consult publicly before issuing or reissuing this code, and must lay the code before the UK Parliament and the devolved legislatures in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
1.3 The Act requires three groups of people to have regard to the principles set out in this Code:
- Data-holding public authorities when disclosing data for processing for subsequent research purposes;
- Processors involved in the processing of this data, whether that processing be concerned principally with the linkage or de-identification of data, or the storage and provision of secure access to the de-identified data; and,
- Individuals to whom de-identified data is made available for research.
1.4 The Act further requires that all persons involved in the processing or use of personal information under this gateway for disclosing information for research purposes, secure accreditation appropriate to the functions they seek to fulfil under the Act. The Act identifies the Authority as the body responsible for overseeing this accreditation process and requires the Authority to publish a set of criteria that individuals, organisations and research projects must meet before being accredited for any of the functions set out in the Act. Details of the criteria for accreditation are set out in Part 2 of this document.
1.5 In drawing up the code and the accreditation criteria, the Authority has had regard to, inter alia, the:
- Information Commissioner’s Data Sharing code of practice (2011)
- Information Commissioner’s Anonymisation: Managing Data Protection Risk Code of Practice (2012)
- Information Commissioner’s Conducting Privacy Impact Assessments Code of Practice (2014)
- Information Commissioner’s Privacy Notices, Transparency and Control Code of Practice (2016)
- Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007
- Code of Practice for Official Statistics (2009)
- Data Protection Act 1998
- Report of the Administrative Data Taskforce (2012)
- Cabinet Office Open Data White Paper (2012)
- EU General Data Protection Regulation
Understanding the power
2.1 The Act helps to position the UK at the forefront of the international research landscape and supports a number of direct public benefits:
- increasing the availability of varied and high-quality data for researchers within and outside government will help drive improvements in the evidence base available to policy and other key decision-makers;
- facilitating the linkage of datasets held by two or more public authorities3 in controlled environments offers increased opportunities for new insights into the social and economic challenges that citizens and businesses face;
- helping researchers and policy-makers build a better understanding of how people live their lives, their patterns of need and use of different services and the resultant outcomes, to support the design and delivery of more effective and efficient public services.
2.2 The Act will help to provide certainty and clarity for public authorities and researchers concerning what data can be made available for research purposes and the conditions under which that data can be made available. This will help to reduce the delays and inconsistent approach to releasing publicly-held data for research purposes, helping to ensure that the economic and social benefits associated with research are more easily realised.
2.3 The Act creates a permissive gateway (the Research power) to enable public authorities to make personal information available to researchers for research that is in the public interest, including using a trusted third party to process the data. Under this model, a data-holding public authority can disclose personal information to a third party for the third party to process that information, or the data-holding public authority can itself carry out the processing, (in both cases referred to as “the processor”), who is then responsible for processing the data. Processing data means linking, de-identifying, storing or related procedures before the de-identified data are made available to an accredited researcher in a secure environment. Following accreditation, the processor must then ensure that any data (or analysis based on the data) that are retained by the researcher, or are published, undergo a disclosure control process to minimise the risk of the data being re-identified or other misuses of the data.
2.4 To ensure data are processed and made available in a safe and secure way, the Act sets out six conditions under which information can be disclosed under the Research power:
- Data must be de-identified before they can be made available so that the data do not directly identify individuals and are not reasonably likely to lead to an individual’s identity being ascertained;
- The parties involved in processing and providing access to the data must take reasonable steps (meaning implementing and maintaining appropriate safeguards) to minimise the possibility that identifying data might be accidentally or intentionally disclosed;
- The data are made available to the researcher either directly by the person(s) involved in the processing of the data, or, once data are suitably processed, the data-holding public authority;
- The research for which the de-identified data are being made available is in the public interest and has been assessed as such through an accreditation process;
- The researcher(s) and all persons involved in processing the data are accredited for these functions; and,
- Public authorities disclosing data to trusted third parties for processing and making de-identified data available for research purposes, and trusted third parties involved in processing information for the same purpose, have regard to this code of practice.
2.5 This Code contains eight principles of data sharing for research purposes, intended to collectively ensure that the processing and provision of personal information under the Act is ethical and legal, and done in a way that ensures information that relates to an individual (whether or not this information identifies the individual) is appropriately protected. All parties who disclose, process, or use data under the Research power are expected to adhere to these principles in performing their function under the Research power. Although not binding for disclosures of non-personal information under this gateway, the principles set out below should be considered as good practice for all those involved in non-personal information disclosures for research purposes.
Principles governing the disclosure of data
Principle 1: Confidentiality
3.1 All persons disclosing, making data available, processing or using data under the provisions set out in the Act must ensure they do so in a way that does all that is necessary to minimise the risk of compromising the confidentiality of personal information . Appropriate safeguards must be established and maintained at all stages of, and by all persons involved in, the handling of data and their use for research purposes under this gateway, proportionately to the sensitivity of that data. All persons using the Research power must maintain the integrity of these safeguards by proactively identifying and assessing the privacy and security risks, and by regularly reviewing safeguards and security solutions to ensure they continue to meet the challenges posed by evolving technologies.
Principle 2: Transparency
4.1 All parties using the Research power should adopt a commitment to transparency by default in order to maximise the potential public value of research facilitated by access to public data. Researchers should routinely engage core stakeholders on the findings of the research drawn from these data, and ensure that research findings are made openly available to the public. Data-supplying public authorities and processors should publish information about the data they are making available, the rationale and purpose of doing so, and any restrictions and safeguards associated with the processing and use of those data. Decisions concerning whether or not to publish such information may be informed by security or other considerations where the risks of publishing such information would outweigh the potential public benefits. In its accreditation capacity, the Authority may also choose to publish details on data requests and accreditation applications and outcomes, including the outcome of any appeals process.
Principle 3: Ethics and the law
5.1 Data can only be disclosed to processors (for the purpose of subsequently making de-identified data available to researchers) where expressly permitted, and must comply with the six conditions set out in the Act. In disclosing data under the Research power , data holders, processors and researchers must also meet all legal obligations arising from the Data Protection Act 1998 and other applicable legislation, and are expected to have regard to best practice on privacy impact assessments and privacy notices, as established in the Information Commissioner’s Conducting Privacy Impact Assessments Code of Practice and Privacy Notices, Transparency and Control Code of Practice.
5.2 All parties involved in the disclosure, processing or use of data through the Research power must observe the highest ethical standards, ensuring that the unique ethical challenges presented by using data collected for operational purposes are accounted for and addressed in the discharging of each of the functions described within the Act. This will involve ensuring the appropriate consideration of issues of privacy, identifying and minimising the risks of re-identification, and considering risks appropriate to the type, scale and sensitivity of the data being disclosed. It may also require reflecting on the risks and limits of new technologies, oversight practices and adherence to recognised methodological and quality standards, legal obligations and public acceptability.
Principle 4: Public interest
6.1 Data obtained under the Research power must only be disclosed, processed and used for the purpose of supporting research in the public interest. Research in the public interest is research whose primary purpose is, for example, to:
- provide or improve evidence bases that support the formulation, development or evaluation of public policy or public service delivery;
- guide critical decision-making with anticipated benefits for the economy, society or quality of life of people in the UK;
- significantly extend existing understanding of social or economic trends or events, either by improving knowledge or challenging accepted analyses; or,
- replicate, validate, challenge or review existing research (including official statistics) in a way that leads to improvements in the quality, coverage or presentation of existing research.
6.2 The Authority has set out further information concerning the criteria for determining whether research is in the public interest in the criteria for the accreditation of research projects (see Accreditation Criteria).
Principle 5: Proportionality
7.1 Data must be disclosed or made available in a way that ensures the burdens and costs of doing so are proportionate to the anticipated benefits of the proposed research, regardless of who accrues the burden and costs. A researcher should ensure that in seeking to secure access to data held by public authorities he or she has assessed, insofar as he or she is able, suitable, less burdensome alternatives and is satisfied that no reasonable alternatives exist or that the financial or quality costs of securing data from other sources would be prohibitive. Equally, data suppliers are required to provide data as efficiently as possible, and to ensure that any cost recovery charges are proportionate to work undertaken specifically for the purpose of releasing data for specified research projects.
Principle 6: Accreditation
8.1 All accredited persons and the research project must remain accredited for the duration of the project and at all times when processing, accessing or using the data, and must therefore observe the requirements for the maintenance of accreditation (such as training obligations). Data holders and accredited processors are also required to ensure that where they disclose or make data available to other processors or researchers it is done for the specific purposes set out in the Act and only to a person that is accredited for the function they are fulfilling.
8.2 The Authority will ensure that it exercises its accreditation function in a way that is free from the influence of organisational, political or personal interests, and that the accreditation of applicants (or those whose accreditation is suspended or removed) have recourse to appropriate appeals mechanisms.
Principle 7: Retention and onward disclosure
9.1 Third party data processors can only retain pre-processed, identified data for a limited time. The Authority will define this period as part of the accreditation process and in accordance with the nature of the data, good practice guidelines and any other relevant considerations. Data processors will be able to apply to the Authority for an extension of this period where there is a clear research rationale for doing so (such as in the case of longitudinal studies), subject to the consent of the data supplier.
9.2 Processors who store the de-identified data may make that de-identified data available to other researchers and for other research projects where the following criteria are met:
- the data supplier has agreed to let the processor make the de-identified data available to additional individuals and/or for additional research projects;
- the processor remains fully accredited for its disclosure function; and,
- the researcher and the research projects are fully accredited for the use of these data.
9.3 Data processors must ensure that any data released to, and subsequently retained by, researchers for further analysis or publication undergoes a process of disclosure control to minimise the risk of its re-identification or other misuse of the data. In line with the requirements set out under the principles above, data should never be disclosed, made available in de-identified form or passed to any parties who are not suitably accredited under these powers.
Part 2: Accreditation Criteria
10.1 The Digital Economy Act 2017 (the Act) permits the disclosure and provision of data held by public authorities for the purpose of conducting research in the public interest (“the Research power”). This disclosure is conditional on the persons involved, and the research being carried out, being accredited by the UK Statistics Authority (hereafter “the Authority”). The Act requires4 the Authority to establish and publish:
- conditions to by met by a person for accreditation under the Act;
- conditions to be met by research for accreditation under the Act; and,
- grounds for the withdrawal of accreditation under the Act from a person or from research.
10.2 This document sets out those conditions and grounds.
Section A: Accreditation of processors
11.1 The gateway in the Act for public authorities to disclose and provide data for the purpose of conducting research (the Research Power), is conditional on the data being processed by an accredited processor. A processor must be accredited for the functions of, specifically the:
- preparation of de-identified data, which means the linking, matching and de-identifying of data; and/or
- storing and provision of access to de-identified data.
11.2 Any person(s) involved in either the preparation or provision of data under the Research power must be accredited for the appropriate function. Accreditation documents will clearly state which of these functions the processor has been accredited for. The UK Statistics Authority (hereafter the Authority) will also publish details of accredited processors, along with details of which function(s) the accreditation covers. In some cases, the processor could be the public authority whose data has been requested if they have the necessary expertise. Public authorities undertaking any aspect of the processing of their own data for accredited research purposes – or indeed, linking and matching their data to that held by another public authority – must be appropriately accredited for the processing function they are performing. This will maintain standards of consistency throughout the accreditation process. If the researcher or any of the persons involved in processing the data do not, in the view of the Authority, act in a way that means they should remain accredited, the Authority may decide to withdraw their accreditation.
11.3 In addition, if personal information is received under the Research power and disclosed in breach of sections 66, 67, 68 or 695 of the Act, the person disclosing it may have committed a criminal offence under the Act.
11.4 By default, an accredited processor will retain accredited status for up to five years with periodic reassessments, for as long as they continue to meet the conditions for accreditation set out below. After this time an accredited processor will need to apply for a renewal of its accredited status. From time to time emerging data threats and challenges may make it necessary to change the conditions required for accreditation as a processor. In such circumstances the Authority may decide to provide notice of its intention to suspend and reassess the accreditation status of processors.
Accreditation conditions for processors
12.1 To secure accreditation processors must meet the following conditions:
The processor is a fit and proper person to perform the functions of a processor
13.1 Under section 71(3) of the Act, a person must be a fit and proper person to be involved in processing before the Authority will accredit them as a processor. In assessing this, the Authority will expect an applicant to provide appropriate evidence to confirm they have sufficient skills, experience, technical infrastructure and policies in place to demonstrate they are a fit and proper person. They will also need to demonstrate a record of appropriate compliance with UK laws, in particular laws relevant to processing activities and the use of data.
13.2 The Authority’s assessment of skills, experience and compliance with relevant UK legislation will extend to the staff of the processor that would be involved in the proposed processing activities. When applying for accreditation as a processor, an applicant must advise the Authority of any matters that might affect the Authority’s assessment of whether the person is a fit and proper person to be involved in processing under the Act, and provide evidence relating to these.
The processor must act under the territorial jurisdiction of the UK and comply with UK laws
14.1 Processors must be legally accountable for the work they carry out and must comply with UK law, whether enacted by the UK Parliament or, where processing is taking place within the jurisdiction of a devolved administration, by the appropriate devolved legislature. Processors must, in particular, ensure they comply with the legal requirements set out in this Act, the Data Protection Act 1998 (and the General Data Protection Regulation when it comes into effect in the UK in May 2018), the Human Rights Act 1998 and relevant provisions under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (including, until that Act comes fully into force, the equivalent provisions of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000). Compliance may be assessed by an audit and is a central condition for the maintenance of a processor’s accredited status.
The processor must meet appropriate cross-government standards for the secure holding of sensitive data
15.1 The UK Government maintains a security control framework setting out the physical, personnel and information security protocols required for the handling of all data assets collected, held and processed by government departments. These protocols vary according to the way the data is classified in accordance with the sensitivity of the data and the risks associated with potential breaches. To protect the confidentiality of potentially sensitive data, any processor seeking accreditation under this gateway must provide evidence of meeting the current security controls required for the handling of government data, commensurate with the sensitivity of the data the processor would ordinarily anticipate handling. Where the processor wishes to process data under this gateway with a higher degree of sensitivity than that for which it has been accredited, it must inform the Authority and provide evidence it meets the additional security requirements.
The processor must have appropriate skills and experience
16.1 The processor must ensure that its staff have the necessary skills and experience to undertake the work required to the standards required, as appropriate for the processing function for which accreditation is sought. Staff involved in the preparation of data must have received training and be able to demonstrate their understanding of the linking, matching, and de-identification of data in a safe way; those involved in the provision of data must be able to demonstrate their experience and capacity to store and make de-identified data available safely. Individuals responsible for any aspect of the processing of data should also have security clearance appropriate to the nature of the data they are handling.
16.2 For auditing purposes the processor must agree to maintain a list of all those individuals who meet these requirements. The processor should also ensure that individuals are only involved in aspects of the processing for which they are suitably experienced and trained and that only suitably experienced and trained individuals have access to data provided by the public authority. All individuals involved in any aspect of the processing must sign a declaration confirming they have understood their responsibilities and will abide by the conditions imposed on them, including protecting the confidentiality of information they access under the legislation.
The processor must make use of appropriate technical infrastructure
17.1 The processor must use suitable data infrastructures to enable it to securely link, match, de-identify data, store and make de-identified data available, as appropriate for the specific function(s) the processor is fulfilling.
The processor must agree to publish and maintain appropriate data policies
18.1 At the point of application the processor must present, and maintain for as long as they wish to remain accredited, a set of detailed documents that demonstrate, to the Authority’s satisfaction, that the processor will meet the requirements for handling, storing, protecting and destroying data it processes for research under the power. Specifically:
- A Secure Environments policy that ensures that the physical environment and processes meet the requirements to hold sensitive data. For processors seeking accreditation for the provision of data these policies must cover the operation of the secure data access facility where researchers can access data. Secure data processing facilities must be suitably accredited in line with cross-government security standards;
- A Major Incident protocol related to data security and privacy breaches;
- A De-Identifying Data policy;
- A Data Retention and Destruction policy; and
- A Data Confidentiality Breaches policy.
18.2 The processor must ensure that appropriate data processing agreements are in place for any data it receives from public authorities before it processes that data. The processor must also agree to abide by any additional policies and procedures the Authority has developed in its accreditation capacity. The Authority will provide appropriate notice where it intends to introduce new policy or procedural requirements.
The processor must agree to its inclusion on a public register
19.1 The Authority is required to maintain a public register of accredited persons. Any persons seeking accreditation for processing under this power must therefore agree to their inclusion on this register, unless there are exceptional reasons not to do so.
The processor must consent to being audited
20.1 In order to discharge its duty of oversight and ensure processors continue to meet relevant requirements, the Authority may, from time to time, decide to undertake an audit of accredited processors. Processors must consent to be audited during their accreditation application, and must fully comply with any audit that takes place in order to maintain their accredited status.
The processor must have regard to the Code of Practice
21.1 The processor must have regard to the Code of Practice and its principles when fulfilling any of its processing functions. Having appropriate regard to the Code is a central condition for the maintenance of a processor’s accredited status and may be assessed by an audit.
Withdrawal of accreditation
22.1 Accreditation may be suspended or withdrawn from a processor accredited for the preparation or provision of data for one or more of the following reasons, where the processor:
- no longer meets any of the accreditation requirements;
- fails to have regard to the Code of Practice governing data sharing for research purposes;
- has breached the Data Protection Act 1998 or other relevant legislation;
- has been convicted of relevant offences under the Act, the Data Protection Act 1998 or other relevant legislation;
- has had any penalties imposed on it by the Information Commissioner’s Office relating to processing under the Data Protection Act 1998;
- has suffered a reported or suspected data breach;
- has refused to provide or withdrawn the processing service for which it has been accredited;
- refuses to be audited, or obstructs the auditing process; and/or
- charges fees for processing, other than those ordinarily permitted for cost-recovery purposes.
23.1 The Authority will provide further guidance on the procedures and processes governing the accreditation of processors for the purpose of preparing or providing access to data under the Act. A processor who is refused accreditation, or who has their accreditation suspended or removed will have a right to appeal.
Section B: Accreditation of researchers and peer reviewers
24.1 Researchers undertaking research using data provided under the Research power must secure accreditation by meeting the conditions below. These conditions also apply equally to individuals seeking access to data for the purpose of reviewing research prior to the publication of research outputs.
Conditions for accreditation of researchers and peer reviewers
The researcher / peer reviewer must provide evidence of suitable research qualifications and/or experience
25.1 To demonstrate they have suitable research qualifications and/or experience, an individual must either:
- have an undergraduate degree (or higher) including a significant proportion of mathematics or statistics; or,
- be able to demonstrate at least 3 years quantitative research experience.
The researcher/peer reviewer must agree to undertake compulsory training
26.1 The Authority may choose to provide training on the safe handling of the data and disclosure control rules for the outputs of the research to ensure researchers are fully aware of their obligations, and to therefore minimise the risk of disclosure of personal information. Researchers/peer reviewers must agree to undertake any training required by the Authority; failure to do so may constitute grounds for the suspension or removal of accreditation until the training is completed.
The researcher/peer reviewer must agree to their inclusion on a public record
27.1 The Authority is required to publish a register of accredited researchers and peer reviewers. The Authority may also choose to publish a high-level overview of accredited research projects and accredited researchers associated with these projects. Researchers/peer reviewers must consent for these details to be published on the register unless the Authority agrees that there are exceptional reasons not to do so.
The researcher/peer reviewer must sign a declaration
28.1 The researcher/peer reviewer must sign a declaration confirming that they have understood their responsibilities and will abide by the conditions imposed upon them, including protecting the confidentiality of information they access under the legislation.
Withdrawal of accreditation
29.1 Accreditation may be suspended or withdrawn from an accredited researcher/peer reviewer for one or more of the following reasons, where the researcher/peer reviewer:
- no longer meets the accreditation requirements;
- fails to have regard to the Code of Practice governing data sharing for research purposes;
- has failed to disclose information that could materially affect the accreditation process or has otherwise dishonestly completed the application form;
- fails to adhere to the terms of any data access agreement between the data holding public authority and the researcher;
- has acted unlawfully in relation to activities for which he or she is accredited;
- has brought the accreditation scheme into disrepute;
- fails to undertake or complete the appropriate training;
- has breached the Data Protection Act 1998 or other relevant legislation;
- has been convicted of a relevant offence under the Act, the Data Protection Act 1998, or other relevant legislation;
- has had any penalties imposed on it by the Information Commissioner’s Office under the Data Protection Act 1998;
- has facilitated or negligently enabled access to identifiable data by a non-accredited person.
30.1 The Authority will provide further guidance on the procedures governing the accreditation of researchers under the Act, including any required training that is a condition of accreditation. In addition to the criteria set out above, applicants should note the following considerations:
- Accreditation as a researcher/peer reviewer will be for a default period of five years. Researchers/peer reviewers are required to renew their accreditation once this term has expired;
- Applicants will be asked to include any relevant information which they think adds or detracts from the application. Steps will be taken during the application process to verify the identity of the applicant;
- Researchers/peer reviewers only need to be accredited once (subject to renewal requirements), but every project requires approval. In line with principle 6 of the Research Code of Practice, accredited researchers/peer reviewers can only use data for the purpose of an accredited research project and that has been processed by an accredited processor(s);
- If the applicant is working towards acquiring the level of skills stated above they may be eligible to apply for provisional accreditation where a fully accredited researcher has agreed to direct, supervise and take responsibility for all work undertaken by the applicant, and on condition the applicant meets the criteria set out above in a reasonable period of time. This provision does not apply to peer reviewers, who must be fully qualified in their own right; and
- A researcher/peer reviewer who is refused accreditation, or who has their accreditation suspended or removed, will have a right to appeal.
- Details of those researchers/peer reviewers who have had their accreditation suspended or removed may be shared with accredited processors.
Section C: Accreditation of research projects
31.1. Research projects making use of data provided under the Research power must secure accreditation by meeting the following conditions:
The research must comply with UK law
32.1 The research must comply with all aspects of UK law, whether enacted by the UK Parliament or, where processing is taking place within the jurisdiction of a devolved administration, by the appropriate devolved legislature. The application must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the UK Statistics Authority that the person(s) that will be involved in the research project will comply with the data protection principles in respect of all forms of personal data, as required by the Data Protection Act 1998, and compliance with them will be monitored.
The research project must be in the public interest
33.1 The Act makes it a condition of the disclosure of data that the research for which the data is disclosed is in the public interest. For the purposes of accrediting research projects the Authority interprets public interest in the same way as ‘public good’, as set out in the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007. To secure accreditation, the primary purpose of a research project must therefore be to serve the public interest in one or more of the following ways, to:
- provide an evidence base for public policy decision-making;
- provide an evidence base for public service delivery;
- provide an evidence base for decisions which are likely to significantly benefit the economy, society or quality of life of people in the UK, UK nationals or people born in the UK now living abroad;
- replicate, validate, challenge or review existing research and proposed research publications, including official statistics;
- significantly extend understanding of social or economic trends or events by improving knowledge or challenging widely accepted analyses; and/or,
- improve the quality, coverage or presentation of existing research, including official or National Statistics.
The research and its results must be transparent
34.1 The intention and anticipated impact of the research should be set out to the satisfaction of the Authority as part of the application. When the project is complete, all results or outcomes of the research must be made openly and accessibly available in a way that could reasonably be expected to be permanent. The public authority which is the source of the data should be acknowledged to allow others to verify the research. The applicant must also set out a clear commitment to engage with core stakeholders on any useful findings from the research in order to maximise the public benefit.
The research must meet appropriate ethical standards
35.1 The research must meet ethical standards appropriate to the nature and intended use of personal information. In assessing whether the research will meet appropriate ethical standards, the Authority may require evidence to be provided to satisfy the Authority that ethical issues have been considered and, where ethical concerns have been raised, that the research proposal includes an appropriate strategy for mitigating or minimising the impact of these concerns. This may include, inter alia, evidence that:
- potentially disclosive information will be stored confidentially and securely;
- issues of consent have been appropriately considered and addressed;
- the risks and limits of new technologies have been considered and appropriately mitigated;
- the research plan provides for human oversight to ensure the methods are consistent with recognised standards of integrity and quality;
- the views of the public have been considered in light of the data used and the perceived benefits of the research; or,
- the access, use and sharing of data is transparent, and is communicated clearly to the public in an accessible format.
The data requested must be appropriate for the research that is proposed
36.1 The application must demonstrate that the data requested is suitable for the research that is proposed, and that the data requested does not exceed the requirements of the research project.
All researchers must be named and accredited
37.1 The project application must name all the researchers who will be accessing the data. No researcher may access the data before they are accredited (including provisional accreditation) under this scheme. When researchers leave or are added to the research project the change must be communicated to the Authority.
Withdrawal of accreditation
38.1 Accreditation may be suspended or withdrawn from an accredited research project accredited for one or more of the following reasons, where:
- the research project is no longer conducted in compliance with the Code of Practice;
- the research project is no longer covered by ethical approval;
- the research project is no longer in the public interest;
- a reported or suspected data breach has occurred; or,
- a court has ordered that the research be halted.
39.1 The Authority will provide further guidance on the procedures and processes governing the accreditation of research projects under the legislation. In addition to the criteria set out above, applicants should note the following additional considerations:
- The application should include an indication of how long the project will take.
- A project can be accredited for a maximum duration of five years, after which the research will require accreditation to be renewed if ongoing access to the data is required.
- The accreditation of research projects can be granted, maintained or withdrawn independently of the accreditation status of researchers or processors involved in the use or processing of data for the project, provided the research project does not breach any of the criteria set out above. This means that withdrawal or refusal of accreditation to a researcher does not necessitate the withdrawal or refusal of accreditation to a research project. Nonetheless, in accordance with Principle 6 of the Research Code of Practice, research can only be conducted where all relevant parties are suitably accredited and only for as long as all relevant parties remain so accredited. Where a research project is refused accreditation, or a project’s accreditation is suspended or removed, the applicant(s) will have a right to appeal.
These legal obligations rest in “the Statistics Board”, that is, in the Board of the UK Statistics Authority. Under the authority of the Board, the work of the UK Statistics Authority and its executive office, the Office for National Statistics, gives effect to the duties enshrined in the Digital Economy Act. Within this document “the Authority” is used to reflect this arrangement. ↩
Required under section 70(1) of the Digital Economy Act 2017. ↩
Excluding public authorities with functions relating to the provision of health services or adult social care. ↩
Section 71(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the Act. ↩
See section 66(2), (5), (10), (11) and (12), section 67(2), (5) and (8), section 68(2),(5) and (8) and section 69(2), (5) and (8) of the Digital Economy Act 2017. ↩