SPEC Kit 334: Research Data Management Services · 79
outreach campaign. Subject librarians working directly with their liaison departments has been very effective, also. The
Distributed Data Curation Center (D2C2) that was founded at the end of 2006, as well as librarians collaborating on
interdisciplinary research grants, helped establish a reputation for the Libraries as a place to go for help with research
data.
51. Has your library assessed the impact or success of your RDM services? N=53
Yes 6 11%
No, but we plan to 28 53%
No 19 36%
If yes or you plan to, what measures are (will be) used to assess these services? N=23
Answered Yes
An assessment of the repository was conducted in March 2013. There has not been an assessment of data service writ
large.
Evaluation of last year’s data management plans assessment of web stats through Google Analytics review of
anecdotal comments from users.
Surveys, feedback forms/evaluations, tracking consultations.
Tracking statistics for consultations provided to and interviews conducted with individual researchers, and workshop/
training attendance.
No, but we plan to
As yet undetermined.
Don’t yet know how we will do this, but have planned to.
Downloads/article accesses and other analytics, consultations, uptake across the university.
Faculty survey to be distributed in the very near future.
Follow up surveys to users focus groups.
More systematic tracking of requests for services pilot project to assess workflow for digitization of data from multiple
formats (audio, handwritten field notes, video).
Not sure yet. (2 responses)
Number of consultations. Metrics are still under development.
Number of service requests, statistics on data downloads, analysis of DMP’s submitted with grant applications.
Our assessment method and criteria have not be defined or determined at this stage.
Review of all data management plans submitted with grant proposals, using a rubric/template created from the basic
components of data management plans as expressed in funding agency guidelines and local best practices.
Statistics around reference transactions have been kept for some time but more meaningful metrics analysis and
outreach campaign. Subject librarians working directly with their liaison departments has been very effective, also. The
Distributed Data Curation Center (D2C2) that was founded at the end of 2006, as well as librarians collaborating on
interdisciplinary research grants, helped establish a reputation for the Libraries as a place to go for help with research
data.
51. Has your library assessed the impact or success of your RDM services? N=53
Yes 6 11%
No, but we plan to 28 53%
No 19 36%
If yes or you plan to, what measures are (will be) used to assess these services? N=23
Answered Yes
An assessment of the repository was conducted in March 2013. There has not been an assessment of data service writ
large.
Evaluation of last year’s data management plans assessment of web stats through Google Analytics review of
anecdotal comments from users.
Surveys, feedback forms/evaluations, tracking consultations.
Tracking statistics for consultations provided to and interviews conducted with individual researchers, and workshop/
training attendance.
No, but we plan to
As yet undetermined.
Don’t yet know how we will do this, but have planned to.
Downloads/article accesses and other analytics, consultations, uptake across the university.
Faculty survey to be distributed in the very near future.
Follow up surveys to users focus groups.
More systematic tracking of requests for services pilot project to assess workflow for digitization of data from multiple
formats (audio, handwritten field notes, video).
Not sure yet. (2 responses)
Number of consultations. Metrics are still under development.
Number of service requests, statistics on data downloads, analysis of DMP’s submitted with grant applications.
Our assessment method and criteria have not be defined or determined at this stage.
Review of all data management plans submitted with grant proposals, using a rubric/template created from the basic
components of data management plans as expressed in funding agency guidelines and local best practices.
Statistics around reference transactions have been kept for some time but more meaningful metrics analysis and
