Part 1 FUNDAMENTAL PROVISIONS

Article 1 Introductory Provisions

1. In accordance with its aim¹, Charles University (hereinafter referred to as the“University”) strives continually to increase the quality of scientific and research activities, developmental and innovative activities, and artistic and other creative activities (hereinafter referred to as the “creative activities”).

2. In order to support the development of a wide range of fields at the Faculties and higher education institutes (hereinafter referred to as the “units”), to help them meet the level of international standards according the the Strategic Plan of Charles University for 2021-2025,² and to strengthen the position of the University as an important European research institution, the University has introduced the evaluation of creative activities (hereinafter referred to as the “evaluation”) in accordance with Article 7 of the Rules for the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance of Charles University (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”).

3. The evaluation also concerns an assessment of the progress in fulfilling the purposes of the Cooperatio Programme for the support of science and research (hereinafter referred to as the “Cooperatio Programme”) as set out in Article 6 of Rector’s Directive No. 22/2023, Principles of the Cooperatio Programme.³

Article 2 Basic Principles and Definition of the Evaluation

1. The aim of the evaluation is to obtain correct and verifiable information through international comparison with regard to the quality of the creative activities at the University and to form, on the basis of such information, recommendations for the future development of these activities.

2. The evaluation is carried out for a period which is defined by entire calendar years, specifically for the period from 2019 to 2023.

3. The evaluation is carried out in accordance with international activities relating to the responsible evaluation of creative activities (internationally it is known as responsible research assessment as described in Agreement on Reforming Research⁴, to which the University is a signatory and the fulfilment of which is the aim of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA), of which the University is a member. It is, therefore, based primarily on qualitative assessment and recognizes the diversity of research activities. It is independent and transparent.

4. The unit of evaluation is research areas, according to the structure of the University Cooperation Programme (hereinafter referred to as the “research areas.⁵

5. The course of the evaluation is governed by the schedule which forms Appendix No. 1 to this Directive.

Part 2 ORGANIZATION OF THE EVALUATION

Article 3 Creative Activities Evaluation Board

1. The Creative Activities Evaluation Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) is the supreme body governing the evaluation procedure.

2. The responsibilities of the Board are, in particular,:

   a.	to supervise the course of the evaluation from the point of view of compliance with its principles, rules, and organization;
   b.	to notify, if necessary, the panelists of any deficiencies, in particular of any factually incorrect information, internal contradictions, or differences in requirements made in evaluating the level of individual research areas;
   c.	to decide on contentious issues;
   d.	to participate in On-Site Visits according to the conditions set out in Article 10 of this Directive;
   e.	to carry out the calibration of evaluations proposed by the Panels, to prepare a Summary Evaluation Report on a given research field, and to award the final grade on the basis of the grading scale provided in Appendix No. 2 to this Directive; and
   f.	to prepare the Summary Final Report and submit it to the Rector of the University according to Article 13 of this Directive.

3. The following provisions apply to the establishment of the Board:

   a.	Its composition guarantees professional competence for evaluating research areas;
   b.	Its members are eminent scientists working abroad; and
   c.	The members are not in a conflict of interest with regard to the evaluated research areas and units (see Appendix No. 3 to this Directive).

4. The members of the Board are appointed and removed by the Rector of the University after a prior discussion in the Research Board of the University.

5. The meetings of the Board are governed by the code of procedure which is approved by the Board.

6. The first meeting of the Board is convened by the Rector of the University.

7. A meeting of the Board may be attended by a member of the Internal Evaluation Board of the University who will be in the role of an observer.

Article 4 Expert Panels

1. The main executive component of the evaluation procedure are Expert Panels (hereinafter referred to as the “Panel”). The following Panels are established on the basis of the structure of the research areas:

   a.	Humanities;
   b.	Social Sciences;
   c.	Medicine; and
   d.	Natural Sciences.

2. The following provisions apply to the establishment of a Panel:

   a.	The number of its members is derived from the number of research areas which fall within its competence;
   b.	Its members are eminent scientists working abroad; and
   c.	Its members are not in a conflict of interest with regard to the evaluated research areas and units (see Appendix No. 3 to this Directive).

3. The chairpersons and deputy chairpersons of the Panels are appointed and removed by the Rector of the University from among the members of the Board.

4. Other members of the Panels are appointed and removed by the Rector of the University.

5. The Internal Evaluation Board of the University nominates one member for every Panel who may participate in the meetings of the Panel in the role of an observer.

6. The division of the research areas between the Panels corresponds to the internal classification of the University⁶ .

7. The Panels carry out the evaluation of the level of the research areas on the basis of the individual evaluation tools, in particular the Self-Evaluation Reports of the Research Areas⁷ (hereinafter referred to as the “Self-Evaluation Reports”).

8. The evaluation of the level of the research areas by the individual Panels results in the preparation of written assessments and a proposal for the overall grade for the given research area according to Article 11 of this Directive. These outputs are submitted to the Board and the Board of the Research Area.

Article 5 Research Area Boards

1. The Research Area Board (hereinafter referred to as the “RA Board”)⁸ is responsible for the preparation of the Self-Evaluation Report according to the form specified in Appendix No. 4 to this Directive.

2. The coordinator of the RA Board⁹ ensures the cooperation of its members from all units involved in a given research area.

3. The members of the RA Board communicate with the management of the individual units while working on the Self-Evaluation Report.

4. The RA Board submits the Self-Evaluation Report for consideration to the research boards of the relevant participating units or possibly to analogous bodies of these units and incorporates their comments. Once the text of the Self-Evaluation Report has been discussed, the RA Board presents the Self-Evaluation Report for opinion and final approval to the Dean/director of the relevant unit.

5. The RA Board answers additional questions of the Panels regarding the Self-Evaluation Report.

6. The RA Board participates in On-Site Visits with the members of the Board.

Article 6 Units

1. The units provide the cooperation necessary to ensure the course of the evaluation according to the requirements set out in this Directive; in particular:

   a.	They participate in ensuring that the information on the basis of which the evaluation is carried out is correct and complete;
   b.	They cooperate with the RA Board in preparing the Self-Evaluation Report; and
   c.	Their representatives participate in On-Site Visits with the members of the Board.

2. The units may submit motions to the Board regarding any non-compliance with the evaluation rules or their violation.

Article 7 Administrative and Technical Support

1. Administrative and technical support for the evaluation on the University level is provided by:

   a.	The Research Support Office of the Rectorate of the University (hereinafter referred to as the “RSO”);
   b.	Analyses and Strategies Department of the Rectorate of the University (hereinafter referred to as the “ASD”)
   c.	Computer Science Centre of the University (hereinafter referred to as the “CSC”).

2. The RSO is responsible for:

   a.	Providing guidance for the participants in the evaluation who include the Board members, the Panel members, the RA Board members, and the representatives of the evaluated units;
   b.	Providing facilities for the activities of the Board and the Panels;
   c.	Preparing a document containing summary information and basic data on the University according to Article 8 of this Directive;
   d.	Providing support during the organization of On-Site Visits according to Article 10 of this Directive; and
   e.	Preparing contracts for cooperation with the members of the Board and the Panels.

3. The ASD is responsible for:

   a.	Processing of bibliometric data given in a Self-Evaluation Report (see Appendix No. 5 to this Directive); and
   b.	Processing of data for the calculation of the weights used for the purpose of converting the grades of the research areas to the units involved according to Appendix No. 6 to this Directive.

4. The CSC is responsible for:

   a.	Preparation of data for the creative activities indicators listed in the Self-Evaluation Report (see Appendix No. 5 to this Directive),
   b.	Preparation of data for the calculation of the weights used for the purpose of converting the grades of the research areas to the units involved according to Appendix No. 6 to this Directive; and
   c.	Providing technical support for the units in recording data in the “Věda” information system database which are used in the course of the evaluation.

PART III EVALUATION TOOLS

Article 8 Summary Information and Basic Data of the University

1. Summary information and basic data of the University are presented to the evaluators in the form of a document which contains the following information and overviews:

   a.	Basic information about the University;
   b.	Organizational structure of the University; and
   c.	Summary overviews: of the persons participating in creative activities; of the outputs of creative activities; of the basic financial indicators; and of the doctoral programmes of study and numbers of students and graduates of these programmes.

2. This document is prepared on the level of the Rectorate of the University and presented to the Panels and the Board.

Article 9 Self-Evaluation Report of a Research Area

1. The Self-Evaluation Report of the Research Area (hereinafter referred to as the “Self-Evaluation Report” or “Report”) is prepared by the RA Board according to the template which forms Appendix No. 4 to this Directive and with regard to the division of the research areas into the relevant categories according to Appendix No. 7 to this Directive.

2. The Report is prepared in the English language.

3. The Report describes and provides a commentary on:

   a.	The basic data of the given research area, i.e., its structure, cooperation within the University, publication structure, objectives in the field of creative activities, etc.;
   b.	The staffing situation in the research area, with an emphasis on junior researchers and the listing of key persons;
   c.	The outputs of the creative activities, including the listing of specific outputs and comments on them;
   d.	The financial means provided for the research area, including the listing of the most important investigated grants and projects;
   e.	The applied research and societal impact of creative activities in the given research area, including the listing of the most important results, their impact, and application;
   f.	The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks in the given research area; and
   g.	The aim of further development of creative activities in the research area.

4. The Report includes key data indicators on which the RA Board provides a commentary. These indicators are prepared according to the methodology set out in Appendix No. 5 to this Directive.

5. The Report is discussed by the research boards of the relevant units and approved by the deans/directors of all units involved in the given research area before it is submitted to the RSO which provides it to the Panels.

Article 10 On-Site Visit

1. The Board organizes an On-Site Visit in order to complete the source documents necessary for a proper evaluation of the level of the research area.

2. An On-Site Visit is attended by the members of the Board sitting on the relevant Panel, the members of the RA Board, and the representatives of each unit involved in the evaluated research area, as well as by the observer sitting on the relevant Panel who is nominated by the Internal Evaluation Board of the University according to Article 4 (5) of this Directive.

3. All information relating to an On-Site Visit, including the details and subject matter of the meeting, is provided to the RA Boards and units by the Board sufficiently in advance, usually one month before the On-Site Visit is to take place.

Part IV EVALUATION OUTPUTS

Article 11 Written Assessments of the Research Areas

1. At least two written assessments are prepared for each research area, giving component grades for the individual parts of the Self-Evaluation Report and summary grades, as well as at least two additional evaluations in the form of component and summary grades without written assessments.

2. The assessments are prepared by the assigned members of the Panel on the basis of their review of the Self-Evaluation Report.

3. The assessments and grades are discussed by the Panel and an overall grade for the given research area is proposed on the basis thereof. The overall grade is based on the arithmetic mean of all the summary grades proposed by the main and secondary panelists, excluding the single worst grade proposed and allowing a possible adjustment by one intermediate grade based on the Panel’s decision and justification (the grading scale and the grading range are described in Appendix No. 2 to this Directive).

4. The assessments are prepared in the English language.

5. The assessments and grades are submitted to the Board and the RA Board prior to the On-Site Visit.

6. Grades are awarded according to the grading scale which forms Appendix No. 2 to this Directive.

Article 12 Summary Evaluation Report on a Research Area

1. The Board will prepare a Summary Evaluation Report on each research area evaluated.

2. The Summary Evaluation Report on each individual research area is based on the written assessments of the panelists and on the discussion held during the On-Site Visit.

3. The Summary Evaluation Report on a given research area includes the final grade for the research area which, based on a justification, may be adjusted by the Board by one intermediate grade from the overall grade proposed by the Panel.

4. The Summary Evaluation Reports on the individual research areas form an appendix to the Summary Final Report for the University as required by Article 13 of this Directive.

Article 13 Summary Final Report on the Evaluation of Creative Activities at the University

1. The Board will prepare a Summary Final Report on the Evaluation of Creative Activities at the University which will summarize the evaluation process and its main outputs.

2. The Summary Final Report on the Evaluation of Creative Activities at the University also includes recommendations for further development of creative activities at the University.

3. The Summary Final Report on the Evaluation of Creative Activities at the University is submitted by the Board to the Rector of the University, upon whose proposal it is further discussed by the International Board of the University, the Research Board of the University, and the Internal Evaluation Board of the University.

4. The Summary Final Report on the Evaluation of Creative Activities at the University is made available to the members of the academic community after it has been discussed by the University bodies according to paragraph 3, and its main conclusions are published in the publicly accessible part of the University website.

5. The evaluation results presented in the Summary Final Report on the Evaluation of Creative Activities at the University are used as sources for:

   a.	The preparation of strategic documents;
   b.	The development of fields and research areas;
   c.	The internal governance of the University and its units;
   d.	The preparation of programmes for the support of science in accordance with Article 7 (1) to (5) of the Rules
   e.	Decision-making on the funding of creative activities from the resources of institutional support;,10
   f.	Support for excellence; and,
   g.	The development of the University’s educational activities.

Part V FINAL PROVISIONS