 All right, so this is really just sharing with everyone because I know this is a data management planning interest group. What our journey has been as part of the Australian research data commons institutional underpinnings. So I'm hoping that we'll have questions as well as opportunities to continue the conversation cause ours is just a journey and we know it's going to be a long journey. I'll acknowledge country from where I'm presenting in Brisbane, which is Minjian country. So UNESCO would like to acknowledge the traditional owners on the land on which we gather would also like to pay our respect to elders past and present and emerging. So, we got involved in the institutional under printing projects as one of the 25 universities that are part of that project. The project has advanced in phases. So there was a phase one, a phase two and a phase three. So what I'll do is just talk about our journey and what we've been able to achieve as well as some of the challenges we've experienced and the learnings. So the aim of our involvement was to implement and enable fair and care principle research practice at UNESCO. And I note there for everyone we've changed we rebranded so we are no longer USQ it's UNESCO. So the focus was on research data management planning and active data management. So we had the goals listed there. So one of the goals was to update our research data management framework. And here it's really broadly talking about the framework what we have in place in terms of resourcing across a university that enabled research data management. The other thing we wanted to do was increase the awareness of fair and care principles, data management planning and active data management practices by researchers and research support staff. Then we were also looking to enrich data sets that we held so that they were more aligned with fair and care. So we're taking the opportunity during that process to have an impact on the data sets as well. Then the other thing part of the involvement of the institutional underpinnings project was to not only gain benefit for our own institution, but to also like share learning with other institutions. And so along with QUT, Canberra University and Charles Darwin Uni, we are working towards testing what QUT have developed, which I believe there was a presentation in the last DMP interest group on that tool. So we're part of that testing process for the tool. So the approach we took, I'll just speak to this, but then I'll provide more details in the next slide. So we kind of took a top-down approach. So what we first did was gain the support at the governance layer. So our research and innovation DVCR, we got support from him and then we worked with the last decision-making bodies within our university. So what we have is the vice chancellor's executive. So we prepared material for them on what the plans were around enriching research data management practices within the university. We also got the support and endorsement of various research committees. And so the idea was across the university. So wherever research was being undertaken, whether from within the schools or within the research centers, there was awareness about the importance of research data management and some of the changes that needed to be made in research data management practices. So that involved doing a few things such as revising and updating of UniSQ research data management framework, which includes the policies or processes and the guidelines. Then the increase of that research staff awareness. So getting access to make presentations to staff and students as well. So that just increasing awareness across the entire university. And not just the users, but the central services teams as well, such as library, ICT services. So bringing everyone along cause there are lots of stakeholders and ideas to try and energize the entire base to get that success when it comes to research data management planning. Then there's application and fair and care principles and the learnings from the involvement. So that involved a bit of a piece of academic work where there's a bit of a literature review understanding what's happening across the other universities as well being involved in the activities that were being run alongside research data management planning across the institutional underpinnings project. Then there was documentation and then the testing of the efficacy of the elements that were being developed, the national framework and some of the tools as well. So what I'll do in this slide is kind of tell the story around each project goal, the approach undertaken, the outcomes we've achieved and the status. So this is kind of reporting where we are at at this point in time. So first goal being updating research data management framework. So this involved revising. So in 2014, actually not in 2014, in 2016, UniSQ developed a research data management procedure. Actually it was a policy at that point in time. So we took the opportunity during the institutional underpinnings to revise the procedure and have a really good look at it or rather the plan, the policy at that point, and have a really good look at it and also look at the other interrelated policies such as the authorship policies research code management practice policy. So all of those were looked at together and one of the key things we did was rewrite the research data management policies and make it part of the research code of conduct policy suite. So now what we have is a research data management and primary materials procedure. And with accompanying guidelines, which have provided links for so when the slides are shared, you should be able to click on those links. And we also added research data management and indigenous government data governance procedure. So so that our practices for research data management at UniSQ are aligned with not only fair principles but care principles. So the status for that is completed. The second goal we had was to increase research staff awareness and understanding of research data management practice principle practice. The thing is, it's a long journey. And the reality is, it's a change that's going to happen over time. So we acknowledge that we had to be kind of like we're somewhere on that journey. So we're probably not at the beginning because we've already made some progress. But I think we're far away from completing everything. So what we've done is developed training materials that can be used to increase staff awareness. So research staff as well as research support staff. Some of the outcomes from that was we've delivered over 20 sessions and I'd like to acknowledge Ade, Dr. Adebui, who's with us today, part of my team. So he has done quite a bit of the sessions delivery to over 150 researchers at UniSQ and other Queensland universities. The sessions with all the courses we developed, we opened up and any university that's interested to use them, we're happy to share. So we've shared with the Queensland universities and what we do is we have a making your research data fair course. We also have one on making your research reproducible session or course and we also have a data management course. The course design is completed so updated to align with all the new principles and the sessions are ongoing. So we deliver the sessions monthly and again online. The third project goal was to increase fair and cannibal research data sets. It was pulled in from another project that was funded by ARDC and the idea was to enrich the data sets by adding metadata records. So most of the research data sets that we had were developed by researchers before they were aware of the richness that can be added to data sets to allow them to be reused as repurposed. And so what we've done at UniSQ is met with researchers, worked them through the missing metadata and we've been able to register over 40 metadata records. And the aim is to then publish those via data set data sites. Then that will also allow those data sets that are linked to the metadata records to be more discoverable and potentially publishable. So this is an ongoing piece of work and we hope that this beginnings will develop into a practice that stays with researchers moving forward. The third goal we had was increasing awareness and understanding of research data management principles and practice beyond our university. So there was documentation and publication of a case study on the experiences of implementing institutional underpinnings aligned RDM planning and practice at UniSQ. So we made a presentation at C3DIS in 21 and the arms 21 conference and we're writing up an article for journal publications. The other thing I must mention is we've been very active in the working groups as a university. So not just the RDMP one, but there's been other working groups for the different elements that have been identified as part of the framework. Now, one of the things that I'd like to share here, which I think is pertinent to this group is some of the work of the IUP has the RDMP element has shifted emphasis from the plan to planning. And that's how we've taken it. So our focus is more on the planning and not just the generation of plans and I can talk to that later in the Q&A if people wanted. So the status of that is ongoing and we hope that they'll continue to be ongoing because this is something that we want to see as a practice moving forward that researchers are engaging with. It's not something that you do once and forget, but it's something that you're constantly striving to towards. Then the final piece of work involves testing the institution underpinnings RDMP framework, which has been published because we're moving into phase three. So as well as the QUT, RDMP and PM checklist. So what we've done just last week is we bought a presentation from QUT on the checklist tool and really got good engagement from the teams across UniSQ. So again, that's early stage progress being made there. And now what I'll do is just wrap up and talk about some of the significant wins just highlight them really not into a lot of detail. So the policy and procedure for us, we feel was a big win high level engagement across the senior research leadership was huge for us. The progress we're making in the registration of the 40 research datasets, which entail a lot of work. So when you're retrofitting things, you have to go back to contracts have conversations with sometimes third party funding agencies as well as collaborators. So it's easier if you do it right from the get go. But we have historical data sets that we want to salvage as well. And so we are doing some of that work where we go back and negotiate things, get the permission, tidy up the ownership and do all of those sorts of things. So we've been sharing and sharing as much as we can. So I know, I think I saw Washi from the GRDC here. So I've been sharing stuff with him. And the Queensland Unis we've, we've been sharing with as well. We're part of a project called agricultural research Federation project. So you need to ask you. One of the flagship areas for research is agriculture. And so we've given a fair bit of focus on agricultural data sets as well and agricultural research projects just to enable them to engage in good research data management practices that extend to primary materials as well. So with that, I come to the close of my presentation and I think I've gone over time my apologies, but I hope this has been meaningful and helpful for everyone attending. Thank you. It has. Thank you. Thank you very much, Francis. I know I already have some questions. So we will save those to the end and we'll have a Q&A for everybody to get involved. And so what we might do now is I would like to introduce Claire Blankley, who was going to be speaking about mandatory DMPs. Claire Blankley is the research integrity and governance advisor at Edith Cowan University in Perth. She provides advice and leads activities to assist the institution and researchers in complying with the responsibilities and principles constituting responsible research conduct. She's worked in research services and support for nine years preceded by health services and project management roles in the UK. So welcome, Claire. Thanks, Katie and to John as well. Thank you for the invitation for to come talk to you today about what we've been doing at Edith Cowan University. Before I start, I'd just like to acknowledge the custodians of the land on which I'm talking to you from today. That's the Wajak people of the Nungar nations and their elders past, present and future. Okay, I've popped my contact details on there and I've also popped them at the slide at the end of the slide deck because I'm really happy if anybody does want to talk to me afterwards that they can contact me and carry on the conversation. I'm conscious I do only have a limited time to talk to you today about the project that we've done so always happy to talk outside of these forums. So to start with, today I'm just going to try and briefly cover a little bit of the work that we've done at ECU about mandating data management plans and what we've done in this space and the work that we've still got to do. I was conscious that Francis used that word journey a few times during his presentation and it just reminded me of that that this is very much a journey. So we've made some good achievements, but there's still a little bit of work to do in this space. So I'll talk to you about what the driver for change was for us and how we've actually, what the mechanism was for driving that change. We had a phased approach to this work so I'll talk to you a little bit about what we did in each of those phases and what our DMP process looks like now. A little bit on some of the issues that we came up about and future activities and then a couple of top tips really a couple of our main learnings. So to start with the driver for change for us was really the Australian code at the very end of 2019 ECU had FTE to work in this space for the very first time in the research integrity space. And one of the first activities that we undertook was a review of the code and review of all the responsibilities and the priorities within the code. And undertook sort of a self assessment to say, well, where are we in terms of those responsibilities, where are the gaps and where are the real high priority big ticket items that we need to look at. And what we came out with after undertaking that assessment was those three areas that you can see on the slide. We needed to look at some research integrity training for our researchers. We needed to look at the mechanism for reporting and how we managed breaches of the code. And we also needed to look very carefully at data management planning and the facilities that we were providing people for the digital storage space. So when we started to have a little bit of a deeper dive into this and look at actually where we were and what the critical issues were at that point. In the 12 months prior, there were only 47 data management plans created at our institution. We are a fairly small research institution, but still I think that may be shocking to some of you. It may not be shocking to others of you, but it may be shocking that there was such a limited number of DMPs created in that period. We had a Word document at the time, and it wasn't something that we promoted or really encouraged in any structured way. There was also no institutional sort of voice, no approach on the digital storage space. It was something that we were fairly silent on. So these were the really sort of critical issues that we needed to address through the project that I'll talk to you about. One of the first things that we did was we knew that we needed a good steering group. And actually this, the steering group that we developed and that we still have in place in some form today was really one of the big wins from this project. And it was one of the reasons why it was so successful, partly because of the composition of this group, which you can see there we had a champion business owner. We had the library research services team. We had digital services team research integrity records and research community membership. And also we had that sort of executive champion support through our deputy vice chancellor of research Caroline Finch. It wasn't just the composition of that group that was important, but I think it was actually the individuals that formed that composition. We're all at the stage where because data management had been a sort of fairly siloed experience ECU up to this point that everybody was really happy to come together as a group that wanted to achieve the same aims really wanted to work together and were sort of champions in their in their own right so I think getting that composition and membership of that group was really important for us. So the aims of the project that that we're talking about we what we really wanted to achieve was it was driven by the code so we wanted to be able to say that we were compliant with the code in terms of data management. We wanted to increase those DMP completions now we didn't know what the outset whether we would be able to actually mandate DMPs or whether we'd get to a point where they'd be strongly recommended and I'll talk to you a little bit about that how how that panned out throughout the course of the project. And we also wanted to provide that sort of clear position on the digital data on that dedicated storage space. So that was what we were looking to achieve and we and we did that through two main phases. We actually delivered in a fairly short space of time. So from the end of 2019 when we came together phase one was delivered by March 2020. And that phase included a revision to the data management plan questions that we had in that original word document. And the steering group that we had were were fairly strong minded that we wanted to streamline what we were actually asking researchers in our DMP and that those questions should be things that either were critical to know, or that they triggered something happening. So we were actually quite ruthless, you might say about what we included and what we didn't include in our revised DMP. We moved that to an online form. So that was initially through Microsoft forms. And this was a soft launch if you like because this was there was an optional completion. At this point it was all educative. It was all raising the profile of data management data management planning and talking to people about it and really encouraging people to start using this form and start understanding the process. We also introduced a triage process. So this was to look at the DMPs that were submitted and actually make an assessment about whether they met our institutional requirements. If there were things of concern in there that we would talk to researchers about them or they may there may be things in there that needed that sort of technical or records view so we had this option to sort of triage the information that was coming in. We also provided we manually created for each project, each research project we manually created a SharePoint digital storage space so every project had 24 terabytes of data through the centrally provisioned space. And we developed our DMP website and some FAQs. It was sort of fairly quickly after this point in that March 2020 time that we knew we could move to a position of actually rather than an optional and the soft launch we could move to a place of mandating DMPs. So the second phase to the project which was delivered then in September of that year was that we moved that online Microsoft form into our research ethics system. Now, I'll give you a little bit of an overview at this point but I'll also talk to you about it in the next slide so the ethics system that we have ECU is is developed in house. It's developed through a number of Microsoft 365 products so it uses SharePoint it uses Flow it uses Power BI's and all research at ECU has to be tested through an initial checklist and that checklist really determines the level of review that is undertaken. So that may be full ethics application is needed, or it may be exempt from ethics review or it could be a reciprocal approval. Obviously full ethics review is needed it then would tip researchers into the application form and they would continue with that. How we managed to work the system to sort of integrate the DMP process was that, no matter what type of research you're conducting whether it's animal whether it's human, whether it's neither of those things. You would go to the next stage which was to create the DMP as part of the application process. So for those researchers that were dealing with human research, the DMP would be one tab of your ethics application for those researchers that weren't dealing with human research you would just do that standalone DMP. And it really meant that we knew we were capturing as much as we can ever know that we're capturing all research projects that are undertaken as ECU because we have this out of scope and exempt and reciprocal process all through that same that same application form. The other things that we achieved through the second phase of the activities was the automatic creation of that digital storage space so we moved that from a manual to an automated process and we revised our data management guidelines. We have a principle based policy system at ECU so we don't have specific data management policy but we have guidelines that are underpin that overarching policy. So they were the two phases of the project so that that process itself evolved to sort of really how I've just described it for you that all research conducted should be first be tested through that checklist process to determine if the ethical review is required, and whether or not it's required, a DMP will then be created within that system for researchers to respond to those questions. So if there is a, for example, an old study that already had ethics in place, we still have a mechanism to create a separate DMP. So this for us meant that not only were we capturing new studies and moving forwards into the future but we also had an opportunity to really talk to people about the studies that were either ongoing or due to be completed. So in completion of that DMP, the system then creates that digital storage space in a SharePoint that also has a teams interface which is really helpful then when it comes to managing external collaborators and actually collaborating in that space as well. Through the triage service and again through some flows that we've set up, we've also got automatic notifications in there to the IT, to the library, to the records team. If there's any sort of non-standard requests or specific issues that researchers have flagged within that DMP, so that will automatically go off to those teams to address. Some of the issues that we came up against and will be common to most of you, I'm sure there's a cultural change element for us having that two stage approach really helped because during phase one, we really were allowed to sort of raise the profile and start talking to people about data management plans. So by the time it came to the fact that they were integrated then into the ethics system, it was a conversation that was more common, we sort of managed to use that as an educative soft launch process. Something else that we came up against that we haven't really yet managed to find a solution for, so it's something we're still working on, is how that works for HDRs. And that's because they automatically have a team's site created for them as soon as they enroll, which manages their candidature. We then create a separate site to manage their research data, so we still haven't yet managed to merge those two, so that's something that we're still working on. Future activities in this space, we are looking to audit what's happening so we're providing people now with that digital storage space. And that's obviously for standard research, you know, for people that are dealing with within that 24 terabytes of data sort of size and don't have any specific technical requirements. If they do then obviously we need to have conversations with them. But we do want to look at an audit, so are people using what they're provided and how well is that used. We're also involved in one of the institutional underpinnings projects, which is more around sort of open data and that's something that our library services team are leading. And we are also sort of mid development of a research technology catalogue. The sort of technology and software that research is used is often something that we get questions about. So we wanted a product really that we can promote where people can see what software and what technology is ECU is being through a due diligence process with. And if something's not on that catalogue that you want to use then give them the mechanism to go through that process. So they're just a couple of things that we're looking at doing in the future. Really the things that worked for us as I mentioned was that that steering group having that group set up to deliver the change and really to drive that change was really key. The composition and membership of the group and having that business owner who was really the leader championing that change and also the executive champion. So the other thing is that that mechanism for delivering mandated DMPs at ECU we had a really good option for that because because our ethics system is in house. We have the opportunity to develop that as we need to and we could do that to incorporate that the management of the MPs in there. And there's also the benefits of the researchers something that we were really conscious about and that we actually really love about the new process is and I know it will be familiar to a number of you. The complaint of dealing with a number of institutional processes and a number of separate institutional systems. The fact that we could actually integrate data management plans into a system that already exists a system that researchers are used to dealing with. So we're not asking them to want to take a separate process was a real win for us. And I've sort of mentioned that in the, you know, consideration of how you'd manage that that cultural change. That's the covert completion bit. And I think covert is probably not a great word, but you're almost undertaking the completion of your DMP without even thinking about it without having to actively and consciously go and do it. You're undertaking your ethics and you're doing it at the same time. And those other things that helped us with definitely like the educational aspect and that that phased approach. So hopefully I've not gone over time and that's given me a little bit of a flavor about what we've done at ECU and how we've managed to move that agenda along and I think, you know, I mentioned earlier that the journey element of it and it is absolutely a journey for us and we're still learning and we've still got issues that we are dealing with and obviously resourcing implications is a big part of that as well. There's a huge amount of work to do in this space and only a limited resource. But quite happy to take questions later and quite happy to take comments or questions offline if you do want to contact me and completely happy for that. Absolutely. Thank you so much, Claire. We've definitely had some questions come up in the chat. So we'll, we'll come to those after our next talk and I'll certainly, well, in fact, I have parts on a message to one of our ethics people about your internal ethics system. So, yeah, we might be interested in having a look at that we'll see what happens. So, I will introduce now mine, our next speaker, who is Jackie Stevens and Jackie is the manager of library research services at the University of Notre Dame Australia free mental campus. She leads a small team of senior librarians and has responsibilities for research related initiatives, including managing the institutional repository, as well as teaching and learning. Since assuming this role her interest in research data management has grown, and the knowledge she has accumulated led to her taking the lead on a university wide project in 2021 to implement foundational infrastructure for research data management, including setting up a data management tool. So, Jackie, over to you. Thanks very much, Katie. Thanks very much, John, for inviting me along today. You'll have to excuse my voice. I'm just, I just recovered from COVID. So I'm still a bit raspy. I'm back in the office though. No, no terrible effects. So, I just like to begin before I start acknowledging the country on which we are standing today, or our Notre Dame campus indeed are located. So, we're proud to acknowledge their traditional owners and custodians of the land upon which our university sits. And we acknowledge that the free mental campus is located on Wajak country, our broom campus on Yaru country and the Sydney campus on Gadigal country. So today's session I've been invited to speak about is about raid our taking on board the raid. And it's been a little bit of a process, learning and a realisation aspect. I think that through the me telling the story today, you'll realise that perhaps we're not in the place where you should have been. But nevertheless, it is a journey as everybody else has talked about today. And we are looking forward to what what utilising the raid holds for us in the future. So we're just going to look about today at what what is a raid, why use a raid, and how does Notre Dame use the raid as well in particular. And I don't know how many of you are familiar with a raid, but it is a research activity ID, and it is a persistent identify identifier for research projects. The raid acts as a container for research project activities by collecting identifiers for people, publications, instruments and institutions that are involved. A raid handle looks like this and is minted by the raid web interface, and in our in our case or an API, if you have the means to do so. So the raid is owned and offered as a service by the ARDC and that is where we came into contact with it in the initial stages, the promotion at ARDC events of the raid and its use. But this story really began some years ago, mentions a time to time at various conferences in meetings, usually in the company of the ARDC people. Often mentioned by Keith Russell, he seemed to be on a crusade for it at some point is concluding at our raid at our rise workshop. The idea of it appealed to me, but was not really a priority at the time for Notre Dame and there were too many other RDM hurdles to jump through. And I thought it was something really for other universities better established RDM infrastructures to implement rather than us at our small university. But very like the journey that Claire was describing earlier, our journey through offering better research data management infrastructure was prompted by the change of code in 2018. And we also implemented a quick bit of a quick turnaround about our research at data management practices and our infrastructure. So last year, eventually, when our foundational RDM infrastructure project was running, and we were going through the pains of putting the structure of our own instance of the red box 2.0 management plan data management plan together. It occurred to me that it was the perfect opportunity to add the raid. It was a perfect, it already incorporated other pits. So we had the orchard embedded into it and we are considering at the moment, popping in a couple of other raids at PIDs, I mean, as well. So the raid and the orchard persistent identifiers were out in the initial persistent identifiers that we did incorporate. The impetus for it was that I had long been wanting to have some sort of mechanism within the university for more effectively tracking projects and funders in particular, which we had no means through our research management system to track. We didn't have any other methods or mechanisms to track what activity was going on, whether we could see the research that was being conducted at the university outside that that had ethics applications. So it was very difficult for everybody really to see and track the activity. So in our initial investigations of QCIF and their red box tool for data management planning, they had showcased a graphic in their sales pitch to show potential integrations and raid was one of those. So it all sort of started to come together and I thought that it was all going to be terribly easy. So we integrated the raid field. We knew that we couldn't initially get an API set up in the short space of time that we had devoted to the implementation of the research data management infrastructure. So we knew it would also be a manual creation. But I'm going to show you in a moment how it looks in our actual DMP and show you how we've managed that and implemented a couple of other processes in the meantime to support hopefully the raid awareness and use of it across the university. So why did we use it? We didn't have a university wide identifier at the university at all. So there was no accession number as it were in our in Irma, which is our research management system. There were no other numbers that we used to consistently track those research connections. So, for example, you know, the grant number is one that's held to be a tracker in the systems and both internal and external, but it didn't connect with anything else. So we were really struggling with using any identifier at all at the university. And so raid for us was the opportunity to embed this. The raid tool was an opportunity to instigate a system using an internationally recognized persistent identifier as well. We could see that there was potential to be integrated in hopefully the near future into systems, into applications, funding, publication or publishers sites and things like that. So it was free to implement. So cost come that came into it for us as well. It's obviously the resourcing is the element that does cost money. And that's not just human resourcing because we manually we manually mint the raid handle, but also making sure that our systems had some form of integration as well so that the raid could be seamlessly integrated into those systems too. And that that the development of that obviously does cost money. We started small and we do intend to grow over time. Like, like others like you see you, for example, as Claire explained, we are a small research institution. And so we had the opportunity really for for use at the university that would would grow with us grow with our research culture with our new perspective as it were on research. And certainly, you know, there were opportunities in that. So, rather than being like a large institution where there may be a proliferation of project numbers or IDs and system IDs and things like that. We didn't have that same encumbrance, if you like. So we had we were starting from ground zero effectively and we were building it and we wanted to be to slowly initiate people into the use of the raid, what it is what it does and how it could potentially work and getting used to really the language around it as well. So it was it was a small aspiration that has hopefully far reaching consequences in time. So how do we use it in the research data management plan, there is a raid field. We have help text within the raid field that leads to the online raid request form. So we've developed our own internal form where you apply for a raid. And that obviously aligns with what the fields are within the raid form itself on the rate website where the where it's it's the handle is minted library staff members manually mint it. And then the staff member takes that information and edits takes the handle and edits the research data management plan raid field and the short title field with raid and informs the researcher then that they have completed that process. When we when we put the template for the data management plan together. We looked at a template from another university, which actually included a short title field and initially we were quite puzzled about why you might need a short title field but we actually have used it to our advantage in so far as we embed the raid within that short title field. So it's got the raid up front and a suffix of a four or five word short title of the project. And it works well because we use it for a folder a folder name folder naming convention. And so we are able to track that folder naming convention and encourage its use across other documentation concerning the project as well. For example, we use it as the researcher is encouraged to use it as the digital storage folder name. And we will also use it as an archiving storage folder name. So what does it look like? Well, this is our research data management plan. I'm not sure how clearly you can see that it's probably quite small, but this is our research data management plan within red box. And we have the first section of the plan as the project overview. The first field is the project title and then we go into the raid. The raid is the very is the second most important as it were field to complete. You can see I've highlighted the there's some help text there which includes some a link going out to raid.org and for more information. And also to the form we have to complete the application or the registration for the raid for library staff. Then then we come to the short project title as I mentioned before, and we show an example of what we are expecting the short title to look like. And tell the researcher also in the help text what it will be we expect it to be looking to be used for. This is the raid website, basically the web interface and we mint the raids by coming in here. We click on create in the top right hand corner and manually create that raid in this form and it's a very, very simple form. So it really only takes we were concerned that our IT staff were concerned that there would be there would be privacy concerns around completing this form and it actually. It prevented this particular particular part of the project from going forward for quite some time until they were quite satisfied that the privacy was not going to be compromised. So all that is put into the overview is that it's the title of the project. The owner is the university. The handle is minted automatically and then a description is added which is input into the form that we requested from to the library and it's date stamped and so it's all some of the processes manual and some of it is automated by the fact that we have an account there. It obviously includes creation dates and start dates that little providers institutions and change ownership elements are other fields that you can potentially change and add more information into. It's very, very simple and very straightforward. So when it's completed you filled out that create raid form. Then your raids show in the master database of the raids or that have been completed. So the one that I put in for this example has been added there at the top. You can see up front. You can see the handle that's minted for the project and the start and the date that it was actually created. You can see all you've got a view of all your raids or you can export. You can print to PDF if you if you wanted to. And you can obviously interrogate the data as you need to. What does it then look like in our back in our data management plan? We as mentioned, we added into the raid field so you can see the raid handle that is minted there with the help text above and in the short project title. That's an example of one of our raid handles as well been put in as a short project title. So the challenges we've met to date we currently only use it within red box 2.0. It's great aspirations as I mentioned in making it a ubiquitous project activity or project ID across the university. Like you see you did. We had a fantastic team for the infrastructure to be created and rolled out. But unfortunately we have some reluctance with new people in the research office to use it in their research management system. If there is no API and the API is a bit slow in coming. They have to be created red box doesn't currently have an API so that will have to be built. The other reluctance from the research office staff is that not only is there no API that to feed it straight into the RMS but also they're a bit concerned about PIDs in general. They are I think just a little bit wary that for example the grid. Persistent identifier for institutions has really changed recently changed over to the raw the ROR persistent identifier and they're concerned that apart from awkward which seems to be fairly established that any of these ideas may very well change in coming years and we don't want to necessarily set a lot of store by using them. So these are real challenges that we're grappling with different people come in to have different opinions different takes on the benefits of these elements and the original team thought was a fantastic boom to the process. The other one of the other challenges that we have is that we have we are relying on the manual minting in obviously in absence of an API. But that's not too onerous we're not getting a heck of a lot of applications we're certainly not getting you know we're not flooded and on a daily basis by applications it's a very manageable rate at this point in time. And I'll show you very quickly a couple of slides with statistics. That would be great I might just interrupt Jackie just to let you know that we we may very well have some people who need to go to head off to other things. I'll go to the slides the other slides in and we would love to open it up to some people to have some some questions and I understand if other people need to head off to other things and I really do hate jumping in and interrupting people. But if for those of you who want to who would like to stay on for a bit longer. When we'd love to just see the the wrap up of Jackie's talk, and then we'll have some questions. I'm all fine and you just to just to really I guess mention that we've had in a hundred with 117 applications for the data management plan submissions. We've only had 81 and that is another challenge to that have applied for raids. We only have a certain percentage out of that complete total, although the vast majority have applied for a raid. So where we are gaining momentum and we have mechanisms to go back to those people who haven't applied for a raid to to request one. Thank you very much. I'll leave it at that.