Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation of Council Recommendation 98/561/EC of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education
Date: 2004-09-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, cooperation policy, education policy, higher education, teaching quality

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 30.09.2004 
COM(2004)620 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE 
COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE 
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

on the implementation of Council Recommendation 98/561/EC of 24 September 1998 on 
European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
  
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

On  the  24th  of  September  1998,  the  Council  of  Ministers  adopted  the  Recommendation  on 
European  cooperation  in  quality  assurance  in  higher  education1.  The  Recommendation  calls 
upon  Member  States  to  support  or  establish  quality  assurance  systems  and  to  encourage 
higher education institutions and competent authorities to cooperate and exchange experience. 
It also asks the Commission to support such cooperation and to report on the implementation 
level. 
of 

the  Recommendation  at  European  and  Member  State 

the  objectives  of 

The  Council  Recommendation  of  1998  was  to  a  large  extent  the  fruit  of  a  European  Pilot 
Project  organised  by  the  Commission  in  the  nineties.  The  Recommendation  laid  the 
foundation  for  the  creation  of  the  ENQA  Network,  the  European  Network  for  Quality 
Assurance in Higher Education and its growing membership. 

Two  political  developments  added  new  momentum  to  the  quality  agenda:  the 
Bologna  Process  and  the  Lisbon  Strategy.  Most  recently  the  importance  of  quality 
assurance  was  underlined  in  the  Joint  Interim  Report  of  the  Council  and  the 
Commission, submitted in March 2004, on the implementation of the detailed work 
programme on the follow-up of the objectives of education and training systems in 
Europe2. A rigorous and transparent system of quality assurance is also a necessary 
component  of  the  “European  Qualifications  Framework”,  to  which  Ministers  have 
committed themselves in the framework of both the Bologna Process and the Lisbon 
Strategy. 

The  present  report  consists  of  two  parts.  Part  One:  Establishing  Quality  Assurance 
Systems  in  Member  States  and  Part  Two:  Cooperation  activities  at  European  and 
international level. The Report also addresses the ‘Berlin Mandate’ given to ENQA 
by the Ministers of the Bologna Signatory States. A country overview of agencies is 
given in annex. 

2. 

Part One: Establishing quality assurance systems in member states 

Summary 

Almost  all  Member  States  and  other  European  countries  have  set  up  quality 
assurance  systems  or  are  about  to  do  so.  The  experience  varies  in  duration  and 
intensity  but  all  regard  quality  assurance  as  an  essential  feature  of  their  higher 
education  systems.  The  systems  in  function  operate  along  the  lines  set  out  in  the 
1998 Council Recommendation. 

1 

2 

Council  Recommendation  of  24  September  1998  on  European  cooperation  in  quality  assurance  in 
higher education (98/561/EC) OJ L 270 of 07.10.1998, p. 56. See annex 1 
“Education  &  Training  2010”,  the  success  of  the  Lisbon  Strategy  hinges  on  urgent  reforms. 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/policies/2010/doc/jir_council_final.pdf 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
2.1. 

The creation of agencies 

The Recommendation calls upon the Member States to support and, where necessary, 
establish transparent quality assurance systems. The answer of most Member States 
has  been  the  creation  of  one  or  more  quality  assurance  agencies,  aiming  at  quality 
improvement  through  external  evaluation.  Higher  education  institutions  have  been 
encouraged  to  set  up  their  own  internal  quality  assurance  mechanisms,  not  least  to 
provide a basis for external evaluation.  

The characteristics of the national higher education system influences the ownership, 
scope  and  focus  of  agencies  and  their  activities.  Hence  the  existence  of  different 
models. A few countries have opted for a ‘star model’ with one central accreditation 
agency,  overseeing  a  series  of  more  specific  evaluation  or  accreditation  agencies. 
Others have one single agency in charge of quality assurance or accreditation. 

The  Council  Recommendation  states  that  “autonomy  and/or  independence  of  the 
relevant  structures,  of  the  body  responsible  for  quality  assurance  (as  regards 
procedures  and  methods)  is  likely  to  contribute  to  the  effectiveness  of  quality 
assurance  procedures  and  the  acceptance  of  results”.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
generally acknowledged that agencies should operate in close contact with academia 
and take due account of the needs of society, public and private sponsors, students, 
parents and the labour market.  

Next  to  national  or  regional  agencies  there  are  a  great  number  of  professional 
accrediting  organisations  (e.g.  for  engineers,  medical  doctors,  accountants).  They 
existed  long  before  the  Council  Recommendation  and  their  modus  operandi  is  not 
influenced by it. There are, however, similarities and synergies worth exploring. This 
is  also  true  for  international  accrediting  agencies  or  bodies  such  as  the  European 
EQUIS (business studies) and the American agencies AACSB (Business studies) and 
ABET  (engineering  accreditation  in  the  US  and  assistance  in  the  development  of 
accreditation systems in other countries). 

2.2. 

Evaluation types 

evaluation, 

institutional 

evaluation,  programme 

Eight  evaluation  or  accreditation  types  can  be  distinguished:  Subject  evaluation, 
programme 
accreditation, 
institutional  accreditation, 
internal  quality  assurance 
institutional  audit  (of 
mechanisms),  subject  benchmarking  and  programme  benchmarking.  The  most 
common  remains  programme  evaluation,  but  programme  accreditation  comes  close 
and  institutional  audit  is  the  third  most  popular  type.  More  recent  is  the  interest  in 
programme  or  subject  benchmarking,  looking  for  the  best  practice  in  a  given  field. 
There is a clear trend towards more variety in evaluation types and most agencies use 
more than one evaluation type on a regular basis. 

2.3. 

Criteria and methodologies 

The Council recommended that systems of quality assurance should be based on the 
features, listed in the Annex to the Recommendation. By and large the agencies work 
according  to  these  features,  although  their  application  may  differ  according  to  the 
national  or  institutional  context.  A  short  analysis  of  their  implementation  is  as 
follows: 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
Criteria 

The Recommendation links quality assurance criteria closely to the aims assigned to 
each  institution  in  relation  to  the  needs  of  society  and  of  the  labour  market.  The 
ENQA survey3 demonstrates that there is a clear shift away from evaluation against 
the stated goals of the institution, towards the use of more objective external criteria 
and  standards  in  evaluation  and  accreditation  exercises.  These  may  be  minimum 
threshold standards, average standards or more demanding higher standards, aiming 
at recognising excellence. 

Self-evaluation by institutions 

Self-evaluation is a requirement of most of the evaluation and accreditation schemes. 
The self-evaluation group consists in most cases of management and teaching staff. 
Students rarely participate. Participation of administrative staff and students varies.  

Site-visits by expert group 

The  site-visit  is  a  standard  element  of  the  evaluation  process.  The  visit  consists  of 
meetings  and  interviews,  often  a  tour  of  the  facilities,  a  meeting  with  senior 
management and the examination of documentary evidence.  

Composition of the expert group 

All agencies use external experts and very often international experts are included in 
the  expert  panel,  notably  in  the  cases  of  neighbouring  countries  sharing  the  same 
language. Experts from the world of employment are used in less than half of cases, 
professional  associations,  students  and  graduates  even  less.  The  inclusion  of 
foreigners in the governing bodies of agencies is less common but increasing. 

Reporting and follow-up 

Reports are published in most but not in all cases of evaluation and accreditation. It 
is  common  practice  to  consult  the  evaluated  institutions  before  the  reports  are 
published. In three quarter of cases, institutions are held responsible for follow-up on 
the  recommendations;  in  half  of  cases  they  share  this  responsibility  with  agencies 
and government. 

3. 

Part two: European and international Cooperation  

Summary: 

Most  countries  are  involved,  in  varying  degrees  in  bilateral,  multilateral,  European 
and  global  cooperation  on  quality  assurance  and  accreditation.  These  transnational 
initiatives have similar objectives: identifying comparable criteria and methodologies 
and  fostering  the  well  functioning  of  quality  agencies  in  order  to  achieve  more 
transparency  and,  ultimately,  the  mutual  recognition  of  quality  assurance  systems 
and assessments. 

3 

See footnote 9 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.1. 

Bilateral and regional cooperation 

The  Governments  of  Belgium  (Flanders)  and  the  Netherlands  have  decided  to 
integrate their quality assurance activities into one joint accreditation system. Quality 
assurance  agencies  and  higher  education  authorities  from  twelve  countries4  have 
decided to engage in the ‘Joint Quality Initiative’, an informal network cooperating 
on issues of quality assurance and accreditation of bachelor and master programmes 
in  Europe.  13  Agencies  from  eight  countries5  have  decided  to  found  the  European 
Consortium  for  Accreditation  ECA,  focussing  on  the  accreditation  aspect  of  the 
quality assurance process and aiming at mutual recognition of their respective quality 
assurance  systems  and  judgements  by  2007.  The  Network  of  Central  and  Eastern 
European  Quality  Assurance  Agencies  in  Higher  Education  (CEE  Network)  has  18 
member  agencies6  and  Quality  assurance  agencies  from  the  five  Nordic  countries7 
decided  in  2003  to  formalize  their  cooperation  in  a  Nordic  Quality  Assurance 
Network in Higher Education.All above groupings concern member agencies of the 
broad European Network for Quality assurance in Higher Education (ENQA). 

3.2. 

The European Network for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) 

ENQA was created as a direct result of the 1998 Council Recommendation and can 
therefore be considered both as its most concrete outcome at European level and as a 
starting point and key actor for future developments. The ENQA General Assembly 
of  June  2004  has  decided  to  extend  ENQA  membership  to  agencies  from  all  40 
Bologna  Signatory  States  and  to  introduce  reforms  needed  for  ENQA  to  fulfil  its 
future  task  of  providing  services  to  its  members  and  working  towards  mutual 
recognition of quality assurance systems in Europe. 

ENQA  has  engaged  itself  into  close  cooperation  with  the  ENIC  and  NARIC 
networks  of  credential  evaluators  in  order  to  explore  how  better  information  on 
quality can speed up the recognition of diplomas and periods of study, in particular 
as  regards  transnational  education.  ENQA  is  planning  to  facilitate,  through  its 
members, transnational evaluations, notably the transnational evaluation of joint and 
double degrees. 

3.3. 

Networks in higher education 

The Council Recommendation calls for support to higher education institutions that 
wish to cooperate in the field of quality assurance on a transnational basis. Several 
initiatives have been taken in this respect or have gained new momentum, thanks to 
the Recommendation and Bologna process peer pressure. 

The  European  University  Association  (EUA)  operates  a  transnational  Institutional 
Evaluation Programme, which aims to help its members ensure that the institution as 

4 

5 
6 

7 

Austria, Belgium (Flanders), Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, 
Switzerland, United Kingdom 
Austria, Belgium (Flanders), Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Switzerland 
From  Austria,  Bulgaria,  Czech  Republic,  Croatia,  Estonia,  Germany  (Bavaria),  Hungary,  Latvia, 
Lithuania, Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia 
Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
a whole takes responsibility for continuous quality assurance and enhancement. EUA 
is  also  engaged  in  the  Commission-supported  ‘Quality  culture’  project,  in  which 
groups  of  universities  help  each  other  to  introduce  internal  quality  assurance 
mechanisms, improve their quality levels and prepare better for external evaluations 

On  a  global  level,  the  International  Network  for  Quality  Assurance  Agencies  in 
Higher Education INQAAHE is working on a Good Practice Guide for agencies and 
the  International  Association  of  University  Presidents  IAUP  is  considering  the 
viability of a ‘World Quality Register’ for quality assurance agencies. 

3.4. 

Council of Europe 

According  to  Council  of  Europe/UNESCO  Convention  on  the  Recognition  of 
Qualifications  concerning  Higher  Education  in  the  Europe  Region8,  each  country 
shall  recognise  qualifications  as  similar  to  corresponding  qualifications  in  its  own 
system,  unless  there  are  substantial  differences  between  its  own  qualifications  and 
the  qualifications  for  which  recognition  is  sought.  Among  these  substantial 
differences may figure the quality of the teaching and learning. Hence the importance 
of  the  recent  close  cooperation  between  experts  in  quality  assurance  (the  ENQA 
network) and experts in credential evaluation (the NARIC network of the EU and the 
ENIC partner network of the Council of Europe and UNESCO-CEPES). 

3.5. 

OECD and UNESCO 

OECD  and  UNESCO  cooperate  on  the  development  of  non-binding  guidelines  on 
consumer  protection  in  cross-border  higher  education,  with  a  strong  emphasis  on 
assurance.  
quality 
UNESCO  has  set  up  a  Global  Forum  on  Quality  Assurance,  Accreditation  and 
Recognition,  building  on  existing  regional  networks  and  conventions  for  diploma 
recognition.  In  Europe,  UNESCO-CEPES  is  carrying  out  a  project  collecting 
indicators  for  higher  education  that  could  be  of  use  in  quality  assurance  and 
evaluation exercises. 

4. 

The Berlin Mandate 

On  19  September  2003,  Ministers  of  Higher  Education  of  40  Bologna  Signatory 
States  gathered  in  Berlin  and  adopted  a  Communiqué  in  which  they  called  upon 
ENQA “through its members, in co-operation with the EUA, EURASHE and ESIB, 
to  develop  an  agreed  set  of  standards,  procedures  and  guidelines  on  quality 
assurance,  to  explore  ways  of  ensuring  an  adequate  peer  review  system  for  quality 
assurance  and/or  accreditation  agencies  or  bodies,  and  to  report  back  through  the 
Follow-up Group to Ministers in 2005.” 

Two  Working  Groups  organised  by  ENQA  examine  the  different  elements  of  the 
Mandate.  One  Working  Group  on  standards,  procedures  and  guidelines  and  one 
Working  Group  on  setting  up  an  adequate  peer  review  system.  Experts  draw  on 
existing studies and on experiences of ENQA and its members, organised in regional 

8 

http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/QueVoulezVous.asp? 
NT=165&CM=8&DF=10/02/04&CL=ENG 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
 
(North  and  Eastern  Europe)  or  specialised  networks  (European  Consortia  for 
Accreditation). They examine EUA Institutional Evaluations, the competence based 
approach of the Tuning Project9 as well as the work of subject specific professional 
accrediting  agencies.  Experiences  in  other  parts  of  the  world,  notably  the  United 
States, will be considered as well. 

ENQA  reports  back  through  the  Bologna  Follow-up  Group  and  will  present  a  Pre-
final  Report  by  the  beginning  of  2005  in  advance  of  the  Ministerial  meeting  in 
Bergen in May 2005. 

5. 

Conclusion 

The  implementation  of  the  Council  Recommendation  of  1998  has  been  a  marked 
success  as  most  countries  have  indeed  set  up  a  quality  assurance  system  and 
European  cooperation  in  the  quality  field  has  been  intense.  The  work  on  quality 
assurance  obviously  received  extra  momentum  from  the  central  position  given  to 
quality  issues  in  the  Bologna  Process  and  the  Lisbon  Strategy  and  has  been 
acknowledged as an essential component of the emerging “European Qualifications 
Framework”. 

Important efforts have been made at bilateral and regional level to create a climate of 
confidence  which  would  facilitate  mutual  recognition  of  quality  assurance  systems 
and assessments. The Mandate given to ENQA in Berlin could have equally positive 
effects on a broader European scale. 

The moment has come to take decisive steps to achieve genuine mutual recognition 
of  quality  assurance  and  accreditation  systems  and  assessments  and  let  quality 
assurance contribute effectively to our shared objective of making European higher 
education  a  "world  quality  reference”.  Progress  can  and  must  be  made  in  this 
important field. 

Annexes 

1. 

2. 

Berlin Communiqué, extract on quality assurance 

Existing Quality Assurance Agencies by country 

9 

University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain (www.relint.deusto.es/TuningProject/index.htm) or University of 
Groningen, The Netherlands (www.let.rug.nl/TuningProject/index.htm) 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Annex 1 

“Realising the European Higher Education Area” 

Communiqué of the Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher  

Education in Berlin on 19 September 2003 

=Extract on Quality Assurance= 

“The quality of higher education has proven to be at the heart of the setting up of a 
European Higher Education Area. Ministers commit themselves to supporting further 
development of quality assurance at institutional, national and European level. They 
stress  the  need  to  develop  mutually  shared  criteria  and  methodologies  on  quality 
assurance. 

They  also  stress  that  consistent  with  the  principle  of  institutional  autonomy,  the 
primary  responsibility  for  quality  assurance  in  higher  education  lies  with  each 
institution  itself  and  this  provides  the  basis  for  real  accountability  of  the  academic 
system within the national quality framework. 

Therefore,  they  agree  that  by  2005  national  quality  assurance  systems  should 
include: 

–  A definition of the responsibilities of the bodies and institutions involved. 

–  Evaluation of programmes or institutions, including internal assessment, external 

review, participation of students and the publication of results. 

–  A system of accreditation, certification or comparable procedures. 

–  International participation, co-operation and networking. 

At  the  European  level,  Ministers  call  upon  ENQA  through  its  members,  in  co-
operation  with  the  EUA,  EURASHE  and  ESIB,  to  develop  an  agreed  set  of 
standards,  procedures  and  guidelines  on  quality  assurance,  to  explore  ways  of 
ensuring  an  adequate  peer  review  system  for  quality  assurance  and/or accreditation 
agencies or bodies, and to report back through the Follow-up Group to Ministers in 
2005.” 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
 
Annex 2 

Higher Education Quality Assurance Agencies by Country 

Country 

Albania 

Agency 

Accreditation  Agency 
of  Higher  Education, 
Accreditation Council 

Austria 

Fachhochschulrat 
www.fhr.ac.at  

– 

Austria 

Belgium 
(Flanders) 

Belgium 
(Flanders) 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Croatia 

Cyprus 

Czech 
Republic 

Österreichischer 
Akkreditierungsrat 
– 
www.akkreditierungsrat.a
t  

Flemish 
Inter-
university  Council  – 
www.vlir.be  
Council  of  Flemish 
for  Higher 
Institutes 
– 
Education 
www.vlhora.be  
Conseil  des  Recteurs 
(CRef) 
Evaluation 
National 
and 
Accreditation 
Agency  at  the  Council 
– 
Ministers 
of 
http://www.neaa.governm
ent.bg  
National  Council  for 
Higher Education 

Council  of  Educational 
Evaluation 
- 
sekap@cytanet.com.cy  

Accreditation 
Commission 
www.msmt.cz/_DOMEK/
default.asp?CAI=2856  

– 

Scope 

National, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors 
National, 
non-
university 
sector 

National, 
private 
universities 

Regional, 
university 
sector 
Regional, 
non-
university 
sector 
University 
sector 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 

National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
non-
university 
sector 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 

Main 
evaluation type
Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 
Institutional 
and 
programme 
evaluation, 
programme 
accreditation 
Institutional 
accreditation, 
programme 
accreditation 
Programme 
evaluation 

Programme 
evaluation 

Programme 
evaluation 
Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 

in 
of 

Programme 
evaluation 
function 
accreditation 
by ministry 
Programme 
evaluation, 
programme 
accreditation 
Programme 
accreditation 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
Country 

Denmark 

Agency 

Danish 
Institute – www.eva.dk  

Evaluation 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

France 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Higher 

Estonian 
Education 
Accreditation  Centre  – 
www.ekak.archimedes.ee  

Finnish 
Higher 
Education  Evaluation 
Council – www.finheec.fi 

National 
– 

Comité 
d’Évaluation 
www.cne-evaluation.fr  
Inspection  générale  de 
l’administration 
de 
l’éducation nationale et 
recherche 
de 
(IGAENR) 
– 
www.education.gouv.fr 

la 

Akkreditierungsrat 
– 
www.akkreditierungsrat.d
e  

Zentrale  Evaluations- 
und 
Akkreditierungsagentur 
(ZevA)  –  www.zeva.uni-
hannover.de 
Akkreditierungs-, 
Zertifizierungs- 
Qualitätssicherungs-
Institut  (ACQUIN)  - 
www.acquin.org 
Agentur 
Qualitätssicherung 
durch  Akkreditierung 
von 
Studiengängen 
(AQAS) – www.aqas.de 

und 

für 

Main 
evaluation type
Programme 
evaluation  and 
accreditation, 
institutional 
evaluation 
Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation 

Institutional 
evaluation 

Institutional 
evaluation 

Meta-
accreditation 

Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
accreditation 

Scope 

National, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
sector 
National, 
university 
non-
and 
university 

National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
Regional, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
Regional, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
Regional, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
Country 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Hungary 

Iceland 

Ireland 

Ireland 

Agency 

Akkreditierungsagentur 
für  Studiengänge  der 
Ingenieurwissenschafte
n,  der  Informatik,  der 
Naturwissenschaften 
und  der  Mathematik 
(ASIIN) – www.asiin.de 
Akkreditierungsagentur 
für  Studiengänge 
im 
Bereich Heilpädagogik, 
Pflege, Gesundheit und 
Arbeit 
Soziale 
(AHPGS) 
– 
www.ahpgs.de 
Stiftung 
Evaluationsagentur 
Baden-Württemberg 
(EVALAG) 
www.evalag.de 
Foundation 
for 
International  Business 
Administration 
Accreditation 
www.fibaa.de 

– 

– 

Hungarian 
Accreditation 
Committee  (HAC)  – 
www.mab.hu 

Division  of  Evaluation 
and 
– 
Supervision 
http://mrn.stjr.is 

Higher  Education  and 
Training 
Awards 
(HETAC) 
Council 
www.hetac.ie 

Higher 
Authority – www.hea.ie 

Education 

Scope 

Regional, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors, 
subject-
specific 
Regional, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors, 
subject-
specific 
Regional, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
Regional, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors, 
subject-
specific 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
non-
university 
sector 

National, 
university 
sector 

Main 
evaluation type
Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
evaluation 

Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
accreditation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 
Institutional 
evaluation, 
meta-
evaluation 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
Country 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Macedonia 

Netherlands 

Netherlands 

Netherlands 

Netherlands 

Agency 

National  Qualification 
Authority  of  Ireland  – 
www.nqai.ie 

National 
Committee 
for  the  Evaluation  of 
the  University  System 
– www.vsu.it 

Higher 
Quality 
Centre - www.aiknc.lv 

Education 
Evaluation 

Lithuanian  Centre  for 
Quality  Assessment  in 
Higher  Education  – 
www.skvc.lt 

Ministry  of  Education 
and 
Science, 
Accreditation Board 

Inspectorate  of  Higher 
Education 
– 
www.owinsp.nl 

Quality 
Netherlands 
Agency  –  www.hbo-
raad.nl 

Netherlands 
Accreditation 
Organisation 
www.nao-ho.nl 

– 

Assurance 

Quality 
Netherlands 
Universities 
–   www.qanu.nl 

(QANU)

Scope 

National, 
non-
university 
sector 
National, 
university 
sector 

National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors 

National, 
non-
university 
sector 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
sector 

Main 
evaluation type
Institutional 
evaluation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation, 
institutional 
accreditation 
Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 
Programme 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 
Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation, 
meta-
evaluation 
Programme 
evaluation 

Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
evaluation 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
Country 

Norway 

Poland 

Poland 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Agency 

Norwegian  Agency  for 
Quality  Assurance  in 
(NOKUT)
Education 
–

  www.nokut.no 

National 
Accreditation 
Commission 
www.men.waw.pl 

General 

– 

– 

University 
Accreditation 
Commission 
http://main.amu.edu.pl/~e
cts/uka/uka.html 
Association 
of 
Management Education 
– 
Forum 
www.semforum.org.pl 

National  Council  for 
Evaluation  of  Higher 
Education  (CNAVES) 
– www.cnaves.pt 

National  Council  for 
Academic  Assessment 
and  Accreditation  – 
www.cneaa.ro 

Accreditation 
Commission 
www.akredkom.sk  

– 

Slovenia 

Council 
Education 

for  Higher 

Slovenia 

Education 
Higher 
Quality 
Assessment 
Commission (HEQAC)

Scope 

National, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
sector 

National, 
private 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors, 
subject-
specific 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
non-
and 
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 
National, 
university 
and 
non-
university 
sectors 

Main 
evaluation type
Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 
Programme 
and 
institutional 
accreditation 

Programme 
accreditation 

Programme 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 

Institutional 
evaluation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
accreditation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
accreditation 

Institutional 
accreditation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
Country 

Spain 

Spain 

Sweden 

Switzerland 

United 
Kingdom 

Agency 

National  Agency  for 
Assessment 
Quality 
Accreditation 
and 
(ANECA) 
– 
www.aneca.es 
Agency 
Assurance 
Catalan 
System 
www.agenqua.org 
National  Agency  for 
Higher  Education  – 
www.hsv.se 

for  Quality 
the 
University 
– 

in 

for 
Centre 
Accreditation 
and 
Quality  Assurance  of 
the  Swiss  Universities 
(OAQ) – www.oaq.ch 
Quality 
Agency 
Education 
www.qaa.ac.uk 

Assurance 
for  Higher 
(QAA)  – 

European  University 
Association  (EUA)  – 
www.eua.be/eua/ 

Scope 

National, 
university 
sector 

Regional, 
university 
sector 

National, 
university 
sector 

National, 
university 
sector 

non 

National, 
university 
and 
university 
sectors 
University 
sector 

Main 
evaluation type
Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 
Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation  and 
accreditation 
Programme 
and 
institutional 
accreditation 

Programme 
and 
institutional 
evaluation 

Institutional 
evaluation 

EN 

14 

   EN