Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Utah state presentation webinar january 16, 2019


Published on

PUSH and HSI hosted the Readying Your University to Open Data Compliance Webinar on January 18, 2019. In this webinar, Utah State University representatives shared their policy, procedures, and guidance for complying with funders’ data management and open data requirements.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Utah state presentation webinar january 16, 2019

  1. 1. USU’s Roadmap to Open Data Kevin Peterson, Director, Division of Sponsored Programs Betty Rozum, Data Librarian
  2. 2. Open Data Challenges  Faced by most universities  Time and money!  Time to document data, to teach others to document and share data.  Cost of repositories, staff  Attitudes  Fear – of being scooped, of not knowing what your are doing  Unwillingness to share data  Uncertainty  Difficulty understanding expectations of Funders, Institutions, Journals - and keeping these expectations aligned  Keeping up with rules  Protection of data and is it okay to release it?
  3. 3. Challenges – and a mandate  Our goal today:  Map our process  Provide a timeline  Outline our accomplishments  Discuss our challenges  Discuss our initial outcomes  Discuss what lies ahead
  4. 4. The Mandate – 2013 OSTP Memo  Federal agencies with over $100M in R&D had to develop plans to make publications and data from federally funded research freely available to the public.  USU needed a means to facilitate access to data, support researchers as they met requirements of the mandate, and ensure the university could meet compliance terms.
  5. 5. USU Roadmap  Create a Data Librarian position  Bring campus stakeholders together  Write and implement a Research Data Policy  Implement a process to create auditable records to facilitate access to data and publications
  6. 6. Timeline  Summer 2015: Data librarian position created  Fall 2015: Taskforce of stakeholders created  Fall 2016: Solution implemented
  7. 7. Stakeholders  Representatives from:  Research Office  Library  Information Technology  Faculty  In one year, a solution was conceptualized, developed and formally implemented  Larger group met bi-monthly and smaller groups met more frequently
  8. 8. Needs  Research Data Policy  USU did not have a policy to describe the University’s position regarding rights and responsibilities of researchers and the institution in the  use,  retention,  maintenance,  and sharing of data  produced as part of the USU research enterprise.  USU Policy 588: Research Data went into effect May 7, 2017
  9. 9. Facilitate Funder Compliance  USU aimed to develop a process that would  Demonstrate to Funders that USU was making good faith effort to comply with mandates  Express to Researchers that complying with funder mandates was an institutional priority  Demonstrate to Researchers that resources were available to support them in meeting funder mandates to make data open
  10. 10. The Process  Relies on Division of Sponsored Programs, Library, Researcher  Uses existing resources: Kuali Grants Management Software, DigitalCommons@USU Institutional Repository, Library Catalog
  11. 11. The Process  Proposal Awarded:  Email to PI from Sponsored Programs; Library is copied  Primary Metadata Document (spreadsheet) with information about award filled out  Reminder about the process of making DMP open and need to deposit data and publications  Offer of assistance  Request of DMP if it isn’t already available  Library creates record to represent award
  12. 12. The Process  Subsequent Years – annual anniversary of award  SPO sends PI the PMD and asks for updates to be sent to Library  Library verifies publication and data deposits, contacts PI as needed, creates records in repository and catalog and indicates these on PMD  Library updates award record with new PMD and notifies SPO  This continues every year until all data and publications are deposited or two years after close out.
  13. 13. Challenges  Lack of responses from PI’s to reminders to update PMDs  Record keeping  How to handle close out in the future (manual process)  Lack of automation for several steps  Training – internal staff have so many tasks and have many things to remember  Faculty confusion regarding the process and the PMD  Limited resources (human, financial)
  14. 14. Initial Outcomes  87 Awards set up  21 updated with second year data; 3 updated with third year data  Over 1500 data management plans downloaded  Increased collaboration between Library and Research Office and safety checks  Increased faculty awareness of funder requirements and resources available to them  Improved relationship between Research Office and Faculty as a result of interactions, trainings, and services
  15. 15. Next Steps  Continue Library-Sponsored Programs-Research Office Collaboration and Communication  Develop outreach and communication program to clarify process  Conduct Focus Groups with Faculty to determine ways to improve what we do