NSF Public Access Plan 2.0

“NSF’s updated public access plan integrates new agency guidance issued by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy in August of 2022. This guidance, which includes zero-embargo public access for research publications and their supporting data, was developed with leadership from the National Science and Technology Council Subcommittee on Open Science, in which NSF has always been actively engaged. NSF developed its plan while considering issues of importance to our many partners across academia and industry, and in alignment with all other U.S. agencies which fund scientific research. This plan is a first step, and we look forward to its further evolution as we address changes in technology and in the needs of members across our communities. Promoting immediate public access to federally funded research results and data is a critically important aspect of achieving the NSF mission of promoting the progress of science, securing the national defense, and advancing the national health, prosperity, and welfare. Indeed, scientific openness, academic freedom, scientific integrity, equity in science, and fairness are American values that rest on the pillar of public access to federally funded research and data….

The sections of this plan describe how NSF will ensure: • That all peer-reviewed scholarly publications resulting from NSF-funded research will be made freely available and publicly accessible by default in the NSF Public Access Repository, or NSF-PAR, without embargo or delay. • That scientific data associated with peer-reviewed publications resulting from NSF awards will be made available in appropriate scientific disciplinary repositories. • That exceptions to the data-sharing requirements will be made based on legal, privacy, ethical, intellectual property and national security considerations. • That persistent identifiers, or PIDs, and other critical metadata associated with peer-reviewed publications and data resulting from NSF-funded research will be collected and made publicly available in NSF-PAR. • That the agency coordinates with other federal funders of scientific research in implementing new public access requirements….

Primary areas of interest that will shape NSF policy as implementation approaches are formulated include: • Minimizing the equity impact of over-reliance on article processing charges, or APCs, also known as the “Gold Open Access” publication model, including inequity for fields, organizations or researchers lacking access to funding; consequences of possible citation bias; the impact on ability to fund research and training activities; and potential negative impacts with respect to public trust. • Promoting use of author’s accepted manuscripts, or AAMs, as a no-cost option to comply with public access requirements. • Minimizing the consequences of changing publishing ecosystems, including impacts for organizations least able to weather dramatic changes to subscription policies, which can increase precarity for those affiliated with these organizations. • Ameliorating the possible impacts of large APCs on small awards. • Involving affected communities regarding issues associated with data collection, data governance, verifying permitted data access, and data destruction, particularly for groups that have previously suffered from the appropriation or misuse of data. 19 • Ensure accessibility of data and results, including access to data cyberinfrastructures for under-resourced and underserved institutions/researchers, as well as considerations for persons with visual disabilities. 20 • Maximizing the reach and impact of U.S. research while seeking to minimize both access barriers in underresourced and underserved communities and challenges related to the language or interpretability of data. • Identifying the full range of costs (tangible and intangible) associated with data provision and addressing any inequities introduced by these costs. • Developing processes for addressing inequities identified in sharing and accessing research findings….”

AHRQ RFI: Draft Public Access Plan – SPARC

“On April 19, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) released their draft plan for updating the agency’s policy for public access and requested public feedback.

SPARC submitted comments praising the no-cost manuscript deposit compliance option and offered additional steps for AHRQ to consider to further strengthen the plan and address rights retention to minimize burden on researchers.

Read SPARC’s Comments: Response to AHRQ RFI on Draft Public Access Plan…”

UKRI updates guidance for open access policy

From 1 January 2024, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)’s new open access policy will apply to monographs, book chapters and edited collections

The open access policy applied since April 2022 for peer-reviewed research articles acknowledging UKRI funding.

The policy aims to ensure that findings from research UKRI funds with public money can be accessed and built on by the research and innovation community and wider society.

New guidance

UKRI has published the following information to support UKRI-funded authors and research organisations to follow the new policy:

guidance for researchers about our long-form open access requirements
updated UKRI open access policy, including new guidance on using long-form policy exemptions
information about UKRI’s dedicated long-form open access fund and other open access implementation updates
updated guidance on accessing long-form open access funding before 2024
updates to frequently asked questions about the policy, including the use of UKRI open access funding for transformative journals

Open access is less established for books and while open access is preferred there may be instances when open access publication is not feasible. Please refer to the guidance about when and how to apply one of the defined exemptions.



Federal Register :: Request for Information: NASA Public Access Plan for Increasing Access to the Results of NASA-Supported Research

“NASA seeks public input on the “NASA’s Public Access Plan, Increasing Access to the Results of Scientific Research” (NASA Public Access Plan). NASA has a decades-long history of providing public access to scholarly publications and data resulting from the research it supports, including through the 2014 Open Access Plan. In 2022, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released a memorandum on “Ensuring Free, Immediate, and Equitable Access to Federally Funded Research” that establishes new guidance for improving public access to scholarly publications and data resulting from Federally supported research. The NASA Public Access Plan outlines the proposed approach NASA will take to implement the new guidance, consistent with its longstanding commitment to public access.”

Complying with the UKRI open access policy: member experiences – Jisc

“Complying with the UKRI open access policy: member experiences

Representatives from three HEI libraries will share their experiences of implementing the UKRI OA policy at their institution.”

OPERAS on Twitter: “#PALOMERA project: Publishers & Librarians, share your thoughts on #OpenAccess book funder policies.”

Organised by the Open Access Books Network, the PALOMERA series next 2 online events call all publishers and libraries to share their concerns and challenges with OA book funder policies. Sign up for the event that works best for you:

Tuesday 16 May, 3pm BST / 4pm CEST / 10am EDT: a 90-minute PALOMERA Series engagement session with Publishers. Sign up here https://us06web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZUsdeuurj4oHtGSlWk-YCxcq9go37C84LQ4#/registration

Wednesday 17 May, 3pm BST / 4pm CEST / 10am EDT: a 90-minute PALOMERA Series engagement session with Librarians. Sign up here https://us06web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZctceyhrDgtGNd3yn-IkLsiQp9YO8Q8gkrl#/registration

Reproducibility and Research Integrity – Science, Innovation and Technology Committee

“The United Kingdom is experiencing the largest-ever increase in public investment in research and development, with the Government R&D budget set to reach £20 billion a year by 2024/5. The creation of the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has been advanced by the Government as heralding an increased focus on research and innovation—seen to be among Britain’s main strengths.

At the same time, there have been increasing concerns raised that the integrity of some scientific research is questionable because of failures to be able to reproduce the claimed findings of some experiments or analyses of data and therefore confirm that the original researcher’s conclusions were justified. Some people have described this as a ‘reproducibility crisis’.

In 2018, our predecessor committee published a report ‘Research Integrity’. Some of the recommendations of that report were implemented—such as the establishment of a national research integrity committee.

This report looks in particular at the issue of the reproducibility of research….

We welcome UKRI’s policy of requiring open access to research that it funds, but we recommend that this should go further in requiring the recipients of research grants to share data and code alongside the publications arising from the funded research….”

NOT-HS-23-011: Request for Information on AHRQ Plan for Updating the Policy for Public Access to Scientific Publications and Scientific Data Resulting from AHRQ Funding

“On February 22, 2013, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released the memorandum entitled “Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research.” This memorandum requires federal agencies to make the results of federally funded scientific research available to and useful for the public, industry, and the scientific community. In response, AHRQ published a plan for establishing a policy for public access to scientific publications and scientific data resulting from AHRQ funding (https://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/publicaccess/index.html) in February 2015, a Policy for Public Access to AHRQ funded Scientific Publications (NOT-HS-16-008) in February 2016,) and in May 2020, a Data Management Plan Policy (NOT-HS-20-011).

On August 25, 2022, the White House OSTP released a memorandum on “Ensuring Free, Immediate, and Equitable Access to Federally Funded Research” (2022 Memo). The 2022 Memo establishes new guidance for improving public access to scholarly publications and data resulting from federally supported research. Accordingly, AHRQ updated its Public Access Plan that outlines the proposed approach AHRQ will take to implement the new guidance, consistent with its longstanding commitment to public access….”

[SPARC response to the NIH public access plan]

“SPARC strongly supports the OSTP Memorandum’s emphasis on ensuring equity in contributing to, accessing, and benefitting from the results of federally funded research, and we appreciate NIH’s specific attention on how to ensure equity in publication opportunities for its funded investigators. As the research process has shifted to the digital environment, a wide variety of channels designed to support more rapid, frequent, and iterative communication of research findings have emerged. It is vital that researchers have compliance options that do not present them with financial barriers. To that end, NIH should make it clear that investigators can fully comply with its public access policy by depositing their author’s accepted manuscripts into PubMed Central (PMC) or any other agency-approved repository—and that there is no charge to do so. In its guidance, it is important for NIH to make clear that any fee that investigators may be asked to pay is a publication fee, and not a fee required by NIH to comply with its policy. It is critical that investigators do not conflate compliance with article processing charges (APCs), which create significant barriers for less-well-resourced investigators and institutions to make their research available….”

OASPA response to NIH RFI 2023 – OASPA

“This is OASPA’s response to the Request for Information based on this policy (with revisions) from the NIH as released on 21 Feb 2023.

OASPA (the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association) represents a diverse community of organizations engaged in open scholarship and encourages and enables open access as the predominant model for scholarly outputs. 

OASPA wishes to ensure that open access is equitable and inclusive and is keen to explore with its publisher members and library stakeholders ways to increase equity in open access publishing. Why? Because the inclusion of all researchers, including authors from developing and transition countries, and indeed from all backgrounds and life stages, is essential for advancing human knowledge and also for a successful transition to open access. Without the development of new and more equitable approaches to open access, we will not benefit from its full potential….”

[COGR comments on the NIH public access plan]

“COGR is an association of over 200 public and private U.S. research universities and affiliated academic medical centers and research institutes. COGR concerns itself with the impact of federal regulations, policies, and practices on the performance of research conducted at our member institutions. As recipients of a significant portion of NIH extramural research programs, COGR’s member institutions value the opportunity to respond to this request. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) memo1 sets forth requirements to increase access to publications and data resulting from federally funded research, and the NIH RFI NOT-OD-23-091 outlines NIH’s plans to address this directive. As recipients of federally funded research, ensuring public access to publications and research data resulting from supported research is core to our mission as research institutions and a responsibility we take seriously. COGR looks forward to continuing to engage with the community and the agencies on this important topic and offer the following comments….”

ARL Comments on NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to Results of NIH-Supported Research – Association of Research Libraries

“On February 21, 2023, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) released “Request for Information on the NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research.” The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) is pleased to offer the following comments in response to this request….”

Re: NIH RFI on Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research | Blog

“tl;dr: The NIH should directly oppose a for-profit APC-driven publication system and cloud research infrastructure, and instead focus efforts on building truly public information infrastructures.

This is a response to: Request for Information on the NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research, an RFI for NOT-OD-23-091 and the 2022 Nelson open access memo….”

Catching up on open access

The days of the traditional, subscription-based scholarly journal seem to be numbered. Around the world, research funders are adopting ever-more expansive policies requiring the researchers they fund to make the results of their work freely accessible to the public. Canada, once a leader in this area, risks falling behind its peers unless it moves to keep pace with the latest developments.

Canada’s three federal research-funding agencies – the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) – adopted a joint open access policy in 2015. The policy requires grant recipients to ensure that any peer-reviewed journal publications arising from Tri-Agency funding are made publicly available to read for free within 12 months of publishing. Researchers may opt to make their published research accessible either through an online repository (essentially a free digital archive hosted by an institution or an organization) or by publishing in a journal that offers content without a direct cost to readers. But the landscape of scholarly publishing has evolved significantly in the eight years since the Tri-Agency decision, and the open science movement has gained steam. Now, many in the scientific community say Canada’s open access policies are due for a rewrite.