Rec. 32: Costing data management

[sjDCC]

Research funders should require data management costs to be considered and included in grant applications, where relevant. To support this, detailed guidelines and worked examples of eligible costs for FAIR data should be provided.

• Details on the costs of data management, curation and publication should be included in all DMP templates.
  Stakeholders: Funders, Institutions, Data services.

• Guidelines should be provided for researchers and reviewers to raise awareness of eligible costs and reinforce the view that data management, long term curation and data publication should be included in project proposals.
  Stakeholders: Funders; Institutions.

• Information from existing and completed projects should be used to retrospectively identify costs and develop examples and guidelines based on these.
  Stakeholders: Funders; Institutions; Data services.

[marcrr]

"where relevant": if FAIR is broadly implemented, this will always be relevant I believe.

[hollydawnmurray]

F1000 position: To make this action a reality, funders should be urged to include a clear statement in their own policies outlining what associated costs will be eligible as part of grant applications. This will benefit both researchers and institutions in their own planning.

[ghost]

4TU.Centre for Research Data position: It would be highly beneficial, if the RDM and archiving costs would have their own dedicated budget slot in the grant application, and not be a part of the general research budget. This should be picked up by the funders.

[katerbow]

DFG position: Recommendation 32 also covers an aspect discussed since long and mentioned in numerous recommendations already. It should not be repeated here in particular because it seems not FAIR specific.

[ScienceEurope]

Science Europe agrees in general and has taken up this topic in its DMP Core Requirements that will be published by the end of 2018.

[eiroforum-it-wg]

EIROforum has published its input for the consultation which is available online (20180724-EIROforum-position-paper-EOSC.pdf). The paper highlights a number of practical points EIROforum members consider essential to ensure the EOSC can effectively interlink People, Data, Services and Training, Publications, Projects and Organisations, including aspects related to Rec. #32 “Costing data management”.

[RCN2018]

• Detailed guidelines of costs: First we need to know what data management and curation costs are. We consider this as a natural part of institutional economy models based on so-called full costing, which we strongly support.
• Concerning the point "Information from existing and completed projects should be used to retrospectively identify costs and develop examples and guidelines based on these." - This is a good idea, but rather than each individual funder analysing these costs, such a calculation should be done as a collaborative work, e.g. through a research project?

[pkdoorn]

Combine with Rec. #5 : Sustainable funding for FAIR components #5 and Rec. #6: Strategic and evidence-based funding #6.

[carrd]

Wellcome Trust position:
We support this and are happy to work with other funders to share experience and work to enhance guidance. It is important institutions are recognised as stakeholders here alongside funders, and important that institutions have clear processes in place to assist researchers in ensuring that funding applications request appropriate costs.

[mromanie]

ESO position
Reversing the argument, funders should provide funding to cover for data management costs. Only once this is done, are applicants in the position of including them in their specific proposal.

[bertocco]

INAF (astronomy) position:
try to group funding/incentives/sustainability in a smaller number of RECs

[gtoneill]

Fully support funding for implementing FAIR Data and supporting researchers to do FAIR Data in research projects. Some overlap with Recommendations 5 and 6 on funding FAIR. Perhaps merge?