federal funder mandates

FEDERAL FUNDER MANDATES FOR OPEN ACCESS

Sherry Lake Data Management Consulting Group

Research Data Services University of Virginia Library

Andrea Horne Denton Research and Data Services Manager Claude Moore Health Sciences Library

Open Access Week October 22, 2014

Today We’ll Cover

•  What brings us here: recent White House policy decisions

•  What got us here: past efforts with manda=ng sharing of publica=ons and data

•  What’s happening today •  What’s next

Memo released February 22, 2013

To ensure that “…direct results of federally funded scien2fic research are made available… Federal agencies inves2ng in research and development (more than $100M in annual expenditures) must develop plans to support increased public access to the results of research …”

hBp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_memo_2013.pdf

Increasing the Access to the Results of Federally Funded ScienAfic Research

Public Access Plan Components 1.  Leverage exis=ng archives; partner w/ journals (where

appropriate) 2.  Improve the public’s ability to locate and access digital

data 3. Approach to op=mize search, archival, and dissemina=on

features that encourage innova=on in accessibility & interoperability and ensure long-‐term stewardship

4. A plan to no=fy awardees & researchers of their obliga=ons

5.  Strategy for measuring and enforcing compliance with the plan

Public Access to Scien=fic Publica=ons

… “the results of unclassified research that are published in peer-‐reviewed publica2ons …should be stored for long-‐term preserva7on and publicly accessible to search, retrieve, and analyze in ways that maximize the impact and accountability …” •  12-‐month post-‐publica=on embargo

•  Ensure aZribu=on is maintained •  No charge for access

Public Access to Scien=fic Data in Digital Formats

… “digitally formaBed scien2fic data resul2ng from unclassified research supported wholly or in part… should be stored and publicly accessible to search, retrieve, and analyze.”

•  Protect confiden=ality & personal privacy •  Ensure appropriate aZribu=on •  No charge for access •  Require Data Management Plans

Data Management Plan Requirements

Researchers to include: •  Descrip=on for long-‐term preserva=on and access •  Appropriate costs for data management and access

Funders ensure: •  Evalua=on criteria for DMP •  Mechanisms for compliance with DMP and policies

•  Support of training related to data management

History of US Funding Agencies Requirements •  The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-‐110 provides the federal administra=ve requirements for grants and agreements with ins=tu=ons of higher educa=on, hospitals and other non-‐profit organiza=ons.

•  In1999, revised to provide public access under some circumstances to research data through the Freedom of Informa=on Act (FOIA).

•  Funding agencies have implemented the OMB requirement in various ways.

FEDERAL MANDATES AROUND PUBLICATION SHARING

Federal mandates around publica=on sharing

1997

Move toward greater access – free PubMed

1999

Harold Varmus, NIH Director Public comment on crea=on of a pre-‐print and publica=on archive of biomedical papers Controversial…


Early 2000’s

Open access biomedical journals BioMedCentral founded in 2000

Increased publisher access to their online ar=cles


2004

New NIH Policy proposed in Sept: NOT-‐OD-‐04-‐064 “Enhanced Public Access to NIH Research Informa=on”

– Elias Zerhouni, NIH Director (encouraged by Congress)

– Much discussion and concern


2005

Policy enacted reques=ng deposit of eligible (NIH-‐funded) papers into PubMed Central

– Very low compliance (5%)


2008

NIH Public Access Policy implements Division F Sec=on 217 of PL 111-‐8 (Omnibus Appropria=ons Act, 2009). Require vs. request


2008 The Director of the Na2onal Ins2tutes of Health ("NIH") shall require in the current fiscal year and thereaUer that all inves2gators funded by the NIH submit or have submiBed for them to the Na2onal Library of Medicine's PubMed Central an electronic version of their final, peer-‐reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publica2on, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months aUer the official date of publica2on: Provided, that the NIH shall implement the public access policy in a manner consistent with copyright law.


2013 Changes to Public Access Policy Compliance Efforts

– NIH will delay processing of an award if publica=ons arising from it are not in compliance with the NIH public access policy

– Compliance s=ll only around 86%


FEDERAL MANDATES AROUND DATA SHARING

NSF Data Archiving and Sharing Policy Prior to 2011

To advance science by encouraging data sharing among researchers:

•  Data obtained with federal funds be accessible to the general public

•  Grantees must develop and submit specific plans to share materials collected with NSF support, except where this is inappropriate or impossible

NSF Dissemina=on & Sharing of Research Results “Inves=gators are expected to share with other researchers, at no more than incremental cost and within a reasonable =me, the primary data, samples, physical collec=ons and other suppor=ng materials created or gathered in the course of work under NSF grants. Grantees are expected to encourage and facilitate such sharing.”

NaAonal Science FoundaAon: Award & Administra2on Guide (AAG) Chapter VI.D.4

NSF Plan for Data Management & Sharing of the Products of Research

As of January 18, 2011:

“Proposals must include a supplementary document of no more than two pages labeled Data Management Plan. This supplement should describe how the proposal will conform to NSF policy on the disseminaAon and sharing of research results, and may include…...”

NSF: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Chapter II.C.2.j

Parts of a (Generic) NSF Data Management Plan I.   Products of the Research: The types of data, samples, physical

collec=ons, sonware, curriculum materials, and other materials to be produced in the course of the project.

II.   Data Formats: The standards to be used for data and metadata format and content (where exis=ng standards are absent or deemed inadequate, this should be documented along with any proposed solu=ons or remedies).

III.   Access to Data and Data Sharing PracAces and Policies: Policies for access and sharing including provisions for appropriate protec=on of privacy, confiden=ality, security, intellectual property, or other rights or requirements.

IV.  Policies for Re-‐Use, Re-‐DistribuAon, and ProducAon of DerivaAves. V.   Archiving of Data: Plans for archiving data, samples, and other research

products, and for preserva=on of access to them.

NSF: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Chapter II.C.2.j

NIH Requirement

“Inves2gators seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year should include a descrip7on of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data sharing is not possible. It is expected that the data sharing discussion will be provided primarily in the form of a brief paragraph…”

NIH Data Sharing Policy & Implementa=on Guidance hZp://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_guidance.htm#inc

NIH: What to Include (in your paragraph)

•  Schedule for data sharing •  Format of final dataset •  Documenta=on to be provided •  Analy=cal tools to be provided, if any •  Need for data sharing agreement •  Mode of data sharing

NIH Data Sharing Repositories

hZp://www.nlm.nih.gov/NIHbmic/nih_data_sharing_repositories.html

data accessible for reuse

Who’s Requiring Data Sharing or Data Management? Require a Data Management Plan (DMP)

Require Sharing of Results – per a Data Policy

•  Na=onal Science Founda=on •  Na=onal Ins=tutes of Health •  Na=onal Oceanographic and

Atmospheric Research (NOAA) •  Ins=tute of Museum and Library

Services (IMLS) •  Na=onal Endowment of Humani=es

– office of digital humani=es (NEH)

•  NASA •  NEH – Preserva=on & Access •  IES – Ins=tute of Educa=on

Sciences

This list is not inclusive

WHAT’S HAPPENING NOW?

Memo released February 22, 2013

To ensure that “…direct results of federally funded scien2fic research are made available… Federal agencies inves2ng in research and development (more than $100M in annual expenditures) must develop plans to support increased public access to the results of research …”

hBp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_memo_2013.pdf

Increasing the Access to the Results of Federally Funded ScienAfic Research

Update March 2014

•  All required agencies have submiZed plans •  OMB & OSTP reviewed and commented on plans •  Agencies working to iden=fy infrastructure solu=ons to support their plans

•  Interagency mee=ngs soon to discuss solu=ons and strategies

hBp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/OpenAccess_March-‐2014.pdf

Publishers’ Response

CHORUS Clearing House for the Open Research of the United States

“...gives the public access to publicly funded scien2fic findings via embargoed access to publishers’ final approved, edited, and formaBed papers.”

www.chorusaccess.org

•  Partnerships with mul=ple publishers -‐ uses their exis=ng publica=on infrastructure

•  Collects publica=on metadata and makes it available to the agencies to aid discovery

•  Other research outputs (e.g. datasets) are not directly included

Higher Educa=on Response

•  SHARE (SHared Access Research Ecosystem)

•  Joint proposal (AAU, ARL, APLU) •  Relates to core mission of academic libraries

– curate and provide access to scholarly outputs •  Four components

– No=fica=on service – Registry – Discovery – Mining and Reuse

hZp://www.arl.org/focus-‐areas/shared-‐access-‐research-‐ecosystem-‐share

SHARE •  Basic approach is to provide a network of ins=tu=onal repositories – Both publica=ons and data

•  Funding – Sloan Founda=on (planning grant and now no=fica=on system)

–  IMLS (no=fica=on system) •  Currently working on the no=fica=on system – Track “research release events” = preprints, ar=cles, datasets, figures, etc

•  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

•  Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)

•  HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR)

•  HHS Centers for Disease Control and Preven=on (CDC)

•  Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

•  Department of Defense (DoD) •  Department of Energy (DOE) •  Department of the Interior (DOI) •  Department of Transporta=on (DOT) •  Department of Educa=on (ED) •  Environmental Protec=on Agency

(EPA) •  HHS Food and Drug Administra=on

(FDA)

•  Na=onal Aeronau=cs and Space

Administra=on (NASA) •  HHS Na=onal Ins=tutes of Health (NIH) •  Department of Commerce (DOC) •  Na=onal Ins=tute of Standards and

Technology (NIST) •  DOC Na=onal Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administra=on (NOAA) •  Na=onal Science Founda=on (NSF) •  Office of the Director of Na=onal

Intelligence (ODNI) •  Smithsonian Ins=tu=on (SI) •  United States Agency for Interna=onal

Development (USAID) •  United States Department of

Agriculture (USDA) •  United States Department of Veterans

Affairs (VA)

The Agencies

Where are we today?

•  All 23 agencies have submiZed dran plans (some 2nd drans)

•  DOE was the first to publicize their plan –  Implementa=on October 2014

•  Public announcements once approved by OBM and OSTP – 14 in pipeline that have been approved

Early Informa=on on Agency Public Access Plans

DOE Public Access Plan •  Scien=fic Publica=ons

– Version of Record hosted by publisher – Access through DOE repository if no other public available version

– PAGES: portal and search interface for discoverability

•  Scien=fic Data in Digital Formats – All research proposals include a DMP – DMPs will be evaluated – Encourage deposit in community repositories

WHAT’S NEXT?

Possible Issues

•  Will we see clusters – number of agencies going with NIH and PubMed Central, some with CHORUS, some on their own

•  Key issues; what is full reuse rights? -‐ in the context of data and text mining, key aspects of DMP

•  Different policies, different requirements for each agency

Thoughts

•  How would these requirements affect how you do your research?

•  Would you ask for funds for data management?

•  Would having other research accessible enhance your research? Benefit you?

More Links

•  OMB: Circular A-‐110 www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a110

•  NSF: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Chapter II.C.2.j www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_2.jsp#dmp

•  CHORUS www.chorusaccess.org/

•  SHARE www.arl.org/focus-‐areas/shared-‐access-‐research-‐ecosystem-‐share

•  DOE Public Access Plan www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/08/f18/DOE_Public_Access%20Plan_FINAL.pdf

federal funder mandates

Education