1 / 8

RSA Project Evaluation and Resource Allocation Strategy Conference Summary

This summary encompasses discussions on decision-making processes, operating principles, criteria, objectives, and resources for RSA projects. Key topics include differentiating RSA projects, criteria for resource allocation, stakeholder considerations, and equitable evaluation processes. The discussion focused on setting guidelines, understanding project scopes, and the unique aspects of RSA projects compared to other initiatives. Criteria such as RSA alignment, quality assurance, managed risk, feasibility, scalability, and dissemination were proposed for fair resource allocation. Equivalence in processing project requests, involvement of RSA staff and fellows, and transparent decision-making were emphasized. The conversation highlighted the essence of maximizing impact with finite resources and ensuring fairness in project evaluations.

rea
Download Presentation

RSA Project Evaluation and Resource Allocation Strategy Conference Summary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Projects: protocols and processes • A cross-section of Fellows and staff met on March 16thto explore: • Processes of decision-making • Operating principles • Criteria and objectives • Necessary resources to make it happen

  2. David Archer FC Trustee Laura Billings staff Tessy Britton FC Chair Sybil Crouch FC Jocelyn Cunningham staff, co-presenter Michael Devlin staff David Dickinson (FC convener and co-presenter) Katy Evans staff Belinda Lester staff Vivienne Long-Ferguson staff Malcolm Noble Fellow and Cheltenham project lead In attendance were:

  3. The factors to be considered. • Differentiation. What is the nature of an RSA project? • Adjudication. What are the criteria by which a request for RSA-resources might be judged? • Equivalence. Should the same criteria be used to evaluate ALL projects? • Scope What are the objectives of the project? (guidelines and responses) • Process. • What is the process we are trying to understand? • What do we need to solve? • What do we need to deliver? • Where does it start and end?

  4. Differentiation. What’s the USP? What makes an RSA project different from: • an Arts Council project • an Regional Development Agency Innovation award • An European Social Fund project …. etc? We felt the clue is in the name: “Royal Society for the Encouragement of the Arts, Manufactures and Commerce”. So how does the RSA get (encourage) the biggest bang for its buck .. and what would be considered a “big bang” by its many stakeholder groups?

  5. Differentiation: – Matthew’s initial model P P P RSA Hubs RSA Projects FRSA Projects F F F

  6. Differentiation: Fellowship Projects, a suggested adaptation RSA Resources Expectation & Commitment RSA staff involvement Fellow involvement Fellows’ projects eligible for resource support

  7. Suggested criteria for fairly determining resource allocation • RSA alignment • Quality Assurance • Unique contribution • Managed risk • Feasibility • Replicability • Scalability • Dissemination • Viability • Time bounded • Finite resources, to be divided effectively across the selected projects, including: • people • finance • space • time • technology (including server space, bandwidth etc)

  8. Equivalence. • We felt that right across the continuum: • all requests should pass through the same process • there should be no preferential treatment or fast-tracking • transparency and clarity are essential characteristics of the process RSA staff involvement Fellow involvement

More Related