Performance Based Research Fund

The major element, the Quality Evaluation, is held periodically. The first was held in 2003, the second, a partial round in which not all staff were required to submit portfolios, was held in 2006, the third in 2012 and the latest full round was held in 2018. Due to COVID-19, the next round was delayed by a year and is due to be held in 2025. [4]

Each Quality Evaluation assesses the quality of research conducted at TEOs, and funding is allocated accordingly. Quality is determined by an assessment of research degree completion numbers, the amount of external research funding an institution achieves, and an evaluation of the individual research performance of all academic staff teaching on degrees or employed to conduct research.

Each academic staff member is required (with some exceptions) to submit an Evidence Portfolio which records their research outputs, contribution to research environment, and peer esteem. They are then assessed as A, B, C or R category. The A indicates international standing, B national, C local and R research inactive or active at a lower level.

From 2006 two new categories, C(NE) and R(NE) were introduced, for new and emerging researchers who have not yet had the benefit of a full six year census period. Each staff member is assigned a numerical grade (in 2006 5 for an A, 3 for a B, 1 for a C or C (NE), and 0 for R and R (NE)). This is used to calculate an overall score. Since the numerical scores assigned for the 2003 assessment and that for the 2006 assessment differed, the results of the two assessments are not entirely comparable, despite the 2006 assessment being designed to be a partial round.

In assessing individuals rather than groups, PBRF differs from the otherwise similar Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) in the United Kingdom.

In 2012, The Victoria University of Wellington was ranked first for research quality. The research rankings up to that year are below. [5]

However these figures are based on the AQS(N) reported average, which measured research quality against the number of full-time equivalent staff receiving an A, B, or C grade. This measure was discontinued for the 2018 round.

• Note: the number of staff and the quality score are weighted for full-time equivalents.
• The national average includes non-university TEOs.
• The 2012 rankings used the "new" Average Quality Score, which excluded all R rated portfolios, whereas the 2003 and 2006 rankings use the previous Average Quality Score.

Other tertiary institutions scoring above 2.0 in the 2012 PBRF round including Polytechnics, Institutes of Technology and Private Training Establishments are below.

These results are based on the AQS(S) - average quality, based on the number of teaching and research staff in a given tertiary education organisation, and is now the primary measure of research quality. [6] These figures were reported by the TEC in 2019 [7]

Other tertiary institutions scoring above 2.0 in the 2018 PBRF round including Polytechnics, Institutes of Technology and Private Training Establishments are below.

• Performance Based Research Fund