Options for Future MRC Unit Reviews
Download eBook for Free
|PDF file||0.7 MB|
|PDF file||0.1 MB|
This report, funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC), is intended to inform the MRC by proposing and appraising two options for reviewing Units: Option A: Scientific track record, reviewed via site visits over variable time scales. Overall Unit synergy is assessed, with award of funding envelope allocated to research groups by Director. Option B: Future scientific strategy is assessed using Strategic Audits, metrics and Directors’ science strategy. Site visit is optional and determined by Quinquennial Review Subcommittee. Units will only supported if there is a strategic need. The two options have been developed through a series of consultations with the key stakeholders involved in the Unit Review process. The options are not proposals nor are they mutually exclusive; it is likely that elements of each are combined to produce a preferred model. Strengths and weaknesses of the two options were appraised, using an appraisal framework looking at their suitability, feasibility and acceptability. Finally, it is suggested how the two options respond to 25 key questions. It is stressed that these choices are best made by the MRC with wider interests to consider and balance.
Table of Contents
Scientific track record reviewed via site visits (Option A)
Future scientific strategy assessed using a combination of methods (Option B)
Study methodology and results
Research conducted by
The research described in this report was prepared for the UK Medical Research Council and was conducted by RAND Europe.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation 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.
The RAND Corporation 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.