Jornadas 2015: PTCRIS: Parte II

PTCRIS - Parte II
João Mendes Moreira
10-Set-14 1

Agenda
Parte I
• WP0: Ponto situação
• WP1: Demo: interoperabilidade
• WP1: Desconstruindo
interoperabilidade
• WP2 Novo sistema CV
• Ciência-IUL (CRIS ISCTE)
Parte II
• WP3: Identificadores de
Organizações
• Ante projeto novo SI Grant
Management
• WP4: Fundações PTCRIS
• WP10: Sítio web PTCRIS
• Plano de atividades 2015
10-Set-14 2

Jisc CASRAI-UK pilot
Organisational identifiers
1oth Feb 2015
Jornadas FCCN

Introducing Jisc
5
Jisc offers digital services for
UK education and research.
The charity does this to
achieve its vision for the UK
to be the most digitally
advanced education and
research nation in the world.
Jisc.ac.uk
© Isaxen via Flickr

What does Jisc do?
6
Does 4 things…
Providing and developing a
network infrastructure and
related services that meet the
needs of the UK research and
education communities
Supporting the procurement
of digital content for UK
education and research
Our network of national and
regional teams provide local
engagement, advice and
support to help you get the
most out of our service offer
Our R&D work, paid for entirely
by our major funders, identifies
emerging technologies and
develops them around your
particular needs

The UK research context: General
7
» Many institutions and research institutes (within and outside universities)
» Many research funders (UK Research Councils only 30% of total research
income)
» Varied infrastructure – Institutional Repositories,CRIS’s (one of these or neither)
» Changing environment
› Mandates effecting research information and research data
› Increasing importance of external (non-governmental) funding
› Interdisciplinary and international focus

The UK research context: policies and mandates
8
» Research excellence Framework (REF) from the four university funding bodies* -
research impact (REF2014 published, preparation for 2020 - awaiting guidance)
» REF open access policy - to be eligible authors accepted manuscripts must be deposited
in Institutional Repositories (journal material)
» Research Councils UK (RCUK)- 7 subject based research councils: the RCUK Policy on
Open Access aims to achieve “immediate, unrestricted, online access to peer reviewed
and published research papers, free of any access charge”
» To help implementation - new funding policy block grant to Universities to cover cost of
Article Processing charges (APC’s)
» EPSRC Research Data Mandate – universities set in place processes and practices to
ensure curation and preservation of research data (create roadmap for compliance and
act on it)
*Higher Education FundingCouncil for England (HEFCE), Scottish FundingCouncil (SFC), the Higher Education FundingCouncil for
Wales (HEFCW) and the Department for Employment and Learning (DEL)

The UK research context: RIM
9
» Not a shared national reporting infrastructure
» Funders & agencies
› Funder systems’ landscape is complex (and somewhat ad hoc): Je-S;
ResearchFish, Research Outcomes System; Grants on theWeb; REF; HESA
» Universities
› Institutional systems landscape is complex (ad hoc): 60 using CRIS/Cerif,
spreadsheets, repositories used by many, 125 HEIs with an Institutional
Repository
» Information required for both day-to-day management, funding requirements
and strategic decision making

Jisc – How are we helping
10
» Support universities core business and help make research
process more productive
› Developing shared services/infrastructure where appropriate
› Supporting implementation of key standards
› Providing a channel for universities requirements with funders,
vendors etc.
› Getting everyone together

Introduction to CASRAI
11
» International community of leading research funders and
institutions collaborating to ensure seamless
interoperability of research information
» Develop and maintain a common data dictionary and
advocate on best practices
»Consortia Advancing Standards in
Research Administration
Information (CASRAI)

»Dictionary defines key terms or information elements
which relate to the management of (for example):
› Research grants
› CVs
› Data management plans
› Controlled vocabularies
› Authoritative lists
› Identifiers
Introduction to CASRAI
12

» UK CASRAI summit in December 2012, decision to
› set up and run three working groups on priority topics
› support discussions in other areas (e.g. equipment profiles and
research ethics) if required.
» Set up a National Review Circle which includes a wider group of
people that are interested in the progress of CASRAI-UK and who
will provide advice and feedback on working group outputs
» Other objectives include exploring how the CASRAI governance
arrangements could work in a UK context beyond the pilot and an
evaluation of the pilot
13

14
» Jisc and CASRAI are piloting three National Working Groups in the
UK
› Data Management Plans
› Organisational (Authoritative) Lists
› Open Access Reporting
» Each at different stage of process but has charter and plan
» Pilot ends March 2015
» Future working groups?
» Evaluation

OrgId Working Group - Objectives
15
» Identify main candidate sources of OrgIds
» Subject them to common use cases which are relevant to
universities and other parts of the RIM and RDM workflow
» The main output will be a common statement about how the UK
research community should use OrgIds and the policy requirement
in order for harmonised OrgIds to work
» Develop a sustainable process for maintaining authoritative lists of
organisations in the CASRAI dictionary
» The membership of this working group includes representatives
fromARMA, Research Councils, HEDIIP, BL, CrossRef,Wellcome
Trust, CRIS system vendors and UK HEIs

OrgId Working Group - Outputs
16
» Organisational Id Landscape Study – a report to inform the
Working Group on the current use of organisational identifiers
was commissioned and delivered (Sept 2013)
» Organisational Id Review – commissioned by theWorking Group
to review a core set of organisational identifiers (ISNI, Ringgold,
Digital Science and UKPRN) (Dec 2014)
» Use cases – based on key use cases from the Research Lifecycle,
these have been identified by the Working Group and further
developed under the OrgId Review (Dec 2014)

Landscape Study –Terms of Reference
17
» Interview representatives within the working group to establish
what authoritative lists of organisations involved in UK research
are being, or could be, used; determine use cases based on
organisational identifiers used, the problems encountered and
the approach they are currently undertaking
» Produce a landscape review of organisational identifiers
currently used, and for what purpose, in the UK
» Look at “organisational” identifiers in its broadest sense.This
would, therefore, include “institutions”, as well as “funders” and
other types of organisation

Landscape Study- Summary
18
» Examined the landscape of organisational identifiers in the UK and identified
23 different IDs
» Based on interviews with key individuals
» Lots of detail on use cases for publishing, funders and institutions
» Stakeholders interviewed for this study typically described identifying
organisations as “a nightmare”, specifically disambiguation and deduplication
» Benefits from effective unique identifiers are truly realised when data is
shared
» Key aspects of identifiers that support the widest range of uses:
› Governance,Trust,Transparency,Temporal, Appropriate Metadata
› Of these, the “temporal” information is perhaps the most challenging to address

Landscape Study - Recommendations
19
» None of the identifiers investigated fulfils the role of being an “authoritative list” of organisations
involved in research.They are all constrained in scope
» ISNI and UKPRN both have traction, and warrant particularly careful consideration by the
working group. UKPRN does not cover the full range of organisations involved in research, is
limited to the UK, and does not include departments, but is a robustly managed list that covers a
defined subset of organisations very well.The role of the registration agency in ISNI is crucial, and
whether the existing agencies offer appropriate services for this domain will need to be
considered
» The Research Councils, as major funders of research in the UK, should be closely involved in the
development of any new identifier system. At present, ROS, ResearchFish and Gateway to
Research all use their own identifiers
» Given the range of existing identifiers, any new identifier system should only be developed and
introduced if there is clear evidence of demand, and sufficient buy in to ensure that it is
universally adopted
» The authority can remain separate from the identifier (for example, it would be feasible to
establish an authority list with appropriate metadata but using the ISNI as the identifier)

OrgId Review –Terms of Reference
20
» Clarify a representative but not comprehensive set of use cases for the UK research
community to use organisational identifiers
» Survey and interview a small number of well-informed people in the field in order to
create and prioritise a list of desirable features for the provision of OrgIDs and potential
services built around them
» Check the use cases and these required features against four* possible candidate OrgIDs
and their providers
» Inform theWorking Group of the review’s conclusions and, if appropriate, make
recommendations for adoption by the UK research community
*Four candidates = ISNI, Ringgold, UKPRN, Digital Science

OrgId Review – Use Cases
21
» UC1 - Researcher applying for funding As a Researcher applying for funding, I need to list multiple organisations related
to my proposal in order to enable the target funder to uniquely identify previous employers and other funders, collaborators or
industry partners and beneficiaries.
» UC2 - Funder: minimising conflicts of interest As a funder preparing to find referees or reviewers, I need to be able to
identify suitable people in order to minimize conflicts of interest (through potential co-location at host institution).
» UC3 - Funder - tracking published outputs As a Funder, collating outputs in end-of-research reports, I need to be able
to track published outputs in order to understand our contribution & successful collaborations.
» UC5 - Researcher or research manager - reporting academic impacts to funders As a research producer,
I need to report academic impacts to different funders with different requirements.
» UC6 - Researcher - tracking organisations across time As a researcher I need to preserve the historical integrity of
organisational names at the time of data creation, collection or deposit (and other, specified times); it is similarly important, however,
to record and retain the links between these differing names, so that any user can see which data came from which organisation, even
if the organisation name has changed.
» UC7 - Repository manager - populating repositories, managing automation As a repository manager I
need to be able to uniquely identify my repository, whether or not its location or URL changes; this will enable me to control semi-
automated population of repository records.
» UC8 - Developer - directory services As a developer for research funders, I need to link an OrgID within my application to
a directory service.This will allow an end user or a machine to verify identity and contact details.
N.B. UC4 was deleted early in the review

OrgId Review – Candidates
22
» UKPRN
› www.ukrlp.co.uk
› UK Register of Learning Providers is a register of legally verified learning providers in UK
› Each verified provider will be assigned with a unique provider reference number UKPRN
› Information shared across sector with agencies (e.g. Skills Funding Agency, Higher Education
Statistics Agency, HE Funding Council for England and Universities and Colleges Admissions
Service)
» Digital Science Institute Database
› Public beta Feb 2015 http://idb.datasci.it
› Global coverage of organisations that feature in the scientific lifecycle
› 25,ooo organisations expected to be indexed by release
› Metadata includes names, aliases, urls, wikipedia pages, types, relationships and addresses,
with all address data linked to geonames
› Substantial amount of this database available for free under a CC-BY licence

OrgId Review – Candidates
23
» ISNI http://www.isni.org/
› Holds public records of over 7.49 million identities including 7M individuals (800K are researchers) and 490,000
organisations
› ISNI database is a cross-domain resource, contributed to by 29 institutions and databases, and 40 major national
and research libraries
› Part of the suite of ISO identifiers (along with ISBN, ISSN, etc.).
› Its governance infrastructure is designed with the purpose of ensuring the long-term viability of the identifier.
› ISNI is a bridge identifier, designed to provide interoperability between different proprietary identifiers, such as
the Ringgold ID and a critical component in Linked Data and SemanticWeb apps
» Ringgold www.ringgold.com
› A registration agency for ISNI
› Identify database contains 400,000 organisation records with organisational identifiers and associated metadata
› The database is global and covers all market sectors, including universities, research centres, funders,
corporations, non-profit organisations, government entities and organisations, healthcare and hospitals, schools
and public libraries
› It contains basic location metadata and is not designed to replace existing identifiers but to provide a bridge
between them across multiple parts of the wider creative industries
› Not replacing the Ringgold ID with the ISNI number, but will provide the ISNI number along with the Ringgold ID.
The ISNI number is designed to sit above the proprietary identifier to link systems of identifiers together as a
bridge identifier.

OrgId Review – Candidate check against use cases
24

OrgId Review – OrgIds in use
25
The following two tables list the desirability of features we asked about, in descending order of agreement
(according to the 16 respondents). [Note:The letter-designations of each feature refer to discussions in the report.]

OrgId Review – Characteristics of an OrgId Service
26

OrgId Review - Recommendations
27

OrgId Review - Recommendations
28
» TheWorking Group should consider recommending a hybrid approach with ISNI as the backbone. Institutions
and others needing to register and use OrgIDs should use a solution which relies on and feeds the minimum
data set curated by ISNI
» In considering registration solutions and value-added services, organisations should bear in mind that, in the
short term, Ringgold is the most developed agency conforming to recommendation 1
» Expect that soon there will be other service providers working to deliver value added services on top of ISNI and
theWorking Group should do what they can to encourage such competition by, for example, DigitalScience,
who should consider the possibility of acting as a registration agency for ISNIs in a similar way to Ringgold
» Jisc should investigate the possibilities and costs of a bulk deal for UK academic institutions for value added
services with Ringgold and (in time) with other service providers
» CrossRef should consider creating and maintaining a crosswalk or table of equivalence betweenFundRef IDs
and ISNI, either through a direct relationship with ISNI or through a third party / registration agency.
Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF) has recently become a registration agency for ISNI and the review
recommends that HEFCE and the British Library discuss whether it would be appropriate for there to be a UK-
based registration agency and how bulk creation/checking of ISNIs (and bulk registration and/or the creation of
a table of equivalence for UKPRNs) might take place for UK academic institutions and other organisations
involved in research

OrgId Working Group – What next?
29
» Statement of Agreement – currently being drafted
› A draft statement based on the recommendations from the OrgId Review Report
and discussions with the OrgIdWorking Group.The purpose of this statement is for
key organisations such as Jisc, RCUK, HEFCE, etc to sign up to.
» Testing
i. A merged list of organisations, created from UCL's interactions with Wellcome,
should be submitted to ISNI to test the quality of the UCL/Wellcome data and the
quality and timeliness of the existing ISNI data and their response
ii. "sandbox" experiments should be set up with Ringgold, Digital Science and ISNI to
look at whether the data tested in [i] (or a subset) is capable of providing the basis
for a value added solution with the present state of orgID services.
» Post-pilotWorking Group
› Pilot ends March 2014 -> future relationship with CASRAI
› ReviewWorking Groups

Further Information
30
» CASRAI/Jisc National Network: Jisc.ac.uk
» CASRAI website casrai.org
» Jisc CASRAI-UK pilot blog jisccasraipilot.jiscinvolve.org/
» Organisational Identifiers
› Landscape study - http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/5381/
› Review & use cases - http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/5853/

Find out more…
31
Christopher Brown
Senior Co-design Manager,
Jisc
christopher.brown@jisc.ac.uk
@chriscb
Except where otherwise noted, this
work is licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND

Agenda
Parte I
interoperabilidade
Parte II
Organizações
Management
10-Set-14 32

Plano Sistemas de Informação para a
Gestão de Ciência da FCT
João Gomes
Diretor Área de Serviços Avançados

Plano SIGCiência 1/2
• Reforço equipa
• Separação Suporte / Desenvolvimento
• Formação metodologias ágeis, processos de
desenvolvimento e usabilidade

Plano SIGCiência 2/2
• Reduzir dependências de pessoas isoladas
• Capacidade de escalar com recursos
externos/outsourcing quando necessário
• Mudar de processos internos
• Planear adoção e transição para Plataforma de
Nova Geração de Sistemas de Informação FCT
(Plataforma de desenvolvimento rápido/ágil)

Arquitetura unificada de sistemas de informação
sobre plataforma de nova geração
• Levantamento de requisitos global
• Estudo de modelos Sueco e Holandês
• Arquitetura global
• Provas de conceito (CERIF, Autenticação Federada
e Simulação de Concursos Tipo)
• Plano de implementação de transição faseada

Resultados esperados
• Melhor capacidade de resposta aos requisitos de
SI da FCT/Comunidade
• Melhor qualidade dos SI produzidos
• Sistema unificado – melhor imagem e usabilidade e
alinhamento PT-CRIS
• Melhor usabilidade de todos os sistemas
• Menor dependência dos informáticos

Agenda
Parte I
interoperabilidade
Parte II
Organizações
Management
10-Set-14 38

Fundações PT-CRIS
Ângela Marta / João Martins Severino

Desafio
Criar um Repositório Único com a informação core de
negócio da FCT...
Fev 2015 40

Desafio
... que permita consolidar os dados segmentados pelos vários
sistemas legacy existentes
... que suporte os processos de negócio e novas aplicações da FCT
... que facilite a adoção de sistemas comerciais ou Open Source
(por exemplo VIVO)
... que seja a referencia para o sistema de Reporting/Data Mining
da FCT
Fev 2015 41

Agenda
Realidade FCT
Modelo CERIF
Projeto “Piloto”
Futuro
Fev 2015 43

Realidade FCT
 Modelos não se encontram analisados e/ou
documentados, e onde existe duplicação e/ou
inconsistência de dados.
 Cenário que dificulta a manutenção e a criação de novas
aplicações, bem como a integração com outros sistemas.
+100 bases de dados
relacionadas a Grant Management
Fev 2015 44

Realidade FCT
O modelo de dados a adotar terá que ser necessariamente
um modelo de dados standard e genérico, com capacidades
de expansão e adaptado à realidade e necessidade da FCT.
Dada a complexidade dos
modelos de dados, a migração
para um modelo central tem que
ser realizada progressivamente
Fev 2015 45

Agenda
Realidade FCT
Modelo CERIF
Futuro
Fev 2015 46

Modelo CERIF
CERIF “Common European Research Information
Format”
EuroCris “The European Organization for International
Research Information”.
Organização responsável por manter e publicar o modelo
CERIF.
Modelo já implementado por outras congéneres da
FCT, dá resposta à maioria das necessidades
decorrentes do negócio:
Programas de investigação;
Apoios às instituições patrocinados por fundos públicos e
privados.
Fev 2015 47

Modelo CERIF
Conceito de objetos ou entidades com atributos tais como
projetos, pessoas, unidades organizacionais;
Suporta relações de n:n entre entidades e recursividade em
algumas delas, fornecendo uma semântica rica que inclui perfis e
tempo.
Extensível sem prejuízo do modelo de dados principal (Extensões
CERIF);
Projetado para troca de dados e para ambientes de
consulta/relatórios heterogéneos;
Modelo totalmente internacionalizado;
Utilização de normas internacionais.
Fev 2015 48

Modelo CERIF
Ampla Rede de comunidades que
produzem de Aplicações (em modelo open
source)
Cooperação com:
CASRAI
VIVO
ORCID
Fev 2015 49

Agenda
Realidade FCT
Modelo CERIF
Futuro
Fev 2015 50

Projeto “Piloto” > Objetivos
Tornar o CERIF a base de dados central da FCT;
Alimentar o modelo com dados dos sistemas Legacy;
Adotar politicas de Data Quality;
Retirar indicadores e KPI’s com base na informação constante no
modelo;
Garantir extensibilidade:
Sempre que possível e que se justifique, as aplicações existentes deverão ter
por fonte o CERIF
Não deve impactar o correto funcionamento dos atuais sistemas.
Fev 2015 51

Projeto “Piloto” > Estratégia
Prioridade: Quick-Wins!
Impacto
Alto Quick-Wins Must HavesBaico
Low-Hanging
Fruit
Money Pit
Baixa Alta
Complexidade
Fev 2015 52

Projeto “Piloto” > 1ª Fase
 Implementar o Modelo CERIF na FCT;
 Avaliar a aplicação do modelo CERIF com a
informação e o negócio da FCT;
 Desenhar e Validar a arquitetura técnica de
referência.
1º FASE – PROJETO PILOTO
Objetivos Domínio
 Projeto SAM (Sistema de Atendimento
Multicanal)
 CRM – MS Dynamics
 Business Intelligence
 Projeto em fase final de implementação com
grande impacto na FCT (projeto de sucesso)
 Área critica de grande visibilidade – bolsas
(~12.000 clientes)
Fev 2015 53

Projeto “Piloto” > 1ª Fase
Migração para o CERIF
dos dados relativos a:
Entidades
Contactos
Candidaturas
Contratos Programa
Contratos de Trabalho
Bolsas
Fev 2015 54
As fontes de dados
utilizadas são:
Base de dados das bolsas e
do emprego científico para
o detalhe de contratos e
contratos programa;
Base de dados das
Avaliações;
Base de dados da aplicação
Investigador IF

Projeto “Piloto” > Estado Atual
Estudo prévio várias soluções
Apresentação Equipa FCT
Análise Funcional e Desenho Técnico
Implementação Piloto CRM
Migração CERIF – 1.5 JPA – Utilização API
Fase de testes e aceitação
Disponibilização em Pré-Produção com dados reais
Fev 2015 55

Projeto “Piloto” > Estado Atual
API - GET
ID da entidade CERIF (pessoa, projeto, organização,…) – Registo
Entidade CERIF – Listagens
Exemplos: Person; OrgUnits; Projects; Funding
http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/persons/1 | http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/persons/2?showLinks=false
http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/orgunits/1 | http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/orgunits/7059
http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/projects/1 | http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/projects/2
http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/fundings | http://api.fct.pt:8080/cerifapi/fundings/1
Fev 2015 56

Projeto “Piloto” > Conclusões
Fev 2015 57
Conhecimento dos Modelos Dados Operacionais da Instituição
Envolvimento das Equipas é FUNDAMENTAL!
Participação nas diversas fases do projeto
Disponibilidade de Recursos
Disponibilização Dados/Informação
Gestão da Mudança
Comunicar e Gerar Necessidade!

Agenda
Realidade FCT
Modelo CERIF
Futuro
Fev 2015 58

Projeto “Piloto” > Futuro
Fev 2015 60
Disponibilizar Dados “as a Service”;
Integração com normas internacionais (CASRAI, ORCID);
Utilização do Modelo de dados CERIF como Source do Business
Intelligence;
Expansão aos restantes departamentos/ instrumentos de
financiamento de forma modular;
Extensão para infraestruturas financiadas.

Agenda
Parte I
interoperabilidade
Parte II
Organizações
Management
10-Set-14 62

Jornadas FCCN 2015, ISCTE (Lisboa), 10 a 12 de fevereiro Workshop PTCRIS
Sítio Web PTCRIS
Filipa Alves, João Moreira e Hugo Mendes

Objetivos
• Dar a conhecer o PT-CRIS e os benefícios associados;
• Difundir os serviços PTCRIS;
• Divulgar e promover a utilização do PTCRIS e dos seus
sistemas constituintes pelos vários públicos-alvo;
• Informar sobre o desenvolvimento do Programa PTCRIS;
• Dar espaço à interação da equipa com os diferentes
públicos-alvo.

Metodologia (1/3)
1. Identificação dos principais tipos de utilizadores:
A. Administradores de SI
B. Gestores de Ciência
C. Investigadores
D. Dirigentes
E. Bibliotecários
F. Financiadores

2. Criação de Personas
Ex: A Joana tem 36 anos e é Gestora de Ciência e Tecnologia
numa Instituição do Ensino Superior em Lisboa. Formada em
Biologia, fez o doutoramento na mesma área e experimentou
o Jornalismo de Ciência antes de enveredar pela Gestão de
Ciência. Entusiasta da Ciência em todas as suas dimensões,
faz a ponte entre as instituições financiadoras e os
investigadores da sua instituição procurando alinhar os
interesses dos primeiros e as necessidades dos segundos.
Metodologia (2/3)

Metodologia (3/3)
3. Match-making Personas – utilizadores reais (N=16)
4. Testes - pré-entrevistas (N=2)
5. Realização de entrevistas (N=7)
– Informais
– Semi-estruturadas
– Entrevistador + Entrevistado + Observador
– Online (Colibri)/Presencial (FCCN ou FCT)

Resultados – conteúdos (1/3)
• Gerais
O que é /Para quê /Para quem /Porquê-Quando
/Como /Quem
Sistemas, macro funções, serviços e
hiperligações
Outros (Glossário, Indicadores, Apresentações
do projeto, etc)

Resultados – conteúdos (1/3)
• Específicos - por Stakeholder:
Requisitos
Benefícios
Case Studies
Investigadores: ORCID – justificação da escolha
Administradores de Sist. de Gestão de C&T
locais: o que é preciso fazer ligar um sistema
local ao PTCRIS - custos

Resultados – forma (3/3)
Pouco texto – com imagens
/esquemas /fluxogramas /infografia
Linguagem pouco técnica no primeiro
nível
Modelo misto: orientado ao utilizador
(stakeholder) e ação

Arquitetura da Informação
Início
1. Sobre o
PTCRIS
2. Notícias 3. Eventos
Navegação Institucional
8. Gestores de
C&T
9. Gestores de
SI
10. Invest. /
Docentes
11. Media 12. Público
Navegação por Público-alvo
4. Benefícios e
custos
5. Serviços
PTCRIS
6. Case
Studies
Case Studies
Navegação de suporte ao PTCRIS
13. Facebook 14 .Twitter 15. Fórum
7. Recursos
Navegação de colaboração
Mapa do Site Perguntas
frequentes
Contactos Acessibilidade Imprensa Termos e
condições
Navegação de rodapé

Sítio web PTCRIS
10-Set-14 81

Agradecimento:
Os autores trabalho agradecem a disponibilidade de todos os
entrevistados no âmbito deste trabalho bem como todos os seus
contributos que foram decisivos para a criação de um website que vá ao
encontra das necessidades dos utilizadores do PTCRIS.

Agenda
Parte I
interoperabilidade
Parte II
Organizações
Management
10-Set-14 83

Agradecimentos
• Parceiros RCAAP (JC) e DeGóis (CSP)
• Alcino Cunha (Professor / Investigador)
• Filipa Alves (Alunamestradoem
Comunicaçãode Ciênciada FCSH-UNL)
• Associações participadas
– ORCID (LH)
– CASRAI (DB)
– euroCRIS (NH)
• Fornecedor de serviços ALTRAN (JS,
AM, JC, VF)
• Fornecedor de serviços KEEPS
• CD-FCT (JNF, PP)
• Equipa PTCRIS (AF, MG)
• Equipa FCT-FCCN
– Área Serviços Avançados,
Utilizador RCTS, RCTSAAI (EP)
– Área de Infraestruturas
Aplicacionais (AG, JR)
– Área de Serviços Avançados,
SAW, (HM)
• Equipa FCT-SIGCiência (JG, JC, BM)
10-Set-14 84
Todos os que me esqueci de mencionar!

Linhas gerais 2015
10-Set-14 85
Estudos e
prospeção
Prototipagem Implementação
2014 2015

WP 1 – Interoperabilidade
• Fechar modelo de interoperabilidade (MI)
• Implementar MI no RCAAP, DeGóis e ORCID
• Alargamentos a outros sistemas:
– Nacionais
– Locais: ex: CRIS locais: CALL a 2 instituições
• Documentar e facilitar adoção do MI
10-Set-14 86

WP2 – Plataforma de CV
• Entrada em produção novo DeGóis
• Integração de CV em sistema de Grant Mng
• Melhorias contínuas
– Integrações adicionais
– Serviços adicionais
10-Set-14 87

WP3 – Gestão de identificadores: Org Ids
• Estudo de estado de arte
• Princípios, regras e processos
• Base de dados de organizações nacionais
• Serviços eletrónicos (piloto)
• Serviços eletrónicos (produção)
– DeGóis, RCAAP, RENATES
10-Set-14 88

WP5 – Base de dados de verdade
• Alargamento da BD a outras áreas de negócio (DPP)
• Utilização da BD para novo sistema de Grant Mng
• Utilização da BD para sistema CRM
10-Set-14 89

Outros
• CRIS Locais
– Estudos para acelerar adoção de normativo
PTCRIS
– Piloto interoperabilidade (CALL)
• RCAAP
– Research portal
– Dspace-CRIS
10-Set-14 90

Tabela execução técnica
10-Set-14 91
Nº Lista e Descrição dos Resultados Físicos Mês
1 a) Organização de sessão PTCRIS nas Jornadas FCCN
b) Sítio Web PTCRIS
c) Estratégia e plano para implementação de identificadores (Org Ids)
4
2 a) Implementação do modelo de interoperabilidade PTCRIS no RCAAP
b) Plano e material de divulgação PTCRIS
c) Implementação de identificadores nos sistemas nacionais
8
3 a) Novo sistema de CV DeGóis (produção)
b) Research portal baseado no VIVO (piloto)
c) DSpace-CRIS (piloto)
12

Cooperação é poder!
Associem-se ao PTCRIS!
10-Set-14 92

Jornadas 2015: PTCRIS: Parte II

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Jornadas 2015: PTCRIS: Parte II

Semelhante a Jornadas 2015: PTCRIS: Parte II (20)

Mais de João Mendes Moreira

Mais de João Mendes Moreira (20)

Último

Último (20)

Jornadas 2015: PTCRIS: Parte II

Notas do Editor