The document provides an overview of the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) in India. It discusses NAAC's history, vision, mission and core values. The revised assessment and accreditation framework focuses on making the process more objective, transparent and data-driven. Institutions submit a self-study report which undergoes data validation and verification to obtain a pre-qualifier score before an onsite peer review. Seven criteria are used to assess institutions, including teaching-learning, research, infrastructure, and governance. Weightages are assigned across key indicators under each criterion.

1. 
Presented by
Dr. S. Sujatha
Prof and HOD
Dept of Pharmaceutics

2. 
1. History
2. Why Accreditation
3. Core Values
4. Benefits of Accreditation
5. Vision And Mission
6. The Revised Assessment And Accreditation(A&A)
Frame Work
7. Process
8. Criteria For Assessment
9. Weightage Across Indicators
10. Guide lines For Institutional Preparation
CONTENTS

3. 
 India has one o the largest and diverse education
systems in the world, the national policy on
education NPE 1986 and the programme of action
established an independent national accreditation
agency to improve the quality of higher education.
The national assessment and accreditation council
(NAAC) was established in 1994 has an autonomous
institution of the university grants commission
(UGC) with its headquarter in Bangalore.
HISTORY

4. 
 At present the Country has 700 universities 38000
colleges and 25 million students.
 Our GER is only 18% whereas the global GER is 29,
for the Asia Pacific Nations it is 37 and in developed
countries still higher. It is in this context NAAC
becomes relevant and essential.
 All institutions intending to apply for Accreditation
and Assessment by NAAC need to mandatorily
upload the information on All India Survey on
Higher Education (AISHE) portal. AISHE code is one
of the requirements for registration.

5. 
 Education plays a vital role in the development of any
nation. Therefore, there is a premium on both quantity
(increased access) and quality (relevance and excellence of
academic programmes offered) of higher education.
 Like in any other domain, the method to improve quality
remains the same. Finding and recognizing new needs
and satisfying them with products and services of
international standards.
 The NAAC has been set up to help all participating
institutions assess their performance vis-à-vis set
parameters. A rating agency for academic excellence
across India, and the country's first such effort.
Why Accreditation

6. 
Contributing to National Development
Fostering Global Competencies among Students
Inculcating a Value System among Students
Promoting the Use of Technology
Quest for Excellence
Core Values

7. 
 1. Institution to know its strengths, weaknesses, and
opportunities through an informed review process.
 2. Identification of internal areas of planning and
resource allocation
 3. Collegiality on the campus.
 4. Funding agencies look for objective data for
performance funding.
 5. Institutions to initiate innovative and modern
methods of pedagogy.
Benefits of Accreditation

8. 
6. New sense of direction and identity for institutions.
7. The society look for reliable information on quality
education offered.
8. Employers look for reliable information on the
quality of education offered to the prospective
recruits.
9. Intra and inter-institutional interactions.

9. 
 Vision
 To make quality the defining element of higher
education in India through a combination of self and
external quality evaluation, promotion and
sustenance initiatives.
 Guided by its vision and striving to achieve its
mission, the NAAC primarily assesses the quality of
institutions of higher education that volunteer for the
process, through an internationally accepted
methodology.
Vision

10. 
 1. To arrange for periodic assessment and
accreditation of institutions of higher education or
units thereof, or specific academic programmes or
projects;
 2. To stimulate the academic environment for
promotion of quality of teaching-learning and
research in higher education institutions;
 3. To encourage self-evaluation, accountability,
autonomy and innovations in higher education;
Mission

11. 
 4. To undertake quality-related research studies,
consultancy and training programmes, and
 5. To collaborate with other stakeholders of higher
education for quality evaluation, promotion and
sustenance.

12. 
 The Revised Assessment and Accreditation (A&A)
Framework was launched on 7th July 2017. It represents
an explicit paradigm shift making it ICT enabled,
objective, transparent, scalable and robust. The shift is: 1.
From qualitative peer Judgement to data based
quantitative indicator evaluation with increased
objectivity and transparency.
 2. Towards extensive use of ICT confirming scalability
and robustness.
 3. In terms of simplification of the process drastic
reduction in number of questions, size of the report, visit
days, and so on
The Revised Assessment and Accreditation
(A&A) Framework

13. 
4. In terms of boosting benchmarking as quality
improvement tool. This has been attempted through
comparison of NAAC indicators with other
international QA framework
5. Introducing pre-qualifier for peer team visit, as 30%
of system generated score. 6. Introducing system
generated scores (SGS) with combination of online
evaluation (about 70%) and peer judgement (about
30

14. 
7. In introducing the element of third party validation
of data
8. In providing appropriate differences in the metrics,
weightages and benchmarks to universities,
autonomous colleges and affiliated/constituent
colleges
9. In revising several metrics to bring in enhanced
participation of students and alumni in the
assessment process

15. 
 Institutional Information for Quality Assessment
(IIQA) and Self Study Report (SSR) The three level
accreditation processes would be more ICT enabled with
Student Satisfaction Survey and Data Verification and
Validation adding value to the process.
 The first level would be submission of Institutional
Information for Quality Assessment (IIQA) which is more
or less similar to the Letter of Intent (LoI) of the earlier
process. Unlike in the earlier system, two specific
Windows will be opened in an year for HEIs to submit
their applications.
Process

16. 
 The first window will be from May – June and the
second window will be from November-December.
 Attempts have been made to make the whole
process user friendly and link the formats with
National databases on HEIs.
 Towards this providing the AISHE reference
number/code is mandatory at the application stage
itself and affiliating Institutions can submit a self
declaration with reference to the latest affiliation
status.

17. 
 On acceptance of the IIQA, institutions can submit
their data /information online in the formats
provided as Manuals for Self Study Report (SSR).
 There would be no requirement for submission of
hard copies of the SSR. The formats for submission
of online SSR are available on NAAC website.

18. 
 Data Validation and Verification (DVV) and Pre-
qualifier Score At the second level, data
/information submitted in the SSR will be subjected
to an online assessment mechanism/process with
Data Validation and Verification (DVV) process.
 After an online evaluation generating a pre-
qualifier score. Institutions securing 30% on the
quantitative metrics will qualify for onsite peer
review/ assessment.
 The pre-qualifier scores are exclusive of the Student
Satisfaction Survey (SSS).

19. 
 The introduction of Student Satisfaction Survey (SSS)
is an attempt to engage students who are the main
stakeholders in the quality assurance process.
 The SSS is conducted concurrent to the DVV. The
scores obtained in the SSS will be part of the overall
CGPA. For taking the Student Satisfaction Survey
institutions will be required to submit the details of
all the students enrolled in the institution i.e. student
enrolment number, Programme, Year of Study(1st
year, 2nd year etc.),email Id and mobile number.

20. 
 NAAC will randomly select students for the survey
to be responded on the questionnaire of NAAC.
Response from 10% of the enrolled students qualifies
for scoring on the metric. Preparation towards
Student Satisfaction Survey (SSS)

21. 
 The onsite assessment will be a peer review by visiting
teams nominated by NAAC and will focus on the
assessment of the information provided on the qualitative
metrics.
 Onsite Assessment - Peer Review by Visiting Teams HEIs
will submit the information and data online in the formats
provided by NAAC.
 The compiled online SSR will be used for the onsite and
offsite evaluations. Institutions scoring 30% and above
qualify for the third level of A&A which would have two
sub processes viz.
 Onsite assessment by visiting Peer Teams and generation
of results by the NAAC.

22. 
 a.) An Onsite assessment of the qualitative
components of the SSR by a visiting team resulting
in generation of a qualitative report of the institution
identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and challenges(SWOC) and assigning scores as per
the performance on each of the qualitative metric.
 b.) On completion of onsite evaluation NAAC will
combine the scores assigned by the teams, the pre-
qualifier scores and the SSS to arrive at overall
Criterion wise Grade Point Averages (CrGPA

23. 
c.) The final outcome will be placed for approval of Executive
council of NAAC before declaring the Accreditation status and
the institutional Grade.
 Based on the size and scope of academic offerings at the HEIs,
the number of days and experts for onsite visit may vary from
2-3 days with 2-5 expert reviewers visiting the institutions. The
visiting teams’ role would be very specific in the revised model
limited to Qualitative Metrics (QlM).
 The teams would play an important role in reviewing the
intangible aspects.
 Unlike in the past NAAC will not pre-disclose the details of the
visiting teams and HEIs will not be responsible for Logistics for
the Visiting Teams. NAAC will make necessary logistics.

24. 
 Based on the size and scope of academic offerings at the
HEIs, the number of days and experts for onsite visit may
vary from 2-3 days with 2-5 expert reviewers visiting the
institutions. The visiting teams’ role would be very
specific in the revised model limited to Qualitative
Metrics (QlM).
 The teams would play an important role in reviewing the
intangible aspects.
 Unlike in the past NAAC will not pre-disclose the details
of the visiting teams and HEIs will not be responsible for
Logistics for the Visiting Teams. NAAC will make
necessary logistics.

25. 
 The NAAC has identified the following seven
criteria to serve as the basis for assessment of HEIs:
1.Curricular Aspects
2.Teaching-Learning and Evaluation
3.Research, Consultancy and Extension
4.Infrastructure and Learning Resources
5.Student Support and Progression
6.Governance and Leadership, and
7.Institutional Values and Best Practices
Criteria for Assessment

26. 
 KEY Indicators
 i. Curricular Planning and Implementation
 ii. Academic Flexibility
 iii. Curriculum Enrichment
 iv. Feedback System
I Curricular Aspects

27. 
 KEY Indicators
 i Student enrolment and profile
 ii. Catering to student Diversity
 iii. Teaching-Learning Process
 iv. Teacher Profile and Quality
 v. Evaluation Process and Reforms
 vi. Student Performance and learning outcomes.
 Vii student satisfaction Survey
II Teaching Learning
and Evaluation

28. 
 Key Indicators
 Resource Mobilisation for research
 Innovation Ecosystem
 Research Publications and awards
 Extension Activities
 Collaboration
III Research, Innovations
and Extensions

29. 
 Key Indicators :
 1 Physical Facilities
 2. Clinical, Equipment and Laboratory
learning resources
 3. Library as a Learning Resource
 IT Infrastructure
 Maintenance of Campus Infrastructure
IV Infrastructure and
Learning Resources

30. 
Key Indicators:
1) Student Support
2) Student progression
3) Student Participation
and Activities
4) Alumni Engagement
V Student Support and
Progression

31. 
Key Indicators:
1. Institutional Vision and Leadership
2. Strategy Development and Deployment
3. Faculty Empowerment Strategies
4. Financial management and resource
mobilization
5. Internal Quality Assurance System
(IQAS)
VI Governance, Leadership
and Management

32. 
Key Indicators:
1. Institutional Values and Social Responsibilities
2. Best practices
3. Institutional Distinctiveness
VII Institutional Values
and Best Practices

33. 
Key Indicators:
1. Curriculum enrichment as per PCI or AICTE
2. Internal assessment methods adopted
3. Quality Improvement Programme by Teachers
4. Membership in Professional bodies
5. Safety Norms adopted
6. New Physical facilities created,
equipment added.
7. Softwares available in the Institution
VIII Discipline Specific
(Pharmacy)

34. 
8. Availability and Usage of Medicinal Herbal Garden,
Drugs and Poison Information Centre
9. Maintenance and Utilisation of Equipment or
Instruments
10. Annual Internal Audit
11. Any Other Accreditations

35. 
Criteria Key Indicators Marks
1. Curricular
aspects
1.1. Curricular Planning and
Implementation.
15
1.2. Academic flexibility 20
1.3. Curriculum enrichment 25
1.4. Feedback system 20
Total 80
Weightage across Key Indicators

36. 
2.Teaching Learning
and Evaluation
2.1.Student
Enrolmemt and
Profile
20
2.2.Catering to
student diversity
25
2.3. Teaching
learning process
45
2.4. Teacher Profile
and quality
50
2.5. Evaluation
Process and Reforms
45
2.6. Student
Performance and
Learning Outcomes
45
2.7. Student
satisfaction Survey
Total
50
280

37. 
3.Research
Innovations and
extension
3.1. Resource
Mobilization for
Research
17
3.2.Innovation eco
system
10
3.3.Research
Publications and
awards
23
3.4. Extension
Activities
50
3.5. Collaborations 20
Total 120
Weightage across Key Indicators

38. 
4.Infrastructure and
Learning Resources
4.1. Physical
Facilities
25
4.2. Clinical,
Equipment and
Laboratory Learning
Resources
20
4.3. Library as a
learning resource
20
4.4.IT Infrastructure 15
4.5.Maintenance of
Campus
Infrastructure
20
Weightage across Key Indicators

39. 
5.Student Support
and Progression
5.1. Student
Support
45
5.2. Student
Progression
40
5.3. Student
Participation and
Activities
25
5.4.Alumni
Engagement
10
Total 120
Weightage across Key Indicators

40. 
6.Governance,
Leadership and
Management
6.1. Institutional
Vision and Leadership
10
6.2. Strategy
Development and
deployment
10
6.3. Faculty
Empowerment
Strategies
30
6.4. Financial
Management and
Resource Mobilization
20
6.5. Internal Quality
assurance System
30
Total 100
Weightage across Key Indicators

41. 
7. Institutional Values
and Best Practices
7.1. Institutional
values and social
Responsibilities
50
7.2. Best Practices 30
7.3. Institutional
Distinctiveness
20
Total 100
Weightage across Key Indicators

42. 
Part A Total 900
Part B Total 100
Part A+ Part B Total Score 1000
Range of Institutional
Cumulative Grade Point
Average (CGPA)
Letter Grade Status
3.51-4.00 A++ Accredited
3.26- 3.50 A+ Accredited
3.01 -3.25 A Accredited
2.76- 3.00 B++ Accredited
2.51- 2.75 B+ Accredited
2.01- 2.50 B Accredited
1.51- 2.00 C Accredited
≤ 1.50 D Not Accredited

43.  1. Vision and Mission statements of the university and of the college to be
displayed. 2. Creation of websites for all the colleges/departments.
 The websites may contain the following information:
 Goals and objectives
 Program options
 Eligibility criteria
 Admission policy and process
 Academic calendar
 Examination and other assessment schedules and procedures
 Infrastructure facilities available for teaching, learning, sports, residence,
research and recreation
 Scholarships given by the state and institution
 Fee structure
Guidelines for Institutional Preparation

44. 
 Alumni association, Data banks, Event registers,
Hand books
 Data banks to consist of all academic activities of
teachers
 Event registers to maintain all the activities of the
Departments/Colleges
 Hand books containing information about faculty,
courses, almanac, research and other facilities
available in the Departments/Colleges
Guidelines for Institutional
Preparation

45. 
 Provide internet facility to all departments in the colleges
and provide access to all students, teachers and research
students.
 Constitute a college level Research Advisory Committee
to encourage and guide teachers applying for research
projects and monitor research work done.
 Provide Assistance to teachers for filing patents
 Creation of student councils, appointment of teacher
counselors and a lady counselor for all
Departments/Colleges.
 Creation of placement and guidance cells in all
departments/colleges
Guidelines for Institutional
Preparation

46. 
 Organizing seminars in all colleges for students through
students councils to get feedback from the students
regarding the academic activities of the departments &
colleges and any other students problems
 Suggestions to be invited for enhancement of quality.
 Provision of basic facilities like telephone, safe drinking
water, toilet facilities in all departments/colleges.
 Introduction of teacher-ward system in the
departments/colleges.
 Undertaking of community activities –each college to
adopt 2 or 3 villages under NSS activity.
Guidelines for Institutional
Preparation

47. 
 Creation of academic audit units in all colleges.
 Collection and analysis of feedback from students
and employees.
 Arranging parent teacher meets.
 Undertaking programmes for soft skills and
personality development
Guidelines for Institutional
Preparation

48. 