UCAS may only have been in existence in its current form since 1993 but, as it plays such a central part in most people’s first and formative experience of university, it feels like a permanent fixture.
As such, it is surprisingly easy to forget how often the process of applying to university has changed over time.
For instance, until 2008, applicants had a maximum of six choices: not five. Until 2025, applicants submitted a single “personal statement” rather than responding to three questions as currently. And “adjustment”, a process that used to allow applicants who had exceeded their firm offer conditions to hold on to their original offer while searching for other places, ended in 2022.
UCAS spends a lot of time thinking, and gathering evidence, about how it can change or improve what it does to best serve the needs of applicants, those who support them, and the providers (or employers – apprenticeships have been on UCAS since 2024) who offer them places. And the current consultation – which focuses on dates, deadlines, and choices – is the latest evidence of that.
Stage two
If you work in admissions you will know that the first stage of this consultation started back in the autumn of 2025. There were 554 participants in workshops – spanning schools and colleges, providers, and policy stakeholders – and a further 351 who fed in via advisory groups and forums. It’s this early input that has been used to develop the proposals put forward in this wider exercise – and that explains why so many of the recommendations are against making changes to existing approaches.
Responses here will go to the UCAS board: if changes are needed these will be implemented no sooner than the 2028 entry cycle. And a summary of responses – which should be made by 22 April – will be available in the summer of this year.
A number of choices
How many courses should an applicant be able to apply to initially? The current answer is five, but opinions on how suitable this is vary according to who you are.
If you are a current, potential, or recent applicant it is very likely that you value this opportunity to apply to a range of providers and courses. It may be that you are not yet settled on your preferred subject of study, or that you want a variety of options that could meet either your likely grades, or that you are not sure whether you will be able to afford to live away from home. Polling suggests that around two thirds of students feel that five is about the right number of choices at that stage: and 75 per cent of the general public, 70 per cent of parents, and 81 per cent of teachers agree.
The picture among higher education providers is more variable. For those who run high volume selective courses a reduction in choices would help reduce the number of applications each cycle to a more manageable level. Others feel that reducing the number of available choices would limit prospective students’ chance to change their intentions as the cycle progresses. And there is a sense that less choices would make the recruitment landscape more challenging for providers who are facing financial instability.
As against that, there is some evidence that around a third of applicants who used all five choices included a course that they had no intention of studying at: but the proportion of applicants who end up at one of their initial choices has increased year on year. Overall, the average applicant applies to 4.5 courses through the main scheme: with 80 per cent of all applicants, and 90 per cent of UK 18 year old applicants using all five.
Based on these findings UCAS is proposing that the use of five initial choices is retained, and also commits to working with the sector to make dealing with applications more efficient and a better informed process.
Firm and insurance
As applications are seen by providers, and become offers, applicants are able to designate a “firm” and “insurance” choice. The “firm” option is the preferred destination, while the “insurance” choice is seen as an alternative for those who do not meet their firm conditions. Some 6.6 per cent of main scheme applicants end up at their insurance choice, a number that has risen slightly over the past two years.
From an applicant perspective, making an early commitment to one of two courses allows more time to explore accommodation and transport options, and the “insurance” choice acts as a kind of psychological safety net. Conversely, the existence of a number of applicants who must be accepted if they choose to be but are more likely to end up somewhere else makes it difficult for providers to plan and resource provision.
UCAS recommends that it maintains the “insurance” choice – but with a number of tweaks to help the process run more smoothly. It is proposed that “decline my place” is made available for the insurance choice (as currently exists for the firm choice) to allow potential students to be clear earlier on that they no longer want to accept that offer. There will also be further consideration on the terminology – with UCAS-specific terms like “firm”, “insurance”, “Extra”, and “Clearing” potentially becoming more applicant friendly. As many people talk about a first or second choice already, and as Clearing has particular historic connotations, this could help make navigating the application process easier for young people and those who support them.
There is also the matter of “Extra” – this little known option allows applicants who do not hold an offer following their first five choices can use this route to apply elsewhere. Only 37 per cent of applicants were aware of this option, and only 4,525 used it during the last cycle. There are no proposals made in this consultation about “Extra”, but we are told that further engagement may be coming.
It is surprisingly complicated stuff – and UCAS has published a couple of research reports on the impact of potential acceptance routes on applicant choices that are well worth a read.
Dates and times
Currently UCAS operates a range of key dates and deadlines to help orient applicants and meet the needs of providers. The equal consideration deadline for medicine, dentistry, veterinary courses, the University of Oxford, and the University of Cambridge is 15 October – while for other universities and courses it was 14 January. UCAS Extra opens on 26 February, while applications received after 30 June go directly to Clearing, which opens on 2 July.
Providers have other key dates: most (things are different for conservatoires) need to make decisions by the Reject By Default date (in 2026 this is 13 May), and most will have an eye on the Decline By Default date of 6 May – which is the last date an applicant can accept an offer as a firm or insurance choice. There is also a target decision date of 31 March (the March advisory date), by which time providers are generally expected to have made a decision on all applications received by the January deadline.
UCAS recommends that most of this should remain as currently, though there is a keenness to ensure that the Decline by Default date does not fall during the main level 3 assessment period and it is intended that a “more sophisticated approach” be taken to the March advisory date – there’s thoughts of allowing universities to state an “expected turnaround time” for applications, and for applicants to be alerted when action is required of them.
This is all backed up by polling – although nearly a third of prospective students feel that the January deadline is too early, though this may have been because it has been a bit later in recent years. The evidence is that applicants are very much driven by the deadline, with the majority getting their choices in early January or late December.
Have you ever wondered why only certain courses and providers use the early deadline? In general it is where additional assessment practices – tests or exams, interviews – are used for highly competitive courses with many applicants. The consultation notes that given the general trend towards applying to higher tariff providers, increased numbers of applications have been generating some pressures elsewhere in the sector – and a few other providers have been asking about using the October deadline to take the pressure off.
There were wide ranging concerns about the impact on access and participation related to any potential inclusion of additional providers in the October deadline, and many others were concerned about a destabilising effect on the sector (even the government has informally expressed some concerns here). There’s not currently a formal request process – but should anyone make formal representations the UCAS board would consult widely about the coverage of courses that should be included, the impact on the sector and on access, and whether institutions should be subject to additional rules (like the current arrangements where you can only apply to Oxford or Cambridge)