C11 Workshop summary and outcomes

Roberts Reporting made easy: A guide for anyone new to reporting RCUK on the implementation of the Roberts Review

Rosie Beales, Portfolio Manager, Research Councils UK and Dr Judy Williams, Postgraduate Training Facilitator, University of Manchester and Vitae North West Hub Co-ordinator

Overview

No matter whether an institution receives a few hundred pounds or over a million pounds for the career development and transferable skills training of researchers, it has to account for its spending to Research Councils UK (RCUK). Demonstrating returns on investments in researchers' skills will provide an evidence base to inform future planning by research councils and government. With HE institutions in receipt of Roberts payments for ~5 years, RCUK and institutions need to consider how we might improve our reporting systems as well as how the information is provided to RCUK.

The session aimed to give participants:

• a clear understanding of the Roberts monitoring requirements
• a practical insight by the University of Manchester into management and co-ordination of skills training and reporting to RCUK
• an opportunity to improve dialogue between institutions and RCUK.

Presentation summary

RCUK's Roberts monitoring requirements: Rosie Beales

The ‘light touch and proportionate' reporting format developed in consultation with the Rugby Team  comprises of a financial table, two page summary, and a requirement to log examples of practice on the Vitae Database of Practice. The summary should cover:

• managing the skills development programme
• range of opportunities and uptake
• use of reflection and feedback
• innovations in the last year and areas for development
• arrangements for sharing practices.

RCUK uses this information to:

• report to research councils and elsewhere in government on the investment
• monitor that the use of funds is appropriate
• inform the sector in the form of annual summaries www.rcuk.ac.uk/rescareer/rcdu/training.htm)

The information is used in conjunction with other information gathering:

• Skills Training and Research Supervisors' Survey (STaRSS)
• Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES)
• Contract Researchers Online Survey (CROS)
• RCUK Cohort Study: see summary for workshop C10

Key points from RCUK's 2007 report show institutions' structures developing, continued innovation in programmes, more practice-sharing, researchers more involved in programme development, and a variety of information sources informing developments.

There continues to be an underspend on research staff support (around 25%) and (smaller) overspend on student development. The fall in the proportion of costs spent on infrastructure (co-ordination costs) between 2005 and 2006 did not drop further.

HEIs must report by 30 November. RCUK will summarise main themes and messages for the Vitae Policy Forum (January 2008) and provide the summary of 2008 reports in March 2009.

View Rosie Beales' presentation.

University of Manchester's approach

The university has around 3,500 postgraduate research students and 1,500 postdoctoral research staff. It is organised around central services (home to the Research Office, Careers Service, Staff Training and Development Unit, Information Management, Information Technology) and four faculties (Engineering and Physical Sciences, Humanities, Life Sciences, Medical and Human Sciences) plus Doctoral Training Centres and Research Institutes. 85% of Roberts payments is devolved to faculty level. Much of the funding retained centrally is allocated for innovative project bids. Manchester also hosts the Vitae North West region Hub. The Roberts allocation funds 15.5 staff: trainers, e-learning developers, administrators and a postdoctoral careers advisor.

Monitoring and accounting arrangements summarised:

• the Research Office completes the annual report to RCUK
• Faculties submit spending strategies for the forthcoming year
• Faculties each produce an annual report covering
• costs and type of courses
• capacity and attendance rates
• developments and innovations.

Feedback mechanisms comprise researcher surveys (PGRSSS and CROS) to Graduate Education Group (steering group) and faculties, plus feedback from courses to the Graduate Education Group and trainers.

The mixed model for use of Manchester's allocation is successful, responding to the diversity of training needs. However, the different approaches adopted by the faculties can bring challenges as well as benefits. Monitoring effectiveness of training must always be a priority.

There are growing mechanisms for sharing good practice, both internally and externally, including:

• skills co-ordinators groups
• research staff and student focus groups
• Vitae North West Hub
• Research support hub

View Judy Williams' presentation.

Discussion outcomes

The post-Roberts landscape was a key discussion theme: universities are beginning to look strategically at sustaining activity after 2011. For more information go to workshop C1/D1 Institutional strategies for sustaining personal development .

Individuals will consider their university's input to the Review of Full Economic Costs, especially with regards to improvement of the human and intellectual sustainability (eg Roberts funding and training).

An important mechanism for sharing practice and extending knowledge is the revised Database of Practice; Vitae's update was highlighted.

 

View the C11 presentation slides for Rosie Beales
View the C11 presentation slides for Dr Judy Williams