Jisc Research Data Shared Service - Spring Update
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like407 views
This document provides an overview and update on Jisc's Research Data Shared Service. It discusses the vision, goals, and key requirements of creating a shared research data infrastructure. It also provides details on the supplier framework, consultant support, pilot engagements, and strategic view of the service. The service aims to make research data management easier for researchers and help institutions meet requirements in a cost-effective, interoperable manner.
Jisc Research Data Shared Service - Spring Update
- 1. Spring Update Jisc Research Data Shared Service13/05/2016
- 2. Content » Shared ServiceVision and Goals » Supplier Framework » Consultancy Support » Pilot Engagement » StrategicView 2
- 3. Shared Service Vision » Researchers shouldn’t need to think (too much!) about Research Data Management » "Visible data, invisible infrastructure" • Provide researchers intuitive, easy functionality to publish, archive and preserve their research outputs. • Provide interoperable systems to allow researchers and institutions to fulfil and go beyond policy requirements and adhere to best practice throughout the RDM lifecycle. 3
- 4. Shared Service Goals » RDM Policy compliance » Increased sector efficiencies: procurement, data re-use, interoperability opportunities » Improving the integrity of research » Addressing Market Gaps: Integrated RDM system, PreservationGap, Usability » Accelerating Research Data Management in institutions » Supporting institutions meet Open Access/REF 4
- 5. A **key** requirement CNI Fall Meeting, December 14th -15th 2015 - Jisc Shared Research Data Management Service
- 7. Pilot’s MVP’s » Everything! » “Easy to use and cost effective archiving, ingest, preservation, repository, reporting and discovery supported that can handle sensitive data” » “Robust data storage that has growth ability for active and archive data” » “Standard metadata profile - international for interoperability” » “Integration with all main CRIS systems and PURE” » “Meets REF and funder deposit requirements (supports deposit of REF data output types)” » ….......... 7
- 8. What we need » Operational Requirements laid out for systems that integrate with each other 8
- 9. Where are we now? 9
- 10. RD Shared Service Framework Lots » Lot 1 - Research Data Repositories (4) » Lot 2- Repository Interfaces (6) » Lot 3 - Research Data Exchange Interface (3) » Lot 4 - Research Information and Administration Systems Integrations (1) » Lot 5 -Research Data Preservation Platforms (2) » Lot 6 - Research Data Preservation tools development (2) » Lot 7 - Research Data Reporting (2) » Lot 8 - User Experience enhancements (4) 10
- 11. RD Shared Service Framework Platforms » Lot 1 - Research Data Repositories (4) – Discoverygarden – Islandora (open source, based on Fedora) – Figshare (proprietary, hosted) – Haplo (based on RIM system used atWestminster, open source) – Sero - Hydra (open source, based on Fedora) » Lot 5 -Research Data Preservation Platforms (2) – Arkivum – Archivematica (open source preservation platform) – Preservica – (propreitary, hosted or licenced) » Lot 7 - Research Data Reporting (2) – Connexica – CXAIR (proprietary, hosted) – Sero – Edges (Also used by Jisc Monitor) 11
- 12. RD Shared Service Framework Development Lot 2 (Max of 6) Lot 3 (Max of 3) Lot 4 (Max of 10) Lot 6 (Max of 5) Lot 8 (Max of 4) Integrations Data Exchange CRIS Integration PresToolsDev UX Sero Uni of London CC Symplectic Arkivum Edingburgh Uni Ocasta Edinburgh Uni Edingburgh Uni magneticNorth Uni of London CC Arkivum Ocasta Edingburgh Uni Arkivum Discovery Garden Ken Chad » Suppliers to be contracted using mini competitions » Pilots need to provide requirements for call offs from platform lots » Supplier workshop and joint supplier-pilot workshop are to be arranged when Framework is confirmed. » “University of Jisc” set up to test integrations.
- 13. Links to R@R Portfolio 13
- 14. Consultancy Support Consultancy Description RDM Costing (Cambridge Econometrics) To investigate current costing practices, tools, models and potential future developments in the field of RDM costing—and this work is being applied to developing the business model for the research data shared service pilot Data Asset Framework (Research Consulting) To provide the consultation phase for stakeholders in the project, not focused on the final technology solution, for example an audit of datasets, legal and compliance framework, financial and strategic commitment. Technical Architect (Digirati) To provide expert technical advice to the project on the technical architecture of the service, assessment of institutional technical capability and to assist in gatheringdetailed requirements from institutions and researchers Metadata and Interoperability (CLAX) An examination of metadata specifications and provide advice on identifier systems and interoperability Project Management (LM) To provide project management support and coordinate contract negotiations, facilitate collaboration between suppliers and HEI’s and monitor overall service development. This function will also gather evidence to feed into the business model for the next stage Market Research (TBC) To gather information on the demand for a service and to test proposed models for the business case to proceed to aproduction service. Preservation Audit (TBC) To provide the requirements and priorities for RDM preservation tools development
- 15. Data Asset Framework Outputs » Reporting on researcher data needs and RDM support staff needs » Analyse existing DAF's and associated materials (interviews etc.) » Provide institutionally branded DAF survey for institutions with no current DAF's » Provide matrix comparing existing DAF's to survey to highlight any information gaps » Site visits with researcher focus groups and support staff (with some institutions that have already completed DAF's and prioritising those with information gaps) » Survey/Focus group Analysis for those with existing DAF’s - interim findings at Sept RDN » Site visits/Focus Groups with institutions using Jisc Survey 15
- 16. Technical Architect Outputs » Impact Mapping Results » Conceptual architecture and initial integration strategy and development pathway for the service as a whole, based on supplier and pilot system analysis. » Methodology for Jisc/Architect to monitor supplier progress against contracts and the development pathway » Specifications for development of new interfaces for systems identified through discussions with pilots institutions and suppliers. » Visits to pilot institutions and reporting » Plan forTechnicalArchitect/TechnicalAdvisor work for July 2016 –April 2018 16
- 17. Metadata and Interoperability Outputs » Define a schema for the service using the UK Research Data Discovery profile as a base » Test pilot use cases and requirements against the proposed profile for the service » Comparison of existing pilot metadata with proposed schema » What is the minimum metadata to meet the use cases (Jisc base? DataCite? plus admin)? » Where are the opportunities for auto-generation of metadata in the profile » Opportunities presented by use of Identifiers. Current use, plans and approaches by pilot institutions and define shared service approach to identifiers » Investigate incorporation of additional metadata sources e.g. equipment.data,Artivity (provenance) etc. » Ensure text metadata meets open access/Ref requirements. 17
- 18. Pilots 18 Institution Name Cardiff University CREST - Consortium for Research Excellence, Support andTraining (Harper Adams, St Mary’s -Twickenham, UCA &Winchester) Imperial College of Science,Technology and Medicine Middlesex University Plymouth University Royal College of Music St George's Hospital Medical School University of Cambridge University of Lancaster University of Lincoln University of StAndrews University of Surrey University ofYork » Pilot institutions selected to create a balanced portfolio of types of institution, specialisms and research systems already in place
- 19. Pilot Engagement Activities 19 » Quarterly user group meetings and regular contact outside » Technical architecture – Visits, interviews, assessment and reporting (current activity) » DataAsset Framework – Desk research, surveys, focus groups and interviews with researchers and RDM support staff (Started March 2016) » Metadata and interoperability – Focus groups and interviews with researchers and RDM support staff (starting May 2016) » RDMCosting – Workshops and interviews with RDM support staff (workshop 6th May) » Supplier selection – Interviews, Pilots/Suppliers workshop with key contacts (TBC) also informed by technical architecture work » Development activity – Working with suppliers to develop and test systems with researchers.
- 20. Moving to a Production Service 20 » Need market research to assess demand for shared services and to test proposed models and pricing » Need accurate and transparent costing information from the service. Software costs, hosting costs, storage costs » Need to investigate a financial model. Is all the service paid for on top of the subscription? Or is some of it within the subscription » Jisc Business case process: POG, preliminary, full business case etc. » Currently operating a “Pick and Mix” model of multiple systems, however moving to Consensus and simplified offer should be a long term goal
- 21. Engagement with wider community 21
- 22. Engagement with wider community 22 » Research DataToolkit –Information on how to implement an RDM service and also how you use RDSS –We need to identify where we are creating information in the pilot and within R@R to synthesise intoToolkit –We need to be organised with our project outputs and useful information
- 23. StrategicView 23 » Links with OA infrastructure: – Text deposit and publication and preservation is a hgh priority for some of the pilots, – also metadata push/notifications/alerts between OA and RDM infrastructures to allow for analytics – Are there parallels in processes, staff and platforms for Jisc services for different content types e.g. Data and publications and should we look to consolidate? » Links with equipment.data, KONFER » Other Jisc services? E.g. potential for preservation to meet records management needs » Increased links with disciplinary practice, infrastructure and funders » Migration from fragmented repository infrastructure into shared services.
- 24. Jisc Shared Service (Core)Team 24 »Rachel Bruce – Deputy Chief Innovation Officer »Catherine Grout – Head of Change – Research »John Kaye – Senior Co-Design Manager »Paul Stokes– Senior Co-Design Manager »Daniela Duca - Senior Co-Design Manager »Nikki Browne – Project Manager Jisc Digital Futures – Research
- 25. Thank you! Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND
Editor's Notes
- #6: The big GAP – so while there are solutions like Arkivum there is a gap in terms of curating for preservation – tools that allow file format identification, metadata and the creation of archival information packages – data integrity and even emulation …people haven’t got to deal with this yet , perhaps also the what to keep question.
- #7: Interoperability with systems can provide opportunities for efficiencies and ease of use for researchers
- #8: A range of minimum viable products, which we are currently firming up with our technical architect
- #9: Plus reporting
- #11: Underlined are platform lots, which are existing products that can be installed straight after contracting, the other lots are development lots to provide interoperability, usability and suitability for RDM
- #12: Define process to select platforms
- #14: Project will be makiing links berween the rest of the Research at Risk portfolio
- #15: A range of consultancy support is underway or planned
- #24: Parallels in processes, staff and platfoms different content types