960 applications for accreditation of civil servant teachers evaluated during September 2025

During September 2025, 959 accreditation applications submitted since April 1, 2024, were evaluated in accordance with the new procedure regulated by RD 678/2024, as well as one accreditation application in accordance with the previous accreditation procedure (regulated by RD 1317/2007).

It is important to note that the average time taken to reach a decision has fallen to 5.4 months from the date of submission (in May this year it was 10.2 months, in June it fell to 8.7 months and in July even further, to 7.4 months).

Since February, when the first collegiate sessions of the new procedure were held, the pace of resolution by the committees has made it possible to reduce the average evaluation time from the date of submission of an accreditation application. Based on the above data, it can be said that ANECA is making decisive progress towards its goal of ensuring that no committee exceeds a 6-month waiting period: we have already achieved this in 17 committees.

As was done in the previous procedure, and now that we have data on negative decisions under the new accreditation procedure, in June we began publishing the success rate of applicants and the corrected success rate (discounting withdrawals after notification of a preliminary negative decision). 

In summary, in October, the average success rate for tenured professors was 94% (92% of women and 96% of men obtained accreditation), while the average success rate for full professor accreditations was 76%, slightly higher for women.

The publication of this data provides information on the effective work of the committees and also represents further progress towards more transparent communication of ANECA's activities.

Applications evaluated – Royal Decree 678/2023

The number of applications evaluated (959) includes:

• Positive and negative decisions (applications resolved).
• Procedural agreements (requests for additional information, proposals for negative resolutions, and proposals for rejection due to non-compliance with the mobility requirement in PTU accreditations or the research excellence requirement in CU accreditations requested by persons accredited to PTU/PPL).
• CONSULTAR EL INFORME EN PDF