The Evaluation Criteria

The good practices proposals are going to be evaluated by are Expert Committee, on the basis of the following criteria:

FOCUS OF THE PRACTICE:

This criterion evaluates the description of the initial situation, the context and objectives. Along with the justification of its needs, the level of integration within the context and the value added. As such, the following aspects are assessed:

1.1. Scope and areas of the University. The description the initial situation, the context, the reasons for the necessity of its adoption and the alignment with the strategies of the University.

1.2. Description of the objectives and added value or improvement to be obtained with the implementation of the practice:  Management improvement or the stakeholders needs.

1.3. Previous planning of the practice application method and the results to be obtained and the follow up method.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRACTICE

This criterion evaluates the description of activities, timing and resources used. It is assessed through the following aspects:

2.1. Structured description of the implementation of the practice: actions, timing, resources applied.

2.2. Degree of adjustment of the practice deployment with the objectives, areas and the planned approach. This aspect should be checked with paragraph 1 referred to the focus of the practice.

ACHIEVED RESULTS:

This criterion evaluates the description of the achieved results in relation to the planned objectives, also with the changes introduced during the practice implementation. Additionally it values ​​the contribution of qualitative and quantitative data that demonstrate the fulfillment of the objectives. This is assessed taking into account the following aspects:

3.1. Description of the qualitative and quantitative results, when appropriate, obtained after the deployment of the practice. It should address, when appropriate, the results in comparison with the initial situation that has justified the adoption of the practice.

3.2. Degree of relevance between the outcome measures described and the planned method of follow up. This aspect should be contrasted with section 1.3.

3.3. The results show the level of achievement of objectives and added value described in the focus of the practice.

3.4. There are sufficient data or fundamentals that give evidence of the practice sustainability.

ASSESSEMENT AND REVIEW:

This criterion values ​​the description of the evaluation process and review and proposals made ​​for improvement identified and introduced into the practice. And the degree of learning from the results obtained and not obtained. This is assessed taking into account the following aspects:

4.1. Description of the process of evaluation and review conducted after the implementation of practice.

4.2. After completing the evaluation process and review, the learning gained regarding the practice improvement should be described. The degree of implementation of the improvement actions taken or identified should also be explained.

INNOVATIVE CHARACTER AND REPLICABILITY

This criterion assesses the description of the aspects of internal innovation (at the institution) and innovation as respect to the context (at the university system) of the practice. As well as the elements and aspects that can be applied to a different context and possible recommendations that should be taken into account in a benchmarking opportunity. This is assessed taking into account the following aspects:

5.1. Description of the aspects of internal innovation (internal to the university implementing the practice).

5.2. Description of estimated innovation that provides the practice in the context of the university system.

5.3. Documentation provided for the replication of the practice and benchmarking activities in other institutions: External communications of the practice, methodologies and contextual elements for possible adaptation to other universities.

To each criterion is assigned a different valuation weight, which is used for final validation of the Good Practice, as follows:

FOCUS OF THE PRACTICE (15%)

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRACTICE (20%)

ACHIEVED RESULTS (25%)

ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW (20%)

INNOVATIVE CHARACTER AND REPLICABILITY (20%)