Data quality

Quality of research activity data

The University requires timely, accurate and reliable research activity data for:

  • effective review of activities and informed decision-making
  • accurate returns to outside bodies

Everyone who enters data into X5 or GoPro, is involved in setting up awards, provides data for the REF, or presents data in annual or other reports or on websites has a responsibility for data quality.

Expand All

These policies set out the responsibilities for data quality, the potential risks to data quality and the actions required to ensure data are of high quality.
 

Information entered into X5 flows through to RPF forms and from there to Oracle Financials and is included in external data returns (including the major Finance Statistics Return to HESA), the University’s Financial Statements and management reporting.

In particular, the 'award type' categorisation determines whether awards are included in external data returns for charity and business support QR funding, and in HE-BCI (Higher Education Business Community Interaction) returns.

These data returns drive substantial income to the University. In 2015/16 the charity support QR income was £35.9m, business research QR income was £8.5m and HEIF (Higher Education Innovation Funding) derived from the HE-BCI return was £3.3m (including 0.5m supplement).

All information entered into X5 and cases in GoPro is used for management reporting and analysis (including Business Intelligence reporting), as well as inter-institutional benchmarking, and drives planning and other decisions. Some of this information, including that about collaborations entered into the AA Case form in GoPro, is also used in the HE-BCI return.
 

  • under-funding
  • over-funding with subsequent claw-back of overpaid funds which, if significant, could impact adversely on the institution’s financial health
  • reputational damage with public and private research funders, other stakeholders and the public, which in turn could prompt additional, burdensome scrutiny of the institution
  • mandatory conditions of grants being breached
  • misleading internal and external impressions of institutional research performance
  • poor decision-making across the institution
     
List of site pages