Showing you the money
5 Sep 2013 by Evoluted New Media
Growing demand for transparency in research is fuelling a digital revolution in funding measurement and evaluation. This could not only mean easier access to information for funding bodies, but also less red tape for you
Accountability in research funding has long been part and parcel of the academic process. From end-of-year grant reports required by funding bodies, to the criteria set out by organisations such as the European Commission to qualify the funds they give out, the need to ensure that funding organisations and researchers are using their resources wisely and achieving value for money has long been a priority in the research world.
Yet in an age of austerity, the pressure for accountability and thorough, effective reporting has grown. Take, for example, the Chancellor’s Spending Review - whilst the scientific research budget remained relatively unscathed, many other Government Departments faced significant cuts and the focus now is on reducing inefficiencies and demonstrating, pound for pound, how funds are being spent.
Historically, research reporting was done manually, with researchers often being required to submit multiple reports, to the different funding organisations that supported their work. But in a digital age, with researchers and funding organisations often working together on projects across the globe, many funders have started to realise that this way of reporting can be time-consuming and inhibit further opportunities for collaboration. Alongside the technology researchers already use which allow them to build their own library of articles which can be accessed and shared anywhere, we are now seeing a revolution taking place in grant reporting too. This is pushing for the use of a single online outcomes system that enables researchers, funders and universities to log the outcomes of their work in a uniform way.
This vision was recognised in May 2010, when a working group of seven research funders, including the Medical Research Council (MRC) and Association for Medical Research Charities (AMRC) joined forces to develop the MRC’s e-Val software to enable consistent reporting across multiple funding organisations. Researchfish, the system that came out of that process in June 2012, has already seen significant uptake across the field of medical research in the UK.
From a research funder perspective, the benefits of adopting a system that supports organisations to fully understand the outcomes and impacts of the work they are investing in is clear, so they can communicate more effectively to their supporters and maximise future fundraising potential.
Mary Robinson, research evaluation manager at Arthritis Research UK, says: “Understanding the outcomes and impact of the research we fund helps us plan our research strategy, ensure we are meeting the broad aims of the charity, and that we can communicate the benefits of research to patients and our supporters. Our ability to demonstrate the benefits of research funded by Arthritis Research UK directly impacts our fundraising success and hence our ability to support further research.”
Researchers also recognise the advantages of a simpler and more effective way of reporting, to reduce the bureaucratic burden associated with the traditional system, whilst promoting thorough evaluation of results. Professor of Biochemistry Bruce Caterson, an internationally renowned scientist who specialises in arthritis research at Cardiff University, says: “Reporting to funders is absolutely vital, but working in the US, Australia and Wales, I had previously been required to produce multiple written reports for different organisations, which was very lengthy and often frustrating because it took time away from the lab or started eating into my free time.”
Earlier this year, in a move that further demonstrates the drive towards accountability and transparency in research, a new collaboration was launched with Europe PubMed Central (Europe PMC) to help funders highlight the value of the research they support through connecting research articles and grants with data on their impact. Through this, on a scale not seen before, researchers can link grant information to the unique PubMed ID of an article which will automatically be made available and publicly searchable via Europe PMC. This has already led to the pairing of over 80,000 medical research grants and articles. Speaking of the implications of this collaboration for industry transparency, Malayka Rahman, Asthma UK’s Research Analysis and Communications Officer says:
“The collaboration has become an essential tool for us. Being able to report on longer term impacts is more important than ever for research charities. With this new development, funders will be able to work together to demonstrate the impact of research spend on the health and wellbeing of the public, which in turn strengthen the case for investing in medical research.”
Looking ahead, as science continues towards adopting a single system for evaluation and tracking impacts and outcomes in a consistent way, the potential for showcasing country-wide achievements in research is now on the horizon. There are unprecedented possibilities for drawing connections across funders, universities and researchers on a global scale.
The Author: Frances Buck is Director of Researchfish
