Evaluation and Strategy Reports NWO: evaluation of all institutes at the ‘same’ time SEP (Standard Evaluation Protocol ): –Two levels of assessment: the institute (or faculty or research school) and research groups or programmes. –Three vital tasks: producing results for the academic community, producing results that are relevant for society, and educating and training the next generation of researchers. –Four main criteria: quality, productivity, relevance, and vitality & feasibility. Additional NWO questions: –Generic: earning power, cooperation with universities. –Specific: strategy next 6 years and strategy after LHC

Timescale januari 2011Job en UBVoordracht laatste lid evaluatiecommissie januari 2011AB-NWOInstemming met laatste lid evaluatiecommissie 27 januari 2011LindeConcept strategisch plan naar SAC 3-4 februari 2011SACBespreking en adviezen van SAC op dit document 1 maart 2011 LindeConcept beide zelfevaluatiedocumenten gereed voor toetsing bureau en verzending aan UB 15 maart 2011 UB en Linde (+ Van Rijn en Wiggers) Eerste bespreking evaluatiedocumenten FOM-Nikhef met UB 25 mei 2011Lindefinale concept documenten gereed voor UB 7 juni 2011UB *) finale vaststelling evaluatiedocumenten FOM-Nikhef juniJob en Akessonvoorbespreking opzet evaluatie en distribution of tasks 15 augustus 2011Nikhef en JobAlle documenten gereed voor verzending aan evaluatiecommissie september FOM-Nikhef, commissie, Job Site visit evaluatiecommissie

Status Strategy Report Introduction Accelerator-based particle physics –Physics at the TeV scale: ATLAS Physics at the TeV scale: ATLAS –Physics with b-quarks: LHCb –Relativistic heavy-ion physics: ALICE Astroparticle physics –Km3net/Antares –Air-shower arrays: AUGER –Gravitational physics – the dynamics of spacetime –Dark Matter Experiments: XENON and DARWIN Enabling physics programmes –Theoretical physics –Physics Data Processing: Grid Computing Mission Introduction Technical Skills and Infrastructure –Technical departments Communication and Education Strategy Finances APPENDICES –SWOT –National& internation context –Organigram –Sector Plan –D Glossary

SWOT analysis for Evaluation/Strategy report Strengths, Weaknesses (both internal), Opportunities and Threats (both external) Tool for audit of the overall strategic position ( and further) Survey among permanent scientific staff members: response 2/3 Comparison with survey 4 years ago for reports made for NWO- evaluation” Leo Wiggers

Nikhef internal Number of technical staff members Was: 34% Weakness - hiring technical staff members Development of Science Park Maintaining continuity in knowledge: experiment and software Amazing; thought it was a weakness O:is 68%, was 56%

Nikhef internal Technical infrastructure: quality of technical support Performance of the LHC accelerator Is 84%, was 94% Strength in 2007 Threat in 2007

Nikhef Internal Present actual duration of PhD work Computing: presence of local Tier1 Grid Quality of the Nikhef detectors in present experiments Weakness in 2007 Opportunity in 2007

Nikhef Internal Specific expertise: knowledge of accelerator physics and technology Typical Nikhef salaries compared to those in private sector Diversity of staff: number of female staff members W: is 55%, was 44% Opportunity in 2007 W: is 50%, was 47% Weakness in 2007 W: is 29%, was 31%

Nikhef Internal Spin off: commercialisation of products and number of companies spun off from Nikhef Administration; amount of management and administration tasks plus audit tasks for projects T: is 29%, was 40% W:is 24%, was 56%

Nikhef Internal Focus: balance and coverage in experimental program Career: availability of postdoc positions at Nikhef Career: availability of permanent staff positions at Nikhef

Network Collaboration in research programs with industry International networks: contacts and collaborations of Nikhef scientists with staff in key positions in academia and industry Scale of research: attractiveness of Nikhef as a partner in new large- scale research initiatives S: is 79%, was 62% S:is 76%, was 72% Strength in 2007 Opportunity in 2007

Network Organisation Nikhef: collaboration and coordination of Dutch activities of institute plus universities Relations with technical universities S: is 74%, was 56% Strength in 2007 W: is 21%, was 22% Weakness in 2007

Funding External funding: attracting external long- term funds from national and European programmes Ending of many physics FOM programs at Nikhef in Funding: prospects for funding by personal grants at NWO, KNAW and ERC

Funding Financial perspective: present mission budget in relation to Nikhef ambitions International credit crisis/international funding Prospects for applying for the short-term FOM Projectruimte T: is 18%, was 72% ! Threat in 2007

Funding Image: how funding agencies view HEP T: is 45%, was 56% Overall conclusion: staff more positive than 4 years ago

Scientific Interest Post-LHC CLIC/ILC LHC upgrade: High Lumi or High Energy Electron-Hadron physics LISA/Einstein Gravitational Waves Long Baseline Neutrino's B-Factories *Scale 0: no particular priority, 3: high priority

Scientific Interest Post-LHC Darwin: Underground Dark Matter Search Precision measurements, e.g. sin2 theta W Muon Collider XFEL *Scale 0: no particular priority, 3: high priority

More SWOT Comments "Visibility and recognition of Nikhef R&D in HEP community: T & O R&D projects too skinny. Project management: W“ “Too few spokesmen/management positions and remainder (non-LHC physics L.W.) very "splintered"", Dark Matter must be a priority. “Missing: neutrinoless double beta decay.” “More data analyzers:…. a strength.“ “W: normal computing support (like videoconference)” “Last question: I've entered zeros everywhere: I'd like to leave the post- lhc physics priorities to the physicists ;-)”

Conclusions Translate results in SWOT table –Weakness Opportunity Strategy report to be finished soon, then evaluation report Reports to SAC/UB-FOM late winter/early spring -> a lot to do : need your cooperation