Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Rhode Island (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.

โ—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
9,727
co-authored works, 5 years
892
partner universities
67
partner countries
500
sustained deep ties
2.75
collaboration impact (FWCI)
89%
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
  • Environmental Science is the standout field. Ranked #292 in the world for connected research, with Earth & Planetary Sciences #320, Agricultural & Biological Sciences #489 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. University of Rhode Island sits in the 62nd percentile for impact and the 44th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 99 of 112 partners (89%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 22nd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,059 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 85% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-94 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Maryland, College Park returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 10.3). 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.

466
h-index of the joint research base
2.5M
citations to co-authored work
2.75
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
9,727
co-authored works, 2021-2025
42
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.

Influence31st pctReach42nd pctDiversity22nd pctSustained41st pctImpact62nd pctInternational44th pctBrokerage34th pct

University of Rhode Island is strongest on impact (62nd percentile), international (44th) and reach (42nd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 99 of 112 partners (89%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (22nd 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 pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight31st pct+6.8
Impact18% weight62nd pct+11.2
Sustained18% weight41st pct+7.4
Reach16% weight42nd pct+6.7
Diversity16% weight22nd pct+3.5
International10% weight44th pct+4.4

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.

Visualisation 2

Where you lead the world, by field

Each subject placed on a log scale of world rank (1 to 1,195). The further left, the more globally central. Gold marks a top-50 standout, blue a solid position.

#1#10#100#1000Environmental Sci.292Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ320Agricultural & Biologiโ€ฆ489Business, Management &โ€ฆ597Nursing626Pharmacology, Toxicoloโ€ฆ628
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Rhode Island's strongest connected fields are Environmental Science #292, Earth & Planetary Sciences #320, Agricultural & Biological Sciences #489. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #1,059 in the deep-dive below, is the clear at-risk area, exactly the gap this chart surfaces.

Source: subject-level indices, 26 fields, minimum 50-university gate

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 #955 for connected research
20/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University269
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Providence College198
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University83
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ64
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University57
Life Sciences
World #1059 for connected research
11/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University51
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tongji University44
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University43
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Sichuan University42
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Fudan University37
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #950 for connected research
20/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ183
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Marylanโ€ฆ114
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State Unโ€ฆ113
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University94
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University93
Social Sciences
World #859 for connected research
28/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University103
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Providence College63
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Tโ€ฆ50
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University47
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University31
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 yieldBrown UniversityProvidence CollegeUniversity of Mary
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Maryland, College Park returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 10.3): a consortium waiting to happen. Brown University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.3: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University420 2.3Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Providence College323 2.2Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University197 3.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington179 4.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University135 3.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Connecticut124 4.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California San Diego118 4.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey114 4.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University97 3.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Davis93 2.9Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 6,987
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 2,069
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 418
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 366
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 269
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 238
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 192
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช Sweden 129

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University 420
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Providence College 323
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 197
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington 179
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University 135
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Connecticut 124
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California San Diego 118
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 114

The network spans 67 countries and 892 universities, but the top two carry about 85% 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.

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-94 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

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-115 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

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Edinburgh United Kingdom · world top-9

University of Edinburgh is top-68 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

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง King's College London United Kingdom · world top-10

King's College London is top-48 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

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.

Providence VA Medical CenterRhode Island Sea GrantRhode Island Agricultural Experiment StationMoorea Coral Reef Long Term Ecological ResearchGSO/URI Marine Geological Samples LaboratoryRhode Island Geological Survey
Earth and Planetary SciencesEnvironmental 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.

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Northwest UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of the Free StateSouth Africa
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ South China Agricultural UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ท Universidade Federal de Santa CatarinaBrazil
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Loyola University ChicagoUnited States
Marine and coastal ecosystemsMarine and fisheries researchGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchUnderwater Acoustics Research

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 HKU 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 Maryland, College Park tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity gap and the life sciences 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 University of Rhode Island.

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 peers.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, Tuesday 25 August 2026 to be included at the 15 September launch.

See the full enhanced fact file → Claim & verify yours

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 peers.

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 peers with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 170,000 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

170,000
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 15 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.