jisc project plan template€¦ · project acronym: krds-i2s2 version: final-public contact:...

Project Acronym: KRDS-I2S2 Version: Final-Public Contact: Manjula Patel Date: 17

th March 2011

JISC Project Plan

Project Information

Project Identifier To be completed by JISC

Project Title KRDS/I2S2 Digital Preservation Benefit Analysis Tools (KRDS-I2S2)

Project Hashtag #krds-i2s2benefits

Start Date 1st Feb 2011 End Date 31

st July 2011

Lead Institution University of Bath (UKOLN)

Project Director Liz Lyon (UKOLN)

Project Manager Manjula Patel (UKOLN)

Contact email [email protected]

Partner Institutions Charles Beagrie Limited, University College London, UK Data Archive, Archaeology Data Service, OCLC Research

Project Webpage URL http://beagrie.com/krds-i2s2.php

Programme Name JISC Infrastructure for Education and Research Programme

(JISC Grant Funding 15/10)

Programme Manager Neil Grindley

Document Information

Author(s) Manjula Patel

Project Role(s) Project Manager

Date 17th March 2011 Filename KRDS-I2S2-ProjectPlan-

170316Public

URL http://beagrie.com/krds-i2s2.php

Access This report is for general dissemination

Document History

Version Date Comments

0.1 25/02/2011 Initial version

0.2 28/02/2011 Conversion to new JISC template

0.3 01/03/2011 Version for comments and input from partners

0.4 16/03/2011 Final version submitted to JISC

Public 17/03/2011 Public version for general dissemination

http://beagrie.com/krds-i2s2.php

http://beagrie.com/krds-i2s2.php


th March 2011

2

Table of Contents

1. Project Overview .............................................................................................................................. 3

1.1 Project Summary ........................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes ........................................................................................ 3 1.4 Overall Approach .................................................................................................................... 4 1.5 Anticipated Impact ................................................................................................................... 4 1.6 Stakeholder Analysis ............................................................................................................... 5 1.7 Related Projects ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.8 Constraints .............................................................................................................................. 5 1.9 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................ 5 1.10 Risk Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 6 1.11 Technical Development ........................................................................................................... 6 1.12 Standards ................................................................................................................................ 6 1.13 Intellectual Property Rights ..................................................................................................... 7

2 Project Resources ............................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Project Partners ............................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Project Management ............................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Project Roles ........................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Programme Support ................................................................................................................ 8

3 Detailed Project Planning ................................................................................................................ 8 3.1 Evaluation Plan ....................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Quality Assurance ................................................................................................................. 10 3.3 Dissemination Plan ............................................................................................................... 11 3.4 Exit and Embedding Plans .................................................................................................... 12 3.5 Sustainability Plans ............................................................................................................... 12

Appendices ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Workpackages ................................................................................................................................... 13


th March 2011

3

1. Project Overview

1.1 Project Summary The project aims to test, review and promote combined use of the Keeping Research Data Safe (KRDS) Benefits Taxonomy and the I2S2 Value Chain Analysis tools for assessing the benefits of digital preservation of research data. It will extend their utility to and adoption within the JISC community by providing user review and guidance for the tools and creating an integrated Toolset. The project consortium consists of a mix of user institutions, projects, and disciplinary data services committed to the testing and exploitation of these tools and the lead partners in their original creation (Neil Beagrie of Charles Beagrie Ltd and Brian Lavoie of OCLC Research). The project will be undertaken in seven work packages that demonstrate and critique the tools, and then create and disseminate the Toolset and accompanying materials such as User Guides and Fact sheets to the wider community. Value chain analysis has been widely used in industry and in consulting but case studies in the I2S2 project have been its first application to digital preservation or the research data lifecycle. As a method it is particularly well suited to working with a lifecycle approach to costing digital preservation and to broadly defined approaches which consider creation/pre-archive phases and support services as contributing to it. The KRDS/I2S2 Value Chain Analysis has been developed using the extended KRDS activity model. It assigns benefits (derived initially from the KRDS Benefits Taxonomy) to specific activities, and weights their impact.

1.2 Objectives The KRDS/I2S2 Digital Preservation Benefit Analysis Tools project will:

– Extend the community testing of the KRDS Benefits Taxonomy and I2S2 Value-Chain Analysis tools and enhance their fitness for purpose;

– Demonstrate use of the tools to new users and capture best practice and guidance needed by them for their effective implementation;

– Critique and validate individual components and overall approaches in both of these tools with users e.g. benefits and dimensions in the KRDS Benefits Taxonomy or the metrics for demonstrating benefits in the I2S2 value-chain analysis tool; styles of stakeholder analysis within the KRDS Benefits Taxonomy (private/public) and I2S2 Value Chain Analysis tool (central service/researcher); and the fit of local workflows and procedures to profiles in the KRDS activity model;

– Measure and record the effectiveness of the draft tools for the user sites via a pro-forma Toolset Review Template and reach a consensus on necessary modifications or additions. Revise the tools in light of feedback, and provide the necessary guidance for their use;

– Report to JISC and the broader community the impact of the project and likely future prospects and use of the Toolset;

– Ensure effective dissemination and future take-up of the Toolset by the partners and the broader community.

1.3 Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes

Output / Outcome Type (e.g. report, publication, software,

knowledge built)

Brief Description

Report

D1 Project Plan

Event + Pro-forma

D2 Workshop Materials and Toolset Review Template

D3 Demonstration & Benchmarking Workshop


th March 2011

4

Event

Report

D4 Tools Review Report

Event

D5 Development Focus Group

Report

D6 Tools Revision Roadmap

Toolset + Guidelines

D7 Toolset Version 2

Event + Knowledge and experience + Best practice

D8 Community Workshop

Publication

D9 Fact sheets

Report + Knowledge and experience + Best practice

D10 Final Report

1.4 Overall Approach The KRDS Activity Model template will be used to model the diverse workflows and processes at each of the test sites. The test sites represent different disciplinary practice and different service contexts, and will provide the opportunity to assess the tools from a number of stakeholder perspectives. A pro-forma Toolset Review Template will enable both qualitative and quantitative measurement of the value derived from application of the KRDS/I2S2 Toolset to the data curation and preservation practices in place at each site. The Review Template will facilitate the collection of test results from each site, which will be synthesised in a Tools Review Report. The Tools Review Report will include a section on how the application of the KRDS/I2S2 Toolset has contributed towards the business goals of each test organisation in terms of supporting research and/or service delivery. In addition, the Report will reflect on the applicability of the KRDS/I2S2 tools in the current challenging economic climate. Organisations in the HE sector including the research councils and HEIs, are facing increasing demands to demonstrate significant return-on-investment of public funds, in terms of research, innovation and data inputs to the global knowledge economy. The enhanced ability to demonstrate value and impact in this context is paramount: the KRDS/I2S2 Toolset is ideally positioned to support this requirement. The Consortium offers a broad reach into a number of disciplinary communities, whilst the UK data community is reached through the activities of the Digital Curation Centre. The final open workshop and other dissemination activities will ensure that the project outputs are available and disseminated in the sector and beyond. The partners also have excellent links into international digital preservation developments, which will enable wider visibility and promotion of the Toolset. The major critical success factors for the project include:

– Fitness for purpose – the Toolset should be able to serve its purpose in helping users to adequately identify the costs and benefits of undertaking digital preservation

– Usability – effectiveness and ease of use of the Toolset – Support for research data management

1.5 Anticipated Impact

Impact Area Anticipated Impact Description

Support for research data management

The project and associated Toolset will aid the stakeholders listed below by making explicit the benefits and impact of under-


th March 2011

5

taking specific digital preservation activities

More cost effective research data management within the community

Demonstrating value to funders

Impact Areas : maintain research excellence; maintain teaching & learning excellence; be more effective/save

money; have a positive impact on wider society; be ready for technology needs in the future.

1.6 Stakeholder Analysis

Stakeholder Interest / stake Importance (H/M/L)

Funders (JISC, HEFCE, Research Councils) Support for research data management and research; Impact of research data management and associated research.

H

National Data Services (ADS, MRC DSS, UKDA etc)

Demonstrating value to funders

H

HEIs Support of research strategy and demonstrating value to funders.

H

Digital Preservation Community (International or non-HEI sector partners)

Wider uptake of Toolset and future support and development in collaboration with UK HEI sector

H

Users (New and current researchers working with research data)

Impact of their research and research data management

Effectiveness and ease of use of the Toolset

Reducing individual effort required by sharing best practice and tools

M

1.7 Related Projects Keeping Research Data Safe JISC MRD Programme Support (cost and benefits)

1.8 Constraints The project is of a short duration (6 months) so both time and resources will need to be managed effectively.

1.9 Assumptions The format of outputs will be WORD documents as time/budget will prohibit other software development. Background IPR has been licensed to the project by Charles Beagrie and HEFCE.


th March 2011

6

1.10 Risk Analysis

Risk Description Probability (P)

1 – 5 (1 = low

5 = high)

Severity (S)

1 – 5 (1 = low

5 = high)

Risk Score (PxS)

Detail of action to be taken (mitigation / reduction / transfer

/ acceptance)

Staffing 1 5 5 No recruitment is required for this project.

Limited timescale 5 2 10

Realistic objectives & work plan. Experienced WP leaders have worked together previously.

Lack of relevance or impact 2 5 10

Dissemination will leverage existing high visibility of KRDS and community partners. Toolkit and guidance will be developed and revised with user sites.

Workshops/ focus group do not work 1 4 4

Experience of running workshops. Meeting materials and objectives will be developed and circulated in advance.

Toolkit unhelpful in design or content. 1 4 4

User testing of tools. Implementation guidance and best practice will be captured and accompany the tools. Partners are very experienced in tool development and delivery.

1.11 Technical Development There will be a formal process of review of the tools via a Review Template. There will be a Focus Group (12th July) for undertaking developments relating to format, presentation and application of the toolset.

1.12 Standards

Name of standard or specification

Version Notes

The project will comply with the JISC Funding Agreement and will adopt open standards where appropriate in compliance with JISC Standards Catalogue guidelines. The accessibility of any Web-based systems and software will be addressed.


th March 2011

7

1.13 Intellectual Property Rights Background IPR will be licensed from Charles Beagrie Ltd and HEFCE. Foreground IPR will belong to the originators. As requested by JISC in the call proposal, the project partners will ensure that project outputs are made available free at the point of use for non-commercial purposes to the UK HE/FE/Research community in perpetuity. We will ensure the consortium agreement between the partners achieves this and the assignment to JISC or HEFCE as its representative of a royalty-free non-exclusive licence in perpetuity for the outputs.

2 Project Resources

2.1 Project Partners University of Bath, UKOLN, Elizabeth Lyon (Project Director), tel: 01225 386580, [email protected] Charles Beagrie Ltd., Neil Beagrie (academic lead/toolset creator), tel: 0709 204 8179, [email protected] OCLC Research, Brain Lavoie (reviewer) tel:+1-614-764-4399, [email protected] UK Data Archive, University of Essex, Matthew Woollard (test site user), tel: 01206 872001, [email protected] Archaeology Data Service, University of York, Catherine Hardman (test site user), tel: 01904 433954, [email protected] UCL Centre for Health Informatics and Multiprofessional Education, London, Dipak Kalra (test site user),) tel: 0120 7288 3362, [email protected] We are aiming for the Consortium Agreement to be signed by end April 2011.

2.2 Project Management

UKOLN/DCC will provide project management to support the project. Manjula Patel, current Project manager of the I2S2 Project, will take this role, providing helpful continuity. The PM will co-ordinate relationships with project partners; produce project documentation (Plan and Final Report), and will liaise with the funders and ensure that effective dissemination and monitoring mechanisms are implemented. Communication between project partners will be facilitated by the three face-to-face meetings/workshops and fortnightly/weekly telcons.

2.3 Project Roles

Team Member Name

Role Contact Details Days per week to be spent on the project

Elizabeth Lyon Project Director tel: 01225 386547 [email protected]

0.2

Manjula Patel Project Manager tel: 01225 386254 1.0

mailto:[email protected]







th March 2011

8

[email protected]

Neil Beagrie (academic lead/toolset creator)

tel: 0709 204 8179 [email protected]

1.4

Brain Lavoie (reviewer) tel:+1-614-764-4399, [email protected]

0.2

Monica Duke (test site user) tel: 01225 386580 [email protected]>

0.2

Matthew Woollard (test site user) tel: 01206 872001 [email protected]

0.2

Julian D Richards (test site user) tel: 01904 433954 [email protected]

0.2

Dipak Kalra (test site user) tel: 0120 7288 3362 [email protected]

0.2

The Project Manager may benefit from a course on Project Management tools and techniques.

2.4 Programme Support The project will benefit from participation in Programme level workshops and meetings enabling knowledge and experiences to be shared amongst related projects. It would be beneficial for the project if the Programme Manager could have an involvement in our dissemination workshop (12th July) and advance publicity for the workshop as well as follow-through from project/future development on completion.

3 Detailed Project Planning

3.1 Evaluation Plan The major purpose of the project is to test, evaluate and revise the cost-benefit analysis tools that are being developed. Consequently, the majority of the work packages are geared towards evaluating the suitability and quality of the tools.

Timing Factor to Evaluate

Questions to Address

Method(s) Measure of Success

WP1: Project Startup (Month 1)

Towards assessing the Toolset for fitness for purpose

Development of the Toolset Review Template for use in the first Workshop

A Toolset review pro-forma capable of being used to measure and record the effectiveness of the draft tools from test site users.

WP2: Toolset Demonstration (Month 2)

Raising awareness of current Toolset amongst test site partners

Has enough context and explanation been provided?

Demonstration of the current Benefits Taxonomy and Value-Chain Analysis tools to project partners at a closed half-day workshop

Ability of test site users to engage with the current Toolset

WP3: User Review and Toolset

Usability of Toolset

How useful are the tools?

The four test sites will intensively

Ability of test site users to make use of tools and




th March 2011

9

Benchmarking (Month 2)

Are the tools intuitive and easy to use? What problems did the test sites encounter in using the tools?

experiment with and assess the existing tools and use the Toolset Review and Benchmarking Template, to capture comments and feedback

populate the review pro-forma Tools review report synthesising the feedback from test sites

WP4: Development Focus Group (Month 3)

Towards assessing the Toolset for quality and fitness for purpose

Were the test sites able to Identify both quantitative and qualitative benefits? Are the test sites likely to adopt the tools?

A half-day Focus group with representatives from the four test sites to discuss the Tools Review Report.

Revision of tools review report synthesising the feedback from test sites

WP5: Tool Revisions and Implementation Guidance (Months 3-5)

Towards ensuring fitness for purpose

Do changes to Toolset reflect feedback from user test sites?

Implementation of new Toolset and User Guidelines.

Version 2 of Toolset User Guidelines

WP 6: Dissemination to the Community (Months 5-6)

Towards assessing quality and fitness for purpose of the new Toolset

Have the tools served their purpose in helping users to adequately identify the costs and benefits of undertaking digital preservation?

The new Toolset and documentation will be shared and promoted to the wider community through an open half-day workshop. Two new Fact sheets will be produced to describe use of the new Toolset

Workshop report assessing extent of likely adoption of Toolset and its effectiveness. Fact sheets

End of Project Effectiveness and value of the project Impact of the project

Are stakeholders on board? What benefits are there for stakeholders?

Self-evaluation and Community commentary through final workshop

Extent of up-take of tools Extent of support that the Toolset provides for supporting research data management


th March 2011

10

3.2 Quality Assurance

Output / Outcome Name

Project Plan

When will QA be carried out?

Who will carry out the QA work?

What QA methods / measures will be used?

Month 1 Project partners Peer review


Workshop Materials and Toolset Review Template






Demonstration & Benchmarking Workshop






Tools Review Report




Month 3 Project partners Peer review at Focus group meeting


Development Focus Group






Tools Revision Roadmap






Toolset Version 2





th March 2011

11

Month 6 Project partners and stakeholders

Peer review at open community workshop


Community Workshop







Fact sheets







Final Report





3.3 Dissemination Plan

Timing Dissemination Activity Audience Purpose Key Message

Month 2

Demonstration and bench-marking workshop

Users at test sites Inform and engage test site partners with Toolset

Value and benefits of using the toolset

Months 5-6

Community Workshop Funders; National Data Services; HEIs; Digital preservation community; new and current researchers working with research data

Raising awareness of the value of the Toolset; Engagement with the project tools


Months 5-6

Fact sheets Funders; National Data Services; HEIs; Digital preservation community; new and current researchers working with

Raising awareness of the value of the Toolset; Engagement with the project tools



th March 2011

12

research data

Months 1-6

JISC RDM Conference (March), Sage Congress (April), International DCC Conference (December), Dissemination will also occur via various Web sites and blogs: DCC, Charles Beagrie (KRDS Website) and on project partner Web sites

Scientific and research communities in eScience, digital preservation etc.

Raising awareness of the value of the Toolset; Advocacy and awareness raising


3.4 Exit and Embedding Plans

Project Outputs/Outcomes

Action for Take-up & Embedding Action for Exit

Project website To be maintained by Charles Beagrie Ltd. for 3 years after project ends

Reports Effective dissemination and promotion throughout stakeholder communities

Ensure final versions readily available on project website

Advocacy and tutorial materials

Effective dissemination and promotion throughout stakeholder communities

Ensure final versions readily available on project website

3.5 Sustainability Plans

Project Outputs Why Sustainable Scenarios for Taking Forward

Issues to Address

New Toolset (version 2)

We expect the Toolset to be widely adopted by the National Data Services as well as researchers working with research data

Charles Beagrie will maintain KRDS and project outputs and provide public access/alerts to any future updates. Incorporation into processes and procedures at National Data Services and HEIs

Operational aspects


th March 2011

13

Appendices

Workpackages Timetable

Month 1 Feb

Month 2 March

Month 3 April

Month 4 May

Month 5 June

Month 6 July

WP1 Project Initiation X

WP2 Demonstration X

WP3 User Review X

WP4 Focus Group X

WP5 Revisions X X X

WP6 Dissemination X X

WP7 Project Man. X X X X X X

WP1: Project Startup WP lead: UKOLN Staff allocation: Manjula Patel 4 days; Neil Beagrie 2 days The main activity will be production of the Project Plan for JISC and programme planning for Workshop 1. This latter activity will include development of the Toolset Review Template for use in the first Workshop. Deliverables: D1 Project Plan, D2 WP2 Workshop Materials and Toolset Review Template WP2: Toolset Demonstration WP lead: Charles Beagrie Ltd Staff allocation: Neil Beagrie 1.5 days; Manjula Patel 1 day; Liz Lyon 1 day; User sites 4 days The current Benefits Taxonomy and Value-Chain Analysis tools (all in Version 1 status) will be demonstrated to the project partners at a closed half-day workshop in London at the beginning of March (Month 2). The workshop programme will cover background and context, tool demonstrations and two existing use cases from the JISC I2S2 Project. A Toolset Review Template will be presented, to provide a structured foundation for the subsequent testing, evaluation and feedback process by the four test sites. This will enable collection of evidence and data associated with using the tools in local workflows and procedures, effectiveness of the tools in terms of practical application and how they meet local business requirements at each of the test sites and future potential of the tools for the wider community. The results from these Templates will be used to inform subsequent development of the Tools. Deliverables: D3 Demonstration & Benchmarking Workshop WP3: User Review and Toolset Benchmarking WP lead: Charles Beagrie Ltd Staff allocation: Neil Beagrie 2 days; Liz Lyon 1 day; Manjula Patel 2 days; User sites 12 days The four test sites will intensively experiment with and assess the existing KRDS Benefits Taxonomy and I2S2 Value-Chain Analysis Tools and will use the Toolset Review and Benchmarking Template, to capture Review comments, implementation steps and issues from the test sites. One month (Month 2 - March) will be allocated for this activity. The Templates will be gathered, contents collated into a Tools Review Report which will be a basis for the Focus Group. Deliverables: D4 Tools Review Report WP4: Development Focus Group

Project Identifier: KRDS-I2S2 Version: 0.4 Contact: Manjula Patel Date: 16th March 2011

14

WP lead: UKOLN Staff allocation: Manjula Patel 2 days; Liz Lyon 1 day; Neil Beagrie 1 day; user sites 4 days A half-day Focus group with representatives from the four test sites will be held in London in early April (month 3), to discuss the Tools Review Report, to receive comments and explore further implementation issues, to achieve consensus on the proposed modifications and additions to the tools and to agree on the nature of the community guidance that is needed. Deliverables: D5 Development Focus Group, D6 Tools Revision Roadmap WP5: Tool Revisions and Implementation Guidance WP lead: Charles Beagrie Ltd Staff allocation: Neil Beagrie 10 days; Charles Beagrie research assistants 5 days; Brian Lavoie 4 days; Manjula Patel 2 days; Liz Lyon 1 day This Work Package will concentrate on implementing the agreed Revisions to the Taxonomy and Value-Chain Analysis tools in light of user feedback. This work on Implementation Guidelines and a new draft of the KRDS User Guide, will be carried out largely by Charles Beagrie during mid-April –mid-June (Months 3-5), with input from test site partners and OCLC Research on circulated drafts. Deliverables: D7 Toolset Version 2 WP 6: Dissemination to the Community WP lead: UKOLN Staff allocation: Manjula Patel 4 days; Liz Lyon 1 day; Neil Beagrie 6 days; Charles Beagrie research assistants 8 days; Brian Lavoie 2 days; User sites 4 days The results from the project i.e. the new toolset (Version 2), and the new documentation will be shared and promoted to the wider community through an open half-day workshop at the end of June or early July in London. It is anticipated that the Workshop will be facilitated by the Digital Curation Centre but will be jointly branded with the partner organisations (MRC, ESRC/UKDA, ADS). Two new Factsheets will be produced and printed for the Workshop, which specifically describe using the new Benefits Taxonomy and Value Chain Analysis Tools. Further dissemination of the new Toolset is proposed at the following events in 2011: JISC RDM Conference (March), Sage Congress (April), International DCC Conference (December), Dissemination will also occur via various Web sites and blogs: DCC, Charles Beagrie (KRDS Website) and on project partner Web sites. Deliverables: D8 Community Workshop, D9 Fact sheets WP7: Project Management WP lead: UKOLN Staff allocation: Manjula Patel 10 days; Neil Beagrie 1.5 days UKOLN/DCC will provide project management to support the project. Manjula Patel, current Project manager of the I2S2 Project, will take this role, providing helpful continuity. The PM will co-ordinate relationships with project partners, produce project documentation (Plan and Final Report), and will liaise with the funders and ensure that effective dissemination and monitoring mechanisms are implemented. Communication between project partners will be facilitated by the three face-to-face meetings/workshops and fortnightly / weekly telcons. Deliverables: D10 Final Report.

jisc project plan template€¦ · project acronym: krds-i2s2 version: final-public contact:...

Documents