Database of Precedents

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	studies based on expert panel review reports are published
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“While the panel welcomed the consistent publication of studies by IQAA addressing the Kazakh higher education and QA systems and the impact of IQAA’s reviews on institutional enhancement the panel however noted that IQAA does not analyse in its publication the results from its institutional and programme reviews. In its statement on the External Review Report, the agency explained that it did not interpret standard 3.4 to explicitly require analyses based on external review reports, but it nevertheless agreed on the importance of these findings and has published a number of studies based on expert panel review reports on institutional accreditation. Considering the evidence provided the Register Committee found that IQAA has addressed its compliance with the standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by GAC
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	systematic approach to analyses
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The review panel considered that the ASIIN newsletter and the annual meetings only partially fulfil the requirements of the standard. The panel noted that the newsletters do not include an analysis of finding ascertained by ASSIIN in its own work. While the annual meetings might address the type of issues to be covered by thematic analyses, the panel noted that there was no specific documentation with summary analyses resulting from those meetings. The Register Committee took note of ASIIN's Statement on the review report and the additional representation. While referring to a number of valuable initiatives and publications, the Committee considered that many of those rather represent internal feedback mechanisms or approaches to ensure consistency in decision-making. While some of ASIIN's newsletters and publications contain elements of thematic analyses, there are currently no regular published analyses which fully respond to the requirements of this standard.The Register Committee further underlined that the standard is not entirely new, but succeeded the standard “system-wide analyses” of the ESG 2005, which, despite its name, applied to all registered agencies already in the past.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of plan for thematic analysis;
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“In its decision of inclusion the Register the Committee noted that attention should be given to whether ECCE publishes regularly and systematically overarching analyses from its accreditation activity. The review panel’s finding showed that ECCE had not undertaken an analysis into its external quality assurance activities although the agency had committed to a series of research of pedagogic papers in its Draft Strategic Plan 2016-2020. The Register Committee underlined the view of the panel that while the need to undertake such analysis had increased (as a result of the rise in the number of reviews) that ECCE lacked the human resources and capacity to undertake such a structured analysis. In its additional representation ECCE provided three research papers co-authored by one of the accreditation committee members that were used to update ECCE standards. The agency also stated that the newly hired consultant will be expected to perform specific research on the internal activities of the organisation. While the Register Committee noted that resources were allocated into the development of thematic analysis, the Committee could not conclude that ECCE’s research papers describe and analyse the general findings of the agency’s activities nor that ECCE has developed a plan to ensure that thematic analysis will be regularly undertaken.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	02/07/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Inactivity in thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“21. The Register Committee understood by the panel’s analysis that the agency, since the last review, produced two publication named “Thematic analysis 2018 to mid-2021” and “Thematic Analysis mid 2021 to mid 2023”. However, as noted by the panel “these significantly digressed from the previous approach and in the eyes of the panel could not be taken as reports that describe and analyse the general findings of evalag’s external quality assurance activities as established by the standard. These reports give merely an overview of the most important projects, publications and events in the period under study, more like an annual report.”

22. The Register Committee, could concur with the panel analysis and underlined the panel’s recommendation that the agency should resume the work on thematic analysis, which was abandoned after 2018, particularly in light of the severe changes in the ‘German system’.

23. The Register Committee therefore concurred with the panel that evalag complies only partially with the standard.

24. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	30/06/2023
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	lack of independent thamatic analysis,
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“35. The Register Committee understood that the agency considers the annual reports submitted to the ministry as thematic analysis prepared by the agency.

36. While the panels found that the annual reports cannot be considered as thematic analysis under ESG 3.4, the Committee noted that these analysis provide useful information regarding ARQA’s activities including recommendations given to accredited institutions/programmes.

37. The Register Committee further emphasised the recommendation of the panel on having a more in-depth approach to analysing findings from its procedures and publishing such thematic reports on its website.

38. The Register Committee therefore concurred with the panel that ARQA only partially complies with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	13/10/2023
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	the geographical coverage of thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“21. The Register Committee noted that QAA carries out systematic thematic analysis within Scotland, sector-wide analysis in Wales, while UK-wide QAA has only carried out “The Quality Assurance of Alternative Providers: A Retrospective View”.

22. The Committee finds that the current activity is sufficient in its understanding and interpretation of the standard and therefore could not follow the panel’s judgment of partial compliance and concluded that QAA complies with ESG 3.4.

23. The Register Committee nevertheless underlines the panel’s recommendation that QAA should develop a clearer plan for thematic analyses for all of its external QA activities in all nations of the UK and publish them on its website.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	12/12/2023
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	publication, analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“14. In its last decision, the Register Committee welcomed AKAST plans for further development of its thematic analysis after an appropriate number of programme accreditation procedures have been carried out.

15. The Register Committee noted that while AKAST has taken some steps in preparing thematic analysis since its last review, i.e., initiating a process for evaluation of the peer review processes carried out by AKAST, since 2022 at the time of the review, no thematic analysis have been made available nor any kind of such analysis have been published.

16. Considering the limited progress made since the inclusion on the Register and the limited development of thematic analysis, the Register Committee concurred with the panel that AKAST complies only partially with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	11/10/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	Agency (24/09/2024)
RC decision	Compliance

“59. The Register Committee learned from the report that the agency has conducted only one thematic analysis, focussing on only one standard from

its EQA Audit procedures carried out by the agency as of

2016.

60. The Committee learned that the agency is considering conducting a thematic analysis for the remaining ten standards. The panel, however, was

not provided with further information on the status of the development of this analysis or, in general, MFHEA’s policy on thematic analysis.

61. The Register Committee noted the agency's plans to revisit its policy and enhance its work on the thematic analysis. The Register Committee

found that these plans have yet to materialise in practice.

62. In its additional representation, the agency informed that it was in a process of conducting its latest thematic analysis and the same should be

finalised by the end of

2024.

63. The Register Committee further asked for clarification whether the work on the thematic analysis is ongoing and whether there is a clear

timeframe when the thematic analysis will be published. The agency clarified that the thematic analysis is currently being finalised and will be

published and presented to the public in December 2024 (see minuted clarification of 2024-09-24).

64. The Committee welcomed the work and progress done by the agency in producing thematic analysis and expects that MFHEA will continue

conducting thematic analysis on regular basis. Given the provided information in the additional representation and the further clarification,

the Register Committee could concur with the panel that the agency is in fact compliant with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	02/07/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“16. In its previous decision of registration on EQAR (of 2020-03-16), the Register Committee found the agency to be partially compliant with the standard, as the publications prepared by the agency did not analyse the outcomes of the review processes.

17. Based on the analysis of the review panel, the Register Committee understood that, since its last review in 2020, the agency published several thematic analyses. Conducting additional studies is also now part of the agency’s strategic documents.

18. The Register Committee was able to follow panel’s conclusion that AHPGS is now compliant with the standard. The Committee, further highlighted the panel’s recommendation that the agency should secure adequate dissemination of its thematic analysis, keeping in mind the various target audiences.

19. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	02/07/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Inactivity in implementing thematic analyses
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“15. The Register Committee understood from the analysis by the panel that the most recent thematic analysis published by the agency were done in 2017.Furthermore, the Committee, noted that “the agency confirmed to the panel that it does not currently have a systematic approach to conducting thematic analysis but confirmed its commitment to developing this.”

16. The Register Committee concurred with the panel that A3ES only partially complies with ESG 3.4. The Register Committee underlined the panel’s recommendation that the agency should resume conducting and publishing thematic analysis of the outcomes and findings of its external quality assurance activities.

17. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	27/11/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“13. In its last decision for renewal of registration (of 2020-03-16), the Register Committee found that VLUHR QA only partially fulfilled the requirements of the standard, as the agency did not publish thematic analysis based on the findings of external quality assurance activities.

14. The Register Committee learned from the panel’s analysis that VLUHR QA has completed three thematic analysis reports since their last review and the number of reports aligns with the level of activity of the agency. Additionally, thematic analysis has been integrated into VLUHR QA’s daily work and in the current Policy Plan (2023-2027).

15. Furthermore, the Register Committee understood that VLUHR QA focusses on the thematic analyses being relevant to higher education stakeholders and ministry representatives, rather than solely concentrating on the outcomes of external review results.

16. The Register Committee was able to follow panel’s conclusion that VLUHR QA is now compliant with the standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	27/11/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“21. The Register Committee learned from the report that AQUIB has a Thematic Analysis Protocol for a systematic approach to conducting thematic analyses, which was adopted in 2023 and is being implemented for the first time. However, the topic of the only thematic analysis conducted so far does not incorporate the results of its external quality assurance procedures.

22. Considering that the only thematic analysis conducted by AQUIB so far is outside the scope of ESG, the Register Committee was unable to concur with the panel’s conclusion of compliance and found that AQUIB only partially complies with the standard.

23. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	27/11/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	thematic report
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“20. The Register Committee learned that ACCUA has created a statistical analysis unit and produced five thematic reports since the last external review. However, as noted by the panel, out of the five reports only one can be considered as a thematic analysis in the sense of the standard, since the other four reports provided useful inputs for policy debates with regional stakeholders and for improvements in quality assurance at universities.

21. The Register Committee finds, in line with its interpretation of the standard, that the thematic analysis report in question is sufficient for achieving compliance with the standard and therefore could not follow the panel’s judgement of partial compliance and concluded that ACCUA complies with ESG 3.4.

22. The Register Committee nevertheless underlined the panel’s recommendation that the agency should devise a clear plan for thematic studies and use its evaluation reports to produce these studies.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	26/11/2024
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Collaborative thematic analysis, lack of regularity
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“20. In its last decision, the Register Committee found that no thematic analysis)

was performed, and therefore concluded that ACSUG complies only partially with

ESG 3.4.

21. The Register Committee understood from the analysis of the panel that

ACSUG relies on collaboration with, and contributes to, the thematic analyses

coordinated by the Spanish Network of University Quality Agencies (REACU).

However, The Committee also understood that ACSUG does not have any stand-

alone thematic analyses that they conduct themselves and that thematic analysis is

still not included in the regular workflows and task distribution of the agency (see

also Register Committee remarks under ESG 3.1).

22. The Register Committee emphasised that conducting thematic analyses

under the partnership with REACU does not fulfil the requirements of the standard

because the regularity of such activities is sporadic, and ACSUG is dependent on the

thematic analysis coordinator (REACU).

23. Following the lack of thematic analysis conducted by ACSUG, the Register

Committee concurred with the panel that ACSUG complies only partially with ESG

3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Targeted, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	27/06/2025
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“13. In its last decision for renewal of registration (of 2020-11-02), the Register Committee found the agency to be partially compliant with the standard due to the limited thematic analysis, both regarding volume and content of the report. At the time, the agency had produced only one thematic analysis, which was descriptive and summarised the contents of inspection reports.

14. The Register Committee learned from the review report that BAC had not produced any thematic analysis since the last external review. Nevertheless, the Committee found that the agency had started working on a new approach to writing thematic analysis and had included stakeholders in the process.

15. The Register Committee therefore concurred with the panel that the agency only partially complies with standard and emphasised the panel’s recommendation to urgently develop precise plans for conducting thematic analysis and start conducting them.”

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