RESEARCH EXCELLENCE FRAMEWORK: IMPACT UPDATE AND PREPARATION Professor Dinah Birch

2. RESEARCH EXCELLENCE FRAMEWORK: IMPACT UPDATE AND PREPARATIONProfessor Dinah Birch May 2011

3. IntroductionUpdate on latest national and local Impact activity • Update on national picture • Impact for UoLvs Impact for REF • UoL activity to date • Ongoing management of Impact preparations

4. National REF Developments • Impact pilot findings published November 2010 • Decisions on the broad framework for the assessment of impact in the REF published March 2011 • Confirmation of weightings: Research outputs: - 65% • Impact:                  - 20% • Environment:         - 15% • Assessment of impact will be developmental. Impact weighting expected to be increased for subsequent REF exercises.

5. National REF Developments (cont.) • Other main decisions: • Case studies will be required, dependent on the number of staff submitted (a minimum of two per submission) • Impact must have arisen between 1st Jan 2008 and 31st July 2013 (the census period) The underpinning research must have taken place from 1st Jan 1993 onwards (possibly 5 years earlier if defined by sub-panels in exceptional cases) • An impact statement will be required, revised from the original pilot template. • More detailed guidance will be available in July 2011 – for consultation until Autumn 2011.

6. Impact - UoL • Need to recognise the differences and distinctions between Impact for UoL ambitions and REF • In its work the University seeks to: • use our existing and growing portfolio of research to address global challenges • Effectively disseminate and exploit both pure and translational research to maximise impact within the academic community and beyond • Contribute to the economic prosperity, quality of life and cultural enrichment of society • As such, the maximisation of impact is integral part of our activity and accepted as a key responsibility for all research active individuals.

7. Impact - REF • In contrast REF seeking a narrower definition of Impact: • Social, economic or cultural impact or benefit beyond academia • Key requirement is excellence with evidence of: • Impact in the census period 2008-2013 • Underpinned by excellent research produced by the submitting institution within a given timeframe • Not enough to have engaged a user, the engagement must have led to a demonstrable change • Definable contribution of the submitting institution • A contact (preferably a user) who can verify the claims if required

8. REF Impact – Key criteria • Attribution and timeframe • The submitting unit: • Must show that it undertook research that made a distinctive contribution to achieving the claimed impact or benefit. • Need not have undertaken all of the contributing research, or have been involved in exploiting the research. • The timeframe for underpinning research = 15 years between the publication of research output(s) that made a distinctive contribution to the impact, and the start of the assessment period (January 2008). In exceptional circumstances the timeframe may be extended by a further five years (case to be made by sub-panel)

9. REF Impact – Key criteria • Submissions • To include a minimum of two case studies, with more for larger submissions (e.g. A submission of 25 staff will require 4 case studies) • Via a generic template with word limits. To include information on: • the underpinning research and evidence of its quality • the way in which the research contributed to the impact or benefit • the nature and extent of the impact or benefit • references to independent sources that could be followed up to verify claims • Onus on institutions to provide evidence that demonstrates the impact or benefit claimed • In addition to case studies, submissions will include information about how the unit has supported and enabled the achievement of impact. This will make a significant contribution to the impact sub-profiles

10. REF Impact – Key criteria • Assessment • Outcomes will be an ‘impact sub-profile’ for each submission, showing the proportion of the submission at each starred level • Case studies will be assessed against the broad generic criteria of ‘reach and significance’ of the impact or benefit • REF panels to explain in more detail how these criteria will be applied in ways that are appropriate to their disciplines

11. REF Impact – Key criteria • Involvement of research users • Expert ‘users’ of research from across the private, public and third sectors will be fully involved in developing the criteria and in assessment in all UoAs • Research user members appointed to all main panels and sub-panels • During the assessment phase, additional research users to be recruited as assessors on sub-panels • Ongoing discussions with RCUK to ensure coherent approach to recognising and encouraging across the dual support system

12. Impact - University activities • Range of activities and support designed to aid the identification and development of appropriate case studies • REF coordinators for each department have just completed a process of identifying potential case studies, using a flow chart process. • Some will be worked up in more detail in the next few months • Feedback will be provided to departments and examples of good practice may be shared.

13. Impact - University activities • Next Steps • Consideration of best ways to support staff to translate research into impact, including sharing of good practice • Encouragement of staff to engage with research users at an early stage • Ensure impact of research since 1993 is being monitored appropriately, and evidence is being stored • Support for staff writing impact case studies and impact statements

14. Impact - University activities Next Steps – Faculties / REF Coordinators / Heads of School Brief colleagues Engage in subject communities - learn from UoAs/institutions involved in pilot, understand current thinking of what constitutes impact Read material on HEFCE website Oversee identification of case studies Ask for advice and guidance if you need it