The Research Infrastructure Self-Evaluation Framework, (RISE), was published at the beginning of 2017 by the Digital Curation Centre (DCC). It is a way of determining how mature your institutional Research Data Services may be

Version 1.1 provides a self-assessment framework with 10 categories covering, amongst others, RDM policies, business plans, advisory services, and training.

Our Goal

Here at Delft, we used RISE to measure our Research Data Services (RDS) and 4TU.Centre for Research Data (4TU). The RISE model is very helpful in providing a fixed framework for categories for research data management services.

Our Evaluation Team

Four team members of the rds/4tu team of 10 people participated in RISE evaluation. The group consisted of one front office person (ie talking to researchers), one back office person, one person being responsible for training, and the team head.

The whole framework was used to determine the maturity levels of the provided services of the research data services (including 4TU) within the plethora of TU Delft Library services. For this first evaluation the standard set of questions were used and no additions were made. At the time of the evaluation the future service provision was not taken into account. In order to improve the evaluation process, a google form was set-up with tick boxes. That helped to quickly go through the questions and later to determine the majority decisions.

After every team member worked themselves through the framework, the evaluation team came together to  analyse the results and determine the final maturity level for each question.

List Overview of RDS / 4TU Level Scoring

RISE section RDS / 4TU Level Score
1 RDM Policy and Strategy
1 a) Policy Development Level 0
1b) Awareness Raising and Stakeholder Engagement Level 3
1c) RDM Implementation Roadmap Level 3
2 Business Plans and Sustainability
2a) Staff Investment Level 3
2b) Technology Investment Level 2
2c) Cost Modelling Level 3
3 Advisory Services
3 a) Guidance Provision Level 2
4 Training
4 a) Online Training Level 0
4 b) Face to Face Training Level 1
5 Data Management Planning
5 a) DMP Provision Level 2
6 Active Data Management
6 a) Scaleability and Synchronisation Level 2
6 b) Collaboration Support Level 1-3
6 c) Security Management Level 1
7 Appraisal and Risk Assessment
7 a) Data Collection Policy Level 3
7 b) Security, Legal and Ethical Risk Assessment Level 1
7 c) Metadata Collection to Inform Decision-making Level 3
8 Preservation
8 a) Preservation Planning and Action Level 3
8 b) Continuity Support Level 3
9 Access and Publishing
9 a) Monitoring locally produced Dataset Level 3
9 b) Data Publishing Mandate Level 2
9 c) Level of Data Curation Level 2
10 Discovery
10 a) Metadata Cataloguing Scope Level 2

Extended Results

We are planning on annually self-evaluating our services.

The original evaluation is in table form, with commentary on our selection and general comment about that section.

The second shortened version is the spotlight of the single sections with remarks:

[googleapps domain=”docs” dir=”document/d/e/2PACX-1vR_MEu6RfaamZqg1SjWGcTF1N-0e2I9HC5fIraainys4CWBPCQRp6EdePDgfbqzXlQCWBIkOGsVtNHD/pub” query=”embedded=true” /]