1. 12/9/10 Pilot assessment impact- paperwork Findings of the expert panels- report + appendix Lessons learned- feedback from pilot institutions Examples good case studies Original and revised guidance given to Institutions All on http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/impact/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/impact/

2. 12/9/10 Main outcomes Case studies good way for assessing impact – across disciplines and using same approach and weighting Case studies varied widely in nature and whether based around individuals or teams Main criteria used – ‘reach’ and ‘significance’- OK Impact statements were less valuable in discriminating good impact- needed to be more strategic

3. 12/9/10 Earth Systems & Environmental Science 4*3*2*1*U UOA average18282415 Institution A05000 Institution B50000 Institution C250 500 Institution D3525 150 Institution E25 5000 Institution F25 0 Institution G0025 50 Institution H050250 Institution I03530035 Institution J0100000

4. 12/9/10 English Language & Literature 4*3*2*1*U UOA profile1930 192 Institution A25050250 Institution B0020800 Institution C2040 00 Institution D0010000 Institution E102050200 Institution F0208000 Institution G4060000 Institution H25502500 Institution I35501500 Institution J4006000 Institution K0600400 Institution L20302015 Institution M0001000

5. 12/9/10 Issues identified with submissions Failure to demonstrate that the impact was based on high quality research (minimum 2*) Failure to provide transparent evidence- i)to link the impact with research, ii) demonstrate that impact had happened Many cases were ‘poorly narrated’ Use of public engagement, special advisory work and policy as examples of impact – all acceptable but link with individual, group or departments OWN research must be clearly illustrated

6. 12/9/10 Users Panel chairs emphasised the vital role of users on panel Most Case studies evaluated by 3-4 panel members (ratio 50:50) users to academics Most users will be recruited in 2013 to take part in assessment in 2014- brought in for the Impact assessment Some concern from HEIs re availability of sufficient high quality informed users

7. 12/9/10 Issues with process -future changes Templates need to be altered to put description of research first Examples needed to be given- guidance too abstract Weighting not yet decided – consulting with community. Likely to be 15-20%. Impact statements may go into environment section

8. 12/9/10 Lessons for us Start now- time consuming and involves wide range academics, admin and support staff Impact is based on historical activity – need good institutional memory Will probably be 1 case study per 10 FTEs Need academic champion(s) in each UoA Involvement central administrators essential High level academic committee to over see draft examples and development to final stage

9. 12/9/10 Timescales Main panels start to meet early 2011 March 2011- broad framework for Impact Assessment published July 2011- guidance on submissions published Autumn 2011 - panels consulted on criteria January 2012- panel criteria and working methods published