RC 1NOV11 12

RESEARCH COMMITTEE OCTOBER 2011

RESEARCH GRANT PERFORMANCE

Introduction to research grant reporting

This is the sixth year/round of this style of reporting to Research Committee, which aims to provide an update on current research grant and contract performance, with an indication of its future trajectory. The cyclical nature of research grant activity is reflected in the content of the following separate reports to the three meetings of the Research Committee

  1. Research grant income – this is the expenditure of the research grants during the academic year. Often research grants are awarded and then spent over several years, so the income comes into the University over those years after the award. It is ametric used to report externally (e.g. for REF, HESA data), and is used in league tables.

This report to Research Committee looks at research grant income, as the full figures for the last academic year have just been produced. The later meetings of Research Committee (in January and May) will focus on ‘in year’ performance of the University overall and that of individual Research Institutes. These will concentrate on grant application rates, sources of grants and success rates. These aspects are all interrelated as the research income is dependent on the quality of the applications and their success rates.

  1. Research grant applications – this gives an indication of RIs effort at applying for grants (giving data in year, and for the previous years)
  1. Research grants agreed – the success rate of the grant applications and therefore (arguably) the quality (giving data in year, and for the previous years)

This first report concentrates on the University’s research grant incomefor 2010/11, gives a comparison with previous years’ performance and a comparison to the budget/target. Furthermore, overhead recovery and sources of funding are analysed. Research Committee can use this information to help project future performance and to identify areas of concern.

This report is structured as follows:

  1. University research income 2010/11
  2. RI targets

c. Research overheads 2010/11

d. Sources of Research Income

e. Research Institute research income and overheads over the past 5 years

f. Conclusion

a. Research income 2010/11 (i.e. expenditure)

Chart 1: Keele University Research income and overheads over the past 5 years

In 2010/11 Keele achieved record research income of £11,945,010 (up 2% on 2009/10), but was below target (£12.8m) and below budget (£13.6m). Overheads are analysed in section c below.

The University is also awarded ‘in kind’ facilities time which is allocated a monetary value on the Research & Enterprise Services database. This facility time is mainly awarded to staff in EPSAM and ISTM, and during 2010/11 totalled an additional £103.5k to the University - £7.5k EPSAM, £96k ISTM (a decrease from £186k 2009/10). This source of funding does not attract any overheads and is not included in external reporting of research income

In order to put our performance into a national perspective, the table below compares Keele’s research income over the past 3 years to the 1994 group and its benchmark group of Universities (note 2010/11 data is not yet available from HESA for other Universities). Between 2008/09 and 2009/10 most Universities in this group grew their research income, and Keele increased by 6%. Notably University of Essex and Exeter grew their research income by 16% and 13% respectively. Keele’s research income is one of the lowest in this group, however the main comparison will always have to be to the discipline specific metrics from RAE2008 on which the targets have been based.

Following requests at Research Committee in November 2010 the analysis also includes analysis of research income per academic staff FTE.

Table 1: 1994 group’s Research Income during the past 3 years (£k) and research income per academic staff FTE

Source: HEIDI

Table 2: Keele’s benchmark group of UniversitiesResearch Income and during the past 3 years (£k) and research income per academic staff FTE

Source: HEIDI

  1. RI targets

Following the publication of the RAE 2008 results, Research Committee (6th May 2009) considered a paper which compared Keele’s research income (per FTE) to other University’s at each Unit of Assessment (or subject level) for submissions to the RAE 2008. The overall conclusion was that Keele performed below the sector average in research income (and PGRs).

To address this issue the Deputy Vice Chancellor has worked with the Deans and Director of Finance to develop targets, which focus on Keele achieving the sector average for research income and students by 2013/14. These research income targets are presented pictorially below:

Chart 2: Keele University Research Income Targets to 2013/14 (£17.9m)

Note: the first 5 bars indicate actual income, and the light grey bars indicate future targets

Chart 2 shows that research income in 2010/11 was around the previous years level, and therefore a greater increase is required to meet the 2011/12 target (£14.5m)

These University targets have been broken down for each Faculty and associated Research Institutes. Further details of RIs progress against targets are included in Annex A.

Research income is also an important external ‘measure’ of Keele’s research performance. It is included in the future Research Excellence Framework under the environment element, which accounts for 15% of the final grade.

The January 2010 report noted a 3% decline on research grant applications to £57m during 2009/10, which has reduced further in 2010/11 to £45.7m. The May 2011 report noted an average success rate of 20% based on monetary value (over the past 3 years), which is slightly lower than 23% the previous year.

Analysis of 2010/11 applications has already shown a significant increase in the success rate to 26% (on 25.10.11). This is a minimum success rate as awards will continue to be made during the year. This analysis indicates a move towards more targeted applications which are being more successful.

c. Research overheads 2010/11

Chart 1 shows the University research income and overhead recovery rate (8.3% in 2010/11) over the past 5 years. However this only includes overheads and does not include directly allocated costs which have also contributed to University costs (e.g. Principal Investor time). In January 2010 the Committee agreed future reports should include both elements. During 2010/11 the University recovered £986k overheads and 512k of directly allocated costs (a decrease compared to £1,106k and £609k in 2009/10).

Therefore, for 2010/11 the total research contribution was £1.5m. The University’s target for overheads for 2010/11was £1.6m and the total research contribution was just short of this. The overhead target for 2011/12 is nearly £2m.

With the advent of fEC the overhead recovery rate should show significant improvement. It follows that the first sources of research funding considered should be those offering fEC and that overheads need to be maximised.

As part of the research income targets discussed by the Deputy Vice Chancellor and Deans, overhead recovery rates were also agreed, so that by 2013/14 Humanities and Social Sciences and Natural Science recovery rate will be 20%, and Health will be 12%. This is summarised in the chart below

Chart 3: University research overhead targets to 2013/14

Overheads are also being eroded in part due to the following factors:

  • meeting 20% shortfall on FEC grants to top up to 100% (in some instances this eradicates the overheads completely)
  • meeting indexation shortfalls
  • NHS Trust grants – the University reports all expenditure generated from these grants but only retrieves a 30% share of the overheads.

d. Sources of Research Income

Chart 4: Current picture - Keele University’s Research income 2010/11 by Source (total £11.9m)

Chart 5: Historical picture - Keele University 5 year Average Research Income 2006/07 to

2010/11 by Source

In 2010/11 the University changed from previously having its largest proportion of income from Research Councils, to UK Central Government (31%) sourcing the majority. This can be partly explained from NIHR applications coming under UK Central Government. Further analysis of this funding source in 2010/11 and particularly NIHR awards, has shown generally overheads earned are at about the same level as Research Councils (obviously there are variations across projects).[1]

The proportion from Research councils was 33% in previous years, and UK Central Government has increased from 22% and 13% previously. Charities remain at 19% (which attracts no overheads).

e. Research Institutes’ research income for the last 3 years

Chart 6:Keele University Analysis of Research Income by Research Institutes for 2008/09 (£10.8m), 2009/10 (£11.4m) and 2010/11 (£11.7m)[2]

The Charts in Annex A provide the Committee with further analysis of each Research Institute’s research income for by source over the past 3 years. The annex also provides details of overhead recovery rates, income per member and progress againstincome and overhead recovery targets.

Key points to note from the RI Charts in Annex A

  • Total research income - PCHS has the largest research income for second time (£4.8m 2010/11).
  • Research income growth – Primary Care and EPSAM showed a year on year growth in income, the other RIs had a reduction
  • Overhead recovery rates– These decreased across all the RIs . Annex A also contains details of FEC directly allocated costs which together indicate the total research contribution.
  • Research income per Research FTE–to try and facilitate comparisons across RIs, data was gathered from RI Managers on the ‘research FTE,’ which in some RIs is referred to as the buyout. However it should be noted this does not include additional PI buyout from successful grants, and further work will be undertaken to ensure consistent data across RIs. Taking these issues into account, PCHS has the largest research income per Research FTE (£274k), followed by EPSAM (£225k), however the cost of research should be taken into account when assessing this measure.
  • Progress against targets – For research income PCHS and EPSAM exceeded their target for 2010/11 (and 2009/10). ISTM, Humanities and SSRI were below target.
  • Grants funding existing staff time – Some RIs (particularly EPSAM, ISTM and PCHS) do this without backfilling staff and therefore generate a contribution/saving against budget in their Resource Allocation System

f. Conclusion

In 2010/11 Keele achieved record research income of £11,945,010 (up 2% on 2009/10), but was slightly belowtarget and budget. The total research contribution was £1.5m in 2010/11, which consists of recovered overheads £986k and 512k of directly allocated costs (a decrease compared to £1,106k and £609k in 2009/10). The University’s target for overheads for 2010/11was £1.6m and the total research contribution was just short of this. The overhead target for 2011/12 is nearly £2m.

The University total value of research grant applications has decreased over recent years to £45.9m in 2010/11, however these applications are showing an improved success rate of 26% (from 20% previously) and this 2010/11 rate will continue to rise as decisions are made throughout the year. This indicates a move towards more targeted applications which are being more successful.

Sources of funding have shown a shift from Research Councils to Central Government, in part due to NIHR applications coming under UK Central Government. There has been varying performance in research income across the RIs with Primary Care and EPSAM increasing on previous years.

Ellie James

25th October 2011

O:\Research Support\Committees\Research Committee\2011-12\1st Nov 2011\4a) Research income MI paper Res Com Oct 11.doc

Annex A – Research Institute’s research income by source over the last 3 years

Social Sciences RI

  • Total research income decreased between 2009/10 and 2010/11by 17%
  • Number of full RI members (Oct 2011) = 159.37 FTEs. This figure has declined by 24% since 2007 when there were 210 FTE full RI members.
  • Research FTE for2011/12 = 29 FTE (which gives income of £35k per FTE)
  • Good spread of sources of research income, main sourceis research council, closely followed by charities and EU Government.
  • 2010/11overheads = £92k (which was below budget of £221k), FEC directly allocated costs = £85k, giving a total research contribution of £177k. Overhead recovery rate (which excludes FEC directly allocated costs) has decreased to 9.2% (previous year 11%)
  • SSRI target research income for 2011/12is £2.34m rising to £3m in 2013/14, target overhead recovery of 20% by 2013/14

SSRI research income against target

In 2009/10 research income was 26% below budget/target
Primary Care & Health Sciences

  • Total research income increased between 2009/10 and 2010/11 by 10%
  • Number of full RI members (Oct 2011)= 24.8 FTEs
  • Research FTE for 2011/12 = 17.7 FTE (which gives income of £274k per FTE)
  • Main source of income is central government, followed by charities and health authorities.
  • 2010/11 overheads = £376k (which was above budget of £291k), FEC directly allocated costs = £55k, giving a total research contribution of £431k. Overhead recovery rate (which excludes FEC directly allocated costs) has decreased slightly to 7% (previous year 8%)
  • PCHS target research income for 2011/12 is £4.5m rising to £5.1m in 2013/14, target overhead recovery of 12% by 2013/14

PCHS research income against target

In 2009/10 research income was 8% above budget/target
Science & Technology in Medicine

  • Total research income decreased between 2009/10 and 2010/11 by 2%
  • Number of full RI members (Oct 2011) = 47 FTEs
  • Research FTE for 2011/12 = 17.7 FTE (which gives income of £205k per FTE)
  • Main source of income is research council, closely followed by charities
  • 2010/11 overheads = £262k (which was below budget of £345k), FEC directly allocated costs = £133k, giving a total research contribution of £395k. . Overhead recovery rate (which excludes FEC directly allocated costs) has decreased to 4% (previous year 9%)
  • ISTM target research income for 2011/12 is £4.75m rising to £5.7m in 2013/14, target overhead recovery of 12% by 2013/14

ISTM research income against target

In 2009/10 research income was 0.4% below budget/target
Humanities

  • Total research income decreased between 2009/10 and 2010/11 by 21%
  • Number of full RI members (Oct 2011) = 40.1 FTEs
  • Research FTE for 2011/12 = 12 FTE (which gives income of £16k per FTE)
  • Main source of income is research council, followed by local authority
  • 2010/11 overheads = £26.3k (which was below budget of £104k), FEC directly allocated costs = £17k, giving a total research contribution of £43.3k. Overhead recovery rate (which excludes FEC directly allocated costs) has decreased to 9% (previous year 28%)
  • Humanities target research income for 2011/12 is £550k rising to £606k in 2013/14, target overhead recovery of 20% by 2013/14

Humanities research income against target

In 2009/10 research income was 45% below budget/target
Environment, Physical Science and Applied Maths

  • Total research income increased between 2009/10 and 2010/11 by 2%
  • Number of full RI members (Oct 2011) = 56.7 FTEs
  • Research FTE for 2011/12 = 8.8 FTE (which gives income of £226k per FTE)
  • Main source of income continues to be research councils
  • 2010/11 overheads = £262k (which was above budget of £250k), FEC directly allocated costs = £223k, giving a total research contribution of £485k. Overhead recovery rate (which excludes FEC directly allocated costs) has decreased slightly to 13% (previous year 14%)
  • Target research income for 2011/12 is £2.3m rising to £3.4m in 2013/14, target overhead recovery of 20% by 2013/14

EPSAM research income against target

In 2009/10 research income was 17% above budget/target

Page 1

[1]Note - these are the redistributed overheads, i.e. the overheads remaining once any shortfall is made up on DI/DA costs

[2] Note - some research income is not attributed to RIs, which accounts for the difference to the University total