Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for City College of New York (United States), ranked in the global index.  See a world-leading example (Oxford) →

The enhanced fact file

Your entire collaboration network, read like a strategist would.

Not a scorecard. A dossier that tells a university leader exactly where the strengths, the risks and the fundable opportunities are, every figure sourced from the open research record.

β—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
4,943
co-authored works, 5 years
782
partner universities
64
partner countries
312
sustained deep ties
2.94
collaboration impact (FWCI)
87%
of partners non-redundant

The one-screen strategic read

Where you stand, at a glance.

The first thing a leader needs is not more data, it is a verdict. Three strengths to lead with, three challenges to manage, three opportunities to act on, each drawn straight from the network below.

Strengths
  • Strong on impact and international. City College of New York sits in the 72nd percentile for impact and the 60th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 100 of 115 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Sustained is the softest pillar. At the 14th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,143 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (United States and China) carry about 81% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-56 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-150 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Washington returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.0). Formalise it into a funded consortium to compound impact, not just volume.

Scholarly weight

The impact behind the network

Collaboration only counts if the work lands. This is the citation weight of everything produced with partners, the substance under the network.

430
h-index of the joint research base
1.9M
citations to co-authored work
2.94
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
4,943
co-authored works, 2021-2025
46
collaboration efficiency, impact per tie

Visualisation 1

Your collaboration profile

Seven pillars, each shown as a global percentile. The dashed ring marks the top-decile benchmark; anything inside it is a genuine, defensible strength.

Influence17th pctReach24th pctDiversity16th pctSustained14th pctImpact72nd pctInternational60th pctBrokerage19th pct

City College of New York is strongest on impact (72nd percentile), international (60th) and reach (24th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 100 of 115 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Sustained (14th percentile), the softest of the six and the clearest place to build.

Source: the open global research record, co-authored works 2021–2025, fractional counting

The anatomy of your standing

Exactly what your position is built from

Six pillars, each weighted, combine into one standing index. Nothing is hidden: this is the entire calculation, in a single bar.

InflImpaSustReacDiveInteEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight17th pct+3.7
Impact18% weight72nd pct+13.0
Sustained18% weight14th pct+2.5
Reach16% weight24th pct+3.8
Diversity16% weight16th pct+2.6
International10% weight60th pct+6.0

Brokerage is reported alongside as a diagnostic, not folded into the score, so a university cannot inflate its standing simply by publishing widely. It measures whether you connect communities that would otherwise stay apart.

Discipline deep-dive

How you collaborate, faculty by faculty

The same network split into its four broad domains, each with its world rank for connected research and the five partners it leans on most. This is the view a dean or pro-vice-chancellor acts on.

Health & Medicine
World #1143 for connected research
4/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ The Graduate Center, …99
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University48
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University33
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Harvard University29
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Johns Hopkins Univers…24
Life Sciences
World #1121 for connected research
6/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ The Graduate Center, …281
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University56
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Harvard University48
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Yale University44
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University44
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1069 for connected research
11/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ The Graduate Center, …602
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University123
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of Washing…86
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Yale University66
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University56
Social Sciences
World #1099 for connected research
8/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ The Graduate Center, …91
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University38
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Rutgers, The State Un…33
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Stanford University18
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University15
Source: domain-level co-authorship, partner institutions 2021–2025

Visualisation 3

Which partnerships actually pay off

Every anchor partner plotted by collaboration volume against the citation impact of the joint work. The prize quadrant is top-right: high volume and high impact. The bottom-right is the trap: a lot of output, little impact.

Joint works (collaboration volume) →Impact (FWCI) →high yieldThe Graduate CenteColumbia UniversitNew York UniversitUniversity of Wash
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Washington returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.0): a consortium waiting to happen. The University of Texas at Austin, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ The Graduate Center, CUNY892 3.3Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University188 2.5Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University118 2.2Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Harvard University103 3.3Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Yale University89 2.4Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey82 3.4Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Cornell University75 2.4Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Stanford University56 3.4Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of Florida54 3.4Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of Washington48 5.0High yield
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 3,797
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 365
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 262
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· France 196
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 157
πŸ‡§πŸ‡· Brazil 138
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 134
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 104

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ The Graduate Center, CUNY 892
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University 188
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University 118
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Harvard University 103
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Yale University 89
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 82
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Cornell University 75
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Stanford University 56

The network spans 64 countries and 782 universities, but the top two carry about 81% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Middle East white-space (0 of the region's 2 leading collaborators) is the clearest gap to close.

Source: co-authorship by partner-institution country, 2021–2025

Visualisation 6

The partners to win next

Not a generic wish-list. Globally central universities you are not yet deeply partnered with, each with the reason it matters and the specific programme that would fund the collaboration.

πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡¬ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-56 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-150 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-215 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί The University of Queensland Australia · world top-12

The University of Queensland is top-199 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

Source: network white-space analysis + funder-programme mapping

The research base

The ecosystem behind the collaboration

A partnership does not plug into a name, it plugs into a base: the affiliated hospitals, presses, institutes and archives, and the research themes where the joint work concentrates.

NOAA Center for Earth System Sciences and Remote Sensing Technologies
NeurosciencePhysics and Astronomy

Context

Your competitive set, and your signature research

Benchmarked against

The named peer group your fact file compares you to, pillar by pillar and subject by subject.

πŸ‡΅πŸ‡± Adam Mickiewicz University in PoznaΕ„Poland
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of MaineUnited States
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Hunan Normal UniversityChina
Pontificia Universidad JaverianaCO
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China University of Petroleum, East ChinaChina
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsQuantum and electron transport phenomenaSemiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies

From insight to action

A 90-day plan, written from the data.

The dossier ends where a strategy meeting begins: three moves, sequenced, each pointing back to a specific finding above.

0-30 days
Name the target

Adopt NUS and a Middle East hub as formal partnership targets; brief the relevant deans with the joint white-space evidence.

30-60 days
Open the funding route

Scope the specific programme for each target, and turn the University of Washington tie into a consortium concept in Physical Sciences & Engineering.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the sustained gap and the health & medicine weakness; set a diversification target for the long tail; and secure an editorial feature in the reputation-survey window.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for City College of New York.

Everything above is the open view. The full partner fact file goes further: every ranked subject and subfield, the complete partner ledger with yield, your named academics and their signature work, the funder-by-funder route map for each target, and this same dossier on up to ten named rivals.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, 22 July 2026 to be included at the 1 September launch.

Claim your fact file →

Free to claim and verify your data. No obligation. Your ranking is unaffected by partnership, and always will be.

Exclusive to partners

Plus this same dossier on up to 10 of your rivals.

Every partnership includes the full intelligence on your named competitive set, their strengths, their funders, their white-space, so you can see exactly where you lead and where to close the gap. Two rivals with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 172,000 academics, with full reporting.

Partnership also places your research as editorial features in the Research Network Report, our newsletter to a verified global academic audience, timed to the reputation-survey season. Every send comes with a full performance report: opens, clicks and geography, benchmarked against the edition.

The Research Network Report

172,000
verified academic subscribers worldwide
Nov–Jan
timed to the reputation-survey season
Full report
opens, clicks and geography on every feature

See your own dossier, built for your university.

Submit your data and we will build and review your enhanced fact file with you, then show exactly how a partnership turns it into advantage, before the index goes public on 1 September 2026.

Request a partnership conversation →
Global Research Partnerships · globalresearchpartnerships.com/rci · Built on the open global research record and the award data of the world's major funders. Methodology.