the role of institutional evaluation in the csic strategic planning and its consequences

1

The role of institutional evaluation in the CSIC strategic planning and its consequences

José M. Fernández de Labastida

Berlin, September 26, 2005

2

CSIC

Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas

15

CSIC Plan of Action 2006-2009

16

CSIC PLAN OF ACTION 2006-2009

• Estrategic vision of the research activity of the organization

• Reference for the decisions relative to resource assignment

• Reference for the decisions to be taken in the Institutes

• Basis of the four-year “administrative contract” with the General Administration of the State

AIM:

17


• Institutes elaborate Strategic Plan Proposals

• CSIC appoints External Peer Review Panels upon nomination by EMBO and ESF

• Institutes submit their Strategic Plan Proposals

• External Peer Review Panels examine the Strategic Plan Proposals and formulate recommendations

• Recommendations on the Strategic Plan Proposals are forwarded to the Institutes

• Institutes formulate observations on the recommendations and resubmit revised Strategic Plan Proposals

• Considering the proposals submitted and the recommendations of the External Peer Review Panels, the Section Commissions approve the Strategic Plans and incorporate them into the CSIC Plan of Action

Strategic Plans of Research Institutes:

18


Format of the Strategic Plans

1. GENERAL INFORMATION AND SITUATION IN JANUARY 2005

1.1. PRESENTATION1.2. STRUCTURAL DATA AND RESOURCES1.3. DEPARTMENTS1.4. LINES OF RESEARCH1.5. SERVICES1.6. EXTERNAL RELATIONS

2. CENTRE/INSTITUTE RESOURCES FOR 2000-2004

2.1. HUMAN RESOURCES2.2. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFRASTRUCTURE2.3. BUDGET

19



3. CENTRE OR INSTITUTE ACTIVITY BETWEEN 2000 AND 2004

3.1. FINANCIAL RESOURCES OF A COMPETITIVE NATURE (PUBLIC CALLS FOR GRANTS) FOR RESEARCH

3.2. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PRODUCTION

3.3. INTERACTION WITH THE PRODUCTIVE AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT AND INTERNATIONALIZATION

3.4.TRAINING OF RESEARCHERS AND POSTDOCTORAL ACTIVITY

3.5. ACTIVITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC CULTURE OR DISSEMINATION

20



4. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE INSTITUTE

4.1. ANALYSIS OF THE STATE OF THE ART OR POSITION OF THE INSTITUTE IN ITS COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT

4.2. MISSION AND VISION OF THE INSTITUTE

4.3. RESEARCH STRATEGY

4.4. CONDITIONS AND EXTERNAL TENDENCIES AND PROPOSED EVALUATION CRITERIA

21



5. ACTIONS TO ACHIEVE OBJETIVES

5.1. ORGANIZATION

5.2. SPACE AND LOCALIZATION

5.3 SCIENTIFIC INFRASTRUCTURE

5.4. HUMAN RESOURCES

5.5. ECONOMIC RESOURCES

5.6. SCIENTIFIC-TECHNOLOGICAL PROJECTS

5.7. ACTIVITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC CULTURE OR DISSEMINATION

5.8. RESULTS INDICATORS FOR RESEARCH ACTIVITIES

22


External Peer Review Panels

• History

• Filology

• Social Sciences

• Biology and Biomedicine

• Terrestrial Organisms and Systems

• Marine Sciences

• Earth Sciences

• Agronomy and Applied Agricultural Sciences

• Physical Engineering and Applied Physics

• Mathematics

• Astrophysics

• Microelectronics and mcro-nano-technology

• Physics

• Materials Science

• Polymer and Ceramic/Glass Science Technology

• Metalurgy and Building and Concret Materials

• Food Sciences and Technologies

• Organic Synthesis and Bioorganic Chemistry

• Environmental Chemistry

• Coal Science and Technology

23


External Peer Review Panel Report

Part 1. Key questions

Mission, Vision and Strategy

• Visions and Strategy• Consistency of strategy and action• Portfolio of research lines• R & D needs and strategies• Comparison with other leading research

institutes

24




Research Dimensions Assessment

• Benchmarking with respect to others• Performance• External and international collaborations• Training• Scientific diffusion

25




Manpower and Resources

• Staff and skills• Efficient use of resources• Funding model

Present and future organisation of the Institute and research perspectives

• Emerging research areas• Development opportunities• Collaborative efforts• Institute organisation• Coherence and integration into the CSIC mainstream

objectives

26


Part 2. Synthesis comments

• Quality, productivity and value-for-money of the institute's research portfolio;

• Role within its field of research in Spain and internationally, including the effectiveness of its collaborations;

• Excellence and feasibility of its future research plans;

• Relevance of the institute's mission and activities;

• Scope, balance and cohesion of the institute's research activities as a whole, in terms of scientific production, research training activities, the effectiveness of the institute's links with users, the arrangements for knowledge transfer, and the contribution to promoting public awareness of science in Spain.


27


Consequences

• Plan of Action 2006-2009

• References to allocate resources

• Reference to plan activities and the Institutes

• Follow-up and Evaluation

the role of institutional evaluation in the csic strategic planning and its consequences

Documents