CSO Health Research Strategy

ANNEX

SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS

Chapter 1 - Efficient Rand D Support for Research

1.6 CSO will therefore define the job description of a nodal Rand D Director and become formally involved in the recruitment of new appointments to these key posts.

1.9 We therefore propose the creation of an NRS General Manager (NRS-GM) with a small support team collectively working as the NRS General Manager Services (NRS-GMS). They will undertake the high level co-ordination of NRS activities and specific NRS operational functions previously undertaken directly by the NHS or CSO, including budgetary aspects.

1.15 CSO will therefore require that all Boards take adequate steps to promote the availability of resources to support research.

1.16 NRS Researcher Support will be fully allocated for researcher time and associated activities by April 2016. CSO will approve the Board methodology to ensure it meets our expectations.

1.23 We will also seek to combine the Scottish Research Ethics Service and NRS Rand D Offices into a single integrated service for researchers while retaining the independence of the REC decision making function.

1.24 We propose these functions should be renamed as NRS Integrated Support Services.

Chapter 2 - Partnership with Scottish Patients and the Public

2.5 CSO will require the newly restructured NRS Research Networks to show evidence of involvement with the public in their work, and to embed patient and public involvement in their management processes.

Chapter 3 - Targeted Deployment of Resources and Infrastructure

3.2 CSO will therefore free up a proportion of its budget to be deployed in support of new initiatives.

3.6 CSO will explore with NETSCC the interface between our two funding streams to ensure the focus of CSO grants is both clear and complementary.

3.10 From 2016 CSO will revise the allocation of underpinning infrastructure funds to ensure a more equitable deployment of resource based on activity.

3.12 CSO therefore intends dividing the NRS Infrastructure allocation into specific areas of investment, with each area being managed as a distinct budget.

3.15 A review of the NRS Biorepository opportunities and investments will be conducted in the course of 2014-15

3.16 A review of the NRS Safe Haven opportunities and investments will therefore be conducted in the course of 2016-17.

3.20 CSO will therefore conduct a strategic review of Unit purpose and funding in the course of 2015-16.

Chapter 4 - Working in Collaboration

4.6 CSO intends building on existing partnership arrangements and will enter into discussions with sector representatives and Scottish Enterprise with a view to increasing the number of studies placed through NRS.

4.11 CSO therefore wishes to explore the creation of a new CSO International Advisory Board to provide expert advice on strategic research issues. Meeting once a year, with membership comprising key global leaders in their field, it would provide high level advice on the steps Scotland should be taking to deliver on its aspirations.

4.13 For this reason CSO is a partner in the recent creation of a Scottish Improvement Science Collaborating Centre (SISCC), co-funded in collaboration with NHS Education Scotland, the Scottish Funding Council and the Health Foundation.

Chapter 5 - Investing in the Future

5.3 CSO aims to maintain active NRS Fellows at this level for the foreseeable future.

5.7 The CSO is supportive of renewal of the SSCF Scheme to ensure that Scotland is able to recruit and retain the very best early-career clinical academics who will play a crucial role in improving the health, healthcare and wealth of our nation. We will work with key partners to deliver on this aim.

5.15 We therefore plan to publish the health and bio-informatics research strategy in 2014, and then move quickly to implement its key recommendations, so that the benefits of a more efficient system of governance and a strong , flexible federal network of safe havens begin to flow as soon as possible, and the returns on the investment in the e-HIRCS, Farr, ADRC and national data linkage service are maximised.

5.17 CSO will therefore fund a £1.2m NHS Stratified Medicine Applied Research Programme designed to evidence the value of adopting a stratified approach. Focused on evidencing the value of existing yet unadopted stratified approaches, rather than seeking to develop new ones, we anticipate that it will provide the health economic evidence base for the subsequent adoption of the technology or process.

SUMMARY OF QUESTIONS

Chapter 1 - Efficient Rand D Support for Research

Question 1: Should CSO and the Health Boards set any eligibility criteria for nodal Rand D Directors? Should appointment of a nodal Rand D Director be for a specific time, and if so what term would be appropriate?

Question 2: CSO proposes to approve the functions of staff in Rand D Offices; should CSO seek to standardise local Rand D functions across Scotland, or is it preferable to allow local flexibility?

Question 3: Are there other NRS functions that might usefully be transferred from the Health Boards or CSO to the new NRS-GMS? Are there functions not currently being undertaken that the NRS-GMS might carry out?

Question 4: To what extent should the joint planning of the deployment of infrastructure resources be formalised? Should there be a formal record of such discussions?

Question 5: Taken together, will these steps to both free up and promote the availability of NRS resources address current concerns over lack of time and support? If not, are there other steps CSO should take?

Question 6: Are there any further changes that should be made to improve the efficient delivery of patients to studies through the NRS Networks and Speciality Groups?

Question 7: To what extent do delays continue to occur as a consequence of differing NHS and university requirements? To what extent is closer integration of NRS and university functions possible and desirable?

Chapter 2 - Partnership with Scottish Patients and Public

Question 8: Would a trial register be of benefit to patients seeking trials? Would it be an effective way to partner patients with researchers? Is there a danger that expectations of taking part could be unfairly raised?

Question 9: Would using electronic NHS patient records to alert GPs to research studies for which their patients may be eligible a service the NHS should offer? If so, would a process where NHS records are only accessed by identified NHS staff working in secure facilities, and only passing potential participant names to their GPs or hospital consultants for consideration, be a suitable way to proceed?

Chapter 3 - Targeted Deployment of Resources and Infrastructure

Question 10: What proportion of CSO funding should be available for deployment in new research initiatives relevant to the NHS? In what areas should CSO seek to disinvest to free up resources?

Question 11: Is the focus of the CSO response mode grant schemes adequately defined and understood by the research community? Should there be a narrower focus to complement and avoid overlap with other funding streams Scottish researchers have access to? What is a realistic upper level for CSO grants to allow worthwhile projects to progress?

Question 12: What should determine the creation and continued funding of a CSO unit? Should any new unit have a plan for CSO funding to be time limited?

Chapter 4 - Working in Collaboration

Question 13: Are there other key areas of partnership CSO should be seeking to build?

Question 14: Would the creation of a CSO International Advisory Board be a positive step in raising Scotland's research profile and supporting our ambition? What should be the make-up of such a Board

Question 15: Are there other areas were CSO funded research could better support the Health Directorates Quality agenda?

Chapter 5 - Investing in the Future

Question 16: Is the Primary Care Research Career Award scheme suitably focused to attract suitable high quality applicants? If not, what would a revised focus be?

Question 17: Do the current CSO personal award schemes targeted to meet our future needs? If not, should CSO conduct a wider review of its capacity building schemes?