970 likes | 1.12k Views
Dr Simon Kerridge RMAS Steering Group. Funding Context. Financial pressures on HEIs Efficiency Agenda Vfm in Research Shared Services. RMAS Feasibility Study 2009. Cashable Benefits Staff efficiencies: 10-20% Non-cashable Benefits Free research active staff Enable growth
E N D
Dr Simon Kerridge RMAS Steering Group
Funding Context • Financial pressures on HEIs • Efficiency Agenda • Vfm in Research • Shared Services
RMAS Feasibility Study 2009 Cashable Benefits • Staff efficiencies: 10-20% Non-cashable Benefits • Free research active staff • Enable growth • Better management Info • Data exchange efficiencies
RMAS Benefits Analysis 2012 Productivity gains • £75k per RMAS module Qualitative Benefits • Enable growth • Improved data quality • Flexible platform for future developments
Universities Modernisation Fund HEFCE approach: • Could have left to the market • Focusing public funds to: • share risk • accelerate timescales and • tailor to HEIs’ needs • helping address the cultural issues
Universities Modernisation Fund • £½m benchmarking • £1m shared services • £6m procurement • £2½m Admin applications • £10m data centres and research applications
UMF Delivery RMAS: • RMAS product suite • Data integration and standards • Pilot HEI efficiencies • Cloud based delivery model UMF Programme: • £14.9m efficiencies – Year 1
What is RMAS? • RMAS is NOT a single, off-the-shelf system • But it is: • A procurement framework containing the ‘best-of-breed’ research systems on the market, • plus a set of free integration tools and methodologies, • being built around a data standard for research information, CERIF
What has the RMAS Project Done? • created a procurement framework containing products that meet your needs – select & buy! • developed a set of free tools and ‘how-to guides’ so you can integrate your systems and data – no need to re-invent the wheel! • Enhanced CERIF to include more data sets, created CERIF conversion tools & convinced suppliers to develop their systems to communicate via CERIF.
RMAS Procurement RMAS Launch Event, July 10th, 2012
Why Create the RMAS Procurement Framework • RMAS Feasibility Studies 2008/9 • Clear demand • Similar customer requirements • Improve the procurement process for the sector • Create a collaborative environment • Issues of coverage and integration • Lack of clarity on standards
Benefits of the Framework • The average OJEU timetable of 6-9 months can be reduced to 4 weeks or less • There are no full tenders to assess - suppliers can be appointed through mini-competitions • Pre-agreed Terms and Conditions provide solid contractual safeguards and reduced professional legal costs, while allowing amendments to suit particular projects
Further Benefits of the Framework • You can access the Framework for free • Long-term relationships between clients and suppliers through a framework encourage improvements in service • Having several suppliers allows flexibility to cater for a range of requirements, and maintains competition • Frameworks help to maintain security of supply • Capture of knowledge and best practice
Who Can Use the Framework • Educational Establishments in England and Wales including Schools, Universities and Colleges • Scottish Further and Higher Education Bodies • Further and Higher Education in Northern Ireland • Central Government Departments, Executive Agencies and NDPBs • Welsh Public Bodies National Assembly for Wales, Welsh Assembly Government and Welsh Local Authorities
Deployment Options • On campus • Cloud based • Integration options • Supplier web services where they exist • Create your own adapter • Use the Nexus ESB
Management of the Framework • Moving toward CERIF compliance • Integration using recognised standards and processes • Improvements for customers
RMAS Integration RMAS Launch Event, July 10th, 2012
http://source.rkt.clients.switchsystems.co.uk/intro.php RMAS Launch Event, July 10th, 2012
The Role of CERIF in RMAS RMAS Launch Event, July 10th, 2012
What is CERIF? Common European Research Information Format An EC-Recommendation to Member States Development since late 1980s The responsibility of euroCRIS since 2002 CERIF
The CERIF Evolution CERIF 1.5 (XML) CERIF 1.5 CERIF 2006 / 2008 Model CERIF 1.3 Funding Equipment Facility Link Base Base Infrastructure Link ExpertiseAndSkills Semantics Similar Ideas UN/UNESCO OECD CODATA Semantics Language Language 2ndLevel 2ndLevel Service Qualification Measurement GEO FOR MA L SEMANT IC S Prize ElectronicAddresse EU Working Group on Research Databases Workshop CERIF 2000 Model CV Roles PostalAddress EXPERTISE OrgUnit PERSON • - Data Model • Infrastructure - Facility, Equipment, Service • - Measurement & Indicator • - Entities and Link Tables • Geographic Bounding Box- CERIF 1.3 Vocabulary • - UUIDs - Terms - Schemes CERIF 91 PROJECT Citation RESULTS EQUIPMENT PROJECT CLASSIFICATION Acronym: ERGO Participant: Keith Jeffery, Anne Asser son, many more Organisations: Rutherford Appleton, Uni- versity of Bergen, … • - Data Model • Model Normalization • - Robust/Consistent Structure • - Extensible Structure • - Semantic Layer • XML Exchange Specification- Elaboration on Publication • CERIF Core Semantics (2008 1.2) Metrics Indicator Measurement Country • Data Model - Multilinguality- Controlled Vocabulary- Roles / Types- User-driven • EC Recommendation to Member States Event Language + Linked Data Currency • - Networking of DBs • Exchange of Records • EC Recommendation to Member States + CERIF Ontology 2012 2006 2008 1987 1991 2000
Common European Research Information Format • A formal Model ofthe Research Domain • Research Entities • Relationships • (Contexts) • EnablesContextualVocabularies(i.e. Semantics) CERIF
Common European Research Information Format Research Context: Finance, Funding, Output, HR, Project-MM, Infrast... CERIF
Common European Research Information Format Research Contexts: Finance, Funding, Output, HR, Project-MM, Infrast .. CERIF
A particular use-case (context) OrgUnit M Part of member Person A OrgUnit O employee member OrgUnit N Part of Project leader Project P author owns IPR Publication X CERIF
The RMAS use-cases (areas) • Human Resources • Projects • Outputs • Finance • Students Funding X budget agreement OrgUnit A Measure Y performance member Project P income / expenditure employer owns IPR Person P result Output X peer-reviewed author CERIF
CERIF for N use-cases • Formal Syntax • DeclaredSemantics i.e. open toanyvocabulary ... A, B, C, D, E, ... X, Y, Z Funding D C OrgUnit Measure B A Project E X Z Person G F Output Y CERIF
Benefits of employing CERIF Funding Learning Finance Output HR Project Infrastructure Standardisation allows for re-use; saves time, thus costs CERIF
Benefits of employing CERIF • a tangibleformalmodel • forre-use, communication, comparison • tosupportinteroperability, exchange • tosupportareaidentification, processmodeling, vocabularydevelopment • itscales; is open foranyvocabularies Standardisation allows for re-use; saves time, thus costs CERIF
Benefits of employing CERIF with RMAS In areas: HR, Project, Output, Finance, Students (byanalysisofexistingsystems) (comparabletosupplierproducts) • entityidentificationanddisambiguation • entityrelationshipidentification • vocabularyidentification • (quality) vocabularydefinition CERIF
Results from euroCRIS/RMAS collaboration Also imported in part vocabularies from CASRAI, CIA project, CERIF itself, HESA CERIF-driven RMAS Vocabularies • Persons: Title, Qualification, Contact Type, Event Involvement, Employment Type, Professional Relationship, Output Contribution, Degree Level of Study, Person Project Role • Projects: Activity Type; Subtype, Organisation Project Role, ActivityFunding Type, Activity Status, ActivityFinanceCategory, ActivityFinanceCategoryAmount • Outputs: Output Type, Publication Status, Peer-Review, Output Quality Level, Output Output Relationship, Open Science Cost • Finance: Funder Type, Funding Source Type • Students:-> Person-Person Role, -> Output Type • Overall: Verification Status CERIF
Results from euroCRIS / RMAS collaboration CERIF-driven RMAS Vocabularies • Will be formalized in latest CERIF XML • A starting point for suppliers • Have been published on www.euroCRIS.org • Will be supported by RMAS SAC* • SAC = Supplier Agnostic Connector CERIF
RMAS Pathfinders • University of Kent • Simon Kerridge • University of Sunderland • Kevin Ginty • University of Exeter • Steve Trowell • Or contact JISC Advance - Simon Foster
University of Kent • Research Led • ~£12M, ~600 proposals
University of Kent ROS REF DCS Je-S, eGAP, EPSS.. External Data sources (UKRISS) Funding Sourcing Academic Expertise Reporting Costing & Financial Proposal Management Outputs & Outcomes Post Award Financial Planning HR SIS/PGR Finance
University of Kent ROS REF DCS Je-S, eGAP, EPSS.. External Data sources (UKRISS) Funding Sourcing Academic Expertise Research Professional Reporting Costing & Financial pFACT Proposal Management Microsoft Reporting Services Outputs & Outcomes EPrints Post Award Financial Planning HR SIS/PGR Finance PSE In-house Cognos Agresso
University of Kent ROS REF DCS Je-S, eGAP, EPSS.. External Data sources (UKRISS) Funding Sourcing Academic Expertise Communication Bus Reporting Costing & Financial Proposal Management Outputs & Outcomes Post Award Financial Planning HR SIS/PGR Finance
University of Kent • Challenge: Connect everyone to everyone • Different suppliers • Different technologies • Different data schemas Start small Release often Build a community RMAS CERIF Proposal-created Proposal-updated Proposal-removed Proposal-submitted Proposal-approved Proposal-rejected
University of Sunderland • Research Active • ~£2M, ~100 proposals
CRM Workflow Academic Expertise Funding Sourcing Tool Electronic Document Management Central Enterprise Service Bus Proposal Management Costing & Financial Management Post Award Management Outputs & Outcomes Proposal Management Costing & Financial Management Local ESB