General Manual for

Accreditation 2019

National Board of Accreditation (NBA)

New Delhi, July 2019

1
 National Board of Accreditation

Vision

To be an accrediting agency of international standard by ensuring the highest degree of

credibility in assurance of quality and relevance to professional education and come up
to the expectations of its stakeholder’s viz., academicians, corporates, educational
institutions, government, industry, regulators, students and their parents.

Mission

To stimulate the quality of teaching, self-evaluation and accountability in the higher

education system, which help institutions realize their academic objectives and adopt
teaching practices that enable them to produce high-quality professionals and to assess
and accredit the programs offered by the institutions imparting technical and professional
education.

2
 Index
Sl. No. Content Page
No.
Mission and Vision
1. Introduction
1.1 Preamble
1.2 About NBA
1.3 Objectives of NBA
1.4 Authorities & Committees of NBA
1.5 Washington Accord
1.6 Accreditation
1.7 Outcome Based Education and Accreditation
1.8 Purpose of accreditation
1.9 Benefits of Accreditation
1.10 The Impact of Accreditation
1.11 Imperatives of Accreditation
2. Accreditation Process
2.1 Scope
2.2 Classification of Institutions
2.3 General Policy on Accreditation
2.4 Accreditation Criteria
2.5 Self-Assessment Process and Report
2.6 Stages of Accreditation Process
2.7 Continuation of Accreditation
2.8 Accreditation Fee
2.9 Reconsideration of Programs
3. Evaluation Process
3.1 Composition of the Evaluation Team
3.2 Base Qualifiers for Evaluation Team
3.3 General Policies for formation of the Evaluation Team
3.4 Evaluation Documents
3.5 Pre-Visit activities
3.6 Award of Accreditation
3.7 Appeal
4. Code of Conduct
4.1 NBA Guidelines for Code of Conduct
4.2 Conflict of Interest
4.3 Conflict of Interest Policy
4.4 NBA Policy on Misconduct shown or/and done by an Institution
5. Feedback
ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE I: Fee Structure
ANNEXURE II: Refund Policy

3
 List of Abbreviations

AC Appellate Committee

AAC Academic Advisory Committee

AICTE All India Council for Technical Education

CO Course Outcomes

EAC Evaluation and Accreditation Committee

EC Executive Committee of NBA

GC General Council

MHRD Ministry of Human Resource Development

MoA Memorandum of Association

NBA National Board of Accreditation

PEO Program Educational Objectives

PG Postgraduate

PO Program Outcomes

PSO Program Specific Outcomes

SAR Self - Assessment Report

SCAAC Sub-Committee of Academic Advisory Committee

UG Undergraduate

WA Washington Accord

4
 Part I

Introduction
1.1. Preamble

India has a large, complex and multi layered system of technical and higher education. It has the third
largest higher education system in the world, behind China and the United States comprising of 903
universities, 39,050 affiliated colleges, 10,011 standalone institutions, 12,84,755 teaching faculty
and 3,41,86,925 students including 40,91,720 post-graduate and 2,07,009 research scholars. The total
enrolment has increased from a meagre 2 lakhs in 1947 to 341 lakhs in 2017-18. Colleges, affiliated to
285 affiliating universities, constitute the bulk of the higher education system in India contributing
around 73.93% of the total enrolment. There are various types of institutions in India such as Central
Government funded, State Government funded, Privately funded, Deemed to be Universities and
Institutions of National Importance.

1.2. About NBA

The National Board of Accreditation (NBA) was set-up in September 1994 by the AICTE to assess the
qualitative competence of the programs offered by technical educational institutions from diploma
level to post-graduate level in engineering and technology, management, pharmacy, architecture and
related disciplines, which are approved by AICTE and the regulatory bodies.

NBA came into existence as an independent autonomous body with effect from 7 th January 2010 with
the objectives of assurance of quality and relevance to technical education, especially of the programs
in technical disciplines, i.e., Engineering and Technology, Management, Architecture, Pharmacy and
Hospitality etc., through the mechanism of accreditation of programs offered by technical institutions.
The Memorandum of Association and Rules of NBA were amended in April 2013, to make it
completely independent of AICTE, administratively as well as financially. NBA conducts evaluation
of programs of technical institutions based on evaluation criteria and parameters laid down by its
Committees and Council. This may include, but not limited to institutional vision, mission and
objectives, organization and governance, infrastructure facilities, quality of teaching and learning,
curriculum design and review, support services (library, laboratory, instrumentation, computer
facilities, etc.) and any other aspect as decided by the Competent Authority of NBA, which will help
the graduates produced by the institutions as per industry requirements.

1.3. Objectives of NBA

Major objectives of the NBA are as follows:

 To assess and accredit the technical education programs like engineering, management,
pharmacy, Hotel Management, etc. ;

 To evolve standards and parameters for assessment and accreditation in line with the
parameters laid down by the appropriate statutory regulatory authority for co-ordination,
determination and regulation of standards in the concerned field of technical education;

5
  To promote excellence through a benchmarking process, which is helpful in determining
whether or not an institution is able to achieve its mission and broad based goals, and in
interpreting the results of the outcomes assessment process;

 To promote quality conscious system of technical education where excellence, relevance to

market needs and participation by all stakeholders are prime and major determinants.

 To build a technical education system as facilitator of human resources, that will match the
national goals of growth by competence, contribution to economy through competitiveness and
compatibility with societal development;

 To set the quality benchmarks targeted at global and national stockpile of human capital in all
fields of technical education;

 To conduct evaluation of self-assessment of technical institutions and/or programs offered by

them on the basis of guidelines, norms and standards specified by it; and

 To contribute to the domain of knowledge in quality parameters, assessment and evaluation.

1.4. Authorities & Committees of NBA

NBA is empowered by its Memorandum of Association (MoA). The governance of NBA is effected
through the following three statutory committees enshrined in its MoA:

(i) The General Council (GC)

(ii) The Executive Committee (EC)
(iii) The Academic Advisory Committee (AAC)

All these committees are chaired by the Chairman NBA.

Member Secretary is the Member Secretary of these committees. Member Secretary is the Executive
Authority of NBA.

1.4.1. The General Council

The General Council is the principal authority of the NBA and is responsible for its overall activities
and affairs. It gives policy directions/ guidelines to the Executive Committee, which takes steps for
managing the activities and affairs of the NBA accordingly.

The constitution of General Council is given in Memorandum of Association (MoA) available on the
NBA Web site at http://www.nbaind.org/files/moa-rules-of-society.pdf.

1.4.2. The Executive Committee

The affairs of the NBA are managed, administered, directed and controlled as per Rules and Bye-laws
approved by the Executive Committee (EC) and ratified by the General Council (GC).

The constitution of Executive Committee is given in Memorandum of Association (MoA) available on

the NBA Web site at http://www.nbaind.org/files/moa-rules-of-society.pdf

6
1.4.3. The Academic Advisory Committee (AAC)

The Academic Advisory Committee of NBA monitors and promotes the activities of NBA with
reference to its various functions like assessment, accreditation, publications, selection and shaping of
instruments for Assessment and Accreditation, modalities of operations, the Rules, Regulations and
Guidelines.

The Chairperson of the Executive Committee is also the Chairperson of the Academic Advisory
Committee. The Member Secretary of the NBA is ex-officio member of the Academic Advisory
Committee.

The constitution of the Academic Advisory Committee (AAC) is given in Memorandum of Association
(MoA) available on the NBA Web site at http://www.nbaind.org/files/moa-rules-of-society.pdf

1.4.4. Sub-Committees of AAC

Sub-Committees on each discipline, i.e., Engineering & Technology, Management, Pharmacy,

Architecture etc. function separately to evolve standard for assessment and accreditation, in their
respective field, to form assessors panels, to lay down guidelines for assessors, to evaluate and approve
the recommendations of the Evaluation and Accreditation Committee (EAC).

The Sub Committees perform such other functions and duties as may be assigned to them by the
General Council and/or Executive Committee.

1.4.5. Evaluation and Accreditation Committee (EAC)

The EAC is constituted for each discipline, i.e., Engineering & Technology, Management, Pharmacy,
Architecture, etc. to review the reports of the evaluation team and submit its recommendations on
accreditation to the concerned Sub Committee of AAC.

1.4.6. Appellate Committee (AC)

The Appellate Committee considers the appeal applications made by the institutions against the
decision on accreditation of a program by NBA and gives its recommendations to the Academic
Advisory Committee (AAC) for the consideration and disposal of the appeals received.

1.5. Washington Accord

The Washington Accord is an international and multi-lateral agreement among bodies responsible for
accrediting undergraduate engineering degree programs, originally signed among six countries in
1989. It recognizes the substantial equivalency of programs accredited by bodies that are its signatory
and recommends that graduates of programs accredited by any of the signatory bodies be recognized
mutually as having met the academic requirements for entry to the practice of engineering in the area
of their jurisdiction. The NBA became a provisional member of the Washington Accord (WA) in 2007
and was given the status of permanent signatory on 13th June 2014. Signatory status is subject to the
condition that only programs with Tier I institutions accredited by NBA are eligible for mutual
recognition under the Washington Accord.

7
1.6. Accreditation

Accreditation is formal recognition of the quality of an educational program by an external -

independent agency by impartial assessment on the basis of well-defined criteria of assessment. It is a
process of quality assurance and improvement, whereby a program in an approved Institution is
critically appraised to verify that the program continues to meet and/or exceed standards prescribed
by the accrediting body from time-to-time.

Accreditation provides quality assurance that the academic aims and objectives of the Institution are
honestly pursued and effectively achieved by the resources currently available, and that the Institution
has demonstrated capabilities of ensuring effectiveness of the educational program(s), over the validity
period of accreditation.

Accreditation may be summarized as a process, based on professional judgment, for evaluating

whether or not an educational Institution or program meets specified standards of educational quality.
Its primary purpose is to assure prospective students and other stakeholders that graduates of an
Institution conducting various accredited programs, have achieved a minimum level of competence in
their chosen fields of study.

1.7. Outcome-based Education and Accreditation

Outcome-based education is targeted at achieving desirable outcomes (in terms of knowledge, skills,
attitudes and behaviour) at the end of a program. Teaching with this awareness and making the
associated effort constitutes outcome-based education. This entails a regular methodology for
ascertaining the attainment of outcomes, and benchmarking these against the program outcomes
consistent with the objectives of the program.

Initially, NBA accreditation used to be based on ‘input – process – output’ model with major emphasis
on availability of resources / facilities and the outputs thereof. In the year 2009, NBA aligned its
methodology with international benchmarks and started accreditation on the basis of outcomes. It
believes that educational quality must be measured by outcomes rather than inputs, because inputs do
not necessarily correlate with quality outcomes. Outcomes are dependent not only on inputs but also
on the processes followed by an institution to convert inputs into defined outcomes.

1.8. Purpose of Accreditation

The purpose of the accreditation by NBA is to promote and recognize excellence in technical education
in colleges and universities—at both the undergraduate and postgraduate levels—through
accreditation. Institutions, students, employers, and the public at large all benefit from the external
verification of quality provided through the NBA accreditation process. They also benefit from the
process of continuous quality improvement that is encouraged by the NBA’s developmental approach
in promoting excellence in technical education.

Through accreditation, the following main purposes are served:

 support and advise technical Institutions in the maintenance and enhancement of their quality;

 confidence and assurance on quality to various stakeholders including students;

8
  assurance of the good standing of an Institution to government departments and other
interested bodies; and

 enabling an Institution to state publicly that it has voluntarily accepted assessment of its Systems
and Processes by NBA and has satisfied all the requirements for operation and maintenance of
quality in education.

1.9. Benefits of Accreditation

The process of accreditation helps in realizing a number of benefits, such as:

 Helps the Institution to know its strengths, weaknesses and opportunities;

 Initiates Institutions into innovative and modern methods of paedagogy;

 Gives Institutions a new sense of direction and identity;

 Provides society with reliable information on quality of education offered;

 Students studying in NBA accredited programs can be assured that they will receive education
which is of high academic quality and professional relevance and that the needs of the corporate
world are well integrated into programs, activities and processes;

 Accreditation assures prospective employers that students come from a program where the
content and quality have been evaluated, satisfying established standards. It also signifies that
the students passing out have acquired competence based on well-established technical inputs;
and

 Accreditation helps in gaining confidence of stakeholders and in giving a strong message that
as a country, our technical manpower is of international standards and can be very useful in
enhancing the global mobility of our technical manpower.

1.10. The Impact of Accreditation

The impact of accreditation goes far beyond quality assurance of an Institution/ program. Major
impacts of accreditation system are summarized below:

 Encourages quality improvement initiatives by Institutions;

 Improves student enrolment both in terms of quality and quantity;

 Helps the Institution in securing necessary funds;

 Enhances employability of graduates;

 Facilitates transnational recognition of degrees and mobility of graduates and professionals;

 Motivates faculty to participate actively in academic and related institutional / departmental

activities;

9
  Helps create sound and challenging academic environment in the Institution; and

 Contributes to social and economic development of the country by producing high quality
technical manpower.

1.11. Imperatives of Accreditation

Accreditation of educational Institutions/programs is a global practice and its need has been felt by
various developing and developed countries for one or more of the following purposes.

 Funding decisions;

 State recognition of qualification/ certification of professionals;

 Accountability of Institutions to stakeholders;

 Encouraging self-improvement initiatives by Institutions; and

 Quality assurance of educational programs.

10
 PART II

Accreditation Process
2.1. Scope

NBA accords accreditation of programs in the following professional disciplines:

Sl. No. Programs Level (Diploma/UG/PG)

1 Engineering & Technology Diploma (of 3 Years duration), UG, PG
2 Management PG
3 Pharmacy Diploma, UG, PG
4 Architecture, Applied Arts and Crafts UG, PG
5 Computer Applications PG
6 Hotel Mangement and Catering Technology UG

2.2. Classification of Institutions

Presently, NBA operates on a two-Tier system for undergraduate engineering programs only. For all
other Programs, the operation is uniform for all Institutions. The classification in respect of
Undergraduate Engineering programs has been retained since Washington Accord (WA) recognizes
the substantial equivalency of UG Engineering qualifications accorded by different member countries.
Only the Undergraduate Engineering programs offered by Tier-I institutions which are accredited by
NBA fall under the ambit of WA.

2.2.1- TIER-I

The categories of institutions that qualify for Tier I accreditation for undergraduate
engineering/technology programs through NBA are given below:

 Institutions of National importance (Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), Indian Institute of

Science (IISc), and Indian Institutes of Information Technology (IIITs) etc.

 National Institutes of Technology (NITs).

 Central Universities (Universities established by or under Act enacted by Parliament of India).

 State Universities (Universities established by or under legislation enacted by the legislature of the
concerned States).

 Private Universities (Universities established by or under legislation enacted by the State legislature
but promoted by private trusts, societies, companies under Section 25 of Indian Companies Act).

 Deemed-to-be-Universities (Institutions declared as Deemed-to-be-Universities by MHRD).

 Institutions declared as Autonomous by a competent empowered authority.

These institutions have freedom to design, develop and update curricula and also have complete
academic autonomy.
11
2.2.2- TIER-II

The Tier-II accreditation for undergraduate engineering/technology programs is applicable to non-

autonomous institutions affiliated to a university. These institutions depend on university for any
change in curriculum, its implementation and to examine the enrolled students for award of degree.
The categories of institutions that qualify for Tier II accreditation for undergraduate
engineering/technology programs through NBA are given below:

 Non-Autonomous Technical Institutions affiliated to a University which may include:

 Government Colleges
 Government Aided Colleges
 Private/Self Financing Colleges

Programs of Tier-I and Tier-II institutions are assessed with the similar set of criteria albeit with the
variation of weightages in some criteria.

2.3. General Policy on Accreditation

The following general policies are the guiding principles for accreditation of programs offered by
various technical institutions:

i) NBA accredits Programs of technical institutions (as per its scope mentioned in 2.1) and not the
Institutions as a whole which is in conformance with internationally accepted practice.

ii) Institutions are required to apply for accreditation through eNBA portal as per norms prescribed
by NBA from time-to-time.

iii) Programs to be accredited should be offered by an educational Institution, which has been
formally approved by the AICTE or the concerned regulatory authority.
iv) Except Management programs, all other programs from which at least two batches of students
have graduated are considered for accreditation. The program should continuously be running
without break with approval of the concerned regulatory authority during the whole duration
of last two batches (for example: 5 years for UG engineering, 3 years for PG engineering, etc.).
For Management programs, at least three batches of students have graduated are considered for
accreditation.
v) Engineering programs in respect of affiliated institutions (Tier-II) shall have the affiliation from
the concerned affiliating university without any break in the admissions during the whole
duration of last two batches (for example: 5 years for UG engineering, 3 years for PG engineering
etc.).
vi) The Institution is required to pay accreditation fee as prescribed by NBA from time-to-time. The
accreditation fee is payable in two phases – 10 per cent first phase fee at the time of submission
of Pre-Qualifiers (explained later) and balance 90 per cent second phase fee at the time of
submission of SAR once the Pre-Qualifiers are approved.

vii) The Institution must submit Self-Assessment Report (SAR) online through e-NBA portal in the
prescribed format in respect of each program proposed for accreditation.

12
 viii) The title of a program to be accredited must be the same as shown on the graduating student’s
degree and the approval letters of the concerned regulatory authority, if required. Part-time
programs are not considered for accreditation.

ix) The institution is required to pay accreditation fee as prescribed by NBA from time-to-time. The
application fee is payable in two phases – 10 per cent at the time of submission of Pre-Qualifiers
and balance 90 per cent fee at the time of submission of SAR once the Pre-Qualifiers are
approved.

x) The institution must submit Self-Assessment Report (SAR) online through e-NBA portal in the
prescribed format in respect of each program proposed for accreditation.

xi) Programs are evaluated in accordance with the accreditation criteria as specified by NBA from
time-to-time.

xii) Institutions are required to represent the accreditation status of each program accurately and
without ambiguity. If accreditation is withdrawn or discontinued or expires, the institution
should no longer refer to the program as accredited.
xiii) A two/three day’s onsite visit is a part of the accreditation process. A Visiting Team appointed
by the NBA carries out the evaluation of the program. The institution is required to propose
such sets of dates for the visit when the regular classes and all academic activities of the program
applied for, are going on.
xiv) Institutions have the option of withdrawing a program during the exit meeting of the visit. The
institution shall handover a written request to the Team chair during the exit meeting. No
communication regarding withdrawal will be accepted after the visiting team has left the
institution. No fee would be refunded in such cases.

xv) The final decision made by the NBA is communicated to the educational institution, together
with comments detailing strengths, weaknesses and scope for improvement.

xvi) A copy of the report of the visiting team is sent to the institution along with the accreditation status in
order to maintain the transparency. In the event of change of the decision from the visiting team to the
decision making team, the reasons for changes are also conveyed along with the visiting team report.

xvii) If an institution is not satisfied with the decision of NBA regarding accreditation status, it may
appeal against the decision to the Appellate Committee (AC) of NBA within 30 days of receipt
of the communication.
xviii) Commencement of Accreditation Period:

 In case visit of the Expert (Visiting) Team to an Institution is conducted between 1 st July - 31st
December, the Period of accreditation would commence from the on-going academic year
(i.e. with effect from 1st July of the on-going academic year).
 In case visit is conducted between 1st January to 30th June, the accreditation period would be
from the next academic year (i.e. with effect from 1st July of the next academic year).
 Same rules apply for deciding the validity period of accreditation periods of programs in
appeal cases also.

xix) If a program is ‘not accredited’ or withdrawn during the visit, a fresh application for
accreditation of the same program can be considered one year after the date of previous visit of
the Visiting Team.
13
xx) If an institution requests postponement of the visit of the expert (visiting) team after the team
has already been constituted for the purpose, an additional fee of 25% shall be required to be
paid before the visit is rescheduled. If the institution causes cancellation of the visit after the
team has already been constituted for the purpose, there would be a cancellation fee of 25%
deducted from the fees paid by the institution. In case, an institution requests for withdrawal of
the program(s) applied by it after the application has been approved by the NBA for further
processing and the fee has been paid by the institution, 10% of the accreditation fee per program
may be deducted while refunding the fee as per the request of the institution.
xxi) For consideration of accreditation of a Postgraduate Engineering program, it is mandatory that
the corresponding Undergraduate engineering program should have valid accreditation on the
date of application. However, this does not apply in cases for special PG engineering programs
that may not have a corresponding UG engineering program running in the Institution. The
special PG engineering programs will be considered on case–to-case basis.

2.4. Accreditation Criteria

The SAR contains the accreditation criteria on the basis of which the institution has to assess itself and
provide details as required. There are broadly ten accreditation criteria which may vary from program
to program in different disciplines. These accreditation criteria have been split into two:

 Program Level Criteria

 Institution Level Criteria

The criteria for each discipline are defined in the respective discipline-specific manuals

2.5. Self-Assessment Process and Report

Self-assessment is a method that facilitates an institution to assess the overall effectiveness of its own
processes. Institution should be careful in compiling data, gathering information and their
interpretation.

Self-Assessment Report (SAR)

Institutions seeking accreditation need to submit a Self-Assessment Report (SAR) in the prescribed
format to NBA. Self-Assessment Report (SAR) should be based on self-introspection and facts. It should
not be narrative and promotional in nature. The Self-Assessment Report

 helps Institution in identifying gaps and preparing an appropriate action plan to address the
weaknesses of the programs to be accredited,

 provides preparedness to Institution for the NBA visit for the programs,

 provides brief status of the program to the visiting team explaining the processes and the extent
to which a program meets each criterion,

 provides the first impression about the Institution/Program to the visiting team, and

 provides documented evidences which the evaluation team maps/matches and verifies with
the visual/oral evidences during the visit.

14
Subsequently, institutions have to prepare themselves for an on-site visit to be conducted by an
evaluation team constituted by NBA in order to validate the SAR submitted by the institution and
assess the strengths and weaknesses of the program.

Definitions of various terms used as accreditation criteria by the NBA are given below:

(a) Mission and Vision Statement – Mission statements are essentially the means to achieve the
vision of the institution. For example, if the vision is to create high-quality engineering
professionals, then the mission could be to offer a well-balanced program of instruction,
practical experience, and opportunities for overall personality development. Vision is a
futuristic statement that the institution would like to achieve over a long period of time, and
Mission is the means by which it proposes to move toward the stated Vision.

(b) Program Educational Objectives (PEOs) – Program education objectives are broad statements
that describe the career and professional accomplishments that the program is preparing
graduates to achieve.

(c) Program Outcomes (POs) – Program Outcomes are statements that describe what students are
expected to know and be able to do upon graduating from the Program. These relate to the skills,
knowledge, attitude and behaviour that students acquire through the program. NBA has
defined the Program Outcomes for each discipline.

(d) Course Outcomes (COs) – Course Outcomes are narrower statements that describe what
students are expected to know, and are able to do at the end of each course. These relate to the
skills, knowledge and behaviour that students acquire in their progress through the course.

(e) Assessment – Assessment is one or more processes, carried out by the institution, that identify,
collect, and prepare data to evaluate the achievement of program educational objectives and
program outcomes.

(f) Evaluation – Evaluation is one or more processes, done by the evaluation team, for interpreting
the data and evidence accumulated through assessment practices. Evaluation determines the
extent to which program education objectives or program outcomes are being achieved, and
results in decisions and actions to improve the program.

(g) Mapping – Mapping is the process of representing, preferably in matrix form, the correlation
among the parameters. It may be done for one to many, many to one, and many to many
parameters.

(h) Rubrics: Rubrics provide a powerful tool for assessment and grading of student work. They can
also serve as a transparent and inspiring guide to learning. Rubrics are scoring, or grading tool
used to measure a students’ performance and learning across a set of criteria and objectives.
Rubrics communicate to students (and to other markers) your expectations in the assessment,
and what you consider important.

Note: Self-Assessment Report format for each discipline are available on NBA’s Website at
(http://nbaind.org/En/1064-current-accreditation-documents.aspx)

15
ACCREDITATION PROCESS FLOW CHART

16
Initial Stage: Registration

Visit e-NBA Web Site

(http://enba.nbaind.org/)

No Fill-in Initial Registration Details

Already
to Get Log-in Credentials in
Registered Click at New Your Register Mail
Registration

Yes
Log-in using Credentials
Proceed to Application Stage Received to Fill-in Complete
Registration Details and Submit
Registration Fee
Pre-assessment Stage
Visit e-NBA Web Site
(http://enba.nbaind.org/)

Click at “Application” under Accreditation

Tab and Select Apply for Accreditation

Generate Application by Selecting

Discipline, Level, Tier & Program &
Upload AICTE Approval Letter

Application ID is generated & you are prompted

to fill-in pre-qualifiers & Payment of 10 % Fee

Fill-in the Pre-qualifiers

Pay 10% Fee (See Appendix I)

No Prepare yourself for re-

PQ Approval
assessment & apply again
Yes

Proceed to Next Stage

(Assessment)

Fig. 1a: Accreditation Workflow: Registration and Pre-assessment Stage

17
Assessment Stage
Download SAR from NBA Website
(http://nbaind.org/) (For Preparation)

Fill-in SAR online (eSAR) for each Program

in the Prescribed Format and Submit

Click Submit and Proceed to Pay 90% Fee

Suggest five Sets of Dates

Coordinate with NBA for Date of Visit

Visit of NBA Visiting Team

Post-Assessment Stage

Submission of Evaluation Report to NBA

by Visiting Team
Moderation Committee
Report of Moderation Committee
communicated to Institute (Institute to
respond within 10 days)

Reports along with observations of the

Moderation Committee and response of
Institute placed before EAC

Recommendation of EAC are placed

before the Subcommittee of AAC

Accreditation Status
Communicated to Institute

Accreditation No Appeal against Accreditation Status

Status Accepted within 30 days

Yes Appellate Committee

Submit Compliance Report 6
months Prior to Expiry of Validity Academic Advisory Committee
of Accreditation

Fig. 1b: Accreditation Workflow: Assessment and Post-assessment Stage

18
2.6 Stages of Accreditation Process

Accreditation workflow for Tier I Engineering institution is summarized in Workflow diagram (Fig. 1)
and described below.

Eligible institutions may apply for accreditation of its programs online through the “Accreditation
Workflow Management System” (https://enba.nbaind.org/) called e-NBA. The process of
accreditation can be grouped into the following four sequential stages essentially in the same order.
These stages are: i) Initial Stage; ii) Pre-Assessment Stage; iii) Assessment Stage; and iv) Post
Assessment Stage (Decision-Making). Applicant institution must complete the previous stage, before
proceeding to the next stage.

2.6.1 Initial Stage: Registration

Institutions willing to seek accreditation of its programs by NBA are required to register with eNBA.
Registration with eNBA is a one-time process. After filing the initial registration form, user gets user-
id and password to fill the Complete Registration Form. Fig.2 is screen shot of initial registration and
login interface for registered institutions.

Fig. 2: Registration of Institutions on e-NBA

Steps involved in the process of registration are as follows:

 The process of registration involves filling-in and submission of basic information of the registering
institution in the data input boxes on e-NBA Registration Interface. On submission of basic
information, the Institution receives temporary login credentials through their registered e-mail,
which become permanent user ID after submission of one-time Registration fee (See Annexure I: Fee
Structure).

 The institution is required to login using credentials received through their registered e-mail to
complete the process of registration which includes keying-in information in the data input boxes
on e-NBA portal, such as the head of the institution, details of key promoters, bank details, details
19
 of the programs proposed for accreditation by the institution and uploading copies of all AICTE
Approval Letters (academic year wise) or any other appropriate regulatory authority. The copies
should be duly authenticated by the Head of the Institution on each page.

 The institution is required to pay one-time registration fee to complete the process of registration,
failing which institution will have to register again.

 Institutions already registered with e-nba are not required to register again.

 The above-mentioned process should be completed within 15 working days of the initiation of the
registration.

2.6.2 Pre-Assessment Stage

2.6.2.1 Application for Accreditation

 Registered institution may apply online for accreditation of its programs by NBA. Login into eNBA
portal using login credentials obtained during the Registration process mentioned above.

 Generate appropriate format for application by selecting Discipline, Level and Programs from pull-
down menus as shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3: Generating Application(s) for Accreditation of Specific Program

 Upload all AICTE Approval Letter for the last five years including the Current Academic Year or
any other appropriate regulatory authority duly authenticated by Head of the Institution.

 Institutions can apply for accreditation up to five programs through a single application on the e-
NBA portal. Management and MCA programs can be clubbed with other programs in a singly
application. Applications for accreditation can be submitted any time when an institute is fairly
confident that its programs comply with the relevant pre-qualifiers, and their system for outcome-
based education and accreditation have been put in place and well imbibed by the faculty members
of the program.

 Click at “Submit” button, for submission of temporary application to NBA for further processing.
Application ID gets generated on successful submission of application.

20
2.6.2.2 Submission of Pre-Qualifiers

After the generation of the temporary application, the institution is required to fill the pre-qualifiers
for program(s) to be accredited through eNBA portal. Login into eNBA portal and Click at “Pre-
qualifier / e-SAR” under “Application” from the Left Navigation Panel. eNBA would display your
Application No., Program and Level. Click at “Proceed to Pre-qualifiers”. e-NBA seeks information on
pre-qualifiers. Screenshot of program-specific information is given below as an example in Fig. 4.

Fig.4: Screenshot of Pre-qualifier: Program-Specific Information

2.6.2.3 Submission of 10 % of Total Accreditation Fee

The institution is required to submit 10 per cent of the total applicable accreditation fee (as prompted
by eNBA portal) (see Annexure I: Fee Structure) along with duly filled-in pre-qualifiers for further
processing of the application. This first stage fee is non-refundable. If all the pre-qualifiers applied
through an application are not approved, then the application is not processed further and the
institution is informed accordingly.

All pre-assessment steps mentioned-above (4.1.2.1 to 4.1.2.3) should be completed within 30 days from
the generation of the temporary application. If all these steps are not completed within 30 days, the
application needs to be regenerated and PQs needs to be filled again.

2.6.3 Assessment Stage

2.6.3.1 Submission of Self-Assessment Report (SAR)

Submission of Self-Assessment Report (SAR) and Assessment by Visiting Team of NBA involves the
following steps:

 Once the Pre-Qualifiers are approved, the institution is required to fill e-SAR for the programs
whose pre-qualifiers are approved as prompted by eNBA portal.

 To fill e-SAR, login into eNBA portal, click at “PQ/e-SAR” under “Application” and start filling the
e-SAR online for each program. The information filled in Pre-Qualifier come prefilled (such as
21
 student information and faculty details) in the e-SAR and institutions are required to fill rest of the
information. The e-SAR contains more detailed information about the programs and helps the
institution to self-assess itself on each accreditation criteria. It is an opportunity for the institution
to showcase its strengths, weaknesses etc. for evaluation and assessment criteria of NBA. However,
e-SAR is expected to be factual and not narrative. Screenshot of the Index Page of eSAR is given
below as an example in Fig. 5.

Fig.5: Screenshot of eSAR: Index Page

 Once all e-SAR of individual programs are submitted, click on the final submit button and pay the
remaining 90% fees for all the programs whose e-SAR has been submitted (See Annexure I – Fee
Structure). Institution can view the submitted e-SAR online and save it as PDF. The e-SAR
submitted online is automatically forwarded to NBA for further necessary action.

 On submission of e-SAR, institution is invited to suggest dates for the visit and prepare itself for
the visit as shown in Fig. 5. Submit three sets of dates for the visit. The institution is required to
propose such sets of dates for the visit when the regular classes and all academic activities of the
program applied for accreditation are on. NBA selects one set of dates and communicates the same
to the institution. After receiving the concurrence of the institution, the dates of visit are fixed, and
Visiting Team of NBA conducts the visit.

Fig. 6: Propose Five Sets of Date for Visiting Team

22
2.6.3.2 Visiting Team to the Institution for Accreditation

 Once the Institution confirms the visit date, NBA constitutes the visit team. A typical accreditation
visit is for 3 days. The Visiting Team consists of a Chairperson and two program evaluators for each
program.

 While constituting a Visiting Team, NBA checks for the conflict of interest, i.e., expert must not be
from the same state as of the institution and should not have any professional relation with the
institution and/or program. Declaration and Feedback taken from the Chairman and Evaluators.

 The Complete Evaluation Process including composition of visiting team, criteria for nomination,
General Policies for Team Formation, etc. have been elaborated in Part III of General Manual
available at http://www.nbaind.org/files/general-manual-of-accreditation.pdf.

 The following Evaluation Documents that are helpful to the Visiting Team in preparing themselves
for the visit as well as guiding them on processes and procedures to be followed are available in
their respective manuals:

 Pre-visit Preparation for Chairman

 Pre-visit Evaluation Report for Evaluator
 Visit Schedule
 List of Documents to be Verified during the Visit
 Evaluation Guidelines
 Chairperson’s Visit Report (Part A, B and C)
 Evaluator’s Visit Report (Part A, B and C)
 Certificate of Participation (to be filled-in by the Chairman of the Visiting Team)
 Certificate and Feedback to be filled by Institution

2.6.3.3 Accreditation Visit

The Evaluation Team will visit the institution seeking accreditation of its program(s) to evaluate and
validate the assessment of the institution/department through the SAR of the program concerned as
per specified accreditation criteria. The program evaluators may obtain such further clarifications from
the institution as they may deem necessary. Although it may not be possible to describe adequately all
the factors to be assessed during the on-site visit, some of the common ones are the following:

i) Outcomes of the education provided;

ii) Quality assurance processes; including internal reviews;
iii) Assessment;
iv) Activities and work of the students;
v) Entry standards and selection for admission of students;
vi) Motivation and enthusiasm of faculty;
vii) Qualifications and activities of faculty members;
viii) Infrastructure facilities;
ix) Laboratory facilities;
x) Library facilities;
xi) Industry participation;
xii) Organization.

In order to assist the Evaluation Team in its assessment, the educational institution should arrange
for the following:
23
 i. Meeting with

a. The Head of the institution/Dean/Heads of Department (HoD)/program and

course coordinators
b. A member of the management (to discuss how the program fits into overall
strategic direction and focus of the institution, and management support for
continued funding and development of the program)
c. Faculty members
d. Alumni(sans Alma Matters)
e. Students
f. Parents

ii. Availability of the following exhibits

a. Profile of faculty involved in the program

b. Evidence that the results of assessment of course outcomes and program outcomes
are being applied to the review and ongoing improvement of program
effectiveness.
c. List of publications, consultancy an sponsored/funded research projects by the
program faculty
d. Sample materials for theory and laboratory courses
e. Sample test/semester examination question papers for all courses
f. Sample of test/semester examination answer scripts projects, assignments,
(including at least one excellent, one good and one marginal pass for each
examination) question papers and evidences related to assessment tools for Cos
and POs.
g. Student records of three immediate batches of graduates
h. Sample project and design reports (excellent, good and marginal pass)by students
i. Sample student feedback form
j. Sample for industry-institution interaction
k. Results of quality assurance reviews
l. Records of employment/higher studies of graduates
m. Records of academic support and other learning activities
n. Any other documents that the Evaluation Team/NBA may require

iii. Visit to

a. Classrooms
b. Laboratories pertaining to the program
c. Central and department library
d. Computer centre

The evaluation Team should conduct an exit meeting with the Management Representative, the Head
of the Institution, the Head of Department and other key officials at the end of the on-site visit to present
its findings (strengths, concerns, weaknesses, deficiencies). The instituting will be given a chance to
withdraw one or more programs from the process of accreditation. In this case, the Head of the
Institution will have to submit the withdrawal in writing to the Chairperson of the Evaluation Team
during the exit meeting.

24
2.6.4 Post-Assessment Stage

2.6.4.1 Processing of Evaluation Report

Processing of Evaluation Report submitted by the Visiting Team involves the following steps:

 Once the accreditation visit is completed, the experts prepare the evaluation report and submit it to
the NBA.

 In respect of the UG Engineering programs, the report is first placed before the Moderation
Committee. The Moderation Committee considers the Evaluation Report and find out the
borderline cases. The observations of the Moderation Committee, for such cases are communicated
to the institution for seeking necessary clarification within 10 days of submission of evaluation
report. Response of the institution is sent to Chairperson of the Visiting Team.

 The Visiting Team Report, observations of Moderation Committee and the response of the
institution are considered by the EAC (Evaluation and Accreditation Committee) in the presence of
Chairperson of the Visiting Team. In case of the programs of all other disciplines the evaluation
reports are considered directly by the respective EAC.

 The recommendations of the EAC are considered by the concerned Sub Committee of AAC for
taking a final decision on accreditation status. The final status of accreditation, as per the decision
of Subcommittee of AAC, is communicated to the institution by NBA.

 If the institution is not satisfied with the accreditation status of the program, it can make an appeal
against the accreditation status conveyed by the NBA by submitting an appeal within 30 days of
the date of receipt of the communication along with the prescribed fee as detailed in Annexure I:
Fee Structure.

2.7 Continuation of Accreditation

Institutions whose UG Engineering and UG Pharmacy programs have already been granted
accreditation for a period of three years, are required to submit the compliance report at least 6 months
before the expiry of validity of accreditation along with the compliance fee.

On receipt of compliance report, a two-member Visiting Team of experts is constituted by NBA for the
visit of the respective institution for data verification. The report of the visiting team is considered by
the concerned committee in NBA for continuation (or otherwise) of accreditation for an appropriate
period.

2.8 Accreditation Fee

Any institution which applied for accreditation is required to pay the fee at various stages as per the
details given in Annexure I: Fee Structure.

2.9 Reconsideration of Programs

If a program is ‘not accredited’ or withdrawn during visit, a fresh application for accreditation of the
same program can be considered after one year from the date of previous visit of the visiting team.

25
 PART III
Evaluation Process
The evaluation process plays a significant role in the grant of accreditation to programs of technical
institutions in the country which starts with the evaluation team visit where the information provided
by the institution in the Self-Assessment Report is verified and the report of evaluation team is
considered for taking the final decision by NBA.

3.1. Composition of the Evaluation team

NBA’s evaluation team comprises of one Chairperson (Team Chair) and two Program Evaluators for
each program. In case, the visit is to evaluate for a single Program, the Team may consist of the
Chairperson and one Evaluator. In such cases, while appointing the Chairman, NBA shall ensure that
the Chairman belongs to the same or allied Program discipline. The program evaluators may be from
amongst the serving as well as retired professionals. NBA provides training / orientation to evaluators
on a regular basis through workshops and seminars to ensure smooth and standardized evaluation
process,. This also helps in updating the program evaluators about the current policies of NBA.

3.2 Base Qualifiers for Evaluation Team

Institute / Evaluators
Industry Qualifications Career Profile Accomplishments
Academic Ph.D. preferably in Associate Professor + 4 + year’s Minimum two
Evaluators / an allied area (for experience or Scientist D and above publications in WoS
Research UG & PG (Research Organizations) indexed journals
Organizations programs)
M. Tech. or
equivalent (for
Diploma program)
Industry/ M. Tech. or B. Tech. 15 years experience in research, Demonstrated
Corporates with first division design, development, corporate accomplishments of a
or equivalent training, quality control etc. high order in an allied
area of activity

For Chairperson
All the above  Should be a Professor or May have undergone
conditions  Directors of Institutions of national around 10 visits of
repute NBA
 Should have significant experience in
accreditation / program evaluation
 Should have administrative
experience preferably as Head, Dean
or coordinator of an academic
program or
 should have ongoing/completed
three R&D or consultancy projects (in
previous 5 years)

26
3.3 General Policies for Formation of Evaluation Team

i) The Chairperson and Program Evaluators are selected from a state which is different from
the state in which the institution is located.

ii) There should be no adverse points pending against the Evaluator. Adverse points may
include:

 Report not submitted on time;

 Misrepresentation of certain information;
 Violation of the code of conduct; and
 Input from vigilance or investigating agencies

iii) Evaluation Team is constituted by NBA after obtaining the consent of the members to
undertake the visit on the specified dates.

3.4 Evaluation Documents

3.4.1 Documents Provided by NBA to the Evaluation Team

The NBA provides the following documents in print / soft form to the Evaluation Team prior to the
visit:

i) Pre Qualifiers of each program submitted by the Institutions for accreditation of the
program;
ii) Self-Assessment Report of each program applied for accreditation by the institution;

iii) Evaluation Guidelines;

iv) Format of the Visit Report;
v) Visit schedule;
vi) List of documents to be verified during the visit; and
vii) Self-declaration & Feedback Forms of the Chairperson & Evaluators.

3.4.2 Documentary Evidences to be Kept Ready by the institution

3.4.2.1 Institution Specific

i) Composition of General Council/Board of Governors, Senate and other Academic and

Administrative bodies, their functions and responsibilities. List of all the meetings of these
bodies held in the past three years along with the attendance records, minutes and action-
taken reports of a few meetings of such bodies along with the list of current faculty
members who are members of such bodies;

ii) Rules, policies and procedures published by the Institution including service book and
academic regulations along with the proof that the employees / students have been made
aware of the rules and procedures;

iii) Budget allocation and utilization: Audited statement of accounts;

27
 iv) Informative website along with its address;

v) Library resources – books and journal holdings;

vi) Listing of core, computing and manufacturing etc;

vii) Records of T & P, career and guidance cells;

viii) Records of safety checks and critical installations;

ix) Medical care records and usages of ambulance etc;

x) Academic calendar, schedule of tutorial and makeup classes;

xi) Course Files containing course details, expected course outcomes, sets of question papers,
assignments, evaluation schemes etc. for first year students;

xii) Analysis for assessment and attainment of outcomes; list of additional topics to meet the
outcomes;

xiii) Feedback form, analysis of feedback and corrective actions;

xiv) Documented feedback received from the stake-holders (e.g., Industries, Parents, Alumni,
Financiers etc.) of the Institution;

xv) List of faculty along with their qualifications teaching first year courses;

xvi) Results of First Year students; and

xvii) Documents related to number of seats filled in the first year.

3.4.2.2 Program Specific

Each program for which an institution seeks accreditation or reaccreditation must have in place:

i) NBA accreditation reports of the past visits, if any

ii) Department budget and allocations (last 3 years data)
iii) Admission – seats filled and ranks ( last 3 years data)
iv) List/Number of students who cleared the program in 4 years (last 3 years data)
v) Average Grade point (CGPA) (last 3 years data of students’ CGPA/ percentage)
vi) Placement and higher studies data (last 3 years data)
vii) Professional society activities, events, conferences organized etc.
viii) List of students’ papers along with hard-copies of the publications; professional society
publications/magazines, etc.
ix) Sample best and average project reports/theses
x) Details of faculty student ratio
xi) Faculty details with their service books, salary details, sample appointment letters,
promotion and award letters/certificates
28
 xii) Faculty list with designation, qualification, joining date, publication, R & D, interaction
details
xiii) List of faculty publications along with DOIs and publication/citation details
xiv) List of R & D and consultancy projects along with approvals and project completion reports
xv) List and proofs of faculty interaction with outside world
xvi) List of class rooms, faculty rooms,
xvii) List of program specific labs and computing facility within department.
xviii) List of non-teaching staff with their appointment letters etc.
xix) List of short-term courses, workshop arranged and course-modules developed
xx) Records of new program specific facility created, if any
xxi) Records of overall program specific improvements, if any
xxii) Curriculum, POs, PEOs, Mission and Vision statements
xxiii) Mapping of Outcomes with PO and PSOs
xxiv) Mapping of course outcome with Program Outcomes
xxv) Course files, plan of course delivery, question papers, answer scripts, assignments, reports
of assignments, project reports, report of design projects, list of laboratory experiments,
reports of laboratory experiments etc.
xxvi) Rubrics developed to validate the POs and PSOs
xxvii) Improvement in curriculum for mapping POs and PSOs
xxviii) Direct and indirect assessment to show attainment of POs and PSOs
xxix) Analysis of assessment and attainment of outcomes
xxx) Actions identified for Improvement and their Impact Analysis
xxxi) Stake-holders involvement in the process of improvement of POs and PSOs
xxxii) Budget allocation and utilization

3.4.3 Documents to be returned by the Evaluation Team to NBA

The Chairperson of Evaluation Team will submit the following documents to NBA:

i) Visit Report of Chairperson and Evaluator’s Report;

ii) Duly filled Self declaration form for the visiting team members including the Chairperson;
and

iii) Feedback Form to be filled by the members of the evaluation team including Chairperson.

The team should ensure that no document related to the visit is left with the institution.

29
3.4.4 On-Site Accreditation Visit

A two to three day visit (The complete Visit Schedule given in the respective manuals) is conducted by
the Evaluation Team constituted by NBA. The team visits the institution seeking accreditation of its
program(s) to evaluate and verify the information / data submitted by the institution in the Self-
Assessment Report. The evaluators may obtain clarification from the institution as they may deem
necessary during the visit. The institution may arrange for discussions with the stakeholders, visit to
central facilities and documentary evidences as needed.

3.5 Pre-visit Activities

i) Once the evaluation team is finalized by NBA, the Pre-Qualifier and SAR is made available
to each program evaluator at least 15 days before the on-site visit;

ii) The program evaluators review the SAR and prepare the pre-visit report well in advance
and send it to the chairman of the visiting team 2-3 days before the visit. The pre visit report
is discussed on Day 0 of the visit; and
iii) Members of evaluation team may contact NBA if necessary, for any institutional/program
details while preparing the pre-visit evaluation report. In any circumstance, the member of
evaluation team should not contact the institution directly.

3.5.1 Activities during Visit

i) The evaluation team conducts an accreditation visit to the institution as per the visit schedule
given by NBA. Duration of the visit for 1 program is of 2 days and for more than 1 program
is of 3 days;

ii) The members of evaluation team meet on Day-0 to review the pre-visit reports and to identify
& discuss issues common to all Programs. The Chairperson briefs the program evaluators on
evaluation process during the visit which is further followed by Q&A session;

iii) Each evaluator of respective program submits the Day-wise report to Chairperson on each
day;

iv) The exit meeting is conducted on last day of the visit which is chaired by the Chairperson in
the presence of all the members of the evaluation team. Management representative / Head
of the Institution / Dean / HOD / Program Coordinator / Senior faculty members also
attend the meeting. The members of the evaluation team share the preliminary findings of
program evaluation during the exit meeting. The chairperson of the team gives an option to
the institution to withdraw from any of the program(s), if the institution wishes to do so after
the team has shared their findings during evaluation visit. In case, the institution opts for
withdrawal of a program then it shall handover a written request to the Team Chair during
the exit meeting. No communication regarding withdrawal will be accepted after the visiting
team has left the institution;

v) Each program evaluator submits a complete evaluation report to the Chairperson after the
exit meeting. Chairperson prepares the Executive Summary of the visit and also consolidates
the program-wise evaluation report and submits the same to NBA within 7 days from the
date of exit meeting; and

vi) The reports are processed as explained under Point 4. Post Assessment Stage in Stages of
Accreditation.

30
3.6 Award of Accreditation

i) Accreditation of the Program for Six years;

ii) Accreditation of the Program for Three years; and

iii) No Accreditation of the program.

The details of Award of Accreditation for each program in various disciplines is given in the respective
Accreditation Manuals.

3.7 Appeal

If the institution is not satisfied with the NBA’s decision on the Status of Accreditation, then the
institution can make an appeal against the decision within 30 days of date of receipt of communication
from NBA along with the fee given in Annexure I. The appeal is placed before the Appellate Committee
and its recommendations are considered by the Academic Advisory Committee (AAC) for taking
decision on appeal.

31
 PART IV

Code of Conduct
4.1. NBA Guidelines for Code of Conduct

NBA holds its staff and volunteers to the highest standards of conduct. The following conflict of interest
policy and code of conduct are signed in writing by all participants in the NBA accreditation process.
NBA requires ethical conduct by each volunteer and staff member engaged in fulfilling the mission of
NBA. The organization requires that every volunteer and staff member exhibits the highest standards
of professionalism, honesty, and integrity. The services provided by NBA require impartiality, fairness,
and equity.

NBA guidelines for interpretation of the Code of Conduct represent the objectives towards which its
volunteers and staff members should strive. The personnel involved in accreditation activities can refer
to these principles in specific situations.

a. NBA volunteers and staff members agree to accept responsibility in making accreditation
decisions and credential evaluations consistent with approved criteria in the interest of safety,
health, and welfare of the public and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public
interest.

b. NBA volunteers and staff members agree to perform services only in areas of their competence.
All those involved in NBA activities shall undertake accreditation assignments only when
qualified by education and/or experience in the specific technical field involved.

c. NBA volunteers and staff members agree to act as faithful agents or trustees of NBA, avoiding
real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible, disclosing them to affected parties
when they do exist.

d. NBA volunteers and staff members agree to keep confidential all matters relating to
accreditation decisions and credential evaluations unless by doing so they endanger the public
or are required by law to disclose information.

e. NBA volunteers and staff members agree to conduct themselves honorably, responsibly,
ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the reputation and usefulness of NBA.

f. NBA volunteers and staff members agree to treat fairly all persons regardless of such factors as
race, religion, gender, disability, age, national origin, marital status, or political affiliation. All
those involved in accreditation activities and credentials evaluations shall act with fairness and
justice to all parties.

g. NBA volunteers and staff members agree to assist colleagues and co- workers in their
professional development and to support them in following this code of conduct.

h. NBA will provide a mechanism for the prompt and fair adjudication of alleged violations of the
Code of Conduct. Persons found to be in violation of the Code may be subject to any of a number
of sanctions including ineligibility for service in further activities on behalf of NBA.

32
4.2. Conflict of Interest

NBA board member, committee member, evaluator member or alternate, program chairperson,
program evaluator, accreditation consultant, or staff member should not create situations that may
result in conflicts of interest or questions regarding the objectivity and credibility of the accreditation
process. NBA expects these individuals to behave in a professional and ethical manner, to disclose real
or perceived conflicts of interest, and to recuse themselves from discussions or decisions related to real
or perceived conflicts of interest. The intent of this policy is to: maintain credibility in the accreditation
process and confidence in the decisions of NBA; assure fairness and impartiality in decision-making;
disclose real or perceived conflicts of interest; act impartially and avoid the appearance of impropriety.

a. Individuals representing NBA must not participate in any decision-making capacity if they have
or have had a close, active association with a program or Institution that is being considered for
official action by NBA.

b. Individuals must absent themselves from any portion of an NBA meeting in which discussions
or decisions occur for which they have a real or perceived conflict of interest. Real or perceived
conflicts may occur if there is: a close, active association with a program or Institution; a financial
or personal interest; or any reason that the individual cannot render an unbiased decision.

The names of individuals who have recused themselves during a meeting for conflicts of interest
will be recorded.

4.3. Conflict of Interest Policy

Purpose

The purpose of conflict of interest policy is to:

 To maintain credibility and transparency in accreditation process; and

 To have confidence and assurance of fairness and impartiality in the decision making vis-à-vis the
accreditation processes.

Persons of Interest who must Declare any Conflict of Interests

Members of Governing Council, Executive Committee, Academic Advisory Committee, Evaluation

and Accreditation Committee, Chair persons/ members of Visiting (Evaluation) Team, Resource
persons, Master trainers, and Consultant and Staff of NBA.

Procedure

In order to avoid potential or perceived conflict of interest, the persons conflict of interest are not
expected to:

 have personal or financial interests of any kind in the university / institution; or

 have or had a close, active association with the programme or faculty / school / department in the
university / institution that is being considered for accreditation. Some of the close / active
associations are:

33
  serving as faculty or consultant, either currently or in the past, for theuniversity / institution
whose programme is being considered for accreditation;

 being an alumnus or a recipient of honorary degree from the university / institution whose
programme(s) is / are being considered for accreditation;

 hold current or past membership of a board of the university / institution or any advisory
committee in the university / institution whose programme is being considered for
accreditation;

 having current or past discussions or negotiations of employment with the institutions. The list
above is just illustrative, and not exhaustive.

 The persons conflict of interest must absent themselves from any NBA meeting(s) in which
discussions or decisions occur for which they have any actual or possible conflict of interest.

 Governing Council, Executive Committee, Evaluation and Accreditation Committee and Staff
members of NBA may observe an accreditation visit, but they are not eligible to serve as members
or Chairpersons of Evaluative team.

 All individuals representating NBA must sign a conflict of interest indicating that they have read
and understood policies.

Duty to Disclose

The responsibility of disclosing any conflict of interest lies with the individuals identified as persons
of interest. They must come forward voluntarily and disclose the nature of their conflict and recuse
themselves from discussions about the institution with which they have the said conflict.

4.4. NBA Policy on Misconduct shown or/and done by an Institution

NBA holds all the higher technical and educational Institutions to the highest standards of conduct.
However, if an Institution indulges in misconduct and wilful misinformation of data and NBA comes
to know about it, appropriate penalty would be awarded to the Institution after due verification of the
facts by way of either Inquiry and/or the Institution given an hearing;

Sr. No. Misdemeanor Penalty

False/misleading advertisement not

Notice to withdraw false information within 7
1. conforming to NBA norms in any public
days or else withdrawal of accreditation
media

Information on website conflicting with Notice to correct information on website within

2.
SAR 7 days or else withdrawal of accreditation

False information in pre-qualification

3. Re-submission within 2 weeks
form – clerical/typo errors

34
 False information in pre-qualification
4. Not Eligible for accreditation for 2 years
form – wilful falsification of data

False information in SAR not affecting

5. Re-submission within 4 weeks
accreditation

False information in SAR affecting

6. Not Eligible for accreditation for 3 years
accreditation

Attempts to influence visiting teams or

7. Not Eligible for accreditation for 2 years
other NBA authorities

Non-cooperation with NBA teams on

8. Not Eligible for accreditation for 2 years
official or surprise visits

35
 PART V

Feedback
Appraisal 360˚ works by gathering the opinions of a number of people. A series of carefully structured
questions prompt one to assess skills in a number of key areas. A number of other people are then
asked to give their perception by answering a set of questions, which are then compiled into a feedback
report. It is envisaged that such feedback will help in bringing transparency and objectivity in the
evaluation process which will help in improving quality of the accreditation process, the cherished goal
of all the stakeholders.

The 360˚ feedback is made available online to the institutions, chairperson and the evaluators by NBA.
They have the flexibility to either fill the form online or download the form and submit the same by
mail within 3 days.

A. Feedback form filled by the Head of the institution- This format mainly focuses on the feedback
on the entire evaluation team comprising the chairperson and evaluators regarding the accreditation
and evaluation process and seeking comments about the general behavior of the evaluation team.

B. Feedback form filled by the chairperson- This format mainly focuses on the feedback on the
performance of the evaluators and also about the cooperation and coordination rendered by the
institution at the time of accreditation visit.

C. Feedback form filled by the evaluators- This format mainly focuses on the feedback on the
chairperson, co-evaluators and also about the cooperation and coordination rendered by the
institution at the time of accreditation visit.

D. Feedback form filled by the chairperson / evaluators in respect of Service Provider- This format
mainly focuses on the feedback on the performance of the service providers during the visit of
accreditation.

36
 Annexure I
Fee Structure
1. Registration Fee:

Registration fee amount is Rs.1,00,000 only + (Taxes as Applicable from Time to Time)

2. Accreditation Fee

a. Processing fees to be paid by the institution for NBA accreditation for any program except
engineering diploma

No. of Programs Payment to be made with application Plus Taxes as

to be Accredited Applicable from Time to Time (in Rupees)

1 5,00,000 only

2 7,00,000 only

3 9,00,000 only

4 11,00,000 only

5 13,00,000 only

b. Processing fees to be paid by the institutions for NBA accreditation of engineering

diploma program:

No. of Programs to be Payment to be made with application Plus Taxes as

Accredited Applicable from Time to Time (in Rupees)

1 2,00,000 only

2 3,50,000 only

3 5,00,000 only

4 6,50,000 only

5 8,00,000 only

3. Appeal Fee

Rs. 1,50,000/- per program + Taxes as Applicable from Time to Time

37
4. Compliance Fee

a. UG engineering programs

No. of programs to be Payment to be made with application Plus Taxes as

accredited Applicable from Time to Time (in Rupees)

1 2,00,000 only

2 2,50,000 only

3 3,00,000 only

4 3,50,000 only

5 4,00,000 only

b. UG pharmacy programs

No. of Programmes to Payment to be made with application Plus Taxes as

be Accredited Applicable from Time to Time (in Rupees)

1 1,00,000

2 1,50,000

3 2,00,000

4 2,50,000

5 3,00,000

Mode of Payment
Institute may pay the fee (Registration/Accreditation) by following modes:
i. Net Banking
ii. Credit/ Debit Card
iii. NEFT/RTGS as per the details given below:-
A/c Name : National Board of Accreditation
A/c No: 054805000417
IFC Code: ICIC0000548
Branch Address: Bisham Pitamah Marg, Pragati Vihar, New Delhi - 110003GST Registration No:
07AAAAN8753G1ZF
PAN Registration No: AAAAN8753G
With regards to payment on eNBA, Please indicate GST registration No of your organization, If any.

38
 Annexure II
Refund Policy

a. Withdrawal of program(s) by the institution after payment of accreditation fee

but before the constitution of the visiting team –

In case an Institution requests for withdrawal of the program or programs applied by it after its
application has been approved in NBA for further processing and the fee has been paid by the
institution, 10% of the accreditation fee per program paid by the Institution shall be deducted
while refunding the fee as per the request of the Institute.

Note: Applicable to the applications in old format where Pre-Qualifiers are not applicable.

b. Closing /Disposing off the Application submitted by the institution due to the
institution not responding to NBA’s Communication:

In case the application is closed after giving the institution concerned a final notice when it does
not submit the pre-qualifiers/SAR/Visit dates even after the prescribed timelines are over and
does not respond to the reminders sent by NBA, the 20% fee paid by the Institution concerned
shall be deducted while refunding the Fee paid by it.

c. Cancellation/Postponement of the visit of the Program(s) by the Institution after

the expert team has been constituted

If the Institute causes postponement of the visit after the expert team has already been constituted
for the purpose, an additional fee of 25% shall be required to be paid before the visit is
rescheduled and if the Institute causes cancellation of the visit after the expert team has already
been constituted for the purpose, there would be a cancellation fee of 25% deducted from the fees
paid by the institution.

39