Costs and Benefits in KRDS and I2S2

Neil Beagrie

RAL Feb 2010

Agenda Costs – Keeping Research Data Safe 1

Benefits – Keeping Research Data Safe 2

I2S2

Keeping Research Data Safe1JISC Research Data Digital Preservation Costs Study(co-authors Brian Lavoie, Julia Chruszcz,+institutions)

Overview

• KRDS1 Aim – investigate costs, develop model and recommendations

• Method – detailed analysis of 4 models: LIFE1/2 & NASA CET in combination with OAIS and UK Research TRAC;

• Plus literature review;12 interviews; 4 detailed case studies.

What was Produced?• A cost framework consisting of:

– activity model in 3 parts: pre-archive, archive, support services

– Key cost variables divided into economic adjustments and service adjustments

– Resources template for Transparent Costing (TRAC)

• 4 detailed case studies (ADS, Cambridge, KCL, Southampton)

• Data from other services.

KRDS

Pre-Archive PhaseOutreach

Initiation

Creation

Archive Phase

Acquisition

Disposal

Ingest

Archival Storage

Preservation Planning

First Mover Innovation

Data Management

Access

Support Services Administration

Common Services

Estates

Putting it all together

• Activity model helps identify cost allocations across preservation process

• Service adjustments helps identify and adjust costs to specific requirements

• Economic adjustments help spread these costs appropriately over time

• Resource framework: pulls all of it together into a TRAC-friendly costing model

What was New?• FEC and TRAC friendly– not in or partial in other models but

– Requirement for HEIs– Absence of FEC (a) distorts business cases e.g. for automation (b)

cannot accurately compare in-house or out-source costs

• Included pre-archive phases – not solely archive centric

• Not an implementation- customisable - application neutral – can cost for in-house archive, full or partial shared service(s), national/subject data centre archive charges

• Tailored for research data: different collection levels, products from data, etc

• Whole of Service costing/Seeing “Big Picture”

Keeping Research Data Safe2JISC Research Data Digital Preservation Costs Study(co-authors Brian Lavoie, Matthew Woollard,+ partner institutions)

Aims

• Review and re-format KRDS1 Activity Model (KRDS2 models now available)

• Identify/Survey Sources of Cost Information (KRDS2 survey now available)

• New in Depth Cost Studies (Oxford, ADS, ULCC, UKDA)

• Analysis and Framework of Benefits

• Benefits studies (UKDA, Soton, Oxford)

Benefits Framework

KRDS2 Benefits Taxonomy

Dimension 1(Type of Outcome)

Direct Indirect (costs avoided)

Dimension 2 (When)

Near-Term Benefits Long-term Benefits

Dimension 3 (Who)

Private Public

Benefits Framework

• Some benefits can be costed (direct or counter-factual)

• Some benefits can be measured in other ways

• Some benefits only have qualitative metrics

Some Thoughts...• Cost framework helpful for planning and analysis (both

internally and cross-project)– “Off-the-shelf” but flexible cost framework facilitates

implementation across very different disciplines• “What does it cost?” = “It depends”

– Evidenced by service adjustments– Choices shape preservation/dissemination strategy,

which determines overall cost• More work needed on “non-centralised” research data• More work needed on identifying and expressing benefits

I2S2

Questions?

Further Information“Keeping Research Data Safe” (KRDS1)Final

report and Executive Summary at http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/publications/keepingresearchdatasafe.aspx

Keeping Research Data Safe2 (KRDS2) webpage at www.beagrie.com/jisc.php