[Rdf-internal] FW: REF returns

[Bernd Stahl]

For info

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Crabtree (staff) <pszaxc at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk> 
Sent: 27 February 2025 18:22
To: Praminda Caleb-Solly (staff) <pszpc1 at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Dario Landa Silva (staff) <pszjds at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Andrew French (staff) <sbzapf at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Steven Furnell (staff) <pszsf at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Christian Wagner (staff) <pszcw at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Graham Hutton (staff) <pszgmh at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Boriana Koleva (staff) <pszbnk at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Steve Benford (staff) <pszsdb at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>; Bernd Stahl (staff) <pszbcs at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>
Cc: Tony Pridmore (staff) <psztpp at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>
Subject: REF returns

Hi,

As you will all appreciate by now, there are problems with our REF returns, very significant problems in most cases

262 outputs were eventually returned but when the eligibility criteria were applied, only 177 remain viable 

I suggest we work with those, and that you work with your teams on fixing the problems I’ve flagged to you

Just so we are clear, there a 3 critical criteria, rules or requirements:

1. An output must be affiliated with UoN, University of Nottingham must be written on it

2. An output must be discoverable in RIS, in progress is not eligible 

3. A conference or journal output must be Open Access (green or gold)

The third rule is, to use a well-worn northern phrase, “a bit of bugger” largely with respect to conference papers as some are classified as book chapters (Springer often do this) and do not as such require OA (basically if an output has ISBN it does not have to be OA)

Nonetheless, please make sure your teams understand these rules and apply them

Going forwards, it is crucial that on acceptance the accepted version of an output is put on RIS 

best wishes,
andy