Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for The Graduate Center, CUNY (United States), a Silver-band university.  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—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
🌍 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
9,995
co-authored works, 5 years
919
partner universities
75
partner countries
497
sustained deep ties
3.50
collaboration impact (FWCI)
86%
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 diversity. The Graduate Center, CUNY sits in the 91st percentile for impact and the 51st for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 93 of 108 partners (86%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 39th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #992 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 United Kingdom) carry about 76% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win NTU Singapore. World top-14. Nanyang Technological University is top-280 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Stanford University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 9.6). 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.

434
h-index of the joint research base
2.1M
citations to co-authored work
3.50
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
9,995
co-authored works, 2021-2025
62
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.

Influence39th pctReach48th pctDiversity51st pctSustained41st pctImpact91st pctInternational51st pctBrokerage44th pct

The Graduate Center, CUNY is strongest on impact (91st percentile), diversity (51st) and international (51st). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 93 of 108 partners (86%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (39th 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 Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight39th pct+8.6
Impact18% weight91st pct+16.4
Sustained18% weight41st pct+7.4
Reach16% weight48th pct+7.7
Diversity16% weight51st pct+8.2
International10% weight51st pct+5.1

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 #984 for connected research
18/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ City College of New Y…99
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Cornell University97
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University91
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Icahn School of Medic…86
πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Έ Universitat de Barcel…84
Life Sciences
World #902 for connected research
24/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ City College of New Y…281
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Cornell University114
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University84
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Harvard University70
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Icahn School of Medic…70
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #992 for connected research
17/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ City College of New Y…602
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University144
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University90
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Cornell University89
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Stony Brook University74
Social Sciences
World #641 for connected research
46/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University99
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ City College of New Y…91
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University56
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Yale University48
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Stony Brook University42
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 yieldCity College of NeColumbia UniversitAlbert Einstein CoStanford Universit
High yieldStandardLow yield

Stanford University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 9.6): a consortium waiting to happen. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 3.1: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ City College of New York892 3.3Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University297 3.5Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University275 3.5Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Cornell University261 3.6Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Harvard University164 6.0Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai156 3.1Low yield
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey132 5.1Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Albert Einstein College of Medicine124 1.8Low yield
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Yale University110 4.4Standard
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Stanford University108 9.6High 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 6,914
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 647
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 585
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· France 462
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 404
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 307
πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Έ Spain 296
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 271

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ City College of New York 892
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Columbia University 297
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ New York University 275
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Cornell University 261
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Harvard University 164
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai 156
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 132
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Albert Einstein College of Medicine 124

The network spans 75 countries and 919 universities, but the top two carry about 76% 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‡­πŸ‡° Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social 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‡ΈπŸ‡¬ Nanyang Technological University Singapore · world top-14

Nanyang Technological University is top-280 globally in Social 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‡ͺ KU Leuven Belgium · world top-21

KU Leuven is top-74 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡­ University of Zurich Switzerland · world top-23

University of Zurich is top-153 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

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.

CUNY Advanced Science Research Center
MedicineMaterials SciencePsychologyComputer Science

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‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of North TexasUnited States
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Renmin University of ChinaChina
Makerere UniversityUG
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Coventry UniversityUnited Kingdom
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Dalian University of TechnologyChina
HIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsMetamaterials and Metasurfaces ApplicationsLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

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 CUHK 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 Stanford University tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence gap and the physical sciences & engineering 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 The Graduate Center, CUNY.

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.