Download eBook for Free

Full Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.7 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Summary Only

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

There is increasing pressure for research funders to demonstrate, and seek to maximise, the payback from the research they fund. This report, prepared for and funded by the Arthritis Research Campaign (arc), presents the results of an evaluation of 16 research grants awarded by arc in the early 1990s. The main objective was to develop a system for evaluating arthritis research, with a view to allowing arc to stimulate and manage the exploitation of research advances so that they translate into outcomes of practical benefit to people with arthritis.

Volume 2 of the report presents a collection of the case studies used in the study. These case studies all follow a similar format based on the conceptual model and provide a rich and detailed narrative on the payback of each research grant.

Volume 1 of the report presents a framework that conceptualises the relationship between research inputs, process, output and outcomes. Using this framework, we catalogue a diverse range of research output and outcomes arising from these 16 grants and make a series of quantitative and qualitative assessments comparing, for example, payback from project grants versus programme grants. In conclusion, we make six observations:

  • There is a diversity of research payback.
  • The researcher is the key driver of research translation.
  • Short, focused project grants seem to provide value for money.
  • Intended and unintended flexibility in funding is used advantageously.
  • Referees’ contributions to the peer-review process are of variable benefit.
  • The payback framework could be operationalised and embedded by arc.

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was prepared for and funded by the Arthritis Research Campaign (arc) and performed by RAND Europe.

This report is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports may include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; present discussions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.