Published on

A benchmarking tool developed by the DCC to assess research data infrastructure. The presentation also outlines alternative versions developed by the University of the West of England and an EPSRC-compliance version

Published in: Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. CARDIO: Collaborative Assessment of Research Data Infrastructures and Objectives Sarah Jones DCC, University of Glasgow
  2. 2. Overview of Presentation 1. Background and purpose 2. CARDIO tool 3. How CARDIO has been used
  4. 4. Background • A tool commissioned by Jisc to integrate elements of other RDM management tools • Builds heavily on AIDA (Assessing Institutional Digital Assets), re-focusing concept on RDM •
  5. 5. CARDIO – Primary Goals • CARDIO is a tool to assess research data infrastructure and support • It uses the concept of maturity, asking different stakeholders to rate provision on a 1-5 scale • CARDIO is collaborative – the aim is to get multiple viewpoints to identify discrepancies and reach consensus
  6. 6. CARDIO – RDM Maturity • Assess a ‘data context’ – a place where data is created and managed (e.g. department, school, project, funding stream, institution...) • How well can it/does it manage its data? • That’s dependent on: – Finances – Technology – Policy and procedures – Organisational will – Skills…
  7. 7. Five stages of maturity Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 ACKNOWLEDGE / NO ACTION ACT / LOCALISED CONSOLIDATE / CO-OPERATE INSTITUTIONALISE / INTEGRATE EXTERNALISE / EMBED Diagram courtesy of Ed Pinsent, AIDA project
  8. 8. CARDIO – Three “Legs” Concept • Organisation: Policy, legality, mandates… • Technology: Servers, data validation, security… • Resources: Staffing, finance, risk… 3 leg stool model developed by University of Cornell
  9. 9. Full coverage of CARDIO (1) ORGANISATION • Data ownership and management • Data policy and procedures • Data policy review • Sharing of / access to research data • Preservation and continuity of research • Internal audit of research activities • Monitoring and feedback of publication • Metadata management • Legal compliance • IPR and rights management • Disaster planning and continuity of research
  10. 10. Full coverage of CARDIO (2) TECHNOLOGY • Technological infrastructure • Appropriate technologies • Ensuring availability • Managing data integrity • Obsolescence • Managing technological change • Security provisions • Security processes • Metadata tools • Institutional repository
  11. 11. Full coverage of CARDIO (3) RESOURCES • Data management costs and sustainability • Business planning • Technological resources allocation • Risk management • Transparency of resource allocation • Sustainability of funding for RDM and preservation • Data management skills • Number of staff for RDM • Staff development opportunities
  12. 12. CARDIO TOOL
  13. 13. CARDIO – Who’s Involved • CARDIO Coordinators: those propelling the process, mediating between… • Infrastructural providers: providing services to support research data management • Researchers: interested in safeguarding their research data, but also defined by their responsibilities
  14. 14. CARDIO – Principal Workflow • Individually score a range of areas within each conceptual leg • Collate scores and negotiate to reach a collective consensus view • Plan for improvements in RDM, based on evidence, visualisations and future recommendations
  15. 15. Stages of CARDIO
  16. 16. Providing maturity ratings
  17. 17. Assessing responses • Visualisations reveal various contributors’ responses • Enables publication of PDF report with itemised maturity
  19. 19. CARDIO-lite: mini quiz • Short version put together for Jisc Inform • Asks 9 questions with A, B, C responses • Provides a basic indication of key gaps -roadshow/Exercise-1-CARDIO-quiz.pdf
  20. 20. CARDIO workshops • Usually conducted after the mini-quiz or some CARDIO assessments have been done • Allows you to present main findings and reach consensus via discussion in groups • Provides an opportunity to prioritise recommendations
  21. 21. UWE 2 page matrix • 2 page matrix which is easy to give out in workshops or meetings • Quick to fill in by circling statement you agree with • Helped UWE begin policy discussions and start to develop and RDM strategy Available to download at: agingresearchdata/projectoutputs/phase1.aspx
  22. 22. EPSRC profile of CARDIO • Adapts the UWE matrix and re-works it in line with the nine expectations of EPSRC • Useful for benchmarking progress towards the EPSRC roadmap deadline of May 2015 • /EPSRC-workshop/CARDIO_matrix_EPSRC.pdf
  23. 23. Benefits of CARDIO • Good in conjunction with DAF – DAF more focused on researcher practice – CARDIO assesses infrastructure and support provision • A less resource-intensive methodology to implement • Useful as a benchmark to repeat and demonstrate organisational progress and change
  24. 24. Tips on implementation • People don’t always want to use online tools – sometimes they desire F2F interactions • Could blend the different approaches • Make sure you get multiple viewpoints as there will inevitably be differences of opinion
  25. 25. Discussion • Could you see a use for CARDIO at Reading? • What infrastructure and services do you already have in place to support RDM? • What do you think the biggest gaps are?