Catalog of data assets

This indicator assesses the establishment, completeness and interoperability of a catalog that records research assets through structured metadata. Research assets include, e.g., datasets, protocols, software, data management plans, strategies and documentation. Maturity reflects the organisation’s capacity to ensure that data assets are systematically described, discoverable and maintained through standardised and sustainable cataloging practices.

Level 1 – Lists of data assets capturing basic (non-standardized) information do not exist or exist within separate sub-units

• Documentation: Information about datasets is kept locally, often in README files or spreadsheets.
• Structure: No consistent metadata scheme or naming convention is applied.
• Visibility: Data are not discoverable beyond the originating research group.
• Responsibility: No designated role or policy supports cataloging activities.

Impact: Cataloging is fragmented and dependent on individual initiative, preventing reuse and institutional overview.

Level 2 – Central catalog exists (although incomplete) with basic metadata about data assets

• Infrastructure and coverage: A central cataloging tool is available but only partly used across the organisation.
• Metadata: Entries contain minimal, non-standardised information.
• Procedures: There are no agreed workflows or responsibilities for registering or updating assets.
• Engagement: Awareness of the catalog is limited in the organisation, e.g., to a few groups or projects only.

Impact: Visibility improves slightly, but catalog use and data quality remain inconsistent and unsustainable.

Level 3 – Central catalog exists. Procedures are in place to capture most of the datasets of organizational interest. Search allows to find data asset of interest only based on basic metadata

• Awareness and coverage: Information about the existence of the catalog is widely shared within the organisation, and most organisational datasets are registered in the catalog.
• Standardisation: Agreed metadata fields are used across research groups, and standard procedures ensure that assets are catalogued.
• Roles: Data stewards or designated staff support cataloging and user guidance.
• Training: Researchers and other relevant staff know how to register and search for assets using the catalog

Impact: Cataloging is coordinated and reliable, enabling systematic discovery and internal reuse of data assets.

Level 4 – Centralized searchable catalog with standardized metadata allowing search of datasets in alignment with organizational goals and retrieval of metadata via API. All assets have a unique accession number

• Metadata quality: Metadata are standardised, complete and interoperable, supporting advanced search, filtering and reuse across domains.
• Integration: Metadata can be accessed via APIs and are linked to other RDM systems, repositories and research workflows at local, national and/or international levels.
• Identifiers: All assets are assigned persistent identifiers (PIDs) or unique accession numbers to ensure traceability and long-term reference.
• Adoption: The catalog is widely used by researchers and embedded in institutional RDM workflows and policies.

Impact: The catalog operates as a sustainable, interoperable component of organisational RDM strategy. It drives FAIR data implementation and seamless integration across research infrastructures.