1. ENQA membership – what repercussions for agencies
ENQA membership – what repercussions for agencies? Paris, 10 July Emmi Helle, Secretary General ENQA

2. Background information on ENQA
network in 2000; association in 2004
umbrella NGO for European QA agencies
37 Full members, 10 Candidate members
Associates and Affiliates since 2006: 19+2

3. European standards and guidelines (ESG)
drafted by ENQA in consultation with EUA, EURASHE and ESIB (now ESU)
approved by the Bologna ministerial conference in Bergen in 2005
introduced internationally accepted standards for quality assurance in higher education
introduced a peer review system for quality assurance agencies:
cyclical reviews of agencies, based on ESG, each five years for (reconfirmation of) full ENQA membership and/or for being (re)listed in EQAR

4. ENQA membership under the ”old” system
The transitional membership arrangements (resulting from the change from network to association in 2004) of the ENQA regulations stipulate that all ENQA member agencies must be externally reviewed by 19 September 2010.
Consequently, the Full Members under the “old” system can preserve their Full Membership until they will be reviewed; this means that there is a possibility that the Full Members under the old system that have not yet undergone a review would not fulfil the ESG / ENQA Membership provisions.

5. ENQA Membership under the ”new” system
Candidate Membership:
Earlier it was possible to apply only for Full Membership, and, if the ENQA Board found that the applicant did not meet the membership criteria sufficiently, but was able to do so in two years time, it granted the applicant a Candidate Membership, with a request of undergoing a review review at the end of that two-year period.
From 2008 it has been possible to apply for Candidate Membership directly (implying the same conditions and review schedule).

6. Cont’d: ENQA MS under the ”new” system
Full Membership
Can be granted only if the membership application is accompanied by a review report.
The agency should have been operating and conducting reviews for at least two years.

7. External reviews of ENQA members
In most cases the membership reviews are likely to be coordinated by national authorities but may also be co-ordinated by ENQA. They can, as well, be co-ordinated by another European QA agency/ organisation.
A-type reviews (ENQA membership/ EQAR listing), B-type reviews (multiple purposes, one of which ENQA MS/ EQAR listing).
Nationally coordinated reviews: 6 stages: 1.Notification to the ENQA Board, 2. Formulation of ToR and review protocol, 3. nomination of the panel, 4. SER by the agency under review, 5. Site-visit by the panel, 6. Final report, 7. Submission of the final report to the ENQA Review Committee, 8. ENQA Board decision.
Currently 15 agencies have (re)confirmed their membership in ENQA following a review and at least 10 ENQA members are undergoing a review at the moment.

8. ENQA MS: repercussions for agencies
Financial consequences:
Application fee 300 EUR
Membership fee EUR per annum
Review costs ca EUR (review panel of five persons) once every five years, valid both for the ENQA MS and EQAR listing
Recognition, credibility at the European level
Normally satisfactory evidence to be included in the EQAR-listing
Benefits of a membership organisation
Possibility to share with European colleagues experiences and concerns
Events, publications, information
Networking

9. ENQA membership and EQAR listing
ENQA is a founding member of the European Quality Assurance Register in Higher Education (EQAR) and represented at its Executive Board
The EQAR statutes state that “Full membership of ENQA (European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education) normally constitutes satisfactory evidence for inclusion in the Register.”
The Register Committee is an independent body consisting of experts functioning in their personal capacity.
There is a possibility that the RC would take different decisions from those of the ENQA Board.