Doctoral Degree

• 1. Self-assessment report and collection of evidence, including an external visit, prior to the university's application to the Council of Universities:

  • Each year, the university informs ANECA of the degrees for which it plans to request accreditation renewal that year, and ANECA and the university jointly establish a schedule for evaluating the degree, taking into account the deadlines established in the current regulations for the administrative procedure.
  • For each degree, the university prepares a self-assessment report using the criteria and guidelines of the accreditation model and provides evidence to support its assessments. ANECA has developed the ACREDITA Program Self-Assessment Guide to guide universities in preparing this self-assessment report, which, once completed, must be submitted within the deadlines via the computer application for submitting ACREDITA program applications.
  • ANECA appoints a panel of experts from outside the university to study the self-assessment report and other information available to ANECA. The panel visits the university, where it holds meetings with different groups, gathering evidence about the development of the curriculum.
  • After the panel's visit, ANECA sends the evaluated university a certificate of completion, which must be submitted, together with the self-assessment report, by the university in its application to the Council of Universities. 

• 2. University application to the Council of Universities and ANECA evaluation report:

  • The university's application will be processed through the SOLRUCT application of the Council of Universities itself. Once the application has been validated, the Council of Universities will forward it to ANECA for evaluation.
  • Through the Accreditation Renewal Commission (CRAC) for Bachelor's and Master's degrees, ANECA evaluates the degree taking into account the self-evaluation report submitted by the university, the evidence presented by the university and that collected by the panel of external experts during their visit to the university, as well as all other information that ANECA has on the degree. ANECA will send the university a justified proposal for a provisional evaluation report for the renewal of accreditation in favorable terms or with aspects that must be modified in order to obtain a report in favorable terms. The report may include recommendations for improving the degree program.
  • Universities have a period of 20 working days to accept the proposed provisional accreditation report or to submit arguments and/or an improvement plan. Once the deadline has passed, the Accreditation Renewal Committee analyzes the available documentation on the degree and proceeds to issue the final evaluation report for the renewal of accreditation, in favorable or unfavorable terms.
  • ANECA sends the final report to the Council of Universities, which is responsible for issuing a favorable or unfavorable decision on accreditation renewal. The university and the Autonomous Community are also recipients of this report.

• 3. Resolution of the Council of Universities:

  • The university may lodge an appeal against the accreditation decision with the Presidency of the Council of Universities within 15 days of notification. If the appeal is accepted for processing, it will be assessed by a committee appointed for this purpose by the aforementioned body. The committee will examine the file relating to the degree to ensure that the established guarantees are met and may ratify the decision or, where appropriate, accept the appeal and forward it to ANECA.
  • The ANECA Advisory Committee for the Evaluation of Education and Institutions is responsible for reviewing the file submitted by the Council of Universities and will submit the corresponding report within a maximum period of one month. 
  • Once the report has been received, the Council of Universities will issue its final decision.

• Self-assessment guide (2023 version)

  Basic aspects of the evaluation process for the renewal of accreditation of official doctoral programmes taught at non-institutionally accredited centres (objectives, scope, process and evaluation model).

  Download guide (PDF)

• Template for preparing the self-assessment report for the first accreditation renewal

  Annex II of the Self-Assessment Guide. 

  The template for preparing the self-assessment report is the tool that universities will use to provide ANECA with the required information relating to each of the guidelines included in the assessment model for the renewal of the ACREDITA DOCTORADO Programme Accreditation.

  Download template (DOCX)

• Template for preparing the self-assessment report for second or subsequent accreditation renewals

  Annex III of the Self-Assessment Guide.

  This template differs from the one used in the first accreditation renewal process because ANECA already has important information about the degree programme. ANECA will therefore focus its evaluations for the second and subsequent accreditation renewals on those aspects that, according to this information and the information provided by the degree programme, are susceptible to improvement.

  Download template (DOCX)

• External Evaluation Guide

  Basic aspects that make up the evaluation process for accreditation renewal (objectives, scope, process and evaluation model) and guide them during the external evaluation process and in the preparation of the various reports resulting from that process.

  See guide (PDF)

• Guide to developing an improvement plan

  Document supporting university institutions in drawing up an improvement plan, once an evaluation process has been carried out.

  See guide (PDF)

• Assessment protocol for monitoring and renewing accreditation of doctoral programmes

  Identifies the common criteria for action defined by the Evaluation Agencies belonging to the Spanish Network of Quality Agencies (REACU) in order to monitor and accredit official doctoral programmes.

  See protocol (PDF)

• Alignment with the criteria established by ANECA

  It shows the alignment of the criteria established by ANECA in the evaluation model for the renewal of accreditation of official doctoral programmes with the Criteria and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) approved by the Conference of Ministers in May 2015 and with the Criteria and Guidelines for the evaluation, monitoring and accreditation of official doctoral degrees approved by the Spanish Network of University Quality Agencies (REACU).

  See alignment of criteria (PDF)

• Ten commandments for virtual visits

  Guide for the proper functioning and development of virtual visits to Doctoral Programmes undergoing evaluation for the renewal of their accreditation.

  See the ten commandments (PDF)

Assessors by panels and committees

• Assessors for official doctoral programmes of study

  Assessors for official doctoral programmes of study

  Profiles, roles and selection criteria for programme evaluators.

• Expert panels: Doctorate

  Expert panels: Doctorate

  Composition of the review panels 2018–2021

Composition of the Committee for the issuance of Ph.

• Chair

  Director of the Degrees and Institutional Assessment Division

  • José Luis Aznarte Mellado

• Academic members

  Teaching and research staff of recognized academic prestige.

  • Juan Francisco Herrero Perezagua. Universidad de Zaragoza
  • Jose Luis Bonet Senach. Universitat Politècnica de València
  • Alberto Martín Pernia. Universidad de Oviedo
  • Mercedes Salido Peracaula. Universidad de Cádiz
  • Juan Alberto Sanchis Llopis. Universitat de Valéncia
  • María Isabel del Hierro Morales. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos

• Secretary

  ANECA staff with experience and knowledge in evaluation processes, which acts as technical and methodological support for the Commission.

  • Elvira Juárez Casalengua