Higher education quality-related research (QR) funding
QR enables the higher education institutions to conduct their own directed research, much of which is supported later by the Research Councils and others (charities, the EU etc.). This is known as the Dual Support System.
QR is paid as part of the block grant to the institutions, which includes funds for learning and teaching and widening participation and, as such, can be distributed by the recipient university according to its own strategic priorities.
Total QR funding (£s) in Northern Ireland, 2012/13 to 2018/19, includes the QR quality premium pot, the Research Degree Programme/ Postgraduate Research (RDP/PGR) Supervision Fund
|QUB Mainstream QR||QUB Charities Support||UU Mainstream QR||UU Charities Support|
|Academic Year*||Total Northern Ireland QR Funding|
*Academic Years run from August to July
Explanation of QR Funding method
There are two main variables affecting the allocation of QR funds to each institution: quality and the number of full-time equivalent research active staff as assessed by the most recent research assessment exercise, currently the Research Excellence Framework (REF).
Tables containing details of QR funding and research volume components for 2012/13 and 2018/19, broken down by subject, for each of the institutions are available to download:
The quality of research, as assessed in the REF 2014, was presented as quality profiles which show the proportion of research activity judged to have met each of the four starred quality levels. These profiles were awarded a rating, on a scale of unclassified to 4* (four stars).
The table below shows how these ratings relate to funding multipliers in academic year 2018/9. A rating of unclassified, 1* (one star) or 2* (two stars) attracts no funding, while a rating of 4* (four stars) attracts four times as much funding as a rating of 3* (three stars) for the same volume of research activity.
|REF 2014||Funding weights in QR model|
The volume of research in each unit of assessment is the full time equivalent number of research active staff submitted to REF 2014.
Although quality and volume were the two main variables, each subject is also assigned with one of three cost weights, which had been calculated to reflect the relative costs of research in those subjects. These were multiplied by the volume of research in each subject to work out the total funding for that subject.
The 3 cost weights are:
|A||Clinical medicine and laboratory based subjects||1.6|
|B||Subjects with a technical/experimental premium||1.3|
QR Quality (Premium) Pot
A QR Quality pot was introduced in 2012/13 from which universities received a £125k or £250k fixed allocation for Units of Assessment (UoAs) which were deemed to be STEM related or areas of wider economic relevance. From 2012/13 to 2014/15, QUB received £3.875m and UU received £2m per academic year. From 2015/16 QUB received £2.971m and UU received £1.485m per academic year.
Post Graduate Research (PGR) Funding Stream (also known as the Research Degree Programme (RDP) Supervision Fund)
PGR funding is provided to universities as a standard contribution to the costs of supervising home and EC research students. It is distributed between our universities on the basis of quality and of eligible cost‑weighted home and EC PGR full-time equivalents.
Charities Support Element
In 2006, the department introduced the Charities Support element within the block grant to supplement university research income received from charities.
This initiative is an integral part of the wider UK Government policy to ensure long term sustainability of the research base through Full Economic Costing and is in keeping with the commitment made by Government, in its Science and Innovation Framework 2004-14, to close the gap between the full cost of charity-sponsored research and the funds currently available from universities and charities.
It also mirrors the charities initiative operated by Research England (formerly higher education funding council for England/HEFCE) and brings the NI universities broadly into line with their English counterparts.