Precedents database

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	12/12/2023
Standard	3.6 Internal quality assurance and professional conduct
Keywords	internal management system, feedback mechanisms
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“33. The Register Committee understood from the panel’s analysis that AIC has set up an internal management system to support the daily work of the agency and the collection of feedback from different sources to inform improvements.

34. The Committee however noted AIC’s internal quality assurance system faces a number of issues and limitations: no major changes/ improvements can take place without government regulation or legal change; the informal nature of the feedback limits the ability of the agency to measure objectively “the outputs of the system”; no sufficient evidence that experts are getting acquainted with additional requirements or obligations set by Study Quality Commission after the accreditation procedure.

35. The Register Committee therefore finds that AIC has yet to consolidate its internal quality assurance system, including internal and external feedback mechanisms for continuous improvement.

36. The Register Committee could not conclude that, as it stands, the agency’s internal quality assurance processes are fully sufficient to assure and enhance the quality and integrity of its activities and therefore could not follow the panel’s conclusion, but found that AIC complies only partially with the standard 3.6.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	04/04/2024
Standard	3.6 Internal quality assurance and professional conduct
Keywords	internal QA,
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“41. In its Change Report Decision (of 2022-11-25), the Register Committee considered the reported change on the newly established body, the Quality Council, and expressed concern with the current proposal of an open-ended regulation that would affect the operability and independence of the Quality Council.

42. While the panel was unable to address concerns with the current proposal of an open-ended regulation that would affect the operability and independence of the Quality Council, it noted that the PKA’s President maintains a supervisory role in the internal quality management system of the agency (by being responsible for supervision of the internal quality management system (IQMS) and in appointing a Quality Management System.

43. The Register Committee found that the current proposal for Quality Council (based on Statutes articles 11a & 15a) could have far reaching consequences, while also noting the organisational issues highlighted under ESG 3.3.

44. The Committee was also made aware of possible conflict of interest scenarios (1) where the Chairs of Section may participate in the discussion of the Presidium, even if they have been part of assessments they have previously prepared and (2) where the Chair of the Appeals Body may vote on resolutions adopted by the Presidium which may be later considered by the Appeals Body. The Register Committee found that this setup lacks the appropriate checks and balances and may affect the integrity of PKA’s activities. The Committee could not understand why PKA has not set up a system that would allow the recusal from the discussion or the possibility for restricting the participation (to no voting rights) of those that could be in a conflict of interest scenario.

45. In its additional representation, PKA informed that the responsibility for establishing the Quality Council will be with the Presidium and no longer solely with the President.

46. Furthermore, PKA committed to introduce provisions stipulating that members of the Presidium participating in programme evaluation procedures or preparing a review in the opinion-giving processes, shall be excluded from voting on those procedures.

47. In its additional representation, PKA clarified that the participation and voting rights of the Chair of the Appeals Body in the Presidium is based on the provisions of the Higher Education Act and PKA’s Statutes. PKA clarified that the Chair of the Appeals Body participates only in the part of the meetings where motions for reconsideration of assessment of opinions are discussed and votes only on this matter.

48. Furthermore, PKA clarified that the Chair of the Appeals Body does not take part in the proceeding assessments of opinions that may become object of applications for reconsideration, nor do they vote on such matters.

49. In the additional documentation (of 2024-03-28), PKA reported that the following statutory changes have been made: (a) The responsibility for establishing the Quality Council will be with the Presidium rather than solely with the President; (b) The members of the Presidium participating in the programme evaluation procedures or preparing a review in the opinion-giving processes, shall be excluded from voting on the decisions resulting from those procedures.

50. While the Register Committee welcomed the changes taken by PKA, it underlined that the issues outlined before remain to be addressed and subsequently to be considered and review by an external review panel in order to determine their implementation in practice.

51. The Register Committee therefore could not follow the review panel’s judgment of compliance and found that PKA complies only partially with ESG 3.6.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	12/12/2023
Standard	3.6 Internal quality assurance and professional conduct
Keywords	internal quality assurance, mechanisms
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“17. The Register Committee, noted in the analysis by the panel the gaps and shortcomings in the implementation of the agency’s Internal Quality Assurance (IQA) Regulations.

18. Furthermore, the Committee underlined that the mechanisms for fostering continuous improvement within the agency are weak and unsustainable on the long-term, i.e., the heavy responsibility of AKAST administrator for all of the IQA processes, the lack of systematic approach in gathering feedback and lack of evidence and example of enhancement based IQA.

19. The Register Committee further noted the lack of commitment in timely addressing the issues previously noted under ESG 3.3 and ESG 3.4 which impacts the overall effectiveness of the agency’s internal quality assurance arrangements.

20. In light of these concerns, the Register Committee could not follow the panel’s judgement of compliance and found that AKAST complies only partially with ESG 3.6.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	12/12/2023
Standard	3.6 Internal quality assurance and professional conduct
Keywords	internal quality assurance (IQA) system not implemented
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“15. In its past decision the Register Committee found that the internal quality assurance (IQA) system had not been implemented at that time. In particular it found that the IQA had yet to prove its role in supporting the internal activity of its speciality commissions and in providing the agency with a sound basis for reviewing and improving the effectiveness with which it works.

16. The Register Committee noted from the detailed analysis of the review repot that ARACIS has set up a functional internal QA system including relevant documentation, structures and personnel. Having considered the evidence presented, the Committee can follow the panel’s conclusion that ARACIS now complies with the requirements of standard 3.6.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	27/11/2024
Standard	3.6 Internal quality assurance and professional conduct
Keywords	internal quality asssurnace system
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“23. In its last decision, the Register Committee found the agency to be partially compliant due to the lack of development and proper implementation of its internal quality assurance system.

24. The Register Committee understood, from the panel analysis, that the agency has made a significant progress, by introducing a number of internal mechanisms, reviewing policies, procedures and guides. The panel noted that, however, the agency does not yet have a full internal quality assurance system in place, but intends to work on this in the coming period.

25. While the Register Committee welcomed the progress made by the agency. The Committee noted that, however, a well-rounded internal quality assurance system that synchronises the newly introduced tools is yet to be set. Therefore, the Register Committee could not follow the panel’s judgement and found the agency to be partially compliant with the standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	25/10/2022
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	reliance on temporary funding sources, state budget allocations insufficient
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“20. The panel discussed SKVC funding, relying on sources from several channels. In particular, SKVC's activities still partly depended on EU structural funds, which are temporary by nature. The panel further noted that the funding from Lithuania's state budget seemed to be insufficient to support the agency's activities sustainably.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Focused, coordinated by ECA
Decision of	18/03/2021
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	volatile resources
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“28. The 2018 external review discussed that EQ-Arts' financial situation was volatile. While the resources were sufficient to sustain the (currently) small number of reviews, the medium-term perspective was not clear.

29. The panel reported that staff increased to 1.3 FTE in 2019, then fell to 0.5 FTE as result of the Covid-19 pandemic and a drop in activities.

30. While the panel found that the “agile and collaborative approach” assured that workload could be handled, the Register Committee considered that the resources of EQ-Arts remain highly volatile; this has not changed since the initial review.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	18/03/2021
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	Human resources planning and work overload; Staff overturn
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	Panel (15/03/2021)
RC decision	Compliance

“The review panel noted the continuously high workload and turnover of staff. It further elaborated that the staff and the management had different positions in regards to the reasons (p. 19). The review panel informed the Register Committee about several measures that the agency plans to introduce, including replacing site visits by online interviews and deploying a single expert panel to several institutions. The panel considered that these were welcome measures that enhance UKÄ's activities and their efficiency. The panel saw that some improvements have already taken place, resulting in decreased staff overturn.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	19/06/2019
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	human resources
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“In its analysis, the review panel commented that, while the situation of resources is acceptable in the short to medium term, some of PKA’s activities “cannot be addressed appropriately due to the lack of resources”. The Panel further expressed concerns with regards to the high turnover of the Bureau staff, who perform the functions of secretaries for the sections Committee. The Register Committee further underlined the review panel’s recommendations on the need to increase the agency’s capacity to perform thematic analysis. The Register Committee was therefore unable to follow the panel’s conclusion of (substantially) compliant but concluded that PKA complies only partially with the standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“In the last review of the agency the Register Committee expressed concern regarding Unibasq’s capacity to ensure adequate resources for the increasing number of its activities.In the meantime, the agency has received additional funds which have allowed the agency to play a very active role in the international quality assurance community. The panel commended the agency for the achievements and the active role.The Register Committee considered that the flag was addressed and therefore concurred with the panel’s conclusion that Unibasq complies with ESG 3.5.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/04/2019
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“When SQAA was admitted to the Register in 2013, the financial sustainability of the agency after the cease of the funding from the European Social Fund (ESF) was flagged for attention. The Register Committee welcomed that the flag was addressed, as already determined in its decision of 18 March 2016”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	06/12/2018
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“[...]The panel, however, added that NEAQA’s predecessor lacked human resources for other tasks which would enhance the agency’s performance. Considering the financial management of the agency, i.e. a bank account managed by the Ministry, the panel found that the planning, management and operational efficiency of the agency were limited due to its dependence on the Ministry’s administrative and financial services. The agency stated in its additional representation that it now has its own accounts and, while it continues to receive financial support from the Republic of Serbia for its initial activities, the agency’s further actions will be financed exclusively from its own funds.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	16/11/2017
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“In its decision of inclusion, the Register Committee flagged the financial arrangements and sustainability of SKVC’s overall activity.The panel’s analysis showed that these concerns remain due to a wavering financial situation and decrease of project funds.The Register Committee noted the panel’s analysis that the financial arrangements remain uncertain and have not been adequately addressed within a realistic financial plan”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/12/2016
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	human resources capacities
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“The Register Committee flagged in its decision of inclusion (ESG 2005: standard ESG 3.4) AI’s capacity to sustain and develop the capacities and qualifications of its professional staff. The panel’s findings showed that human resources have steadily increased and that AI offers seminars and courses for staff members.The panel also commended the yearly individual meetings with staff whereby considerations are given to workload and possible needs for competence development.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“Apart from the greater autonomy in staff appointments that AEQES gained, the financial resources available to the agency have not changed since

2012. The review panel noted that an increase is not foreseeable in the near future and that AEQES might face a negative financial balance in 2020.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by GAC
Decision of	03/12/2016
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	human resources planning and estimation of workload
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“The review report described that financial losses experienced by ACQUIN have eventually been recovered by reducing activity costs. The Register Committee was able to follow the panel's concerns with regard to human resources planning and estimation of workload. Despite the fact that planning and documentation require improvement, the Register Committee did, however, not understand that the number of accreditation procedures conducted by ACQUIN significantly exceeds its capacity. Moreover, the Register Committee appreciated that an agency operating in a market-based system naturally experiences greater fluctuation than an agency in a monopoly situation”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“The panel noted that ECCE’s level of financing was not fully ensured to professionally run external QA and make possible the further development of the organisation. In its additional representation (of 27/03/2017) ECCE informed that the membership fees of the agency have increased, that allowed the agency to improve its financial resources and employ a quality assurance consultant.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/12/2016
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The Register Committee noted that ACPUA’s main funding source comes from the regional government. The panel stated that the agency is considering possibilities to diversify its funding revenues and therefore reduce its financial dependence from the Ministry. While the panel commended the agency on the way it has dealt with its tasks considering its limited human and financial resources, it also expressed concerns regarding the agency’s ability to further sustain these efforts and ensure effectiveness in meeting its strategic goals.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	30/06/2023
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	state budget
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	Agency (06/06/2023)
RC decision	Compliance

“The Register Committee noted that the proportion of HAKA’s activities financed through state budget has been decreasing. This is caused by the fact that HAKA has taken on activities for other education levels/types not falling under the ESG, which are financed through projects.

The Register Committee understood from the agency’s clarification (see minuted response of 2023-06-06) that the financial concerns do not affect the agency’s ability to carry out its regular external QA activities.

The Register Committee therefore concluded that the agency continues to comply with ESG 3.5.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	04/04/2024
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	resources
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“38. In its past review, the Register Committee noted concerns related to the lack of resources, the high turnover of the Bureau staff and the agency’s capacity to perform thematic analysis.

39. The Register Committee noted from the findings of the latest review (review report of 2023) that the agency now benefits from an increase in support and resources, a decrease in staff turnover, an improved focus on thematic analysis and a legislative recognition for this activity. The panel also found that staff, managers and stakeholders were satisfied with the current resources of the agency.

40. Based on the findings of the review panel, the Register Committee was able to concur with the judgement of compliance with standard 3.5.”

Full decision: see agency register entry